The Fallacy of "Shared Governance" at UVA -- Part I

Recently at the University, a number of groups have vocally espoused the position that “shared governance” has been a cornerstone of UVA life and institutional integrity— a notion that invokes collaboration between the Board of Visitors, administration, faculty, and students. Yet the concept of shared governance as espoused is an ephemeral one, with no real foundation either in UVA’s legal structure or historical realities.

Some faculty and students have begun issuing protests and formal resolutions, arguing that shared governance is being sidelined or even violated. These declarations demonstrate a fundamental lack of knowledge regarding the historical nature of shared governance at UVA as well as an uncomfortable reality but critical truth: namely, that shared governance is nothing more than an undefined concept; it has no legal basis or authority at UVA.

UVA is governed by a combination of legal and institutional documents that outline its structure, authority, and operations. These include:

1. The Charter of the University of Virginia: This primary, foundational document was originally granted by the Virginia General Assembly in 1819. It establishes UVA as a public institution and specifies its primary governance structure, which is the Board of Visitors. The Charter outlines the legal authority of the Board and the responsibilities of university leadership. Nowhere in this charter – or even in the entire Code of Virginia – does the term “shared governance” appear.
   
   

2. Manual of the Board of Visitors: This document provides the details for the operation and authority of the Board of Visitors, the university’s governing body. It specifies the roles, powers, and duties of the Board members, as well as the processes by which they make decisions and govern UVA. It also does not contain any mention of “shared governance” or anything that could even be inferred as such.
   
   

3. Faculty Handbook: This document outlines the roles, responsibilities, rights, and privileges of the faculty. While it offers guidance on faculty governance and participation in some areas of University decision-making, it is not a legally binding document in the same sense as the Charter or Manual referenced above. The Handbook is a framework for academic governance within the constraints of the broader institutional structure. It also does not contain the phrase “shared governance” anywhere; on the contrary, it clearly states that the “[A]uthority for the governance of the University is vested by statute in the Board of Visitors by the General Assembly of the Commonwealth of Virginia.
   
   

4. Faculty Senate Constitution and Bylaws:  Like the Faculty Handbook, this secondary document provides the structure for the Faculty Senate, a body of representatives from all the schools at UVA. This document is included because a member of the Faculty Senate sits as a non-voting member on the Board of Visitors. It also turns up nothing with regard to shared governance.  In fact, the document specifically delineates limited power -- advisory, not legal -- in Section II.B: “Additionally, the Faculty Senate shall advise the President and the Rector and Board of Visitors…” Advising is not shared governance. It is a discretionary academic courtesy.
   
   

5. Student Council Constitution and Bylaws: Like the Faculty Senate, the Student Council also provides a student representative to sit as a non-voting member on the Board of Visitors, and therefore, the BOV’s governing documents apply to such representation. Furthermore, neither the Student Council’s constitution nor bylaws state anything about shared governance.
   
   

Accordingly, the concept of shared governance at UVA exists only to the extent that the parties involved agree and decide that it should apply to any specific situation. It is a vague and undefined concept to begin with, and if and when any form of mutually agreeable sharing may occur, it exists as a courtesy and is never legally or structurally mandated. Yet as the term “shared governance” continues to be invoked in recent months, many in the University community assume shared governance not only exists but also means equal decision-making power across the University. This has never been the case at UVA. When faculty, staff, or students expect their input to be binding, or believe they have an equal say in all aspects of University operations, friction necessarily arises when misconstrued expectations don’t align with UVA’s legal obligations and historical reality.

Consequently, any notion of shared governance at UVA lacks legal basis because it is not enshrined in any legal document or statute. As defined by Virginia state law and UVA’s Charter, the Board of Visitors holds the ultimate decision-making power over all matters of institutional governance. Shared governance is neither defined nor recognized; no co-governing or reciprocal arrangements exist at UVA. While faculty, staff, and students may participate in advisory roles or collaborative discussions, they do so as a courtesy, not a right. The Board of Visitors is the only legally authorized body with the power to set institutional priorities, oversee the president's administration, select a new president, and make most final policy decisions. Until the University community accepts that “shared governance” is a courtesy and not an entitlement, UVA will continue to suffer from misplaced expectations and needless conflict. Each segment of the University Community has a defined role at UVA–and specifically regarding choosing a new President, the Board of Visitors holds the sole power and responsibility to do so.