The Campus Assembly
The Campus Assembly is UMM’s most visible, college-wide symbol
of shared governance. Reflecting UMM’s traditions and commitments
it is inclusive, with representatives from all campus-based constituencies:
faculty, both regular and part-time; academic staff, students, civil
service and bargaining unit employees. It is both a forum for deliberation
and a site for action. As the UMM Constitution puts it, “The Assembly,
as the policy-making and legislative body, exercises general legislative
authority and responsibility in all educational matters concerning the
Morris Campus delegated to it by the University Senate and Board of
Regents.” According to the University Senate Constitution, “Each
campus shall determine its own assembly and shall adopt its own constitution
and by-laws, consistent with the constitution and by-laws of the University
Senate.” UMM’s Assembly encompasses such matters as “curriculum,
library, honors, functions, admissions, graduation, teacher education,
residential life, athletics, student activities, awards, financial aid,
student behavior, and campus events.” While most Assembly decisions
are taken by the whole body, the voting of degrees and academic honors
for students are reserved to the faculty, and some elections are conducted
by constituencies rather than the membership.
Much of the work of the Assembly is done by its committees, whose
composition and charges are described in the Constitution and By-Laws.
While the Assembly may delegate its powers to its committees or to
other bodies, most items of general interest return to the Assembly
for final review. As it has evolved in recent years, the Assembly
meets as a whole several times a year, but its committees may meet
considerably more often. An elected Executive Committee sets Assembly
agendas and proposes committee memberships.
Not all of UMM’s shared governance functions rest with the
Assembly. UMM’s academic divisions—Education, Humanities,
Science and Mathematics, and Social Sciences--comprise “the
basic unit[s] of the campus” and have primary responsibility
to advise the Division Chairs about divisional budgets, programs,
and policies. Curricular decision making begins here with discipline
and Divisional review of course proposals prior to submission to the
Assembly’s Curriculum Committee and to the Assembly itself.
Personnel matters are also largely a divisional matter. Under the
all-University Tenure Code, the divisions have primary responsibility
for making recommendations about faculty appointments, retention,
and promotion. For many years, elected student representatives have
carried undergraduate concerns to the faculty of UMM’s academic
disciplines and divisions, often serving in an advisory capacity on
search committees.
Two other bodies address issues of individual or more general concern.
A Campus Grievance Committee contains both UMM representatives and
members from outside the campus, and works with the University Grievance
Officer. An elected Campus Consultative Committee, which includes
faculty, students, and staff, does not report to the Campus Assembly,
but is designated to “discuss special problems” and “to
facilitate communication” where appropriate.
A brief look at the history of UMM’s Campus Assembly illustrates
the growth and change of campus governance since the early days of
the college during the 1960s. During the campus’s first decade
UMM had an Assembly that had no student or civil service representation.
The 1967 Constitution observed that “part-time faculty normally
shall be without vote” in Divisional matters. Yet the Assembly
gathered frequently, sometimes every week, in town meeting fashion
to discuss the campus mission. A substantial revision of the Constitution
took place during the 1969-1970 academic year when a small task force
appointed in February 1970 held nineteen meetings before presenting
a draft to the campus in May. After considering alternative forms
of organization, the committee proposed an Assembly consisting of
faculty members working more than one-third time, student members
at a ratio of 1:100, and civil service members including all directors
and two civil servants elected at large. This inclusive approach continued
through subsequent revisions, especially the change in 1982 incorporating “academic
professionals” as faculty and “academic administrative
staff” as civil servants with an addition of civil service elected
membership on a basis of 1:50. Taking into account the increased numbers
of faculty, today’s Assembly is a much larger body than that
of earlier times, with about 200 members.
Also in the early 1980s, a substantial revision of the By-Laws transformed
the committee structure. Four Assembly Committees—Campus Resources
and Planning, Student Services, Curriculum, and Scholastic—achieved
special prominence, the Assembly deleted several committees, and others
became Adjunct Committees reporting to the new Assembly Committees,
but with a sunset provision. Each Adjunct Committee had to be reauthorized
every two years after justifying itself to its parent committee. Adjunct
Committees have included a Faculty Development Committee (reporting
to CRPC); Teacher Education, Minority Experience (later Multi-Ethnic
Experience), and International Programs committees (reporting to Curriculum);
and Academic Support and Functions and Awards committees (reporting
to Scholastic). These revisions also established term limits and essentially
precluded Assembly members from serving on more than one committee,
all with a view toward involving as many as possible in this aspect
of governance. In subsequent years an Assessment of Student Learning
Committee has been added and, in 2004-2005, an elected Faculty Affairs
Committee.
The Campus Assembly has been influenced by its traditions. It is
a broadly based Assembly, not a more restrictively elected Senate,
and as a result of its town meeting origins discussion historically
has been free-wheeling. Years ago, at least one chancellor routinely
declined to recognize attempts to cut off discussion by “calling
the question” if members still wished to speak on a matter before
the Assembly. Though not all have been satisfied with the result of
Assembly decisions on any given question, a widely shared belief in
the value of deliberative discussion has enabled the Assembly to bring
together its diverse constituencies to create shared “teaching
moments” that have enhanced UMM’s sense of community and
its mission to promote liberal education.
Roland Guyotte
February 2006
|