Shelby ain't worried - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Mar 6, 2005

Shelby ain't worried

Date: Mar 6, 2005

While it may be true that SFT "ain't worried," that is an artifact of his personality disorder and not facts.

I think it's time to email my dean and ask when the CoAL faculty meeting to defend liberal arts is scheduled this week!

Also, since there seems to be an attempt to exert undue influence on certain IHL board members by a small sliver of the wealthy local business leaders, it's time to point out why this is in violation of SACS accreditation principles.

Even the pro-SFT members of the IHL board should be feeling quite irked at this move. It simply shines a light on the possible undue influence by special interest groups, and will make their job all the harder if they truly feel that the direction SFT has taken us is the right one.

Amy Young

Date: Mar 6, 2005

Amy,

You're right about SFT's personality disorder. Everyone should keep in mind that his attitude toward SACS was also "ain't worried." If there hadn't been outside intervention, it would have kept right on being "ain't worried"--until USM lost its accreditation.

You and other faculty members may have to organize that CoAL meeting yourselves. Lots of people need to ask Elliott Pood to call the meeting, but I predict he will be too busy hiding under his desk to respond.

Robert Campbell

Date: Mar 6, 2005

With announcement of the March 10 meeting, the president signals (to his buddies, the board, and the beleaguered faculty) that he's ready for a bare-knuckles brawl over the future of USM. Win or lose, he won't go down without a fight -- the uglier and bloodier the better. He figures the faculty for wusses with no stomach for hand-to-hand combat.

Faculty can rise to the challenge by taking high-profile action. The Faculty Senate should sponsor -- immediately, prior to spring break -- open forums in all the colleges, not just COAL, as a deliberate counter to the divide-and-conquer strategy of isolating "liberal arts faculty." The FS should, further, hold an emergency meeting -- March 10 would be ideal -- to denounce, loudly, the efforts of so-called "business leaders" to smear the faculty and dictate the direction of the university.

AAUP should be still bolder; some options: 1. Demand an immediate audience with Crofts to decry the brewing "Coca-Cola putsch." 2. Call for a faculty work slowdown/walkout on all SACS-related activity until IHL provides assurance that Thames is on his way out. 3. Convene a "crisis council" of the heads of key faculty organizations/committees (FS, AAUP, Academic Council, Graduate Council, Council of Chairs) and propose a strong joint statement of denunciation. 4. Call for Lisa Mader's immediate termination for promoting conflict and division within "the USM family."

The time is, indeed, NOW. Not, however, a time for letters and quiet phone calls, but for bold public action with a single message -- "Things will never 'settle down' under Shelby Thames."

Date: Mar 6, 2005

Go for Broke,

Some faculty members won't accept a slowdown on accreditation-related activities... unless the condition of USM gets even more desperate. I don't agree with them, but I respect their point of view.

Your other suggestions are all ones that will be taken seriously by USM faculty ... or so I hope.

I started calling for a resolution of no confidence in Lisa Mader last summer. Frankly, her role in the "Coca-Cola putsch" should put to rest any notion that she is a mere staff employee and can do no damage of her own. Even if she is about to decamp to Jackson, to work on Phil Bryant's campaign or whatever it is, her record at USM is so horrible as to deserve the bad publicity that a resolution of no confidence would bring.

As for a resolution of no confidence in Ken Malone, I personally think it's even more badly needed now than it was in the past. But I won't get into that again.

NO QUARTER.

Robert Campbell

Date: Mar 6, 2005

The time isnow for planful action in anticipation of the meeting of business people this upcoming Thursday; we must be mindful however that all who might be in attendance at this meeting are not necessarily supporters of the faction (pro-Shelby) that is organizing this meeting.

But, for sure, we cannot sit by and allow this meeting to occur and then respond. It will be too late, if such is the case. All organizations within the University must respond!!! Some swift demonstrative action is vitally necessary. Under no circumstances am I willing to allow this small faction to dictate the direction of the University that I truly love. The faculty needs to come together to support our Liberal Arts colleagues to the max; the attack is on; I choose not to give up without a fight. As others have stated, the gloves are off!!!!

