CoB Bombshell!!! - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Feb 5, 2005

RE: RE: CoB Bombshell!!!

Date: Feb 5, 2005

I remember something was sound about the language of the letter, and doty said he couldn't read parts of it to the faculty. I don't know if the language was foul. Arguing over this is irrelevant in the sense that everyone in the CoB now knows that Thames et al cursed out Associate Dean Niroomand and a very recent cabinet meeting in the dome over related issues involving CoB. This story is travelling all over campus. It's no secret our leaders are both stupid and crude.

Date: Feb 5, 2005

You may be missing the bigger picture! This is really beneficial to the students. Since there is no value in adding to the body of knowledge and doing basic research, you can stop requiring students to buy most textbooks since in many fields of busines (e.g., management), the books contain mostly basic theory. You can take your classes on field trips to various hattiesburg businesses to learn first hand about good business practice. There's really no need for exams any more so faculty will have more time to devote to helping local businesses improve. Thames could write how to books in each area to replace the textbooks (he seems to know more than the terminally qualified faculty in these other areas). Freed from the burden of doing quality research, the faculty will have more time to teach more classes and you can reach the 20,000 student goal more quickly...it all fits together!

Date: Feb 5, 2005

I wasn't trying to start an argument. Frankly, whatever the language, the message absolutely confirmed the rumors that have been circulating about "The Phoenix Model" (Grimes referred to Phoenix by name for goodness sake!) and blatantly redirected the faculty regarding research directions. Let's not quibble about words and start fighting for academic freedom. What was it one of the lawyers said above? "This is a fundamental battle over the life of a university."

Date: Feb 5, 2005

Without a doubt, the fight is now and always has been about the survival of this University. We are quickly reaching the point where even more concrete forms of demonstration are necessary. The pursuit of knowledge is the central point of any university. When we are being told to not engage in such, words cannot describe the concerns that come to mind. All faculty need to rise up and speak to what is apparently happening in the COB; the same can happen to all of us. The Council of Chairs should be up in arms over such action by the Administration; I can't even refer to them as our Administration any longer. I keep saying the days can't get any darker here, and they continue to do so.

Without a doubt, the only end can be NO QUARTER!!!!

Date: Feb 5, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: still in shock
"Here's the worst part. Grimes indicated that it was the administration's desire that all "basic research" endeavors in the CoB basically cease"

Is USM trying to make it's CoB faculty totally unmarketable academically? This would do it. Welcome to USM - forever. How lucky they were - the faculty who managed to escape before the trap began to close in on them.

Date: Feb 5, 2005

Cialis. on the other hand, apparently thinks it is fine to stir the pot with embellished 'truths' as long as it fosters his/her point of view. I do not remember stating anywhere that the letter from the provost is not a bad thing. I strongly believe that it is a bad thing and he (and Thames for letting it happen) should lose his job over it. Things are plenty bad enough without making things up.

Date: Feb 5, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Scavenger
"Is USM trying to make it's CoB faculty totally unmarketable academically? This would do it. Welcome to USM - forever. How lucky they were - the faculty who managed to escape before the trap began to close in on them. "

Less marketable? Academically, yes. But, hell, I think all the CoB faculty should take the logical next step: rather than being what would be essecitally an underpaid consultant to local businesses who also has to teach more classes and more students than before, why not leave and join a business thus doing exactly what Shelby is pushing you to do and making more money with more benefits to boot?

Date: Feb 5, 2005

This will seal our SACS fate. When the accreditors find out that the university's policy is to discourage research and inquiry, they will yank our accreditation quicker than Shelby can say "whirl class".

If IHL doesn't believe this is enough to terminate Shelby F$*$#*% THames, then the Holocost didn't happen, Neil Armstrong said "one small step" in Hollywood and Rosa Parks never got on that bus.

Date: Feb 5, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: waltersboy
"This story is travelling all over campus."

Across campus heck. The story is travelling across country.

Date: Feb 5, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: FFG
"Cialis. on the other hand, apparently thinks it is fine to stir the pot with embellished 'truths' as long as it fosters his/her point of view. I do not remember stating anywhere that the letter from the provost is not a bad thing. I strongly believe that it is a bad thing and he (and Thames for letting it happen) should lose his job over it. Things are plenty bad enough without making things up."

I never said that, FFG. I simply posted that, in fairness, the original poster who said something about "foul" qualified it also with use of the phrase "near foul," indicating to me at least that the same poster was admitting that their recollection wasn't perfect. What I saw was people jumping all over him/her instead of politely correcting holes in his/her recollection. I thought jumping all over this person that way could be construed as another way of stirring the pot.

