I have noticed that the liberal arts faculty at USM has been subject to a great deal of haughty contempt as reflected by letters-to-the-editor and some other community sources.

If one were to give these same letter writers and other community sources just 15 seconds to name an institution that they believe to be held in the highest regard in America, most of the respondants would probably name Harvard. Harvard has become a common household name for academic excellence among university professionals and laypersons alike.

So let's see what today's Associated Press article about the current presidential controversy at Harvard has to say about the status and role of the arts and sciences faculty at Harvard:

"The 672-member arts and sciences faculty is indeed just one of nine faculties at Harvard that oversee 11 academic divisions, but it remains first among equals in prestige. It is the wealthiest and largest, and the physical and intellectual core of the university."

Harvard's 672-member arts and sciences faculty: "Wealthiest . . . largest . . . the physical and intellectual core of the university."

Harvard's other academic faculties have scholars and intellectuals also, as do the other academic faculties at USM, but the arts and sciences faculty at Harvard is clearly regarded as the intellectual core of that premier university. Harvard is not by itself in that regard. The other Ivy's, and the other prestigious universities across America, have and support a strong liberal arts and sciences faculty.

As I see it, an erosion of USM's core began when the COAL dean was summarily dismissed. Then there was the bungled attempt to terminate two tenured professors from that college. Then another left COAL after giving with that magnificient display with teaching awards in hand. And next went Noel Polk. Those are only some examples.

The more the COAL faculty is beat up (pardon the violent term "beat up" - is is only a metaphor), USM will drop deeper and deeper into the academic pit of sub-mediocrity. Being at the botton of tier 3 will become an aspiration rather than an embarrasment. USM will move further and further away from the good schools and further and further toward those schools whose academic priorities are questionable and who can not attract the brightest students or the most productive faculty. As grant applications are reviewed, Federal funding agencies will take note of USM's place at or near the bottom of the academic dungheap (grant reviewers at that level are not stupid, nor are they uninformed). As time passes, USM will be viewed by the academic community at large as something to be avoided.

And now, what has been a highly regarded School of Nursing at USM - one USM's jewels - has been taking one big hit after another (again, pardon the violent term "one big hit after another" - it is only a metaphor). Faculty fleeing. Proposal of the remote grocery store location. Decline in NCLEX scores. There is more. The job market in Nursing is probably greater than for any other group of majors at the university. USM-educated Nursing students (I say "educated" rather than "trained" because graduates of the USM Nursing program not only have the necessary technical skills, they also have important thinking and leadership skills) play a prominent role in Nursing - not only in Mississippi but across the nation. 

It appears to me that the college of Business and their Dean are being jerked around unmercifully.

Why is this being done to the College of Arts and Letters?

Why is this being done to Nursing?

Why is this being done of Business?

Why isn't the IHL doing something about what is happening to USM?

Why are some members of the local business community that depend on the USM faculty for a substantial portion of their livelihood reaching out to bite the hand that feed them?

"Harvard's 672-member arts and sciences faculty: "Wealthiest . . . largest . . . the physical and intellectual core of the university."