Taiwanese faculty and administrators\u27 perceptions and preferences toward shared governance

This study investigated the perceptions, attitudes, preferences, and actual reported degree of faculty participation in decision-making in Taiwanese universities. It was aimed at exploring possible agreements and disagreements between the faculty and administrators concerning these perceptions, and between the actual and preferred degree of faculty participation in both groups. Seven questions were addressed in this study: (a) What are the most and the least reported areas of faculty involvement in decision making? (b) What are the most and the least preferred areas of faculty involvement in decision-making? (c) Is there a difference between faculty and administrators\u27 reports of faculty involvement in decision-making? (d) Is there a difference between faculty and administrators in their preference for faculty involvement in decision-making? (e) Among the faculty, is reported involvement different from preferred involvement in decision-making? (f) Among the administrators, is their reported faculty involvement different from their preferred faculty involvement? and (g) Do faculty and administrators hold different attitudes toward faculty participation in decision-making? The results indicated that: (a) Faculty had the highest level of involvement in academic decisions, and had the lowest level of involvement in developing general policies. (b) Both faculty and administrators had the highest preference for faculty involvement in academic decisions, and both of them had the lowest preference for faculty involvement in general policies. (c) Administrators reported a level of involvement for the faculty that was higher than the level that the faculty themselves reported. (d) Faculty desired a higher level of involvement than they currently have, and administrators also agreed that faculty should have greater involvement. The interview results indicated that the presidents believed that faculty should participate in decision-making, but they also had negative feelings towards faculty who were enthusiastic about participating. The presidents showed their support of faculty participation in academic decisions, but not in other areas. The results reflected the traditional Taiwanese social expectations of the role of faculty. When the range of decisions was narrowed to the academic context, the disagreements between the faculty, administrators, and university presidents disappeared. However, when the range of decisions was expanded, the agreement declined