Sam Houston State University (SHSU) is governed by the Texas State University System’s (TSUS) Board of Regents. The policy-making functions of the Board of Regents are addressed in the Texas Statutes Education Code and the TSUS Rules and Regulations. There is a clear distinction in writing and practice between the policy-making function of the Board of Regents and the responsibility of the SHSU administration and faculty to administer and implement these policies.
The Texas Education Code and the TSUS Rules and Regulations clearly distinguish the policy-making function of the TSUS Board of Regents from the responsibility of the administration and faculty of SHSU to administer and implement policy. The Texas Education Code, Chapter 95.21(b) gives the Board of Regents of the TSUS the authority to create policies when it states the following:
The board has the authority to promulgate and enforce such rules, regulations, and orders for the operation, control, and management of the university system and its institutions as the board may deem either necessary or desirable. When a power is vested in the board, the board may adopt a rule, regulation, or order delegating such power to any officer, employee, or committee as the board may designate. [1]
The TSUS Rules and Regulations comprises the set of rules and regulations formulated and approved by the TSUS Board of Regents regarding the overall management of the system. Chapter IV, Section 2 of the TSUS Rules and Regulations delegates the power to the President of the University to administer these rules and regulations by stating, “the President shall . . . have discretionary powers broad enough effectively to administer the Component within the policies and guidelines as set forth by the Chancellor and Board of Regents” [2]. The SHSU organizational chart is a visual representation of how the responsibility of implementing these policies is further delegated [3].
Chapter I, Section 1 of the TSUS Rules and Regulations reinforces the policy-making function of the Board of Regents when it states the board has been given the authority “for the formation of Rules and Regulations in the governance functions” [4]. Chapter 5 of the TSUS Rules and Regulations further covers terms and conditions of employment for all System employees, including articulation of how tenure is granted, providing grievance and termination procedures and stating rights and responsibilities of the faculty [5]. SHSU’s implementation of these policies is evidenced in the policies and procedures throughout the institution. Examples include employee job descriptions, employee handbooks, and formal policy statements. SHSU employee job descriptions provide evidence that there is an appropriate distinction between the functions of the governing board and the responsibilities of the administration [6] [7] [8] [9]. In a similar fashion, the Faculty Handbook delineates policies governing faculty responsibilities and expectations [10]. Expectations for faculty are also described within the Faculty Evaluation System Policy, which stresses the three traditional functions of teaching, research, and service [11].
In practice, there is also a clear and appropriate distinction between the policy-making functions of the TSUS Board of Regents and the responsibility of the administration and faculty of SHSU to administer and implement policy. The board sets broad-based policy, which is then administered at the campus level. TSUS Rules and Regulations, Chapter III, Section 1 stipulates that items including contracts, personnel, financial matters, construction matters, curriculum, admission requirements, and property, among others, require board approval [12]. At the quarterly board meetings, each component of the system requests board motions to be approved by the board [13]. After approval, it is then the responsibility of system components (administration and faculty of SHSU) to implement these approved requests.
The SHSU President uses a committee system to provide feedback on policy implementation and maintenance. University committees work closely with the administration and provide advisory services to the Provost and President concerning issues such as, but not limited to, the budget, strategic planning, curriculum, diversity, and grievances [14]. For example, a board motion to install a pedestrian pathway between a new parking lot and the main campus was approved at the August 2017 Board of Regents meeting [15]. Parking issues that affect the University community, such as construction projects, are discussed in SHSU’s Parking and Transportation Committee, and members provide advice and input to assure the campus community is kept informed [16].
The process for evaluating and implementing university policy starts when an administrative unit identifies the need for a policy revision or review. For academic policy statements, in particular, the administrative unit overseeing the policy’s implementation provides suggested revisions to the Council of Academic Deans for review and approval. The Provost then sends the revised draft policy to the Faculty Senate for input. The Faculty Senate makes suggestions, and the policy is sent back to the Council of Academic Deans for input. After the Faculty Senate and Council of Academic Deans have contributed their feedback, the policy is reviewed by TSUS legal counsel, discussed and voted on by the SHSU Academic Affairs Council, and then sent to the President for final review and approval.
For example, minutes from the April 27, 2017, Faculty Senate meeting [17] show Academic Policy Statement 921007 (Academic Advisory Councils) and Academic Policy Statement 791221 (Faculty Participation in Commencement) were reviewed by the Faculty Senate, and changes to the wording of the policies were recommended. Minutes from the June 21, 2017, Council of Academic Deans meeting [18] show the Deans then reviewed the suggested changes and accepted the recommendations of the Faculty Senate for Academic Policy Statement 921007, but not for Academic Policy Statement 791221.
An example of the implementation of the distinct responsibilities of the Board and the faculty can be seen also in the curriculum process. The TSUS Rules and Regulations, Chapter III, Section 1, Subsection 1.10 specifically state that course additions, deletions, and changes, as well as degree program additions, deletions, and changes require board approval [19]. At the conclusion of extensive internal curriculum processes involving faculty, department committees, college committees, and university committees (see Standard 9.1), the University requests approval of a curriculum motion to the board (course additions, deletions, changes) for approval at a quarterly board meeting [20]. Following the approval of these proposed changes [21], the courses are incorporated by the administration and faculty of the University into the course inventory [22] and the respective degree curriculums within the undergraduate [23] and graduate [24] catalogs. It is evident in this process that the board approves the curriculum, but the implementation and evaluation is delegated to the administration and the faculty.