How university governance works

Penn’s board has 48 voting participants, and a further 36 longstanding emeritus members who have reached the retirement age of 70 but are still allowed to attend and speak at meetings.  MIT has 74 board members, Cornell 64.  Harvard has a “corporation” of 12, and then 32 overseers.  Of course that is done in part to keep donors involved and perhaps also reward them.  It does not lead to good governance or a strong ability to make substantive decisions.

I very much enjoyed this FT article on these themes.  Faculty members are upset that their governing boards want to govern.

I almost split my gut over this part: “…said Lynn Pasquerella, president of the American Association of Colleges and Universities and former head of Mount Holyoke College. “Often people from the corporate world don’t understand the culture of collegiality, transparency and shared governance.”

It is amazing how the faculty are trying to portray themselves as the defenders of academic freedom against their boards, when over the last few decades they have been the primary enemies of academic freedom (along with staff, and sometimes students).

I do not see university faculty or administrators as being in a position to turn around the PR on this issue in their favor anytime soon.