quote:

---

Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"amy--while i'm on my soapbox--where ever this goes i would recommend that all the elected bodies (FS, AC, GC) start having meetings with faculty. And I don't mean saying "our meetings are open." Be proactive. Each council's college delegation ought to start meeting with the faculty in that college independent of the regular meeting. Years ago the faculty senate delegations did that. I've gotten very frustrated to find that I get more information on this board about FS meetings than I do on its website--when's the next time minutes will be posted? my department's FS rep won't talk about issues. Other council's don't archive their minutes. there needs to be a sense that the faculty members on all of these elected bodies start talking with their constiuency. "

---

On informng faculty: I think some of us try SCM -- I have to tell you if I create one more meeting for my faculty  they will probably stretch me on a rack. I try to inform them as best I can about AC council and Senate but it is an imperfect world and most of the people on Senate are also the people on about a million other committees -- mostly because many faculty would rather not do it. Remember - this university (unlike my previous one) does not really regard University Service as very important so it really is one of the things you do well on top of an already overloaded schedule, at least that is true in my case. I can tell from the three years I have been in Academic Council and two years on the Senate that people are stretched as thin as ever -- frankly I can tell on academic council that half of us haven't even fully read all of the paperwork we have to deal with every month.

So while I agree in principle, please try not to sound as though there are millions of people out there waiting to moved into action, anxious to volunteer and ready to go.  As Amy can tell you the other night from our trying to get people to work on a couple of AAUP committees - right now most people aren't willing to give much more.

The worst thing about this SACs messup is the time several hundred people are going to have to devote to it. Personally, I take the accrediting issue with some respect and also a deep dish of salt grains -- some of this is good, and helpful, and makes sense. But frankly, my attitude is that also a lot of it is over the top -- only partly necessary, but a distraction. And since I spend 14 hours pretty much 7 days a week in my building  .  . .  a deep distraction of time I'd rather spend on the shop floor, the paint deck, in design projects, or in class with my students. Now, I'm lucky -- myprogram is nationally accrediated and we have been gathering data -- nice to see it finally posted. But I and a couple of my collegues ina smal department are gooing to be preoccupied serving on committees helping deal with SACs in general and other programs in particular.

Its fine. I'll do it. But please -- don't ask me not to be grumpy about it. Sorry about that.

 

When the stress gets to you, let me know and we'll meet for a drink or two.

Good to see you here.

FS

toady--agreed. if you've got your ducks in a row, changes in administration should have minimal effects on the basics of accreditation.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: stephen judd
" On informng faculty: I think some of us try SCM -- I have to tell you if I create one more meeting for my faculty  they will probably stretch me on a rack. I try to inform them as best I can about AC council and Senate but it is an imperfect world and most of the people on Senate are also the people on about a million other committees -- mostly because many faculty would rather not do it. Remember - this university (unlike my previous one) does not really regard University Service as very important so it really is one of the things you do well on top of an already overloaded schedule, at least that is true in my case. I can tell from the three years I have been in Academic Council and two years on the Senate that people are stretched as thin as ever -- frankly I can tell on academic council that half of us haven't even fully read all of the paperwork we have to deal with every month. So while I agree in principle, please try not to sound as though there are millions of people out there waiting to moved into action, anxious to volunteer and ready to go.  As Amy can tell you the other night from our trying to get people to work on a couple of AAUP committees - right now most people aren't willing to give much more. The worst thing about this SACs messup is the time several hundred people are going to have to devote to it. Personally, I take the accrediting issue with some respect and also a deep dish of salt grains -- some of this is good, and helpful, and makes sense. But frankly, my attitude is that also a lot of it is over the top -- only partly necessary, but a distraction. And since I spend 14 hours pretty much 7 days a week in my building  .  . .  a deep distraction of time I'd rather spend on the shop floor, the paint deck, in design projects, or in class with my students. Now, I'm lucky -- myprogram is nationally accrediated and we have been gathering data -- nice to see it finally posted. But I and a couple of my collegues ina smal department are gooing to be preoccupied serving on committees helping deal with SACs in general and other programs in particular. Its fine. I'll do it. But please -- don't ask me not to be grumpy about it. Sorry about that.  "

