The College of New Jersey Logo

Apply     Visit     Give     |     Alumni     Parents     Offices     TCNJ Today     Three Bar Menu

Status of Issues in Governance 2007-2008

Status of Issues in Governance 2007-2008


Issue/Charge Committee         Status* and Link to Policy Text
Disciplinary Policies

Continued  from 2005-06

CSCC Step 2
Posting of Flyers

Continued  from 2006-07

CSCC Step 3

Procedural recommendation made to The Office of Student Activities and Leadership Development and reflected in policy available at:

Advising Feedback

Continued from 2006-07

CAP Referred  to Advising and Student Support Planning Council
Undergraduate Students Taking Graduate Courses – Limit of Credits

Continued  from 2006-07

CAP Approved
Defining Minors

Continued  from 2006-07

CAP Current policy re-affirmed
Double Counting for Minors in International Business and Art History

Continued  from 2006-07

CAP Step 3:  CAP reaffirmed current policy and recommended against exceptions to the rule in these two cases.


Central Eurasian Studies Minor

Continued  from 2006-07

CAP Approved
Student Feedback on Teaching (item #15-overall summary)

Continued  from 2006-07

CAP Will be included as part of the overall review of the Student Feedback on Teaching in Fall, 2008
Revision of Governance 2005 Document (Revised to indicate governance responsibilities for course scheduling grid, academic calendar, and Wednesday meeting schedule Steering Approved
Walking at graduation CAP Current policy re-affirmed
Graduation with Honors CAP Current policy re-affirmed
Review of class schedule grid CAP Step 2
African Studies minor CAP Approved
Peer review of teaching
(as follow up of 2007 Promotion and Reappointment Document)
CFA Approved
Use of external review
(as follow up of 2007 Promotion and Reappointment Document)
CFA Step 1
Use of grade distributions (as follow up of 2007 Promotion and Reappointment Document) CFA Step 1
SOSA review CFA Approved
Five-Year review of tenured faculty CFA Step 1
Curricular and program change CAP Step 3
Student Travel Policy

reactivated  from 2004-05

CSCC Step 2
Sabbatical Leave Process CFA Approved
Graduate Program Approval Process CAP Incorporated in curricular and program change (above)
Post-master’s program for teachers of the blind and visually impaired and MAT option for teachers of the blind and visually impaired CAP Approved
Reading Days CAP Approved
Arabic Minor CAP Approved
Quantitative Criminology Minor CAP Step 2
Discontinuation of Master’s Programs in English and Applied Spanish CAP Approved

Last Updated: September 16, 2008


*      Step #1 — Identifying and reporting the problem:  When a Standing Committee receives an issue from the Steering Committee, the first responsibility is to clearly articulate and report the problem to the campus community through regular updates to the campus community and the Governance Web Page ( ).  The problem may have been set out clearly in the charge received from the Steering Committee, or it may be necessary for the Standing Committee to frame a problem statement.  The problem statement should indicate the difficulties or uncertainties that need to be addressed through new or revised policy, procedure, or program.  The problem statement should be broadly stated and should include a context such as existing policy or practice.  Problem statements may include solution parameters but should not suggest any actual solutions.  Clearly stated problems will lead to better recommendations.

Step #2 — Preparing a preliminary recommendation:  Once the campus community has received the problem statement, committees can begin to collect data needed to make a recommendation.  Committees typically receive input through committee membership, formal testimony, and open comment from affected individuals and all stakeholder groups.  Committees must be proactive in inviting stakeholder groups (including Student Government Association, Staff Senate and Faculty Senate) to provide formal testimony prior to developing a preliminary recommendation.  When, in the best judgment of the committee, adequate clarity of the principles contributing to the problem are known, a preliminary recommendation should be drafted and disseminated to the campus community through regular updates and the Governance Web Page.

Step #3 — Making a Final Recommendation:  Committees must use sound judgment to give the campus adequate time to review the preliminary recommendation before making their final recommendation.  Again, committees are expected to be proactive in receiving feedback on the preliminary recommendation.  If a full calendar year has passed since the formal announcement of the preliminary recommendation, the committee must resubmit a preliminary recommendation to the campus community.  When, in the best judgment of the committee, the campus community has responded to the proposed resolution of the issue, the committee shall send their final recommendation (complete documentation) to the Steering Committee.


The presenting of testimony is central to the concept of shared governance.  All stakeholder groups will have an opportunity to provide input into governance issues through direct membership as well as invited testimony.  Individuals appointed or elected to the governance system are expected to take a broad institutional perspective relative to issues being considered.  In contrast, invited testimony will reflect the stakeholder perspective on the issue being considered.  Committees are expected to be proactive in inviting stakeholder groups to provide testimony at both step # 2 and #3 of the process.  Committees need to identify stakeholder groups that are interested in each particular issue and invite their testimony at scheduled Committee meetings or hearings.  Committees should report in their minutes which groups were targeted as stakeholders, how testimony was invited, the form of the testimony (written, oral, etc.), and the substantive content of the testimony.