Shape up or ship out - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: May 11, 2005

Shape up or ship out

Date: May 11, 2005

LVN had already seen the new posts on the "sticky" thread and, in her usual perceptive and efficient manner, already responded. I inadvertently omitted your post, LVN. But here it is:

LVN

Date: 56 min. ago
Views: 15

Quote | Reply RE: 2004-05 Departures Update

Chain of command?? Please. Is that the chain of command Dr. Thames himself used when he attempted to fire Drs. Glamser and Stringer without even notifying the Provost, Dean, or Chairs of their departments? Dr. Glamser was teaching 130+ students the day he was locked out of his office with no notice, and his chair was suddenly faced with the task of handling that situation.
Or what about his respect for "chain of command" and best practices when he instituted a "reorganization" by gathering all the deans together minutes before a press conference to tell them they were all fired? Mention has already been made of nursing. One of the Deans fired that day was Dr. Marie Farell, a nationally-known nursing educator who had been hired the year before after a national search. She quit in total disgust.
There is no "chain of command" at USM. The Thames model does not operate by accepted principles of academic behavior and governance. I am sorry you cannot see this. This is a university, not a factory.

Date: May 11, 2005

Even though teaching is an honorable and extremely worthwhile occupation(hopefully a passion), it is not more honorable than ANY other occupation. It is the free expression of the learners, not the teachers that is important here. Hopefully, those of you who have obtained the "tenured" label have already obtained a foundation for your principles and life purpose (You've "found" yourself). If you have not learned or do not believe in the principles of the free market or you do not agree with them in this college setting, then you don't need to be a part of this system. Call that whatever "evil" name you want, it is what "We the people", the ones who pay you, want. We will have it our way. The chain of command is to be honored or find another institution that will do it your way.

I want to see how this poster explains that "free market principles" support the democratic principles upon which this nation was founded? There is a reason why the saying exists that "a company/corporation is not a democracy" and it, like the post, above usually emphasizes doing as your told and keeping your mouth shut. Are we not to have democracy in any part of our society anymore - especially taxpayer-funded entities? Do you not realize that is what the AAUP stands for - making sure that the primary employees have a voice in the management of the institution? Before you dare insult me with your authoritarian (fascist?) claptrap perhaps you should read the Declaration of Independence, the US Constitution, the Bill of Rights and so forth. Your attitude is dangerously anti-American.

Date: May 11, 2005

Here is another excerpt from that "sticky" thread:

Southern Miss product and your employer

Date: 1 day ago
Views: 163

This is the way it should be

Thanks for the hard work they each did. They were paid as the rest of you are being paid. We, the lay people, do appreciate the work of educators. We feel that what you do is important and honorable just as all work is honorable. We, the public, do not give you carte blanc to be insubordinate or use the time we are paying for to lobby for your personal causes. For those who cannot support President Thames we ask to please leave. We feel that the university will be much better off without you and you will be happier in a less outcome-oriented setting.

Date: May 11, 2005

Angeline, all these people think a university is like a plant or a store, or even like the military, where you need top-down management to make things happen. (Even then, the good ones incorporate some form of employee participation.)
What they don't grasp is the historical concept of "university" -- which in its purest form is only a collection of pretty independent "colleges" -- the university evolved from the Middle Ages, and is more like some types of churches, or like hospitals, than it is like any business entity we know. The hospital analogy has been used a lot on this board, and bears repeating. The President of Forrest General raises money, community awareness, has a critical PR function, and is charged with keeping the nuts and bolts of the place working, and with keeping it in compliance with JCAHO, Medicare, and so on. He does not tell doctors how to practice medicine. He is not the "boss" of doctors, although he has recourse in extreme situations, he would not dream of locking a doctor out of a clinic without due process of some sort. He understands that doctors are sometimes a wild and woolly bunch, but they're the ones who make the wheels go round.
You can pick a lot of holes in this analogy, but the basic principle is there -- just as Mr. Oliver is not really the "boss" of the doctors, but is "boss" of the institution, so Dr. Thames is not the "boss" of the professors -- their chair and dean are their boss, and a president would not normally intervene or micromanage to the extent we see at USM.

