what's a regent, exactly?

Music: Bon Iver: [self titled] (2011)

Most of the readers of Rosechron are my friends, and then interested academic types, as many of the things I discuss here have an academic character. I'm not afraid to share my ignorance or my learning process, and this post is in that vein: I don't quite understand what a Board of Regents is, or what it actually does, in respect to the governance of a university.

How can I be a tenured professor and not know what a board of regents does?

Well, it happens. As a junior you are encouraged to put your head down and do your work and teach. The service-hydra doesn't emerge until after you are "vested." And then you look up and start to notice this massive machine whirring . . . administrators, complicators . . . er, governors.

Part of my ignorance has to do with the wide variability of such a critter state-to-state: in some states, regents have an advisorly role; in some states, regents have a lot of power over university governance. In some private school sectors, the regency takes on a fundraising role. And here in Texas, there are multiple regencies. It's all very confusing to the younger academic who does not have the historical background.

As a "side hobby," I've decided that this summer I will dedicate a little free time to exploring the nature of university governance and how the system works. My interest is sparked, obviously, by the recent political events regarding Governor Good Hair, the appointment of regents to the A&M and UT systems, and the so-called "flagship wars" occurring here in Texas. The newspapers have been running story after story about Perry's appointees to these regencies, their ties to a conservative political think-tank, the Texas Public Policy Foundation, and the neoliberal policies this foundation champions. Reading all of these stories, it occurred to me I just don't understand what the Board of Regents is or what it actually does.

Here's the thing: I don't think 85% of my colleagues, if that, knows this stuff either. Like any contemporary system, each of its parts does its little job, not having a full grasp of the whole.

I had thought for years, since the Texas boards consist of various appointees mostly from the big bidness world (including "big oil"), that the regency was largely a fundraising and advisorly committee, as well as the brains behind financing the whole shebang---the chancellor is the CEO, etc. It's clear, however, the Board of Regents of both the A&M and UT system play a much larger role than I had assumed. I know that, at the inception of the state university system, they ran the whole show. I also thought that, over the century, they became something like Blavatsky's Secret Chiefs---advising from a distance. I know they've got the power to fire the university president, and they've done so in the past. But I'm still a bit fuzzy about the power structure and how this all works.

I had planned to blog tonight about the recent events here at the University of Texas; the story dropped today that at the same time the regents were endorsing the chancellor's recent statements regarding the autonomy of the university, at least one regent was on a micromanaging bent behind the scenes. But as I started writing the post it occurred to me I cannot say anything truly informative unless I was informed myself---unless I knew what the true nature of the regency was, their power, and their role. Talking to my friend Rosa tonight on the phone, it became clear I'm too ignorant to actually say something substantive at all.

So, stay tuned. When I learn, I'll pass it on.