Acadia University Senate

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
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:
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
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:
  1. Target enrolment: 3600-3800 undergraduate students.
Page 2/Attachment 3)a)vi)
Senate Agenda/12Jun06
  1. Goal to become increasingly selective in its admission of students. Current goal is to maintain enrolment without compromising admission screening average of 70%.
  2. 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.
  3. Acadia aspires to be increasingly Nova Scotian.
  4. Acadia aspires to increase the number of students from the US (primarily New England).
  5. 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.
  6.  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.
  7. 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
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
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.
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
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

Attachment 3)a)ix)
Senate Agenda/12Jun06
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
                                                 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.
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
Faculty Development Committee Report
Members: (2005-2006)
Darcy Benoit (chair)
Robert Pitter
Ann Marie Powers
Jonathan Wilson
No meetings were held this year.
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
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
No corrections required
Few (<10), minor changes required
Many (>10), minor changes required
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
Honours Thesis Submitted – 2005/06
Breakdown by Faculty & Department
Faculty / Department Number of thesis
Faculty of Arts  
sub-total 32
Faculty of Professional Studies  
sub-total 10
Faculty of Science  
sub-total 70
Total 112

Attachment 3)a)xiii)
Senate Agenda/12Jun06
Annual Report of the Senate Curriculum Committee (2005-06)
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
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)
“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. 
The proper role of the Senate Executive continues to be an unresolved issue.
Respectfully Submitted by the Chair,
Ian Wilks            

Attachment 3)a)xv)
Senate Agenda/12Jun06
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.
 . – 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

Attachment 3)a)xvi)
Senate Agenda/12Jun06
Senate Academic Discipline Appeals Committee
ANNUAL REPORT 2005 - 2006
Appointed and meets only when necessary.
To deal with the matter of academic discipline which cannot be resolved by the Vice-President (Academic).
G. Perry
R. Mehta
H. Kitchin
P. Eirikson
Student Position is Vacant
It was not necessary for this committee to meet during this reporting period.

Attachment 3)a)xvii)
Senate Agenda/12Jun06
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
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
Wendy Bedingfield