MSVU Senate Minutes -- November 24 2008
Loading...
Date
2010-04-15T17:53:14Z
Authors
Senate, Mount Saint Vincent University
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Publisher
Abstract
Description
1
Senate Meeting November 24, 2008
Rosaria Boardroom 7:30 p.m.
Minutes of Meeting
Present: K. Laurin (Chair), R. Bagg, R. Bérard, I. Blum, P. Crouse, A. Davis, K. Dewar,
S. Drain, R. Farmer, M. Forrest, R. Gechtman, P. Glenister, P. Gouthro, C. Hill, B. Jessop,
N. Kayhani, M. Lyon, B. MacInnes, J. MacLeod, A. McCalla, S. Mumm, N. Peach, J. Sawler,
J. Sharpe, L. Steele, S. Walsh, P. Watts, M. Whalen, D. Woolcott
Regrets : D. Bourne-Tyson, J. Jackson, A. MacGillivary, J. Mills, J. Neilson, T. Richards
1. Approval of Agenda
Moved by R. Bagg, seconded by K. Dewar that Senate approve the agenda as circulated.
CARRIED.
2. Approval of Minutes of October 27, 2008
Moved by M. Lyon, seconded by L. Steele that Senate approve the minutes of October 27, 2008
with the changes noted below. CARRIED.
On page 4, last paragraph, â five 3000-level coursesâ should read â a concentration of five unitsâ
On page 8, Item 7.12, should read â C. Hill reported that the Committee had its first meeting and
is using findings from NSSE, the University Report Card Survey and the Survey of Graduating
Students to set the agenda for the coming year.â
On page 10, line 33, â R. Baggâ should be R. Farmer.
3. Business Arising from the Minutes of September 29, 2008
3.1 Revision to Senate by-law 14.3.1, CAPP Terms of Reference
This item should have read Graduate Studies Program and Policy Committee Terms of Reference
and was deferred until the January 26, 2009 Senate Meeting.
3.2 Revision to Senate by-law 14.8, UREB
This item should have read Revision to Senate by-law 14.13, UREB and was deferred until the
January 26, 2009 Senate Meeting.
2
4. Presidentâ s Announcements
President Laurin noted the following Senators will finish their terms-of-office on December 31,
2008: P. Crouse, M. Forrest, P. Gouthro and A. McCalla. She thanked them for their
contributions and service to Senate . In addition, the President noted the upcoming departure of
S. Mumm and wished her well in her future endeavours.
At the request of the President, B. Jessop gave Senators a synopsis of demographic information,
enrollment information and financial information. In summary: Approximately 76 per cent of
MSVU students are within the 17-29 age range. From 1991 to 2031, a steady decrease in the
population for this age range is projected; from 2006 to 2016 there is a decrease of approximately
7.7 per cent. From 2002 to 2006, there has been a reduction of approximately 3 per cent in the
number of high school graduates going to university. Between 2003 and 2008, enrollments at St.
Francis Xavier University and Dalhousie University have remained steady and NSCC has
experienced an increase. MSVU, Acadia University, St. Maryâ s University, and Cape Breton
University have experienced decreased enrollments.
MSVUâ s Budget is $44M; student fees are $22M and provincial government grants are $17.5M.
University salaries and benefits comprise approximately 70 per cent of the budget. Utilities
account for approximately 8 per cent of the budget. The original three-year financial plan
projected a 5 percent decrease in enrollments for 2008/9; however, enrollments decreased by 8.5
per cent for 2008/9. Therefore, the total projected variance by 2009/10 is -$880,000. The current
negative market has resulted in decreased endowment income; a one per cent decrease in
endowment income results in an annual decrease of $150,000 for scholarships and bursaries.
As of the 2011-2012 school year, the provincial government funding formula will be structured
on a three-year average of enrollments from 2008-2010. In addition, even though current market
conditions have resulted in decreased interest rates, the administration fees and liquidity fees
applicable to debt servicing have both increased.