Date: May 11, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Southern Miss product and your employer
"We feel that the university will be much better off without you and you will be happier in a less outcome-oriented setting."

What is outcome-oriented about the way the USM administration is being handled by the IHL? Why hasn't the IHL reacted to the outcomes? You want outcomes? Let me tell you about outcomes: One-third of the faculty has left, the university was placed on accreditation probation (unprecedented in the annals of Mississippi Higher education since the Theodore Bilbo era, US News has dropped USM to a lower tier, the USM nursing program, once viewed as the best in the state, has seen its licensing exam performance drop to the lowest in the state, exagerrated enrollment numbers have been used, and full-time enrollment on the Hattiesburg campus has dropped. If outcomes matter for the faculty, why don't they matter for the administration? By business standards alone, the stockholders and board of directors of any industry would not tolerate what is happening at USM.

Date: May 12, 2005

SOURCE:

Vanishing Point

Date: 7 hr, 4 min. ago
Views: 13

RE: 2004-05 Departures Update

USM product,

In any well run organization, there is informal input from the troops to the "commanders". The only real difference in academia is that this input is formalized into the chain of command. The commander still has the ultimate decision-making authority. SFT is coming to grief for an utter disregard for either the informal or more formal inputs from the troops. Neither a university or any other moderately complex organization can function with the commander making decisions in an informational vacuum. In a university, you can get away with running a department this way but it will fall apart on you at the college level. That's why failed Deans are a dime a dozen. It also doesn't help if you have no regard for the laws that govern behavior in the public sector. You may not like the laws, but they must be obeyed. If you try to run a public sector entity just like a private sector entity, you end up being a legal bull in a china closet. Ultimately, I cannot support SFT for the latter reason.

For one of the two reasons above, the institution will eventually implode. This sometimes happens at tiny private schools but I can't find an example of this happening to a larger public school. Don't worry about the faculty. If they were all replaced tomorrow, USM would still end up in the same place. I agree with you that the faculty should be quieter but for a different reason. I would prefer the implosion to come out of nowhere. The faculty keeps alerting the administration to some landmines that they probably wouldn't otherwise see. In my view, this is unfortunately prolonging the day of reckoning. I, for one, am a model employee at work. Just watching, inwardly laughing, and waiting. I keep my 35 years of experience to myself.

Date: May 12, 2005

Straw Boss,

You confuse the workings of the market with the governance of an organization. The market works outside organizations and has its impact through its evaluation of the inputs and outputs of the organization. Hence the market shapes organizations to the degree that these organizations interact with the market. Most businesses are affected by the market directly because they purchase inputs with dollars and sell outputs for dollars with the hope that dollars in are greater than dollars out. Private universities operate in an environment much the same as business. Public universities usually are mixed with heavily subsidized inputs and market based priced outputs.

In all of these cases, the market shapes the nature of the organization. Automobile manufacturers differ from banks for example. Higher education also is shaped by the market including subsidized public universities. The way organizations operate in response to the market leads to a similarity among the players and the way the organization is structured. Thus, USM as an organization has operated very similarly to other state supported universities, certainly very similarly to Ole Miss and Mississippi State. Just as GM has to compete with Ford and Toyota, so must USM compete with other universities. The more SFT makes USM different from its competition, particularly in changing the role of faculty, the less competitive it will be. No matter what SFT and his supporting cast believe or hope, the market will doom his efforts to failure. Failure comes at great cost. Because of the subsidies, USM will not disappear. It will remain, but it will be a sorry excuse for a university, and its output will be less competitive in the market. In addition, there is bad news for the sports fans of USM. Universities on the way down do not field strong athletic teams because the whole campus will have the smell and feel of a loser.

