Maybe you could get the editorial writer of the HA to attend and get a better grip on reality?

kick

FROM FS LISTSERV: Anne Wallace reports

colleagues,

some observations from the President's Council Meeting of January 18, 2005—

First, I should tell you that Dr. Exline did not add the two agenda items that Myron and I requested—sabbatical suspension and posttenure review.  Nor did a renewal of the development fund issue appear, though I asked for it some time ago.  So we'll try again next time.

SFT opened with a report about the current legislative session and about the projected 5-10% budget cuts to higher education, which he characterized as "possible," something we should begin preparing for but which might not happen.  [Kevin Walters called me late that afternoon and said that Percy Watson plus 2 other reps told him that these cuts were certain, not merely possible.  The story will be in the American soon,  if it hasn't already hit.]

SACS:  We looked at the letter and Exline said the same things she said to Faculty Senate.

Gulf Coast enrollment caps:  SFT offered the rationale that GC has more nontraditional students (true?) who needed more flexibility to get needed courses, and also that they wanted to find out how many people actually wanted a given course so that they could open another section if needed.  SFT repeated what we had heard, that "about 5 students" got the $100 "scholarship" for moving to another class, and that this was a one-time thing.  He also claimed that by lifting the caps we managed to "serve well over 100 more students," who he implied were accommodated in full classes or new sections.  SFT also said, "at no time was the enrollment cap ever exceeded without first talking to the instructor"—a statement he quickly modified, saying that even if the instructor was not asked first, no instructor was forced to take more students.  Instructors were merely asked if they were willing to take overload students.
        I told SFT that this was not the case I had heard described, and he challenged me to give him particular cases of instructors who were not informed or consulted after the fact about the number of students in the class. (If you know of a specific case, please tell me.) Myron asked how many faculty had agreed to lift caps and who they were.  SFT said he would find out.  Robin Ryder (EdPsych staff)indicated that what we really needed to look at here was the ability of many staff and administrators to override the course caps—a security issue, as he described it.

Gulf Coast Library:  SFT offered a history of the building development on the GC.  The gist of his claim was that the library wouldn't be "fully utilized" for 10 years, and that it was wasteful to maintain that unused space when we also needed classroom space.  He said he wanted to "assure" us that the space was not being permanently taken from the library.  Myron strongly pressed the question of the relationship between the ExMBA and the "renovation."  SFT responded that they never intended that the new classrooms should be used only for the ExMBA. Greg Lassen (I think it was him) stressed that all this was just "planning," just various ideas floating around which hadn't been made final and for which there were not yet funds.  Myron further pressed the issue of the ExMBA—does it exist?  SFT said some things after this, but gave no answer that I could discern.

Other topics were:
> student recruitment plans, including the expansion of the Freshman Year Experience into a "First Year Experience" that would reach transfer students;
> Physical Plant plans, including a privately funded renovation of the power plant by Aramark (into a restaurant—all Aramark funds), DOT-funded creation of a bike/pedestrian path connected to Rails-to-Trails, lots of pedestrian/mall areas around campus, and the use of the Provost's house at GC by local purveyor Bankhouse Coffee—no changes to the house, Lassen claimed (this part of the 2 hour meeting took about 40 minutes)
> changes in staff performance assessement, primarily changing the assessment scale from a 9-pt scale to a 5-pt (similar scale, then, to what we use in faculty evaluation), and a separate move to look at a different classification system for staff
> Lassen on the budget—this all seemed very vague to me, though there may have been things buried in it that I didn't understand—hidden IHL costs (things we get billed for that we have no control over), rising energy costs—ringing phrases included "weaned off the state dollar"" and "citizens paying their own way."  SFT added that while in the 70s the proportion of USM's budget coming from state appropriations was 75%, now it's 29%.  I don't know if those figures are right but they sure feel right.

Somewhere in here—either in the discussion of student recruitment or in that of the budget—Myron vigorously argued that faculty teaching was undervalued.  Myron, I find I can't rearticulate the argument in the compelling way you spoke to this point and I hope you'll at to these notes.  I remember that you pointed out that faculty teaching and research are inherently "economic development," and also that the FAR still reflects ED as a "fourth category," though we were assured that this would not be so this year.  Please do make this excellent argument again for me, Myron.

I should also mention that Tammy Greer (Ed/Psych faculty) asked some very helpful questions, especially on the point of staff assessment and classification.

