| Abstract: | This study determined and analyzed the perceived effectiveness of faculty trusteeship. A representative group of 53 colleges participated in the survey which began on April 26, 1972, when a questionnaire was sent to 1,766 persons, including each president, each faculty and student representative on the board, and to a random sample of lay trustees and faculty members at each institution. As of August 3, 1972, a total of 335 usable questionnaires had been returned for an 18.9 percent response rate. The questionnaire consisted of 66 statements in an evaluative section preceded by 15 other data items. Eighty-one percent of the respondents judged their system of faculty representation to be effective. Also at 44 (83%) of the 53 institutions, a majority of the respondents received faculty trusteeship to be effective. On the other hand, only 45 percent of the respondents preferred their system of faculty representation to a system of collective bargaining, with the tested groups differing significantly on this issue as they also did in their ratings of faculty trusteeship. Faculty representation was perceived to be more effective where the presentation of faculty views to the board is through the president, where there is an established method of faculty representative-faculty communication before board meetings, and where the presidents and/or lay trustees have a more favorable attitude toward faculty trusteeship. On the other hand, there was no significant difference in the ratings of faculty representation which could be attributed to the following variables: 1) Prerogatives of faculty representatives during board meetings; 2) Existence of faculty representation on major board committees; 3) Size of college; 4) Type of college; 5) Faculty representatives holding administrative positions; 6) Number of faculty representatives; 7) Number of lay trustees; 8) Lay trustee-faculty representative ratio; 9) Method by which faculty representatives are selected; and 10) Length of time the institution has had faculty representation. ... |
|---|