dean of COAL - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Feb 11, 2005

dean of COAL

Date: Feb 11, 2005

Don't make this about Doty but DO make it about other administrators who had better make a stand now or live with the consequences of their inaction.

Date: Feb 11, 2005

Thank you. That was exactly my intention; exactly my point.

Date: Feb 11, 2005

kick

Date: Feb 11, 2005

Thames has made miscalculation after miscalculation. He still doesn't get it.

Doty had no choice but to fight or die, as a College and for his job. Luckily, Thames, the idiot, forgot to file paperwork with SACS, allowing some accrediting body, some power outside of the incestuous IHL circle, to be involved in our situation.

Thames is fighting wars on too many fronts now. Everything is in retreat. The Dome is a bunker under assault.

See you on the other side Shelb.

Date: Feb 11, 2005

Justice is always more satisfying when it's self-administered.

Date: Feb 11, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: yellow tail
"Therefore one can not help but wonder why the dean of COAL so willingly allows ED into his college, into Political Science. At the moment, so it appears, Political Science no longer even has a departmental name so "beneficial" has its inclusion into that department, and into COAL been. "

The other 2/3 of economic development is now in Science and Technology, isn't it?

Date: Feb 11, 2005

Now that Thames is getting ready to remove Grimes (his memo of today, referenced on another thread, makes that obvious), do you think that he will try to make Pood his next Provost?

Not that it matters much... Thames may not remain in office long enough to accomplish that. Even if he does, a Provost under Thames needs to be told what to do all the time.

All the more reason to keep the heat on Ken Malone.

Without Malone, won't Thames have to issue every last order himself?

Robert Campbell

Date: Feb 11, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"Now that Thames is getting ready to remove Grimes (his memo of today, referenced on another thread, makes that obvious), do you think that he will try to make Pood his next Provost?

Not that it matters much... Thames may not remain in office long enough to accomplish that. Even if he does, a Provost under Thames needs to be told what to do all the time.

All the more reason to keep the heat on Ken Malone.
"

Pood as provost. Now that is a frightening thought. But not as frightening as Malone.

Date: Feb 11, 2005

Be careful of Gandy sliding in if Shelby skates through this. INSIST that the committee makes the decision and that Shelby doesn't temporarily fill the position. Stay alert.

Date: Feb 11, 2005

word on the street is Pood is disgusted with the whole mess and is seriously considering stepping down. anybody have a read on what Gandy is thinking?

Date: Feb 11, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: watchin' & waitin'
"word on the street is Pood is disgusted with the whole mess and is seriously considering stepping down. anybody have a read on what Gandy is thinking?"

I think it possible that there are administrators who have begun to understand that they can no longer continue to compromise with the administration in the hope that they will ultimately be able to help "civilize" the barbarians who run the dome. It is clear that the barbarians aren't going to change -- and it is even clearer that no one from Dean on down is going to ever be trusted to make significant decisions by a micomanaging chief executive. Finally, I'd submit that all of our deans are just as exhausted as we are and realize that if this administration wins, none of us will ever have a life outside of campus and we will never stop working our asses off to fix the problems that thoughtless incompetence has caused . . .

It is time to reel the Deans in to our side and encourage them to use their positions to quietly undermine some of the most stupid last gasps of this administration . . . . when the story is told we may find that there have been acts of sabotage which we can only begin to guess at . .

Doty had no choice but to go public if he wanted to maintain control over his program and gain the respect of his faculty. The creation of an MBA degree outside his college and being told how to run his college were direct challenges . . . fortunately, he had the guts not to cave in. Other Deans mught not be currently under such a challenge . . . but they might be acting quietly in the better interests of their college without broadcasting it.

I think it is time to welcome everyone who wants to cross over -- we should encourage it no matter what we think of the motivation. It might be a tad self righteous for those of us who have been fighting from the beginning to look down our noses at those whom we believe are coming late to realization. We should celebrate -- each person who in any quiet way disobeys an order, or stalls on an unjust action, or quietly encourages those who might be a little bolder takes us closer to the day of liberation. That is how subversion works.

It is also how we will begin to heal once the reign of terror ends. We want to be careful -- Robespierre's thirst for revenge is not a good example to follow if we want to put the pieces back together in a post Thames world . . . .

