University goals - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Dec 18, 2004

University goals

Date: Dec 18, 2004

PS--Though the text is complete as I wrote it, I somehow didn't finish my comment on Goal #4. It probably needs rewording anyway. My thinking was that we should already have been assessing learning effectiveness--and many departments have already been doing so--and to list such assessment as a goal highlights our unpreparedness for SACS review.

Jameela

Date: Dec 18, 2004

Doing all those things in within the required eight month period will be a piece of cake.

Date: Dec 18, 2004

I particularly like the rejoinders to the goals. It is pathetic, though, that if anyone had asked, almost any faculty member could have told SFT, Exline, etc., what Jameela wrote. There seems to be a fine line between amazing incompetence and comlete insanity in the dome. Perhaps if they hadn't fired the deans . . . .

Date: Dec 18, 2004

Prof. Lares, before I respond, I just want to say that your class (10 years ago) was one of the most memorable and enjoyable classes I took at USM.

I completely agree that increasing alumni giving should be a number one priority. I’m not aware of a grant that will build the university endowment (do we even have an endowment?).

I disagree with your assessment of the goal #2. I don’t think that growing the amount of external funds means that everyone has to equally contribute to this goal. The goal should be for the colleges that have opportunities to attract large grants (cost, coep, coh, cob???) to use these grants to offset costs within their own departments so that monies can be transferred to the liberal arts, fine arts, and other programs, which are important for the academic reputation of the institution. By the way, coal is not devoid of grant getting departments, anthropology and sociology should bring in plenty of money, and GS showed that English could get its share as well. Remember, external funds do not have to be grants; music and theater probably bring in a fair share through ticket sales.

I also do not believe that writing a grant takes away from the duties of a professor at a graduate level university. The synthesis activity of reviewing prior research and looking at it in a new way to generate innovated questions is the first step in research and writing it out as a grant application that will be reviewed by others can be stressful but very rewarding. Any activity that increases your knowledge of current directions in your field is also a benefit to your students. My finial point is that all universities at the top encourage (or demand) their faculty to seek external funding. If the pursuit of grants was detrimental to the education process, top universities would not want their faculty wasting their time.

Date: Dec 19, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: asdf
" ...I disagree with your assessment of the goal #2. I don’t think that growing the amount of external funds means that everyone has to equally contribute to this goal. The goal should be for the colleges that have opportunities to attract large grants (cost, coep, coh, cob???) to use these grants to offset costs within their own departments so that monies can be transferred to the liberal arts, fine arts, and other programs, which are important for the academic reputation of the institution. By the way, coal is not devoid of grant getting departments, anthropology and sociology should bring in plenty of money, and GS showed that English could get its share as well. Remember, external funds do not have to be grants; music and theater probably bring in a fair share through ticket sales. I also do not believe that writing a grant takes away from the duties of a professor at a graduate level university. The synthesis activity of reviewing prior research and looking at it in a new way to generate innovated questions is the first step in research and writing it out as a grant application that will be reviewed by others can be stressful but very rewarding. Any activity that increases your knowledge of current directions in your field is also a benefit to your students. My finial point is that all universities at the top encourage (or demand) their faculty to seek external funding. If the pursuit of grants was detrimental to the education process, top universities would not want their faculty wasting their time."

ASDF, I can agree with most of what you say. However, at USM there is a sever lack of resources and infrastructure compared to the better universities. So I agree that the goals per se are not to blame, but rather the lack of resources makes it a zero-sum-game.

The funding goals are being used as the excuse to more faculty from departments with little chance of funding to ones that have a better chance. Hence the shift from CoAL to CoST of positions. Departments that are very important as far as education is concerned are now devalued based on the funding goal. Departments that are on the fringe of a basic university education are being expanded because of funding opportunities. So the goals per se are not to blame, but they can only expand funding departments if they take away from other areas. Mathematics and English are examples of disciplines that have been devalued by the shift in faculty. In addition the MIDAS program encourages faculty to buy out their time so they won't "have to teach". AS if the more a department resembles industry and less academia , the greater the reward.

The "grade inflation problem" has been point to by faculty (especially Frank Glamser who documented the evidence) as an indication that the administration will cut corners to reach the 20,000-student goal. And grade inflation can't be blamed only on the faculty. Raises are based on student evaluations. We have too many "students" who just want a degree to get a job and have no interest in an education. They tell the administration who the good teachers are by evaluations. More than one method of evaluation must be used to counter this. But many departments still do not use two or more methods.

