tcnj wordmark

Status of Issues in Governance 2005-2006

Status of Issues in Governance 2005-2006

Issue/Charge

Committee

Status*

Japanese Minor

CAP

Approved

Actuarial Science Minor

CAP

Approved

Academic Load – GPA Requirements for

CAP

Clarified by CAP

Advising Feedback

APC

Step 3

To be continued by CAP in 2006-07

Revision of Minor Approval Process

Steering

Revised by Steering

Self-Designed Major

CAP

Approved by BOT;

Pending State Approval

Allocation of research release time through SOSA

CFA

Reaffirmation of the current SOSA policies and procedures
Double counting courses for minors

CAP

Approved

Department/Program Strategic Planning

CPP

Final

Student Feedback on Teaching 

Student Feedback on Teaching Form

CAP

Step 3

Form Implemented

Composition of Liberal Learning Program Council

Steering

Director of Writing Program approved as member without vote
Walking at Graduation

Steering

Clarified by Steering

Implementation of Recommendations about  Faculty Work  

Moved forward from 2004-05

CFA

Step 3

Conference Committee Report

Alignment of Promotions Document with Reappointment/Tenure Document 

Moved forward from 2004-05

CFA

Step 3

Pending Provost’s response

Disciplinary Policies 

Moved forward from 2004-05

CSCC

Step 2

Task force to continue work in 2006-07

Student Travel Policy 

Moved forward from 2004-05

CSCC

Step1

Program Closure of Academic and Non-Academic Programs 

Moved forward from 2004-05

CPP and CAP

Approved by Board of Trustees

Last Updated 8-15-2006


 

*          Step #1 — Identifying and reporting the problem:  When a Standing Committee receives an issue from the Steering Committee, the first responsibility is to clearly articulate and report the problem to the campus community through regular updates to the campus community and the Governance Web Page (http://academicaffairs.pages.tcnj.edu/college-governance/).  The problem may have been set out clearly in the charge received from the Steering Committee, or it may be necessary for the Standing Committee to frame a problem statement.  The problem statement should indicate the difficulties or uncertainties that need to be addressed through new or revised policy, procedure, or program.  The problem statement should be broadly stated and should include a context such as existing policy or practice.  Problem statements may include solution parameters but should not suggest any actual solutions.  Clearly stated problems will lead to better recommendations.

Step #2 — Preparing a preliminary recommendation:  Once the campus community has received the problem statement, committees can begin to collect data needed to make a recommendation.  Committees typically receive input through committee membership, formal testimony, and open comment from affected individuals and all stakeholder groups.  Committees must be proactive in inviting stakeholder groups (including Student Government Association, Staff Senate and Faculty Senate) to provide formal testimony prior to developing a preliminary recommendation.  When, in the best judgment of the committee, adequate clarity of the principles contributing to the problem are known, a preliminary recommendation should be drafted and disseminated to the campus community through regular updates and the Governance Web Page.

Step #3 — Making a Final Recommendation:  Committees must use sound judgment to give the campus adequate time to review the preliminary recommendation before making their final recommendation.  Again, committees are expected to be proactive in receiving feedback on the preliminary recommendation.  If a full calendar year has passed since the formal announcement of the preliminary recommendation, the committee must resubmit a preliminary recommendation to the campus community.  When, in the best judgment of the committee, the campus community has responded to the proposed resolution of the issue, the committee shall send their final recommendation (complete documentation) to the Steering Committee.

Testimony

The presenting of testimony is central to the concept of shared governance.  All stakeholder groups will have an opportunity to provide input into governance issues through direct membership as well as invited testimony.  Individuals appointed or elected to the governance system are expected to take a broad institutional perspective relative to issues being considered.  In contrast, invited testimony will reflect the stakeholder perspective on the issue being considered.  Committees are expected to be proactive in inviting stakeholder groups to provide testimony at both step # 2 and #3 of the process.  Committees need to identify stakeholder groups that are interested in each particular issue and invite their testimony at scheduled Committee meetings or hearings.  Committees should report in their minutes which groups were targeted as stakeholders, how testimony was invited, the form of the testimony (written, oral, etc.), and the substantive content of the testimony.

7ads6x98y Top