This summer I came across an article written by James Minor1 in which he categorizes faculty senates as functional, influential, ceremonial or subverted based on the organization’s area(s) of decision making, how it is perceived by its campus constituents, and its relationship with the institution’s administration. While some may debate which model best describes our own governance system, I doubt any would argue the merits of being a functional or influential senate. Thus it seems appropriate to consider these two models as we begin a new academic year.
Functional and influential models describe senates that effectively represent their constituents, exist to protect faculty rights and are capable of initiating changes on campus. These senates experience cooperative or collaborative relationships with the administration and are involved in decisions that impact issues of faculty concern. At MCC this is generally demonstrated in preserving faculty rights in the areas of curriculum development and initiating changes in our academic policies. What have always been more difficult areas in which to demonstrate the importance of our function and influence have been those involving decisions to key administrative positions, reorganizations, or redefinitions of departments. Even so, several instances over the past year show strides have been made as the administration has sought collaboration and cooperation in making some important decisions. Whether or not we truly become a functional senate in these areas may ultimately depend more on our willingness to accept the responsibility of participating in the decision making process rather than the administration’s willingness to ask for it.
The September 11, 2007 Tribune included a submission from Lori VanDusen, Chair of MCC’s Board of Trustee. Several times throughout the article, Ms. VanDusen referred to the role of the senate’s Special Committee on Administrative Affairs (SCAA) in the process of selecting the next president of Monroe Community College. Ms. VanDusen’s actions demonstrate her sincerity in wanting faculty input. At the September 20th Faculty Senate meeting SCAA will outline a number of opportunities faculty will have to participate and influence the selection of MCC’s next president.
While the search for a college president will undoubtedly receive a lot of attention, other senate committees will be working to gather information and make appropriate recommendations in other areas of faculty concern. Examples include those relating to academic programs and facilities at DCC; academic policies that improve the likelihood of success for students placed on academic probation or suspension, and effective ways for academic departments to utilize data collected from Student Opinion Surveys of Faculty and Courses.
The work required to become an effective senate is often inconvenient, but the price of apathy and cynicism can be costly. During the coming year I challenge each of you to find time in your schedule to ensure our senate moves toward a truly functional model.
1Minor, James T. “Understanding Faculty Senates: Moving from Mystery to Models” The Review of Higher Education, Spring 2004, Vol. 27:3, pp. 343-363
Terri Tugel, President
Faculty Senate
09/18/2007 |