Date: Mar 6, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"Go for Broke, Some faculty members won't accept a slowdown on accreditation-related activities... unless the condition of USM gets even more desperate. I don't agree with them, but I respect their point of view. Your other suggestions are all ones that will be taken seriously by USM faculty ... or so I hope. I started calling for a resolution of no confidence in Lisa Mader last summer. Frankly, her role in the "Coca-Cola putsch" should put to rest any notion that she is a mere staff employee and can do no damage of her own. Even if she is about to decamp to Jackson, to work on Phil Bryant's campaign or whatever it is, her record at USM is so horrible as to deserve the bad publicity that a resolution of no confidence would bring. As for a resolution of no confidence in Ken Malone, I personally think it's even more badly needed now than it was in the past. But I won't get into that again. NO QUARTER. Robert Campbell "

Bob:

I'm now in agreement with you on both counts. My proviso is that we should invite Malone once more to appear before the Senate to answer questions. We should also do the same with Mader. A refusal to appear would lock it -- an appearance would give us a chnace to ask them questions and then act if we determoned, as I suspect we would, that both of them are not actingin the best interests of the university and (at least in Lisa's case) are acting expressly against the interests of the faculty.

It is fairly clear at this point that information concerning Continuing Ed is being controlled andf withheld from Faculty Senate and Academic Council. This definitely is a violation of the spirit, if not the letter, of shared governance.

Mader's actions are simply beyond the pale. Up to this point the involvement of the public in the USM issue has been largely both sides resorting to rheotric, although we certainly are aware of some early organizing efforts on the part of the administration that were low profile on the radar screen.

This latest attempt to actually organize public opinion through community leaders in order to attack the faculty (and particularly the arts and letters faculty) is a new and dangerous precedent. The clear collaboration of members and resources of the university administration, the ADP, and private business proves that the administration really will resort to a scorched earth policy to save the President. The administration is willing to risk accreditation, to risk further attrition of key faculty as well as searches ongoing, to both risk and provoke faculty division that will be longin healing if successful; and to create a scapegoat college against which to rally community anger, to win this battle.

Incidently, we now have two different new accounts of Mader's involvement -- one is from the Independent in which Mader is cited as the instigator. Thge other is KW's account in which she cites her and her offices role as merely facilitating. We also have two different purposes of the coke meeting cited: one is the citation of looking at the "future" of the university and the impact of that future on the community. The other is that the purpose of the meeting is to "drum up" support for the President's contract extension, attributed to "sources" witihin the group but not quoted.

We need to try to push these contradictions out into the public and make it clear that one news account is wrong and that someone is lying.

This is why I believe the senate needs and has a right to question Mader at this point.

Date: Mar 6, 2005

We have had an AAUP meeting scheduled for March 10 at 4:00 in the COB (I can't remember the room number, I'm at home).

There is an Academic Council meeting scheduled for tomorrow at 3:30 in the Hall of Honors.

I hope there will be a CoAL meeting sometime before Thursday.

I would also like Graduate and Academic Councils to have a joint meeting to invite SFT to discuss the Coca Cola meeting. But that cannot happen (if it does happen) before spring break or before the IHL board meeting.

Several academic council members have expressed that they think Crofts should be contacted (by Academic Council) about SACS, set up a meeting or something.

We will be voting on a resolution at AAUP, asking for the IHL board to start the search (echoing Faculty Senate)

Everyone is welcome to AAUP.

Amy Young

Date: Mar 6, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Amy Young
"We have had an AAUP meeting scheduled for March 10 at 4:00 in the COB (I can't remember the room number, I'm at home).
"

The meeting is in COB 116

Date: Mar 6, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Amy Young
"We have had an AAUP meeting scheduled for March 10 at 4:00 in the COB (I can't remember the room number, I'm at home). There is an Academic Council meeting scheduled for tomorrow at 3:30 in the Hall of Honors. I hope there will be a CoAL meeting sometime before Thursday. I would also like Graduate and Academic Councils to have a joint meeting to invite SFT to discuss the Coca Cola meeting. But that cannot happen (if it does happen) before spring break or before the IHL board meeting. Several academic council members have expressed that they think Crofts should be contacted (by Academic Council) about SACS, set up a meeting or something. We will be voting on a resolution at AAUP, asking for the IHL board to start the search (echoing Faculty Senate) Everyone is welcome to AAUP. Amy Young"

Amy, Will the AAUP meeting get over in time for me to get to the Coke plant with my camera? I want to see who our "community leaders" are who know so much about running a university.

