Sabbaticals reinstated - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Jan 26, 2005

Sabbaticals reinstated

Date: Jan 26, 2005

I heard that "a few" sabbats would be given, not the full compliment.

Date: Jan 26, 2005

Perhaps they began to doubt the value of the leaves for professional development when they spied the faculty supposedly on such leave actually working full time at Lowes, not engaged in full time research.

Date: Jan 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: sawithappen
"Perhaps they began to doubt the value of the leaves for professional development when they spied the faculty supposedly on such leave actually working full time at Lowes, not engaged in full time research. "

Faculty as in singular or plural? Full time at Lowes for a week or two, or a semester or two?

I infer from your post that the administration might have been justified in the decision to curtail all sabbaticals because there may have been some abuse of the practice. Would the reasonable remedy for such an abuse (such abuses?) be to end the practice for everyone?

I also understand that somebody took a sabbatical from teaching at a university in order to work at a building supply house. What does that say about working at the university?

Date: Jan 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Dumb as The Rock
" I also understand that somebody took a sabbatical from teaching at a university in order to work at a building supply house. What does that say about working at the university? "

That university pay is not so good?

Date: Jan 27, 2005

Or maybe we should understand that Sawithappen is a troll who witnessed no such thing.

Or if there were such a faculty member, perhaps that person was in marketing research.

Gimme a break. Faculty on sabbaticals must account for how they used their time in professional development. Folks at the Dome want to pull the plug on sabbaticals because they're short on cash, not because of any perceived abuses.