HA: David Wheeler named Eng. Dept. chair - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Sep 8, 2004

HA: David Wheeler named Eng. Dept. chair

Date: Sep 13, 2004

It seems that I read somewhere (on this message board I believe) that the COAL dean has been given assurance that the six English faculty members who have left will be replaced. I wonder if they will be replaced by visible senior faculty. If former faculty members like Polk, Berry, Stringer and others are replaced only by junior faculty members, the only immediate benefits I can see are (a) saving the university lots of money, and (b) staffing classes. As is the case in other disciplines, it will take many years for junior faculty members to develop national reputations. Without visible senior faculty replacements the English department will be functional in one sense but not nearly the department it was two years ago.

Date: Sep 13, 2004

The HA article said English did have that assurance. The level of appointment was not specified. Wheeler was quoted:

“But the dean has assured me that we will be able to fill the vacancies . . . "

Date: Sep 13, 2004

i think there are still some pretty good senior faculty members in english. no doubt, the loss of the faculty listed will hurt, but i wouldn't underestimate the quality of those still there.

Date: Sep 13, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"i think there are still some pretty good senior faculty members in english. no doubt, the loss of the faculty listed will hurt, but i wouldn't underestimate the quality of those still there."

English took a bit hit with the departure of those senior faculty members. The loss is not trivial. Even exceedingly strong departments at excedingly prestitious institutions can ill afford such a sudden hit. Their loss should not be trivialized even if those who remain are talented.

Date: Sep 13, 2004

i'm not trivializing the loss. however, i've seen departments think that the best way to hire and develop a department is to hire senior faculty. sometimes hiring young faculty who are fresh out of graduate school is a better way. grow a department from the bottom up.

Date: Sep 13, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"sometimes hiring young faculty who are fresh out of graduate school is a better way. grow a department from the bottom up."

Good departments elsewhere want to bring in an established person when someone important leaves. But maybe that is not the case at USM. What was that I read about "cleaning house?"

Date: Sep 13, 2004

i also know plenty of good departments elsewhere that when someone important leaves try to bring in new, young faculty who are bringing the newest ideas out of graduate school. i think we simply disagree on the ways to "grow" a department.

Date: Sep 13, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"i also know plenty of good departments elsewhere that when someone important leaves try to bring in new, young faculty who are bringing the newest ideas out of graduate school. i think we simply disagree on the ways to "grow" a department. "

Please take this with the respect with which it is indended, Stinky, but you speak like an inexperienced administrator, or a would-be administrator, or a faculty member who has never held an academic position elsewhere. I believe I would tear my hair out if I had a dean who held your position unless I was in a department with a 100% committment to teaching and no scholarly endeavors. The truth of the matter is that the level of appointment of replacement faculty in the USM department of English is really none of my business. It's just that I thought USM was trying to get out of this 3rd tier and English can help us do that - but not without nationally visible senior faculty replacements.

Date: Sep 13, 2004

i'm not offended. i see a lot of excellent associate professors in english who i assume have developed or are developing national reputations. they, and the senior professors who are still there, can mentor and cultivate good assistant professors. most of those senior professors that were in the dept. and still are in the department came as "wet-behind-the-ears" assistant professors. they turned out pretty well. given USM's history when many were hired, i suspect that they had to develop themselves a lot more than at other universities.

Date: Sep 13, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"i'm not offended. i see a lot of excellent associate professors in english who i assume have developed or are developing national reputations. they, and the senior professors who are still there, can mentor and cultivate good assistant professors. most of those senior professors that were in the dept. and still are in the department came as "wet-behind-the-ears" assistant professors. they turned out pretty well. given USM's history when many were hired, i suspect that they had to develop themselves a lot more than at other universities. "

It's USM's recent history that bothers me the most. Will talented assistant profs actually come here given the recent developments?? I hope so, but I'm hesitant to think it will actually happen. I won't be recommending any of the fine potential junior faculty who I happen to know to apply here given the recent situation. Sad, but true.

Date: Sep 13, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"i'm not offended. i see a lot of excellent associate professors in english who i assume have developed or are developing national reputations. they, and the senior professors who are still there, can mentor and cultivate good assistant professors. most of those senior professors that were in the dept. and still are in the department came as "wet-behind-the-ears" assistant professors. they turned out pretty well. given USM's history when many were hired, i suspect that they had to develop themselves a lot more than at other universities. "

Stinky, salary is probably one of the most costly of a university's expenses. That's why administrators love to replace a highly-paid, long-term senior faculty member with a low-paid new Ph.D. The "savings" can be sizable and usually goes back to some higher-level administrator for either spending or reallocation. But in view of magnitude of English's loss, and their visibility, I would think USM would want to infuse those funds back into that department. My position is that it that strong departments and strong programs should be supported. That the fastest way to achieving excellence. Growing a department from bottom up takes time. USM is running out of time - unless it wants to remain where it is among its peer universities. Believe me.

