Mr. Johnson,

I noted with interest your statement that read, "His record of achievements at USM is unmatched ...." On this board you will find a thread entitled "USM: Progress Report." Thereon you will find a running list of the positive things which have occurred during the past two years. Please consider adding to that list.

The faculty ARE the university. If they move on, so has the university. You don't make a university in the image of a single person. (Except Bob Jones)

Who do you guys think his city councilman is?

I will assume this letter is genuine.


Mr. Johnson,

I have read carefully your letter posted here earlier this morning, and, while I am sure it will draw the ire of many, I decided to post a civil response here so that you may read it if you return to this message board.

I would first suggest that if you have a close relationship with your city councilman in Gulfport, you might venture up to Hattiesburg and develop some type of relationship with a faculty member or members. Often, things are a matter of perspective, and gaining new perspective is never a bad thing. What faculty at USM believe is a bad thing, however, is blindly and mutely playing "follow the leader" down what we believe is a dead-end path.

Why do we believe the path is a dead-end? First, I will say that most of us have experience at other universities outside of Mississippi (many in the surrounding states) that has given us the opportunity to observe other university presidents at work. I have personally seen three other presidents successfully guide universities through both ordinary and difficult times. I have seen presidents deal with a broad spectrum of opinion, and I have seen presidents take harsh criticism and not return it in the form of useless rhetoric. I have seen presidents who were loved their respective universities but who were more concerned with their university community's (students, alumni, staff, and faculty) well-being than their own. Never have I seen a president surprised by an accreditation agency; successful presidents take accreditation seriously from Day One, not from Day 800. Never have I seen a president forced to communicate with faculty; the monthly president's letter and the President's University Council (PUC) were begun at a late date to pay "lip service" to the faculty's concerns regarding a lack of communication from the administration. In short, many faculty know what successful university presidents do to make a university a better place, and Shelby F. Thames does none of these things.

Further, president Thames has failed to appropriately include faculty in his goal setting, his decision making, and his implementation strategy building exercises. He began using an autocratic style, something that is highly unacceptable at quality universities, and has never ceased to let that leadership style govern his actions. Universities are a lot like democracies. What makes a university "go" is not the administration, but the faculty or permanent residents of the institution. The concept of the democratic republic in which we live is based on the idea that people govern themselves; oddly enough, that is the very same principle upon which the university concept is based. At quality universities, faculty have substantial input into their administrative leaders, who are chosen from among the academic community itself based on merit, skill, and ability to lead. I would say that no one on the faculty would argue that Shelby F. Thames distinguished himself through polymer science. What I would suggest, however, is that Thames' leadership abilities, or lack thereof, was apparent to a majority of faculty members when he was considered to permanently replace Horace Fleming. Concerns were voiced, but no attention was paid. The College Board proceeded with a course of action that was 180 degrees from the desired action of the USM faculty, and we have been reaping the rewards ever since. In the spring of 2003, Thames fired all deans of colleges at USM and reorganized the colleges without serious faculty input. He informed the deans of their termination less than one hour before holding a press conference to announce the firings and reorganization; members of the Hattiesburg community had been informed before those who were terminated, an inexcusably coarse and thoughtless move.

Thames then proceeded to attempt to turn USM into a business, a concept that is ludicrous in and of itself. Universities offer services that cannot always be valued with a dollar amount. While departments that offer courses in Latin, ancient history, anthropology, sociology, or other "soft" disciplines may not turn out graduates who can earn astronomical salaries, these areas are extremely important to a well-rounded and well-educated individual, the creation of which is a core function of the university. Thames cut departmental faculty, budgets, and support for "non-profitable" programs. Faculty had no input into these decisions. He brought in non-academics with no academic experience to help govern the university. Faculty had no input into these decisions. He gave one of these non-academics the charge of rewriting the faculty handbook to include termination of tenured faculty members and a drug and alcohol policy that would have made taking some cold medicines a fireable offense. Faculty had no input into these decisions pr processes. He made someone with no real research record the head of research, giving her power to deny tenure and promotion when she herself had never been through a university-level tenure process. Faculty had no input into these decisions.

The move that lit the "powder keg" at USM was when termination proceedings were begun against Frank Glamser and Gary Stringer, both valued faculty members who spoke out against Thames' practices. Glamser and Stringer were summoned to Thames' office to receive notification that the termination proceedings had begun while university workers changed the locks on the professors' office doors, denying them access to their research and personal effects. Further, this action was taken during school hours, causing extreme embarrassment to the professors who had to endure this in full view of students and peers. The termination proceedings were well-publicized. Faculty, staff, and students opposed Thames in this action. Today, Glamser is on faculty at Tulane University, while Stringer is on faculty at Texas A&M University, both of which are at least Tier Two schools as ranked by U.S. News and World Report (USM has fallen to Fourth Tier status under Thames). I suppose Glamser and Stringer's actions at USM did not deter higher-quality institutions from hiring them, so the question must be asked: Why were the termination proceedings held? Faculty believe that Thames was taking action to squash opposition to his nebulous plan, which he himself formulated and is unwilling to change.