---

Stephen-I understand totally. I have been a service junkie at USM too. Unfortunately, I see the same faces on the same committees over and over. I have been told more than once to learn to "just to say no." But the real issue is that our teaching loads, in my opinion, are not consistent with other CRE universities. Not a tremendous amount higher, but higher enough to make taking on service chores a bear. I took today off (thus time for a lot of posts), but that is getting unusual if I want to continue to publish in a way that is consistent with my academic values. Of all the issues that FS and AAUP should be advocating, teaching loads in my opinion, should be at the top of the list to deal with. But I have not heard a word about this. 

scm,

Much of what you're saying about dealing with SACS makes good sense.  Among other things, SACS representatives are not going to demand Thames' dismissal, even if every one of them would privately rejoice over his departure.

But in logic the alternatives are not: either saving USM or firing Shelby Thames.

You seem to be assuming that Thames will not try to obstruct efforts to get back on track with SACS.  But of course he will try to obstruct them--that is predictable from his personality and from his "leadership" style.  Besides, he has already served notice in the media of his intention to interfere.

You seem to be assuming that firing Thames must detract from the effort to get into compliance with SACS.  It could, if it is made the only priority by the anti-Thames forces.  But surely getting better leadership for USM will help in dealing with SACS, not hurt.

Aren't the alternatives more like these?

Firing Thames and saving USM?

Firing Thames and letting USM go under?

Keeping Thames in power and letting USM go under?

Perhaps you think the first alternative is not even worth thinking about, because you are sure that Thames will remain in power, and therefore you want USM faculty and staff to make the best of their bad lot by investing no further effort in trying to get Thames thrown out.

The cold fact is that IHL Board can keep Thames in office depite the tierdrop.  It has enough power to keep him in office despite probation.  It could keep him in office down the road a piece, despite deaccreditation.  It could keep him in office despite abundant evidence that USM is going down the tubes.  The Board has enough unaccountable power to do these things.

No one who contributes to this board can discount those possibilities.  But if everyone regarded them as inevitable, wouldn't it be time for everyone who participates here, and is still in the employ of USM, to leave as soon as possible?

Perhaps you think that everyone at USM deserves to pay for the sins of the Fleming and Lucas administrations.  They had many flaws, from what I have been able to learn about them.  But in what way could Thames be an improvement over either of them?

Perhaps you have a positive argument as to how Thames, despite himself, will end up contributing to saving USM.  But if you do have one, you need to present your reasons for believing that there is a fourth alternative (Keeping Thames and saving USM), instead of obliquely implying that everyone must pull behind Thames in the present crisis.

If Thames didn't get on the stick in June 2002 regarding accreditation--in fact, he lied when the probation story hit the press, and pretended that no one had told him there were any problems back in 2002--why on earth should be entrusted with accreditation now?  Isn't Thames the one administrator that everyone is in a position to know cannot be entrusted with such matters?

Robert Campbell

 

Remember, I speak as an alumnus. I view the SACS probation as the latest in a series of embarrassments that have been continually degrading the value of my degrees from USM. This distinguishes me from most of the faculty who read this board.

Yes, it's your job on the line, but if you fail, you still have a degree from an accredited institution (USM doesn't hire its own grads, as a general rule, right?) & you can move on. I'm the one left holding the bag. Fortunately, I have a pretty good job & 25 years paid into PERS, but I shudder to think what this would mean for a grad student planning to start a thesis in 2005-2006.

With this said, there is one person responsible for the chain of events that has led to the present morass. It's not a deputy assistant vice neutron somewhere. It's the Big Kahuna. Le Grand Fromage. The Archbishop of Anarchy. And I don't want to give him a chance to redeem himself. I've known him for 35+ years & let's just say that the day he became president, I became a former member of the USM alumni association. I knew where this was going & I hate to say "I told you so." But you can go back to the old FireShelby board archives -- I was saying that ultimately SACS was going to hammer USM & that it would be because SFT didn't understand how accreditation operates.

Left to his own devices, Shelby Thames is going to bludgeon the university into compliance with SACS. That's his style. The first time he tells Joan Exline to have a report in his office at 8 AM on a Monday & she shows up at 8:15, you are going to hear the screaming clear down to Fraternity Row. People are going to have a lot of onerous paperwork to do. They do not need to be browbeaten, harangued, yelled at, threatened, or treated like mental defectives while they're doing it.

