Topsy Turvey Turnover Turmoil - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Apr 23, 2005

Topsy Turvey Turnover Turmoil

Date: Apr 24, 2005

Git oer it. Dey weren't bidness tipes.

Date: Apr 24, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Humpty Dumpty
"In less than three years there has been an unbelievable turnover in key faculty, administrative, and staff positions ..... Can you think of others? "

The Director of the School of Nursing.

Date: Apr 24, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by:
"Git oer it. Dey weren't bidness tipes."

Sorry no name, but several were.

This is just more evidence that Shelby Thames is a disaster for the university. It is not just the faculty and staff who are leaving in droves but his hand-picked advisors as well. How many can he point a finger at before it is all to obvious that HE IS THE PROBLEM.

Date: Apr 24, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Humpty Dumpty
"... This kind of turnover should be brought to the attention of the IHL as further evidence of the management problems and an intolerable work environment at the university. "

There is no doubt that Commissioner Crofts will shortly provide the IHL with a damning inventory of the many failings of the Thames administration -- much more than sufficient evidence to end Thames' presidency. The question is, will it matter to a "governing" body driven principally by political, economic, and in some cases probably purely personal concerns and commitments?

Date: Apr 24, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Jean Moulin
"The question is, will it matter to a "governing" body driven principally by political, economic, and in some cases probably purely personal concerns and commitments? "

I don't think it will matter at all.

In fact, I'm inclined to think that, if anything, the board may well reprimand Crofts for his work on the evaluations.

Date: Apr 24, 2005

Invictus, if you're right (and I know that you HOPE to be wrong) we can hang it up and go home, can't we.
If the IHL ignores the faculty, then they do not deserve the faculty's continued efforts. If there is no relief in May, then the exit strategies now in formation should be implemented.

Date: Apr 24, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: LVN
"Invictus, if you're right (and I know that you HOPE to be wrong) we can hang it up and go home, can't we. If the IHL ignores the faculty, then they do not deserve the faculty's continued efforts. If there is no relief in May, then the exit strategies now in formation should be implemented."

If the IHL will not listen to an experienced commissioner, and will not listen to an experienced faculty, the only hope is that they will listen to SACS. Maybe. Maybe not.

Date: Apr 24, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: LVN
"Invictus, if you're right (and I know that you HOPE to be wrong) we can hang it up and go home, can't we. "

You're correct, LVN, I hope I'm wrong. Unfortunately, everything -- or almost everything -- that IHL's done the past year leads me to believe that the board will ignore the faculty & ignore common sense.

We make a lot of assumptions about what Crofts will say. If I'm not incorrect, he told the various faculty representatives he interviewed to make no presumptions about what he was going to recommend.

Since SACS did not levy the probation on USM based on any governance (or lack of governance) issues, I believe that if Exline's group is able to present the appropriate institutional effectiveness documentation, the probation will be lifted, providing SFT with some vindictation, vindication that might help him with a contract extension. At that point, USM enters a regular self-study (beginning with the compliance phase) & any further SACS action would be at least two -- and more likely three -- years out ... ample time for Shelby to get his precious contract extension & complete the destruction of USM.

Dang, am I pessimistic today, or what?

Date: Apr 24, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Invictus
" I don't think it will matter at all. In fact, I'm inclined to think that, if anything, the board may well reprimand Crofts for his work on the evaluations."

I'm not saying your are wrong, Invictus, but I just don't follow your logic. Why would the Board reprimand Crofts for doing what they ordered him to do? If they want to keep SFT they can just put more credit on the input they get from his supports and ignore the faculty councils and SACS guidelines. I don't see any need for any reprimands.

Date: Apr 24, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Reporter
"
I'm not saying your are wrong, Invictus, but I just don't follow your logic. Why would the Board reprimand Crofts for doing what they ordered him to do? If they want to keep SFT they can just put more credit on the input they get from his supports and ignore the faculty councils and SACS guidelines. I don't see any need for any reprimands."

We are discussing a totally illogical process. We are talking about "The Conspiracy" & that's an amorphous, decades-old thing that defies logic.

Yes, Crofts was directed to conduct the evaluations. However, you can bet your bottom dollar that at least three board members (Klumb, Ross & Colbert) have very clear ideas of what an "acceptable" evaluation is going to say. They may have even communicated their ideas to Crofts. (I'd be surprised if he didn't get input from the board, as that would be a "logical" part of the evaluation process.) When Crofts submits an "unacceptable" evaluation, the board -- or at least a subset of it -- could very well come back on him.

Date: Apr 24, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Invictus
" ... If I'm not incorrect, he told the various faculty representatives he interviewed to make no presumptions about what he was going to recommend. ..."

Don't you think Dr. Crofts was just being prudent with highly biased faculty? It would be foolish for any group to presume anything since Dr. Crofts was still collecting information that had to be digested, correlated and balanced with the input of all parties. I suspect the data was so overwhelming, Dr. Crofts was just warning the faculty to be sensible about these serious issues.

Date: Apr 24, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: LVN
"Invictus, if you're right (and I know that you HOPE to be wrong) we can hang it up and go home, can't we. If the IHL ignores the faculty, then they do not deserve the faculty's continued efforts. If there is no relief in May, then the exit strategies now in formation should be implemented."

