No more sabbaticals - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Jan 14, 2005

No more sabbaticals

Date: Jan 14, 2005

No one will ever accept a position at USM unless they are desperate.
USM is not a "research university." Research universities give leaves to allow people to do research. USM is now a community college (or maybe people get sabbaticals there? I don't know). Maybe USM is a high school.

Date: Jan 14, 2005

As a suggestion, I don't think faculty need to make the sabbatical issue a point of public debate. Frankly, most citizens think being a professor is an easy job anyway, and the idea of having some "right" to a sabbatical sounds a little over-the-top. This is a prejudice/bias that no amount of letters, newspaper quotes, press conferences will change in our lifetime. And don't be too offended, many states have already eliminated sabbatical policies for their state institutions (Georgia is one I know for sure).

I'm very sympathetic to the challenges facing USM's faculty, but for the benefit of the larger cause I think everyone needs to stay consistently on message with the simple, easy-for-the-larger-public-to-understand issue -- loss of accreditation is very bad and directly attributable to Thames.

My two cents...

Date: Jan 14, 2005

I think Observer is correct, although I am very sorry to hear about this latest change in policy at USM. Will a similar change be made at all of the state's universities? Does Observer know which other states besides Georgia have made such a change?

Date: Jan 14, 2005

Observer, you are right about public perceptions. But there's another way to come at this: sabbaticals are a well-established part of faculty development. I've just been looking at Dr. Exline's memo to administrators (which fortunately got sent to my chair too--doesn't always get that far!) describing SACS standards for teaching faculty. Her last paragraph says that besides faculty evaluations, "we must provide . . . evidence of ongoing professional development of faculty as teachers, scholars, and practitioners."

The point to be made here is that sabbaticals are crucial to faculty's professional development, especially in a university where there are so few internal supports for research, and especially in fields such as my own (English) where there are very few grant opportunities for individual scholars. The suspension of sabbaticals directly impacts the "professional development" that SACS wants to see.

Perhaps this point would not make a difference in public perceptions either. But we'd at least better address it internally. I think it's another black mark against us in the probation matter.

NO QUARTER.
Anne Wallace

Date: Jan 14, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Anne Wallace
"Observer, you are right about public perceptions. But there's another way to come at this: sabbaticals are a well-established part of faculty development. I've just been looking at Dr. Exline's memo to administrators (which fortunately got sent to my chair too--doesn't always get that far!) describing SACS standards for teaching faculty. Her last paragraph says that besides faculty evaluations, "we must provide . . . evidence of ongoing professional development of faculty as teachers, scholars, and practitioners." The point to be made here is that sabbaticals are crucial to faculty's professional development, especially in a university where there are so few internal supports for research, and especially in fields such as my own (English) where there are very few grant opportunities for individual scholars. The suspension of sabbaticals directly impacts the "professional development" that SACS wants to see. Perhaps this point would not make a difference in public perceptions either. But we'd at least better address it internally. I think it's another black mark against us in the probation matter. NO QUARTER. Anne Wallace"

I've been here seven years and my own professional development has pretty much ground to a halt -- not lazy . . . . just too many things to do to keep my program up and running. Let's see . . . recruiting, fundraising, doing assessments, accounting, compiling data and statsitics, reporting . . . oh, right . . . and then there is teaching and creative work. La!. (personal life? fuhgeddaboutit)

Date: Jan 14, 2005

I think we're all on the same page here. Clearly this change is critical -- and another potential indicator of a decreasing emphasis on research quality and academic rigor at USM. But, let's agree to address this matter via the various internal channels/venues (and with sensitivity to the unintentional negative consequences if it becomes a point of broad public discourse).

Date: Jan 14, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Arnold
"USM is now a community college (or maybe people get sabbaticals there? I don't know). Maybe USM is a high school."

Hey! That's a terrible slam against community colleges, y'know?

I agree with Observer, though. USM faculty shouldn't harp too much about sabbaticals, because John Q Public would love a "paid vacation" to pursue his "academic interests" for six months or a year. (My own "academic interest" involves an ongoing research project to determine what dry fly will attract large Micropterus salmoides specimens, but just as many in the private sector would love a "sabbatical" to catch up on their reading.) The potential is simply too great for this issue to be grievously misconstrued by a public that is very willing to accept the "lazy faculty" argument.

