Revision to the faculty constitution up for vote

By Kristopher Hopkins

The Faculty Senate passed a proposed revision to the Faculty Senate Constitution labeled as "Plan B" April 7. Acceptance of the plan into the constitution will require a two-thirds vote approval by faculty within 10 days of Faculty Senate approval. "Briefly, Plan B incorporates most of the proposed changes in shared governance currently under consideration but keeps shared governance totally within the Senate Constitution," wrote Dale Cloninger, president of the Faculty Senate, in a letter of explanation to faculty dated April 7. The issues of shared governance at UH-Clear Lake have been under review during the past year. Philosophical differences among faculty and academic administrators have prevented modifications to the shared governance process. A lack of trust between faculty and some administrative personnel is at the center of the philosophical differences. "I think that there is an air of distrust on the part of both faculty and administrators," Provost Edward Hayes said. "I don't want to ascribe blame to either group. It is a matter of the way this process unfolded throughout the year and as a result of what I would consider lack of trust and effective leadership." "I will only say this, differences such as these concern either money or power," Cloninger said. "There is no money involved." If approved by faculty, the current proposal to revise shared governance gives a deadline of Dec. 1 for faculty and administration to resolve their differences with an alternative plan. If the current shared governance system does not pass the alternative plan, then Plan B will become effective. "Plan B will only go into effect if discussions between now and next fall fail to produce an amended version of the original plan proposed by the Ad Hoc Committee last September," Cloninger said. "In my view, any action that the Faculty Senate takes regarding a revision of shared governance is inappropriate," Hayes said. "What this really means is that the president will provide direction on how he wants the institution to proceed with any future revision of shared governance on this campus." A key issue, addressed by Staples in a faculty meeting held March 31 involves policy making. Staples said that shared governance is a policy making process, not the implementation of policy. Staples then posed the question of whether or not it was important that faculty, staff, students and administration be on every committee. Staples pointed out that there is a difference in university policy making and academic policy making. Smoking on campus, for example, is a university policy. If the university made a policy about smoking on campus, then students, staff and faculty would be expected to make a joint decision. Academic policy relates to issues or policies regarding admissions, standards and graduate programs at the university. A decision regarding academic policy would involve the faculty and administration. "The implementation of the policy is for whoever is responsible for implementing that policy," Staples said. "If the policy works, we keep it. If it doesn't work, it is brought back into the policy making process for some kind of revision." Until 1991 UH-Clear Lake was accustomed to a very traditional shared governance process. In 1991 the university adopted a more liberal view of shared governance. "Tradition says shared governance at a university is by and large between faculty and administration," Hayes said. "What the faculty did here 14 years ago when they voted into their constitution that they would allow staff and student participation changed the total culture of this institution and to go back and rescind that, I think you see some of the fall outs on campus now when you look at the groups that would be no longer included in the process." Bruce Palmer, dean of HSH, was involved with shared governance from 1992 through 1999 as a faculty member. Palmer participated in the implementation of changes to the shared governance process developed in 1991 to create the current plan of shared governance, which involved allowing staff and students as voting members of shared governance committees. "In my opinion only, the advantage of the current system is that it puts every constituency at the table when the policy is being discussed, Palmer said. "That does not mean every constituency has the same voice, but certainly it means that every constituency has a voice." The Student Government Association shares mixed emotions toward the shared governance review, but celebrates the opportunity for students to have a voice and vote on campus issues. "Although the current model works well for the most part, certain aspects require streamlining to ensure greater cost-effectiveness and efficiency," said Robert Ausmus, president of SGA. "It is the view of the current SGA that those people who will participate in its re-evaluation will adhere to the principles of inclusion, equity, fair play, respect and open communication." Hayes said that he is basically concerned with forming an effective process that gives each constituent group an opportunity to be heard as it is unacceptable to only hear one side of the situation. The Faculty Senate Executive Committee maintains that there is a general agreement that UH-Clear Lake is an academic institution, created and maintained by academics. "It is understandable that faculty want a direct relationship with academic administration, without staff and students being a part of that, which is a more traditional form of shared governance," said Staples at a university council meeting Dec.9.