|
CSEA CONNECTION
by Nidal Kobaissi, CSEA president |
||
|
Governance—The good, the bad, Over the last two years I’ve become very familiar with how the governance structure works at Glendale College. When I first started participating, I was lost. It took about a year before I became acquainted enough with the process to participate actively and contribute to the decision-making process. Now, I think I have a much better understanding of what goes on. For the most part, the governance process works; it may have its glitches, but overall it works. Just like any other structure or decision-making body, governance can be manipulated and tweaked to benefit or to hinder programs, people and ideas. I have seen participants shoot something down because they have personal feelings about a particular matter and they use their personal experience as a rule of thumb about what is right and what is wrong, without any regard for what is best for the college or the entity they represent. I’ve also watched as grownups yell and sometimes lose their cool when things don’t go their way. This is no way to represent their constituents and is completely unprofessional. When the initial legislation was passed to enact the governance process, I am sure it was not the intention of the legislature to create more red tape or an avenue for manipulation by participants. It was intended to give people affected by administrative and academic decisions an opportunity to participate in the decision-making process and make recommendations for the Board of Trustees to consider. I wonder how many times some person or some group has made a recommendation based solely on their personal feelings or group agenda that ended up having a negative impact on our college. Fortunately, I don’t believe this happens too often. I’ve seen many colleagues take a stand and stop the bickering before it gets out of hand. We owe many thanks to these brave participants who put personal issues aside and make sure that the process works to benefit everyone at Glendale College. You might be asking, “Why does this happen?” My answer is that it happens because we sometimes get too involved in winning battles or proving guilt, pointing fingers or holding grudges. Some of us participate in self-serving political maneuvering and lose sight of what our real job is: to serve students by creating an atmosphere that nurtures open minds and provides objective education. However, the biggest problem is the lack of participation by the constituents themselves. All of us are too busy doing the jobs we were hired to do, and that leaves very little time to participate. As I have watched things unfold over the last two years, I’ve had mixed feelings about the process. I have no doubt that when things appear to be going bad, someone will almost always step up and make things right. It may not be the easiest thing to do, but it’s what must be done. We owe it to our students, our institution and ourselves. The governance process is not bad. I’m just highlighting what I feel we need to do to improve it. In most instances, shared governance has proven to be the best method of doing business. Participants should be commended for taking time out of their busy schedules to be part of this important process. Ultimately, if we need to blame someone for bad representation on a particular committee, we need to look at ourselves and ask one simple question… Would the result have been different if I had participated? & |
