More on Shared Governance
Governance at the University of Baltimore
I - 6.00 POLICY ON SHARED GOVERNANCE IN THE UNIVERSITY SYSTEM OF MARYLAND
(Approved by the Board of Regents October 4, 1996; Amended on August 25, 2000)
I. PURPOSE
The University System of Maryland (USM) consists of 13 institutions with distinct but complementary missions. The Board of Regents recognizes the distinct and complementary roles that the Regents, the Chancellor, the Presidents, other administrators, the faculty, the staff, and students have in governing the USM institutions.
Moreover, the Board also recognizes that as higher education changes and evolves, implementation of the fundamental principles of shared governance set forth below must also continue to evolve.
This policy affirms the Board's commitment to these fundamental principles, which shall guide the development of institution- specific shared governance practices consistent with this policy.
II. PRINCIPLES
A. Final authority and responsibility for the welfare of the USM and its institutions rests with the Board of Regents. The Board may delegate to the Chancellor and the Presidents portions of that authority for the purpose of assuring the effective management of the System and its institutions.
B. Shared governance procedures and principles apply at all levels within the USM.
C. Shared governance requires informed participation and collaboration by faculty, students, staff, and administrators.
D. Faculty, staff, and students shall have opportunities to participate, appropriate to their special knowledge and expertise, in decisions that relate to:
1. Mission and budget priorities for the University System of Maryland and its constituent institutions;
2. Curriculum, course content, and instruction;
3. Research;
4. Appointment, promotion, and tenure of all faculty members and the development of policies that affect faculty welfare generally;
5. Development of human resources policies and procedures for exempt and non-exempt staff;
6. Election and appointment of administrators;
7. Issues that affect the ability of students to complete their education; and
8. Other issues that arise from time to time that affect the overall welfare of the USM and/or its institutions.
E. While some members of shared governance bodies may be appointed, the substantial majority should be elected by their constituencies. Such bodies should elect their own presiding officers.
III. PRACTICE
A. Each USM institution shall have in place written procedures and formal structures that provide for appropriate collaboration and communication between and among administration, faculty, staff, and students. The structures and procedures shall be developed cooperatively, disseminated widely prior to adoption, and reviewed periodically according to procedures and timelines established in the documents governing institutional practice.
B. Each constituent institution within the USM shall have either a single shared governance body for the institution as a whole, or separate bodies for faculty, staff, and students. At least 75% of the voting members shall be elected by their constituencies. This percentage shall not apply to paragraph G. below. These bodies shall have written bylaws and shall meet regularly.
C. Each institution shall define the subject matter appropriate for faculty, staff, and/or student participation in the shared governance process.
The definitions shall recognize:
1. The responsibility of administrators for forming and articulating a vision for the institution, for providing strategic leadership, and for managing its human resources, finances, and operations;
2. The central role of the faculty in the institution's teaching, research, and outreach programs, including the assessment of the quality of these activities through peer review;
3. The essential support provided by staff in facilitating the institution's operations and the legitimate interest of the staff in participating in the development of policies and procedures that affect them and the welfare of their institutions;
4. That students are the institution's main academic educational focus and that they have a legitimate interest in matters affecting their ability to complete their education, including but not limited to costs, grading, and housing; and
5. That there is a role for each group in the search for and selection of key institutional administrators.
D. Institutional structures and procedures for shared governance shall address the role of non-tenured and non-tenure track, part-time, adjunct, and other faculty ranks as established by Regents' policy, as well as other employees on long-term contracts.
E. The Presidents and other institution-wide administrators shall consult regularly with the institution's elected representative body or bodies. This consultation will be in accordance with accountability plans developed collaboratively by the participants. These accountability plans shall be subject to the approval of the Board of Regents. The Presidents shall report annually to the Chancellor on the implementation of these accountability plans, and the Chancellor in turn shall report to the Board.
F. The Chancellor and other System administrators shall consult regularly with the legislatively-mandated, System-wide representative bodies. The Chancellor shall report annually to the Board on the status of these consultations.
G. The Presidents shall assure that shared governance, based upon the principles and practices in this policy, is appropriately implemented in all sub-units, and are accountable for assuring that other administrators follow them in unit-level deliberations.
H. Effective implementation of shared governance shall be a component of evaluations of the Chancellor, the Presidents, and other administrators as designated by the Chancellor for the USM Office, and by the President for the institutions.
I. In keeping with Principle II.C., all participants share with their Presidents and the USM leadership responsibility for:
1. Being informed on issues that confront higher education, the USM, and the institutions;
2. Acting within time constraints that are imposed by external agencies and influences, sometimes with little or no notice;
3. Sharing appropriate information and providing timely feedback;
4. Recognizing the specific goals and needs of the institution, and being accountable to the constituencies represented; and
5. Distinguishing the roles played by various units and individuals in decision making and administration.
J. Given the dynamic nature of institutional governance, it is understood
1. That there may be occasions when institutional leaders must act in the best interest of the institution on major issues affecting the institutional constituencies without full benefit of the shared governance process. In such cases the representative bodies shall be informed in a timely manner and have an opportunity to comment on the issues.
2. That administrators shall inform important constituencies in a timely manner if they choose to disregard, in whole or in part, the advice and recommendation of constituencies, and they should provide the reasons for their decision. In these cases, the shared governance body may, if it so chooses, present a written statement of its position and/or any objections to the decision as part of the institution's or unit's record on the issue.
