back to search...

NASJE Curriculum Design - Governance Entry Level - Participant Activities

1.1.3.7 Describing the Local Judicial Branch Education Governance (3pg/.06MB)

National Association of State Judicial Educators (NASJE)

Notes:
Governance Entry-Level Faculty Resource Describing the Local Judicial Branch Education Governance

Description:

1.1.3.7 Describing the Local Judicial Branch Education Governance                     Environment

Purpose of activity

This activity focuses judicial branch educators on their own governance environment and engages them in applying what they have learned during a course based on this curriculum design.  There are no right or wrong answers to this activity.  Instead, the activity may serve as a commitment to action by judicial branch educators as they share their answers and listen to the answers of others.

Use of activity

This activity would be effective at or near the conclusion of a course so judicial branch educators have a comprehensive view of governance issues.

This is an individual activity.

Relevant Learning Objective

• Describe the current local roles and relationships among administrative and stakeholder-based governance structures and judicial branch educators and identify whether and/or which improvements or enhancements could be made.

The Basics of Governance in Judicial Branch Education

The Local Judicial Branch Education Environment

Answer the following questions about your local stakeholder-based governance entity and your judicial branch education department.

Based on the descriptions provided, how would you describe the relationship between the stakeholder-based governance entity and the judicial branch education department?

Partnership
Full and open communication, joint planning, joint decision-making between stakeholders and judicial branch educators; judicial branch educators are viewed as educational experts and provide substantial guidance to stakeholder-based governance entities; stakeholders are viewed as vital to the success and effectiveness of judicial branch education
Cooperation
Close working relationship, but one group feels they are in the lead; stakeholders feel judicial branch educators are in a supportive role and are limited to participation only when invited to do so or judicial branch educators feel stakeholders are limited to an advisory role and are not involved in decision making
Staffing
Stakeholders feel they are the prime source of judicial branch education and judicial branch educators are expected to provide logistic and administrative services only

What is your level of satisfaction about the relationship?

Completely satisfied – would not change it
Very satisfied – it works well
Satisfied – it is OK
Somewhat unsatisfied – it could be better
Unsatisfied – would like to change it

If you are satisfied to some degree, what is good about the relationship?
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

If you are unsatisfied to some degree, what problems do you see with the relationship?
__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

The Local Judicial Branch Education Environment, continued

Check components of stakeholder-based governance that are in place locally:

For each stakeholder group
Mission or purpose statement
Statement of life span
Description of relationships with other groups
 Clearly stated level and parameters of authority

For stakeholder group membership
Stated roles and responsibilities of members
Defined relationship(s) with judicial branch education personnel
Documented representation for groups of people
Documented types of diversity desirable
Defined terms and replacement process
Clearly stated policies for awards or recognition for service

For stakeholder group leadership
Stated role and responsibilities
Defined term and replacement processes
Stated succession plan
Clearly stated policies for awards or recognition for service

For stakeholder group meetings
Types of meetings necessary and possible
Defined recurrence of meetings (schedule)
General guidelines for seating (members and visitors)
General guidelines for materials
Guidelines for voting (including process for proxy voting)
Template for agendas
Guidelines for recording or documenting meetings
Guidelines for problems that can be anticipated
Procedures to handle unanticipated problems

What improvements or enhancements do you think would improve the stakeholder-based governance entity and/or relationship between stakeholder groups and judicial branch educators and/or the department?