Frequently Asked Questions
General Questions
Why are you trying to change both the constitution and the bylaws at the
same time? Why not take care of the constitution first and then address the bylaws?
There are many faculty who care more about the bylaws than the constitution.
They don't want to buy into changes in the constitution, which they perceive
as diminishing campus autonomy, unless they are confident that the bylaws will
protect their campus interests. In addition, it seems a doable task. The UAC
believes it has developed both the needed changes to the constitution for
one University Senate and the necessary adaptations to the bylaws to make
one University Senate work. To address only the constitution without getting
down to the nitty-gritty about how one Senate will in fact operate through
its bylaws provides an insufficient basis for deciding whether to accept
the constitutional changes.
In ACD 112-01: Academic Constitution and Bylaws, Preamble...why the deletion
about the "function within the range of their authority and responsibility as
....?
What follows that "as" is "as circumscribed by state law and the Board of Regents."
A preamble should be something more than simply saying that we're going to operate
within the constraints imposed on us. That literally goes without saying. A preamble
should be a more positive statement about the value os shared governance and the
positive aspirations we have for it.
Article I of the Constitution Return to top
Why is there no longer a president of the Academic Assembly?
Because the Tempe campus
is home to almost 80% of the Assembly, there is a distinct possibility that
Tempe could dominate any university-wide election of officers. At this formative
stage of a multi-campus system, it seems both fairer and effective to continue
to have campus-wide leaders, elected by those most likely to know and best able
to decide who can represent them, and create a plural executive in the form
of the University Academic Council. The Council will select a chair from among
the four campus presidents, but the chair is a primus inter pares only in the
sense that he or she convenes and chairs meetings of the Council and serves
as a principle communications liaison between the Council and the administration.
If there is no longer a president of the Academic Assembly, why is there a
secretary of the Assembly and Senate?
The Senate and the Assembly
has the normal reporting, organizational, and archival needs of a governance structure.
This does not mean that campus representational bodies may not wish to select
a secretary of that body, but it does mean that the University Assembly and the
University Senate need a secretary. The term has been changed from one to two
years, making it consistent with the University ombudsperson, and for the same
reason. There is a learning curve that makes a two-year position a more efficient
and effective service period. On the other hand, three years may simply be too
much of a commitment to ask of anyone and might discourage otherwise interested
and good people from being willing to serve.
Article II of the Constitution Return
to top
Why create a single University Senate?
The current system of different
Senates for the different campuses does not work. There is no question that the
pace of change at ASU has quickened beyond the ability of separate Senates to
keep up. President Crow has asked for a single Senate ever since his arrival.
For him, the ability to have a single Senate that can meet the interactive demands
of shared governance is critical. Rapid change requires a Senate that is nimble,
efficient, and timely. That is best achieved by a single Senate.
Will a single Senate obviate campus Senates?
No. The proposal envisions functioning
shared governance structures at departmental, school/college, and campus levels.
It may well be, for example, that the representatives to the campus body might
be the senators to the University Senate. While proclaiming that ASU is one university
in many places, not a system with different campuses or one with branch campuses,
the campuses are imbued with different and distinct missions. Maintaining a campus
representative body that can address campus concerns is still a priority under
this one university senate proposal.
How will a single Senate operate?
A single Senate for four campuses
means that the Senate meeting will occur simultaneously on all four campuses.
Rooms have been designated and equipment and human resources are committed to
providing an effective audio/video presence from any campus location. No one campus
will be designated as the primary meeting location. Any senator may attend the
meeting at any one of the locations. The chair of any particular meeting will
be one of the four campus presidents and the presiding chair may be at any one
of the four locations. Presentations and discussions can take place from any of
the locations. Motions and amendments can come from senators at any location.
How will the Senate be constituted?
The proposal puts forward provides one representative
from each degree-granting department under 40 Academic Assembly members, one additional
member for departments with 40 to 99 members, and a third senator for any department
with 100 or more Assembly members. The system for selecting senators to represent
a department must be determined by the Academic Assembly members from that department.
The presumption is that the senators will be elected by the Assembly members,
but it is possible for the Assembly members to establish other systems (e.g.,
random selection, rotation, volunteer), except that the senator may not be appointed
by the administrative head of the department. Departments are free not to participate
in the Senate. Very small units on whom Senate representation might impose a special
burden are welcome to join with other units to create a representational unit.
