Strategic plan - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Jan 27, 2005

Strategic plan

Date: Jan 27, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Amy Young
"I was cruisin' the old Faculty Senate minutes and came across the minutes for the meeting in September 2002. The link, if you want to read it all, is below, but here is the interesting part where Thames discusses the goals for the university. We will try to get to the $100M level in research funding. This frees up money in the general budget. Dr. Dvorak and I have had intense discussions on how to get to $100M. We need to improve our physical infrastructure. We need to grow to 20K students. We're stretched already, but you're either moving ahead or falling behind. Let's grow our population, and demand what we need to teach those students. When our population is going up the legislature has to pay attention. We need to grow this university. We need to increase our average ACT score, because that's a perception of quality. We need to be seen as the first rate institution that we are. We must achieve the $100M capital campaign goal (now at $78M). http://www.usm.edu/fsenate/minutes/2002-09-13.html How are we doing so far? Don't you just love shared governance? Amy Young "

So the goals in the current strategic plan (supposedly developed after focus group meetings with the faculty, widespread input from all parts of the university to the Strategic Planning Committee last summer) were in the dome gnome's mind in September 2002?

Date: Jan 27, 2005

I wonder if Dr. Joan Exline will be surprised to learn of this when she addresses the Faculty Senate tomorrow. I wonder if SACS will consider this "faculty input" to the plan via "Shared Governance" if it occurred after two administrators decided the goals months before.

Date: Jan 27, 2005

Most interesting...

and if Thames really thinks that the legislature will shower more money on USM after it increases its total enrollment, he's been consuming controlled substances.

The last president of Clemson who thought he could talk the legislature into giving us more money was run out by our Board of Trustees in 1999.

Robert Campbell

Date: Jan 27, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: LeavingASAP
" I wonder if Dr. Joan Exline will be surprised to learn of this when she addresses the Faculty Senate tomorrow. I wonder if SACS will consider this "faculty input" to the plan via "Shared Governance" if it occurred after two administrators decided the goals months before."

These minutes were from the September 13, 2002 meeting. This was 2 YEARS before the current goals were supposedly formulated after significant input from the faculty. It's all a bunch of hogwash.

Date: Jan 27, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"and if Thames really thinks that the legislature will shower more money on USM after it increases its total enrollment, he's been consuming controlled substances."

A bigger slice of a smaller pie is not always a larger piece of pie. Sometimes it's the same size piece as it was when the pie was bigger. And sometimes it's smaller. Folks might as well forget state appropriations; they've been heading south (metaphorically but not literally) for five years.

The real fiscal impact of increased enrollment is increased tuition revenues.

Regarding the last part of your post, Dr. C, remember the old '60s motto, "Better living through chemistry."

Date: Jan 28, 2005

Many of us have read the so-called strategic plan. I understand that in CST you must include in your annual evaluation goals which of these goals in the strategic plan you will be working on and how you will do this.

But even more important is the fact that the strategic plan is being palmed off as something that faculty had a hand in creating. When someone in the administration asserts that this document involved faculty, I can only think of one word, "liars."

The faculty senate meets today. They were told in the December meeting by Joan Exline that faculty participated in the formation of the strategic plan through focus groups.

Shared governance has been obliterated by this administration.
NO CONFIDENCE!

Academics have been decimated by this administration (eg. depts of math, English, the entire nursing unit, and now the entire college of business)
NO CONFIDENCE!

Faculty have been attacked again and again! (e.g., Gary Stringer, Frank Glamser, Noel Polk, Diane Stevenson, and there are others I hesitate to name- apologies for using your names).
NO CONFIDENCE!

This isn't about how faculty appear to the local business community or the public. This is about the future of higher education in this part of the state.
NO CONFIDENCE!

Amy Young

Date: Jan 28, 2005

From Kiss Principal on another thread in reponse to Amy Young. The lying is important for more than all the normal reasons. The lying is specifically in violation of SACS!

What about this issue? Integrity. It's simple, easy to understand, relevant, and appropriate for multiple audiences.

Excerpted from SACS Principles of Accreditation:

Overview, page 4:

"The first task of the Commission when considering accreditation status is to determine the institution's integrity and its commitment to quality improvement."

Integrity, page 5:

"The Commission on Colleges expects integrity to govern the operation of institutions. Therefore, evidence of intentionally withholding information, deliberately providing inaccurate information to the public, or failing to provide timely and accurate information to the Commission will be seen as a lack of full commitment to integrity an may result in a loss of membership in the Commission on Colleges."

Has this administration provided any examples of violating the SACS Integrity policy? If so, then it seems like a message that ought to go to SACS, the IHL, and the media.

Date: Jan 28, 2005

Kickback,

I think you will find that SACS' conception of integrity is a lot narrower than the one most posters to this board have in mind.

Otherwise the lies and obfuscations that have become commonplace in university administration would lead to deaccreditations all over SACS' territory.

But from what Amy has shown us about the lineage of USM's "strategic plan," there was never any input to it from anyone except Shelby Thames.

SACS might even consider it a lousy strategic plan.

Robert Campbell

Date: Jan 28, 2005

robert--i think you're right about SACS notion of integrity. a lot of it focuses on what you tell them and what you say about them, particularly in the press. whether SACS considers it a poor strategic plan is debatable--i think the consultant will help round it into shape some. i know faculty (those i talk with) think it's lousy.