P. Gouthro noted that mature students are not in the traditional age range of 17-29. Although the
numbers of mature graduate students have not decreased, there has been a decrease in the
numbers of mature undergraduate students attending MSVU and there appears to be insufficient
marketing targeted at this group. B. Jessop indicated that although enrollment numbers have
changed, the overall trend of age distribution has been consistent. P. Gouthro stated that the
mature-student market is a potential source of additional enrollments.
S. Drain noted that enrollments at MSVU were fairly consistent from 2003 until 2007; the notable
decrease from 2007/8 was an anomaly as opposed to a characteristic trend. B. Jessop explained
that the nature of the programs at MSVU helped to prevent the decreases that other institutions
experienced from 2003 to 2007.
M. Whelan stated that it is difficult to explain the decrease for 2007/8, although the decrease must
be taken in context with what is occurring throughout the region. For example, UNBâ s current
enrollment is approximately 75 per cent of their enrollments in 2003.
J. Sawler asked if there was any evidence to indicate the decrease in MSVU enrollments for
2007/8 was just an anomaly and that enrollment would increase for subsequent years.
M. Whalen stated that there was no such evidence. B. Jessop highlighted that the population aged
17-29 has steadily decreased since 1991 and the projected population for this age group will
continue to decrease. M. Whalen noted that the data distributed to Senate was a summary and
3
that his much more detailed presentation to the Board of Governors is available on the MSVU
Intranet â Enrollment Managementâ site.
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 Committee
J. Sawler reported that the Committee conducted a hearing to discuss an alleged incident of
plagiarism. The judgment of the Committee was that plagiarism had occurred.
7.3 Academic Policy and Planning
7.3.1 Proposal for a Collaborative PhD in Education
Moved by D. Woolcott, seconded by J. Sharpe that Senate approve the proposal for a
collaborative PhD in Education. CARRIED.
D. Woolcott stated that the Graduate Studies Program and Policy Committee brought the proposal
to CAPP; it is the result of extensive collaboration between faculty at MSVU, Acadia University
and St. Francis Xavier University as well as an external review/site visits at all three universities.
The proposal is subject to approval at all three universities and, once approved, will go forward to
MPHEC. D. Woolcott highlighted that the implementation of the proposal is dependent upon
government funding.
M. Lyon noted that the proposal was the result of much discussion and received the scrutiny of
the Education Department. The present proposal has evolved from the 2002 framework proposal
brought to Senate in order to receive approval in principle . However, Acadia University and St.
Francis Xavier University were unable to move forward with the proposal at that time. M. Lyon
noted that the proposal was sent to various institutions with graduate programs throughout the
province for review and feedback.
J. Sharpe drew Senatorsâ attention to the uniqueness of the inter-university nature of the proposal.
A similar model exists in Ontario between Brock University, Lakehead University and the
University of Windsor. The external reviewer for the MSVU proposal was involved in the
Ontario proposal. However, the MSVU proposal is different in that it creates more of a research
culture within the institutions, so the proposal requires a year of residency at one of the
participant universities. All three universities are using a lot of distance-technology, i.e.
teleconferencing and computer conferencing, to create an appropriate culture for graduate
seminars between the campuses. J. Sharpe thanked S. McGregor for her work on the proposal
and highlighted the 21 members of the Inter-University Doctoral Program Proposal Committee
4
and the 60 faculty involved in all three universities and the strength of the faculties. The external
reviewer was most impressed with the research base, present culture and strength of the faculty.
P. Gouthro expressed support for the proposal and asked if the $6,000 funding for students was
expected to be a portion of faculty research grants or was a projected amount. J. Sharpe stated
that $6,000 is an average amount. M. Lyon later indicated that the $6,000 is a projected amount
and there is nothing in the proposal that guarantees funding. P. Gouthro asked if the funding was
a realistic amount or if it was to increase the chance of a positive government response to provide
funding. J. Sharpe replied that the $6,000 is a projection and applie s only to the residency period,
not for the entire length of the program. There is a general consensus that research efforts have
been hampered in the past by not having full-time graduate and PhD students.
