09/11/00

DRAFT

The purpose of this white paper is to set forth recommendations for faculty participation in future searches for UF Presidential candidates. This document is to be drafted by a task force of the UF Faculty Senate. It is expected that it will then be presented to the Board of Regents for consideration and implementation. The hope is to ensure a wider spectrum of input, advice, comments, recommendations, and participation by the entire university community in the process of the selection of a new President. A democratic and representative procedure should provide a fuller discussion and better information on which to base the selection, and invest a larger portion of the university in this process.

Several guiding principles are important to these recommendations. These include the following: (1) More rank-and-file faculty should be included. (2) Each unit/college should have a representative, and each department should be ensured a mechanism for providing input. (3) The search committee should play an active role in choosing the short list of candidates, instead of yielding that role to a consultation firm. This should include participation in nomination and recruitment of candidates, review of CV's and formulation of a short list of candidates, and providing substantial feedback at all stages.

A committee of 50 (like the Search Advisory Committee, or SAC, convened in the most recent Presidential search) is too large to be an efficient working committee. Yet if the membership is overly reduced, it becomes more difficult to ensure a balanced and equitable representation of all parties and constituencies. We suggest a representative system consisting of a sub-committee of each constituency (e.g., rank-and-file faculty, students, administration, community, staff, alumni and boosters, BoR), from each of which 2-3 members would be selected as representatives to an overall advisory board whose function would be similar to the current SAC. This could allow better representation (e.g., each college or unit could elect a faculty, student, staff, and administration representative to the sub-comittee) from which comments and input could be distilled, and at the same time keep the final advisory committee at a more manageable size.

In the most recent search, the Senate Steering Committee and Faculty Academic Advisory Council jointly met with each candidate for breakfast. These informal breakfast and lunch meetings of faculty and staff and students with the candidates should be continued and promoted. In addition, the larger and more formal faculty forums should be continued.

back to HotTopics