next stupid thing - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Mar 26, 2005

RE: RE: next stupid thing

Date: Mar 26, 2005

In southern Mississppi...yes.

Date: Mar 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Jameela Lares
" ... It would appear that the charge of elitism is "the next party line"; I imagine we'll be hearing more about it in letters to the editor. But if there is going to be anything held in high regard, let it be the truth itself, the facts about how things must work. People can make errors, and people blindly loyal can make even greater errors. Unless I'm greatly mistaken about SACS principles, this latest plan--to bypass appropriate input in the face of SACS probation regarding distance learning--is another day off life support for USM. Please, please, oh IHL, take some action, and take it soon. Jameela"

Ultimately, public opinion doesn't matter. The truth certainly doesn't matter. Even SACS is a secondary factor in the short run.

The only thing that DOES matter is the IHL, and what the IHL does NOT want is constant turmoil at one of its schools. The best message to the IHL, therefore, is -- Back Thames and the turmoil will never stop, because he will never stop, and the faculty will never stop opposing him. Academic Council should send IHL the message, Faculty Senate should send IHL the message, AAUP should send IHL the message.

Faculty have much more power than they realize. If they don't roll over and play dead, the faculty always win campus brawls; it's their home turf. Make a loud noise now and Thames will be out by summer.

Date: Mar 26, 2005

The main problem I have is the complete disassocation of the administration from the disciplines offering the courses. Shouldn't the conversation have been:

Grimes: "Hi Jim, Jay Grimes here. We've been thinking about offering some sociology courses at Oak Grove high school to qualified students as a way of encouraging them to attend USM.....oops I mean Mississippi Southern. Could you run it by your faculty and see if they think its a good idea and if so, let me know what the best way is to insure that we meet all accreditation requirements and offer a quality course? And you might ask them if they could suggest the best person to teach these students. I want to make sure that its a very positive experience for them."

Flanagan "Sure, Dr. Grimes. I'm sure that my faculty will be glad to discuss this possibility. I'll put it on the agenda for our next faculty meeting."

Date: Mar 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Amy Young
"The flier said students needed a 21 composite ACT score. Dual enrollment requires either 24 or 25 (it's printed in the Bulletin)."

Without addressing the #1 concern (apparent lack of faculty involvement in planning the dual enrollment courses), I suspect that the USM Bulletin is just like every other college catalog & includes some sort of disclaimer about things being subject to change without notice.

I will have to check my dual enrollment materials at the office on Monday, but the state changed the dual enrollment law a few years ago. The minimum ACT composite required for a student to dual enroll was lowered. (I believe it is technically lower than a 21, but I'm not 100% sure.) It looks to me as if the USM Bulletin reflects the old requirements & probably wasn't updated until somebody decided that dual enrollment could be a good recruiting tool.

Whether dual enrollment actually is a good recruiting tool is another question. My limited observations suggest that former dually enrolled students aren't any more likely to register as regular freshmen at the institution where they dually enrolled than their classmates who didn't take dual enrollment classes.

Date: Mar 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: another nail in the coffin
" Faculty have much more power than they realize. If they don't roll over and play dead, the faculty always win campus brawls; it's their home turf. Make a loud noise now and Thames will be out by summer. "

YES. I believe it. IHL doesn't want this continued upheaval either. If we let this latest stupid thing get by, soon it will be summer and who knows what other stupid things will be slipped through when many faculty are gone and when most faculty bodies are not functioning in full mode.

It is time for the Academic Council, the Faculty Senate, the Graduate Council, and the Council of Chairs to send one joint, very strongly worded letter to the IHL and to the Commissioner, saying that this madness must stop NOW.

I am tired of working my butt off on probation issues, only to see this type of stupidity in the newspaper. This administration is undermining everything we are doing to get us off probation and to keep us accredited.

Date: Mar 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: 1/USMTTT
"The main problem I have is the complete disassocation of the administration from the disciplines offering the courses. Shouldn't the conversation have been: Grimes: "Hi Jim, Jay Grimes here. We've been thinking about offering some sociology courses at Oak Grove high school to qualified students as a way of encouraging them to attend USM.....oops I mean Mississippi Southern. Could you run it by your faculty and see if they think its a good idea and if so, let me know what the best way is to insure that we meet all accreditation requirements and offer a quality course? And you might ask them if they could suggest the best person to teach these students. I want to make sure that its a very positive experience for them."Flanagan "Sure, Dr. Grimes. I'm sure that my faculty will be glad to discuss this possibility. I'll put it on the agenda for our next faculty meeting.""

Exactly! And how many folks here think the idea would've been dismissed out-of-hand at that faculty meeting? My bet is that the outcome of such an exchange would've been a stronger course offering, more support for the teachers (presumably adjuncts) & ultimately a better working relationship between the university department & the public school district.