Date: Mar 6, 2005

I'm sure you aren't the only one who wants to be there with camera in hand! I certainly hope we can conduct the bulk of our business in an hour.

Amy Young

Date: Mar 6, 2005

Stephen,

Asking Mader and Malone to appear in front of the Senate, one more time, is a good idea.

How soon can this be done? The Senators must be terribly weary of emergency meetings, but with the March 10 event coming right up, it looks as though it needs to be done quickly.

There's a good chance that Malone, at least, will simply refuse to appear. After all, Kevin Walters will almost certainly be covering that Senate meeting... But you won't know if you haven't made the request.

Robert Campbell

Date: Mar 6, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"Stephen, Asking Mader and Malone to appear in front of the Senate, one more time, is a good idea. How soon can this be done? The Senators must be terribly weary of emergency meetings, but with the March 10 event coming right up, it looks as though it needs to be done quickly. There's a good chance that Malone, at least, will simply refuse to appear. After all, Kevin Walters will almost certainly be covering that Senate meeting... But you won't know if you haven't made the request. Robert Campbell"

Some are agitating for an emergency meeting this week. I would support that. I also think we should deamnd that if Mader and her office are not involved, as she says., then the administration should issue a public statement that distancing itself from the statements of the Coca Cola crowd couple with a statement of support for faculty in general and liberal arts facultyin particular.

Despite promised from the previous provost, we have never gotten a public statement of support vis a vis those who are attacking the faculty.

Date: Mar 6, 2005

It is prudent to continue to ask Malone and others to meet with the appropriate faculty representatives and respond to questions. I doubt it will result in any cooperation from Malone, but it maintains the pressure on SFT and minions to communicate with the faculty. It could also lead to some revelations that were not known. Who knows, Malone may solicit the Faculty Senate’s help in lynching Kevin Walters. I still think that the ultimate hammer that will smash SFT and shake up the Board is what SACS has in store. I posted earlier that SACS accreditation for USM is not going to happen in the near future. We are going to be the example that SACS can hold up to any other school that thinks that SACS is a paper tiger. Nor do I think that SACS will stop with USM. I am sure that SACS is aware that the IHL is a rouge Board. I do not think SACS will satisfied with only the removal of SFT. I think they will slap the IHL Board around enough to send a message. That is, take care of business and stop trying to create a university in their image that hacks off SACS. If that happens we will see other universities in the system become more interested in our problem. They will not want SACS looking more closely at them because of the Board.

Date: Mar 6, 2005

The only problem is that we have to wait on SACS to get down here, and by the time that happens, the whole university may be "in the grave." What are the ramifications of faculty directly contacting SACS and/or discipline-specific accrediting bodies and asking for an immediate investigation? Would that even catch anyone's ear?

When dealing with a corrupt local sheriff, one might want to contact the FBI. Since our local "sheriffs" are on the side of SFT, might that be our only hope of a resolution in the near future? Or, should we just make like Buford Pusser and get a big stick and beat the crap out of all of our corrupt enemies?

Date: Mar 6, 2005

SACS is already here in some dimensions. Look how quickly it was communicated to the administration about the SACS view on starting new programs while on probation. The informal communication between the USM campus and SACS in Atlanta will continue. We have a SACS approved consultant on campus and leaks of information to SACS occur often. I agree it will not be quick, and that many more bad things can happen. But, I do think it will be through and SFT will go and the IHL Board will be chastised.

