Student trustees have been members of local community college
governing boards since 1977. Their privileges and how they are elected
are established by local governing boards. Boards, as well as college
administrators, therefore establish the environment and expectations
for student trustees.
This paper explores the roles and responsibilities of student
trustees from two different perspectives or points of view. It is
intended to promote discussion among trustees, associated student (A.S.)
representatives, and college administrators in order to clarify
expectations for student trustees and the role they play. It was
developed by the League’s Advisory Committee on Education Services
in response to concerns about differing assumptions about the role of
student trustees.
Concerns about the role include frustration about limits on the
student trustee role, disagreements about whether or not the student
trustee is represents and is an advocate for the A. S., and
disagreements over the extent to which the person is considered to be
a regular member of the board. Other concerns relate to the ability of
the student to productively contribute to the board and the time and
support that should be devoted to the student trustee position.
Frustration, lack of clarity, and differences of opinion about
student trustee roles and responsibilities reduce their potential
effectiveness as members of the board. Student trustee effectiveness
may be enhanced if the assumptions and expectations about the role are
explored, clarified and made public, and if the practices and support
provided to the student trustees are aligned with the expectations for
their role.
Background: Student Roles in Governance
In 1977, the student trustee seat on local governing boards was
established in law. The California Education Code (Section 72023.5)
reads:
"The governing board of each community college district
shall order the inclusion within the membership of the governing
board, in addition to the number of members otherwise prescribed,
one or more nonvoting students who are residents of California . .
. These students shall have the right to attend each and all
meetings of the governing board, except . . . executive
sessions."
"The nonvoting student member shall be seated with the
members of the governing board and shall be recognized as a full
member of the board at the meetings, receiving all materials
presented to the board members and participating in the
questioning of witnesses and the discussion of issues."
The students in a district select student members in accordance
with procedures prescribed by the governing board. A 1998 survey
indicates that in 45 districts the student body elects the person; in
16 districts the student body president is also the student trustee;
and in 10 districts the person is selected by other methods.
AB 1725 charged the Board of Governors to develop, in cooperation
with district and student representatives, a plan for encouraging
greater student participation in appropriate aspects of campus,
district, and systemwide governance. The ensuing regulations
identified the associated student organization (or its equivalent) as
the representative body to offer opinions and to make recommendations
to the college administration and governing board with regard to
policies and procedures that have a significant effect on students.
Two Perspectives on the Student Trustee Role
There are two general perspectives on the role of the student
trustee in local governance. One emphasizes the "student"
nature of the role; the other emphasizes the "trustee"
aspect of the position. The different views reflect different
assumptions about the role and person’s responsibilities. The
perspectives are not necessarily exclusive; student trustees may find
themselves integrating, balancing, or being torn between two different
sets of expectations.
Perspective One: Representative of the Students
The first perspective is that the student trustee represents the
students currently enrolled in the district. The student trustee is
considered to be the voice of the students, based on the fact that the
students select the trustee.
This perspective predates the Associated Students designation in
AB1725 as the official voice of the students in shared governance.
The California Student Association of the Community Colleges
(CalSACC) affirmed this perspective in a 1991 resolution when it
stated that "the purpose of the Student Trustee position is to
represent the students as a member of the district Governing Board and
to represent a cross-section of the students’ views to the Board at
all meetings."
In this perspective, both the student trustee and the associated
student body organization have the responsibility to be the voice of
students in the governance of the district. The A.S. has that
responsibility within the shared governance structure, including the
board, to the extent provided for in local policy. The student trustee
is the voice of the students in deliberations of the governing board.
The student trustees' participation in those deliberations may be
limited to topics in which there is an advocacy role for students.
The joint responsibility implies that the A. S. and the student
trustee should work closely together and their roles should be clearly
defined to ensure cooperation and delineation of function. In
multi-college districts, student trustees may be expected to meet with
the Associated Students or other student groups in all colleges in the
district. Administrative support for the student trustee would likely
be the responsibility of the same office that advises the district
Associated Students.
The limitations of this perspective include its constituency-based
view of the member of the board. It minimizes adherence to the
principle that all members of the governing board have a
responsibility to consider the greater good of the institution and the
community in their deliberations. (Effective boards and trustees
recognize that individual trustees do not represent any one
constituency, whether or not the person received support from or was
elected by a particular area or group. Instead, trustees on effective
boards take into account and integrate multiple interests in their
communities in making their decisions.)
This constituency-based view allows the student trustee to be
viewed as not a "real" member of the board. Privileges
granted to and support for the student trustee would likely be
limited.
Strengths of this perspective include that it provides two avenues
for official student input into college and district governance. It
reinforces the advocacy power of the student trustee as a
representative of the clientele of the institution. It reflects the
difference between how the student trustee becomes a member of the
governing board and how other members are elected.
Perspective Two: Trustee Member of the Governing Board
The second perspective emphasizes the responsibilities of the
student trustee as a full member of the board. Student trustees are
considered to have the same responsibility to deliberate for the good
of the district as a whole as do other trustees. The common good,
aggregate interests, and the future direction and needs of the
students and community become primary considerations in
decision-making.
In this view, the purpose of the student trustee seat is to ensure
that a board member with a student perspective is part of the
deliberations of the governing board. It ensures that a member of the
group that uses college services and programs has an official voice.
However, in this perspective, the student member is not on the board
to be an advocate for the A. S. or current student body.
This second perspective requires that student trustees are held to
the same high standards of trusteeship, including participation and
preparation, as are all trustees. They are valued as "real"
members of the board and their role and contributions assume more
importance than otherwise might be the case.