Which brings us full circle to an underlying principle: Shared governance results in stronger programs, better course offerings, more effective operations. And as we've seen in the past, by the time one factors in all the damage control & corrections that must be made when changes are implemented by fiat decree, shared governance does not "slow things down."

Date: Mar 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Googler
"Are the wishes of a "principal" greater than the "principle" of shared governance?"

I like your Citation. Do you like my nom? Wake up Miss I

Date: Mar 26, 2005

Wow!

Although I have enough experience with the dynamics of the Thames administration to know that, under Thames, there will always be another stupid thing, I would never have anticipated one this boneheaded, arriving this fast.

Less than a week ago we had posters on this board defending Exline and proclaiming that if faculty bodies censured her, USM could not emerge from SACS probation!

Faculty bodies (Academic Council, Faculty Senate, accreditation-related committees) have to demand an immediate public accounting from Exline. Who at SACS told her that these course offerings at high schools would be OK? What did she tell the SACS official about the manner in which the course offerings were approved? And of course any SACS official she names must be contacted by these bodies and asked to corroborate any story she tells.

If Exline cannot give a satisfactory account of her actions (and it seems very unlikely that she will be able to), it's time for resolutions of no confidence in her.

In my opinion it's just as well that the presidency of the Faculty Senate is about to turn over. Dave Beckett got some results with his semi-accommodationist approach, but it prevented the Faculty Senate from taking action against Ken Malone (even Beckett's remarks this past week about needing a provost for Gulf Park skated around the Malone problem). It certainly impede taking effective action against Joan Exline.

Robert Campbell

Date: Mar 26, 2005

Last line: it would certainly impede...

Date: Mar 26, 2005

The IHL, and Dr. Crofts, should soon be aware of all this, since I copied much of this thread earlier in the day and sent it to them. Surely they cannot be happy with this latest development. I wonder if Shelby checked with the IHL before doing this. I agree (as usual) with Robert Campbell: I can never believe how "boneheaded" (fine word) Shelby is. Just when I think this board is beginning to simmer down, Shelby turns around and pulls another one of his stunts. The man is in a class all by himself; I have never heard, seen, or read of an academic administrator this incompetent.

Date: Mar 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: The Principal of Shared Governance
"I like your Citation. Do you like my nom? Wake up Miss I"

Miss I is busy baking cupcakes for the Ladies Missionary Society Sunday school Easter egg hunt, but I've noted the nom.

Date: Mar 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: 1/USMTTT
"Shouldn't the conversation have been: Grimes: "Hi Jim, Jay Grimes here. We've been thinking about offering some sociology courses at Oak Grove high school........."

Is provost to chair the usual protocol in such matters at USM? Very unusual.The call would have been provost to dean at most universities. The dean would then consult with the dhair. All of this assumes, of course, that the provost was in the loop which is unlikely. Does this have KM's fingerprints all over it? (Metaphor Alert!)

Date: Mar 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"Wow! Although I have enough experience with the dynamics of the Thames administration to know that, under Thames, there will always be another stupid thing, I would never have anticipated one this boneheaded, arriving this fast. Less than a week ago we had posters on this board defending Exline and proclaiming that if faculty bodies censured her, USM could not emerge from SACS probation! Faculty bodies (Academic Council, Faculty Senate, accreditation-related committees) have to demand an immediate public accounting from Exline. Who at SACS told her that these course offerings at high schools would be OK? What did she tell the SACS official about the manner in which the course offerings were approved? And of course any SACS official she names must be contacted by these bodies and asked to corroborate any story she tells. If Exline cannot give a satisfactory account of her actions (and it seems very unlikely that she will be able to), it's time for resolutions of no confidence in her. In my opinion it's just as well that the presidency of the Faculty Senate is about to turn over. Dave Beckett got some results with his semi-accommodationist approach, but it prevented the Faculty Senate from taking action against Ken Malone (even Beckett's remarks this past week about needing a provost for Gulf Park skated around the Malone problem). It certainly impede taking effective action against Joan Exline. Robert Campbell"

Robert,

I would think the deans of the CoAL and Ed-Psy should pull a "Dean Doty type of public statement" representing their by-passed Curriculum Committees. Isn't there MCATE accreditation issues here just like what occurred in CoB situation?

It appears to me that SFT's administration is afraid that they will have no response to any faculty questions concerning this. Rather than possi9bility losing a debate, SFT rather run around the faculty. This is very similar to what he does when confronted at the PYC meetings. This I believe is the reason we don't have more shared governance, he can't stand losing or even the chance of not getting his way. He has no practice at not getting his way.

Date: Mar 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: The Principal of Shared Governance
"I like your Citation. Do you like my nom? Wake up Miss I"

Thank you, and yes I do. I see it has been Duly Noted.

