H.A. Editorial - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Jan 5, 2005

H.A. Editorial

Date: Jan 5, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Reporter
"USM faculty must rise to challengehttp://www.hattiesburgamerican.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050105/OPINION01/501050301/1014/OPINION"

What seems to have been overlooked in this editorial is that what has been done at USM during past 10 years has been done. You can't alter the past. All you can do is describe the past. You can alter the future, but not the past. To prepare a document that attempts to alter the past and says something other than the truth would be deceptive. Just what is it that the faculty can do to "help?" All they can do is make currently existing data available, and perhaps help organize that data. But that can't alter the past. What's done is done. Nothing can change that. No faculty member, no administrator, no IHL member. The past is fixed. Only the future is alterable.

Date: Jan 5, 2005

"No one, including the Southern Miss faculty, will benefit if the institution fails to restore its standing with SACS."

I hate to say this, but if USM does restore its standing with SACS on the first attempt, with Shelby in office, Shelby will claim a great victory. However, if USM fails on the first attempt, Shelby will be gone, and healthy restoration will then be possible. I am not advocating a failure on the first round, just noting that once again Shelby benefits from his own incompetence. As Jimmy Carter once said, life is not fair.

Date: Jan 5, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: USM Sympathizer
"" I am not advocating a failure on the first round, just noting that once again Shelby benefits from his own incompetence. As Jimmy Carter once said, life is not fair. "

Correct analysis on all counts. Allowing the hemmhorage to continue for a bit may be the requisite tradeoff for a Thames removal. And by the way, if anyone should know about incompetence, it's Jimmy Carter.

Date: Jan 5, 2005

"USM faculty must rise to challenge" sounds as if the administration is off the hook with SACS. Sounds to me like your administration can continue to be inept, unprofessional & clueless, but the faculty d@mn sure better rise to the challenge!

But as another poster noted, "Life is not fair." You are d@mned if you do & d@mned if you don't.

Date: Jan 5, 2005

i worry about people talking about "first attempts" implying that there may be a "second attempt." there may not be a second chance. if the first attempt doesn't succeed USM could be in deep trouble.

Date: Jan 5, 2005

This may have been discussed before but, if so, it's buried and today's editorial calls for it to be back in the forefront.

Aren't there a number of professors at USM with significant accreditation experience? Some specifically with SACS? Aren't there even several professors qualified to do site visits? The names of the experts should be made public and Shelby Thames should be forced to acknowledge that his pride and paranoia have prevented him from asking the experts to help with this probation. This general "blame it on the unsupportive faculty" stance that is beginning to take root must be nipped in the bud; it's one more example of the power of the spin cycle. However long the SACS problem has been brewing, Shelby Thames did not make it a priority in the first two years of his presidency and now the university is paying the price.

The IHL or the media should ask to see a list of the experts and then ask why Shelby Thames is unwilling to use the academic resources that this university has.

Date: Jan 5, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"i worry about people talking about "first attempts" implying that there may be a "second attempt." there may not be a second chance. if the first attempt doesn't succeed USM could be in deep trouble. "

SCM,

It's hard for me to imagine that SACS would really withdraw accreditation from USM in a way that would be irreversible and irrevocable, but I am fully really to admit that I could be wrong. Do others on the board have any thoughts on this? It would seem to be a huge injustice to the people of the area, the students, the faculty, and that staff if SACS were to really allow for such a possibility because of the incompetence of a single set of administrators. Again, though, I know that I may be wrong. What has happened at other schools that have lost their SACS accreditation?

Date: Jan 5, 2005

really = ready

Date: Jan 5, 2005

to second invictus's comment--don't mess with SACS. in all candor, SACS doesn't want to revoke an institution's accreditation. they will help an institution all they can. but, USM has got to pull together to get our accreditation reaffirmed. if not, SACS has its rules. as i've also said before, it's not due to a single set of administrators. reaffirmation of a university's accreditation is a 10-year process. if finger-pointing is of any use at this point (and i don't think it is), there are plenty of people who can be pointed at.

Date: Jan 5, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"i worry about people talking about "first attempts" implying that there may be a "second attempt." there may not be a second chance. if the first attempt doesn't succeed USM could be in deep trouble. "

Excellent point, SCM. Just one correction: USM is already in deep trouble & it was in deep trouble before the SACS probation.

Date: Jan 5, 2005

My only concern is the faculty who are nontenured (or not promoted) and are given large tasks to complete for accreditation and then it comes back to haunt them when they weren't given proper time to pursue the scholarly activity part and are subsequently told that they put too much time into Service. Oh, and don't say that that can't and won't happen. People with tenure and are fulls better step up.

Date: Jan 5, 2005

shaft--agree wholeheartedly.

Date: Jan 5, 2005

So what exactly needs to be done...from a distance, I don't get what the faculty and such will be doing on daily basis to gain reaccrediation. It all seems like abstract goal making and then data conjuring to make this work. What exactly will go on?