Date: Feb 11, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: stephen judd
"
I
I think it is time to welcome everyone who wants to cross over -- we should encourage it no matter what we think of the motivation. It might be a tad self righteous for those of us who have been fighting from the beginning to look down our noses at those whom we believe are coming late to realization. We should celebrate -- each person who in any quiet way disobeys an order, or stalls on an unjust action, or quietly encourages those who might be a little bolder takes us closer to the day of liberation. That is how subversion works.
It is also how we will begin to heal once the reign of terror ends. We want to be careful -- Robespierre's thirst for revenge is not a good example to follow if we want to put the pieces back together in a post Thames world . . . .

"

I am reminded of a story about some laborers in a certain vineyard . . .

Date: Feb 11, 2005

Hear! Hear! Professor Judd.

Date: Feb 11, 2005

stephen-- i agree with 90%+ of what you say, but you use language that reminds me of star wars when you say "I think it is time to welcome everyone who wants to cross over . . . ." i assume from the dark side to the bright side. your comments seem to be primarily directed to administrators, particularly given the thread title. i've been stewing over this for about two months, and i've decided to bring this issue up now.

i hope you invite some members of the leadership (as well as non-leadership members) of the FS and AAUP to come over from the dark side as well. if you've read any of my posts in the past few months, i've mentioned my cynicism at hypocrisy. i asked about recall of poor FS members. i served on the academic and graduate councils long ago, and never wanted to serve again because of what i saw then. i still see it. i see leaders of both bodies say one thing publically and do other things privately. there's a certain "ego" that some assume when they assume a leadership position.

what i know is that some members (leadership people) of both organizations were cutting "deals" with former administrators (as short as 3 months ago). deals that were suspect, as best, and in some cases, in possible violation of laws if allowed to continue. if faculty heard of these "deals" i think they would cringe. i think members of both bodies need to learn more about people they elect to leadership positions. what do you know about them? what do you know about deals they are cutting at USM? do they meet your standards of propriety?

Date: Feb 11, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"stephen-- i agree with 90%+ of what you say, but you use language that reminds me of star wars when you say "I think it is time to welcome everyone who wants to cross over . . . ." i assume from the dark side to the bright side. your comments seem to be primarily directed to administrators, particularly given the thread title. i've been stewing over this for about two months, and i've decided to bring this issue up now. i hope you invite some members of the leadership (as well as non-leadership members) of the FS and AAUP to come over from the dark side as well. if you've read any of my posts in the past few months, i've mentioned my cynicism at hypocrisy. i asked about recall of poor FS members. i served on the academic and graduate councils long ago, and never wanted to serve again because of what i saw then. i still see it. i see leaders of both bodies say one thing publically and do other things privately. there's a certain "ego" that some assume when they assume a leadership position. what i know is that some members (leadership people) of both organizations were cutting "deals" with former administrators (as short as 3 months ago). deals that were suspect, as best, and in some cases, in possible violation of laws if allowed to continue. if faculty heard of these "deals" i think they would cringe. i think members of both bodies need to learn more about people they elect to leadership positions. what do you know about them? what do you know about deals they are cutting at USM? do they meet your standards of propriety? "

cheese man: But their votes have been unanimlous or near unanimous. They seem to put their money where they mouth is. That's not so bad for such large groups.

Date: Feb 11, 2005

book--all i'm saying is that the bodies need to look at their leadership and its ethics.

Date: Feb 12, 2005

scm: This post really disturbs me. I know some of the current leaders pretty well and have observed close hand the struggles they have had with this administration and what those struggles have cost them. While I've agreed with some of your earlier posts and have disagreed with others, this post seems very troll-like and designed to undermine those who are at the forefront of the fight.

I know from past experience how very difficult it is to be in a position of faculty leadership and I expect that you do as well. That's why I'm particularly disturbed by your reference to deals on the part of these people.

