SACS Summit - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Dec 13, 2004

RE: SACS Summit

Date: Dec 13, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"invictus--i'm not trying to be an ass when i say i understand where you come from. if you knew who i was you would understand that i have no love for Thames. like you, i have predicted in various arenas that we would be in the same problems. putting his head on a platter would suit me well, but doesn't solve our accreditation problem. we have 12 months. usm was accredited when you graduated. for one of my children that may not be true. we're thinking about other universities that she'll have to transfer to. did you have to think that?"

Stinky, at least your child has a choice of schools. Lucky. My child already graduated.

Date: Dec 13, 2004

buddy system--this is not an enabling thread. i don't want to enable Thames at all. but, as i've said in some other thread i want accreditation. accreditation trumps thames. i've also discussed a particular scenario where the AAUP gets what it wants. think about it?

Date: Dec 13, 2004

parent--what? i have one who will hopefully graduate in may. i've got one who is just starting. more than invictus, mine will be affected by this issue.

Date: Dec 13, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"buddy system--this is not an enabling thread. i don't want to enable Thames at all. but, as i've said in some other thread i want accreditation. accreditation trumps thames. i've also discussed a particular scenario where the AAUP gets what it wants. think about it? "

But could the institution really withstand four additional years of this and still be viable - accredited or not accredited. It might come out marginally accredited, still in the fourth tier, and still populated with a fearful faculty.

Date: Dec 13, 2004

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)"

Sorry to wait so long to respond to this. Delegation is an absolute necessity. No argument. But once a supervisor delegates a task to a subordinate, that does not mean that the supervisor washes his or her hands until the task is complete. Maybe on a simple, short-term task; but not on something as complex and prolonged as SACS accreditation.

Certainly, if the supervisor delegates and then remains too involved, the supervisor could be guilty of micro-management, with all the attendant morale-busting results. On the other hand, the supervisor must continue to get at least minimal feedback and provide at least minimal guidance to assure that the task is being accomplished as desired.

Could it be a fine line and delicate balance between the two? You bet. Require some tact and finesse? Unh-huh. Who could be better suited than Shelby Thames?

Date: Dec 13, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"parent--what? i have one who will hopefully graduate in may. i've got one who is just starting. more than invictus, mine will be affected by this issue."

Mine will not be affected by this issue at all. As I've said for months, USM was never a serious consideration for her. She'll be attending the University of Mississippi.

Date: Dec 13, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Invictus
"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!"

Mr. Wonderful, pic any paragraph. They're all good.

Date: Dec 13, 2004

Invictus,

I agree with Impressed. You've hit the nail squarely.

scm.

Maybe I can achieve brevity this time.

I think the SACS summit is a great idea. Anyone who is willing and able to contibute should be invited. Invite Joan Exline. (Contributors here who know her don't seem to think she is another Angie Dvorak.) Call for the immediate hiring of an experienced SACS consultant.

Be as polite as you can about it, but make it clear that Shelby Thames is not invited. Everyone who is contributing to this effort is doing it for USM, not for Shelby Freland Thames. Thames has already demonstrated that he can't handle accreditation. He has already demonstrated that he doesn't know the difference between USM and Shelby Freland Thames.

If Thames is fired, good. If he stays...he can choose to put his signature on the work that others have done, or to obstruct the work others have done. But in either case it will be other people's work, and the media will be continually informed of that.

Robert Campbell

Date: Dec 13, 2004

Stinky Cheese Man,

Other people are speaking eloquently to the SACS issues - my plea is a personal one to you.

Joan Exline does have my prayers and support; she is a good person working hard. She got torpedoed by people she thought were her friends and colleagues last spring. I think she's being used by Shelby who will drop her in a heartbeat when her usefulness is done. RC, she's nothing like Angie Dvorak. At any rate, that's not the issue.

Shelby Thames is a bad president; worse than that, he is a bad man. Sounds so simplistic but it's true and, ultimately, it's why he has to go.

I may not paraphrase correctly and I may not credit all the right posters here so forgive me if I don't but I think Stephen Judd said the SACS issue transcends battles about strategic direction, I think Ram said good leadership requires finesse, I think Invictus said a retired, interim president with SACS expertise and good people skills could be found quickly, I think Amy Young said that there are well qualified people on the faculty ready and willing to help. The most telling is the person who reported that Shelby Thames has publicly stated he doesn't value university service by faculty. Noel Polk's most recent reference to Shelby's "ham-fisted" style reminds us that he is not going to change nor is he going to take the advice from the people who can help the university - he's shown it over and over again.

SCM, your insights and opinions have been so valuable. I bet I've agreed with you when others have not - even under your old name on the old board. I believe we share a perspective, not the least of which is concern for the degrees of our children. I want your support on this board probably more than I want anyone's because I respect it and value it. I believe you are a scholar and a person of integrity. But I also believe, truly believe, that you are setting up a false foundation and building your logical arguments upon it. It is not Shelby or accreditation. Now is the time to get rid of a president who has failed us miserably and to reclaim this business as a university - an accredited university. Your position is divisive, even if that is not your intent.

