Latest Liberty and Power update - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Dec 11, 2004

Latest Liberty and Power update

Date: Dec 12, 2004

Thanks, Dr. Campbell.

In the final sentence of your entry, you mention the IHL Board's "plans for the University." My limited perception is only that the board shows a general commitment to the diminution of value and status of USM. For many years, I have wondered if we in Mississippi might adopt a model of university governance similar to that employed in Louisiana and Tennessee, with an independent flagship university (such as LSU) and several, less prestigious schools with some apparently common administration (such as the University of Louisiana at Monroe, UL-Lafayette, and the other six schools that make up the University of Louisiana system.) http://www.uls.state.la.us/ If that is indeed the model the IHL envisions, I suspect that of our schools, only Ole Miss and MSU would remain independent.

Perhaps, the IHL Board only wants USM to return to a regional, teachers' college, more similar to Delta State in size and status, than to UM or MSU.

Would you (or any of the other posters) offer more specific alternatives or comment on the two I've mentioned?

Date: Dec 12, 2004

ram,

The Delta State model is a distinct possibility.

Another possibility is the anti-USM faction on the Board merely wants to reduce USM's status and has no clear notion of what to reduce it to.

In either case, Thames has to be an unwitting tool of Klumb et al. m Big, expensive engineering programs doing lots of grant-funded research are not part of the long-term vision.

Robert Campbell

Date: Dec 12, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: ram
"Perhaps, the IHL Board only wants USM to return to a regional, teachers' college, more similar to Delta State in size and status, than to UM or MSU. Would you (or any of the other posters) offer more specific alternatives or comment on the two I've mentioned?"

Rather than competing with the flagship Mississippi schools on the basis of quality education, my belief is that Shelby's mission, centering around economic development, is to ride the wave of legislative hype about economic development and create this specialty. It's the reason for the hyperbole that spews from the dome. Unfortunately, like all of his plans it was poorly thought out and is being poorly implemented. SACS is going to recognize the disconnect between the mission and the implementation no matter how much paperwork gets generated.

Date: Dec 12, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"... Big, expensive engineering programs doing lots of grant-funded research are not part of the long-term vision. Robert Campbell "

In the CoST we are told that engineering and some of the sciences are NOT expensive because they will "generate money". The cost to the state is not much because these programs are expected to be like Polymer Science and become self-supporting. In my opinion, that is why CoAL and departments like Math in CoST are being "down sized" while other programs in CoST are expanding. This was discussed before on this board, but I don't recall by whom.

Date: Dec 12, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Spin Doctor
"SACS is going to recognize the disconnect between the mission and the implementation no matter how much paperwork gets generated."

I'd be really surprised if there's anybody from SACS who will dig deep enough to find the disconnect. If Exline's office can get rid of all the dead links to planning documents on its website & make sure that every one of those documents has a "use of results" statement, USM will be off probation. She's showing two years now. She will have a bunch of 2005-2006 docs up by next December, since the fiscal starts in July.

Date: Dec 12, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: ram
If that is indeed the model the IHL envisions, I suspect that of our schools, only Ole Miss and MSU would remain independent.

Wouldn't the Ayres decision preclude that?

Date: Dec 12, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Politician
"Wouldn't the Ayres decision preclude that? "

No.

Date: Dec 12, 2004

Scientist,

What does self-supporting mean?

Are the salary and benefits of every faculty member in Polymer Science paid for strictly out of "soft money"...grant funds, as perhaps supplemented by patent royalties and endowment funds earmarked for Polymer Science?

Are all of the other expenses in Polymer Science also paid for out of "soft money"?

Unless they are, the folks in the Polymer Palace are costing the taxpayers of Mississippi something.

And they get paid a lot better than professors of sociology or foreign languages do.

The general rule is that programs that do a lot of grant-funded research have faculty members with higher salaries and also have greater expenses. They also tend to have lower enrollments. So revenue from lower-cost, higher-enrollment programs is used to cross-subsidize them.

Robert Campbell

Date: Dec 12, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Don't Bet On It
"If Exline's office can get rid of all the dead links to planning documents on its website & make sure that every one of those documents has a "use of results" statement, USM will be off probation. She's showing two years now. She will have a bunch of 2005-2006 docs up by next December, since the fiscal starts in July. "

Don't Bet on It,

If dropping or updating dead links, and putting a "use of results" section into every planning document were enough to get USM off probation, how come Exline didn't do those things over the summer, and dodge the bullet entirely?

I don't know how much SACS will care about the Economic Development hype. We know it mattered enough to AACSB to threaten the continued accreditation of the College of Business if Economic Development remained there.