Date: Dec 19, 2004

asdf and Pig-in-a-SACS,

Whatever happened to peer evaluations of teaching? Are these not in use at USM? If you rely only on student evaluations, you will get grade inflation--lots of it.

Also, grant funding is in competition with undergraduate teaching. Professors have only many hours per day, and can respond to only so many incentives at one time. There's no reason a university can't have grant-funded research and undergraduate teaching, but when the top administration's goals become as skewed as they have under SFT, undergraduate teaching is guaranteed to lose out.

Robert Campbell

Date: Dec 19, 2004

One of the great things about being a non-returning adjunct is that I did not have to submit to student evaluations. Instead, I got my gold star when one student said she now felt free to write what she really wanted to say. Anyway, as much as I resisted, I found myself giving 'way too many B & C grades which should have been C & D. (I persuaded the F's to withdraw earlier. ) Three of my six A's were foreign students, which should give us all pause for thought.
I don't know how we can fight grade inflation when the "average" is so low. Honors gets the really capable students, so what are we supposed to do?

Date: Dec 19, 2004

Does anybody have data that shows the level of our students according to national test scores...what is the trend, how does it compare with State or Ole Miss. I assume it is going done as we become basically an open-admissions, but your degree here type of place. There will be even stronger pressure to invite come-one-come-all with the probabtionary status and the tide of publicity washing through the region and state. Would most parents of MS HS students even know or care about any of this?

Date: Dec 19, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: ACT
"Does anybody have data that shows the level of our students according to national test scores...what is the trend, how does it compare with State or Ole Miss. I assume it is going done as we become basically an open-admissions, but your degree here type of place. There will be even stronger pressure to invite come-one-come-all with the probabtionary status and the tide of publicity washing through the region and state. Would most parents of MS HS students even know or care about any of this?"

ACT,

I haven't seen any such data. However I do remember that the study that Frank Glamser did on grade inflation showed no trend between grades and ACT performance. The reason, I recall him explaining, was that the students with the low ACT scores were going into the programs with the greatest grade inflation. Of course, if you are an administrator who wants to boost enrollment, you could use this as "evidence" that we shouldn't deny students with low ACTs because ACTs don't mean anything.

Date: Dec 19, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Otherside
" ACT, I haven't seen any such data. However I do remember that the study that Frank Glamser did on grade inflation showed no trend between grades and ACT performance. The reason, I recall him explaining, was that the students with the low ACT scores were going into the programs with the greatest grade inflation. Of course, if you are an administrator who wants to boost enrollment, you could use this as "evidence" that we shouldn't deny students with low ACTs because ACTs don't mean anything. "

And the highest grade inflation had to do with Dana Thames's dept.

Date: Dec 19, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: ACT
"Does anybody have data that shows the level of our students according to national test scores...what is the trend, how does it compare with State or Ole Miss. I assume it is going done as we become basically an open-admissions, but your degree here type of place. There will be even stronger pressure to invite come-one-come-all with the probabtionary status and the tide of publicity washing through the region and state. Would most parents of MS HS students even know or care about any of this?"

According to The Princeton Review, average ACT scores are:

MSU = 24
MUW = 24
UM = 23
USM = 22
DSU = 19
ASU = 18
JSU = 17
MVSU = Not Reported

It is my belief that Ayers will result in declining average ACT scores systemwide & that there will be concerns at all universities about "declining" into open admissions institutions.

Date: Dec 19, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: qualitative listener
"And the highest grade inflation had to do with Dana Thames's dept. "

Oh!. Did I forget to mention that? I guess I'm taking too much for granted on the part of the readers.

Date: Dec 19, 2004

Otherside:

Yes, what appears to many of us to be obvious, might be surprising for those who have just joined this message board. Dr. Frank Glamser did not make a friend in Dr. Dana Thames's world when he officially questioned the grade inflation in that dept. Glamser had every right to question that dept., btw. They were the worst offenders (especially at the lower undergrad levels.). On a side note - they continue to hire their own although they are posting in the Chronicle for 10 plus jobs.

