1

Deidra Baxter
April 9, 2014
EDLD 7431: Higher Education Administration

Field Observation
On Tuesday February 18, 2014, I attended a Faculty Senate meeting at Georgia
Institute of Technology. This meeting was held at the Student Center on campus. The
purpose of this meeting was to update general and academic faculty on what is
happening on campus. The meeting began at 3pm with opening remarks from President
Bud Peterson. He discussed current demands and challenges as well as positive
factors that the institution is currently experiencing. Some of these demands and
challenges included request of building renovations on campus and fiscal barriers. He
discussed $1.7 million dollars of design funding going towards the library towers, which
is the next major renovation on campus. Additionally, he discussed several other
building requests, such as the environmental health and safety building in Marietta, GA,
and that the challenge is meeting the needs of all requests. President Peterson
discussed prioritizing these demands in which there are areas of actual need. Just like
the texts suggests, no single budget principle is more important than the philosophy
characterized by the phrase money follows mission. (Schloss & Cragg, 2013, p.102) I
believe President Peterson was suggesting that allocating funds where it makes sense
and according to the mission of the institution is the priority. This is an example of
demands and challenges that upper administrators face. Georgia Tech is an extremely
large campus, and the President receives tons of requests from all different areas, but
he mentions prioritizing as a way to slowly face these demands and challenges. Another
2

challenge President Peterson addressed was the many missed days due to inclement
weather. Many faculty members at the meeting asked questions on how they suggest
they continue on with their syllabus due to those missed days. President Peterson
recommended that faculty keep the make-up period at a fair amount of time. He also
worked with the Registrars office to create a fixed schedule period where faculty can
schedule make-up times for their class. In this situation, students are considered
stakeholders, since they invest their time and tuition dollars into their education. The
issue of weather caused them to miss about five days of class, which is a large amount
of time. The President, along with the Registrars office came up with a great alternative
solution to assist the stakeholders to ensure they were still getting what they were
investing.
After President Peterson stated his opening remarks and updates, he asked the
provost and executive vice president for Academic Affairs, Dr. Rafael Bras to come
forward to discuss strategic planning. Strategic planning is significant in higher
education, and there are many different theories that scholars argue when it comes to
this topic. According to Dooris, Kelley, and Trainer, there are three themes to strategic
planning. First, a rational-deductive, formulaic approach to strategic planning is being
tempered with a cultural-environmental-political perspective. Second, strategic planning
is now increasingly about learning and creativity, with recognition that college and
university leaders need to challenge assumptions and consider radically changing
existing structures and processes. Third, there is a new and powerful emphasis on
moving from formulation to implementation, from plan to practice, following Benjamin
Franklins aphorism that well done is better than well said. (2004, p.7-8) Dr. Bras
3

stated that the overall task is to provide guidance and prioritize activities. Since Georgia
Tech is such a large institution, he is trying to have town hall meetings at about 6 to 8
schools within the institution to hear the voices and answer questions from faculty and
staff. This is an example of a way to address the social and political aspects of the
institution. In addition, the theory Dr. Bras uses is the second theme of strategic
planning, learning and creativity. With his town hall meetings, he is learning information
about each school within the institution and in a formal, creative way, town hall
meetings. According to Maurer, Town hall meetings are a fairly popular format inside
large organizations. They give people a chance to talk more informally with leaders.
They can inspire candid conversation. Leaders have a chance to hear directly from
people at various levels. (2013, p.30) Additionally, alignment requires the development
of a communications strategy that includes helping individuals who will be responsible
for the plans success to know what it is they are expected to do, when they are
expected to do it, and what the deliverables are to be. (Schloss & Cragg, 2013, p. 153)
I have attended a town hall meeting for the School of Electrical and Computer
Engineering at Georgia Tech, and I believe they are a successful communications
strategy. President Peterson and Dr. Bras both attended and heard what faculty and
staff had to say regarding the school. Im sure the feedback from faculty and staff was
effective and helped them approve certain issues.
During this meeting, I experienced how upper administration and committee
members handle their decision-making process, when it comes to electing positions and
implementing change. For example, Professor Bob Kirkman, Chair of the Nominations
Committee, encouraged faculty members to nominate people for faculty governance
4

positions. He explained the process in which how faculty members can nominate, which
can be done online. He provided visual aid and displayed how to navigate. Another
example of decision making, which was heavily discussed during this meeting, was the
recommendation of a new version of the Faculty Handbook. Ms. Jeanne Balsam, Chair
of the Statutes Committee gave her presentation. The main change proposed was to
retire the term general faculty to be broken down to two different terms, research
faculty and academic faculty. During Ms. Balsams presentation, she provided visual
aid on how members of the faculty can navigate the current faculty handbook and view
the proposed changes, which can be found on Georgia Techs Policy Library website.
After Ms. Balsams presentation, there was a motion to move forward with looking into
these proposed changes. The motion was approved and there was discussion of voting
on the changes during the next meeting. With decision making, Ive noticed that issues
were presented properly and well organized. The floor was open for discussion for
faculty members to challenge or question the issue presented, additionally, information
was provided online for people to do further research on the issues. Not only were they
available online, committee chairs displayed how to navigate. If an issue or challenge
arises, such as changes to the faculty handbook, it is well-presented to the President
and faculty, open for discussion, and voted upon once the recommendations are clearly
stated to everyone. This is how decision making is done during a faculty senate
meeting.
After Jeanne Balsams presentation, it was time for minutes from the previous
meeting to be approved. Before the motion to approve the minutes, Professor Laura
Hollengreen, Chair of the Undergraduate Curriculum Committee briefly discussed the
5

action items from their January 14
th
meeting, which were also found in the meeting
agenda. After she presented, Professor Jeff Jagoda, Chair of the Graduate Curriculum
Committee went over action items from their January 16
th
meeting. These actions items
were also found in the meeting agenda. There were two sets of minutes to approve,
one from the General Faculty and other from the Academic Faculty, both were
approved. I believe since there were already separated faculty (general and academic)
formatted in these senate meetings is why it was recommended to change in the faculty
handbook. Prior to this meeting, attendees were able to get a copy of the minutes
online. Usually, Professor Craig Tovey, Chair of the Student Academic and Financial
Affairs Committee would present action items, but there were none to present at this
meeting. After the action items were presented and minutes were approved, President
Peterson asked if there was any other business to discuss. Nothing new was brought
up, so the meeting was then adjourned.
Overall, this faculty senate meeting highlighted and touched on many aspects in
higher education administration. Upper administration (President Peterson & Dr. Bras)
attended and interacted with faculty members, strategic planning was discussed,
decision making was done in a well-organized manner, and issues that were brought up
were addressed and positively resolved. In addition, I was able to see first- hand how
upper administration handled unexpected issues. For example, how the inclement
weather impacted students (stakeholders) and their academic schedules. I understand
that all institutions have their share of problems and areas that need work, however I
believe Georgia Institute of Technology is well organized when it comes to Academic
Affairs and that upper administration displays great communication skills.
6

Work Cited

Dooris, M. J., Kelley, J. M., & Trainer, J. F. (2004). Strategic planning in higher
education.
New Directions for Institutional Research, 2004(123), 5-11.
Maurer, R. (2013). How not to hold a town hall meeting. The Journal for Quality &
Participation, 35(4), 30-31.
Schloss, P. J. & Cragg, K. M.(2013) Organization and Administration in
Higher Education. New York, New York: Routledge.