Plan & Progress Report - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Dec 10, 2004

Plan & Progress Report

Date: Dec 10, 2004

Am I wrong in thinking that there's darn little substance here?

A whole bunch of appointing goin' on, though . . .

NO QUARTER.
Anne Wallace

Date: Dec 10, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Anne Wallace
"Am I wrong in thinking that there's darn little substance here?"

Little substance = lots of bull

Date: Dec 10, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Anne Wallace
"Am I wrong in thinking that there's darn little substance here? A whole bunch of appointing goin' on, though . . . NO QUARTER. Anne Wallace"

I was unable to attend last evening’s special meeting of the faculty senate because I was teaching my regular British Literature I survey course. Our final texts were by Samuel Johnson (1709-1748), best known for compiling the first real English dictionary, of which some definitions are still in use. Johnson is so rich a mine that we more or less skipped one of the essays, but I thought the following excerpt might be pertinent here:

As Pride sometimes is hid under humility, Idleness is often covered by turbulence and hurry. He that neglects his known duty and real employment, naturally endeavors to crowd his mind with something that may bar out the remembrance of his own folly, and does any thing but what he ought to do with eager diligence, that he may keep himself in his own favor.

Some are always in a state of preparation, occupied in previous measures, forming plans, accumulating materials, and providing for the main affair. These are certainly under the secret power of Idleness. Nothing is to be expected from the workman whose tools are forever to be sought.

(Idler, 31, Saturday, November 18, 1758)

Jameela

Date: Dec 10, 2004

quote:

Originally posted by: Jameela Lares
"Our final texts were by Samuel Johnson (1709-1748) . . . ."

Sorry, make those years 1709-1784.

Date: Dec 10, 2004

All SACS progress reports are a lot of bull. The big problem with this one is that there isn't enough bull in it. It is very short. 40-50 pages would probably be more the norm. I assume this is just the outline. If this is the whole report, I can see why the C&R committee was unimpressed. However, there's enough here to merit the "good cause" extension & maybe that's all it was supposed to be.

Date: Dec 10, 2004

Looking over this material, I am already worried about the next round of reviews. To quote some friends:

"It's time to run this business like a university!"

No quarter, no confidence, we have had "one fiasco after another."

Date: Dec 10, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Amy Young
"Looking over this material, I am already worried about the next round of reviews. To quote some friends: "It's time to run this business like a university!" No quarter, no confidence, we have had "one fiasco after another.""

LOL! Apparently, we run in the same circles!!!

Date: Dec 10, 2004

amy--i hope your cynicism/skepticism is unfounded. invictus is correct--accreditation reports can be mind-numbing. however, they are a necessary evil. if the next round is not good, then we can all look for new jobs. and I mean all. that's how critical accreditation is. i'm close enough to retirement (technically I qualify) that I can survive, but others in their mid-careers (12-15 years here) are the ones I worry about.

Date: Dec 11, 2004

My Mama used to say "why is there never enough time to do it right but always enough time to do it over". She said that along with "an ounce of prevention is better than a pound of cure". If Mama were still alive she would probably agree with Dr. Young and say it's time to start "running this business like a university"!

Date: Dec 11, 2004

I actually believe in the accreditation processes, though I know there is a lot of bull in the reports. What can I say, I usually have great faith in people to do the right thing. At this point, however, with one fiasco after another, I have no faith, no confidence in the administration to do the right thing. We need drastic change.

I am a good example of someone in mid-career. I have been at USM for about 10 years and have many years before retirement. I elected to come here - to Mississippi and to USM though I had other opportunities. With tenure and at mid-career, I do not see myself leaving easily. My husband is tenure-track at South Alabama. Therefore I feel compelled to fight for this university and for all of us in south Mississippi who deserve good, solid educational opportunites. From my perspective as Chair of Academic Council, adding online courses and programs, watering down the core by the administration, placing unbelievable teaching burdens on faculty but not providing them the necessary resources (chalk, podiums, computers, laboratories), and increasing the number of students we each have, we seem to be selling the population short. I know faculty do the best they can, but there are limits.

I believe with a new administration with the right people, we can get USM back on track and restore the quality of education here. I think the IHL Board members could be the biggest heros and recognize this, help us put together a great interim administration in January. I believe most faculty will work even harder to correct the probation problems in this situation because they won't feel that they are saving Shelby's butt. Moreover, the more I learn, the more convinced I am that the problem with SACS must lie at the top of the chain of command. Many faculty stop me and say, "but we have been self-assessing in our units, we don't understand!" Can it be true that the departments are fine, but how this self-assessment articulates with the mission, goals, etc. at the university level are the missing attributes here? During restructuring, a plan for how this would affect (and since we were in trouble even then -even correct) self-assessment and reporting should have been part of the reports to SACS.