Date: Feb 5, 2005

I know from my CoB friends that the CoB is a good ally in this mess. We all have to stand behind them now, whatever that takes!!!!

Date: Feb 5, 2005

Announced at a Friday meeting of the CoB faculty right before a 4-day weekend (Mardi Gras holidays Mon-Tues)...hmm...is it just me, or is there a pattern of bombshells being dropped just before spring breaks or intersession breaks, etc.? March 11 could be the next Black Friday.

Date: Feb 5, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: David Johnson
"Announced at a Friday meeting of the CoB faculty right before a 4-day weekend (Mardi Gras holidays Mon-Tues)...hmm...is it just me, or is there a pattern of bombshells being dropped just before spring breaks or intersession breaks, etc.? March 11 could be the next Black Friday."

Let's worry about one "Black Friday" at a time, please.

Date: Feb 5, 2005

What would happen if the entire COB faculty en masse simply refused to obey??

Date: Feb 5, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: LVN
"What would happen if the entire COB faculty en masse simply refused to obey??"

This thought occurred to me, too, LVN, but my gut tells me that it might be taken as a reason to dismiss the participating faculty for insubordination. It is hardly a secret that the reason there is an effort to destroy AACSB accreditation is because it requires higher faculty salaries. This is a very tangled web and the CoB faculty must think strategically and six moves ahead. Fortunately, the faculty members that I know in CoB are pretty good strategists. I agree with an earlier poster that they deserve our support. I can't wait to see how Walt Cain spins this one. CoB students should lead the charge on the Provost's office. I'm in CoH, but I'll do all I can to be there if they do.

Date: Feb 5, 2005

Thanks DJ, it did occur to me that it's impossible to just "stop" doing research -- don't people have committments for articles, book chapters, books and conference presentations already lined up? What about people who are co-authors and co researchers with people in other schools? I mean, how many people can they fire?

Date: Feb 5, 2005

I wondered about that, too. This is absurd as thinking you can stop an aircraft carrier on a dime. As to how many they can fire, the assumption is that you can't fire the entire faculty of a college because that would leave the students in the lurch. Given past behavior, that hardly seems any more bizarre than some of the goings-on we've seen to date. AACSB no longer being a concern, the thought pattern is probably to fill in with adjuncts. It would likely all be done around the time of graduation...which is FRIDAY, May 13 giving them summer to scramble and get less-qualified and much lower paid faculty members. Of course, none of this would really work, but doing things with forethought and good sense doesn't seem to have been a hallmark of this administration.

If all of this is true, I do think that every class in CoB next week should include a discussion of this couched in business or marketing or economics or finance terms such that it cannot be portrayed as "outside the subject matter." This is perfect grist for a business school to use as case studies, term paper assignments, extra credit, etc.

Date: Feb 5, 2005

Keep in mind that Grimes announced to the deans that the post-tenure review policy has been altered from the FS version so that the trigger for PT review is much more sensitive. Coupled with the new pronouncement in COB that diminishes the importance of basic research and elevates revenue-enhancing activities, expect to see many COB tenured faculty on the IHL list of poor-performing faculty. Since it has become common practice for deans to "adjust" departmental evaluations, the administration will be able to juggle the annual evaluations for "undesirables", effectively picking those trouble makers who they want to eliminate.

No Quarter!

Date: Feb 5, 2005

Can someone who took notes provide some quotations from the letter?

The full text will require a Public Records Act request, which I hope the Hat Am and several others have already made. But that will take time.

I want to get this story out on L and P but to do so I need to be able to document what Grimes' Black Friday letter said.

As for foul language or whatever, that seems immaterial. I'm reminded that when the White House tapes started coming out in 1974, some people were aghast at the language Richard Nixon was using. What they needed to be aghast at was what he was discussing, and ordering his flunkies to do. Same here.

Robert Campbell

PS. We know who was behind that letter... and his name wasn't Jay Grimes.

Date: Feb 5, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: FFG
"Cialis. on the other hand, apparently thinks it is fine to stir the pot with embellished 'truths' as long as it fosters his/her point of view. I do not remember stating anywhere that the letter from the provost is not a bad thing. I strongly believe that it is a bad thing and he (and Thames for letting it happen) should lose his job over it. Things are plenty bad enough without making things up."

FFG, I do not have complete recollection of what was said by Doty about the letter. I was dazed. Maybe I remember someone next to me saying he should write a profane reply, or him saying that was suggested to him by someone. Or Doty saying the letter was harsh or something. Some of these details are a fog to me now. I just remember hearing that the CoB was to disengage in academic research. I was not stirring a pot --- Grimes did that perfectly himself.