Date: Mar 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Reporter
" Robert, I would think the deans of the CoAL and Ed-Psy should pull a "Dean Doty type of public statement" representing their by-passed Curriculum Committees. Isn't there MCATE accreditation issues here just like what occurred in CoB situation? It appears to me that SFT's administration is afraid that they will have no response to any faculty questions concerning this. Rather than possi9bility losing a debate, SFT rather run around the faculty. This is very similar to what he does when confronted at the PYC meetings. This I believe is the reason we don't have more shared governance, he can't stand losing or even the chance of not getting his way. He has no practice at not getting his way. "

My concern is that Pood may have known about this in some fashion. We better clear that up before assuming that the Administration did this with no input from the college at all. I know that the Administration is as careless as has been suggested on this thread, but I am not willing to clear Pood of complicity just yet. We need to hear from him.

Date: Mar 26, 2005

The big issue that has not been discussed so far is the alck of contact hours. How in the world can you teach a 3 hour class in two contact hours. I for one would refuse to teach in that environment (although that is easy to say if you have tenure as I do, not so easy for a new assistant prof...)

Date: Mar 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Angeline
"My concern is that Pood may have known about this in some fashion. We better clear that up before assuming that the Administration did this with no input from the college at all. I know that the Administration is as careless as has been suggested on this thread, but I am not willing to clear Pood of complicity just yet. We need to hear from him."

Good point, Angeline. But even if deans knew the desire of the upper administration their Curriculum Committees were by-passed if Amy's post is correct. They should, at least, represent their Curriculum Committees. I hope faculty in these colleges do as you suggest and find out the facts.

Date: Mar 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Who's on first
"
Is provost to chair the usual protocol in such matters at USM? Very unusual.The call would have been provost to dean at most universities. The dean would then consult with the dhair. All of this assumes, of course, that the provost was in the loop which is unlikely. Does this have KM's fingerprints all over it? (Metaphor Alert!)
"

BS (before Shelby), provosts, deans and chairs had a good working relationship where everyone felt comfortable picking up the phone and calling each other about all kind of issues. Nobody felt their position was threatened and everyone was secure in their jobs. Now a chair can't call anyone in the dome without it being a breach of protocol.

If this is efficiency....

Date: Mar 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Angeline
"My concern is that Pood may have known about this in some fashion. We better clear that up before assuming that the Administration did this with no input from the college at all. I know that the Administration is as careless as has been suggested on this thread, but I am not willing to clear Pood of complicity just yet. We need to hear from him."

This sounds like a job for Superm . . . er, Stephen Judd, who seems fearless about asking the dean questions.

Date: Mar 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: 1/USMTTT
" BS (before Shelby), provosts, deans and chairs had a good working relationship where everyone felt comfortable picking up the phone and calling each other about all kind of issues. . . ."

BS there wasn't a concern about office phones being bugged and email being read, either.

Date: Mar 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: palindrome
"The big issue that has not been discussed so far is the alck of contact hours. How in the world can you teach a 3 hour class in two contact hours. I for one would refuse to teach in that environment (although that is easy to say if you have tenure as I do, not so easy for a new assistant prof...)"

I assume that (a) you never dismiss your classes one minute early, (b) you are never one minute late for a class, & (c) you never have to cancel classes due to meetings or other emergencies. (Based on my own years as a student at USM, I can't think of a single tenured professor who could answer affirmatively to those 3 questions. And based on my own 27 years as faculty & administration, I'll go ahead & say that any professor -- tenured or not -- who responds affirmatively is more than likely dissembling through his/her dentition. Please note also that the key word in those 3 assumptions is "you" & not "your teaching assistant.")

There are factors other than the number of minutes a class meets in a week, such as the number of weeks in the semester (h.s. terms are typically longer than college terms) & the length of the "hour" (55 minutes vs 60 minutes?), that determine whether class meets the mandated minimum minutes over the course of a semester. My bet is that the h.s. schedule is going to come in right on the minimum with no "wiggle room" for cancelled classes, while the average course minutes for a USM on-campus class has 2-3 hours of "cushion" above the minimum. I know that when we plan academic calendars at my institution, we try to build in a cushion.

Again, the issue here ought to be whether the appropriate faculty-level consultation about the proposed classes has taken place.

Date: Mar 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Invictus
" Exactly! And how many folks here think the idea would've been dismissed out-of-hand at that faculty meeting? My bet is that the outcome of such an exchange would've been a stronger course offering, more support for the teachers (presumably adjuncts) & ultimately a better working relationship between the university department & the public school district. Which brings us full circle to an underlying principle: Shared governance results in stronger programs, better course offerings, more effective operations. And as we've seen in the past, by the time one factors in all the damage control & corrections that must be made when changes are implemented by fiat decree, shared governance does not "slow things down." "

In a sense, it was. The CoAL chairs dismissed the idea of setting up on campus sections of high schoool students only. Their reasoning would only be excerbated in a high school setting. A class of high school students only is not a college class. Period. A class of high school students only on a high school campus (and perhaps taught by an adjunct hired only for the purpose of teaching that class is even less so.