From the perspective of AAUP, there are other very critical problems that need fixing here as well. I have confidence that AAUP national will be willing to guide us through the process leading to an investigation.

This is all so sad.

Date: Dec 11, 2004

Thanks, Amy, for all you do to make USM a better place. We are lucky to have someone of your courage, energy, and integrity working for us. The AAUP chapter has been a blessing to the faculty, students, and alumni. It's time for people to join you in your efforts.

Date: Dec 11, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Amy Young
"This is all so sad."

Yes, it is and I've been there and may be there again but right now I'm angry and you should be too. Faculty, students, alumni, community - you should be OUTRAGED at what this president has done to reduce the worth of your educational investment.

Date: Dec 11, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Amy Young
"I know faculty do the best they can, but there are limits. I believe with a new administration with the right people, we can get USM back on track and restore the quality of education here. I think the IHL Board members could be the biggest heroes and recognize this, help us put together a great interim administration in January. I believe most faculty will work even harder to correct the probation problems in this situation because they won't feel that they are saving Shelby's butt. Moreover, the more I learn, the more convinced I am that the problem with SACS must lie at the top of the chain of command. Many faculty stop me and say, "but we have been self-assessing in our units, we don't understand!" Can it be true that the departments are fine, but how this self-assessment articulates with the mission, goals, etc. at the university level are the missing attributes here? During restructuring, a plan for how this would affect (and since we were in trouble even then -even correct) self-assessment and reporting should have been part of the reports to SACS."

Amy,

I hope you will tell every media outlet within earshot exactly what you said above.

Robert Campbell

PS. It might be worth adding that Thames will actively obstruct faculty efforts to get caught up with the SACS process--even though objectively such efforts may be the only thing that will save his butt.

Date: Dec 11, 2004

amy--indeed this is sad. but if faculty think that self-assessing is the only thing that has to be done at the department level, they only know part of the story. my department self-assesses but we haven't discussed the results and tried to determine whether we need to make curricular changes. one of my takes about this situation (which I predicted three years ago would happen--i kept saying to people we're going to be on probation) is that faculty don't understand accreditation like they should.

I also think that part of this is a problem with USM's culture that transcends any administration. In my 20+ years USM has never taken planning seriously (meaning if departments made plans and did not follow through there were no consequences) and assessment of learning outcomes was not seen as important and did not result in curricular changes. In fact, members of the university assessment and planning committee told me that some faculty figured this was just another exercise (because we'd been through it before) and were resentful that it had to be done.

Date: Dec 11, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"I also think that part of this is a problem with USM's culture that transcends any administration. In my 20+ years USM has never taken planning seriously . ."

I'm 100% with you on this one, stinky. You are very perceptive. USM's abysmal culture transcends any administation - at least from W.D. McCain until the present time. It is going to be hard to shake. Cultural anthropologists could very handily explain some of the forces underlying USM's plight.

Date: Dec 11, 2004

While it may be true that the USM culture hasn't been where it should, the last two years of Shelby Thames has created another perspective altogether. Throughout the screaming for shared governance and our constant look at glaring problems within THIS administration, we not only want shared governance, we are downright uppity about it. As an anthropologist, I find this transformation refreshing.

Given a new mind-set or culture within the faculty, I think we are prepared to make some amazing progress. BUT, ifthe administration continues in this way, and I have NO reason to believe otherwise (faculty senate has NOT recinded their votes of no confidence), we will be left in worse condition than ever before. We stand on the brink and it could be wonderful, or horrifying in terms of higher education here. There are many many amazing faculty here with talents to draw upon. Simply put, we need new leadership.

Date: Dec 11, 2004

quote:
Originally posted the wise old stinky cheese man
"amy--indeed this is sad. but if faculty think that self-assessing is the only thing that has to be done at the department level, they only know part of the story. my department self-assesses but we haven't discussed the results and tried to determine whether we need to make curricular changes. one of my takes about this situation (which I predicted three years ago would happen--i kept saying to people we're going to be on probation) is that faculty don't understand accreditation like they should."

Everything here is spot on (although I really can't comment about the "culture" issue, since I got my last degree from USM 20 years ago). I would like to add to Mr. SCM's post that when you do start discussing how to use those self-assessment results to improve what you do, you are going to do great things. Things that will have a definite positive impact on your students. More than any other thing that can be done in a university, "closing the loop" on planning & assessment has the greatest potential to really take the institution to the proverbial "next level."

I am not being a pollyanna about this. I have seen it happen.

But it takes true commitment from the top down to make it work. Lip service won't hack it. This is why USM needs new leadership.