Date: Jan 5, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: USM Sympathizer
"What has happened at other schools that have lost their SACS accreditation?"

I think it is helpful to understand that the vast majority of institutions that have been "removed from membership" in SACS are small private colleges. Most have religious affiliations. And the normal reason is fiscal instability. Some of these colleges remain open by conducting fund-raising drives & at least one Historically Black College in Tennessee actually put nearly the whole student body on workstudy to replace the lost Pell monies. But for a lot of these schools, SACS is simply putting them out of their misery.

Offhand, I can't think of a single medium-to-large public university that has lost accreditation in the past 20 years. That doesn't mean that this isn't serious or that SCM's worst case scenario isn't possible. But you may find Auburn's SACS FAQ interesting, particularly the following:

"Withdrawal of accreditation happens only when problems are so serious that it is hard for the school to stay open or for students to be sure they're getting a quality education. Some smaller colleges and schools have lost accreditation, usually because of very bad financial management. This loss in most cases meant the schools lost money from the federal government to pay for students' financial aid and scholarships, and that the schools weren't where most people would choose to go for an education. Plus, many employers and graduate schools prefer students graduate from an accredited school.

If a college has an outstanding academic reputation and is financially sound, like AU, it probably won't lose accreditation unless it shows a complete lack of cooperation and blatant disregard of rules. AU intends to cooperate fully with SACS. If for some reason SACS needs even more information than what we give them in response to probation, the probation time would probably be extended. Loss of accreditation at AU is unlikely because it would not only hurt more than 23,000 students, but also because AU meets nearly all the other membership criteria, is managed very well, and has a great academic reputation."

Date: Jan 5, 2005

I did some checking around on the internet and, apparently, once SACS accreditation is lost, it is difficult (but not impossible) to regain. Institutions are sometimes given a second year of probabation. Small, underfunded colleges seem especially unlikely to regain accreditation once it has been lost. Interestingly, one of the first steps usually involved in the process of getting off probation seems to be firing the president. See excerpts below.

http://www.mercurynews.com/mld/charlotte/living/education/higher_learning/9122719.htm?1c

Posted on Sat, Jul. 10, 2004

Barber-Scotia won't appeal SACS action

Instead, college plans to launch $6 million fund drive for scholarships

JEREMY BORDEN

Staff Writer

Reversing course, Barber-Scotia College officials announced Friday they will not appeal the loss of the school's accreditation, making students ineligible for federal financial aid this fall.

That's a severe blow to a school where 90 percent of students get some form of government help.

The college earlier had planned to appeal the June 24 decision by the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools to yank its accreditation. That would have allowed students to continue to receive financial aid until a decision was reached.

But officials at SACS, the regional accrediting agency, said appeals from its decisions are rarely successful. President Gloria Bromell-Tinubu said it would have cost $15,000. . . .

===================================================================

http://www.pcusa.org/pcnews/oldnews/2003/03257.htm

June 11, 2003

Mary Holmes president resigns

Board to meet this week to ponder future of troubled institution

by Evan Silverstein

LOUISVILLE — Nathaniel Jackson resigned last month as president of troubled Mary Holmes College in West Point, MS, making the future of the historic, Presbyterian-related institution even more uncertain.

The 111-year-old private, historically black college has been on shaky ground in recent years. It lost its accreditation in December after years of struggling with financial problems, declining enrollment and a deteriorating physical plant.

The two-year college stands to lose millions of dollars in crucial federal funding by month’s end. It also owes thousands of dollars to U.S. education officials and to the Presbyterian Church (USA), which owns the land it occupies.

The Mary Holmes board of trustees may determine what comes next for the college — if anything — when they meet on campus June 13.

In May, the trustees reaffirmed their desire to keep the school open, even without federal funding and without accreditation. School leaders hope eventually to regain accreditation from the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools (SACS).

However, Jack Baugh, the board chairman, suggested this week that he and the other trustees may have been “following their hearts” in trying to save the school, and now must focus on the “hard questions” of whether keeping the college open is really feasible. . . .

In January, school officials appealed the SACS decision to drop Mary Holmes’ accreditation. SACS is the regional body for the accreditation of universities and colleges in 11 Southern states. Institutions of higher education are accredited through its Commission on Colleges.

An appeals committee later upheld the original SACS ruling.

Without accreditation, Mary Holmes would be ineligible for crucial federal funding, and its 256 students would lose access to grants, loans and other financial aid. Practically all students at Mary Holmes receive financial aid.

Federal money is also used to pay professors’ salaries and for campus and classroom improvements.