Date: Feb 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"stephen-- i agree with 90%+ of what you say, but you use language that reminds me of star wars when you say "I think it is time to welcome everyone who wants to cross over . . . ." i assume from the dark side to the bright side. your comments seem to be primarily directed to administrators, particularly given the thread title. i've been stewing over this for about two months, and i've decided to bring this issue up now.
i hope you invite some members of the leadership (as well as non-leadership members) of the FS and AAUP to come over from the dark side as well. if you've read any of my posts in the past few months, i've mentioned my cynicism at hypocrisy. i asked about recall of poor FS members. i served on the academic and graduate councils long ago, and never wanted to serve again because of what i saw then. i still see it. i see leaders of both bodies say one thing publically and do other things privately. there's a certain "ego" that some assume when they assume a leadership position.
what i know is that some members (leadership people) of both organizations were cutting "deals" with former administrators (as short as 3 months ago). deals that were suspect, as best, and in some cases, in possible violation of laws if allowed to continue. if faculty heard of these "deals" i think they would cringe. i think members of both bodies need to learn more about people they elect to leadership positions. what do you know about them? what do you know about deals they are cutting at USM? do they meet your standards of propriety?
"

SCM

I take issue with your post. As a member of AAUP "leadership," I have openly fought every decision that I thought was not in the interests of USM and higher education. I have labored to represent the faculty by talking to as many people as I can. I have listened and reacted to a variety of opinions. But most importantly, I also acknowledge that I am only one of MANY who have done the same thing. Many have served to the best of their abilities in graduate council and academic council, on faculty senate, as well as in AAUP. They work within the structure as best they can while openly fighting for change. If you would like me or anyone else to represent you better, you need to communicate what it is you want. OR, you can take up a leadership position yourself.

Amy Young

Date: Feb 12, 2005

Bravo, Amy.

Date: Feb 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"stephen-- ... i hope you invite some members of the leadership (as well as non-leadership members) of the FS and AAUP to come over from the dark side as well. if you've read any of my posts in the past few months, i've mentioned my cynicism at hypocrisy. ... i served on the academic and graduate councils long ago, and never wanted to serve again because of what i saw then. i still see it. i see leaders of both bodies say one thing publically and do other things privately. ... what i know is that some members (leadership people) of both organizations were cutting "deals" with former administrators (as short as 3 months ago). deals that were suspect, as best, and in some cases, in possible violation of laws if allowed to continue. if faculty heard of these "deals" i think they would cringe. ... "

SCM, These are strong words, but you provide no specifics. "Cutting deals" can mean many things. The leadership of the FS had the backing of the Senate to negotiate with the administration on some issues. They did a splendid job over last weekend revising and renegotiating the P-T Review document. Just because you "suspect" deals doesn't mean they are evil.

We don't know who you are, so why don't you describe the "deals" without using specific names and let this board judge if they are " possible violations of laws". And don't forget the faculty leaders represent their organizations and not themselves. But in private they represent themselves. Sometimes these positions are in contradiction. I know of a Senator who had a proxy for someone who had a different opinion on one issue. When it came to a vote they had to vote both ways to represent themselves and their proxy. During discussion I believe they even spoke out to provide the two sides of the argument. That is what I consider good democracy and collegiality.

Please provide some specifics or you will just come across as a troll (I know you are not) with an axe to grind.

Date: Feb 12, 2005

"I think it is time to welcome everyone who wants to cross over -- we should encourage it no matter what we think of the motivation. It might be a tad self righteous for those of us who have been fighting from the beginning to look down our noses at those whom we believe are coming late to realization. We should celebrate -- each person who in any quiet way disobeys an order, or stalls on an unjust action, or quietly encourages those who might be a little bolder takes us closer to the day of liberation. That is how subversion works. "

The dean of COAL defines the word smarmy. Seeing advantage to himself in appearing to "cross over" he will try. Anyone who believes him will be, as it were, slitting their own throat. He loves to tell people how hard he worked "behind the scenes" on behalf of Gary and Frank. Yet if one talks to Gary, Frank and one of the lawyers no behind the scenes effort is recalled. In short, some people align themselves with power for power. Every day this craven man does more damage to over 100 facutly viz a viz teaching loads, classrooom space, sabbaticals, research leave, hiring, raises, and general micromanaging without direction aim or purpose that to consider him in any way as a possible ally is foolish at best self destructive at worst. Please recall that Foreign Languages has twice voted for a chair only to have the dean reject that unamimous department vote, override it and run the department out of his own office. Please recall that the situation is such that only seven people in the entire county have applied to be chair of Political Science. Please recall that every major international scholar has left under this man's rule, and that those very few remaining are currently on the market or about to retire as a direct result of his mismanagement. There is no need to go on but the situation is so dire that the very idea of this man continuing under any circumstances would spell the absolute end of academic intellectual integrity in both the arts and letters at usm.

