NotesFAQContact Us
Collection
Advanced
Search Tips
ERIC Number: ED482060
Record Type: RIE
Publication Date: 2003
Pages: 25
Abstractor: N/A
Reference Count: N/A
ISBN: N/A
ISSN: N/A
Challenges for Governance: A National Report.
Tierney, William G.; Minor, James T.
This report is designed to help policymakers, administrators, faculty, and researchers address the challenges of institutional governance by providing empirical data on the current role of faculty in institutional governance. It presents the results of a survey of more than 2,000 faculty and provosts across the United States (response rate of 53%) that addressed the way faculty participate in governance, the degree and effectiveness of that participation, and faculty attitudes toward it. Findings show that governance bodies, known as faculty senates, exist in most of the surveyed institutions, with only 13% of schools not having a faculty senate or the equivalent. Not all respondents believe that their senate provides a significant means of faculty participation. At doctoral schools, three other venues were considered more important than senates for shared decision making: academic departments, standing committees, and ad-hoc committees. Findings show widespread dissatisfaction with faculty senates, although faculty do have strong influence in several areas, including undergraduate curriculum, general standards of proportion and tenure, and standards for evaluating teaching. While the concept of shared governance is widely values, there is disagreement about what shared governance means. However, most respondents considered levels of campus trust to be adequate, and most felt there is sufficient communication between the faculty and administrators. Institutions with collective bargaining did not report significant differences with regard to the importance placed on shared governance or the levels of trust between faculty and administration. (Contains 18 references.) (SLD)
For full text: http://www.usc.edu/dept/chepa.
Publication Type: Reports - Research
Education Level: N/A
Audience: N/A
Language: English
Sponsor: N/A
Authoring Institution: N/A
Note: Prepared by the Center for Higher Education Policy Analysis (Los Angeles, CA).