Kudos - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Apr 8, 2007

Kudos

Date: Apr 8, 2007

And let there be no mistake, the strongest ally USM has had on the IHL board for the last five years is Virginia S. Newton. I'm glad she got to see the happy ending to the tragedy before her term expired. She showed great courage and persistence.

Date: Apr 9, 2007

Godless Liberal wrote:

I need to say that I am proud of y'all. Given the diificult hand we were dealt after years with Shelby, and the rough edges of the MSU search, many folks came together to make our search process a positive experience. Kudos to the USM faculty, staff, alumni, students, Campus Advisory Committee, Tom, Robin, Virginia, the IHL search committee, our community supporters, and so forth. Nicely done boys and girls. For those of us who were around for the last search process, it feels like the keel is back in the water and we can hoist sails.

I am afraid I have to agree with the C/L. We all think the search was good. We all know it was all we were going to get from Meredith. The IHL(Meredith) gave the half baked excuses("the applicant may very well come under pressure from their present job"--what about the two sitting presidents in Mississippi who have openly applied? In fact both were given contract extensions(I beleive both are now under fire from the faculty at their respective institutions)

Just consider for a moment a truly open search. The results could very possibly turned out the same.(I feel we have a great opportunity with Saunders) Would you feel better today thinking the best person was chosen or being told the best person was chosen?

I suppose if we say we had a great process(search) long enough we will all beleive it is true.

I truly dont know if we had a better search process than last time or we got a better person for the job?

Date: Apr 9, 2007

driving down hard...
The most recent USM search was infinitely more legitimate and open than the 2002 search.

The 2002 search was a done deal from the git-go for SFT. We went through the motions of bringing in other candidates, but, the deal was made in advance.

I also favored a completely open search for the 2007 process. We didn't get it, we will have to live with what we got, which is remarkingly better than what we got in 2002.

I think Dr. Saunders would have done well in a truly open search. She seems to be well qualified.

Date: Apr 9, 2007

A reminder that we had eleven faculty members (not counting deans) that were selected from a pool proposed by the Senate (faculty elected body) and the Deans. Those were all solid, good citizens of the faculty, many with high visibility in goverance. In addition, the initial group was selected by the campus advisory council -- and no outsider was added at any point in the process once the intitial pool was chosen. The group of seven that worked with the board five was highly representative, and were very active in terms of the search, sharing equally with the board in the duties of the search, including interviews with the final five. I'm sympathetic to the want to have a more open search, but to contend that this search did not, in a represenative sense, involve the campus community (including the faculty) in a very powerful way is just wrong.

What i know is that no powerful alum or influential member of the community had a major impact on the search. The people who gnashed their teeth in the State search were those who suddenly found themselves closed out. What i know about our last open search was that it was a joke and was, in the end, controlled by a few.

Meredith staked his reputation that the search would be fair, honest, and constituents would have the major influence in selecting a president. By my lights, he came through. No one who served on the Campus Committee that I spoke to has anything but praise for his judiciousness and his adaptability. I don't want to seem to be singing the praises of Dr. Meredith unconditionally, but in this instance he delivered exactly what he promised and the results look pretty good.

Date: Apr 9, 2007

It is quite possible that Dr. Saunders, in only her second year at Whitewater, would have been reluctant to apply for a position in a public search. No doubt there were other good people in the pool that might not have been there, as well. As Stephen has made clear, there has never been a search for a president in Mississippi with more meaningful participation of faculty, staff, students and alumni. The proof of the pudding is in the eating, and it's hard to believe that USM could have done better than Dr. Saunders who appears uniquely qualified for USM at this point in history. Dr. Meredith was dead right on this one.

Date: Apr 9, 2007

I never intended to imply that the committee was not pure in thought and deeds.

I still say the reasons given to keep the search secret does not pass muster.

If Meredith wants to keep presidential searches under wraps why not just say so? I understand the media wants to use some ink on the process, thats their job, but telling the community we will not get good candidates if it is an open process is a crock. If anyone feels otherwise you need to explain the two sitting presidents who openly applied for jobs and they apparently have no problems with IHL(in fact they were rewarded with contract extensions).

