Boards of Trustees and Academic Decisionmaking: A Review of Literature and Research

Abstract

The literature reviewed for this paper was placed in three categories. The categories emerged from the scope of the literature base, which ranged from official documents, through impressions by participants in the governance process, to reports of systematic observations of what trustees do. The trustee activity that was the focus for the review was academic affairs. Academic affairs are those that have an obvious and direct relationship to curriculum and instruction and to faculty and students in their scholarly role.

Specifically, the three types of literature include: (1) studies with quasi-legalistic assertions for and against board involvement in decisions about academic matters; (2) studies that offer surveys of the perceptions and opinions of trustees, administrators, and faculty about board responsibilities for decisions regarding academic matters; and (3) studies that address what boards of trustees actually decide about academic affairs.

The authors apply two ideological assumptions to their review which are drawn from political science. They are the expectation in a democratic society that its leaders should be held accountable for their decisions, and the recognition that elitism is fostered by the specialized knowledge of faculty, the control of information by administrators, and the use of complex committee structure by boards and institutions. In this context elites are those who exercise power out of proportion to the size of their group, and whose power is usually related to authority.

The paucity of empirical and analytical studies of board decisionmaking is noted.