If sabbaticals are suspended, travel budgets for administrators & support units be locked down as well.

Date: Jan 14, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Observer
"I think we're all on the same page here. Clearly this change is critical -- and another potential indicator of a decreasing emphasis on research quality and academic rigor at USM. But, let's agree to address this matter via the various internal channels/venues (and with sensitivity to the unintentional negative consequences if it becomes a point of broad public discourse).
"

Increasing evidence? As if one needed more indicators of the school's rapid decline from the heights of mediocrity to its current state of base ineffectiveness. I would never send my children to USM, no matter how much they discount the tuition for faculty and staff.

Date: Jan 14, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Arnold
"No one will ever accept a position at USM unless they are desperate.
USM is not a "research university." Research universities give leaves to allow people to do research. USM is now a community college (or maybe people get sabbaticals there? I don't know). Maybe USM is a high school."

My high school was run better than this place. USM is a joke now, people will probably see my degree and laugh me out of their HR offices.

Date: Jan 14, 2005

I have to agree with you, Anne. While this is certainly not going to be any kind of issue that rallies any kind of support with the public (unsure at this point WHAT will anyway, I haven't seen the first even mildly passionate letter from Jane Q. Public chastising our unraveling local university in recent days), Exline is contradicting her own position. Sabbaticals are NOT about catching up on casual reading. That is a real insult to those of us who have used it to "catch up" on our professional research and scholarly pursuits. Most of us wait far longer than our seven years (many I know don't take advantage at all) and find ourselves at USM playing this catch up game forever. As I look over my opportunities to leave USM as a full professor, I know that I have focused far too much on teaching and service. Yes, it matters at other comparable universities. Especially in those areas where external funding is almost impossible to secure without extraordinary time/effort. Make that past tense regarding the "comparable" part. No, I am not surprised that sabbaticals are "suspended", why would I be? I won't be surprised to see the rose garden leased out for Home and Garden Network or MTV's "Pimp my Ride" for some fraternity any day now. Shot in the Dark (batteries NOT included, bring your own flashlight)

Date: Jan 14, 2005

Please, high schools would never allow these kinds of shenanigans to take place. Not even in Mississippi. Excellent high schools do provide sabbaticals, and faculty are held accountable for their planned activities. And classrooms are not up for grabs as to size. Standards are held by state accreditation criteria. Daycare (if you care to go down the academic ladder) are even more stringent as to size and qualifications of staff. Ok, if you care for less than ten children in the home, maybe. So, maybe one could compare USM to a "private home class child care facility"? (Does SFT and Exline have their CPR certification???)

So prepare to receive posts from that contingency...they also have advocacy groups on the web.

Looks like USM may drop out of the 4th tier. Does Readers' Digest rank childcare facilities? Might want to explore alternative accreditation avenues?

High school guidance counselor, CPR certified

Date: Jan 14, 2005

I'm a prof at a univ. that is not considered a "research" univ. and they give sabbaticals.

Date: Jan 14, 2005

usm's sabbatical leave policy has been questioned for years by the IHL. i've talked to colleagues at other universities and they are envious of our policy allowing for one semester on sabbatical at full pay. that is the typical way sabbatical leave is taken at usm. at other universities these are rare--it is more typical to receive a sabbatical leave for one year at half pay. and, you usually get but one. i know folks who have gotten 2 or 3 at usm.

Date: Jan 14, 2005

Maybe the sabbatical issue isn't one to ask the public to understand or be sympathetic about, but it's pretty clear that USM cannot expect much in the way of support or sympathy from such a public anyway, so why waste another minute worrying about what they'll think?

Nonetheless, this is a VERY important issue, and just one more reason that USM should no longer expect to attract high-quality applicants to fill its many faculty vacancies.

The USM faculty position I left last spring was filled by a one-year person. A search is now underway for a tenure-track person. Today is the deadline for applications to receive "full consideration." A last-minute e-mail announcement of the position sent just a few days ago to professors in my specialty around the country is indicative that the pool of applicants is not what it should be. And when candidates hear about this suspension of sabbaticals, on top of everything else... well, need I say more?

I am very, very sad for USM.

