Transcript Task Force on Shared Governance

Shared Governance Task Force Report
Special Report presented to the Faculty Senate
October 13, 2011
Members of the Shared Governance Task Force
Lynda Ciuffetti, Professor, Botany and Plant Pathology,
Past President, Faculty Senate (Chair)
Becky Warner, Senior Vice Provost for Academic Affairs
(Co-chair)
Dan Arp, Dean, University Honors College
Roger Hammer, Associate Professor, Sociology
Goran Jovanovic, Professor, Chemical, Biological and
Environmental Engineering
Michael Oriard, Associate Dean, College of Liberal Arts
Sheryl Thorburn, Associate Professor, Public Health
Meg Reeves, General Counsel, Ex-Officio
Shared Governance Task Force Report
SECTION 4:
A.
B.
C.
D.
E.
Current practices and procedures for decisionmaking at OSU, with recommendations (15) for
improvement
Institutional Planning: 2
Faculty Senate Governance: 4
University, College, and Unit Spending Priorities: 3
Faculty Compensation and Advancement: 2
Administrative Appointments: 3
SECTION 5:
2
April 11, 2016
Review and Assessment: 1
Requested Changes/Changes to the SGTF Report
Principle 4, page 11
Shared governance should be practiced wherever possible in
institutional decision-making at all levels .The SGTF recognized
the following priority areas in which shared governance needs
to be fully implemented: i) planning and organization; ii)
academic programs, curriculum, and academic regulations; iii)
spending priorities; iv) faculty compensation and advancement;
and v) administrative appointments and faculty hiring. Shared
governance structures should recognize that faculty bear
primary responsibility for curriculum, subject matter and
methods of instruction, research, faculty status and aspects of
student life which relate to the educational process.
3
4/11/2016
Recommendation 1, page, 15
Recommendation: The principle of “full-cycle” governance
should guide administrators’ interactions with the faculty in
general and the Faculty Senate in particular. That is,
administrators should solicit faculty input, weigh that input,
arrive at decisions, and report back to the faculty on the
rationale for those decisions. Faculty judgment should prevail
in the areas of curriculum, subject matter and methods of
instruction, research, faculty status, and aspects of student life
which relate to the educational process.
4
4/11/2016
Further Clarification on Authority
In order to emphasize again the areas over which the Faculty
Senate does have statutory authority, we reiterate from the
Faculty Senate Bylaws: “As noted in the Faculty Senate Bylaws
Article II, Section II, the Faculty Senate has “legislative
responsibility with respect to academic policies, educational
standards, curricula, and academic regulations.” This statement
now appears on pages 2, 9, and 11.
5
4/11/2016
Recommendation 1, Page 14 (also included on pgs, 3,4,17)
Recommendation: Committees or task forces formed by the
president and provost to help guide budget allocation and
planning should have at least 20% of its membership appointed
by the Faculty Senate Executive Committee.
Suggested ammendment: "at least 40%"
6
4/11/2016
Addition to the Report, Section C:
New passage appears on page 16 of the report.
“The process for the 2013-15 biennium will likely be affected by
two bills passed during the 2011 legislative session. SB 909
creates the Oregon Education Investment Board (OEIB), chaired
by the Governor, which is charged with developing a
comprehensive budget along the entire education continuum,
from early childhood through post graduate programs. The
legislature also passed SB 242 which established greater
autonomy for OUS and eliminated many of the specific budget
lines associated with the OUS budget. Over the next six
months the OEIB process will become more defined as will the
changes in the OUS governance.”
7
4/11/2016