USM supporters will be left with the mess. The market is luring faculty away to other universities that are not in the failure mode. The better students who used to attend USM are going elsewhere. Many of the sports supporters will withdraw and some will support another school. Things look grim for you Straw Boss; I hope you can stand the pain.

Date: May 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Cossack
"No matter what SFT and his supporting cast believe or hope, the market will doom his efforts to failure. Failure comes at great cost. Because of the subsidies, USM will not disappear. It will remain, but it will be a sorry excuse for a university, and its output will be less competitive in the market."

Good post Cossack.

Date: May 12, 2005

USM could be run like a business. In fact, USM is being run like a business. The problem is that USM is currently being run like a badly run business.

SFT is a bad manager. We have models of what happens to good businesses when bad management takes over, so the current USM situation should be no surprise. The manager is the key to it all.

A good manager would say to his or her employees:
Your job is to teach, research, and do service. At the end of the year, you will be evaluated on your accomplishments in those areas. Now, let's talk about what constitutes progress in those areas. Let's define what types of accomplishments we are looking for. Let's benchmark ourselves against some "competitor firms." Let's make sure that everyone is on the same page and that everyone is clear on what their role is in the organization. Now, you guys go to work.

And the manager would allow the employees to work unfettered as long as they met the deadlines (i.e., turning in grades, FARs, etc.) and would not micromanage. The manager would realize that the English department knows how to run an English department. The manager would allocate funding to each department via his or her controller/treasurer/vp of finance. The manager would step back and watch as the departments did their jobs.

At the end of the year, the manager would analyze progress reports/FARs/etc., and would reward (through money or encouraging words or both, whatever is available) those who achieved and would have serious discussions with those who did not.

I am sure that many on this board are freaking out over the use of the business model in my post. However, there are many businesses that operate in just this manner. Professors ARE employees. Professors SHOULD do what they're told and not meddle in administrative affairs. These statements are true when there is a good manager in place, but the manager makes all the difference. If you're not here to educate students first, do research second, and perform service third, then you SHOULD leave, because that's the mission of this university. When there is a bad manager, however, stockholders often have to vote him or her out and tell the board of directors to get rid of that manager.

The problem with that is that the USM faculty has shot its wad with the IHL. "Get rid of Fleming" now appears to be a really stupid movement, successful though it was. In that sense, I really can't blame the IHL for not listening to the USM faculty. The IHL gave the USM faculty what it wanted before. I don't think the IHL will make the mistake of letting faculty have a large say again.

Faculty just don't want to see the big picture: the average Mississippian doesn't care about sociology or astronomy or business classes or education in general. The average Mississippian thinks that getting paid $40,000 per year to teach 6 math (or English or business or whatever) courses per year is an outrage. The average Mississippian has to work 40+ hours per week. The average Mississian gets about 2 weeks of vacation. The average Mississippian begrudges doctors their high salaries less than he begrudges professors their salaries because, to paraphrase LVN, when is the last time a history professor saved your life? Faculty are just expendable. They serve no real purpose to the average Mississippian. You don't matter.

Why is this?
Because for years academics have been violating the wishes of the people who pay their salaries. Because almost every college-educated person in this state has a story about a run-in with an unreasonable professor. Because teaching 3 courses per semester (9 hours per week) plus office hours is a pretty sorry workload. [I understand about research. Hold on.] The average Mississippian has no idea that any research is going on at USM because the research that has been produced at USM isn't tangible to them. That's why they love SFT. They know what paint is. They don't like the paint smell. SFT created a paint that is odorless. They know what that research was about. It produced something they can use and that may make someone's life better in the long run. But the Donne varorium? What the hell is a Varorium, anyway? John Donne? Why didn't he just spell his name "Dunn" like everyone else does?

