University of Southern California
vol. Ixv no. 60	los angeles, California	friday, january 5, 1973
Daily
Trojan
governance
PENSIVE—President John R. Hubbard is shown in a moment of thought as he explained the university's new decision-making system Thursday. Hubbard, who has been giving the issue much thought recently, released the plan in a five-page memorandum to the university community. The 87-member council will consist largely of students and faculty.
resentatives of students and faculty.
The academic units include the Schools of Architecture and Fine Arts, Business Administration, Dentistry, Education, Engineering, Law, Library Science, Medicine, Performing Arts, Pharmacy, Public Administration, and Social - Work.
The Graduate School, Institute of Aerospace Safety and Management, Gerontology Center, and University College and Summer Session will also get four representatives each.
12 for LAS
For the College of Letters, Arts and Sciences, which has the university’s largest undergraduate enrollment, each of the three divisions—Humanities, Natural Sciences and Mathematics, and Social Sciences and Communication—will be considered as separate academic units. They will have 12 representatives in all.
The University Library will get two representatives. The Divisions of Business Affairs, Financial and Legal Affairs, Student Affairs and University Affairs will have one representative each that will provide the first formal representation of staff members in the university’s decision-making system.
On top of all this, the faculty will elect five representatives at large, which will insure a permanent faculty majority of 44 in the 87-member council. There will be 20 deans and directors, 19 students and 4 staff members.
Hubbard will preside over the council, which is scheduled to meet at least monthly.
Why do faculty members get a permanent majority?
“Administrators are transient; they have no tenure in office. Students are also transient,” Hubbard said.
“But faculty members are more or less permanent—the university is their lives.”
Hubbard said that elections for the new council should take place as soon as possible, with the first council meetingto come in September. Election proce-
dures are to be decided by individual academic units.
Donald L. Pyke, coordinator of academic planning in the office of Z.A. Kaprielian, vice-president for academic administration and research, will serve temporarily as staff officer for the council in coordinating elections of its members.
“I hope the new plan will serve the purpose of bring the component parts ofthe university—students, faculty and deans—into a closer relationship for formulation of policy, a device for effective communication, and a vehicle for speeding up the decisionmaking process,” Hubbard said.
“I feel that through this system, we can arrive at a consensus on policy within a reasonable length of time.”
Hubbard, as presiding officer, will speak to the council on the state of the university, and will answer written questions from
. . Through this system, we can arrive at a consensus on policy within a reasonable length of time"—President John R. Hubbard;
council members submitted in advance to him to give the vice-presidents and other members of the presidential staff time to prepare responses.
This is apparently similar to a practice in the British Parliament called question time, in which members may submit written questions to the government for reply.
Besides advising the president, the council will supervise the university committee system, including all standing committees.
What about the Advisory Committee on Academic Planning, its standing committees on university priorities and resource management, and its task forces?
ACAP criticized
The advisory committee, chaired by Kaprielian. has been the target of criticism by some faculty members, who say it is
separated from the regular committee system.
Hubbard said that the two standing committees will be placed under the council, but the full advisory committee and the task forces will still be under Kaprielian.
“Ad hoc committees, task forces or advisory groups may be appointed by any administrative officer,” Hubbard's memo to the faculty said.
“Their findings, however, will be open to the council, and their recommendations will be transmitted to the appropriate standing committees through the president or his staff.”
The agenda for council meetings will be prepared by an executive committee composed of five faculty members, two deans, two students, and one staff representative. Hubbard and Kaprielian will be ex-officio members, without vote.
Deans, faculty and students may still have their own formal governing councils for matters of primary concern to their own constituency, Hubbard said.
Faculty, deans consulted
Hubbard said he consulted with representatives of the University Senate, the representative body of the faculty, and the Council of Deans before announcing his plan.
However, some senate members indicate that Hubbard consulted the executive committee but did not give them the opportunity to discuss the plan, particularly as it would affect the faculty.
Hubbard appeared at a senate meeting Dec. 13 to discuss the council plan and told the senators they must determine their own future.
Some senators thought that the present senate would have complete freedom to determine the composition of the new allfaculty senate. But apparently this is not quite correct.
A senate with solely faculty membership is expected to be establised from the present University Senate, composed of 140 elected faculty members and 52 exofficio members.
Advisory council to be key to
Hubbard announces long-awaited decision
By Peter Wong
associate editor
An 87-member advisory council of students, faculty, staff and deans will be the central instrument of the university’s decision-making system, President John R. Hubbard announced Thursday.
In a five-page memorandum that was mailed to faculty members Thursday night, Hubbard said that after four years of debate, he has decided on a system he hopes will be satisfactory to the major university constituencies.
The proposed university council, which will advise the president and supervise the university committee system, will be composed of the dean or director of each major academic unit, two faculty members and one student.
Four-year debate This plan may settle the four-year controversy over the governance issue, and the deadlock that arose when the constituencies could not agree on a plan.
The deans voted Sept. 21 to approve a plan in which an assembly of more than 100 members would be the key decisionmaking mechanism.
That plan was developed by a commission appointed by Hubbard in September, 1971, and headed by Henry Reining, Jr.,
dean of Von KleinSmid Center for International and Public Affairs.
But 60 faculty members of the University Senate, at an all-day meeting Oct. 28, favored a plan in which a senate with solely faculty representation would be established, and separate governing councils for students, faculty and deans.
Under this proposal, a 15-member council of students, faculty and deans would be established to advise the president on matters of general university concern, and to supervise the committee system.
They combined elements of plans by the senate, approved in October, 1969, and by a committee appointed by President Norman Topping in February, 1970, and headed by Paul Hadley, dean of University College and Summer Session.
Plan a compromise
Hubbard said his plan was a compromise between the two proposals, because with separate councils permitted for each constituency and a council to discuss issues of mutual concern, the plan should satisfy senate members.
Those who favor a broadly representative assembly should be satisfied with the composition of the 87-member council, enlarged to include more rep-
SENDING THE NEWS—Liz King, Hubbard's executive secretary, addresses copies of a memorandum detailing the president's decisionmaking system. The memorandum was mailed to all faculty members Thursday night. DT photos by Barry Brown.