The document summarizes the history and present structure of shared governance at Penn State University, focusing on the role of the Faculty Senate. It discusses how governance has evolved from autocratic models pre-1870s to the current system where faculty have an institutionalized role in decision-making through the Senate. The Senate has legislative, advisory, and other functions carried out by committees. It faces ongoing challenges to meaningful participation from administrative techniques that sideline faculty input as well as structural changes to the faculty and university.

1. Institutionalization of Faculty Role in
Shared Governance: The Faculty Senate
at Penn State University
Larry Catá Backer
Comparative Study in University Management
Summer 2015
Prof. Hideto Fukudome
Graduate School of Education
The University of Tokyo

2. Order of Presentation
• 1. History
• 2. Present Organization and Operation
• 3. The Structures of shared governance at
Penn State
• 4. Challenges and Future Development

3. Brief History
• In the beginning (1600s-1870s) —autocracy
– Before the modern American university took shape in the 1870s, institutional
governance was mainly in the hands of governing boards and the college
presidents they appointed
• With the introduction of research move toward internal
democratization (1870-1915)
• 1915: formation of AAUP among elite faculty—Professionalization
– the modern university was “predicated on the increasing professionalization of
American faculty, who would use their new status” to make claims to a “greater
role in institutional governance” and to the academic freedom necessary to
“fulfill their mission as professionals.”
• Democratization of Education 1940s-1980s—Institutionalization
• Change and Challenge (1980s-present)

4. Present Organization and Operation
• University of Maryland Policy on Shared Governance
– II. PRINCIPLES A. Final authority and responsibility for the welfare of
the USM and its institutions rests with the Board of Regents. . . .
– B. Shared governance procedures and principles apply at all levels
within the USM.
– C. Shared governance requires informed participation and
collaboration by faculty, students, staff, and administrators.
– D. Faculty, staff, and students shall have opportunities to participate,
appropriate to their special knowledge and expertise, in decisions that relate to:
• 1. Mission and budget priorities. . . . ; 2. Curriculum, course content, and instruction; 3.
Research; 4. Appointment, promotion, and tenure of all faculty members and the
development of policies that affect faculty welfare generally; 5. Development of human
resources policies and procedures for exempt and non-exempt staff; 6. Selection and
appointment of administrators; 7. Issues that affect the ability of students to complete
their education; and 8. Other issues that arise from time to time that affect the overall
welfare of the USM and/or its institutions.

5. The Structures of shared governance
at Penn State
• Functions
– Legislative; Advisory and Consultative; Forensic; Informational; Recognition
• Organization
– Senate leaders elected by all Senators, Senators represent each unit at the
university
– Function specific standing committees; Senate Council as gatekeeper; leadership
• Operation
– Interlocked meetings; Senate Leadership, Senate Council; Senate Standing
Committees, Senate Joint Task Forces
• Interlinking with Administration
– Faculty Advisory Committee, Senate representation on key administrative
committees
• Interlinking with Board of Trustees
– Senate participation on Board

6. Challenges and Future Development
• 10 administrative techniques that undermine shared
governance (http://lcbpsusenate.blogspot.com/2015/07/you-dont-have-authority-counting-down.html) :
– 1. "You don't have the authority.”
– 2. "We can't share that information.”
– 3. "Let's form a Task Force"
– 4. "This is a technical issue that requires administrative expertise”
– 5. "You have a conflict of interest”
– 6. "Let us define the premises for you”
– 7. "We consulted faculty; we reached out to specific faculty directly who
we thought had expertise”
– 8. "We consulted. . .we showed you the final draft shortly before roll out
and asked your opinion”
– 9. "You take too long. . we need to do this now."
– 10. "An outside agency is making us do this."

7. The Future
• Structural Challenges
– Change in composition of faculty
– Changes in character of university
• social function
– Changing nature of faculty participation
– Assessment
– Retaliation
– Changing nature of expertise
• Internal (administrative; faculty);
• external (trade organizations and benchmarking)

8. Thanks
• Essays on faculty
governance are
available at
Governing University
Governance:
– http://lcbpsusenate.bl
ogspot.com/
• Penn State’s Faculty
Senate website can be
found here:
• http://senate.psu.edu
/