College of Business is in Big AACSB trouble! - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Feb 4, 2005

RE: College of Business is in Big AACSB trouble!

Date: Feb 4, 2005

stinky cheese man,

you've missed the point again. it's not that AACSB will do anything to ED. AACSB will not do anything to ED. AACSB will punish the COB for the sins of ED, though, so that the COB could possibly get a probationary status because ED has a pseudo-business program. that's what riles the business faculty up -- that their college's accreditation could be damaged by ED, and ED will be blissfully unaware that accreditation is important to anyone else, because it's not to them.

imagine you build a house on a lot in a quiet subdivision. suppose that the developer let his no-good son move onto the lot next to yours in a manufactured home. who does that hurt? the no-good son? no! the no-good son doesn't care. it's your property value that plummets.

by the way, iddad is not a business term. check the old FireShelby website for a poster whose posts closely resemble those of stinky cheese man. apparently, Robert thinks you're one and the same. before tonight, i wouldn't have agreed.

Date: Feb 4, 2005

While trolling the internet, I stumbled upon this gem of a job opportunity. Apparently you can get a tenure-track position at USM without expectations of teaching there whatsoever...or, for that matter, having any teaching experience. Notice the ad asks for an entrepreneur.....Nice list at the end too of all the "important people" who "teach" in this "department"

***************************

Professor of Tech-based Economic Development
The Department of Economic Development at the University of Southern Mississippi has a tenure track faculty opportunity for an entrepreneur passionate about delivering economic growth through attracting, expanding and starting-up technology businesses.

This high performing individual must have demonstrated accomplishments in the area of economic and technology development, a history of publishing about the use of technology businesses to drive economic growth, a track record of generating grant funding and a Ph.D.

The applicant should have a strong interest in generating grant funding in the area of Economic and Technology Development, mentoring graduate students and taking an active role in the University's Economic Development activities.

Economic Development is a Top Mission at Southern Miss
The Department of Economic Development is housed in the College of Business and Economic Development and grants degrees at the bachelors, masters and doctoral level.

The university is committed to economic development at the highest levels. The president of the university has declared Economic Development as a primary mission of the university alongside teaching and research. The Provost, the Vice President for Research and Economic Development, and the Director of Business Ventures are teaching members of the Economic Development faculty.

The university successfully practices economic development through a variety of efforts. The Center for Community and Economic Development historically services the needs of the region, while the Trent Lott National Center for Economic Development and Entrepreneurship will expand this service to the nation. The Mississippi Polymer Institute and the Lean Manufacturing Center provide university technology assistance to the region. An active technology incubator program hosts a variety of companies on campus. A research park is in master planning, hundreds of acres have been acquired, and initial financial backing is in place.

Please respond to:

Ken Malone, Chair
Department of Economic Development
ken.malone@usm.edu
601-266-4736

Date: Feb 4, 2005

SCM - I feel a little bit bad that I engaged with you for a bit yesterday afternoon and then left you stranded in the discussion - looks the evening was a tough one. All the biz school posters (I know, I know - COB) seem to be making the same arguments I was making. My concern about you is this, you seem to be an expert in SACS and for that you have credibility. You don't have the same expertise in AACSB yet that doesn't seem to stop you from repeatedly discussing it. Unfortunately, your ignorance is influential. If you care about this issue, please take the time to learn about AACSB, talk to the knowledgeable faculty within COB or AACSB officials outside of the university or (and I hate to say this because I have no right) stop arguing about it. If you are truly concerned, contact the AACSB office directly and ask the AACSB staff. Perhaps the best solution would be for numerous faculty at USM to begin contacting both AACSB and SACS directly. I am concerned that if either SACS or AACSB learns the real truth on a site visit USM is in for a rough go.

Date: Feb 4, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: i felt a funeral in my brain...
"The university is committed to economic development at the highest levels. The president of the university has declared Economic Development as a primary mission of the university alongside teaching and research. The Provost, the Vice President for Research and Economic Development, and the Director of Business Ventures are teaching members of the Economic Development faculty. Please respond to: Ken Malone, Chair Department of Economic Development ken.malone@usm.edu 601-266-4736"

Are the Director of Business Ventures and the Chair of Economic Development one and the same? Maybe the ad should read that the Chief Operating officer for the coast also teaches in the program.

Date: Feb 4, 2005

So is Ken Malone the chair of that dept. or is he part of the Chair Department????

Date: Feb 4, 2005

Forget my first question. What an ignorant ad altogether. I think that the fact that all those named (positions, not actual names) appear to teach in that Economic Development whatever would NOT be a selling point, even if I was looking for a lame place to call myself a professor where I'd never have to teach. Another poor selling point is that El Presidente has named it as one of his primary missions. Well, it is doomed from the start because who cares what Shelby attempts to think? If it is an original thought from him, then it is self-serving from the get-go.