Date: Jan 14, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"usm's sabbatical leave policy has been questioned for years by the IHL. i've talked to colleagues at other universities and they are envious of our policy allowing for one semester on sabbatical at full pay. that is the typical way sabbatical leave is taken at usm. at other universities these are rare--it is more typical to receive a sabbatical leave for one year at half pay. and, you usually get but one. i know folks who have gotten 2 or 3 at usm. "

scm, with all due respect - this is not about "2 or 3" sabbaticals that individuals, in their careers, have received. It's about the issue of sabbaticals being granted. It's about USM bragging that they are Carnegie whatever as if that makes them immune to the slugs and hisses from those of us who know that their behavior is shoddy - it's luring students in with a false premise. It's promising something that they refuse to support. As the parent of a first-year university student, if the university where my child attends (and where a portion of my paycheck goes) told me they were "something" that was an outright lie, I'd be infuriated and, surprise - surprise, I might feel like I had the grounds to sue. We all know that if something isn't accomplished quickly by the very people that the administration feels are beneath the muddy ground of the gnomish dome, this place is royally screwed.

Date: Jan 14, 2005

educator--i've been here long enough and through enough times of tight money to know that sabbaticals get examined closely in tight times. lucas used to remind people that in tight financial times they might not be given. i even think one year they weren't.

i have to admit the i'm old school on this. i got promoted to full professor without one, no administrative position involved. did it the old fashioned way. know others as well. i understand others need them--i have no problem with that. but USM, relative to other universities (even tier 1), has had an incredibly good sabbatical leave policy. some have told me, much better than sister universities in the state have.

Date: Jan 14, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"usm's sabbatical leave policy has been questioned for years by the IHL. i've talked to colleagues at other universities and they are envious of our policy allowing for one semester on sabbatical at full pay. that is the typical way sabbatical leave is taken at usm. at other universities these are rare--it is more typical to receive a sabbatical leave for one year at half pay. and, you usually get but one. i know folks who have gotten 2 or 3 at usm. "

MSU still offers sabaticals - 1 semester at full pay - so it is not an IHL issue.

Date: Jan 14, 2005

i was told it was the number we give.

Date: Jan 14, 2005

then it's a "plus" in their category for staying accredited. With everything else falling apart (and all things do eventually) - they need all the backup that they can find at this point - because it is a tenuous time - in fact, it is everywhere at all universities across the nation. Our Chancellor, in his address to the faculty at our in-service this week, gave quite a visionary outlook for our university's future. He addressed the problems that many universities face, and he discussed ways that we could combat them. Remarkably, "economic development" was never mentioned. We're doing fine in that direction (thanks to some businesses born here that have basically taken over the country in their respective fields). His discussion focused on our students, and he basically said that what the university puts into us (the faculty) is a direct investment into the better education of our students.

Date: Jan 14, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"i've talked to colleagues at other universities and they are envious of our policy allowing for one semester on sabbatical at full pay. that is the typical way sabbatical leave is taken at usm. at other universities these are rare--it is more typical to receive a sabbatical leave for one year at half pay. and, you usually get but one. i know folks who have gotten 2 or 3 at usm. "

I don't know who stinky cheese man has been talking to about sabbaticals, but it is quite standard procedure at universities throughout the nation to offer tenured faculty a chance to apply every seven years for a sabbatical, with the option of one semester at full pay or two semesters at half pay. USM's sabbatical policy has NOT been atypical or extravagant; don't let anyone convince you that it is!!

I am suspicious of the reason given for sabbaticals being suspended: "due to financial constraints." Financial constraints are nothing new in regard to sabbaticals; from what I observed at USM in recent years, courses of faculty on sabbatical have typically been taught by colleagues as an overload and/or by adjuncts paid a pittance.

Both Shelby and the IHL apparently would like to get rid of tenure. It shouldn't surprise us in the least if they wanted to get rid of sabbaticals, libraries, and everything else that makes a university less "cost-effective" than WalMart, so that the money "saved" could be put into the pockets of their buddies.

In fiscally tight times a university might be justified in awarding fewer sabbaticals or making the requirements more stringent, but to eliminate sabbaticals entirely -- even for one year -- is a very serious move. Once sabbaticals are "suspended", folks, don't hold your breath waiting for them to be reinstated; you'll die of asphyxiation!

And one more thought -- actually a question: Wouldn't (Shouldn't) SACS expect a "research university" to grant sabbaticals to its faculty? Do you think USM's administration considered this question before deciding to "suspend" sabbaticals, especially while the institution is on probation?