To the poster above you --- Different Recollection (or something like that), again I refer to my statement here this morning. To Cialis, I wasn't stirring a pot. No need to argue with anyone about it. To David Johnson and all the supporters here this morning, it's nice to wake up, get my coffee and come straight to the board and see all of this support.

I hope the weather stays nice, I need to clear my head.

Date: Feb 5, 2005

I absolutely agree with everything in your letter, RC. Keeping our eye on the ball is prime. Don't forget, referring to your P.S., that it was the Nixon stooges that went to jail. The man himself didn't and pretty effectively rehabilitated himself in the public eye. Heck, even his papers have now been slated to be moved from D.C. to his library which will be taken over by the National Archives as the other presidential libraries are. This completes the rehabilitation.

Behind it or not, if Grimes signed the letter, he's culpable.

Date: Feb 5, 2005

David,

Of course Grimes is responsible for the contents of a letter he signed.

But so are Thames and Malone for dictating the contents to him.

It's time for Malone to start feeling some heat. His contact with the media has been limited for a reason.

Robert Campbell

Date: Feb 5, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: David Johnson
"Announced at a Friday meeting of the CoB faculty right before a 4-day weekend (Mardi Gras holidays Mon-Tues)...hmm...is it just me, or is there a pattern of bombshells being dropped just before spring breaks or intersession breaks, etc.? March 11 could be the next Black Friday."

D**n, and Faculty Senate has a regularly scheduled meeting on Friday, February 11. I thought it would be a short meeting after meeting this week. Looks like FS will be meeting every week from now on if this s**t keeps up. Talk about Black Fridays, maybe FS will have to pull out that nuclear weapon it saved from earlier this week.

Date: Feb 5, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"David, Of course Grimes is responsible for the contents of a letter he signed. But so are Thames and Malone for dictating the contents to him. It's time for Malone to start feeling some heat. His contact with the media has been limited for a reason. Robert Campbell"

and why he was not allowed to appear before the PUC as promised...

Date: Feb 5, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"David,
Of course Grimes is responsible for the contents of a letter he signed.
But so are Thames and Malone for dictating the contents to him.
It's time for Malone to start feeling some heat. His contact with the media has been limited for a reason.
Robert Campbell"

Couldn't agree more, Robert. My only point is that it is Grimes who will end up taking it in the shorts for this one.

Date: Feb 5, 2005

I was there.

Two passages (out of seven) were read to faculty verbatim, according to both the dean and associate dean.

Passage 1 indicated that the COB would offer an executive-type MBA by fall 2005 OR ELSE one would be offered elsewhere on campus. The letter specified that the program would compete for students with Carey and Phoenix (both named by name). Apparently, this is an extension of an earlier discussion between the dean and provost, where the dean told the provost that having an MBA program not under the COB's control would forfeit AACSB, and the provost's reply was "I don't care."

Passage 2 stated that COB faculty were spending too much time on "basic research" and that, since the COB does not grant a Ph.D., the faculty should cease "basic research" and focus on "applied research" that would directly benefit local business and industry. Also, no new hires will be allowed unless they have relevant industry experience and can do the type of research the provost previously identified as appropriate.

These are the recollections I have. The dean said that conversations with the provost were "terse," and I was later told that the letter contained "terse" language that wasn't suitable for publication; if that means foul language or more threatening language or if it explicitly mentioned firing the dean, I don't know.

Provosts dictating research agendas and program offerings to deans and faculty are not positive to either SACS or AACSB, if my readings of those bodies' guidelines are correct.

Date: Feb 5, 2005

Now, there's an idea, Invictus! Let's put a rubber band around the croakers in the dome. I can think of several locations where a loss of blood flow would be helpful.

Date: Feb 5, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Leper
"Several things came to mind as I heard what Grimes had written."

Several things came to mind as I saw what Leper had written.

First & foremost is that Thames has been angling to demolish the College of Business in general & its dean in particular ever since they "rejected" his beloved Economic Development Department. Related to this is the obvious fact that Thames does not consider accreditation to be especially important in his grand scheme of things.

Second, I can say with some certainty that an lot of what they do down at GCRL is publishing for "Field & Stream" & assisting at Bubba's bait shop. Scholarly papers? Heck, I've seen them publish articles about rubber bands found on croakers. They know more about croakers than anybody on the face of the planet. Had GCRL not been located in Trent Lott's home county & had it not been run by a personal friend of Trent's (Tom McIlwain), it would have had to close 20-25 years ago.

Date: Feb 5, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Just a thought
"Now, there's an idea, Invictus! Let's put a rubber band around the croakers in the dome. I can think of several locations where a loss of blood flow would be helpful."

Amazing! Your reply was posted 17 seconds before my post. Outstanding!

Maybe somebody could send Dr. Grimes a notochord. It would be a start.