As we both know, LVN, there are some wonderful people preparing the exit strategies. If there is no promise of change, we can expect to see the attrition continue only it will bite deeper into the associate level, in my view. There are people who have been working diligently here for ten or more year, are at midcareer and weren't prepared to leave but who are now pushing their publication and research dates up, cleaning up their dossiers and beginning to look actively at the job market. We can expect the next couple of years to be pretty depressing if May or June come and there is no sign that the Board is initiating a search.

Date: Apr 24, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Invictus
" We are discussing a totally illogical process. We are talking about "The Conspiracy" & that's an amorphous, decades-old thing that defies logic. ..."

Well fine then. There is no need to rebut or explain anything. Whenever you deal with illogical processes anything goes, by definition. All one can do is "chat" about the illogical. You can't reason about it.

Or do you mean logic based on other principles or values. That can be reasoned with if you know the base assumptions, (principles or values). Maybe that is what you mean.

Date: Apr 24, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: stephen judd
"As we both know, LVN, there are some wonderful people preparing the exit strategies. If there is no promise of change, we can expect to see the attrition continue only it will bite deeper into the associate level, in my view. There are people who have been working diligently here for ten or more year, are at midcareer and weren't prepared to leave but who are now pushing their publication and research dates up, cleaning up their dossiers and beginning to look actively at the job market. We can expect the next couple of years to be pretty depressing if May or June come and there is no sign that the Board is initiating a search. "

At least one dean - Pood - is on record in conversations with several people that he "will step down as dean" if Shelby gets renewed. Now, I don't necessarily believe Pood if he really said that, but hopefully it is a sign of how deep the resentment of a renewal is.

Date: Apr 25, 2005

At the chairs' retreat Friday, Shelby said the turn over was not that high. He has a very nice chart showing this fact.

Date: Apr 25, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: I was there
"At the chairs' retreat Friday, Shelby said the turn over was not that high. He has a very nice chart showing this fact."

Since when has Shelby Thames let facts get in the way of wurl' class boasting?

RC

Date: Apr 25, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Angeline
"At least one dean - Pood - is on record in conversations with several people that he "will step down as dean" if Shelby gets renewed. Now, I don't necessarily believe Pood if he really said that, but hopefully it is a sign of how deep the resentment of a renewal is."

If you heard it -- and if it were true -- it might not be such a good thing to put in a forum watched by folks who live in the Dome.

Even those that dislike Pood for his failure to publically stand up when G&S were thrown off campus should know that strategically it is better to protect the Deans if they are now taking on a stronger role in bringing about change. I've said it before -- at this point I don't give a damn where the help comes from. If history gets in the way of our gaining the change we want then we need to turn our eyes away from that history for a while and work with anyone who join the struggle. I think even G&S would say that -- what a shame for them to have our resentments (even if justified) cause us to alienate people who are in a position to affect things far more than the rest of us. If our failure to unify with anyone who now sees the light means four more years then I can't believe either Frank or Gary would agree that is right.

Date: Apr 26, 2005

I'll lean toward the notion of protecting the deans when and only when they protect their faculty and not their own backsides. Look very carefully at the deans' mouths when they make pronouncements (for example, those allegedly attributed to Pood and others) and you will see forked tongues and individuals speaking out of both sides of their mouths. Do not trust any of the deans. They all had more than one opportunity to speak up for more than a year. Don't believe that last year they were working behind the scenes. Perhaps they can "get over" what happened last year but most faculty will never forget the inaction of all of the deans.

Date: Apr 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Trust No One
"I'll lean toward the notion of protecting the deans when and only when they protect their faculty and not their own backsides . . . They all had more than one opportunity to speak up for more than a year . . . Perhaps they can "get over" what happened last year but most faculty will never forget the inaction of all of the deans."

This needs to be repeated over and over and over.

Date: Apr 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: stephen judd
"it is better to protect the Deans if they are now taking on a stronger role in bringing about change."

And just what are they doing in "bringing about change?" Are they still working "behind the scenes?"

Date: Apr 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Trust No One
"I'll lean toward the notion of protecting the deans when and only when they protect their faculty and not their own backsides. Look very carefully at the deans' mouths when they make pronouncements (for example, those allegedly attributed to Pood and others) and you will see forked tongues and individuals speaking out of both sides of their mouths. Do not trust any of the deans. They all had more than one opportunity to speak up for more than a year. Don't believe that last year they were working behind the scenes. Perhaps they can "get over" what happened last year but most faculty will never forget the inaction of all of the deans."

Sorry, Stephen. I understand what you are saying, but in this case, their inaction was unforgivable. No, this is not Nazi Germany. But these guys could have made a difference if they'd done the right thing, especially if they had acted collectively. Perhaps we do need them now, but hopefully we don't. If they knew better, they were cowardly. If they didn't, they don't deserve to be university professionals.

Date: Apr 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Kiss and Tell
"And just what are they doing in "bringing about change?" Are they still working "behind the scenes?" "

Three years is a little long to be working backstage with no demonstratable results.

Date: Apr 26, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Prop Manager
"Three years is a little long to be working backstage with no demonstratable results. "

If I were working backstage and saw that the show's star was going to be replaced by some understudy, that would put me in a survival mode and would motivate me to be seen making at least some feeble effort.