I don't care if anybody else in the USM upper administration is fired or not. I've had some favorable reports about Joan Exline & the articulation agreement. I don't believe Jay Grimes is evil. Ken Malone won't be doing any work anyway, but it doesn't matter because without Thames, he's neutered. Student services & finance units aren't cited by SACS, so nobody needs to can anybody there. As far as the deans go, you'll find out who can do the work & who can't. It would be an excellent chance to find out which deans are deans & which deans are done.

Bring in an interim president who can unify people, speak truthfully & start restoring public faith in the institution, an interim who comprehends how SACS works & knows how to get the job done without damaging the institution irreparably in the process. You need a good people person right now. Someone who is willing to lead by example.

Once the institution has resolved the problem, a new president can be installed & s/he can clean out the upper administration as need be.

Back to my original statement. I'm an alumnus. I'm bitter about this. Right now, my diplomas are mildewed but they're still worth something. I want them to keep being worth something. I want Shelby Thames' head on a platter. If he'd been sitting in that ballroom in Atlanta last Tuesday like a red-blooded American male, I might feel a little different about it. But I don't like being represented by a chicken who can't face 5 minutes of public embarrassment while being perfectly willing to embarrass my alma mater publicly by lying & shirking responsibility.

FIRE SHELBY NOW. ASK QUESTIONS LATER!

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Toady
"I had a big shot accred person tell me that if a good system is in place, an institution should survive any admin changes without being hurt on accred."

Toady, I believe that is true at a strong university. Strong universities will endure. Administrators are temporary. Administrators are not as important as the weaker among them seem to think. Strong administrators know they are dispensible. But USM is a special case. Lots of administrators  here seem to think they are indispensible, this following many years of university neglect. I've never seen anything quite like this.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"buddy system--the university president is ultimately accountable for all of the acceditation process. however, there is also something called delegation--the process is delegated."

---

Cheese man, I was not implying that a president should roll up his sleeves and actually do the scut work. It is the president, or someone appointed by the president, who delegates the work to be done. That delegation authority can't be usurped by a faculty member or group of faculty members no matter how motivated they might be to enable the president to solve the problem. With the presidential authority they may be just spinning their wheels.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"buddy system--all i was saying is that good administrators delegate tasks. whether they are done well or not is the responsibility of the person to whom they are delegated. ultimately, however, the ones who delegate have to bear the burden of those to whom they delegated the task. simply put, the delegator has to deal with the quality of work of the delegatee. (i think that sounds stupid but i hope it gets my point across)"

---

Cheese man, there is so much static and desperation on this thread that it is confusing me. Just who or what group has been delegated at the present time?

it's joan exline. she needs our support and quite frankly our prayers.

she's involved in the discussion. but not in the newspapers. I'm not sure what you're asking.

i'm confused. what do you mean?

quote:

---

Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"invictus--remember 12 months! you want his head. fine. i want accreditation. if not for me, my children, my students, my colleagues, and the alumni. "

---

Oh. Give Shelby a chance to redeem himself by "saving" USM from all the bad residue of the Lucas & Fleming administrations. Yeah, I see your point. Shelby redeems himself & you've gotten yourself a president for life. A true innovative leader. A paragon of 21st century management technique. Pigs fly & leopards can change their spots.

You will work out from under this probation in the next 12 months. There's no doubt in my mind that's gonna happen. There are too many smart people working at USM for it to be otherwise. You'll do this with or without Shelby. Hell, you can do it with or without a president at all. (It's happened.)

The question is whether you want to develop a sham system of minimal compliance that will allow an autocrat to continue to mismanage his way from one crisis to another or whether you will develop a modern, outcomes-driven planning & budgeting system that will allow the institution to thrive. The amount of work you'll have to do is roughly the same. Either one & you're accredited.

Truthfully, though, it's not my choice & it's not your choice. It's the IHL board's choice. May God help the University of Southern Mississippi.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"it's joan exline. she needs our support and quite frankly our prayers. "

---

I'll agree with you on this. I have had only minimal contact with her. And I know not everybody at USM is crazy about her. But she really needs all the help & encouragement she can get. Having been in a similar position myself, let me suggest that if anybody sees something they think she isn't doing right, they should let her know, but come in with an idea for fixing it & offer to help. What she is doing is very rough on the mind & spirit.