200 likes | 370 Views
Trends in Academic Governance in Canada. Glen A. Jones Ontario Research Chair in Postsecondary Education Policy and Measurement. Agenda. Overview of university governance in Canada G overning boards S enates Recent findings Key issues. University Governance in Canada.
E N D
Trends in Academic Governance in Canada Glen A. Jones Ontario Research Chair in Postsecondary Education Policy and Measurement
Agenda • Overview of university governance in Canada • Governing boards • Senates • Recent findings • Key issues
University Governance in Canada • Colonial “government” boards made up of members of colonial legislature • 19th century experimentation • 20th century – bicameralism as the dominant model
Canadian approach • Separate act creating university as autonomous, not-for-profit, private corporation • Act provides university with broad mission • Act creates Governing Board, Senate • Many unique arrangements (Quebec, Newfoundland, etc.)
Governing Boards • Jones and Skolnik (1997) study of 45 university boards • Average size of board = 27 members • Internal members = 1/3 of total • Faculty = 17% of total members • Students = 9 % of total members • President = voting member of all boards
Governing Boards • External members = 2/3 of total • Lay-members appointed by government or board • 90% of universities include alumni members • Members – most are mature and well-educated
Governing Boards • Occupation of members: • Education sector (37% - includes internal) • Business (26% - frequently executives) • Professions (13% - law, accounting, medicine) • Other sectors (11% - Non-profit, government) • Retired (11%)
Governing Boards • Jones/Skolnik study suggested that boards are working reasonably well • Members believed they had the information and knowledge they need • Boards were viewed as effective with clear roles
University Senates • Jones, Shanahan and Goyan (2004) focusing on senior academic decision-making body (senate, general faculties council, academic board) • Average size of senate = 61 (considerable variation)
University Senates • Internal members = 95% • Faculty = 44% (100% of Universities) • Students = 18% (100%) • VPs/Deans = 12% (76%) • Other senior admin = 11% (83%) • Staff = 6% (54%) • Board members = 3% (49%) • Affiliated colleges = 2% (27%) • Others = 2% (22%) • Alumni = 2% (34%) • President/Rector/Principal = 2% (90%) • Government Appointment = 1% (10%) • Chancellor = 1% (41%)
University Senates • Only 44% of members believed it was “effective” • 65% believe that it is an important forum for discussion • Major differences in the role that senate members believe it SHOULD play compared with those it DOES play
University Senates • Play a role in establishing research policy • Should = 78% agree • Does = 44% agree • Play a role in determining the future direction of the university • Should = 89% agree • Does = 43% agree • Also: fundraising priorities, strategic research directions, budget, quality assessment
University Senates • Major findings • Faculty are not a majority of senate members • Important forum for communication, but not an effective governing body • Concerns about the role of the senate in relation to strategic academic decisions • Concerns about the role of the senate in relation to board, administration, and faculty association • Need to reform
University Senates • Currently repeating the senate study with Lea Pennock (Saskatchewan) and Jeff Leclerc (Manitoba) • Received responses form 48 university secretaries (40 completed responses) and currently surveying senate members
Have there been changes to senate? • In legislation? (29% said yes) • In constitutional documents (43%) • In committee structure (73%)
What are some of these changes? • New universities • Removing government appointments • Representation from contract/part-time faculty • Increasing faculty representation (new faculties/departments) • Rationalizing committee structure
Some key issues • Faculty engagement (with competing priorities) • Scope of authority (academic planning, quality, research, fundraising, budget) • Size and committee structure (Capable of making decisions? Using faculty time wisely) • Orientation and education
Moving forward … • Academic governance is key to the future of higher education in Canada • We need to rethink academic governance for the 21st century
Thank you!gjones@oise.utoronto.ca www.glenjones.ca