Robert Campbell

Date: Dec 12, 2004

Robert, another nice post on L&P. I have couple of questions of interest:

1) Won't SACS have the complete file with copies of all corespondence with USM during the period in question? Perhaps someone from the Gov.'s office, the IHL, or the reporter Kevin from the HA should be camped out at SACS's headquaters in Decatur, GA Monday morning to find out exactly what corespondence took place between SACS and USM and to fill-in the timeline correctly. This way, everyone will know this about SFT: a) what did he know?, and b) when did he know it?

2) What happened to the Economic Development dept. and what college is it under? Note the USM web site has College of Business, not CBED. Eye

Date: Dec 12, 2004

Eye,

SACS will have all the correspondence with USM administrators, including Thames himself. I don't know what their confidentiality rules are like, but the media should be asking to see all of this stuff.

Thames has already been caught in a couple of lies about "not being informed." More details out of SACS are not going to make him look better.

I'm a little fuzzy on what happened to Economic Development. I started a piece on the program and the preposterous claims being made for it for Liberty and Power back in September and got sidetracked; I will go back and finish it soon, as it is relevant to the present crisis. Did Malone's fiefdom end up in Science and Technology, or Education and Psychology? Has its new home been identified with finality? Other contributors to this board will know.

I do know that Economic Development got pulled out of the College of Business because it became clear that keeping it there would bring down the wrath of the AACSB and get the business programs deaccredited. Reportedly, Dean Harold Doty is still in Thames' doghouse for having the temerity to point that out to him.

Robert Campbell

Date: Dec 12, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Eye on USM
"Robert, another nice post on L&P. I have couple of questions of interest: 1) Won't SACS have the complete file with copies of all corespondence with USM during the period in question? Perhaps someone from the Gov.'s office, the IHL, or the reporter Kevin from the HA should be camped out at SACS's headquaters in Decatur, GA Monday morning to find out exactly what corespondence took place between SACS and USM and to fill-in the timeline correctly. This way, everyone will know this about SFT: a) what did he know?, and b) when did he know it? 2) What happened to the Economic Development dept. and what college is it under? Note the USM web site has College of Business, not CBED. Eye"

Eye on USM, did you take the economic development job at the University of Southern Mississippi that you were so interested in last spring? If you did, then you certainly know that the IDV program is in COAL and the masters program is in COST.

Present Professor, heads up.

Date: Dec 12, 2004

NCP,

Thank you for the corrections.

What was the stated rationale for parking the Econ Dev Ph D program in one college and the Masters in another?

Or am I asking a dumb question...

Robert Campbell

Date: Dec 12, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"NCP, Thank you for the corrections. What was the stated rationale for parking the Econ Dev Ph D program in one college and the Masters in another? Or am I asking a dumb question... Robert Campbell"

I don't know. The IHL minutes show only closed session discussions. If there was "stated rationale" it was not circulated outside the dome...except perhaps to the economic development department, who by the way most assuredly participated in the "focus groups" mentioned on another thread. Tread carefully on the sacred cow!

Date: Dec 12, 2004

NCP,

Could you be implying that the Economic Development "faculty" were the only ones who attended a focus group run by Joan Exline?

Robert Campbell

Date: Dec 12, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"NCP, Could you be implying that the Economic Development "faculty" were the only ones who attended a focus group run by Joan Exline? Robert Campbell"

If so, it would have been a very small group meeting...even if all those "faculty" attended.

Once again, I don't know about the focus group but I do know about the emphasis (and the influence).

Workforce Training & Development may have ended up in CEP - didn't we read this week or last that there was an economic development position open over there? There was a second letter to the editor today in the HA. Without looking it up and refreshing my memory, I think it was called something like "Educators should Educate" . At any rate, the title reminded me of some things we've seen on this board this week. The letter itself did not - seemed to be advocating training over educating - very much a key component of the economic development spin.

Date: Dec 12, 2004

The right hand doesn't seem to know what the left hand is doing down on Hardy Street. It's time to turn this business into a university.

Date: Dec 12, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Newly Created Positions
" If so, it would have been a very small group meeting...even if all those "faculty" attended. Once again, I don't know about the focus group but I do know about the emphasis (and the influence). Workforce Training & Development may have ended up in CEP - didn't we read this week or last that there was an economic development position open over there? There was a second letter to the editor today in the HA. Without looking it up and refreshing my memory, I think it was called something like "Educators should Educate" . At any rate, the title reminded me of some things we've seen on this board this week. The letter itself did not - seemed to be advocating training over educating - very much a key component of the economic development spin."

