Interesting excerpt:

"The Mississippi university system is a growing and flourishing enterprise, but it flourishes despite the declining state resources that are invested in it. We take an annual investment from the Legislature of about $560 million and turn it into an enterprise whose annual expenditures exceed $2 billion. Enrollment continues to grow, including large numbers of students who come into Mississippi for higher education and bring their dollars with them. The extra dollars from student tuition, research grants, and private donations make the difference in quality for the moment, but we are not sure that reliance on those sources of funding can continue to make up for the limited economic resources in Mississippi made available for public higher education. The board of trustees tries to manage so that competition among the universities does not become a part of the problem, and the board is currently considering important changes that will lead it to speak more for the needs of the entire state."

The fact that Crofts is getting press coverage again is the most important thing about this interview.

Either the Board hasn't ordered him to keep quiet--or he doesn't care that the Board wants him to keep quiet.

Robert Campbell

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"The fact that Crofts is getting press coverage again is the most important thing about this interview. Either the Board hasn't ordered him to keep quiet--or he doesn't care that the Board wants him to keep quiet. Robert Campbell  "

---

Robert, do you think the Board is preparing the public for a big change.  Either Crofts replacing SFT or maybe Crofts' departure.  Part of the interview sounds like a farewell address to me. 

scm,

I didn't mean to imply that the C-L dreamed up a whole interview series just so it could be sure to feature Richard Crofts.

But I do think that:

It's not an accident that the C-L approached him recently.

It's not an accident that he gave them the interview now, instead of putting them off.

Does Roy Klumb really want Crofts talking to the press at all--except to declare that Roy Klumb and his allies are great, and that everything Roy Klumb says is golden?

Robert Campbell

 

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Green Hornet
""The difficulties between faculty and administration at the University of Southern Mississippi are unfortunate. I believe that the university is on track to deal with the serious accreditation issues it has faced. Everyone knows that you achieve more working together than in opposition, but sometimes it seems hard to act on that knowledge."
 
 "

---

I hope this comment is addressed to Thames . . . .

It's hard to believe that a person this articulate and thoughtful works in the same building (or even the same state) with Roy Klumb.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Rudy Kazootie
""....the board is currently considering important changes that will lead it to speak more for the needs of the entire state." Does anybody else worry that this could refer to changing USM's status to less than that of Ole Miss and State, as we who have come to believe in the 'conspiracy theory' have feared?  This clause scares the bejabbers out of me."

---

Me too, Rudy.  Didn't the Board just finish a " retreat" concerning organization of high education, its relationship to the commissioner, leadership, etc, etc?  Maybe they are going to put some of that new training to work.  

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"It occurred to me, too, that Crofts could be alluding to some official change of Board priorities, in which USM's status is officially reduced. Not that I'm hoping the Board is about knock USM out of research university status in the state system--but if it does announce such a change, how is Thames going to react? No one here has thought that Thames was actually trying to drop  USM out of the research university ranks. Robert Campbell"

---

I agree, Robert.  If anything, SFT has stressed research to such an extent that it has threatened teaching and the rest of academics. Now with all of the news about the programs in trouble, I wouldn't be surprised if plans were underway to reduce the status of Nursing, Arts and Letters etc. to beef up the physical sciences/engineering areas where the "big" money grants can be found. 

Seems like we had this discussion before. You pointed out how foolish this would be and how this will not be cost effective. 

   

LTAG,

That's another possible interpretation of Crofts' remarks.

But surely a more powerful Commisssioner is not what Roy Klumb wants.

Wouldn't a move toward strengthening the Commissioner's office, under current conditions, be a defeat for the pro-Thames forces?

Look at the comments by "W. J. Johnson."  Maybe W. J. Johnson is a real Thames supporter, maybe just a pro-Thames troll.  Either way, if Dean Doty's only proper response to the Black Friday memo was to shout, "Yes sir!"--then Crofts' only proper response was to bless those sagacious leaders Thames, Malone, and Grimes for producing it.

That's not what Crofts did.  And it's not what a Commissioner with more autonomy could be expected to do.

Robert Campbell

Wow, LAG, you are truly an optimist! I hope you're right, but I'm not convinced that the IHL is capable of any sort of forward-thinking like that.