NO QUARTER!

Date: Jan 14, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: high school guidance counselor
"Please, high schools would never allow these kinds of shenanigans to take place. Not even in Mississippi. Excellent high schools do provide sabbaticals, and faculty are held accountable for their planned activities. And classrooms are not up for grabs as to size. Standards are held by state accreditation criteria. Daycare (if you care to go down the academic ladder) are even more stringent as to size and qualifications of staff. Ok, if you care for less than ten children in the home, maybe. So, maybe one could compare USM to a "private home class child care facility"? (Does SFT and Exline have their CPR certification???)
So prepare to receive posts from that contingency...they also have advocacy groups on the web.
Looks like USM may drop out of the 4th tier. Does Readers' Digest rank childcare facilities? Might want to explore alternative accreditation avenues?
High school guidance counselor, CPR certified
"

My sincere apologies to Invictus and high school guidance counselor. USM is simply not an educational institution, it is a very small fascist country. . . .

Date: Jan 14, 2005

left--all of the bold print and big fonts don't make you right. i talked to colleagues from across the u.s. i'm smart enough to know that my sample is very selective. our 1 semester/full pay sabbatical is unusual at those universities. i know this--from googling--the university of georgia did not have a sabbatical program as of 2001 or 2002. if anyone here has more recent information on georgia , chime in.

Date: Jan 14, 2005

scm, and your point is?

Date: Jan 14, 2005

emma--not sure of your question. i guess people see the sabbatical issue as a problem unique to usm. i don't see it that way. i think my previous posts are clear about sabbaticals. talked with someone a while ago, informed me of why we have the policy we do. has a lot to do with the need back in the late 70's and early 80's of trying to get a faculty with phd's. sabbaticals, at a semester with full pay, were supposed to help. as you hire a more phd'd faculty that rationale wanes. again, the university of georgia as late as 01 or 02 didn't have a sabbatical policy.

Date: Jan 14, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"emma--not sure of your question. i guess people see the sabbatical issue as a problem unique to usm. i don't see it that way. i think my previous posts are clear about sabbaticals. talked with someone a while ago, informed me of why we have the policy we do. has a lot to do with the need back in the late 70's and early 80's of trying to get a faculty with phd's. sabbaticals, at a semester with full pay, were supposed to help. as you hire a more phd'd faculty that rationale wanes. again, the university of georgia as late as 01 or 02 didn't have a sabbatical policy. "

But every true "world class university" has a generous sabbatical policy. If Georgia is the only point of comparison there is little wonder USM never achieves much beyond the state's borders. Let's compare to the Ivy League and then to top state universities throughout the country. We all know the deep South has lagged behind for so long on all matters academic that it is a poor point of comparison for a "w'url class university" such as ours.

Date: Jan 14, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"left--all of the bold print and big fonts don't make you right. "

I'm well aware that bold print and big fonts are not what makes one right -- or wrong.

I will repeat here, in plain, normal size font:
...it is quite standard procedure at universities throughout the nation to offer tenured faculty a chance to apply every seven years for a sabbatical, with the option of one semester at full pay or two semesters at half pay. USM's sabbatical policy has not been atypical or extravagant...

-------------------

But let us not be distracted from the original point of this thread: sabbaticals are being suspended for the upcoming year.

This is one more administrative move that is accelerating USM's plunge into the abyss.

No Quarter.

Date: Jan 14, 2005

emma and angeline:

1. i think it's sad that USM because of budgetary problems is not going to have them at least this year.

2. we have/had a generous policy. >. left--give me at least 3 examples (websites) of those universities that have the policy you refer to.

3. i'm old school. sorry.

Date: Jan 14, 2005

parts of my last post got edited (and no i did not use foul language!). but in the past at USM sabbaticals have been suspended (or severely restricted) because of the budget . this is again not a new issue.

Date: Jan 14, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"give me at least 3 examples (websites) of those universities that have the policy you refer to."

Hmmm. The school at which I got my undergrad degree, the school at which I got my Masters and PhD, and the first three institutions at which I worked all granted sabbaticals. These ranged from large, prestigious universities to small community colleges. I don't know what their web pages would say, but this would be the first time I've thought of sabbaticals as being extravagant. Come to think of it, nearly everyone I knew in grad school got their first job as a one-year sabbatical replacement. Surely they aren't that rare.