Myron, please amend as you see the need—

cheers,
Anne

FROM FS LISTSERV: Myron Henry reports

Hi Anne and Colleagues:

I am just back from Jackson after delivering the proposal Anne
mentioned.  Anne has provided an excellent summary to the PC meeting
yesterday morning.    Ray Folse set a high standard for both Anne and I
in representing the Faculty Senate and faculty in general on the PC.  
Ray, we will try to uphold that standard by asking the questions we know
Senate colleagues and the faculty we represent would be interested in.

Anne gives a very complete summary of the events occurring in
yesterday's PC.  As she has requested, I will  try to capture a sense of
the "conversation" I had with Dr. Thames toward the end of the PC
meeting.  The summary that follows does not provide for exact quotes,
but rather reflects the spirit of my interchange with Dr. Thames.  Anne,
if I have missed anything, feel free to clarily whatever needs to be.

After (I think) Greg Lassen spoke about the budget, Dr. Thames stated
how important it is to have faculty involved in the retention and
recruitment of students, especially in the context of supplanting
declining state appropriations with tuition income.  At that stage, I
(gently?) suggested  that  the recognition and reward structures (e.g.,
promotion, tenure, and raises) at USM under the Thames Administration do
not encourage faculty to engage students in ways that might improve
retention, nor do they encourage faculty to be more involved in
recruitment.  I then asserted that  the rewards for teaching and service
do not measure up to those associated with research and economic
development (Midas is just one example in support of my assertion.)    I
further stated that I had filled out the FAR on Monday evening.  In
doing so, I  noted that there was no recognition under the economic
development category that faculty who are serving students  in classes
are actually prominent revenue generators of tuition, the most flexible
(and now most reliable)  income the university receives.  I also stated
that there are four categories in the FAR including economic development
(even though Dr. Thames agreed to a Faculty Senate request from over a
year ago that economic development would be folded under the traditional
three).   Dr. Thames responded by criticizing the Faculty Senate for not
answering his memo from late last spring requesting the Senate to state
how it would help in recruitment and retention.  He also said that I
needed to give examples of my assertions.  I responded that I had one
example (I did not reveal the example, but in Mathematics, a superb
young faculty member is being fired after his third year review in spite
of a unanimous recommendation by the department for continuation.)  Dr.
Thames then stated that USM is a big university and my assertions could
not be supported by just a single example.  The interchange pretty much
ended there.

Myron

Anne Wallace, I am glad you are now on the PC. I'm glad Myron is still there, too. I appreciate the reports from each of you.

I can't help being reminded of a story concerning what George Washington said to John Adams at Adams' inauguration as the second President of the US. I'm reluctant to call it a quote as I've been unable to find the exact language, so I will report it as a paraphrase to the effect of Washington's having said to Mr. President Adams: Sir, I am well out and you are well in. We shall see which of us is the better for it.

Emeritus status rocks. Congrats to the new members and only 7 months to go for the remaining ones of the PC!

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Crawfishin'
" Could it be that the IHL wouldn't think an enrollment numbers goal should be the university's overwhelming objective?  Is Shelby being honest with the IHL? 
 "

---

It is arguable that enrollment is the ultimate indicator of quality, affordability & access. Quality programs that students can afford to attend theoretically should be well-populated. Unfortunately, there are many other ways to increase enrollment than to be offering the best programs.

BTW & as a completely semi-irrelevant sidenote, Myron Henry is an Eagle Scout. Not "was" but "is." (Only fellow Eagle Scouts will quite understand that.) To some of us, that speaks volumes. 'Nuff said by me.

FROM FS LISTSERV:

THe ongoing growth of library book collection on the third floor of the
Gulf Park Library is a promise made in the Board's plan for Gulf Park
approved by the board and then sworn to under oath in a Federal Case and
in a State Supreme Court Case. In both cases the Board's plan as
affirmed repeatedly called for the pursuit of site-based accreditation
at Gulf Park. That plan has not been repealed. It pledges to add at
least 2500 to 3000 new books per year to the Gulf Park collection
($135,00 in new library money per year) for each of the first five years
in which we teach freshmen. It pledges space for book collection
expansion and study to support the expansion and points to the partially
funded library building which was in the planning stage when the plan
was approved and went to court.

What is proposed at Gulf Park under the guise that our book collection
space can be compressed would be the equivalent of lopping off the top
two floors of the Cook library in Hattiesburg for a conference center...
It was build with stack space to take care of necessary growth of the
collection. Cook was build to grow in to over a 20 to 25 year period. It
has not been that long ago that all Cook collections and study space was
in a two story structure. Surely you could compress the collection and
turn that premium space to some use more profitable that learning and
academic research. The planning documents I have looked at from the Gulf
Park court cases speak of further expansion of the Gulf Park library
after ten years, NOT merely reclaiming the space that we told the courts
we were then planning to bring online as a good faith effort to create a
respectable four-year program on the Coast.