I am pleased with Saunders and the 2007 search is better than 2002.

Date: Apr 9, 2007

stephen judd wrote:

A reminder that we had eleven faculty members (not counting deans) that were selected from a pool proposed by the Senate (faculty elected body) and the Deans. Those were all solid, good citizens of the faculty, many with high visibility in goverance. In addition, the initial group was selected by the campus advisory council -- and no outsider was added at any point in the process once the intitial pool was chosen. The group of seven that worked with the board five was highly representative, and were very active in terms of the search, sharing equally with the board in the duties of the search, including interviews with the final five. I'm sympathetic to the want to have a more open search, but to contend that this search did not, in a represenative sense, involve the campus community (including the faculty) in a very powerful way is just wrong.

What i know is that no powerful alum or influential member of the community had a major impact on the search. The people who gnashed their teeth in the State search were those who suddenly found themselves closed out. What i know about our last open search was that it was a joke and was, in the end, controlled by a few.

Meredith staked his reputation that the search would be fair, honest, and constituents would have the major influence in selecting a president. By my lights, he came through. No one who served on the Campus Committee that I spoke to has anything but praise for his judiciousness and his adaptability. I don't want to seem to be singing the praises of Dr. Meredith unconditionally, but in this instance he delivered exactly what he promised and the results look pretty good.

Having served as a member of the Search Advisory Committee and having had several conversations with Dr. Meredith during the process, I fully understand his rationale. I, as did many, held Dr. Meredith's reputation in the balance. It is my impression that he delivered fully in spite of (what I would suspect) pressure from the outside (locally and otherwise). He took a bashing in the CL and from others and always remained totally professional in every way. He held true to his word, which means a lot to me in light of the past and looking to the future. Without a doubt, this search process was far and above, a dramatic improvement over the previous "open" search. I would take this search process as designed by Dr. Meredith any day when compared to the 2002 search.

Date: Apr 9, 2007

Joe
There is no disagreement that the 07 search superseded the 02 search. It's like having to choose between Imus, Al Sharpton, and Billy Graham.

I hope the we have got a Billy Graham solution, a decision that can solve all our concerns.

Now if we want to move higher than BG...maybe to the J guy........maybe we don't need to go there....I don't think he is really interested.

But, did we get the best person possible? I think we did under the rules and regulations that we were dealt by the IHL.

Date: Apr 9, 2007

driving down hardy wrote:

I never intended to imply that the committee was not pure in thought and deeds.

I still say the reasons given to keep the search secret does not pass muster.

If Meredith wants to keep presidential searches under wraps why not just say so? I understand the media wants to use some ink on the process, thats their job, but telling the community we will not get good candidates if it is an open process is a crock. If anyone feels otherwise you need to explain the two sitting presidents who openly applied for jobs and they apparently have no problems with IHL(in fact they were rewarded with contract extensions).

I am pleased with Saunders and the 2007 search is better than 2002.

I'm not saying I completely agree with Dr. Meredith on the candidate pool. I actually have no way of really knowing although I've seen some of the same apocryphal stories about Presidents runninginto trouble with their boards.

The main reason for me to support the search as it went was Meredith's promise to keep it straight. I'm sorry to say that a publc search might be public, but in Mississippi at the present it would be neither "open" nor remain free of undue influence. With the search organized as it was, the Commissioner could maintain the integrity of the search. That is what he promised and for me, that trumps my usual desire for such a process to be open.

The fact that two sitting President's applied for positions to me speaks for their confidence that the IHL and Commissioner would not punish them. This is apparently not true everywhere . . . .

