Members Login
Username 
 
Password 
    Remember Me  
 
USM Forum -- Message Board -> AAUP-USM MESSAGE BOARD -> He's the Mann
Post Info TOPIC: He's the Mann
Festus

Date:
He's the Mann
Permalink Closed

Dr. Thames,

It has been brought to the attention of the Graduate Council that a
change is being proposed to IHL Board Policies on MINIMUM STANDARDS FOR
TENURED EMPLOYMENT (403.0101).  The current policy states, "At the time
of initial employment by the Board, an administrative employee whose
preceding employment included faculty rank and tenure may be granted
tenure only if so recommended by the department (or equivalent academic
unit), the Dean, the Provost/Vice President, and the President and
approved by the Board."  The proposed revision, to be voted on at the
March meeting of the IHL Board, reads, "At the time of initial
employment by the Board, a faculty member or an administrative employee
whose preceding employment included faculty rank at the level of
assistant professor, associate professor, or professor and tenure may be
granted tenure only if so recommended by the President/Chancellor and
approved by the Board."
 
After significant discussion, the Graduate Council voted unanimously to
express its objection to the proposed policy change.  It is felt that
such a policy change would eliminate the fundamental and important roles
of the department, the college, and the chief academic officer of a
Mississippi university in determining the tenure status of certain
faculty within their units.  The Graduate Council requests that you not
support the proposed policy change and that the Board not approve the
proposed policy change.

A similar request will be forwarded to Provost Grimes and to
Commissioner Crofts.  Additionally, a request will be sent to Ms. Susan
Sharpe, Chief of Staff, and Ms. Sarah Nicholas, Office of Public
Affairs, requesting that they distribute the state objection of the USM
Graduate Council to the proposed change in policy to the members of the
IHL Board.

Your attention to the request to not support the Board policy change is
greatly appreciated.

Ed Mann, Chair
USM Graduate Council


__________________
Robert Campbell

Date:
Permalink Closed

Good to see the GC taking a stand on this.


Where would the policy change leave Ken Malone, though?  Did he ever hold faculty rank anywhere, before coming to USM?


Robert Campbell



__________________
Miss Kitty

Date:
Permalink Closed

You are the man, Dr. Mann.

__________________
stinky cheese man

Date:
Permalink Closed

sad to say but the GC is a little behind on this issue. the change to section 403.0101 was first read and approved at the October 2004 IHL meeting, and received final approval at the December, 2004 board meeting. check the IHL minutes.

__________________
Read my lips

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"sad to say but the GC is a little behind on this issue. the change to section 403.0101 was first read and approved at the October 2004 IHL meeting, and received final approval at the December, 2004 board meeting. check the IHL minutes. "
Does this mean that there was no faculty input whatsoever?

__________________
Bill Powell

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"sad to say but the GC is a little behind on this issue. the change to section 403.0101 was first read and approved at the October 2004 IHL meeting, and received final approval at the December, 2004 board meeting. check the IHL minutes. "


It is sad, Stinky, especially since the the GC was reacting to an internal USM note solliciting feedback for an issue that would be taken up at the March meeting of the IHL. I suppose we all need to be more vigilant of Board activities and spread the word when we run across critical information. This change in Board policy could result in colleagues being forced upon a department.

__________________
stinky cheese man

Date:
Permalink Closed

don't know. just know the GC didn't have its facts when it approved this memo / statement.

__________________
truth4usm/AH

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"Good to see the GC taking a stand on this.
Where would the policy change leave Ken Malone, though?  Did he ever hold faculty rank anywhere, before coming to USM?
Robert Campbell"


Robert, as far as I know (and I actually remember when Ken Malone came on board at USM since I was working in Polymer Science at the time), Kenbot has never held a faculty appointment anywhere else. He was in the business world prior to his employment at USM.

__________________
stinky cheese man

Date:
Permalink Closed

bill--but to send it to crofts, board staffers, and to ask that Mann's memo be distributed to all board members?! what impression are they now going to have of the GC? I understand the Academic Council was going to send a similar memo. doesn't help with credibility.

__________________
Dime Late, Dollar Short

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"bill--but to send it to crofts, board staffers, and to ask that Mann's memo be distributed to all board members?! what impression are they now going to have of the GC? I understand the Academic Council was going to send a similar memo. doesn't help with credibility."
Would it suggest to the IHL that there is little or no involvement of the JSM faculty in such matters?

__________________
Switcheroo

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"I understand the Academic Council was going to send a similar memo. doesn't help with credibility."
stinky, I heard that the faculty senate was asked for input by Grimes this month. Where's the credibility problem?