Date: Dec 13, 2004

Great idea. One can be almost certain that getting rid of all of the Deans, reorganizing the units, and hiring a new set of Deans was the plan that lost the previous two years of documentation. In all of those changes, does anyone know where the records went?

Date: Dec 13, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Impressed
" Mr. Wonderful, pic any paragraph. They're all good."

Duly noted. All eight paragraphs.

Date: Dec 13, 2004

It's not stick with shelby or lose accreditation, sorry.

Date: Dec 13, 2004

to let academics govern and rc and "all points in between"--again, i have no love lost for Thames. if you knew who I am you'd know why I say this. he has to go. but i'm not naive enough to believe that the IHL will dump him before the accreditation issue is over. (as i said in some other thread i'm maddest at the IHL because they have given us 10 years of inadequate leadership.) so, although i believe it is a both/and world (thanks to my wife) this may be an either/or issue. we may have to live with Thames through this. and if we do, accreditation trumps thames. i am more concerned about the university, its students past, present, and future, faculty, staff, alumni, and any one else than I am Thames. university presidents come and go, universities don't.

what i am fearful of is that people's distrust of other USM administrators (some of whom are genuinely good people despite what some may say and want to help this university move forward) and some "hot rhetoric" issues will derail the accreditation process. meetings will become little more than "ain't it awful" sessions. as invictus or someone else said, getting reaffirmed in the accreditation process may well save Thames job. then so be it. work to get rid of him after USM is saved. we have but 12 months.

Date: Dec 13, 2004

I want to reiterate that if y'all work to meet the spirit of the SACS regulations & not just minimal compliance to maintain accreditation, it could very well be the most subversive thing you could possibly do to Shelby Thames. The kind of management that institutional effectiveness systems demand is not the kind of management that SFT knows how to do. If USM can't have shared governance in the front door, it's possible to sneak it in through a window.

It isn't "Shelby or accreditation." It's "minimal compliance or real progress."

Date: Dec 13, 2004

invictus--i agree. it is subversive to try to meet the spirit of SACS. That's what my buddy at SACS would say. Thames wouldn't like it. but it still may be that for 12 months it is both shelby and accreditation.

Date: Dec 13, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Invictus
"I want to reiterate that if y'all work to meet the spirit of the SACS regulations & not just minimal compliance to maintain accreditation, it could very well be the most subversive thing you could possibly do to Shelby Thames. The kind of management that institutional effectiveness systems demand is not the kind of management that SFT knows how to do. If USM can't have shared governance in the front door, it's possible to sneak it in through a window. It isn't "Shelby or accreditation." It's "minimal compliance or real progress." "

I must be in a better mood this morning after last night's whine.

I agree with Invictus here.

Date: Dec 13, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: stephen judd
" I must be in a better mood this morning after last night's whine. I agree with Invictus here. "

I must agree. I always like a little cheese with my whine.

Date: Dec 13, 2004

What Thames is capable of doing to one faculty member, he is willing to do to all faculty members. His belief of economic development as the mission overshadowing those of academic principles evidently shows his belief in the expendability of all faculty. Someone is probably sitting down with him right now and trying to explain SACS to him. If he had understood - and respected - what SACS accreditation encompasses he'd listen to the best advisors he's never known - his faculty. Not the Ken Magrones, Wangies or Lisa SLayemalls. His ego won't allow him to work honestly with any of you all. NCATE's about as good as gone (friends of mine in that national office have asked ME about it, they can't help but be aware) - he doesn't care about that accrediation - I don't think it's dawned on him that he ought to REALLY care about this all important one. Talk about painting yourself into a corner!!! He's a befuddled little man who's bound and determined to go down with the H.M.S. USM.

Custer had a clearer vision that Thames.

Date: Dec 13, 2004

Edicator is me - typing after coming in from the East Coast on a very late flight.

Date: Dec 13, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: edicator
"Custer had a clearer vision than Thames."

That'll preach. Can we get it on bumper stickers?

Date: Dec 13, 2004

Ram, thanks for changing the that to a than.

Custer had a clearer vision than Thames. Makes sense now.

You know, when I am going to be away from the computer for awhile, I always imagine just what can happen at USM while I'm away, and each new event never fails to amaze me. Thames marches to his own beat, but what musical instrument governs his step?

Date: Dec 13, 2004

SCM I am the guy who has your Exit 13 To all faculty members. There is only ONE language those incompetent inbreds on IHL (Virginia excluded) will understand.

"We will work our butts of for accreditation BUT Shelby has to go. So, it is either he stays and no accreditation or we will get accreditation back and he is gone."

And, if that does not work, threaten to sue them, jointly and individually. I stated that in a letter to the HA in support of Fleming and it prompted Nicholson to call me. The IHL is s$$t scared of being sued.

Date: Dec 13, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Left too
"The IHL is s$$t scared of being sued."

My spouse asked me if all of those students who are just shy of graduation wouldn't have a cause of action should their diplomas suddenly become worthless. What with sovereign immunity and such I really don't know the answer. But it is an engaging thought.