Date: Dec 19, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Invictus
"

According to The Princeton Review, average ACT scores are:

MSU = 24
MUW = 24
UM = 23
USM = 22
DSU = 19
ASU = 18
JSU = 17
MVSU = Not Reported

It is my belief that Ayers will result in declining average ACT scores systemwide & that there will be concerns at all universities about "declining" into open admissions institutions."

According to the USM Factbook, the ACT average was 20.8 in 2003. The figures for State and Ole Miss may have risen a bit recently. I'll do some searching. During Fleming's last year the USM ACT average was 21.6.

Date: Dec 19, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Curmudgeon
"According to the USM Factbook, the ACT average was 20.8 in 2003. The figures for State and Ole Miss may have risen a bit recently. I'll do some searching. During Fleming's last year the USM ACT average was 21.6."

I thought the numbers at The Princeton Review website looked a bit high. But they weren't not qualified (all students vs new freshmen or whatever). It isn't unlikely that the overall undergraduate ACT at USM is higher than 20.8 (which I believe is the average for new freshmen), since there is a bit of "selection" going on between freshman & senior years. Survival of the fittest or whatever.

My last point was that with the Ayers case, USM (and other state universities) are under court order regarding ACT & admissions. This is moving the universities closer to "open admissions," which puzzled me a lot since Mississippi already has fifteen open admissions institutions.

Date: Dec 21, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Pig-in-a-SACS
" . . . The "grade inflation problem" has been point to by faculty (especially Frank Glamser who documented the evidence) as an indication that the administration will cut corners to reach the 20,000-student goal. And grade inflation can't be blamed only on the faculty. Raises are based on student evaluations. We have too many "students" who just want a degree to get a job and have no interest in an education. They tell the administration who the good teachers are by evaluations. More than one method of evaluation must be used to counter this. But many departments still do not use two or more methods. "

We are using a second method of evaluation now!

We seek to validate inter-rater reliability for the student evaluations of faculty performance by hosting focus groups meetings with students at which one of the questions that we ask them is, “Who is your favorite professor?”

We act surprised when they do not reply by with the answer, “All of them.”

Do we need to change our question or just our professors?

Date: Dec 21, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Customer Service
" We are using a second method of evaluation now! We seek to validate inter-rater reliability for the student evaluations of faculty performance by hosting focus groups meetings with students at which one of the questions that we ask them is, “Who is your favorite professor?” We act surprised when they do not reply by with the answer, “All of them.” Do we need to change our question or just our professors?"

C.S. I would guess you need to change the question. Asking for "a" favorite implies a ranking and you are asking for the "best" in their ranking. On the other hand you may be asking who they "like" the best. But I would say, "who cares who they "like"? This isn't high school and the citizens of the state are not paying for them to be "entertained", but rather educated. Once they graduate and more on in life, they may discover their best teacher wasn't their "favorite".

An excellent football coach may not be the player’s favorite when they are playing.

Date: Dec 21, 2004

C.S.,

A professor once told me not to forget to teach students how to learn from and deal with people that they can't stand. Anyone can function with people they like, but that isn't what the real world is like. I see this affecting students all of the time. They turn off when a professor does something disagreeable to them. Just like using the remote to change channels when a commercial comes on. This use to be a high school problem, but now, thanks to open enrollment, it is now a university problem.

Date: Dec 21, 2004

Otherside,

Excellent point.

RC

Date: Dec 21, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Customer Service
" We are using a second method of evaluation now! We seek to validate inter-rater reliability for the student evaluations of faculty performance by hosting focus groups meetings with students at which one of the questions that we ask them is, “Who is your favorite professor?” We act surprised when they do not reply by with the answer, “All of them.” Do we need to change our question or just our professors?"

I have always been amazed that USM has been in business (pardon the term) since 1910 and it still struggles with "teaching" evaluations. My solution: evaluate "learning." It's as simple as that. No more popularity contests.

Date: Dec 21, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Charismatic Professor
"I have always been amazed that USM has been in business (pardon the term) since 1910 and it still struggles with "teaching" evaluations. My solution: evaluate "learning." It's as simple as that. No more popularity contests. "

C.P.

Isn't that what SACS wants us to do. "Outcomes assessment" has been delayed and even opposed by some at USM. Could it be that once it is assessed that we can no longer call ourselves "world Class"?

