Draft Report: Governance Review Task Force For the Faculty Senate October 13, 2010 Jane L. Curry, Chair Governance Task Force

 Dissatisfaction expressed by faculty and staff in WASC survey over how governance is working.  University has changed significantly since when governance was first developed and implemented.  There has been a leadership change in the university. Result: WASC identified the governance process as an important issue for the University to address prior to the Educational Effectiveness Review in February. Governance Task Force SCU Governance Review Why Now?

Governance Task Force SCU Governance Review WASC Recommendation The shared governance structure at SCU appears to have served the institution well for many years. Recent changes in leadership, the increased complexity of university operations, the economic downturn with inherent resource constraints of indefinite duration, and the need to develop stronger consensus about priorities for the University may require new approaches to both shared governance and to transparency in decision ‐ making.... The Visiting Team recommends that SCU initiate a review of its approach to shared governance prior to the EER. The team also acknowledges the importance of ensuring an active voice for staff in the deliberations affecting the objectives, implementation and quality of academic programs at SCU, and anticipates the engagement and involvement of all segments of the campus community in contributing to educational effectiveness.

Governance Task Force SCU Governance Review Members, Executive Task Force  Faculty: – Jane Curry, Chair – Andre Delbecq – Leilani Miller  Staff: – Gail Gradowski – Jim Rowan – Jacqueline Wender  Administration: – Don Polden – Jeannie Rosenberger – Robert Warren

Governance Task Force “What’s Broke at SCU”, ) The role of the faculty in the selection of administrators. 2) The role of the faculty in recruiting and evaluating faculty (Rank and Tenure decisions, hiring and placement from above, awarding Chairs without consultation) 3) The role of faculty in determining in determining the curriculum (faculty not consulted in development of programs, centers, curriculum decisions) 4) The role of the faculty in evaluating proposed change in structure for academic units (planning done without faculty role). 5) Lack of response to faculty initiatives (“our contributions are ignored”). SCU Governance Review

Governance Task Force SCU Governance Review 1993 Collaborative Governance Model Board of Trustees AdministrationStaffFaculty President Vice-President UCC (all) UPCs Academic Affairs, Faculty Affairs, Planning Action Council, Staff Affairs, Student Affairs, University Budget Council ASSCU participation in Academic Affairs, Student Affairs Faculty Senate

Governance Task Force SCU Governance Review Current Collaborative Governance Model Board of Trustees AdministrationStaff President Vice-Presidents (3) UCC (some) UPCs Academic Affairs, Faculty Affairs, Staff Affairs, Student Affairs, and others ASSCU participation in Academic Affairs, Student Affairs PAC UBC Benefits Parking VP Admin/Finance Provost (recommends) (appoints) Faculty Senate Faculty

Governance Task Force SCU Governance Review University Capacity Indicators Students Faculty Staff Admin Ctrs / Distinct Budget Endowment $346M $545M Ø $114M $150M

 Significant increase in the number of non-tenure track faculty.  Centers of Distinction in addition to the Ethics Center.  Increased loci of policy making: Administrative committees, standing committees, Schools, etc.  Jesuit School of Theology Governance Task Force SCU Governance Review New Pieces of Santa Clara:

Governance Task Force Where Do We Go From Here? Summer, 2010 Review of past; other models; best practices Fall, 2010 Focus groups Survey questions Discussion with administration and any other constituency groups. Winter and Spring, 2011 Development of reforms Open Discussions Spring, 2011: Retreat (Proposal) Approval by all the participants SCU Governance Review

Governance Task Force Concerns and Proposals Contact us as individuals or at: SCU Governance Review