Date: Sep 13, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
". . . try to bring in new, young faculty who are bringing the newest ideas out of graduate school. i think we simply disagree on the ways to "grow" a department. "

Stinky, think for a minute about what you have said here. Just where did those "newest ideas" that "new, young faculty" get those ideas? Not from a cornflakes box. They had mentors -ususally experienced senior faculty members such as the ones who have left USM. You can trust a faculty member who is over 30. Believe me.

Date: Sep 13, 2004

Fire and start over rebuilding, fire and start over rebuilding, fire and start over rebuilding. That's not a very smart strategy for a university like USM.

Date: Sep 13, 2004

i also mean no offense but i wouldn't want to be an assistant professor with your approach. you'd never hire an assistant professor when a senior professor left. that's more like the harvard approach, but we aren't harvard (no sh*t). i do like to think that students coming out of graduate school can teach me a thing or two. i also like to think that i can teach them a thing or two as well. maybe you have the "hare" approach to developing a department and maybe i have the "tortoise" approach. i don't know. but i've seen enough attempts fail here and at other universities to give quick infusions of academic talent to a department that i am skeptical. you can hire "stars" but they are often hired away. they sometimes have marginal commitments to a department and a university. stanley fish in the chronicle has talked about this (particularly interesting since he is or was a star).

Date: Sep 13, 2004

quote:

Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"we aren't harvard

Stinky, according to the peer ratings we aren't even Mississippi State or Ole Miss. I can also tell you where USM will be if it continues in the direction it is currently headed.

you can hire "stars" but they are often hired away. they sometimes have marginal commitments to a department and a university.

Stinky, Noel Polk was here 27 years. I'd hardly call that a "marginal commitment." The same pertains to Gary Stringer. Those, and others long-termers who left, including faculty members in other departments, such as Frank Glamser, were strongly committed to USM. I can name other long-term quite a few others who were committed but who felt they must leave, but I believe those names serve to make my point. The bottom line is that it all depends on what the higher-administration wants for the department in question. Some will be supported. Some will not. We will see what happens to English. We will also see what happens to the university. As I said, what happens to English is really none of my business. But I consider myself a big time stakeholder in what happens to USM.

Date: Sep 13, 2004

sonny--first of all, i've got plenty of sweat equity in my department and this university (20+ years). your use of noel makes my point. your other examples do as well. they didn't come as senior professors and they developed much of their status while here. i can think of few "stars" hired in COAL in my time here.

most telling of your comments is "The bottom line is that it all depends on what the higher-administration wants for the department in question. Some will be supported. Some will not." absolutely--that's the way it's been all the time i've been here and will be in the future (by higher administration let me add that i include the dean of a college). but that's the way most universities work. the biggest issue has been why some departments get support and some don't.

i'll ignore your comment about harvard. i think (or hope) you get my point about how harvard hires.

Date: Sep 13, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
" i think (or hope) you get my point about how harvard hires."

Sonny, Harvard does hire new Ph.D.'s. Their selection and retention criteria are high. Those that make it stay (or voluntarily move on to another good school) Those that don't make it leave. I don't quite know where you got the idea that I didn't think USM should hire new Ph.D.'s. It would be foolish to hire only senior faculty members. A university must allow room for the infusion of new faculty at all ranks. That means it should have a tough selection and retention system. I don't have access to the current figures, but I suspect that the percentage of tenured faculty members in some departments at USM is probably too high to be healthy. That has not always been the department's fault. Many appropriate departmental-level personnel decisions have been inappropriately overridden at the higher administrative level. That is another of USM's gigantic problems.

Date: Sep 13, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Sonny
"Sonny, Harvard does hire new Ph.D.'s. Their selection and retention criteria are high. Those that make it stay (or voluntarily move on to another good school) Those that don't make it leave. I don't quite know where you got the idea that I didn't think USM should hire new Ph.D.'s. It would be foolish to hire only senior faculty members. A university must allow room for the infusion of new faculty at all ranks. That means it should have a tough selection and retention system. I don't have access to the current figures, but I suspect that the percentage of tenured faculty members in some departments at USM is probably too high to be healthy. That has not always been the department's fault. Many appropriate departmental-level personnel decisions have been inappropriately overridden at the higher administrative level. That is another of USM's gigantic problems."