Thames has continued to act in a dictatorial manner with respect to faculty involvement in decision making. He has allowed enrollment numbers to be fabricated. He has continued to place peripheral activities (like athletics, external education, etc.) ahead of the core mission of the university -- educating the population of South Mississippi. He has thumbed his nose at accrediting bodies, and he has continued to have an "I don't care what faculty think" attitude with regard to the path the university is now on.

At no other university would these actions be tolerated. Some may call faculty "whiners" or "inmates," both of which are insulting terms. Telling faculty this is like telling an M.D. that he or she doesn't know anything about how the human body works or telling a litigator that he or she is ignorant of courtroom procedure; to achieve a certain status, one must learn how the respective systems work, which brings me back to my central point: faculty members know how a university should work, and USM is not working properly. Shelby F. Thames' vision for USM will not work, because it is HIS vision. The university's vision must be that of its faculty (remember that Thames was a faculty member first, a fact he has apparently forgotten). Thames is a "man of action," though he most often takes the wrong action and takes such action without appropriate consultation.

Are faculty jealous of Thames? My answer is no. Should faculty blindly and mutely follow Thames? My answer is no. Should Thames remain as president, given his seemingly endless string of failures? My answer is no.

Sincerely,

The Razor's Edge

P.S. -- I did not sign my real name to this letter for fear of retribution from Thames, another sign that something is terribly wrong at USM.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: The Razor's Edge
" "

---

Not only are you a shoe-in for my award, I hereby nominate you to Mr. Wonderful.  Go post something on the Password thread and you can receive this week's trifecta!  USM Sympathizer, will you please do your magic with this letter?

I am not former faculty or staff.  There are more than 10-15 posters, which can be determined because there are substantially more than 10-15 opinions being written.

I do think it is interesting that your councilman knew about this board.  Just goes to show you that there are more than 10-15 posting here.

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Speaking in Tongues
"Would someone with access to the proprietary WindTalkers program please decipher the Maderspeak in the above letter?"

---

I think the WindTalkers must be on assignment with the BBC and Michael Palen again, but a preliminary linguistic analysis indicates:

...councilman...sirs...new facilities (GC Library??)...Gulfport...Sun Herald..."known Dr. Thames for many years"...y'all are jealous (to parapharse)...

sounds like a new "good-ol'boy" round of talking points has emerged on the coast. Seems a little too "good ol' boy" for Ms Mader, but that could be interference from the code delivery mechanism...

Let it go, let it go, comrades. You guys have been trolled into expending time and energy in an utterly lost cause. Chances are that this guy Johnson who wrote the SH is the same person who posted here saying that there are only 15 posters on this board and that they're all former employees.

Too bad there's not a pro-Thames board where we could engage in some psy-ops ourselves.

Also, if you want to work to hit back at these s-dogs, spend the time thinking up creative guerilla-style tactics to commemorate and protest the Stringer/Glamser firings. Personally, I like the idea of locking the toad out his office.

The response by Razor's Edge is one of the best summations of the problems at USM that I have read.  I will indeed send it off to the IHL (for whatever little good that may do).  Thanks VERY MUCH to the Edge for taking the time to draft such a thoughtful reply.

Mr. Johnson, I hope you will realize that although the sarcasm level does get high at times on this board (due to extreme frustration with the way Shelby Thames is getting away with "destructing" USM [the verb belongs to Roy Klumb]), we really would like to engage in a serious dialogue with anyone who genuinely does have an open mind.  If you fit into the latter category, I think you'll find that people on this board would enjoy explaining themselves to you in a really civil manner.

My own response to your letter would simply reiterate what has already been said: President Thames has suffered one vote of no confidence after another by the faculty senate and the entire faculty itself.  University faculty have no innate desire to oppose their presidents; they WANT their presidents to succeed, for such success can only be good for the faculty and staff and students and institution as a whole IF the President is leading the school in a positive direction. 

If you had any idea how much damage Shelby Thames has done to the reputation -- and the actual, measurable standing -- of USM, I suspect you would be very worried for the future of your school.

 

 

Richard Rose resigned his seat on the Gulfport City Council in 2004 to become city manager of D'Iberville. Libby Milner Roland was elected to fill the vacancy in September.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Malapropism
"Not only are you a shoe-in for my award, I hereby nominate you to Mr. Wonderful. 

---

Duly Noted, Miss Information. I apologize for being 10 hours late acknowledging your nomination of Razor's Edge post, but #1 Groupie was on duty and she must have dozed off at the time the post arrived. And thank you, foot soldier, for also spotting this one.

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Malapropism
"The 10 hour delay is not a problem, confusing me with Miss I is!"

---

Hey, you frequently confuse me with Miss I, especially after you've had 6 or 8 of those dewberry brandy spritzers!