K. Faculty and staff who do not hold administrative appointments, and all students, may express their opinions freely on all shared governance matters without retaliation. Administrators, including faculty holding administrative appointments, may also express their opinions freely during policy discussions, without retaliation, but once a decision is reached they are expected to support and implement policy as determined by the institutional leadership.
L. Shared governance requires a commitment of resources and time from the USM institutions. Each institution shall provide a proper level of resources, as determined by the President, to faculty, staff, and students to allow them to carry out their shared governance responsibilities effectively.
M. While participation in governance by faculty, staff, and students is necessary and important for the well-being of the USM and its institutions, the final responsibility for decision-making rests with institutional Presidents, the Chancellor, or the Board of Regents, who are ultimately held accountable by the public and its elected leaders.
at UB
SHARED GOVERNANCE STRUCTURE AT THE UNIVERSITY OF BALTIMORE(As Amended November 30, 2001)
The University of Baltimore adopted a revised governance structure in Fall 2001.
Current Governance Structure
The chief campus-wide governance body at the University of Baltimore is the University Council (formerly the Provost Council). Before describing its role, it is important to understand its composition and its relationship to other shared governance bodies of the campus. Shared governance at the UB begins in the individual colleges, with college senates (Business and Liberal Arts) and faculty councils (Law). These are bodies of the whole, i.e., they include all full-time faculty in each of school or college, and, in the case of the School of Law, adjunct faculty as well. They address the entire range of issues identified the Board of Regents' Policy on Shared Governance (as amended, August 25, 2000), Section II. Sub. D., as those issues apply to the particular college or school. In Business and Liberal Arts the chairs are elected, while, in Law the Dean serves as chair, ex officio. Each school senate or council elects two voting representatives to the campus-wide University Council.
The University Faculty Senate (UFS) consists of the chairs of the Business and Liberal Arts Senates, three additional elected representatives each from Business and Liberal Arts, and four from Law (since the Dean serves as chair of Law Faculty Council). In addition, UB's two elected CUSF representatives serve on the UFS. This body then elects its own chair, who also serves on the University Council and on the Planning Committee. The USF is largely advisory. Through its chair, the UFS receives minutes of the University Council and Executive Council, meets periodically with campus officers, raises issues of concern and makes recommendations for action to either the school senates or the University Council, as appropriate.
The UB staff is organized into two campus-wide bodies, the Classified Staff Council and the Administrative Staff Council. All staff in these respective categories are eligible to participate, and each body elects its own chair. These bodies are advisory to the campus administration, meet periodically with campus leaders, and receive the minutes of campus-level governance bodies. Each elects one voting representative to the University Council.
There are three student organizations at UB, the Undergraduate Senate, the Graduate Senate, and the Student Bar Association (SBA). These organizations participate in the development and management of student activities and are advisory to both their respective academic programs and to the campus governance bodies. They meet periodically with school and campus leaders. Each of these bodies elects one voting representative to the University Council.
Returning to the University Council, this is the ultimate review and approval body for institutional mission, curriculum and academic/research policy, as well as personnel (include promotion and tenure) and student related policies. Detailed procedures to implement these campus policies are developed by a wide variety of committees and administrative offices, and the individual colleges may adopt more detailed internal policies within the framework of policy established by the University Council. The actions of the University Council are, of course, subject to presidential review and approval and are constrained by BOR of Regents, MHEC and State of Maryland regulations. The University Council also receives detailed reports on the campus budget from the Vice President for Administration and Finance and the Executive Council and votes on budget priorities.
During the Summer of 2001, following a system mandate that the University Governance body be 75% elected membership, the Provost convened a group of faculty to recommend changes to the Council. They worked over the Spring 2001 and the Summer 2001 semesters to formulate their recommendation. These were presented to the Provost's Council, and a lively discussion ensued.
Outcome of Governing Revisions
On July 23, 2001 the Provost's Council approved a restructuring plan for that organization. The Provost's Council voted to replace itself with the University Council (UBUC), effective immediately. The UBUC is the central policy-recommending body of the University. The UBUC is the highest level in shared governance and reports to the President of the University.
The University Council approves new academic programs and major revisions of existing academic programs, and new and revised academic policies. The UBUC also makes recommendations to the President on strategic planning and budget priorities, and on a wide range of issues affecting campus climate, public safety, administrative practices, etc.
Seventy-five percent of the voting membership of the University Council is elected by student, faculty, and staff groups. The sixteen voting members of UBUC are:
A. Six Elected Faculty Members, Two From Each School, Including the Current President of the University Faculty Senate
B. One Elected Library Faculty Member
C. One Elected Classified Staff Member
D. One Elected Exempt Staff Member
E. Three Elected Student Representatives, One From Each School
F. The Provost (Non-Elected)
G. One Dean, Chosen Annually by the Deans (Non-Elected)
H. One Vice President, Chosen Annually by the Vice Presidents (Non-Elected)
I. One Student Affairs Representative (Non-Elected)
The chair of the University Council will be elected annually by the Membership from among the elected members. The Office of the Provost will provide administrative support and services for the UBUC.
In addition to the above voting membership, the University Council also includes the UB President as a non-voting member.