__________________
Robert Campbell

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: Switcheroo
"stinky, I heard that the faculty senate was asked for input by Grimes this month. Where's the credibility problem? "

Maybe with Jay Grimes and the people he takes his orders from?


By the way, "W. J. Johnson" boasted in his 2nd post that Roy Klumb told him that university presidents would be given the power to grant tenure all by themselves.


Robert Campbell



__________________
stephen judd

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: Switcheroo
"stinky, I heard that the faculty senate was asked for input by Grimes this month. Where's the credibility problem? "

"I heard . . ."


From whom?


In what form?


Damned if I recollect any request for input on this . . . . (but there are so many things to keep track of these days, I just may have missed it among all of the other verbiange that gets put out from the folks in the dome.


 


 


 



__________________
stinky cheese man

Date:
Permalink Closed

don't know anything about the Grimes memo. what i do know is that the councils need to make sure they have their facts before they send memos to the IHL. it didn't take me but 2 minutes to check the board minutes. it's ammunition that allows the IHL to ignore faculty--i can hear it now--"they don't know what they're talking about." frankly, the GC needs to take responsibility for their action--we ask administrators to--the councils should too.

__________________
Stephen judd

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"bill--but to send it to crofts, board staffers, and to ask that Mann's memo be distributed to all board members?! what impression are they now going to have of the GC? I understand the Academic Council was going to send a similar memo. doesn't help with credibility."

I disagree with you.


The action was taken BY the Board. So of course it ia approrpriate to communicate with them. The letter to Thames was to inform him of GCs views and to request him to oppose the Board's decision. That doesn't mean GC can't address the Board, Crofts, etc.


The Board needs to read this for what it is -- faculty have no direct link to the Board. That means there is no way to assure that any communication from faculty can get through but by taking multiple directions. If they were smart, they'd see this as an act of desperation since (as far as I know) it is the first time such a communication has happened). The Board ought to see that as problem in how it gets information --


You are correct. Academic Council has discussed and has forwarded letters to the Board through Dr. Crofts on issues of concern in which the Board is directly involved through its decisionmaking. 


 


 



__________________
Blind Mouse

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: stephen judd
" "I heard . . ." From whom? In what form? Damned if I recollect any request for input on this . . . . (but there are so many things to keep track of these days, I just may have missed it among all of the other verbiange that gets put out from the folks in the dome.      "
Wasn't it on the Faculty Senate Listserv?

__________________
stinky cheese man

Date:
Permalink Closed

stephen--you misunderstand my point. i think it perfectly appropriate for the councils and senate to communicate directly with the board. my point is this memo addresses a moot issue--the board made their decision in december, and first approved it at their october meeting. it makes the GC look ill-informed, at best.

__________________
Decoux's Boy Toy

Date:
Permalink Closed

cheese--

While the GC may have been late, the sentiment is on the money. I think we can expect some pretty major things have been slipped through the cracks while diversions were being staged by Thames and Co.

Accountability? You seem to be really well informed. If so, why didn't you spend your time keeping up with the IHL minutes last October and raise the red flag then??? Or did you only hear about this on this board today??

__________________
Chameleon

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"don't know anything about the Grimes memo. what i do know is that the councils need to make sure they have their facts before they send memos to the IHL. it didn't take me but 2 minutes to check the board minutes. it's ammunition that allows the IHL to ignore faculty--i can hear it now--"they don't know what they're talking about." frankly, the GC needs to take responsibility for their action--we ask administrators to--the councils should too."
When the administration sends a request for input in February, you ought to be able to assume that the matter was not voted on last fall. This manner of doing business should be exposed to the IHL. Why do you want to insulate the IHL from this screwup? 

__________________
stinky cheese man

Date:
Permalink Closed

i don't know when i got the drift of this. it was in the past couple of weeks--maybe a month or two ago. i heard of the GC's action and remembered thinking then, it was ill-advised because i thought the policy had already been passed. double-checked my intuition. the sentiment may be on the mark, but it's a day late. members of the various councils and the senate ought to check with their colleagues at other MS universities to see if they heard of it.

__________________
stphen judd

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"don't know anything about the Grimes memo. what i do know is that the councils need to make sure they have their facts before they send memos to the IHL. it didn't take me but 2 minutes to check the board minutes. it's ammunition that allows the IHL to ignore faculty--i can hear it now--"they don't know what they're talking about." frankly, the GC needs to take responsibility for their action--we ask administrators to--the councils should too."