There is no Workforce Training and Development degree program in the College of Education and Psychology. We do offer a business education degree, and have for many years. The letter you mention that was published in the HA reflects the bizarre ramblings of one of the people who sends letters in on a regular basis, likely written in crayon because they are not allowed to possess sharp objects. He was railing against tax funded teacher education at universities, among other things. We teach them young 'uns "useless theories and ideologies," I seem to recall the gent writing. This fella is in the mold of AE Griffin, another prolific writer of stange letters to the editor in the CL and HA.

Date: Dec 12, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"Scientist, What does self-supporting mean? Are the salary and benefits of every faculty member in Polymer Science paid for strictly out of "soft money"...grant funds, as perhaps supplemented by patent royalties and endowment funds earmarked for Polymer Science? Are all of the other expenses in Polymer Science also paid for out of "soft money"? Unless they are, the folks in the Polymer Palace are costing the taxpayers of Mississippi something. And they get paid a lot better than professors of sociology or foreign languages do. The general rule is that programs that do a lot of grant-funded research have faculty members with higher salaries and also have greater expenses. They also tend to have lower enrollments. So revenue from lower-cost, higher-enrollment programs is used to cross-subsidize them. Robert Campbell "

Robert,

I will try to answer. What I said was my interpretation of what my dean said when asked if the state needed another engineering program. He was discussing starting more engineering at USM.

My take on this is they won’t be putting out any money for salary, benefits, etc, because they will be moving positions from areas that don’t bring in money to the engineering/sciences. Then you demand that to get tenure the faculty must bring in grants overhead. Some will be able to buy out their time with grants and the money will be used to bring in adjuncts to teach and do research. (The MIDAS program that you already know about is encouraging this.) Grants overhead will fund the infrastructure, assistantships etc. You may not be aware that USM is notorious about starting graduate programs, but not funding them. The program is expected to get their support from outside sources.

If my take on what is happening is wrong, I welcome explanations from others in CoST.

Date: Dec 12, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Scientist
" What I said was my interpretation of what my dean said when asked if the state needed another engineering program. He was discussing starting more engineering at USM. My take on this is they won’t be putting out any money for salary, benefits, etc, because they will be moving positions from areas that don’t bring in money to the engineering/sciences."

My memory could be failing me but didn't the IHL approve an engineering program at Jackson State not very long ago? I know Mississippi State already has one.

Date: Dec 12, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Toady
"There is no Workforce Training and Development degree program in the College of Education and Psychology. We do offer a business education degree, and have for many years. The letter you mention that was published in the HA reflects the bizarre ramblings of one of the people who sends letters in on a regular basis, likely written in crayon because they are not allowed to possess sharp objects. He was railing against tax funded teacher education at universities, among other things. We teach them young 'uns "useless theories and ideologies," I seem to recall the gent writing. This fella is in the mold of AE Griffin, another prolific writer of stange letters to the editor in the CL and HA. "

No slight was intended to the fine college that publishes excellent research and seeds our K-12 schools with teachers. Thanks for the clarification but wasn't there a workforce development position advertised with your other faculty positions recently? If not in CEP, where did workforce development land COST? To get further off topic, wouldn't training be better delivered at our fine community colleges in Mississippi anyway?

Date: Dec 12, 2004

Workforce Development was started in COST and in Shelby's wisdom moved to CBED. Under do-nothing doty it has been moved out of CBED to the coast campus to allow KM to better manage it and this was before the "AACSB" reorganization that moved ED out of business. Maybe some should inquire of the business faculty how successful their AACSB efforts are at present? I hear from friends that they are doing little and many are expecting probation at best there in the near future. Now back to Workforce Development - Who runs it, we all know - Little Ken. Which college? Doesn't matter when Ken is in charge.

Gone Never Returning

Date: Dec 12, 2004

Gone Never Returning,

I was on the College of Business and Behavioral Science curriculum committee when my colleagues in the Business departments at Clemson were going through AACSB reaccreditation. A curriculum subcommittee consisting of the Business department representatives asked for and got money from the dean, then worked all summer on some big reports as well as a complete reshaping of the core Business curriculum.

They obviously knew what they were doing as they passed the AACSB review with flying colors. (Of course, since then, our dean became involved in AACSB work and after he was pushed out by the provost last year, he happily retired from the university to become an AACSB official).

In any event, if the folks in the College of Business at USM have not been putting forth this kind of effort--and haven't gotten this kind of support from the administration--they may indeed have something to worry about from the AACSB. I recall that the process was grueling.