Date: Dec 21, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Otherside
" C.P. Isn't that what SACS wants us to do. "Outcomes assessment" has been delayed and even opposed by some at USM. Could it be that once it is assessed that we can no longer call ourselves "world Class"?"

I'm not suggesting this for USM, but some departments at some outstanding smaller schools require their senior majors to take the subject matter section of GRE their senior year.

Date: Dec 21, 2004

I would like to hear discussion or another University Goal.

Goal #2: Grow external research funding to $100 million. Rationale--Resources received through external contracts and grants can be used to fund equipment and maintenance, graduate assistants, professional development, and award programs.

What do board members think of USM spending the states budgeted money on things that the IHL Board didn't intend? Example: The IHL funds a faculty position, which requires the professor to do teaching, research and service. But the faculty member gets a grant and spends almost all of their time on research. The state funds pay the professors salary and the grant reimburses the university the money. But the money from the funding agency is not under the mandates of the IHL and can be spent anyway the administration want. The V.P. for Research takes some, the college dean get a cut and some is returned to the department. The amount returned may or may not be used for an adjunct to teach. Sometimes the extra teaching load is just spread among faculty that don't have grants. Thus the overall effect is money for academics is moved into unknown and unintended functions. Sometimes the "research" involved in the grant is really "contractual services" and really not publishable new scholarship.

What thinks thee?

Date: Dec 21, 2004

my wife's department made her do that in the early '70's. all majors had to take the subject matter test. (now, as an aside, not all disciplines have subject matter tests.)

Date: Dec 21, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Reporter
"I would like to hear discussion or another University Goal. Goal #2: Grow external research funding to $100 million. Rationale--Resources received through external contracts and grants can be used to fund equipment and maintenance, graduate assistants, professional development, and award programs. What do board members think of USM spending the states budgeted money on things that the IHL Board didn't intend? Example: The IHL funds a faculty position, which requires the professor to do teaching, research and service. But the faculty member gets a grant and spends almost all of their time on research. The state funds pay the professors salary and the grant reimburses the university the money. But the money from the funding agency is not under the mandates of the IHL and can be spent anyway the administration want. The V.P. for Research takes some, the college dean get a cut and some is returned to the department. The amount returned may or may not be used for an adjunct to teach. Sometimes the extra teaching load is just spread among faculty that don't have grants. Thus the overall effect is money for academics is moved into unknown and unintended functions. Sometimes the "research" involved in the grant is really "contractual services" and really not publishable new scholarship. What thinks thee? "

Reporter:

It sounds like you have a nose for a story.

Do you have any particular boondoggles in mind?

An Interested Reader

Date: Dec 21, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Reporter
"I would like to hear discussion or another University Goal. Goal #2: Grow external research funding to $100 million. Rationale--Resources received through external contracts and grants can be used to fund equipment and maintenance, graduate assistants, professional development, and award programs. What do board members think of USM spending the states budgeted money on things that the IHL Board didn't intend? Example: The IHL funds a faculty position, which requires the professor to do teaching, research and service. But the faculty member gets a grant and spends almost all of their time on research. The state funds pay the professors salary and the grant reimburses the university the money. But the money from the funding agency is not under the mandates of the IHL and can be spent anyway the administration want. The V.P. for Research takes some, the college dean get a cut and some is returned to the department. The amount returned may or may not be used for an adjunct to teach. Sometimes the extra teaching load is just spread among faculty that don't have grants. Thus the overall effect is money for academics is moved into unknown and unintended functions. Sometimes the "research" involved in the grant is really "contractual services" and really not publishable new scholarship. What thinks thee? "

Extrernal funding is a double edged sword, and as you note, not all funding is created equal. I have been lucky enough since I've been here (1996) to get awards worth a little over 1 mil from the NIH. I couldn't do the type of research I've been trained to do (at least the psychopharm end) without funding. It's also allowed me to collect a lot of ancillary data for publication, support graduate students at a reasonable rate, helped with start up funds for new faculty, supplied equipment that many faculty use, contributed to the travel coffers for faculty, contributed to student health services, and so on (I am speaking of both direct costs and F&A, of course). These research grants were highly competitive and took quite a bit of work to get. Some downsides? Even with course re-allocation money (each "course buy out" I am required to pay from my grants could fund four-five adjuncts or several grad TAs to cover undergraduate courses), grantees still must do the work to get a yearly renewal, and with all my other obligations this is a seven day a week gig for me. No matter how one slices or dices it, however, it is a money maker for the state and university, and good for my department. Now the double edged sword--not all disciplines are research fundable (at least not at big dollar rates). A university needs to be prepared to give reasonable teaching loads to faculty who are not grant funded but good scholars (notice I didn't say "researchers"). From my perspective, scholarly activity expectations need to be balanced with teaching and service-all are important and should be recognized. And good scholars who don't bring in big cash should be honored and valued as much as those that do. Period. This is an non-issue among the Tier I big dogs, and if we want to play the CRE game we need to let our scholars be scholars. Good teaching and service will then fall into place.