It is a fair statement. It is also fair to say that it is very time consuming trying to ferret out all of these actions the administration and the IHL is making. I think you are blaming the guy who is in the middle of a gang of twenty for not successfully seeing the one blow that gets through  . . . . we are inundated with administration and IHL initiatives. I spend fully half my academic day as a department head dealing with the fallout from the reorganizations, new budgeting rules; new foundation rules, new academic rules complete with all their new forms, new online reporting forms that supercede the old hard copies, SACs . .  . and on top of that trying to watch an administration that seems determoned to slip a knife in my ribs when I'm not looking. So are we a little sloppy stiinky? You bet. Are we a little unorganized and not analytical enough -- guilty. 


It would be more constructive if you'd share this information not to deride those who are trying to hang on to some sanity, but to help lend some clarity and helpfulness instead of ripping colleagues who are doing their best in a time of stress. I'm open to correction -- but you offer correction with scorn and it just isn't helpful.


You are right -- I'd rahter not make any mistakes. I'd rather dot every I and cross every T. But if I spent all my time doing that I'd be paralyized -- this administration knows a lot about creating paralysis by overload . . . . sometimes you just gotta do your best and act  . . .


Sorry that sounds so unacademic. But to tell you the truth, when you sit on a committee with these (I'll dete this myself) administrators and you present them with reasons and then watch them nod in agreement and then ask them why we should go forward anyway even when the idea they have offered is self evidently bad even to them and the answer is "no reason . . ." but they act anyway --- you start living in a land where you know reason is no longer a resource for argument. Been there. Seen it.


 



__________________
stinky cheese man

Date:
Permalink Closed

for all i know the IHL did this on their own. they have the power to do that. the minutes do not give much guidance about where this idea generated from. could be IHL staffers for all i know. on first reading it passed unanimously.

__________________
stephen judd

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"stephen--you misunderstand my point. i think it perfectly appropriate for the councils and senate to communicate directly with the board. my point is this memo addresses a moot issue--the board made their decision in december, and first approved it at their october meeting. it makes the GC look ill-informed, at best. "

I'm already regetting the heat of my statement (see entry above) since I popped back up to see your answer here . . ..  I apologize for the frustration. It has been a long day.


 



__________________
stinky cheese man

Date:
Permalink Closed

stephen--since you are a regular poster, you know i'm not easily offended.

__________________
Alice's Rabbit

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: stphen judd
" you start living in a land where you know reason is no longer a resource for argument. Been there. Seen it.  "
Welcome to Wonderland!

__________________
stephen judd

Date:
Permalink Closed

quote:
Originally posted by: stinky cheese man
"stephen--since you are a regular poster, you know i'm not easily offended. "

Well . . . thanks. It's not my habit to make an ad hominum attsack and I think I was a little close there . . . .


 



__________________
stinky cheese man

Date:
Permalink Closed

as my father, head cheese, you to say to me: stinky, don't dish it out if you can't take it. i figure if i dish it out, i better be prepared to take it.

__________________
Jameela Lares

Date:
Permalink Closed

Next question:  what happens when SACS sees this new top-down policy?  Doesn't it particularly fly in the face of their requirement that faculty have input in academic decisions?  The IHL can hardly afford the political fallout if SACS puts the entire state on probation.  And SACS has done it before.


Jameela



__________________
Jameela Lares

Date:
Permalink Closed

Some history in town-gown relations is instructive here.  I've never heard that the community improved instruction at the university, unless it was in the most general sense, by driving people away to build a university elsewhere. 


Early medieval growth in the student population of Oxford University (the one in England, of course) strained town-gown relations to the point that there were numerous riots.  One in 1209 resulted in an exodus to a more congenial place--where they founded Cambridge University!  The worse Oxford riot, in 1355, left 63 students dead, at which point King Edward III virtually put the university in charge of the town, which it more or less controlled for the next 500 years.  (I checked http://worldfacts.us/UK-Oxford.htm to make sure of my facts, but I've heard about this all less formally at Oxford.)  We don't have a king anymore, but we do have SACS.


By the way,  the 1209 Oxford riot was occasioned by the town arresting, trying, convicting, and hanging two university scholars instead of letting them be dealt with in-house.  Caveat mercator. 


Et nimine missione.


Jameela



__________________
Outside Observer

Date:
Permalink Closed

So....the President can simply award tenure at his discretion...new hires won't have to earn tenure...sort of like honorary tenure isn't it?  Hmmm...maybe he plans to award honorary doctorates to his cronies and then award them tenure and populate the faculty and administration with his people.  Hundreds of mini-me gnomes all over campus

__________________
1 2  >  Last»  | Page of 2  sorted by
 
Quick Reply

Please log in to post quick replies.
USM Forum -- Message Board -> AAUP-USM MESSAGE BOARD -> He's the Mann
Tweet this page Post to Digg Post to Del.icio.us


Create your own FREE Forum
Report Abuse 		Powered by ActiveBoard