GOVERNANCE TASKFORCE

MINUTES, August 12, 2004

AGENDA

1. 12:00: UPDATE ON WEBPAGE, ARTICLE IN RICE NEWS, AND OUR THREE "WORKING DOCUMENTS"
2. 12:15: VISITOR: GARY WIHL, DEAN OF HUMANITIES

Attending: Braam, Caldwell, Scott, Zeff, Crowell (FC liaison)

Guest: Gary Wihl, Dean of Humanities

1. UPDATE ON WEBPAGE AND DOCUMENTS

Caldwell gave an update on the webpage, including the new sections being set up to allow correspondence with Faculty Council and public postings on governance issues. Zeff proposed that the categories for discussion be clarified somewhat to draw the faculty into discussion more easily. Instead of "Faculty Senate," for example, he proposed a clear question: "Should the faculty meet in plenary session to make decisions, or should a large representative body, a Senate, have that power?" A set of such questions began to form. Caldwell will collect such questions via email and pass them on to Sarah Holloman for the webpage.

2. MEETING WITH GARY WIHL:

Wihl related his experience with faculty and shared governance at McGill University and Emory University. At Emory, Wihl was less involved with faculty governance and more with the administration .At McGill, however, which has a Faculty Senate system, Wihl served on the Steering Committee of the Senate. That committee plays a central role in the governance of the University, discussing matters ranging from budget and curriculum to general priorities for the University. The president of the University is on the Steering Committee and chairs Senate meetings. The Steering Committee together sets the agenda for meetings.

[More on the McGill system may be found at http://www.mcgill.ca/senate/.]

Wihl thought that the Steering Committee at McGill did an excellent job, and supported efforts to increase the stature of a similar executive committee at Rice. He defended close cooperation between faculty representative body and the administration, and stated that at least in the case of McGill University, the president did a good job as chair of Senate meetings.

The Task Force asked Wihl about his impressions of faculty meetings and governance during his first year at Rice. Wihl noted a number of curricular decisions that these meetings had decided. At the same time, he did not consider the meetings to be very effective.

Wihl made several remarks on faculty participation in governance:

• Faculty naturally protect their time; they will participate in governance, but only if that work is clearly useful.
• In his experience, faculty representatives in a senate system did, at times, promote the particular interest of their school or department over the general interest of the University, but by no means did so at all times.
• Untenured faculty should probably be involved in governance at some level, to give them a sense of the University enterprise, although their time also needs to be protected.
• If the members of Faculty Council or of the Steering Committee of a Faculty Senate is to be effective, they need to be relieved of the additional burden of Promotion and Tenure; Wihl agreed with the position of most members of the Task Force that P&T needs to be elected separately from Faculty Council or Steering Committee.

The role of non-tenure-track faculty in governance raises problems for the University, Wihl stated: they have a different kind of contract and a different relationship to the University than tenure-track faculty. Zeff and Caldwell noted the different positions on non-tenure-track faculty that had appeared in AAUP discussions at Rice: on the one hand, these groups should have some kind of representation, on the other hand tenure-track faculty have a different kind of stake in the University. The Task Force discussed alternative ways to provide a voice for non-tenure-track faculty at Rice.

Wihl did not take a position on whether faculty voting in full plenary session or voting through representatives would be preferable at Rice. He did state that a large senate could help foment a more serious attitude of the faculty to governance, especially if the point is to convince faculty members to be accountable for their votes. Elected representatives to a senate could have more of a stake in attending and voting in meetings than faculty members in general. He did, however, express concern that a small number of faculty would end up making governance their long-term task, when the point is to bring more faculty members into governance procedures.

The Task Force thanked Dean Wihl for his help in our ongoing discussion.

3. FUTURE MEETINGS

The Task Force plans to meet next week if another Dean or the Provost is able to attend the meeting. Otherwise, it will continue its informal email discussions on the proposed model for a Faculty Senate; on the proposal for a reformed Faculty Council; and on the documents concerning standing committees.