Visitors and consultants have remarked on the atmosphere at Millersville University.

The recently completed process to develop the Millersville University [Facilities] Master Plan is testament to the openness and collegial nature of this fine institution. This process was expertly guided by a steering committee that represented a wide cross-section of University community, including students, faculty, staff and administration. This strong, consensus-building process also provided many opportunities for every member of the University community to have input into the Master Plan. This willingness by the University to seek input from all of these groups ensured that the plan will be well understood and supported by both the University and local communities, resulting in the highest and best use of University facilities and ensuring the greatest good for the largest number of people.

-Douglas Steele, H2L2 Architects/Planners

PWC spent seven days at Millersville University interviewing . . . and conducting focus groups with faculty and staff. During those interviews, participants repeatedly stressed that one of the university's most important strengths was the open and collegial atmosphere on campus. Many described Millersville's open and friendly environment characterized by staff members [who] were willing to go out of their way in order to help colleagues as well as students.

-Amy Houston, Pricewaterhouse Coopers

I have consistently found the folks at Millersville, from the president to clerical staff members, from the faculty to administrators, to be energized to think about and to do what's best for the institution... the planning committee for information technology...worked together in a unique spirit of cooperation.

-Linda Fleit, President, EduTech

Focus groups of 68 faculty sponsored by the Center for Academic Excellence in 1999 indicated that one of the most positive aspects of working here is the collegial relationship between faculty and administration. The extent to which faculty judgment on academic matters is valued is illustrated by a somewhat controversial 1996 proposal to adopt "plus-minus" grades for undergraduate courses. Despite an overwhelmingly negative student referendum conducted by the Student Senate, the President approved the change on the grounds that the Millersville grading system should belong to the faculty.

A variety of mechanisms exist for maximizing opportunities for input from all constituents and for reaching optimal consensus. Through the University's traditional line relationships, all faculty belong to an academic department. They have input from their department through their department chairs to their school council, then through their dean to Deans' Council, and then through the Provost to the President's Advisory Council and the President. Staff similarly have input through their office heads to their dean or assistant/associate vice president, then through that person to their vice president, then through their vice president to the President's Advisory Council and the President. Line managers are strongly encouraged to employ consultative procedures in making decisions and in the formulation of recommendations. The Strategic Planning and Resource Council (see Chapter 2) is a broadly representative group that advises the President on a host of matters related to Millersville's future. And, through the governance bodies and collective bargaining units noted earlier, the views of most employees are represented.

Committees and Task Forces

Employees also have opportunities to contribute to institutional decisions through a broad array of councils, committees, task forces and open meetings. The range of University committees and the compositions of their memberships, documented in the Governance Manual, show the degree to which participation in governance is broad-based.

As the need is perceived, the administration appoints task forces of faculty, administrators, and sometimes support staff and students to consider specific issues. In recent years, task forces have studied information technology, administrative complement costs, the cost of the curriculum, data development and management, the class schedule, strategies to counter student alcohol abuse, and the process for hiring temporary part-time faculty. Continuous improvement groups have studied dozens of processes. Steering committees have guided the launch of our new administrative data management system, our virtual university, and our capital facilities master plan. Many of these efforts are discussed elsewhere in this self-study.

Although Millersville's shared governance affords the opportunity for faculty, staff, and students to participate in a large number of diverse committees, it has become increasingly difficult to fill committee vacancies and chairs, particularly for key faculty committees such as Academic Policies, General Education Review, and Undergraduate Course and Program Review. This may be attributable to the expanding number of committees, task forces, and ad hoc groups; this self-study documents many of the new groups that have been created in the past five years. (On the other hand, a number of groups have ceased their work, such as the Technology Vision Task Force and the Hash-Bassler Planning Group.) It may also be due to the perception among some that service is less than half as important as teaching or scholarship in promotion and tenure decisions (see Chapter 4).

Open Meetings

Well-publicized open meetings on a variety of issues provide further opportunities for input by the University community. In addition to the General Education curriculum forums discussed above, open meetings have been held on the capital facilities master plan (see Chapter 11), enrollment management (see Chapter 6), and the University Honors Program. Open meetings are also held with all candidates for senior management positions.