Date: Dec 21, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: An Interested Reader
" Reporter: It sounds like you have a nose for a story. Do you have any particular boondoggles in mind? An Interested Reader"

As far as I know this is standard operating procedure at USM. The MIDAS money was incentive for faculty to "buy out" their time through "research" grants. The MIDAS money comes from the process I describes in my post. I know that Robert Campbell has discussed this in depth and pointed out that this is "fools gold" that the administration is mining. But I believe the IHL board believes this is the way to do things.

Date: Dec 21, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Reporter
"I would like to hear discussion or another University Goal. Goal #2: Grow external research funding to $100 million. Rationale--Resources received through external contracts and grants can be used to fund equipment and maintenance, graduate assistants, professional development, and award programs. What do board members think of USM spending the states budgeted money on things that the IHL Board didn't intend? Example: The IHL funds a faculty position, which requires the professor to do teaching, research and service. But the faculty member gets a grant and spends almost all of their time on research. The state funds pay the professors salary and the grant reimburses the university the money. But the money from the funding agency is not under the mandates of the IHL and can be spent anyway the administration want. The V.P. for Research takes some, the college dean get a cut and some is returned to the department. The amount returned may or may not be used for an adjunct to teach. Sometimes the extra teaching load is just spread among faculty that don't have grants. Thus the overall effect is money for academics is moved into unknown and unintended functions. Sometimes the "research" involved in the grant is really "contractual services" and really not publishable new scholarship. What thinks thee? "

It's just like the old preacher who was asked if he believed in baptism. The preacher responded, "Believe in it? I've actually seen it." In resonse to your question, Reporter, I've actually seen what you describe - right here off Hardy Street. And I think its terrible. I'm not sure that some of the funding agencies would be terribly happy about this.

Date: Dec 21, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Reporter
" As far as I know this is standard operating procedure at USM. The MIDAS money was incentive for faculty to "buy out" their time through "research" grants. The MIDAS money comes from the process I describes in my post. I know that Robert Campbell has discussed this in depth and pointed out that this is "fools gold" that the administration is mining. But I believe the IHL board believes this is the way to do things. "

I have not yet been a recipient of MIDAS cash (but may get some next year, who knows...). I was on the URC when this was bandied about, and there were some other issues that have not yet been discussed on this board that were related to putting this incentive system in place (I am not a fan of the MIDAS acronym, so don't blame the URC for that one). Specifically, many grant funded faculty were asking for "in-kind" funding from one office or another for re-assignment time (and using the cash for other items). Now, this is sometimes a good strategy on the part of the researcher to stretch research dollars (and you have the fun task of negotiating [extorting] the dean or chair [hey, if you don't support my research with "in-kinds," just forgetaboutit--I'll spend my time elsewhere], but not so good for the college and department that has to cover these courses. So, an incentive system gets the researcher to think about kicking in his or her fair share, rather than asking for "in-kinds." A related issue is the increased pressure by SPA to asking grant agencies to support graduate assistant tuition waivers associated with stipends rather than having the university kick this in as "in kinds" (many universities insist on this, but USM over the years has been reasonably generous with this). This also helps stretch research bucks, but of course needs to come from some pocket or another. Now, there are downsides to MIDAS-like systems, and I wouldn't mind seeing the data on "in kind" requests since its implementation before making a judgment. One of my major concerns is that there are people who bring in much contract money that really helps our department and produces good scholarhip to boot (Joe Olmi, for example), but who do not receive a financial incentive in terms of a one-time payment for all that work (i.e., they can't use funds for course re-assignment). Getting these people in the boat would be a morale-booster, but I am not familiar enough with the system to say how (or if) this could be done.