| |
Last spring, the Governance
Review Committee recommended a change in the language of the Governance
document, and this change was approved by the College Executive
committee. The
old language read: After a term is completed the member may be replaced
or reappointed if there has not been sufficient interest from another
person to serve.
The new language reads: “It is
in the interest of the governance process to ensure the widest possible
participation. Although the importance of expertise is recognized,
rotation is strongly encouraged. After a term is completed the member
may be replaced or reappointed.”
This language was adopted after a request for clarification
from the Guild executive. The
question they put to us for clarification was whether committee members
must
be rotated off
governance
committees to make room for
faculty who have expressed an interest in serving on those committees.
This raised a number of issues which GRC attempted to sort out. We soon
saw that there were competing rationales for appointments.
The first rationale is obvious. We seek to encourage the widest
possible participation in campus governance in order to promote and
sustain a culture of shared governance. A situation where committee
work remains indefinitely in the same hands is clearly unacceptable.
Further, the value of wide participation necessitates that, for a while
at least, some committee members are going to learn by the seat of their
pants. The payoff is a wider circle of expertise as well as an
encouragement of future leadership.
Of course, experience is also desirable and committee members
frequently serve as the institutional memory of their committees.
Further, the various executives who appoint members (the Senate, Guild,
and CSEA presidents and the Administration) should be allowed to choose
individuals who will support the goals of their constituents. In some
cases, members must be jointly appointed by two executives. This has
the effect of shrinking the pool of candidates for the committee in
question. And finally, some care has to be taken in the mix of
personalities on committees: no one wants to be caught in a situation
akin to sharing space with two scorpions in a bottle.
Ideally, then, executives will choose representatives who represent
a mix of experience and fresh perspectives. An eye should be kept on
promoting our future leaders while at the same time drawing on the
expertise of our veterans. Accordingly, the GRC recommended the policy
permitting the executives to reappoint at their discretion, but added
the participatory language to urge the executives to cast their nets
widely. With this in mind, we urge everyone to jump into those nets and
help governance thrive.
&
back to top
|
|