A. McCalla asked if those who could supervise doctoral students also needed to hold research
grants. J. Sharpe stated that a research grant was not necessary and that the admission process
would be by committee. J. Sharpe noted that supervision of students in the program would be in
accordance with supervision procedures at each institution. S. Walsh asked if there would be a
differentiation between supervision of masters and doctoral students. J. Sharpe indicated that it
was not an issue for this proposal.
K. Dewar asked if the projected government funding was an existing or expected commitment
and what would happen in there was no government funding. D. Woolcott replied that
government funding is a necessary condition for the implementation of the proposed program.
K. Dewar also asked if the July 2009 start-date was a tentative date. M. Lyon and
J. Sharpe indicated that July 2009 was perhaps an overly optimistic date as the proposal still has
to receive formal approval of all Senates and there has to be funding. M. Lyon stated that 2010 is
probably a much more realistic start-date.
7.3.2 Academic Calendar Dates, 2009-2010
K. Dewar asked if the start-date for the February Reading Week was the same for MSVU,
Dalhousie University and St. Maryâ s University. B. MacInnes believed that Dalhousie University
had the same date, but was unsure of the start-date for St. Maryâ s University; all three Registrars
hope to have a meeting in an effort to schedule similar schedules for that week.
7.3.3 Memorandum of Understanding and Student Exchange Agreement between
MSVU and Universidad Carlos III de Madrid
Moved by D. Woolcott, seconded by L. Steele that Senate approve the MOU and Student
Exchange Agreement between MSVU and Universidad Carlos III de Madrid. CARRIED.
I. Blum asked whether Universidad Carlos III de Madrid is a private university; M. Whalen
indicated that it is a public university.
7.3.4 Academic Plan for MSVU : Focusing Efforts and Resources on High Quality,
Distinctive and Sustainable Programs That Are Attractive to Students :
Discussion Paper
D. Woolcott asked that Senators provide comments and feedback regarding the criteria listed in
the discussion paper. She noted that the academic plan of MSVU has not been updated since
2002. Destination 2012 identifies academic planning as an area of priority. Goal 1 of Destination
2012 relates to quality of programs in teaching, learning and research. Although there is
5
increased student interest in some programs, the environment in which the committee is
formulating the plan is one of changing patterns of enrollment, lower enrollment in most
programs and increasing financial costs. MSVU has a great breadth of programs and must
distribute reduced resources among these programs; this results in an increased challenge for the
University to maintain quality in programs. It is important that MSVU do what is required in
order to sustain itself as an institution. There must be consideration of new undertakings to
enhance programs and the cessation of practices that negatively impact sustainability.
As this is a difficult task it is important to find the optimal mix of programs while maintaining
quality. CAPP is continuing to compile data and foresees that in the future the Mount would
offer fewer distinct full programs as opposed to discontinuing areas of study.
S. Drain indicated that CAPP has noted on more than one occasion â the difficulty of maintaining
quality in our programs.â However, there appears to be a lack of concrete evidence. D. Woolcott
noted that reviews have indicated common themes on a consistent basis, one being a need for
greater resources in order to increase the depth of programs. M. Lyon stated that no one is
suggesting that less quality refers to the quality of teaching or students. The need for greater
quality is more a reflection of the Mountâ s resource capacity, i.e. managing the part-time budget.
The Mount has difficulty adding full-time faculty and approximately 70 per cent of courses are
taught by part-time faculty. S. Drain noted that she was not questioning the substance of the
proposal but the lack of concrete evidence, noting that reviews do not always come forward to
Senate.