The average Mississippian looks at a college professor and says, "He (or she) makes so much money for teaching a couple of classes at the university. Then he complains about when spring break is. I wish I got a spring break. I wish I got summers off. I wish i got off every holiday. I wish I got a month off during the winter holidays. Man, those professors are lazy." And they're right. Professors appear lazy to the average Mississippian because profs do gripe a lot and they don't do much in the way of promoting themselves to the public. I know, I know. PR isn't your job.

You have to give the people what they want. If they want enlightenment, then fine. The average Mississippian wants an extension of high school (which is what the "normal" concept was, anyway) from USM. You, the faculty, haven't delivered that. The average Mississippian sees that as a failure to do your job. Just teach facts. Don't introduce commie/hippie/queer culture to our children. Give them skills they can use to get a job and have a better life. Maximize the dollar return on their college "investment."

Back to the business analogy. The average Mississippian can understand the business model and has no idea about the academic model. Trying to explain that model to them is like trying to teach a bear to talk.

Perception is reality. If you want to be trreated better, then you have to work to change the perception that you're lazy, disgruntled, counterculture, dope-smoking communists who try to lure young minds into a life of free thinking instead of the job-oriented life the taxpayers of Mississippi want. It's your choice, but choose wisely. This may be your last chance to keep USM from becoming Mississippi Southern College again.

Date: May 12, 2005

Every Mississippian....etc. etc.

This is why I'm so very glad I left. It's not like this everywhere folks.

Date: May 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Plant Manager
"USM could be run like a business. In fact, USM is being run like a business. The problem is that USM is currently being run like a badly run business. SFT is a bad manager. We have models of what happens to good businesses when bad management takes over, so the current USM situation should be no surprise. The manager is the key to it all. A good manager would say to his or her employees: Your job is to teach, research, and do service. At the end of the year, you will be evaluated on your accomplishments in those areas. Now, let's talk about what constitutes progress in those areas. Let's define what types of accomplishments we are looking for. Let's benchmark ourselves against some "competitor firms." Let's make sure that everyone is on the same page and that everyone is clear on what their role is in the organization. Now, you guys go to work. And the manager would allow the employees to work unfettered as long as they met the deadlines (i.e., turning in grades, FARs, etc.) and would not micromanage. The manager would realize that the English department knows how to run an English department. The manager would allocate funding to each department via his or her controller/treasurer/vp of finance. The manager would step back and watch as the departments did their jobs. At the end of the year, the manager would analyze progress reports/FARs/etc., and would reward (through money or encouraging words or both, whatever is available) those who achieved and would have serious discussions with those who did not. I am sure that many on this board are freaking out over the use of the business model in my post. However, there are many businesses that operate in just this manner. Professors ARE employees. Professors SHOULD do what they're told and not meddle in administrative affairs. These statements are true when there is a good manager in place, but the manager makes all the difference. If you're not here to educate students first, do research second, and perform service third, then you SHOULD leave, because that's the mission of this university. When there is a bad manager, however, stockholders often have to vote him or her out and tell the board of directors to get rid of that manager. The problem with that is that the USM faculty has shot its wad with the IHL. "Get rid of Fleming" now appears to be a really stupid movement, successful though it was. In that sense, I really can't blame the IHL for not listening to the USM faculty. The IHL gave the USM faculty what it wanted before. I don't think the IHL will make the mistake of letting faculty have a large say again. Faculty just don't want to see the big picture: the average Mississippian doesn't care about sociology or astronomy or business classes or education in general. The average Mississippian thinks that getting paid $40,000 per year to teach 6 math (or English or business or whatever) courses per year is an outrage. The average Mississippian has to work 40+ hours per week. The average Mississian gets about 2 weeks of vacation. The average Mississippian begrudges doctors their high salaries less than he begrudges professors their salaries because, to paraphrase LVN, when is the last time a history professor saved your life? Faculty are just expendable. They serve no real purpose to the average Mississippian. You don't matter. Why is this? Because for years academics have been violating the wishes of the people who pay their salaries. Because almost every college-educated person in this state has a story about a run-in with an unreasonable professor. Because teaching 3 courses per semester (9 hours per week) plus office hours is a pretty sorry workload. [I understand about research. Hold on.] The average Mississippian has no idea that any research is going on at USM because the research that has been produced at USM isn't tangible to them. That's why they love SFT. They know what paint is. They don't like the paint smell. SFT created a paint that is odorless. They know what that research was about. It produced something they can use and that may make someone's life better in the long run. But the Donne varorium? What the hell is a Varorium, anyway? John Donne? Why didn't he just spell his name "Dunn" like everyone else does? The average Mississippian looks at a college professor and says, "He (or she) makes so much money for teaching a couple of classes at the university. Then he complains about when spring break is. I wish I got a spring break. I wish I got summers off. I wish i got off every holiday. I wish I got a month off during the winter holidays. Man, those professors are lazy." And they're right. Professors appear lazy to the average Mississippian because profs do gripe a lot and they don't do much in the way of promoting themselves to the public. I know, I know. PR isn't your job. You have to give the people what they want. If they want enlightenment, then fine. The average Mississippian wants an extension of high school (which is what the "normal" concept was, anyway) from USM. You, the faculty, haven't delivered that. The average Mississippian sees that as a failure to do your job. Just teach facts. Don't introduce commie/hippie/queer culture to our children. Give them skills they can use to get a job and have a better life. Maximize the dollar return on their college "investment." Back to the business analogy. The average Mississippian can understand the business model and has no idea about the academic model. Trying to explain that model to them is like trying to teach a bear to talk. Perception is reality. If you want to be trreated better, then you have to work to change the perception that you're lazy, disgruntled, counterculture, dope-smoking communists who try to lure young minds into a life of free thinking instead of the job-oriented life the taxpayers of Mississippi want. It's your choice, but choose wisely. This may be your last chance to keep USM from becoming Mississippi Southern College again."

