USVI Public Records

Document text

SGAC Response to President’s Question on Shared Governance at UVI ITEM RESPONSE MOTION ACTION 1. The number of senators (9 plus non-voting assistants with a quorum of 5). Could you explain how this small number of persons will function within the scope of a larger University and the need to have widespread representation and involvement throughout the process? I should note that within the general context of University senates, this is an unusually small number of members. UVI is a very small university. A small senate body with adequate time to work will be far more likely to obtain a quorum at meetings and to touch base with their constituencies. Diluting the senate with members who are unable to attend meetings or to make the necessary commitment will only weaken it. It was learned during the recent visit to Virginia State (which has a student body of 4500) that their University Council is comprised of 22 members. However, considering that UVI is striving to increase enrollment and number of faculty and staff, we would consider increasing the size of the voting membership to not more than 13 to compensate for future growth. Based on the practices of the universities recently visited and other institutions, the president plays a leading role in the decision- making process of the University councils. A commitment from the president of the University is critical to effective shared governance. We recommend retaining the 9 voting members. (CONSENSUS) SGAC Response to President’s Question on Shared Governance at UVI 2. The Senate to include faculty, staff and students but no administrators and Cabinet members. A review of the membership lists of several University Senates indicates that the President of the University and University officers/Cabinet are members of the Senate. Although these persons may be classified as ex- officio and non-voting, as the case may be, they are able to provide valuable information to allow for informed decision-making. The Senate Agenda is also usually set jointly by the Senate Executive Committee and the Cabinet. Cabinet members influence decisions; therefore, their presence as non-voting members allows important exchange of ideas and thought processes and results in informed decision making. Recognizing that the role of the University senate is advisory, the agenda should be set jointly by the voting members of the senate. The University executives serving on the UVI Senate shall include the president and 2 cabinet members as ex-officio members. The agenda shall be set by the voting members of the senate. (CONSENSUS) 3. The appointment of University committees “as normal” and not guided by the Senate bylaws. Generally, within the Senate structure, University committees operate through the Senate and are comprised of and chaired by senators. Other members of the University community who may not be members of the Senate may also serve on these committees. The emphasis here is on structured process involvement. Standing committees are established to assist with the operation of the University. These committees shall investigate, study and report on designated issues. Standing committees shall report to the University Senate at least once a year or as deemed necessary. Note: Language presented on the relationship between the proposed UVI Senate and University Standing committees requires reworking. Members of the committee are working on language. PENDING SGAC Response to President’s Question on Shared Governance at UVI 4. I further recommend the development of a model or process diagram/flow chart that illustrates how the Senate would operate viz a viz the Faculty Association, Staff Council, SGA, and Cabinet. A one-page summary outlining guidelines for the operation of the Senate would also be appropriate not only in building trust but also in getting the information regarding shared governance out to the University community. The diagram shown on the right displays the proposed model for shared governance at UVI. It attempts to avoid the visualization of the structure as hierarchical, but instead it promotes an open and equitable process for informed decision-making among each constituency and their area of responsibility. (CONSENSUS)