K. Laurin suggested that it is important that the discussion focus on the criteria, so that the
Committee can receive constructive feedback. K. Dewar noted that part of the problem with
addressing the criteria is that the criteria accept the assumption of the discussion paper, which is
lack of sustainability. The Mount has a long history of having many small programs and it is
important that assumptions are supported with evidence. D. Woolcott responded that the
demographic data that B. Jessop provided earlier speaks directly to evidence. Additional
information is already available and indicates that the Mountâ s capacity to sustain sufficient
quality is problematic. The current demographic reality is different than the 1990s.
R. Gechtman stated his difficulty with the assumption of the document, i.e. the relationship
between sustainability and education. Enrollment has been steady until this year and he is not
convinced that the crucial factor is quality. He has serious concerns with how enrollment is
managed, i.e. insufficient initiatives to recruit students from other provinces and internationally.
There needs to be more effort towards finding niches which could potentially increase enrollment.
D. Woolcott agreed and noted that Goal 4 of Destination 2012 involves accessibility; there are
many people on campus who are putting as much effort into accessibility as CAPP is putting into
academic planning. R. Gechtman stated that it was noted at a previous Senate meeting that the
resources for the enrollment committee were limited and perhaps more resources would help
increase enrollment. The relationship between sustainability and education is not an obvious one.
For example, organizations would never engage in education because education is not sustainable
by itself; other elements are required. Education is a long-term investment. R. Gechtman noted
that although he agrees that difficult decisions are required, issues of enrollment should be
addressed through enrollment management and issues of quality should be addressed as separate
issues.
N. Kayhani noted that the Mount will have difficulty attracting more students when the
University is cutting programs and not adding them. She also stated that since 70 per cent of the
University budget is for salaries, it is questionable how much money can be saved by cutting a
few programs. D. Woolcott emphasized that the first principle in an academic setting is always
6
academic reviews with the desired goal being the attainment of an appropriate mix and range of
programs and the delivery of those programs. The main reason for academic reviews is to have a
quality university experience, which is attractive to students.
S. Walsh referred to the criteria and indicated that many people who are already in a university
setting are adept at doing research. In her opinion, there needs to be more statistical analysis and
â sound evidence-based decisionsâ need to be more substantial. Site visits to other smaller
institutions may also be helpful.
R. Bérard stated that CAPP will have to pay attention to the criteria and make clear how they
apply to various departments. For example, the use of a number of different criteria can make it
difficult for CAPP to convince a Department that is affected by changes that CAPP considered
the right criteria.
J. Sharpe highlighted the need for creative thinking and noted that the document forces faculty to
look at the mix of pr ograms. The best outcome of the plan would be to consider what various
programs should look like, while not trying to sustain everything that has been done in the past.
It is important to focus on needs and quality experiences.
A. McCalla noted that Senate was being asked to put a lot of faith in CAPP and Senate should not
be a faith-based institution. D. Woolcott responded that members of CAPP are elected from
colleagues and include senior academic leaders of the community who have the best intentions
for the Mount. A. McCalla suggested that more hard evidence would be a helpful aid to increase
trust. D. Woolcott emphasized that CAPP is anxiously awaiting feedback which can be e-mailed
to academic.plan@msvu.ca. If the criteria listed in the discussion paper are inadequate or
problematic, then it is important to provide alternative suggestions so that CAPP can discuss and
implement additional information. To date, there has been little substantive discussion in regards
to the criteria.
S. Mumm emphasized that the discussion paper is in no way an epigram of where CAPP thinks
we ought to go. CAPP needs feedback from everyone concerned in order to make good
decisions. There has been very little discussion as to whether or not the criteria are good criteria
or if there are better alternative criteria.
M. Forrest noted that she is confused by reports of reviews indicating too much part-time
teaching because this practice has occurred for quite some time. She emphasized that she is in
favour of creative solutions but noted that making major decisions is a risky process and
curriculum changes are complex. On the one hand, enrollment is declining. On the other hand,
the Mount is in the process of constructing a new building, which may be inappropriate for an
institution that faces financial difficulties.