================================================================

http://www.ajc.com/news/content/metro/cobb/1204/08life.html?UrAuth=`N`NUOcNYUbTTUWUXUTUZTZUbUWUbU^UZU`UbUcTYWVVZV

Life U gets key stamp of approval

By KRISTINA TORRES
The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
Published on: 12/07/04

Shaun Roach enrolled in Life University 2 1/2 years ago, just as the Marietta-based school was falling into financial and academic trouble. He stuck around, though, even when many of his classmates left.

Tuesday, Roach joined in the "whooping and hollering" when it was announced that Life was back in good standing with the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools.

Andy Sharp/AJC
(ENLARGE)

Life University President Guy Riekeman beams after learning that the Marietta-based school's accreditation has been restored.

EMAIL THIS
PRINT THIS
MOST POPULAR

"I think it's going to bring back students, and I think it's going to open people's eyes," said Roach.

The association took the chiropractic college off probation Tuesday and renewed its accreditation, mainly because Life put its finances back in order.

"They have made the kind of progress we were looking for," said the association's executive director, Jim Rogers.

The association's decision was key to Life's survival. Without it, the school would be ineligible for federal student aid and students' degrees would have been virtually worthless.

The association placed Life on probation two years ago, when the school was more than $1 million in debt. The same year, the Council on Chiropractic Education also placed Life on probation, at odds over what the college's students learned about chiropractic medicine and how it was applied in community clinics run by the school.

Without the council's accreditation, graduates of chiropractic schools cannot be licensed to practice in most states. Last month, the council extended Life's probation through July. The SACS decision likely will play a role in Life's push to regain full status with the council.

Life's turnaround can be credited in large part to two people.

Ben DeSpain, a 30-year university and public school administrator, was hired as president in November 2002. He made several cutbacks, including axing the school's athletic program.

===================================================================

http://orig.clarionledger.com/news/0212/11/m09.html

. . . College president Charles Taylor, brought on this year to solve the financial problems, promised the school would appeal and fight to stay open.

Morris Brown students said they were shocked by the decision. Some who receive financial aid said they will be forced to leave school; others said they would stay and fight.

Another historically black institution, Grambling State University in Louisiana, will continue on probation for another year, SACS officials say.

==================================================================

Date: Jan 5, 2005

I thought today's editorial was pretty dismal.

Whoever wrote it has no real understanding of the bind that USM faculty are in. Everyone's got two choices:

(1) Put other projects aside and throw themselves into reaccreditation--endless committee meetings and report writing--while Shelby Thames obstructs their efforts and continues to trash the university in other ways (financially, for instance). And do all of this knowing that if USM gets off probation in 2005, Thames will appropriate the credit and feel that he has a new mandate to spit on the faculty who just saved his hide. You can count on Thames to punish those who put excessive efforts into "service," as soon as he is out of danger.

(2) Do whatever they can to escape to other jobs, knowing the whole time that by not helping the accreditation efforts they are increasing the likelihood that USM will go under.

In particular, the editorial fails to acknowledge that Thames is still a major impediment to solving the accreditation problems that USM faces. I know this is inconsistent with scm's theme of "no finger pointing," but there is a qualitative difference between the Thames regime and its predecessors (and I say this harboring no illusions about a golden age under Lucas or Fleming). Thames has a bad attitude about accreditation. Until very recently, I don't believe he took SACS seriously. I very much doubt that he has any idea now what will be required to repair the damage. To judge from the purported "strategic plan" that just got carved up on this board, people like Joan Exline have no idea either.

If the Board doesn't get rid of Thames, it will be touch and go for USM.

Robert Campbell

Date: Jan 6, 2005

Question:

Has ANY president at a institution on SACS probation "survived" and retained the position of president?

Date: Jan 6, 2005

GH,

I don't know the history over a longer period. Judging from what's appeared on this thread, none of the universities that were put on probation recently have emerged from it without changing presidents.

Robert Campbell

Date: Jan 6, 2005

the only universities i am familiar with are grambling and auburn. grambling had something like 5 presidents in 8 years. they were put on probation (as was louisiana-monroe) because the state auditor would not certify their finances. they knew how much money they spent but didn't know to whom. auburn is a bit more complicated because the president they fired also was involved in the embarrassment of flying to Louisiville to get a new football coach and getting found out. that contributed as much to his firing as SACS.

Date: Jan 6, 2005

scm,

If Phil Bryant actually looked at USM's finances (I'm sure he'd rather not) would he certify them?

Robert Campbell

Date: Jan 6, 2005

i'm pretty sure he would. it's a SACS requirement. the problems at grambling and louisiana-monroe are almost unheard of. they couldn't keep track of things like what vendors they paid.

Date: Jan 6, 2005

scm,

OK, SACS isn't concerned with finances unless something qualitatively much worse than the usual lax state university financial reporting is going on.

Robert Campbell

Date: Jan 6, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
" scm, OK, SACS isn't concerned with finances unless something qualitatively much worse than the usual lax state university financial reporting is going on. Robert Campbell"

How about upwards of a quarter million for advertising a boondoggle?