This post was from Sonny to stinky cheese man - not the other way around as indicated in the post.

Date: Sep 13, 2004

sonny--harvard hires assistant professors but they keep few to none to tenure. the chronicle of higher education had an article about this. your comment on the number of tenured professors in departments is scary. i'll leave saying we agree to disagree. i don't get the sense you're a faculty member here. i'm worrrying about ivan.

Date: Sep 13, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"sonny--harvard hires assistant professors but they keep few to none to tenure."

Sonny, you are correct about Harvard keeping only a few of its assistant professors. I have known many former Harvard assistant professors. That's why I said that Harvard's "selection and retention criteria are high." I have known severa; former Harvard assistant professors. The ones I know, without exception, went to really good universities when they left Harvard and spoke well of Harvard even though they were not retained there. Harvard is a great place to begin a career. Now, you go get ready for hurricane. I believe I am ready for it so I will continue with post before I hit the sack. Perhaps you will read this when the hurricane has passed:

I believe the "hare" (slow) method to which you subscribe is much preferred to my "tortoise" method under normal circumstances. SUNY Stony Brook tried the "tortoise" system when they infused a tremendous amount of $$$ into the system. That worked very well for awhile. The "hare" system is how English at USM developed into an excellent department - it seized upon opportunities and grew its own. That takes time, and USM is no longer in a normal situation. Its esteem in the eyes of others has been severly eroded. I can't imagine how, without a substantial amount of support and changes in administrative philosophy, USM can possibly retain it's tier 4 status. But I do have a solution - one which will not please many and one which depresses me to even think about it: USM could declare itself a regional rather than a national university. The "competition," for the most part, would not be nearly as stiff (although some regional universities are great!). I believe there is at least an outside chance that USM would fare no worse than 17th from the bottom of the tier 3 institutions (17th or 18th from the bottom of the tier 4 instituions is where we are now). Unless there are radical changes, I believe USM is destined to fall even further in the tier 4 category. But making such decisions is one reason why your administrators, not me, are paid the big bucks. I've enjoyed talking with you Stinky. Perhaps we will meet on another thread. I hope to meet you in person one of these days - maybe at the BIG PARTY!

NO QUARTER

Date: Sep 13, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Sonny
" Sonny, you are correct about Harvard keeping only a few of its assistant professors. I have known many former Harvard assistant professors. That's why I said that Harvard's "selection and retention criteria are high." I have known severa; former Harvard assistant professors. The ones I know, without exception, went to really good universities when they left Harvard and spoke well of Harvard even though they were not retained there. Harvard is a great place to begin a career. Now, you go get ready for hurricane. I believe I am ready for it so I will continue with post before I hit the sack. Perhaps you will read this when the hurricane has passed: I believe the "hare" (slow) method to which you subscribe is much preferred to my "tortoise" method under normal circumstances. SUNY Stony Brook tried the "tortoise" system when they infused a tremendous amount of $$$ into the system. That worked very well for awhile. The "hare" system is how English at USM developed into an excellent department - it seized upon opportunities and grew its own. That takes time, and USM is no longer in a normal situation. Its esteem in the eyes of others has been severly eroded. I can't imagine how, without a substantial amount of support and changes in administrative philosophy, USM can possibly retain it's tier 4 status. But I do have a solution - one which will not please many and one which depresses me to even think about it: USM could declare itself a regional rather than a national university. The "competition," for the most part, would not be nearly as stiff (although some regional universities are great!). I believe there is at least an outside chance that USM would fare no worse than 17th from the bottom of the tier 3 institutions (17th or 18th from the bottom of the tier 4 instituions is where we are now). Unless there are radical changes, I believe USM is destined to fall even further in the tier 4 category. But making such decisions is one reason why your administrators, not me, are paid the big bucks. I've enjoyed talking with you Stinky. Perhaps we will meet on another thread. I hope to meet you in person one of these days - maybe at the BIG PARTY! NO QUARTER "

Again I have entered the wrong name! I will, therefore, repost this statement: the above post should have been addressed to stinky cheese man, not to me (Sonny).