B. Jessop noted that the new building will not move forward unless there is a viable and prudent
business operating-plan. He stated that the Admissions office does a lot with limited funds and
they should be complimented for working within those constraints. The Mount has spent an
additional $150,000 for recruiting-related activities, i.e. strategic investment and marketing
campaign and strategic reserve funds for Information Technologyâ s fibre network.
S. Walsh stated that more references would be helpful so that people could have the option of
reviewing the references in an effort to think more critically about the criteria. D. Woolcott said
that the criteria came from the literature review and the committee could probably provide some
7
references. The list was the result of a June 2008 meeting of CAPP and some information would
be considered common knowledge.
K. Dewar emphasized that the faculty is very engaged in discussions about the document.
However, a possible obstacle to engagement is that the document is a â downerâ to read. In
addition, the paper seems to discourage reflection upon the past, but the past can be a good
teacher and guide for present and future actions. For example, the Mount has always had a
number of smaller programs with much creative leadership.
K. Laurin noted that the opportunity for creativity is positive and agreed that one need not look to
the past as a negative activity. The current situation is indeed challenging; however, the Mount
has a tremendous history of doing a lot on a shoestring budget. The goal of the document is to
assist everyone in understanding the current environment and to provoke creative thinking to
result in productive conclusions and solutions; constructive feedback is necessary for collective
decision-making.
7.4 Graduate Studies Program and Policy Committee
M. Lyon had no further report from the Committee other than a minor prerequisite change
presented for information regarding GCYS 6013, Intervention and Evaluation for Children and
Youth (0.5 unit).
7.5 Graduate Studies Scholarships, Assistantships and Awards Committee
M. Lyon reported that the Committee received one NSERC application as compared to last year,
when the committee received the greatest number of applications.
7.6 Undergraduate Curriculum
7.6.1 Changes to existing programs
7.6.1.1 Biology
Moved by S. Mumm, seconded by I. Blum that Senate approve the addition of BIOL 2207,
Microbial Diversity and the addition of a Major, which replaces an Advanced Major. CARRIED.
7.6.1.2 Cultural Studies
Moved by S. Mumm, seconded by L. Steele that Senate approve the requirements for a Major,
and the deletion of CULS 1100, Understanding Music I, CULS 2000, Understanding Music II,
CULS 2296, Aesthetics of Film, CULS 3303, Presenting Visual Culture I, CULS 3304,
Presenting Visual Culture II, and the addit ion of CULS 2202, Music and Culture, CULS 2294,
Film Genres, and CULS 3302, Censorship and Art. CARRIED.
7.6.1.3 Education
Moved by S. Mumm, seconded by R. Bérard that Senate approve the program changes, the
Practicum placement delay or denial, Elementary Education degree requirements, Secondary
Education degree requirements, and the addition of EDUC 5404, Critical Media Literacy, EDUC
5429, Health Education/Healthy Living, and the deletion of EDUC 5353, Development and
Exceptionality and EDUC 5428, Health Education in Elementary Schools. CARRIED.
8
7.6.1.4 English
Moved by S. Mumm, seconded by S. Drain that Senate approve the program changes,
Concentration (inserted before the Minor) and a new calendar description for the program
Major. CARRIED.
S. Drain queried the status of the Major Certificate mentioned in the attached documentation.
S. Mumm responded that the Certificate was sent to UCC. However, it was not brought to Senate
as a result of discussions with the Registrarâ s Office. Uniform wording will be used for all
programs and there has been no decision yet regarding this wording.
7.6.1.5 History
Moved by S. Mumm, seconded by K. Dewar that Senate approve the addition of HIST 2260,
Cultural Encounters in the Modern World. CARRIED.
7.6.1.6 Mathematics
Moved by S. Mumm, seconded by I. Blum that Senate approve the program changes, a new
calendar description for the Computer Science Minor, a Concentration in Mathematics and a
Concentration in Statistics. CARRIED.