Date: Feb 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"stephen-- i agree with 90%+ of what you say, but you use language that reminds me of star wars when you say "I think it is time to welcome everyone who wants to cross over . . . ." i assume from the dark side to the bright side. your comments seem to be primarily directed to administrators, particularly given the thread title. i've been stewing over this for about two months, and i've decided to bring this issue up now. i hope you invite some members of the leadership (as well as non-leadership members) of the FS and AAUP to come over from the dark side as well. if you've read any of my posts in the past few months, i've mentioned my cynicism at hypocrisy. i asked about recall of poor FS members. i served on the academic and graduate councils long ago, and never wanted to serve again because of what i saw then. i still see it. i see leaders of both bodies say one thing publically and do other things privately. there's a certain "ego" that some assume when they assume a leadership position. what i know is that some members (leadership people) of both organizations were cutting "deals" with former administrators (as short as 3 months ago). deals that were suspect, as best, and in some cases, in possible violation of laws if allowed to continue. if faculty heard of these "deals" i think they would cringe. i think members of both bodies need to learn more about people they elect to leadership positions. what do you know about them? what do you know about deals they are cutting at USM? do they meet your standards of propriety? "

[Braude, 1965]
A scorpion, being a very poor swimmer, asked a turtle to carry him on his back across a river. "Are you mad?" exclaimed the turtle. "You'll sting me while I'm swimming and I'll drown."
"My dear turtle," laughed the scorpion, "if I were to sting you, you would drown and I would go down with you. Now where is the logic in that?"
"You're right!" cried the turtle. "Hop on!" The scorpion climbed aboard and halfway across the river gave the turtle a mighty sting. As they both sank to the bottom, the turtle resignedly said:
"Do you mind if I ask you something? You said there'd be no logic in your stinging me. Why did you do it?"
"It has nothing to do with logic," the drowning scorpion sadly replied. "It's just my character."

[Collected on the Internet, 2001]
This girl finds a snake that pleads with her to place it in her winter coat because otherwise the snake will freeze. The girl goes "No your bite me blah blah blah". Anyway the girl eventually puts the snake in her jacket to keep it warm and she continues on her walk. Then she feels a sharp pain in her side, the snake drops out and begins to slither away. The girl say something like "Why? I took care of you, blah blah blah". The snake simply replies "You knew what I was when you found me".

Date: Feb 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Amy Young
"SCM I take issue with your post."

I too disagree with stinky. But he is free to switch positions as aften as he wishes.

Date: Feb 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Double Agent
"I too disagree with stinky. But he is free to switch positions as aften as he wishes. "

I think SCM is suffering from brucellosis, aka "foot 'n' mouth disease"

SCM: You did make a pretty serious allegation. Perhaps you should clear this up with AAUP & tell them what your facts/perceptions are. You should, however, do that through private email channels (or more securely, by phone). They don't even need to know that you're Stinky Cheese Man, y'know? Just don't air it out over here. This is not the time for us to be diverted by internecine warfare among faculty members. There are a lot of stakeholders besides faculty in the "big picture," while there are few stakeholders outside the faculty in any problems you have with the FS or AAUP leadership.

Date: Feb 12, 2005

Faculty Senate leaders often do cut deals with the upper administration. Some of these are ethically questionable; a few are downright foul. At Clemson I've seen close to the full spectrum of Faculty Senate leader behavior--from consistently tough and uncompromising, on the issues where tough and uncompromising were needed, to carrying water for the Provost and representing the administration to the faculty, instead of the other way around.

The present USM Faculty Senate got off to a terrible start with the foolish compromise over Angie Dvorak's vita. I accept the judgment of those who say that there was no deal (nothing like "AD will be eased out of her post if you agree to overlook her misrepresentations"). But that just made it all the more foolish. Had the Board not been pressuring Thames to get rid of AD, the Senate could have helped to entrench her at USM for years to come.

Since the early fall, however, the Senate has more than compensated for that lapse. Quite recently, some posters to this board were predicting that Dave Beckett would cave and there would be no resolution against Thames--instead the Senate promptly produced one and passed it 39-2.