Robert Campbell

Date: Dec 12, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Gone Never Returning
"Workforce Development was started in COST and in Shelby's wisdom moved to CBED. Under do-nothing doty it has been moved out of CBED to the coast campus to allow KM to better manage it and this was before the "AACSB" reorganization that moved ED out of business. Maybe some should inquire of the business faculty how successful their AACSB efforts are at present? I hear from friends that they are doing little and many are expecting probation at best there in the near future. Now back to Workforce Development - Who runs it, we all know - Little Ken. Which college? Doesn't matter when Ken is in charge. Gone Never Returning"

Robert Campbell, I think you've received your answer but have you noticed what happens when we tread on the sacred cow? So predictable!

Date: Dec 12, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Scientist
"My take on this is they won’t be putting out any money for salary, benefits, etc, because they will be moving positions from areas that don’t bring in money to the engineering/sciences. Then you demand that to get tenure the faculty must bring in grants overhead. Some will be able to buy out their time with grants and the money will be used to bring in adjuncts to teach and do research. (The MIDAS program that you already know about is encouraging this.) Grants overhead will fund the infrastructure, assistantships etc. You may not be aware that USM is notorious about starting graduate programs, but not funding them. The program is expected to get their support from outside sources. If my take on what is happening is wrong, I welcome explanations from others in CoST. "

Scientist,

Here's how I interpret what you're saying.

They are expecting faculty members to bring in grant overhead--and using it to pay for assistanships and lab equipment. Also using some of it for buyouts of professor's teaching time.

But, from what you've said, the salary and benefits for these faculty positions are all paid for out of "hard money"--state appropriations and tuition revenue primarily. In other words, if a tenured engineering faculty member is between grants, he or she may not be able to offer assistanships, but will still have a job--and a salary.

They can take "hard money" faculty positions away from the arts, humanities, social sciences, etc., and convert them into engineering positions (although it may sometimes take the funds from two existing positions in these other disciplines to cover salary and benefits for one faculty line in engineering). But what happens when so many positions have been shifted out of the other disciplines into engineering that the net positive revenue produced by the administratively disfavored undergraduate programs begins to decline?

Thames can't meet his enrollment goals with graduate students in engineering (most of whom don't pay anything like the sticker price for tuition anyway). Or with undegraduates in engineering, for that matter. At Clemson, which has an engineering tradition going back to 1890 rather than 1970, and grandiose and (so far) unrealizable goals for increased engineering enrollment are periodically announced, no one imagines that we are going to get 20,000 students enrolled in engineering programs.

Follow the money... and I suspect you will find that an engineering program at USM is not truly self-supporting. Keep in mind that university administrators count grant income as pure gravy, and keep no track of the cost of becoming and remaining competitive for grants.

Robert Campbell

Date: Dec 12, 2004

AACSB accreditation efforts are progressing nicely in the CoB. As you observed, ED was moved out of the business school because the low quality of the program would not pass muster with the AACSB. In fact, most of the "faculty" teaching in the area don't even meet SACS qualification standards. The battle over ED shows that the CoB is actively managing AACSB processes.

Last summer the college filed all the necessary paperwork and reports with the AACSB to request a visit at the correct time. I do not know if the AACSB has responded. The CoB is activlely engaged in learning outcome assessment and using the data to drive curriculum revisions. It is engaged in strategic planning and benchmarking. It may still have some problems with the quantity of intellectual contributions from the faculty, but the research activity in the school is increasing. I know a number of individuals on different AACSB committees, and they report ongoing activity and progress. I know the CoB is spending money on their efforts, in fact I think they even sent two of our colleagues in the Philosophy depart to an AACSB teaching workshop on ethics.

AACSB is clearly a difficult process, but my friends over there report to me that the CoB is taking the process seriously and making significant progress. I realize you don't like Doty, but he at least hasn't dropped the accreditation ball.

Date: Dec 12, 2004

NCP,

People in Mississippi need to learn the Economic Development rhetoric emanating from Thames et al. is pure rhetoric. No Economic Development program will ever deliver what is expected by university administrators, Board members, legislators, others state officials--even by the industries that expect to get extensive use out state unviersity resources that other people are paying for. Until it is seen through, all it will do is keep the likes of Thames, Malone, and Dr. Professor Dvorak in high-paying jobs.

Robert Campbell

Date: Dec 12, 2004

My apologies for the typos in the last message.

RC

Date: Dec 12, 2004

RE: RE: RE: RE: RE: Latest Liberty and Power updat