Log In
  • AASHE-STARS

The Sustainability Tracking, Assessment & Rating System™ (STARS) is a transparent, self-reporting framework for colleges and universities to measure their sustainability performance.

Overall Rating Gold
Overall Score 74.63
Liaison Moira Hafer
Submission Date July 30, 2014
Executive Letter Download

STARS v2.0

Stanford University
PA-3: Governance

Status Score Responsible Party
Complete 2.00 / 3.00 Moira Hafer
Sustainability Specialist
Office of Sustainability
"---" indicates that no data was submitted for this field

Do all enrolled students, regardless of type or status, have an avenue to participate in one or more governance bodies (through direct participation or the election of representatives)?:
Yes

A brief description of the mechanisms through which students have an avenue to participate in one or more governance bodies:

The Nominations Commission (NomCom) is a branch of the ASSU composed of 7 students from the undergraduate and graduate populations that is responsible for nominating students as voting members to university committees, Stanford Board of Trustee committees, and the Stanford Student Enterprises board of directors. University Committees are critical to allowing students' voices to be heard at the administrative level. The Board of Trustees, the Academic Council, the Provost, the President, the Dean of the School of Humanities and Sciences, the Dean of Student Affairs, and the Chief Information Officer convene almost 50 committees for yearlong terms to address a variety of issues affecting all walks of student life.

NomCom has a direct impact on issues across the university through the students they nominate to committees. The term for the 7 NomCom members begins at the start of winter quarter and runs through the end of the next fall quarter. This term was adjusted by an amendment to the bylaws and passed in November 2013 by the Undergraduate Senate and the Graduate Student Council. The current NomCom chairs are Anuj Patel and Jackie M. Robinson. They can be contacted by students or other Stanford affiliates at assu.stanford.edu with any questions or concerns pertaining to NomCom or selection to university committees.

The 2014 Nominations Commission, serving from January 2014 until the end of December 2014, selecting students for the 2014-2015 academic year is: Sumia Ahmad, Sarah Houamed, Jonathan Leong, Marisa Messina, Minh Nguyen-Dang, Anuj Patel (co-chair), and Jackie M. Robinson (co-chair).


Is there at least one student representative on the institution’s governing body who was elected by peers or appointed by a representative student body or organization?:
Yes

A brief description of student representation on the governing body, including how the representatives are selected:

See response to the prior section and the following websites for complete details:
http://nomcom.stanford.edu/?q=node/3
http://nomcom.stanford.edu/?q=node/2


Do students have a formal role in decision-making in regard to the following?:
Yes or No
Establishing organizational mission, vision, and/or goals Yes
Establishing new policies, programs, or initiatives Yes
Strategic and long-term planning Yes
Existing or prospective physical resources Yes
Budgeting, staffing and financial planning Yes
Communications processes and transparency practices Yes
Prioritization of programs and projects Yes

A brief description of the formal student role in regard to each area indicated, including examples from the previous three years:

As student involvement is quite extensive, please see responses to the prior section and the following websites for complete details:
http://nomcom.stanford.edu/?q=node/3
http://nomcom.stanford.edu/?q=node/2


Do all staff, regardless of type or status, have an avenue to participate in one or more governance bodies (through direct participation or the election of representatives)?:
No

A brief description of the mechanisms through which all staff have an avenue to participate in one or more governance bodies:

N/A


Is there at least one non-supervisory staff representative on the institution’s governing body who was elected by peers or appointed by a representative staff body or organization?:
No

A brief description of non-supervisory staff representation on the governing body, including how the representatives are selected:

N/A


Do non-supervisory staff have a formal role in decision-making in regard to the following? :
Yes or No
Establishing organizational mission, vision, and/or goals No
Establishing new policies, programs, or initiatives No
Strategic and long-term planning No
Existing or prospective physical resources No
Budgeting, staffing and financial planning No
Communications processes and transparency practices No
Prioritization of programs and projects No

A brief description of the formal staff role in regard to each area indicated, including examples from the previous three years:

N/A


Do all faculty, regardless of type or status, have an avenue to participate in one or more governance bodies (through direct participation or the election of representatives)?:
Yes

A brief description of the mechanisms through which all faculty (including adjunct faculty) have an avenue to participate in one or more governance bodies:

According to the Articles of Organization of the Faculty, originally adopted by the Board of Trustees in 1904 and revised in 1977, the powers and authority of the faculty are vested in the Academic Council consisting of:

(1) the President of the University
(2) tenure-line faculty: Assistant, Associate, and Full Professor
(3) nontenure-line faculty: Associate and Full Professor followed by the parenthetical notation (Teaching), (Performance), (Applied Research), or (Clinical)
(4) nontenure-line research faculty: Assistant Professor (Research), Associate Professor (Research), Professor (Research)
(5) Senior Fellows in specified policy centers and institutes
(6) certain specified officers of academic administration.

