Challenges and Opportunities for Collegial Governance at Canadian Universities - Reflections on a Survey of Academic Senates

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Muffet

Following a 2000 design, the authors survey university senates in Canada to evaluate the state of academic governance. Building on earlier analysis of senate size, composition, structure, legislative authority, work, and intervening decade changes, this paper emphasizes themes from the 2012 survey’s open-ended responses. Key results highlight a major gap between members’ perceived importance of effective academic oversight and their ability to achieve it. Reform suggestions address performance, trust, authority and accountability clarity, and collegial oversight.

LanguageEnglish

CategoryResearch & Report

FormatPDF

Pages17

Reading Time43 min

AccessFree to download

Abstract

Introduction and Research Design

Canadian collegial governance and governance structure

Survey design: phases, participants, response rate

CSSHE SCÉES Canadian Journal of Higher Education Revue canadienne d’enseignement supérieur Volume 46, No. 3, 2016, pages 73-89 Challenges and Opportunities for Collegial Governance at Canadian Universities: Reflections on a Survey of Academic Senates Lea Pennock University of Saskatchewan Glen A. Jones Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto Jeff M. Leclerc University of Manitoba Sharon X. Li Ontario Institute for Studies in Education, University of Toronto Abstract Following the design of a similar study in 2000, the authors conducted a study of university senates (academic councils) to assess the current state of academic governance in Canada’s universities. An earlier paper presented and analyzed the data that were gathered about senate size, composition, structure, legislative authority, and work, and about structural and governance changes to senates in the intervening decade. The current paper focuses on themes arising from responses to the 2012 survey’s open-ended questions, highlighting key findings. Significant findings relate to a sizeable discrepancy between senate members’ perceptions ofthe importance of effective academic oversight and their success at achieving this. Suggested reforms include: reviewing and improving senate performance; fostering a culture of trust and respect among and within governing bodies; clarifying spheres of authority and accountability; and promoting the importance of collegial governance and oversight within the institution. CJHE / RCES Volume 46, No. 3, 2016 Challenges and Opportunities for Collegial Governance / L. Pennock, G. A. Jones, J. M. Leclerc, & S. X. Li 74 Résumé Des suites d’une étudesemblableréaliséeenl’an 2000, les auteurs decet article ont mené une étude sur les conseils académiques afin d’évaluerl’état actuel deleur gouvernance dans les universités canadiennes. Un article antérieur avait analysé des données sur la taille, la composition, la structure, le cadre légal, le cadre de travail ainsi que les changements de structure et de gouvernance des conseils de la décennie. Le présent article se penche sur les thèmes soulevésdans les réponses ouvertes du questionnaire. Les constats les plus révélateurstraitent del’écart important entre la perception des membres du conseil quant à l’importance d’une surveillance académique efficace et de la réalisation decet idéal dans la pratique. Parmi les recommandations de réforme, on trouvele besoin de revoir et d’améliorer le rendement des membres du conseil, lanécessité de créer une culture de confiance et de respect entre les instances degouvernance, un éclaircissement par rapport aux sphères d’autorité, ainsi que la promotion d’une gouvernance collégiale qui se charge de la surveillance au sein de l’établissement. Introduction and Research Design In Canada, collegial governance is expressed in a strong tradition of shared governance. Virtually every university in Canada operates, with local variations, under a bicameral system enshrined in its founding legislation or in provincial legislation. Authority for academic matters is given to an academic council (often called the senate), and authority over finances and resources rests with a governing board made up primarily of external members whose role is to represent the public interest and to exercise responsible stewardship over institutional resources. (For an introduction to Canadian governance models and terms, see Jones, 2002.) Senates in particular have not received adequate attention in higher education governance literature. As Jones, Shanahan, and Goyan (2004) observed,“most of what has been written on the topic [university governance] is not grounded in empirical research . . . [and has] tended to focus on governing boards . . . or on governance mechanisms associated with finance/resource allocation issues”(pp. 36–37).1 Aside from the study from which that reference is taken, the observation remains true.

FAQs

What is the main purpose of the 2012 study discussed in the paper?

To refresh the 2000 study by surveying Canadian university senates and examining how academic governance is currently practiced, using themes from the 2012 survey’s open-ended responses.

Which earlier topics does the paper build on?

It builds on prior analysis of senate size, composition, structure, legislative authority, work, and structural and governance changes over the intervening decade.

What reform directions does the paper recommend?

Reviewing and improving senate performance; fostering trust and respect within governance bodies; clarifying authority and accountability; and promoting the role of collegial governance and oversight.

Oct 15, 2026

Uploaded by Muffet