7.6.1.7 Public Policy
Moved by S. Mumm, seconded by J. MacLeod that Senate approve the program changes.
CARRIED.
S. Drain asked what the rationale was for the changes. S. Mumm noted that program change
discussions began approximately 18 months ago in an effort to make the program more attractive
to students. J. MacLeod added that the rationale is centered around viability and sustainability
and to increase flexibility to ensure the Mount could offer an effective degree.
N. Kayhani noted that the Departments listed on page 117 should also include Economics.
7.6.1.8 Registrar
Moved by S. Mumm, seconded by B. MacInnes that Senate approve the 2.0 GPA required for
minors/concentrations. CARRIED.
7.6.1.9 Sociology/Anthropology
Moved by S. Mumm, seconded by M. Lyon that Senate approve the addition of SOAN 1102,
Introduction to Anthropology, SOAN 1103, Introduction to Sociology, and the deletion of SOAN
4410, Senior Seminar, and the program changes, the Major replacing the Advanced Major, and
the Honours degree requirements. CARRIED.
S. Drain referred to page 128 and stated that students should not have to look in two places to
receive an explanation. S. Mumm responded that, if the courses are approved at this Senate
meeting, a calendar edit will eliminate the duplic ation.
9
7.6.1.10 Additional Concentrations
Moved by S. Mumm, seconded by N. Kayhani that Senate approve the additional concentrations
for Economics. CARRIED.
Moved by S. Mumm, seconded by R. Gechtman that Senate approve the additional
concentrations for History. CARRIED.
Moved by S. Mumm, seconded by S. Walsh that Senate approve the additional concentrations for
Womenâ s Studies. CARRIED.
7.6.2 Changes to existing programs (for information)
7.6.2.1 Biology
7.6.2.1.1 New course names, prerequisites, calendar descriptions
BIOL 2202, General Microbiology (replacing Microbiology)
BIOL 3302, Microbial Interactions (replacing Advanced
Microbiology)
BIOL 3309, Physiology of Plants
BIOL 3310, Physiology of Animals
BIOL 3312, General Ecology
BIOL 3314, Evolutionary Biology
7.6.2.2 Cultural Studies
7.6.2.2.1 New prerequisites
CULS 3310, 3311, 3312 Special Topics
7.6.2.2.2 New course name
CULS 2293, Understanding Movies (replacing Introduction to Film
Language)
7.6.2.3 Education
7.6.2.3.1 New course names
EDUC 5305, Curriculum Practices in Family Studies I
EDUC 5306, Curriculum Practices in Family Studies II
EDUC 5327, Social and Cultural Contexts of Schooling I
EDUC 5328, Social and Cultural Contexts of Schooling II
EDUC 5331, Curriculum Practices in Secondary French I
EDUC 5333, Curriculum Practices in Secondary French II
EDUC 5360, Curriculum Practices in Secondary Mathematics I
EDUC 5361, Curriculum Practices in Secondary Mathematics II
EDUC 5370, Curriculum Practices in Secondary Science I
EDUC 5371, Curriculum Practices in Secondary Science II
EDUC 5381, Curriculum Practices in Secondary Social Studies I
EDUC 5382, Curriculum Practices in Secondary Social Studies II
EDUC 5383, Global Studies in Education (replacing The Impact
of Global Studies on Practice)
7.6.2.4 Sociology/Anthropology
7.6.2.4.1 New calendar description
SOAN 3360, Organizations and Society
7.6.2.5 Womenâ s Studies
7.6.2.5.1 New calendar descriptions
WOMS 1110, Focus on Women I
WOMS 1112, Focus on Women II
10
7.6.2.5.2 Delete prerequisites
WOMS 2221, Women and Health
WOMS 2231, Women and Culture
WOMS 2281, Women and Caregiving
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
There was no report.