Date: Mar 6, 2005

Tiger By The Tale, I forgot to respond to the other part of your post. I agree with you about smacking the crap out of some of them. Violence is a very effective tool and it can be very satisfying. Unfortunately, the old country axiom I used to hear in my youth, "they needed killing," is frowned upon by the law. Moreover, there likely are many at the university who would not wish to participate being sensitive to the rule of law and the rights of the accused as they are.

Date: Mar 6, 2005

As noted on another thread, complaint procedures--and note, this is for individuals--should have been widely posted. I'm still checking out the "how" on this wide posting, but I don't remember ever hearing about how such complaints could be filed. But see http://www.sacscoc.org/pdf/complaintpolicy.pdf, which includes the language, "The Commission on Colleges recognizes the value of information provided by students, employees, and others in determining whether an institution's performance is consistent with the Commissions criteria for attaining or maintaining accreditation. The Commission's interest also is in insuring that member institutions maintain appropriate grievance procedures and standards of procedural fairness and that the procedures are applied appropriately and consistently."

Note that the Complaint cannot be filed anonymously and cannot concern local issues best dealt with in house but certainly can deal with issues that compromise SACS accreditation.

Again I ask, were we ever informed that we had the option to complain individually? Please let me know, as otherwise the administration's failure to widely publicize the existence of the Complaint will be part of the complaint I mean to file.

No quarter.

Jameela

Date: Mar 6, 2005

As far as I know, Faculty in college of health were not notified.

Date: Mar 6, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Jameela Lares
"As noted on another thread, complaint procedures--and note, this is for individuals--should have been widely posted. I'm still checking out the "how" on this wide posting, but I don't remember ever hearing about how such complaints could be filed. But see http://www.sacscoc.org/pdf/complaintpolicy.pdf, which includes the language, "The Commission on Colleges recognizes the value of information provided by students, employees, and others in determining whether an institution's performance is consistent with the Commissions criteria for attaining or maintaining accreditation. The Commission's interest also is in insuring that member institutions maintain appropriate grievance procedures and standards of procedural fairness and that the procedures are applied appropriately and consistently." Note that the Complaint cannot be filed anonymously and cannot concern local issues best dealt with in house but certainly can deal with issues that compromise SACS accreditation. Again I ask, were we ever informed that we had the option to complain individually? Please let me know, as otherwise the administration's failure to widely publicize the existence of the Complaint will be part of the complaint I mean to file. No quarter. Jameela "

I have been told that it was complaints by individual faculty to SACS that led, ultimately, to SACS putting Auburn on probation. Individual complaints are thus not pointless.

Date: Mar 7, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Tiger by the Tail
"The only problem is that we have to wait on SACS to get down here, and by the time that happens, the whole university may be "in the grave." What are the ramifications of faculty directly contacting SACS and/or discipline-specific accrediting bodies and asking for an immediate investigation? Would that even catch anyone's ear?

When dealing with a corrupt local sheriff, one might want to contact the FBI. Since our local "sheriffs" are on the side of SFT, might that be our only hope of a resolution in the near future? Or, should we just make like Buford Pusser and get a big stick and beat the crap out of all of our corrupt enemies?"

There are no ramifications for filing a complaint with SACS. It is standard procedure. Ideally, dept chairs, pres of fac senate, etc will file the complaints. However, to file a complaint you must do so as an individual and specifically reference the violation of accreditation principles to which you refer. The letter of complaint by SACS guidelines has to be acknowledged by SACS. Caveat: political fallout and retribution from this administration will occur upon filing of the complaint. However, since that is already standard operatiing procedure here there is no longer any fear since the retribution is now an everyday occurance complaint or no. I know for a fact from recent coonversations with those who have been on SACS accreditation teams that the more complaints filed against a university the more trouble the university will be in. My advice, therefore, is for as many people who see complaints worth filing to file them and fast and now. Essentially every SACS principle has currently been violated and official complaints stating the obvious with documentation (news articles, emails, dates, events etc) are now required. Every one reading this should indeed file a complaint today.

Date: Mar 7, 2005

Could a person not affiliated with the university file a complaint? For instance, could a Mississippi taxpayer file a complaint? What about someone from out of state? (I realize the last suggestion may be a bit of a stretch, but I thought there might be no harm in asking.)

