Description: Butler Reception Room Source: The Xavierite
On Jan. 29, members of the Higher Learning Commission (HLC) conducted a focus visit with members of the university staff regarding shared governance. The aspects discussed included the staff’s involvement in the shared governance process, their access to the administration, and the previous focus visit report.
The 1:30 p.m. open meeting for staff was conducted by Elaine Ponitllo, Ph.D., of Indiana Institute of Technology and Barbara Andereck, Ph.D., of Ohio Wesleyan University.
Pontillo began the meeting by noting that the HLC focus visits zero in on one issue that the last visiting team identified as “raising some concerns” in their eyes. In the case of SXU, that issue was shared governance.
Shared governance refers to the “joint responsibility of faculty, administrations, and governing boards to govern colleges and universities. Differences in the weight of each group’s voice on a particular issue should be determined by the extent of its responsibility for and expertise on that issue,” according to the American Association of University Professors.
To begin the conversation on this topic, Pontillo asked about the staff’s involvement in the shared governance process.
Director of Client Services Rola Othman, Ph. D., expressed that there is a Staff Council, which has representatives from the staff that communicate to the staff and for the staff in the shared governance process.
Othman added that members of the staff council serve on various subcommittees that have an impact or provide evidence towards decision making such as: the University Planning and Budget Committee (UPBC), Institutional Effectiveness (IE), and Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI).
“It’s been a great way to meet other people within different departments that you normally would not meet or get a chance to see and learn about the different issues that are occurring within the universities that one may not know about,” stated a staff member from the University Advancement department.
Staff were invited to participate in a training event regarding shared governance, though it was optional.
The current President of the Staff Council, Associate Director of Employer Engagement and Internships James Miller, confirmed that he represents the staff in his position on the council.
Miller speaks on behalf of the staff at quarterly Board Meetings. He noted that oftentimes, he will present with the President of the Faculty Senate, and they will usually sit together during the meetings.
Following this, Pontillo asked how staff felt regarding the presidential search process and the incoming president, Keith Elder, Ph. D.. She wondered if they had any hesitations, and how they were thinking of welcoming Elder.
One of the biggest concerns the staff had, according to Miller, was how involved they could be in the selection process of the new president.
When he first raised the question of how staff would be in the search process, Miller expressed that the answer he had received was that faculty tend to play a larger part in the selection process.
However, Interim President Rebecca Sherrick, Ph. D., did arrange a meeting for the entire Staff Council with Academic Search-the outside organization hired to guide the presidential search- in order to ask the questions they had and to discuss what they were looking for in the university’s next president.
“Some of us shared a lot of dreams and some of us were just kind of chipping up things that we would like to see. We felt listened to, and they allowed us to follow up afterwards with both recommendations and ideas” continued Miller.
The Executive Committee of the Staff Council were also able to meet with the final candidates for the presidential position to ask all the questions they thought were pertinent. Miller added that they felt like they were a huge part of the process.
Pontillo questioned the staff’s access to the administration and whether or not they felt heard by the administration. Those in attendance noted that the town halls being hosted by Sherrick helped with the feeling of being heard.
She added that after the last visit, it was clear that there was a lack of trust across the institution. “I know you have had changes in leadership. The previous president left, you have an interim president right now and your provost is relatively new here,” she clarified.
It was then highlighted that at the last town hall meeting, Sherrick had announced that there was a budget working group that has provided full transparency of financials.
This led Pontillo to query about whether the staff present thought that they were headed towards more openness with the university’s budget.
“Yes, we have different administration with different viewpoints about sharing these reports and our status and finances. It is not always a pretty picture and it can be confusing, so we are trying to also make it so it is easy to understand for everyone and just know where we’re financially in the institution,” responded a staff member.
Othman clarified that there was budget sharing in the past, but due to the level of distrust within the institution, there was the issue of whether or not what was being shared was believed.
It was highlighted that the town halls give face-to-face communication and the ability to ask questions in person, such as the aforementioned budget and enrollment numbers.
Staff members present indicated that most of them attend the town halls, and that they are live streamed for those who cannot get away from their desks to attend in person.
Pontillo also discussed the focus visit reports, questioning the culture of the university five years ago versus currently. She communicated that it was enlightening to get the context of the university’s history.
“I am sure those were really difficult times and it’s hard not to get pay increases and a lot of things that went on. You have been through a lot, I am wondering, are you seeing a difference in the feeling?” asked Pontillo.
Director of Student Media Peter Kreten described the difference as “night and day” from where the university is now in comparison to where it was six years ago.
“The previous administration just was not welcoming, was not very open to collaboration and things like that” he stated.
Kreten continued to note that he was optimistic with the institution’s current state, as Sherrick has changed the culture and it is starting to move back to the way it was before.
“The main consistency of this place is: we’re here for the students,” added Director of Transfer Services Eileen Luce.
Pontillo concluded the staff visit by confirming she has heard positive comments about how Sherrick has helped move things forward at the university. Sherrick is leaving big shoes to fill, she stated.
An open meeting for faculty members was conducted following the staff meeting.