Mr. SCM is also correct that faculty don't understand accreditation like they should. If there are on-campus seminars about accreditation & assessment -- and something tells me there will be -- attend them. If you are a faculty member & have not asked your dean to submit your name to the SACS registry so you can be considered as a peer evaluator, you should do it. You may never get the call, but you should request listing. SACS is always looking for subject area specialists. You should ask about being sent to a SACS evaluator training workshop. You should, at the very least, read the Principles of Accreditation & if possible the various handbooks that SACS publishes. As I've stated before, it's not rocket science & it's all going to strike you as common sense good practice stuff.

Date: Dec 11, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Amy Young
"We stand on the brink and it could be wonderful, or horrifying in terms of higher education here. There are many many amazing faculty here with talents to draw upon. Simply put, we need new leadership."

You are going to have to make a leap of faith & it's hard to do it if you don't have faith in the guy who's telling you to jump.

Date: Dec 11, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Amy Young
"Given a new mind-set or culture within the faculty, I think we are prepared to make some amazing progress . . ."

Amy,

I, too, believe the Zeitgeist is right for a new mind-set or culture. The current depolorable state of affairs could set the stage for a bright new day at USM. Just the other day someone applied an AA analogy to what has happened to USM: in some instances it is necessary to hit the very bottom before resurfacing as a new person. USM has most certainly hit the bottom.

Date: Dec 11, 2004

You folks are in a world of hurt. Looking at the plan above, I noticed this:

"Plans, reports, and actions taken are posted on the Institutional Effectiveness website for academic units (143) and administrative units (69) for 2003-04
- Plans for academic units and administrative units are posted for 2004-05"

Well, while admiring the plagiarized SACS probation notice page, I spied a link to the Institutional Effectiveness website. The majority of the links to academic unit assessment plans & reports for 2003-2004 & 2004-2005 lead to "404 error" pages. In other words, they are dead links. There's nothing posted behind those links. There may be 143 links to academic units, but there aren't 143 documents behind those links.

And if you go to "Summary of Program Reviews," you will find that only the CoAL link is active & only four programs are listed there (Art, Theatre, Dance & Interior Design). At least Stephen Judd seems to be with the program...

After browsing around the IE site, I exited back out to the main USM home page. Lo & behold, if there isn't a link directly to the land of dead links right there for the world to find.

Date: Dec 11, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: 404 error
"You folks are in a world of hurt. Looking at the plan above, I noticed this: "Plans, reports, and actions taken are posted on the Institutional Effectiveness website for academic units (143) and administrative units (69) for 2003-04 - Plans for academic units and administrative units are posted for 2004-05" Well, while admiring the plagiarized SACS probation notice page, I spied a link to the Institutional Effectiveness website. The majority of the links to academic unit assessment plans & reports for 2003-2004 & 2004-2005 lead to "404 error" pages. In other words, they are dead links. There's nothing posted behind those links. There may be 143 links to academic units, but there aren't 143 documents behind those links. And if you go to "Summary of Program Reviews," you will find that only the CoAL link is active & only four programs are listed there (Art, Theatre, Dance & Interior Design). At least Stephen Judd seems to be with the program... After browsing around the IE site, I exited back out to the main USM home page. Lo & behold, if there isn't a link directly to the land of dead links right there for the world to find."

Thanks you 404 error. I'd love to take full credit for my department's work but the truth is that the previous chair, Frank Kuhn, was the primary mover and shaker, along with current interim chair (Stacy Reischman, Director of Dance) for getting the faculty to put the material out and then making sure it was organized and poperly updated. That makes our part of the work for this year far easier of course. It also helps that nboth our programs are nationally accredited, so we had the material on hand. Art and Music are similarly run.

Never the less this is going to be a lot of work for many people.

I want to say I don't agree that (at least in all quarters of the university) previous efforts to work through assessment and strategic planning was haphazard and on;y done with resistence. As I havesaid in the past, whenI came here in 1998 the Fleming Strategic Plan was well underway and that required all units to put plans together in alignment with the University Strategic Plan and University Goals. My belief is that the plan never got fully implemented for a variety of reasons -- but it was clearly designed to address SACs concerns. It existed when Shelby came on Board. It would not have taken a great deal to take the plan and adapt it, reinvigate it, and then move it back down through the units. But., as has now been made completely clear by the events of the last two years, this administration was so intent on leaving no artifact of Horace Fleming's tenure. I didn't agree with everything Horace did -- but one thing a university needs even as it chnages is a sense of continuity with its own past. The new administration did everything in its power to disrupt the university from its past.