This proposal has never been offered to the chairs of CoAL. As far as I know it has never been proposed to the chairs of the deaprtments involved. The Dean has denied to two of us that he knew anything about it before this became public. It has never been brought before academic council. It is also a core course -- and any new staging of the course that might raise concerns about the legitiamcy of the course or the GEC should also be put before the GEC Committee.

Needless to say, we have had "stealth" raises (thank you Myron Henry for that terms); we have had "stealth" students enrolled; and now we have "stealth" classes about to be offered at a local high school.

Date: Mar 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Just an opinion
" This sounds like a job for Superm . . . er, Stephen Judd, who seems fearless about asking the dean questions. "

Amy Young and I both did (see above post) and he indicated at that time that he knew nothing about this.

Date: Mar 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: stephen judd
"A class of high school students only is not a college class. Period. A class of high school students only on a high school campus (and perhaps taught by an adjunct hired only for the purpose of teaching that class is even less so. "

Of course, a "college" class populated by students admitted with sub-18 ACT scores & taught on-campus by a teaching assistant for whom English is a second language (go to CoST & see if the shoe fits) is somehow fundamentally better than a class populated by high school seniors who've already earned a 21 ACT & taught by an adjunct instructor. Yes, I see the point.

I'll add that the best "plan" for dual enrollment is for the high school to give students a release to attend regular college classes at the college campus. High schools don't like to do this because of their fixation on in loco parentis & their obsession with Minimum Daily Attendance, but it really works better educationally.

Date: Mar 26, 2005

invictus--that's what they do at HHS. The students who dual enroll take classes at USM.

Date: Mar 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: stephen judd
" Amy Young and I both did (see above post) and he indicated at that time that he knew nothing about this. "

"Cox said deans of the individual colleges are aware of the plans"

Date: Mar 26, 2005

From my personal knowledge of PRCC's experiences with these classes at the campus of OGHS, Petal and Colombia in the past, they abandoned them for the very reasons suggested in previous messages: difficulty finding faculty who met the 18 hours requirement, classes with only hs students did not meet the intended purpose of taking a college course and the students did NOT end up going to PRCC upon graduation as anticipated (which was one reason for offering the courses). PRCC now teaches these courses on campus as does the other schools. It hasn't worked!

Another thought: this ill-non-advised move seems to be following the Gulf Coast programs in nursing as we take the RN/BSN programs to the local hospitals, not just the nursing courses AT THE HOSPITAL but the pre nursing courses as well. Amy, isn't there a SOC 314 class scheduled for summer at one of coast hospitals? I know Singing River now wants classes along with Biloxi Regional and Gulfport Memorial. Again, I have the same problem with this "outsourcing" of classes but for slightly different reasons: it reeks of the old diploma nursing schools when "special" academic classes were taught for nurses (i.e. meaning diluted, less than). So, we continue to go backwards in many ways. BTW, also, without faculty input.

I have to agree with a previous poster, this does seem like a flagrant attempt to garner another community cohort of supporters ("it is about time that USM started doing something for our students in the local schools.") with zero regard for SACS probation. I cannot imagine that even THIS administration would court MORE violations with this stunt. And I agree, no vote of confidence for Exline, the new "ALmost" at USM; she is now talking almost exclusively in "we" terms. I am with Robert, this even surprises me, that such an idiotic move would come on the heels of the past debacles. I keep asking myself, can I tolerate this environment even ONE more semester....can my state of mind and health continue to live under these repressive and ludicrous conditions. Further, can I expect my family to endure ME for another year. Is it time to ask whether the patient (USM) has an advanced directive in place for life support? Please, isn’t someone out there listening to our pleas for the surgical team????

Date: Mar 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: florence's house cat
". . .So, we continue to go backwards in many ways. . . ."

I keep waiting for SFT to announce we are going back to having registration in the Coliseum, complete with orange cards and long lines. Surely some of you remember that experience...

Date: Mar 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Googler
"I keep waiting for SFT to announce we are going back to having registration in the Coliseum, complete with orange cards and long lines. Surely some of you remember that experience..."

Yes, but the one reason SFT won't go back to that model is that it allowed the control of appropriate enrollments for classes to be be made by individual departments. We had just enough orange cards for each section of each class; when the cards were all gone, the class was closed. And, under the Shelboo/Kenbot mode of "enrollment management" this would never be delegated to faculty and department chairs.