In the Spring of 1968, the Academic Council approved the charter for a Senate to be composed of 55 representatives elected by the Hare System of Proportional Representation and, as ex officio nonvoting members, deans of the academic schools and certain major officers of academic administration.

In the allocation of representation, each school constitutes a major constituency. The Senate may create from time to time other major constituencies as conditions warrant. Approximately one-half of the representatives are allocated to constituencies on the basis of the number of students in those constituencies and the remainder on the basis of the number of members of the Academic Council from each constituency.

The Faculty Senate is the legislative body of the Academic Council and has responsibility for academic and research policy as well as the authority to grant degrees. In addition to formulating policy, the Senate reviews, via the committees, two types of curriculum proposals, broadly speaking: proposals or reviews of degree granting programs, and, periodically, broad curriculum reforms resulting from ad-hoc university level review committees which examine university wide curriculum such as general education requirements, writing requirements and other similar classes all undergraduates must take. The Senate also reviews interdisciplinary degree granting programs (IDPs) as well as proposals for new degree granting programs, including honors and joint degree programs (JDPs) and name changes of departments and programs.

The Senate discharges its academic and research policy and oversight responsibilities via the hard work of seven standing Committees of the Academic Council (https://facultysenate.stanford.edu/academic-council-committees). These committees are charged by the Senate. There are four Senate committees: the Committee on Committees, the Steering Committee, the Committee of Tellers and the Planning and Policy Board.


Is there at least one teaching or research faculty representative on the institution’s governing body who was elected by peers or appointed by a representative faculty body or organization?:
Yes

A brief description of faculty representation on the governing body, including how the representatives are selected:

The Senate is composed of 55 voting members serving staggered 2 year terms and 15 ex officio members. Standing guest seats are reserved for the student representatives, the Registrar, the Vice Provost for Academic Affairs, the Vice Provost for Student Affairs, the Vice Provost of Faculty Development and Diversity and the Emeriti Council representative. The Chair, Vice Chair and Steering Committee members are elected from within the Senate body.

Members of the Academic Council are eligible to serve on the Senate and are placed in units based on school and discipline. Senators are elected annually by the Hare System of Proportional Representation; all Academic Council faculty may vote for faculty within their unit. Elected Senators serve as free agents, not as representatives of a particular program, unit or school. The number of seats per unit is allocated relative to the size of the school and disciplines within that unit.

The Steering Committee is elected by the incoming Senate from a slate of Senators nominated by the Committee on Committees. One of the Steering Committee's first tasks is to appoint members of the incoming Senate to serve on the Committee on Committees. Each Board of Trustees subcommittee has at least one faculty member appointed via the Committee on Committees and the Nominations Committee.

Full Professors in the Academic Council are also elected to the Advisory Board, which handles the promotion and tenure of Academic Council faculty.


Do faculty have a formal role in decision-making in regard to the following?:
Yes or No
Establishing organizational mission, vision, and/or goals Yes
Establishing new policies, programs, or initiatives Yes
Strategic and long-term planning Yes
Existing or prospective physical resources Yes
Budgeting, staffing and financial planning Yes
Communications processes and transparency practices Yes
Prioritization of programs and projects Yes

A brief description of the formal faculty role in regard to each area indicated, including examples from the previous three years:

As faculty involvement is quite extensive, a few key examples are provided below for reference only. For further details on all areas described above, please view the recent Faculty Senate minutes, archived online and available to the public: https://facultysenate.stanford.edu/senate/46th-senate-minutes.

STUDY OF UNDERGRADUATE EDUCATION AT STANFORD
The Report of the Study of Undergraduate Education at Stanford (SUES) is a 127-page document published in 2012. It was presented by the SUES committee, co-chaired by James Campbell, Professor of History, and Susan McConnell, Professor of Biology. Over 100 faculty participated in the two-year study. It is widely regarded as a landmark document and already the basic undergraduate curriculum has begun to change substantively as a result of its findings.

REPORT ON ONLINE EDUCATION
A report on Online Education was given on April 19, 2012 and was the first formal internal presentation of this new phenomenon in higher education: the presentation of college courses online, soon to be known as MOOC’s (Massive Online Open Courses). It led to the establishment of a new office, the office of the Vice Provost for Online Education. Stanford is one of the leaders in this field and the work is driven by members of the Academic Council.

JOINT MAJORS PROGRAM
For full details, please visit:
http://news.stanford.edu/news/2014/february/faculty-senate-three-022114.html

RECONSIDERATION OF ROTC ON CAMPUS
For full details, please visit: http://fsi.stanford.edu/news/william_perry_david_kennedy_argue_for_return_of_rotc_to_stanford_20100305/


The website URL where information about the institution’s governance structure is available:

The information presented here is self-reported. While AASHE staff review portions of all STARS reports and institutions are welcome to seek additional forms of review, the data in STARS reports are not verified by AASHE. If you believe any of this information is erroneous or inconsistent with credit criteria, please review the process for inquiring about the information reported by an institution and complete the Data Inquiry Form.