Status of Issues in Governance 2009-2010

Issue/Charge	Committee	Status* and Link to Policy Text
Student travel policy Reactivated from 2004-2005	CSCC	Step 2
Advising Feedback Continued from 2007-08	CAP	Referred  to Advising and Student Support Planning Council
Student Feedback on Teaching	CAP	Step 1
Review of class schedule grid Continued  from 2007-8	CAP	Step 3
Five-Year review of tenured faculty Continued from 2007-08	CFA	Step 3
Involuntary Withdrawal for Health or Safety Reasons Review of previously approved policy	CSCC	Step 3
New Course Approval Process	CAP	Step 2
Syllabi	CAP	Step 2
Academic Load (student overload)	CAP	Step 1
Modifications/Clarifications to the Reappointment, Tenure, and Promotion Document	CFA	Cover memo Step 3
Types of Majors	CAP	Step 1
Interdisciplinary Standards (for reappointment, tenure, and promotion)	CFA	Step 1
Martin Luther King Day	CPP/CSCC	Step 1:  CSCC Response
Chinese Minor	CAP	Step 1
Business and Society Minor	CAP	Step 1
Counselor Education Program Changes Proposal	CAP	Step 1
Graduate Certificate in Women’s and Gender Studies Proposal	CPP	Step 1
Maximum number of transfer credits in Engineering Request from School of Engineering	CAP	Step 1
Honor Code	CPP	Step 1
Faculty Office Hours	CFA	Step 1
Mid-Semester Grades/Evaluations	CAP	Step 1

 Last Updated: November 16, 2009

---

Step #1 -- Identifying and reporting the problem:  When a Standing Committee receives an issue from the Steering Committee, the first responsibility is to clearly articulate and report the problem to the campus community through regular updates to the campus community and the Governance Web Page (www.tcnj.edu/~steering ).  The problem may have been set out clearly in the charge received from the Steering Committee, or it may be necessary for the Standing Committee to frame a problem statement.  The problem statement should indicate the difficulties or uncertainties that need to be addressed through new or revised policy, procedure, or program.  The problem statement should be broadly stated and should include a context such as existing policy or practice.  Problem statements may include solution parameters but should not suggest any actual solutions.  Clearly stated problems will lead to better recommendations.

Step #2 -- Preparing a preliminary recommendation:  Once the campus community has received the problem statement, committees can begin to collect data needed to make a recommendation.  Committees typically receive input through committee membership, formal testimony, and open comment from affected individuals and all stakeholder groups.  Committees must be proactive in inviting stakeholder groups (including Student Government Association, Staff Senate and Faculty Senate) to provide formal testimony prior to developing a preliminary recommendation.  When, in the best judgment of the committee, adequate clarity of the principles contributing to the problem are known, a preliminary recommendation should be drafted and disseminated to the campus community through regular updates and the Governance Web Page.

Step #3 -- Making a Final Recommendation:  Committees must use sound judgment to give the campus adequate time to review the preliminary recommendation before making their final recommendation.  Again, committees are expected to be proactive in receiving feedback on the preliminary recommendation.  If a full calendar year has passed since the formal announcement of the preliminary recommendation, the committee must resubmit a preliminary recommendation to the campus community.  When, in the best judgment of the committee, the campus community has responded to the proposed resolution of the issue, the committee shall send their final recommendation (complete documentation) to the Steering Committee.

Testimony

The presenting of testimony is central to the concept of shared governance.  All stakeholder groups will have an opportunity to provide input into governance issues through direct membership as well as invited testimony.  Individuals appointed or elected to the governance system are expected to take a broad institutional perspective relative to issues being considered.  In contrast, invited testimony will reflect the stakeholder perspective on the issue being considered.  Committees are expected to be proactive in inviting stakeholder groups to provide testimony at both step # 2 and #3 of the process.  Committees need to identify stakeholder groups that are interested in each particular issue and invite their testimony at scheduled Committee meetings or hearings.  Committees should report in their minutes which groups were targeted as stakeholders, how testimony was invited, the form of the testimony (written, oral, etc.), and the substantive content of the testimony.