Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
 
USM Forum -- Message Board -> AAUP-USM MESSAGE BOARD -> FS Called Meeting
Post Info TOPIC: FS Called Meeting
Reporter

Date:
FS Called Meeting
Permalink Closed

There is not much to report from the special called meeting of the Faculty Senate.  Every thing below is my take on what occurred and should be taken with a grain of salt.  The media (both paper and TV) was present and will give a more accurate account.


 


The meeting was called to address two issues. 1) The situation which occurred on the gulf coast between certain administrators and Dr. Stevenson and 2) consideration of a new Post-Tenure Review policy.


 


1) A resolution was passed mildly (in my opinion) condemning the administrators involved in the incident with Dr. Stevenson and requesting that the administrators apologize to Dr. Stevenson and, in the future, follow university policies of chain- of-command and professional courtesy.  When I get the resolution, I will post it here.


 


2) After much debate about wording a Post Tenure Review policy was passed.


 


The floor was then open for discussion about the SACS probation.  Specific information will not be available until January.  The Senate will ask Dr. Joan Exline to the Senate’s January meeting to provide the information and answer questions.  In general, the senators express serious concern and offer all the help they can provide to correct the problem.  However, there were many voices wanting to make clear that the lost of the deans during SFT’s reorganization contributed to this situation.  When the facts are presented in January, it was suggested that a committee be formed to determine the source of the problem.  Many were angry that this situation was known two years ago and the faculty could have been working on this all of that time, instead of trying to accomplish all of the work in the next 12 months.  My sense was there were many that wanted another vote of no confidence.  However, the AAUP will be taking a survey soon and the results of that will decide if another no confidence vote is in order.  In my opinion, Senators also want to get the information from SACS in order to not jump the gun.       


 


Both TV and the paper interviewed the usual senators after the meeting.  Check your local media for more info.  



__________________
bammo

Date:
Permalink Closed

This is a cross-post from Count on another thread... But this should definitely be addressed by the Senate.  Hiring more people is outrageous.


--------------------


"Joan Exline, assistant to the president for accreditation, planning and articulation, said USM will update its strategic planning and will hire a director of assessment to ensure the school properly reports and documents its academic programs to SACS."



Hire a director of assessment???  I thought that was her job!!  Isn't that what the "assistant to the president for accreditation, planning, and articulation" is supposed to be doing??  Looks like another opportunity for her to expand her power and be "the boss", and set someone else up as the fall guy.  How long will it take to hire such a person, at what cost, and how is it humanly possible that this person could possible come up to speed to address the SACS deficiencies??



We're screwed....



Count



__________________
Institutional Effectiveness?

Date:
Permalink Closed

There was an interesting discussion at the Faculty Senate meeting about SACS. I wnat to know what is the "sensitive information" that was released in the 2:30 meeting that is supposed to be secret. With this probation, what we do not need now is secrecy. What are they hiding?

Is the 2:30 meeting with Deans and faculty leaders considered closed? Isn't this considered public information for a public institution? Were personnel issues discussed - like who is gonna be fired over this?

We all need to know. Then we need to express no confidence in the administration - and send a clear message to the IHL board. They meet the Thames next week.

__________________
Kickback

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: Institutional Effectiveness?
"There was an interesting discussion at the Faculty Senate meeting about SACS. I wnat to know what is the "sensitive information" that was released in the 2:30 meeting that is supposed to be secret. With this probation, what we do not need now is secrecy. What are they hiding? Is the 2:30 meeting with Deans and faculty leaders considered closed? Isn't this considered public information for a public institution? Were personnel issues discussed - like who is gonna be fired over this? We all need to know. Then we need to express no confidence in the administration - and send a clear message to the IHL board. They meet the Thames next week."
Very small kick up for Invictus.

__________________
Robert Campbell

Date:
Permalink Closed

Reporter,


What the Faculty Senate enacted today helps put pressure on Thames--but does the FS really sense the urgency of the situation?  Even a fool like Thames provides only so many openings to his opponents.  Can the Faculty Senate afford to revert to the mindset that led to the compromise over Angie Dvorak's "professional" vita, back in June?


Robert Campbell



__________________
In the news

Date:
Permalink Closed

Details are needed, in writing, from SACS. It's hard to take a firm stand without firm ground.


The SACS web site will have written details on this (and other matters I am sure) next Wednesday on their web site.


http://www.sacs.org/


 


 



__________________
In the news

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: In the news
"Details are needed, in writing, from SACS. It's hard to take a firm stand without firm ground. The SACS web site will have written details on this (and other matters I am sure) next Wednesday on their web site. http://www.sacs.org/    "
Please forgive the redundancy. Fingers type too quickly.

__________________
Reporter

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"Reporter, What the Faculty Senate enacted today helps put pressure on Thames--but does the FS really sense the urgency of the situation?  Even a fool like Thames provides only so many openings to his opponents.  Can the Faculty Senate afford to revert to the mindset that led to the compromise over Angie Dvorak's "professional" vita, back in June? Robert Campbell"

Robert,


As In The News said,  "Details are needed, in writing, from SACS. It's hard to take a firm stand without firm ground." 


In my opinion, it would have been premature for the senate to take a stand on SACS last night.  The message is that the faculty are ready to work very hard to get the University off probation. But, at the same time, we are also aware of the poor leadership and management which is the root cause of the problems.  I do know that many senators have had enough and were ready to vote "no confidence" last night.  But fortuneately they were prudent in did not start shooting from the hip.  


As a side note, I expect the next PUC meeting to be very interesting.  Don't forget Anne (No Quarter) Wallace will be the new rep from Faculty Senate. 


 



__________________
Page 1 of 1  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.
USM Forum -- Message Board -> AAUP-USM MESSAGE BOARD -> FS Called Meeting
Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse 		Powered by ActiveBoard