tcnj wordmark

Status of Issues in Governance 2006-2007

Status of Issues in Governance 2006-2007

 

Issue/Charge

Committee

Status* and link to policy text

Revision of Governance 2005 Document (Revised charge for Committee on Planning and Priorities) Steering Approved
Revision of Governance 2005 Document (Revised section on Planning Councils) Steering Approved
Promotion and Reappointment Document

continued from 2005-2006

CFA

Approved by Board of Trustees

Composition of Liberal Learning Program Council:  Addition of Director of Writing Program Ex-Officio Steering Approved
Athletics Advisory Program Council Membership:  Addition of Faculty Representative to NCAA Steering Approved
Alcohol Policy

required to be reviewed every two years

CSCC Approved unchanged
Liberal Learning Option A for Selected Elem/ECE Programs CAP Approved
Final Examinations CAP Approved by Board of Trustees
Disciplinary Policies

 

Continued  from 2005-06

CSCC Step 2

 

 

Posting of Flyers CSCC Step 1
Advising Feedback CAP Referred  back to Advising and Student Support Planning Council
Undergraduate Students Taking Graduate Courses – Limit of Credits CAP Step 1
Defining Minors CAP Step 1
Double Counting for Minors in International Business and Art History CAP Step 1
Central Eurasian Studies Minor CAP Step 1
Civil Engineering major CAP Approved by Board of Trustees and State
Student Feedback on Teaching (item #15-overall summary) CAP Step 1
Scheduling and Academic Calendar Committee CPP Step 3

Last Updated: September, 2007


 

*          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.

Top