Date: Mar 7, 2005

Page 4 of the complaint form at http://www.sacscoc.org/pdf/complaintpolicy.pdf specifies that the complaints may be from "students, faculty, and other members of the public." I'm not sure how broadly they're interpreting "public," but I imagine that one could call SACS to inquire. Their posted telephone number is (404) 679-4500.

Jameela

Date: Mar 7, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Amy Young
"While it may be true that SFT "ain't worried," that is an artifact of his personality disorder and not facts. I think it's time to email my dean and ask when the CoAL faculty meeting to defend liberal arts is scheduled this week! Also, since there seems to be an attempt to exert undue influence on certain IHL board members by a small sliver of the wealthy local business leaders, it's time to point out why this is in violation of SACS accreditation principles. Even the pro-SFT members of the IHL board should be feeling quite irked at this move. It simply shines a light on the possible undue influence by special interest groups, and will make their job all the harder if they truly feel that the direction SFT has taken us is the right one. Amy Young"

Amy:

Shelby does not have a personality disorder (PD). He has marked narcissistic traits, however. To say that he is PD places the blame for admin scew ups on the presence of a mental disorder, rather than squarely on his shoulders. He holds a grudge and can be very vindictive, and is prone to react to criticism with rage. But he is a very tenacious and an extraordinarily shrewd opponent. That's his style--it's scary and self-focused, but he does not meet the criteria for PD.

Date: Mar 7, 2005

So you're saying he's not crazy, he's just evil? I wonder which is worse.

Date: Mar 7, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Third witch
"So you're saying he's not crazy, he's just evil? I wonder which is worse."

I'll tell you. Crazy is bad, but evil is worse. I can treat someone who is crazy.

Date: Mar 7, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Let the Shrinks Diagnose
" Amy: Shelby does not have a personality disorder (PD). He has marked narcissistic traits, however. To say that he is PD places the blame for admin scew ups on the presence of a mental disorder, rather than squarely on his shoulders. He holds a grudge and can be very vindictive, and is prone to react to criticism with rage. But he is a very tenacious and an extraordinarily shrewd opponent. That's his style--it's scary and self-focused, but he does not meet the criteria for PD. "

It's all inherited. Dana has proven that.

Date: Mar 7, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: FAMILY TRADITION
"It's all inherited. Dana has proven that."

Nope. You can learn a lot by merely sitting on daddy's lap.

Date: Mar 7, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Let the Shrinks Diagnose
" Amy: Shelby does not have a personality disorder (PD). He has marked narcissistic traits, however. To say that he is PD places the blame for admin scew ups on the presence of a mental disorder, rather than squarely on his shoulders. He holds a grudge and can be very vindictive, and is prone to react to criticism with rage. But he is a very tenacious and an extraordinarily shrewd opponent. That's his style--it's scary and self-focused, but he does not meet the criteria for PD. "

Okay, Shrink, which of the criteria do not apply?

Diagnostic Criteria for Narcissistic Personality Disorder

A pervasive pattern of grandiosity (in fantasy or behavior), need for admiration, and lack of empathy, beginning by early adulthood and present in a variety of contexts, as indicated by five (or more) of the following:

has a grandiose sense of self-importance (e.g., exaggerates achievements and talents, expects to be recognized as superior without commensurate achievements)
is preoccupied with fantasies of unlimited success, power, brilliance, beauty, or ideal love
believes that he or she is "special" and unique and can only be understood by, or should associate with, other special or high-status people (or institutions)
requires excessive admiration
has a sense of entitlement, i.e., unreasonable expectations of especially favorable treatment or automatic compliance with his or her expectations
is interpersonally exploitative, i.e., takes advantage of others to achieve his or her own ends
lacks empathy: is unwilling to recognize or identify with the feelings and needs of others
is often envious of others or believes that others are envious of him or her
shows arrogant, haughty behaviors or attitudes

Date: Mar 7, 2005

Uh-oh. I'm in trouble.