Date: Sep 14, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Sonny
" Please take this with the respect with which it is indended, Stinky, but you speak like an inexperienced administrator, or a would-be administrator, or a faculty member who has never held an academic position elsewhere. I believe I would tear my hair out if I had a dean who held your position unless I was in a department with a 100% committment to teaching and no scholarly endeavors. The truth of the matter is that the level of appointment of replacement faculty in the USM department of English is really none of my business. It's just that I thought USM was trying to get out of this 3rd tier and English can help us do that - but not without nationally visible senior faculty replacements."

Sorry, Sonny, I agree with Stinky in many respects (and I have been around the faculty and admin block here and elsewhere). If you look at the classifieds in most disciplines, the overwhelming number of ads is for new assistants. Even at the Tier 1s. Fulls are ususally hired if there are admin duties tied to it, or if an endowed chair is available, or if there are other exigent circumstances (e.g., a department is devoid of tenured faculty). The best strategy for building a department is to get someone out a couple years who has developed a good programmatic record of scholarship, and is beginning to gain national prominence. If you have the money, you can bring in an advanced assistant and road test him or her before awarding tenure. Of course, a department should have a core of old-timers to mentor, provide stability, and provide history for the new folks (English still has these here). But to go out and hire exclusively Fulls who are approaching retirement anyway is probably not a good way to develop a fresh and diverse program (sorry you gray hairs out there).

Date: Sep 14, 2004

quote:

Originally posted by: Been There
"Sorry, Sonny, I agree with Stinky in many respects (and I have been around the faculty and admin block here and elsewhere).

Gut USM is not elsewhere. If it continues on its current route it might very well be nowhere.USM's current situation is different. It has developed into something that is unlike other places.

If you look at the classifieds in most disciplines, the overwhelming number of ads is for new assistants.

Everyone who reads knows tha t most universities replace full professors with faculty members at lower ranks (particulary at lower salaries).

Even at the Tier 1s. Fulls are ususally hired if there are admin duties tied to it

In view of what I've seen at USM bringing in an experienced and capable administrator seems to be a pretty good idea to me - unless you are satisfied with the status quo.

The best strategy for building a department is to get someone out a couple years who has developed a good programmatic record of scholarship, and is beginning to gain national prominence. If you have the money, you can bring in an advanced assistant and road test him or her before awarding tenure. Of course, a department should have a core of old-timers to mentor, provide stability, and provide history for the new folks (English still has these here).

Sorry, but one size doesn't fit all. Your words are rather generic - more like something you'd tell a dean if you were an assistant dean aspiring to a department chair position; or like an assistant dean aspiring to a deanship might say.

But to go out and hire exclusively Fulls who are approaching retirement anyway is probably not a good way to develop a fresh and diverse program (sorry you gray hairs out there).

With the reputation it has developed, I doubt that USM could go out and hire a cadre of Full Professors. And I did not suggest that. I said that a university must keep the opportunities open for hiring new Ph.D.s. Having a "tenured in" department" would not be healthy. USM has been top-heavy with tenured faculty members. It's critieria for promotion and tenure have been all too loose. If you have been in administrative or even faculty roles at other schools, as you claim, you surely know this. Again, your words are more like an aspiring assistant dean might speak in an interview with a provost if gunning for a dean's position. As I said previously, what English does is their business. If you are satisfied with the status quo at USM, that is your business. But I want USM to prosper academically. I want what has been done to USM to be undone. That is my business. Good luck in achieving your aspired goals.

Date: Sep 14, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Sonny
""

Well Sonny, you are one obnoxious SOB. You've convinced me. Everyone but you has crappy aspirations for USM and everyone but you is oblivious to the problems that we face. Stinky cheese man-might I suggest that we post no more in response to this fool--it will only encourage him.

Date: Sep 14, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Been There
"Well Sonny, you are one obnoxious SOB. You've convinced me. Everyone but you has crappy aspirations for USM and everyone but you is oblivious to the problems that we face. Stinky cheese man-might I suggest that we post no more in response to this fool--it will only encourage him. "

Been There, there are many who hold very high aspirations for USM. Some spoke out and served as sacrificial lambs. One of those departed for Texas A&M, for instance. I suppose the big difference between my position and your position is that I see USM in much more trouble than you evidently see, and I believe it is going to take a great deal to resurrect what it has lost in national esteem. Congratulations, Been There, on being the very first I have seen to use profanity on this message board. I sure must have hit a chord with you by something I said.

Date: Sep 14, 2004

You really are a self-important fool, Sonny. You did strike a chord. Your bile and bluster is no different than that coming from the Dome.

No Quarter