This whole exercise has been at least as much about toppling previous monuments in favor of building a new one as it has been in creating qualitative chnage and purposeful action. I've never been to a university with a genuine sense of mission in which President's and Provosts didn;t frequently cite the work of their predecessors as important stops on the path of progress. I'm not clear thatin all of the generic clattertrap I hear come out of this administration and its mouthpieces I ever hear any specific references to past academic leaders. I don't want to be definitive about this -- I haven't read, heard, or viewed everything out there. But my distinct impression is this administration has mostly contempt for the work on those who preceded it.

We are now reaping the benefits of that arrogance.

Date: Dec 11, 2004

stephen--i agree with much of what you say. where i disagree is with the efforts of the Fleming administration. we spent lots of time missioning and visioning. little on assessment. if you don't take my word for it, take SACS because in 2002 they said we hadn't done enough (that's the point of brad bond's comment that's been reported in the media).

Date: Dec 11, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Stephen judd
" But my distinct impression is this administration has mostly contempt for the work on those who preceded it. "

That is an interesting observation. I heard Greg Lassen speak one day last week. Among other things, he said that he had been here only a year, so he could not take credit for all the great things at Southern Miss. Of course, he praised Dr. Thames, but he also twice mentioned the work of "the previous administration." I found it odd and wondered whether he meant Lucas or Fleming. The way he said it put me in mind of a political candidate who will mention "my opponent" rather than personalize the opposition by name.

Not particularly significant, I suppose, just odd.

Date: Dec 11, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"stephen--i agree with much of what you say. where i disagree is with the efforts of the Fleming administration. we spent lots of time missioning and visioning. little on assessment. if you don't take my word for it, take SACS because in 2002 they said we hadn't done enough (that's the point of brad bond's comment that's been reported in the media). "

Well, I'll again defer on this. My distinct impression is that the Strategic Plan was developed at least partly to set the framework for assessement. I reember some early conversation in my department around late 99 that this was coming but you are right, it never happened. IMy own impression is that the administration got quickly beleaguered both by its own mistakes and the quick attack of opponants looking for weaknesses to exploit. The person who could probably speak to this most effectively would be Myron Henry, since he was one of the prime movers behind the Strategic Plan. Myron and Fleming had a parting of ways --

Date: Dec 11, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"stephen--i agree with much of what you say. where i disagree is with the efforts of the Fleming administration. we spent lots of time missioning and visioning. little on assessment. if you don't take my word for it, take SACS because in 2002 they said we hadn't done enough (that's the point of brad bond's comment that's been reported in the media). "

scm, it seems you were not the president of the Horace Fleming fan club. Neither was I. And I cannot quarrel with how well he responded to the need to affirmatively address the assessment reports mandated by SACS. For the purpose of discussion, let's all agree that he was a miserable failure and we are all happy that he left in 2001.

That said, in 6/2002, when Bond reported to Thames that the university was not in compliance, Fleming's failures became history. The ball was in the Thames court at that point. It was his problem. Period. It does not go back any further than that. Had Thames started fixing things on June 25, 2002, he could point back to residual problems that he inherited. But he didn't try to fix things. Apparently, all he did was say, we have to make this a top priority and then not follow up until the axe had fallen.

Seeker used to say, Share the Blame -- Clean Slate. That won't even fly here; Fleming is long gone.

Date: Dec 11, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: ram
" scm, it seems you were not the president of the Horace Fleming fan club. Neither was I. And I cannot quarrel with how well he responded to the need to affirmatively address the assessment reports mandated by SACS. For the purpose of discussion, let's all agree that he was a miserable failure and we are all happy that he left in 2001. That said, in 6/2002, when Bond reported to Thames that the university was not in compliance, Fleming's failures became history. The ball was in the Thames court at that point. It was his problem. Period. It does not go back any further than that. Had Thames started fixing things on June 25, 2002, he could point back to residual problems that he inherited. But he didn't try to fix things. Apparently, all he did was say, we have to make this a top priority and then not follow up until the axe had fallen. Seeker used to say, Share the Blame -- Clean Slate. That won't even fly here; Fleming is long gone."

Ram: a more than pertinent point.

Date: Dec 11, 2004

stephen and ram--agreed. but i believe that blame ought to be fairly assigned. as i said on another thread--i blame the IHL. they gave us two poor presidents who got us in this mess.

Date: Dec 11, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"stephen and ram--agreed. but i believe that blame ought to be fairly assigned. as i said on another thread--i blame the IHL. they gave us two poor presidents who got us in this mess. "

I'd love to know which two but I'm afraid to ask. I know it was not McCain. He is probably on everybody's list. Maybe you would say whether or not those two presidents served in sequential order. Then I could figure it out.

Date: Dec 11, 2004

fleming and thames.