Report of the Evaluation Team representing
the Middle States Commission (based on March 2004 campus visit)
The Middles States evaluation team suggested
"[a] serious, substantial and self-critical review of faculty
governance which we think essential to empowering the faculty to
work effectively with the incoming leadership of the University
in moving Bucknell to the next level of its potential." (This
suggestion appears on p. 14 of the
complete report.) Other governance suggestions relating to
the Board appear on p. 8, and specific suggestions about the
role of the President appear on p. 9.
Bucknell Response to Visiting Team
Report (May 11, 2004)
The University responded to the Middle States Commission by
noting the faculty's vote to form the Committee to Review
Faculty Governance, and commented that "In the course of this
study, the Faculty will give full and careful consideration
to the specific suggestions of the visiting team regarding the
powers and authority of the President (e.g., the suggestions
that the President chair meetings of the Faculty and have
authority to reject tenure recommendations)." (This quote
is from p. 3 of the complete response.)
Letter from Middles States accepting
monitoring report (June 23, 2005)
"At its session on June 22, 2005 the Middle States Commission on Higher
Education acted to accept the monitoring report submitted by Bucknell
University. The Commission requested a progress letter, due October
1, 2006, documenting further progress in the implementation of
governance changes."
Report of the Ad Hoc Committee
to Review Faculty Governance and Amended Recommendations
The ad hoc Committee to Review Faculty Governance began work in
September 2004, and presented a
report
to the faculty at the February meeting of the Faculty. The issues raised
in the report were discussed in an Open Forum on Governance held
February 14. (See the
Minutes of the Open Forum
for details.)
Amendments to the report
based on faculty feedback were presented in the Agenda of the
March 2005 meeting.
Specific motions arising from the report and discussion were brought to
the Faculty at the March and April 2005 meetings. The "Immediate
Recommendations" section received faculty support in March, and
"Recommendations Requiring Handbook Amendments were discussed individually
and voted on in April. See the
March 2005 Minutes and
April 2005 Minutes for
a more complete discussion.
