2007 EDUCATION DEPARTMENT SATISFACTION WITH UNIT GOVERNANCE SURVEY 1. Meetings are purposeful and productive.

Response Percent

Response Total

Exemplary

16.7%

2

Excellent

58.3%

7

Expected

25%

3

Emerging

0%

0

Unacceptable

0%

0

Total Respondents

12

(skipped this question)

0

2. Meetings are collegial and collaborative.

Response Percent

Response Total

Exemplary

8.3%

1

Excellent

66.7%

8

Expected

16.7%

2

Emerging

8.3%

1

Unacceptable

0%

0

Total Respondents

12

(skipped this question)

0

3. Meeting allow for all committee members to have a voice.

Response Percent

Response Total

Exemplary

33.3%

4

Excellent

41.7%

5

Expected

25%

3

Emerging

0%

0

Unacceptable

0%

0

Total Respondents

12

(skipped this question)

0

4. Meeting agendas, materials, and minutes are provided in a timely fashion.

Response Percent

Response Total

Exemplary

91.7%

11

Excellent

8.3%

1

Expected

0%

0

Emergin

0%

0

Unacceptable

0%

0

Total Respondents

12

(skipped this question)

0

5. I am knowledgeable about the committee's role and responsibilities.

Response Percent

Response Total

Exemplary

41.7%

5

Excellent

41.7%

5

Expected

16.7%

2

Emerging

0%

0

Unacceptable

0%

0

Total Respondents

12

(skipped this question)

0

6. Members have timely access to information to make informed decisions.

Response Percent

Response Total

Exemplary

58.3%

7

Excellent

41.7%

5

Expected

0%

0

Emerging

0%

0

Unacceptable

0%

0

Total Respondents

12

(skipped this question)

0

What aspect(s) of the Unit's governance system are working well?

1.	I think the Dept. Chair is very well-organized and timely with agendas, handouts, minutes. She seeks input and is willing to build consensus, even when it takes several meetings and several rounds of editing forms or proposals. We are following our decision-making procedures well and using assessment data to drive decision making. The restructuring of the base program advisory boards into one advisory board is a welcome change and is more efficient. We are using our base program assessment plans more systematically. Having separate dept. meetings and assessment meetings makes sense.
2.	The system provides open discussion and collaboration on all issues. The leadership is available for consulation and guidance on process and projects.
3.	Department members are kept well informed of issues and decisions affecting the department and our students. We are fortunate indeed to have Sharon Andrews' leadership regarding accreditation and certification issues.
4.	organization
5.	Consistency, opportunity for input, information provided in a timely fashion
6.	We are given plenty of notice about meetings and agendas and are invited to submit agenda items.

Are there any aspect(s) of the Unit's governance system that should be changed or modified?

1.	None.
2.	keep the policies and procedures the same for everyone and all issues
3.	None that I can think of
4.	I think our meetings are a good use of our time.

Other comments/observations:

1.

I feel that the department members usually work well together as a unit. There is a positive feeling of common purpose at most meetings. At times, I have observed that many of us do not use good listening skills--there is quite a bit of interrupting and side conversations; some tend to dominate and do not seek input from others, and some multi-task, which I find a little irritating. Maybe they are better at multi-tasking, and I prefer to focus on one thing at a time. Still, for a large group, we do tend to get things done, and generally in a positive manner.

2.

Although controversial issues don't emerge regularly within the department, when they do, it is sometimes difficult to reach consensus among individuals with differing opinions. In such cases, it might be helpful to resort to a vote of the department membership.