Date: Feb 4, 2005

yawn--after a longer night's sleep. folks i understand all of what you say--as i said earlier yesterday, is it a marketing or branding issue? is it an issue with Ken Malone and his credentials? (SACS will handle that) i get confused by the fact that people say AACSB will ding the CoB at USM, but my perusing of the web (thanks to google) shows me other ED programs at other universities where AACSB and these ED programs seem to peacefully coexist. (remember, originally ED was a one of a kind program, ain't so. given it ain't so how do we explain it's peaceful coexistence?) i guess i find the claim about this issue confusing and not as clear as others do. sorry.

Date: Feb 4, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"yawn--after a longer night's sleep. folks i understand all of what you say--as i said earlier yesterday, is it a marketing or branding issue? is it an issue with Ken Malone and his credentials? (SACS will handle that) i get confused by the fact that people say AACSB will ding the CoB at USM, but my perusing of the web (thanks to google) shows me other ED programs at other universities where AACSB and these ED programs seem to peacefully coexist. (remember, originally ED was a one of a kind program, ain't so. given it ain't so how do we explain it's peaceful coexistence?) i guess i find the claim about this issue confusing and not as clear as others do. sorry. "

Stinky Cheese Man, quick question. What were the credentials of the faculty who teach at the "other ED programs at other universities where AACSB and ED gracefully coexist?"

Date: Feb 4, 2005

I have never seen a thread on this Board where so many people who know so little about a topic have so much to say anyway.

The content of the ED program will not pose an AACSB accreditation problem for the COB. Only if the three or four COB courses listed in the curriculum were taught by unqualified ED faculty would there be ann issue, but I assume that these classes will be taught by COB faculty.

Date: Feb 4, 2005

bemused--my point precisely. i don't think the ED program presents nearly the threat to AACSB accreditation as some think it does. there's a lot of mythology about accreditation.

and when it comes to faculty credentials some don't understand that SACS trumps disciplinary accrediting agencies. this came up at the council of chairs. some said "my disciplinary accrediting agency says this degree is the terminal degree" and the SACS consultant said clearly, SACS doesn't care. SACS only recognizes certain degrees as the terminal degree, regardless of what disciplinary accrediting agencies may say.

Date: Feb 4, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"bemused--my point precisely. i don't think the ED program presents nearly the threat to AACSB accreditation as some think it does. there's a lot of mythology about accreditation. and when it comes to faculty credentials some don't understand that SACS trumps disciplinary accrediting agencies. this came up at the council of chairs. some said "my disciplinary accrediting agency says this degree is the terminal degree" and the SACS consultant said clearly, SACS doesn't care. SACS only recognizes certain degrees as the terminal degree, regardless of what disciplinary accrediting agencies may say. "

You misread bemused. He/she assumes that CoB faculty will be teaching the business courses in the ED program in saying that AACSB. He/she admits that if that is not the case, there are problems.

I am here to tell you "that it is NOT the case" and that there will be a problem.

Date: Feb 4, 2005

correction--you may be right. but maybe not. see, i don't know. i still can't figure out where all the parts went. but i can't tell my students to question things critically and not do it myself. i'll defer to the passage of time. as James taylor says "the secret of life is enjoying the passage of time."

Date: Feb 4, 2005

Correction,

May I remind you that this thread began with a link to the ED curriculum and the idea that the curriculum posed a serious threat to AACSB accreditation. Now you're telling me that the real problem is that you know for sure that the three or four COB courses will be taught by unqualified ED faculty: if that were true, then you are correct that AACSB accreditation would be jeopardized. However, this possibility is not what started this thread and is a separate issue. To be fair, I do remember an earlier thread on an ED finance-type course being taught by an ED faculty menber whose vita did not seem to support either SACS or AACSB qualification for teaching the subject matter. Given the problem we have with SACS, I would assume that those situations will be addressed in the SACS context prior to becoming an AACSB issue. I have heard that the university is now doing a very careful review of faculty credentials to assure that courses are taught by qualified individuals.

Thank goodness for accrediting agencies. If there is any upside to SACS probation, it is that SACS scrutiny will severely curtail uninformed administrative intrusions into curricular matters for the foreseeable future. I also suspect that there will be more concern for program accreditations such as AACSB given that the President probably doesn't to explain any more accreditation fiascos.

Date: Feb 4, 2005

bemused--so true about faculty credentials being checked. i hear there are some programs in deep trouble. sadly, some were told in 1995 to clean up their act. The Malone situation (who i think a lot are referring to) should get cleaned up by SACS.

Date: Feb 4, 2005

bemused, you're right about SACS and the credentials. I think it's possible that AACSB will act on the CoB issues before final rulings come from SACS. I think what the biz profs were pointing out is that the ED program would cause problems with AACSB even without SACS commenting (first) on them.