Nondegree granting units that nonetheless are home to Assembly members (e.g.,
University Libraries, Emeritus College) may also submit proposals for their effective
representation in the Senate. The purpose of the Senate is to create a representative
forum for two-way communication between the administration and the Academic Assembly.
Representation in the Senate is intended to be sufficiently flexible to meet the
special needs of unique units, and any unit can petition for representation that
fulfills this communication goal. In addition to the senators, the three presidential-track
campus-wide elected officers from each camps will be in the Senate. Other ex-officio
members will include certain members of the administration as has been the custom,
albeit usually as nonvoting members.
Is there any potential for extra representation if a college grants degrees
as well as units within the college?
No. The focus is on the home
unit of the Assembly member, which in most cases is a degree-granting department.
Why give power to a Council to meet and make decisions over the summer?
It's less about making decisions
than offering faculty/AP input during a time when the Senate is unavailable. We
can shut down over the summer some of the Senate committee functions, such as
many curriculum, grievance, and personnel matters, but the university does not
shut down over the summer. Shared governance has taken a real hit over the years
by not providing a working group with whom the administration can work in the
summer. The president of the Senate was typically available, but under the new
constitution creating a single senate for four campuses, it makes more sense to
have campus presidents and a plural executive board rather than a single president
for the whole Assembly. The constitution and bylaws basically substitute in as
Council responsibilities those previously given to the single president, including
working over the summer as representatives of the Senate and Assembly. The Council
remains answerable to the Senate, but it does provide a superior presence over
one person in terms of working with the administration while representing diverse
perspectives of the Assembly and Senate.
Article III of the Constitution Return
to top
Why remove the requirement for bylaw amendments to be approved by the Assembly?
The current constitution is inconsistent. It provides the Senate the power to
create bylaws, but does not allow it to amend bylaws. Bylaws address how the
Senate organizes itself and operates. The Senate should be able to create and
amend its own bylaws. In the absence of any other specification, bylaws amendments
would require a 2/3 vote of the Senate membership for approval.
Why have amendments proposed by Assembly members go to the Council rather
than directly to the Senate?
Petitions bringing forward
language for a constitutional amendment should be vetted to help insure that
the petitioners are accomplishing what they seek to accomplish. The UAC can
best work with petitioners to make the amendment the most effective it can be
to accomplish what the petitioners seek. The next paragraph in the constitution
(D) requires the Council to submit these proposed amendments to the Senate,
so the Council is not a gatekeeper exercising independent judgment on which
can go forward.
Why did you remove the requirement for the grievance committees to submit an annual report to the Senate?
That requirement currently resides individually with each of the three grievance groups.
The proposed amendments do not remove that requirement. Rather the requirement was shifted
to the Clearinghouse Committee, which consists of the chairs of the three grievance groups.
In this manner, one report on grievances would come to the Senate and it would contain
information up front about the number of grievances filed and the Clearinghouse Committee
decisions regarding how to route those grievances, in addition to the information from each
of the three groups. The change is designed to make the report more complete, more consistent
among the different groups, and more efficient.
Why did you specify that Assembly members may vote only for those nominees
for committee positions from their own campus?
University committees need representation
from the different campuses. Assembly members are most likely to vote for individuals
whom they know. Generally, most of us are likely to know better those who inhabit
our own campus. Moreover, as representatives from a particular campus, it seems
both prudent and fair that they be elected by members from their own campus. It
seems to the UAC that you would no more allow members from another campus to select
your campus representatives than you would allow members from another department
to select your senator(s).
Why did you delete the grievance committees' establishing procedural guidelines in favor of guidelines
developed by the General Counsel's office?
The change was this "2. The
committee shall elect a chair from its membership and shall establish written
procedural guidelines. The
committee shall operate according to the “Grievance Committee Hearing Process
and Procedures” compiled by the ASU Office of General Counsel. It seemed
to us initially that procedural guidelines regarding grievances should have
some permanence in the ACD Policies and Procedures, not ephemeral procedures
developed anew annually by a committee, so the establishment of procedural guidelines
by committee had to go. When trying to determine what should be specified, we
accepted language that presumably actually described what does take place. It
appears we may be mistaken, and are looking to clarify what actually occurs
and make certain that the language assures authoritative faculty and AP input
in consultation with general counsel. An amendment to this proposed language
change will be submitted.
Why was the Dean of the University Libraries removed from membership on CAPC?
That was an error. In changing the title to University Librarian,
the deletion of the old title was made but the new title was not inserted. We will place that change
in the omnibus amendment being assembled to make corrections and perfecting alterations.