Date: Apr 9, 2007

stephen judd wrote:

driving down hardy wrote: I never intended to imply that the committee was not pure in thought and deeds.I still say the reasons given to keep the search secret does not pass muster.If Meredith wants to keep presidential searches under wraps why not just say so? I understand the media wants to use some ink on the process, thats their job, but telling the community we will not get good candidates if it is an open process is a crock. If anyone feels otherwise you need to explain the two sitting presidents who openly applied for jobs and they apparently have no problems with IHL(in fact they were rewarded with contract extensions).I am pleased with Saunders and the 2007 search is better than 2002.I'm not saying I completely agree with Dr. Meredith on the candidate pool. I actually have no way of really knowing although I've seen some of the same apocryphal stories about Presidents runninginto trouble with their boards.The main reason for me to support the search as it went was Meredith's promise to keep it straight. I'm sorry to say that a publc search might be public, but in Mississippi at the present it would be neither "open" nor remain free of undue influence. With the search organized as it was, the Commissioner could maintain the integrity of the search. That is what he promised and for me, that trumps my usual desire for such a process to be open. The fact that two sitting President's applied for positions to me speaks for their confidence that the IHL and Commissioner would not punish them. This is apparently not true everywhere . . . .

Sorry, I cant agree with your last statement. I truly wish I could believe any part of this statement.

Undue influence in the search(if it were open)? Ask the alumnae at the W if all 130 legislators who signed onto their cause influenced Meredith? Better find a better shot at a closed search.

Date: Apr 9, 2007

Stephen Judd wrote, "I'm sorry to say that a public search might be public, but in Mississippi at the present it would be neither "open" nor remain free of undue influence."

Unfortunately, this is demonstrably true. What happened to USM over the last five years was made possible by "Mississippi at present"--and of course, Mississippi in the past. We can all hope that the future will be different, but we are always at the mercy of Mississippi.

Date: Apr 9, 2007

Interested onlooker wrote:

Stephen Judd wrote, "I'm sorry to say that a public search might be public, but in Mississippi at the present it would be neither "open" nor remain free of undue influence."

Unfortunately, this is demonstrably true. What happened to USM over the last five years was made possible by "Mississippi at present"--and of course, Mississippi in the past. We can all hope that the future will be different, but we are always at the mercy of Mississippi.

I can only hope that many lessons have been learned over the past 5 years; I know I have certainly learned several. I'm no longer the naive person I was. When I came to USM I often wondered why some of the senior faculty members with whom I came into contact were so very cynical; 15 years later, not only do I fully understand the cynicism, but now I find myself much more cynical than I thought I could ever be. That is the only regret I have of the last 15 years of my professional life, especially of the last 5 years. I hope and intend for the next 10 years of my professional life to go far to repair and rid myself of that cynicism. I hope the last 5 years have taught us all a lesson; those on both sides of the issues. Many have expended a lot of energy; energy that we don't have. I can only hope that lessons have been learned; the right lessons. And, I think there are "right" lessons that should have been learned.

Date: Apr 10, 2007

AMEN Joe.

Date: Apr 10, 2007

I can only hope that many lessons have been learned over the past 5 years; I know I have certainly learned several. I'm no longer the naive person I was. When I came to USM I often wondered why some of the senior faculty members with whom I came into contact were so very cynical; 15 years later, not only do I fully understand the cynicism, but now I find myself much more cynical than I thought I could ever be. That is the only regret I have of the last 15 years of my professional life, especially of the last 5 years. I hope and intend for the next 10 years of my professional life to go far to repair and rid myself of that cynicism. I hope the last 5 years have taught us all a lesson; those on both sides of the issues. Many have expended a lot of energy; energy that we don't have. I can only hope that lessons have been learned; the right lessons. And, I think there are "right" lessons that should have been learned.

Dear Joe:

Maybe our cynicism will soon be replaced by a sense of healthy skepticism--as at other institutions of higher learning. The syndrome that best describes my experience under Shelly is a subclinical level of PTSD (avoidance, arousal, hypervigilance, re-experiencing). As you know, the "treatment" for getting over the effects of an assualt by an abuser is to get back in the game and to learn that all is not threat and danger. To a large degree, this will depend on Martha's actions.

Well, I started this thread on an upbeat note, and now I am in clinical mode.