Four members of the Committee to Study Shared Governance met with the Faculty Senate to weigh the pros and cons of their seven recommendations like implementing a universal meeting time.

President Bill Perry formed the committee in Spring 2011, and the recommendations could take effect within three or four years.

Lynne Curry, a history professor and a member of the Committee to Study Shared Governance, said the idea of a universal meeting time was not to suggest that there would be only one meeting time.

“There would be a block of time where no classes are schedules and no commitments were already made for that time, thus freeing people up to have a meeting where different constituents of the university would be able to meet together,” Curry said.

Grant Sterling, a Faculty Senate member and a political science professor, argued that if governing bodies like the Faculty Senate and the Council on Academic Affairs decided to have meetings at the same time, they would not be able to send a representative to attend the meeting.

“The description of the action still seems to me to be in conflict with the idea that governing bodies would be scheduled during the time in which there would be no scheduled responsibilities because you can’t schedule around everything on campus,” Sterling said.

Charles Delman, a math professor and committee member, said the committee understood that it would be impossible to solve the problem perfectly with time and space constraints, but it would provide the framework for the opportunity to represent large constituencies.

The universal meeting time was the only recommendation that was not unanimously approved by the committee.

James Tidwell, the chair of the journalism department and a committee member, said he voted against the recommendation because it was impractical when considering all of the different class and lab times different departments have.

Angela Campbell, the Staff Senate president and committee member, said she thinks the block of time would help staff members who want to serve on a committee.

“There are many staff members who feel they can’t participate on committees and groups because of the staffing responsibilities, and a universal meeting time would allow supervisors to schedule work around that time so we could get more voices and encourage more participation,” Campbell said.

Perry endorsed the recommendation, and it will be presented to the Council on University Planning and Budget.

The committee members and Faculty Senate members also discussed the recommendation for the University Council, which would consist of: five members from the Faculty Senate, five members from the Staff Senate, five members from the Student Senate, a vice president, a dean and a member from the Council of Chairs.

Rebecca Throneburg, a Council on Academic Affairs member and a communication disorders and sciences professor, mentioned her concern that the University Council did not include academic councils like the CAA, the Council on Graduate Studies and the Council on Teacher Education.

In the original recommendation, the University Council would have the authority to determine what governing structures were necessary.

In Perry’s recommendations, he changed the name to the President’s Round Table, and described it as more of an advisory council instead of a power structure.

“It seems as though the proposal was made to cut down the number of committees and the amount of bureaucracy, but the (President’s Round Table) would create extra bureaucracy,” Sterling said.

The committee’s goal with the University Council was to bring all constituents together to have a broad communication level and address campus-wide issues, Curry said.

“If the council would provide a positive forum for communication among groups that don’t normally have an opportunity to interact with each other, then I think it would be worth it to have a little more bureaucracy,” Delman said.

Rachel Rodgers can be reached at 581-2812 or [email protected].