So, scm, you need to bring compelling evidence that the Senate leadership is embroiled in dirty deals right now. The Senate's public behavior is definitely not consistent with anything of the kind.

As for the AAUP leadership, gimme a break! Give us all a break! Under Frank Glamser, under Amy Young, under others, its conduct during this crisis has been exemplary. I know something about weak AAUP chapter leadership, and divided AAUP chapter leadership. I've even seen corrupt behavior on the part of a state-level AAUP official. Allegations of this kind against the AAUP chapter at USM are as far off as they can be.

On to the issue raised by Stephen, I agree that the magnanimous road is best, and that those admnistrators who sincerely come out against Thames in public should be accepted.

I think there is a pretty short list of people who either must go, when Thames is finally removed, or must be sent back to the classroom or the lab, so that USM can recover. Nearly all of them are referred to by name on this board, on a weekly if not daily basis.

I do agree that Elliot Pood belongs on that short list. Everything I have heard about him, on this board and off, indicates that he is unfit to be a dean, and unworthy of anyone's trust. If he jumps off the SS Thames at the last minute, he really ought to be ignored--and faculty members, inside and outside of CoAL, need to inform the incoming administration in blunt terms that he has done terrible damage while in office and is patently unacceptable.

Robert Campbell

Date: Feb 12, 2005

And, Willie Pierce might make a very good dean if Shelby is gone and Dana loses what little wind remains to push her sails. Her demotion, through Pierce, would make a very nice start.

Date: Feb 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: CIS(Hattiesburg)
"And, Willie Pierce might make a very good dean if Shelby is gone and Dana loses what little wind remains to push her sails. Her demotion, through Pierce, would make a very nice start."

This might be the only way for him to ever really be a Dean.

Date: Feb 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"...... On to the issue raised by Stephen, I agree that the magnanimous road is best, and that those admnistrators who sincerely come out against Thames in public should be accepted. I think there is a pretty short list of people who either must go, when Thames is finally removed, or must be sent back to the classroom or the lab, so that USM can recover. Nearly all of them are referred to by name on this board, on a weekly if not daily basis. I do agree that Elliot Pood belongs on that short list. Everything I have heard about him, on this board and off, indicates that he is unfit to be a dean, and unworthy of anyone's trust. If he jumps off the SS Thames at the last minute, he really ought to be ignored--and faculty members, inside and outside of CoAL, need to inform the incoming administration in blunt terms that he has done terrible damage while in office and is patently unacceptable. Robert Campbell "

Robert and Stephen, I fear some faculty (and staff) may react in a way similar to what happened when Paris was liberated in WWII. The citizens went after the "collaborators". Can USM afford such a house cleaning? I think not. Leadership will be in very short supply.

Who are the "collaborators"? Pood and Gandy will be the first names that come to mind. Both accepted ED programs moved from CoB without approval of any Council AFAIK. I doubt that even the Curriculum Committees of CoAL and CoST were consulted. I also think the credentials of Malone, Chair of ED, are still an issue under the "credentials" standards of SACS. I'm not sure in which college he is now considered a member.

My point is that if things keep moving in the direction of SFT not being president in the near future, these deans will need to establish their academic integrity ASAP to be acceptable, as Stephen suggested, to the faculty. I suspect it is already too late for Pood, so it appears Gandy is now are at critical junction for himself and USM. CoST faculty have a lot to think about .

Date: Feb 12, 2005

to amy, invictus, and others--i stand by my remarks. i can't reveal all of my sources. i'm not talking about the FS working with the administration. i know they have to do that. i'm talking about members of these bodies who in other capacities in the university want subadministrators to do things that they would publically speak against. and if the bodies like the FS knew what was going on, they would publically condemn. but lots of the business of the university does not happen in the open. people go to people's offices and have private conversations where these things happen. there are good ole boy poker games. i know of one incident in the past two months where a subadministrator sensed something was wrong about what was going on. the faculty member in question said so-and-so has let us do that. the subadministrator took it to lee gore who said it was ill-advised, if not illegal. as i said, most of the time i roll my eyes when i hear some of these people make public pronouncements relating to people's ethics. last night--i couldn't live with what i see as hypocrisy from some people. there are some fine folks on these councils. but there are others that aren't so pure. when i get really cynical about USM i make invictus look like pollyanna.