Date: Feb 4, 2005

The COB is such a disaster it deserves to loose accreditation. Without even considering ED, the mess in COB alone is enought to have AACSB ask "is this really a college?"

Date: Feb 4, 2005

COBed,

Why do you think COB is a "disaster" in terms of meeting AACSB accreditation standards?

Date: Feb 4, 2005

Why is the COB at USM in such a mess? Please give some details. I am an alumn who will soon be on the job market (management departments) and would be interested in returning to Hattiesburg. Why is it so bad?

Date: Feb 4, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Bemused
"I have never seen a thread on this Board where so many people who know so little about a topic have so much to say anyway.

Good job Bemused. Your analysis appears right on target. My question is, “when does a program outside the control of the Business School Dean, but using business courses and qualified faculty either from the college or outside begin to present a problem or does it?”

This may not be germane to the immediate discussion but inquiring minds want to know.

Date: Feb 4, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: ABD
"Why is the COB at USM in such a mess? Please give some details. I am an alumn who will soon be on the job market (management departments) and would be interested in returning to Hattiesburg. Why is it so bad?"

ABD, Management is part of the management and marketing department. The department has a great chairman, probable the best in the University and competitively nationally. The management faculty has a lot of young talent with many good things developing. You will be hard pressed to find a better group of colleagues then those in management at Southern Miss. The faculty in COB are a good group with whom to work. The University on the other hand is a mess. The President needs to go and soon. My two cents worth.

Date: Feb 4, 2005

Inquirer,

It is my understanding that if some non-business program were to offer and staff any business courses, accreditation would be jeopardized since all such offerings are supposed to be under the control of the business school. Whether the faculty were qualified or not would not matter.

It is, however, permissible for non-business programs to include business courses in their curricula. Students in the programs would have to meet course prerequisites, and the percentage of business courses in the non-business curriculum is limited (I believe to less than 50 percent for graduate programs.)

Someone more familiar with AACSB standards may have better information.

Date: Feb 4, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Bemused
"Inquirer, It is my understanding that if some non-business program were to offer and staff any business courses, accreditation would be jeopardized since all such offerings are supposed to be under the control of the business school. Whether the faculty were qualified or not would not matter. It is, however, permissible for non-business programs to include business courses in their curricula. Students in the programs would have to meet course prerequisites, and the percentage of business courses in the non-business curriculum is limited (I believe to less than 50 percent for graduate programs.) Someone more familiar with AACSB standards may have better information."

Bemused, if this is indeed the case, than AACSB difficulties would loom large for COB. I have heard that Ken Malone is teaching a course in international finance as part of the Economic Devleopment program. That is not the course title but the texbook and the syllabus reflects this course content. Maybe COB would be better off, if the program had remained in COB but under the Dean's control From what I have heard the program never was under his control. A good discussion, thank you.

Date: Feb 4, 2005

I am afraid I have to agree with Bemused. Never have so many with so little knowledge about the issue had such strong opinions. It reminds me a little of a saying I heard about a minister when I was growing up, "Never in doubt, but not always right." In the initial stages of the AACSB process, the CoB did a thorough analysis of all courses and degree programs in the University to identify CoB courses taught by business faculty in other degree programs or pseudo business courses (business type courses) taught by non-CoB faculty in other degree programs. This information was then utilized to prepare a list of excluded programs (non-CoB programs which have a significant number of CoB classes or psuedo business classes to be excluded from the AACSB accreditation process) to be sent to AACSB with justification as to why the programs should not be included (e.g., the program is not controlled by the CoB and/or the classes are not being taught by CoB faculty). The AACSB will then make a determination as to whether the non-CoB programs are subject to AACSB accreditation. Assuming the graduate programs in economic development were on the excluded programs list (and I believe they were) and assuming that the AACSB accepts the justification for exclusion (and I believe it will), the CoB does not have any problem with AACSB accreditation due to economic development degree programs. SCM, keep asking those questions!

Date: Feb 5, 2005

scm and Far from Gruntled,

All of a sudden, Jay Grimes' Black Friday memo has rendered much of this discussion beside the point. The Thames regime is aggressively pursuing AACSB deaccreditation of the College of Business itself. They are not waiting for collateral damage to CoB from courses taught in the Economic Development program.

That said, I think it would help to get to the bottom of the collateral damage issue. A senior business professor in my college (Business and Behavioral Science is what Clemson calls it) who has extensive AACSB experience believes that business courses taught outside a College of Business would draw the unfavorable attention of that accrediting body. I now have inquiries out to the top experts here at Clemson... and will pursue the matter a good deal further if necessary.

Robert Campbell

Date: Feb 5, 2005

robert--from my perspective, don't waste your time. the discussion on the other CoB thread says it all.