7.9 Library
R. Bagg reported that the annual Library Committee Luncheon for Department Coordinators
occurred on November 21st. The library is in the process of implementing new programs and
there may be a second meeting of the Department Coordinators in the Spring of 2009.
7.10 Nominations
7.10.1 Senate-elected committees
Moved by P. Crouse, seconded by I. Blum that Senate elect the following individuals to fill
vacancies on the identified committees. CARRIED.
Committee Nominee Term Begins Term Ends
University Research Ethics
Board Dr. Jeff Young January 1, 2009 June 30, 2011
Joint Board-Senate Liaison Dr. Jeff MacLeod
Prof. Jean Mills
When elected June 30, 2011
K. Laurin explained that the Joint Board-Senate Liaison Committee is a liaison committee
comprising two representatives of Senate, two members from the Board of Governors, VP
Academic, VP Administration, the President and the Board of Governorsâ Chair, and meets to
discuss academic and financial issues. On the Senate agenda the committee would appear under
â Other Reports.â R. Bagg stated that it may be a good idea to circulate the committeeâ s terms of
reference to Senators since the Committee serves as a means of communication between the
Board of Governors and the Senate on matters of common concern such as linking academic
goals and financial forecasts. J. MacLeod noted that Senate does not delegate any authority to the
Committee which serves a communicative function as opposed to being a decision-making body.
7.11 Research and Publications
A. Davis reported that the Committee has met for adjudication and letters will be sent in the next
few days.
7.12 Student Affairs
C. Hill reported that the Committee has met and is working on regular agenda items.
11
7.13 Committee on Teaching and Learning
P. Watts reported that the Committee met on November 18th and discussed Goals 1 and 3 of the
strategic plan. The teaching award descriptions have been revised and the Committee hopes to
present them to Senate in January 2009.
7.14 Writing Initiatives
S. Drain reported that the collaborative writing program has been indefinitely postponed as the
result of insufficient faculty interest.
7.15 Undergraduate Admissions and Scholarships
B. MacInnes reported that the committee has met but has nothing formal to report.
7.16 University Research Ethics Board
M. Forrest reported that the Chair and Coordinator are preparing for the Department Research
Ethics Boards a revised set of guidelines in conjunction with new and/or refined guidelines from
the Tri-Council Policy Committee, in particula r, those guidelines that apply to participatoryaction
research.
8. Other Reports
8.1 Board of Governors
R. Bérard reported that the Board of Governors met on November 13th. New members of the
Board in attendance were Mike Brien, Sister Joan Butler and Sister Marjorie Gallagher. M.
Whalen presented a report on enrollment. The Board approved MSVUâ s quarterly Compliance
Report and the annual Directors and Officers Liability Insurance Report. The Board received the
following reports: Presidentâ s Report on Senate Activities; Report on Re-appointments, Tenure
and Promotion; Reports on Destination 2012; Pension Governance Report, and reports from
regular Board committees. The Finance Committee reported that a deficit is projected. The
Investment Committee reported that in consideration of the current economic turmoil, the Mount
is not â doing as badly as we might be doing.â The Board also re-appointed Board members to
further terms.
8.2 Studentsâ Union
N. Peach reported that various committees of the Studentsâ Union have met. The Annual General
Meeting is on November 25th. N. Peach attended Multi-Cultural Night and Civil Rights Night,
both of which were well-attended.
8.3 Destination 2012
R. Farmer reported that the Committee met November 24th. M. Forrest noted that the template
for the insertion of data is somewhat problematic and the Committee hopes to rectify and simplify
this issue and to distribute additional information by December 15th.
12
9. New Business
There was no new business.
10. Items for Communication
No items for communication were noted.
11. Adjournment
Moved by J. MacLeod, seconded by R. Bagg to adjourn the meeting at 9:20 p.m. CARRIED.
Respectfully submitted,
Lorna Cottenden
Recording Secretary