I have a great deal of experience dealing with outside boards.  Directors, for the most part, do not have the time or inclination to micromanage.  A stong commissioner who competently handles all that "technical stuff" and reports to the board is a much more common and "efficient" model.  Understandably, we tend to be a little myopic about the problems at USM.  From the board's perspective, USM must simply taking up too much of its time.  Roy Klumb is not THE board and that is a fact worth remembering.  There are some very solid people on the board and they are currently being advised by a highly competent academic administrator, Dr. Crofts.  Let's not jump to any conclusions about all the various conspiracy theories by overinterpreting "currently considering important changes" while at the same time not giving a moment's reprieve to exposing the problems of this administration.  Once again, I can't help but applaud the very reasoned but determined stances by the Faculty Senate and AAUP leadership.  Now, if only the alumni leadership would formally do its part.  I hear that many alums are being quite active behind the scenes but that is not enough, especially in light of what will become a full court press by the Thames propaganda machine over the next weeks and months.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: stephen judd
" Also interesting: Newton is in charge of the search fora new commissioner. I think the fact that the committee has visited some university  systems where there seems to be as structure that gives a Commissioner (chancellor, what have you) more authority is significant. I think that is the model that Newton seems to be trying to steer toward. Just a thought.  "

---

This is what I was thinking, Stephen.  I couldn't remember where they visited but I did remember that system had a very strong position for the Commissioner.  I believe the presidents had yearly appointments in that system and so could be terminated by the commissioner without much ado.  Do you recall any of this or am I dreaming?

quote:

---

Originally posted by: KB
"North Carolina and Georgia.  See IHL board minutes from 1/20.  "

---

http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20050222/NEWS01/502220334/1002

Thanks KickBack.  The qote I was looking for was :

"In Mississippi, the commissioner and university presidents report to and are evaluated by the College Board. Presidents have four-year contracts.

In Georgia, presidents report to the chancellor, the same as a commissioner. The chancellor evaluates presidents, who have one-year contracts, Meredith said.

"If they're not any good, part of my job is to get rid of the president," he said.

Some University of Southern Mississippi faculty want the board to replace President Shelby Thames. His contract expires in May 2006. He will be evaluated later this year.

A resolution passed 39-2 earlier this month asking for a national search. The faculty senate cast a 40-0 no-confidence vote on Thames in March 2004. The faculty echoed the vote 430-32 shortly thereafter.

Meredith said later his comments weren't in reference to anything in Mississippi."

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Invictus
" I hope this isn't simply wishful thinking, Stephen. It makes a lot of sense, of course, but there are mega-political forces that would do everything possible to exclude certain institutions from such a system. In fact, the arrangement in Louisiana where LSU has its own board & all other state universities (with the possible exception of UNO -- I simply don't recall) are under a common chancellor & board. I could see Mississippi ending up with a central chancellor who "ruled" over the presidents at USM, JSU, MUW, ASU, DSU & MVSU, with UM & MSU enjoying their own semi-autonomy. After all, Dr. Khayat's title isn't "president"..."

---

Yes -- a very good point that I think you may have made on another thread in the past. You are right - we could still end up with a powerful commissioner of six schools and the other "Big Two" could be their own systems, so to speak.  I can't imagine, incidently, the even Shelby would stand for that.

If we were to assume that the Board did not renew the current administration, it would be a vulnerable time for us. I wish I had a better sense of whether the Klumb/Ross crowd is a strong affirmative minority vis a vis the issue of redefining the missions of the universities to conform with a more hierarchical strucutre with UM and MSA at the top or whether in the fact the Board as a whole has this as an end but disagrees about the strategy of how to get there.

In all of the conversations I have had with those who know VSN, no one has indicated to me that she is an advocate for redefinition along the lines we fear. However, I have to say that from a Board point of view such a move would make sense -- instead of having three or four (JSU obviously wants to join the crowd) contending for many of the same programs, perks and funding, if the universities were to be more strictly defined it would also probably make the Board's job of arbitrating less onerous once the big battle was over and the dust had cleared.

Everyone would literally be put in their place and expected to know the limits.