The Impact of External Factors on Academic Governance in Universities

In a number of countries, the main issue regarding internal or academic governance in universities is, at least from the standpoint of faculty and faculty unions, collegial governance. In North America and Western Europe in particular, the degree to which the academic governance of universities is carried out in a collegial fashion, that is, through conferring, collaborating, and gaining consensus is the object of an abundant scholarly literature. The author reviews the external factors that have an impact on the internal, academic governance of universities in both Canada and France, asking if those factors have any altering effect on collegial governance in Canadian and French universities.

Collegial governance in postwar Australian universities

PurposeThe purpose of this paper is to outline the structures of collegial governance in Australian universities between 1945 and the “Dawkins reforms” of the late 1980s. It describes the historical contours of collegial governance in practice, the changes it underwent, and the structural limits within which it was able to operate.Design/methodology/approachThe analysis is based upon the writings of academics and university administrators from the period, with more fine-grained exemplification provided by archival and other evidence from Faculties of Arts and their equivalents in newer universities.FindingsElements of hierarchy and lateral organisation coexisted in the pre-Dawkins university in ways not generally made explicit in the existing literature. This mixture was sustained by ideals about academic freedom.Research limitations/implicationsBy historicising “collegiality” the research problematises polemical uses of the term, either for or against. It also seeks to clarify the distinctiveness of contemporary structures—especially for those with no first-hand experience of the pre-Dawkins university—by demonstrating historical difference without resort to nostalgia.Originality/value“Collegiality” is a common concept in education and organisation studies, as well as in critiques of the contemporary corporate university. However, the concept has received little sustained historical investigation. A clearer history of collegial governance is valuable both in its own right and as a conceptually clarifying resource for contemporary analyses of collegiality and managerialism.

Introduction

In the Introduction, Angana P. Chatterji, Thomas Blom Hansen and Christophe Jaffrelot elaborate on the unparalleled majoritarian turn of politics in India today, its present effects and future impact. The Introduction delimits the ascendance of Hindu nationalist dominance in India via the institutions of state and within civil and political society, and also names the key elements in the contemporary ascendance of Hindu nationalist dominance to establish a majoritarian state in India. The triumph of the BJP in 2014, the article elaborates, brought about two unprecedented events: never had the Hindu nationalist movement won an absolute majority in the Lok Sabha, (the lower house of parliament), and never had this movement, known for its hostility to the personalization of power and its collegial governance, been so influenced by one politician, Narendra Modi. The Introduction outlines the key themes and issues elaborated upon in the interdisciplinary collection that delves into the politics, representations, and aspirations, the aspects and events, and the traumas and dislocations of the seemingly continuous yet structurally reconstituted contemporary experiment to establish a majoritarian state in India.

Good Governance and Canadian universities: Fiduciary duties of university governing boards and their implications for shared collegial governance.

Using a legal framework, doctrinal analysis, critical legal analysis, and fundamental legal research and drawing upon legislation, case law, judicial, and scholarly commentary, this article defines the fiduciary duties of Canadian university governing boards given the unique features of the university as a legal entity. Thelegal analysis considers the Canadian university as a corporation, distinguishing itfrom other types of corporations, identifying the charitable, not-for-profit, public/private dimensions of universities in Canada, and significantly, considering the judicially recognized “community of scholars” and collegial features of universities. The article argues that all of these features shape the fiduciary duties of governing boards and have implications for shared collegial governance in Canadian universities.

The Landscape of the Contemporary University

ABSTRACT Universities are being fundamentally transformed—facing formidable external and internal pressures to focus research on what is deemed practical and economically beneficial and to narrow education to preparing students for the job market. The university’s traditional mission is being compromised by underfunding, by policies of Canada’s research funding agencies, by inappropriate university research collaborations, and by growing reliance on exploited contingent academic staff. Diminished academic freedom and ineffective collegial governance both contribute to and are the results of these changes. Academic staff can work to reverse this. A start is to reclaim their voice in governance through creative use of collective bargaining, to reinvigorate academic freedom through exercising their collective agreement rights, and to engage the public in what is happening within universities.RÉSUMÉ Les universités sont en train de subir une transformation fondamentale—elles font face à de formidables pressions internes et externes pour axer leur recherche sur des projets supposément pratiques et rentables et pour offrir une éducation qui se limiterait à préparer les étudiants pour le marché du travail. La mission traditionnelle de l’université se voit compromise par le sous-financement, les politiques formulées par les organismes subventionnant la recherche au Canada, des partenariats de recherche universitaire inappropriés et une dépendance croissante envers un personnel académique contingent et exploité. Ces changements sont à la fois le résultat et la cause d’une liberté académique en décroissance et d’une gouvernance collégiale inefficace. Les membres du personnel académique pourraient cependant renverser ces tendances. Pour commencer, ils pourraient reprendre leur influence sur la gouvernance en ayant recours de manière créative à la négociation collective, ils pourraient renforcer leur liberté académique en assumant leurs droits tels qu’établis dans leur convention collective, et ils pourraient davantage aviser le public de ce qui se passe au sein des universités.

Challenges and Opportunities for Collegial Governance at Canadian Universities: Reflections on a Survey of Academic Senates

Following the design of a similar study in 2000, the authors conducted a study of university senates (academic councils) to assess the current state of academic governance in Canada’s universities. An earlier paper presented and analyzed the data that were gathered about senate size, composition, structure, legislative authority and work, and about structural and governance changes to senates in the intervening decade. The current paper focuses on themes arising from responses to the open-ended questions, highlighting key findings. Significant findings relate to a sizeable discrepancy between senate members’ perceptions of the importance of effective academic oversight, and their success at achieving this. Suggested reforms include reviewing and improving senate performance; fostering a culture of trust and respect among and within governing bodies; clarifying spheres of authority and accountability; and promoting the importance of collegial governance and oversight within the institution.