Date: Jan 28, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"SACS' conception of integrity is a lot narrower than the one most posters to this board have in mind. "

Narrowed down to discussions with the IHL about strategic plan and accreditation issues might be enough. The new commissioner is no dummy, nor are several of the board members who may have previously supported Thames. Remember that the board needed a viable option - one that it didn't have last spring. Big questions that loom now are how much damage Thames can do on the way out, how much territorial strife he can agitate amongst the faculty, and how entrenched he can keep his minions. Keep your fingers crossed that the center will hold!

Date: Jan 28, 2005

One of my colleagues is affiliated with SACS because she does the visits etc. She has told me that the word is spreading among those who are a part of the SACS accreditation that they've got to get this one right, and this does not favor little Zero Nero btw. They're "onto" USM. Covering tracks is going to be slippery at best and damaging at worst.

Date: Jan 28, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"

Otherwise the lies and obfuscations that have become commonplace in university administration would lead to deaccreditations all over SACS' territory.

Robert Campbell"

Yes, many university leaders in this country lie, cheat, steal, slander, and don't even follow their own university rules. Nothing is usually done to these "fine" people. In fact, if they get away with it they are promoted even higher so they can "handle" the faculty and staff.

It's been a long time since universities "sought the truth" on a regular basis and made it SOP. The question of the moment here is--- will SACS really dig and seek the truth?

Date: Jan 28, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Cherry Tree Planter
" Yes, many university leaders in this country lie, cheat, steal, slander, and don't even follow their own university rules. Nothing is usually done to these "fine" people. In fact, if they get away with it they are promoted even higher so they can "handle" the faculty and staff. It's been a long time since universities "sought the truth" on a regular basis and made it SOP. The question of the moment here is--- will SACS really dig and seek the truth? "

Isnt' it really the Peter Principle?

Date: Jan 28, 2005

I've heard senior colleagues describe administrators as faculty members who have "failed upward."

That's an application of the Peter Principle, isn't it?

RC

Date: Jan 28, 2005

Or, as I've posted before, it's my mother's observation -- "why do the jacka$$es always end up in charge?"

Date: Jan 28, 2005

The Peter Principle is generally considered as: the theory that employees within an organization will advance to their highest level of competence and then be promoted to and remain at a level at which they are incompetent.

My comments said nothing about their being incompetent. My point was that people who get away with bending or breaking the rules get promoted to keep others in line because they are good at the dirty tricks (can clean house, etc). There are many competent and smart tricksters out there.

Date: Jan 28, 2005

Yet, Thames was considered a fairly competent polymer scientist. He tried the admin. side out and got punted because of his immoral behavior (this does also include the bathroom breaks on the Coast besides other dalliances). Then he is back deep into Polymer Science - making a name for himself once again in a GOOD way, and then he's got to go right back to the administrative side where he so clearly failed before. He went back to the level of his total incompetence whether his so-called peter was principled or not (I know this will be slammed).

Date: Jan 28, 2005

You might get slammed, but this is one of the best posts yet!!!!!!

Date: Jan 29, 2005

Cherry Tree Planter,

Another source worth reading on these phenomena is The Road to Serfdom, by Friedrich Hayek. Particularly the chapter titled "Why the Worst Get on Top."

RC

Date: Jan 29, 2005

I second RC's recomendation

Date: Jan 30, 2005

Let me see if I understand the logic. The current arugment is that after almost three years we have a "draft" of a strategy? And that is only because the "strategy developed with faculty input" appears to have been drafted before the faculty was involved. And the participation process cannot change three of the four goals because Shelby said so? And Shelby's plan is different from the plan that was submitted to the IHL. Y'all got good drugs down here in the rabbit hole!

Date: Jan 30, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Alice
"Let me see if I understand the logic. The current arugment is that after almost three years we have a "draft" of a strategy? And that is only because the "strategy developed with faculty input" appears to have been drafted before the faculty was involved. And the participation process cannot change three of the four goals because Shelby said so? And Shelby's plan is different from the plan that was submitted to the IHL. Y'all got good drugs down here in the rabbit hole!
"

It gets better down the rabbit hole.....

Exline has directed all chairs to immediately call department meetings, discuss the strategic plan draft (that she wrote on New Year's day based on Mr. Shelgoo's 2002 pronouncment), make sure that the meetings are documented in the minutes, and then provide her with suggestions so she and Shelgoo can pick through the ones they like.

The product, of course, will be portrayed to SACS as the result of a long, arduous process involving faculty input. Bull$t.

Date: Jan 30, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: row harder, Ben Hur
"Bull$t. "

Rabbit$t.

Date: Feb 1, 2005

In the interest of speaking the truth, it would seem important that such minutes reflect the last-minute nature of such faculty input.

I heard about a man who bought a broken vase for cheap and asked the store to wrap it up carefully and send it to a friend, thinking he could get credit for thoughtfulness but blame the store for the breakage. The store followed his directions to wrap it carefully. The gift arrived with each each broken piece wrapped separately.

So let it be written, so let it be done.

Jameela

Date: Feb 1, 2005

The way I learned (implemented...taught) strategic planning, it would not have involved an arbitrary top line number subsequently divided into unit responsibility.