Limitations of this perspective include its inconsistency with the
limited selection process and the year-length term. Those factors make
it difficult to expect the student trustee to have the same
responsibilities as trustees who are elected in general elections. It
is unfair to expect student trustees to contribute at the same level
as other trustees, since they are elected for only one year. Their
primary responsibility is to be a successful student, which may
prevent them from being able to fully participate as a trustee.
In addition, since by law they cannot vote, student trustees do not
have the power or authority of other trustees, and therefore it is
inconsistent to consider that they are the same as other trustees.
Since they cannot vote, the only role they have is onr of influence.
One strength of this perspective is that it is aligned with
principles of effective trusteeship, which include that the trustee
role should not be limited to being an agent for constituent groups or
specific electorates or areas. Another strength is that the
perspective also helps differentiate the responsibilities of the
student trustee and the Associated Students in local governance.
Student trustees play a profoundly different role that being advocates
or representatives of that particular group.
The League’s approach to student trustees reflects this
perspective. For the most part, the same materials are used in the
Student Trustee Workshop to describe governing board responsibilities
and the role of individual trustees as those that are used in the
Trustee Orientation Workshop for all new trustees. The presentations
emphasize stewardship for the larger community and future students, as
well as boardsmanship responsibilities and skills. The workshop
encourages student trustees to adopt principles of good trusteeship.
Comparison of the Two Perspectives
The chart below compares and summarizes a number of assumptions and
implications related to each perspective. However, expectations and
practices in any one district do not necessarily reflect only one or
the other perspective. They are often an amalgamation of approaches
resulting from the evolution of the role of the student trustee in the
district.
| Arena |
Perspective One:
Student Representative on Board
|
Perspective Two:
Trustee Member of Board
|
| Role of Associated Students |
Both A. S. and the student
trustee represent students in shared governance. |
The Associated Student
government is the official representative of the students in
the shared governance. |
| Relationship with A.S. |
Close working relationship.
In multi-college districts, the student trustee would meet
with the district A. S. (if any) and/or may need to meet with
college A. S. groups. |
Student trustees and A.S.
representatives are not expected to work closely together.
Student trustees may be independent from student groups. |
| Expectations for Involvement |
Attend regular board
meetings, Likely attend A.S. meetings or use other avenues to
talk with student groups. Participate in discussions of topics
that affect students. May play a state and national advocacy
role on student-related issues. |
Same expectations for
participation as for all trustees, including external
community meetings. Educated and informed about a broad range
of issues. May attend state and national conferences and play
an advocacy role. |
| Contact Point |
Likely the same advisor as
the A.S. |
Superintendent or chancellor
(the same as for all trustees). |
| Point of View |
Immediate and operational
issues on behalf of current students and A. S. |
Long range and broad on
behalf of future students and external community. |
| Orientation and Training for
the Position |
Focus on internal,
student-oriented issues; orientation and major sources of
information are the A.S., other students, and administration. |
Focus on both internal and
external trends and issues. Orientation and sources of
information are the same as for all board members. |
| Rights and Privileges |
Likely to be limited to the
rights provided for in law. |
Privileges are likely to be
granted as far as law allows; has an advisory vote. |
| Financial Support |
Funds for travel and board
related responsibilities may come from A. S. funds and may be
limited. |
Same support as other
trustees receive. |
| Multi-College Districts |
May have a student trustee
from each college in the district who is expected to represent
the college. |
Would likely have one
student trustee who is not expected to represent the A.S. at
each college. |
Again, the two perspectives are not necessarily mutually exclusive
nor are policies and practices necessarily aligned with one
perspective or the other in any one district. Policies and practices
often have been adopted as a result of board philosophy, experiences
with individual student trustees, proposals from the Associated
Students, and administrative and organizational needs. They reflect
the perspective of the person or entity proposing or implementing the
policy or practice.
Blending or alternating between the perspectives can and does work
in some districts, as long as the rationale for each practice or
policy is understood and supported by the parties involved. However,
confusion and disagreements can and do result from differences and
clashes between perspectives. One or more of the parties (the student
trustee, governing board, A.S., chancellor or superintendent, student
affairs personnel) may make and act on assumptions about the role that
are different than those of the other parties. The resulting
discussion may require problem-solving time and energy. Confusion and
disagreement can reduce the effectiveness of the student trustee role,
no matter how the role is defined.
Conclusion
Student trustees have a unique responsibility to balance many
demands and expectations during their relatively short time as board
members. They can make valuable and consistent contributions to their
boards either as student representatives or as trustee members of the
board. Alternatively, they may find the responsibilities to be too
overwhelming and/or the expectations for their role too conflicting,
and sporadic participation and contributions may result.
Therefore, to help create and sustain an environment in which
student trustees can be effective, it is important that districts
clarify and make public their expectations and provide the appropriate
support necessary for student trustees to carry out their
responsibilities.
This paper is designed to be a resource to help local districts
engage in discussion about the student trustee role. Local governing
boards may wish to use this paper to review their assumptions about
the student trustee role and responsibilities and to explore their
assumptions with the Associated Students, the CEO and other college
staff, as appropriate. The assumptions and perspectives about the role
can then be compared with policies and practices related to student
trustees. Through this process, boards may ensure that policy and
practice reflect their perspective and assumptions about the role.
This paper is also used in the League’s Student Trustee Workshop
to clarify the different perspectives. The workshop covers the roles
and responsibilities of governing boards and focuses on the
"trusteeship" aspect of the student trustee position.
However, the workshop reminds students that it is ultimately the local
governing board that determines the policies and practices that define
the role and responsibilities of student trustees.
Developed by: Advisory Committee
on Education Services
Principal Author: Cindra
Smith, Director of Education Services
October, 1998
|