Also notable is the huge enrollment increase Malone claims at the Coast
for this term---practically 20% over last year. Do these students need
no study space? Do these students need no on site collections? Was our
board crazy for affirming that these things were a condition of the Gulf
Park expansion?. If we loose this space we are going back on a serious
commitment to this community represented in the books to bricks program
and in our sworn statements in court and in board policy.

James Pat Smith

i think the reference has to do with the court decision that allowed USM to admit freshmen to the coast campus. i don't there is an Ayres link.

Regarding enrollment caps at GP I have been told by one current staffer on campus that one person has an online course capped by the dept. head at 40 that now has over 100 due to KM's GP management without the knowledge or approval of the college, dept. or instructor.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: stephen judd
" Yep -- "

---

Thanks for the confirmation Professor Judd.  Shelby & company are getting to the point of simultaneously putting out so many fires that they can't keep the stories straight.  As this story unfolds, watch and compare the words carefully as the spin squad tries to crawfish from this latest foiled fiasco. 

This one was foiled only because faculty and staff are ever diligent to the poor decisions being made and the resulting transparency exposes the administration's secret maneuverings.  What a perfectly great use of everyone's time.

Thanks for the info Mitch. Some of my colleagues on the coast have waxed eloquent about the library -- and also the way in which the community dfown there and the faculty came together to get it up against lots of obstacles. I have even heard the story of the faculty. staff and students lining up to pass books hand to hand. So there is clearly a lot of emotional and spritual investment in this building that makes it unique. Now that I know more, I'm looking forward to visiting it next time I am down on the coast.

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by: coaster
"Dana has planted herself down here this week for reasons unknown to us. "

---

She's taking down names for her Daddy.  Better mind your P's & Q's till you see her tail lights.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Anne Wallace
"Let's not give them any, no, not ANY quarter."

---

No quarter. Not even a wooden nickle!

"The ongoing growth of library book collection on the third floor of the
Gulf Park Library is a promise made in the Board's plan for Gulf Park
approved by the board and then sworn to under oath in a Federal Case and
in a State Supreme Court Case."

Can some one please explain the part about the Federal Case and the State Supreme Court Case? Does this have something to do with Ayers? And if so why? Thanks"

Foot Soldier:

When USM-GC and the community on the Coast were finally able to convince the IHL that enrolling frosh and sophmores on the Coast would not be a violation of a 1971 state law whose language was, for a long time, thought to forbid USM-GC to do so, a group of community college alumni, supporters and administrators put together a Chancery Court law suit claiming that, in fact, the 1971 law actually did proscribe USM-GC frosh and sophs.

The CC's were nervous that USM-GC would cut into their enrollments, thus jeopardizing their funding and threatening their very existence. This suit, I think, eventually found its way to the State Supreme Court, where, as I remember, it was thrown out; the injunction lifted and the Coast expansion went forward. 

What Dr. Smith describes is how the IHL's plan for expansion at USM-GC was thoroughly interrogated by the Courts in hearing this suit. This included various board members and USM administrators--maybe Jim Williams? then USM-GC VP--giving sworn testimony as to USM's committment to provide the Coast with a higher quality college education than was currently available there. A new, state-of-the-art library was a big part of that committment.

Now, I'm not a lawyer, but it does seem to me that all this jurisprudence, testifying under oath, tacit judicial approval of USM's Coast plan and whatnot could certainly be inferred to constitute a binding legal agreement between the IHL and the people of Mississippi. Thus, to follow this reasoning, any plan to so reconfigure the Gulf Park Library as to impinge upon its quality as a library could conceivably provide grounds for civil action against the IHL or USM or both. A failure by USM to live up to its end of the agreement might even be a criminal offense mightn't it? Like maybe contempt of court?

Anyhow, this is what Dr. Smith's getting at. As far as a Federal hearing of the plan goes, I'm sort of in the dark; maybe the fact that the entire IHL was under Federal scrutiny because of Ayres did have something to do with that. The Ayres plantiffs actually did manage an injunction against USM-GC's plan to admit its first 150 frosh partly on the basis of an essay written as part of the application. The Ayres plaitiffs claimed, successfully, that such a  requirement violated the clause of the Ayres Decision mandating absolutely uniform entrance requirements for all IHL institutions. Since the USM-GC essay writing requirement would have been unique, USM-GC had to rescind the requirement. The Ayes injunction delayed the expansion for about a year, I think, maybe less.