Seriously, this may be the best post I have ever read on this board. The writer does an excellent job of relaying the truth of perception.

Date: May 12, 2005

Well-written though the above argument was, it is other external consituencies, such as the accrediting agencies and established ranking organizations, whose "perceptions" will determine the quality of a university and its leadership.

Date: May 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Misplaced Perceptions
"Well-written though the above argument was, it is other external consituencies, such as the accrediting agencies and established ranking organizations, whose "perceptions" will determine the quality of a university and its leadership. "

Here's where I differ from many on the board. I think we determine our own self-worth and purpose as defined by our constituency, community, and environment. Our determination should be of a particular quality that SACS should say "That's a university we want bearing our symbol." I don't believe we should be lock-stepping behind the SACS general model for the sake of getting SACS reaccredited.

Date: May 12, 2005

The following is NOT true:

The problem with that is that the USM faculty has shot its wad with the IHL. "Get rid of Fleming" now appears to be a really stupid movement, successful though it was. In that sense, I really can't blame the IHL for not listening to the USM faculty. The IHL gave the USM faculty what it wanted before. I don't think the IHL will make the mistake of letting faculty have a large say again.

The faculty senate never took a no confidence vote in Fleming. Anyone who has been around Hattiesburg for the past few years knows that Fleming was run off by car salesmen and CPAs who love athletics more than academics. IHL did not give faculty what they wanted because the majority of faculty wanted Fleming to stay. The IHL Board did give some of the local bidness people what they wanted, and that is why we are in the mess we are in. Get your facts straight before lecturing people on "perceptions." Unless, that is, you are in the business of creating false impressions and misleading "facts."

Date: May 12, 2005

Plant Manager....

Educating the populace to the importance of the university model: that is one of the roles of a university president. In fact, it may the principal one. I agree that most do not understand what we do. They do not realize the importance of research (whether it be Faulker, Donne, civil rights history, or information theory) to the quality of their lives. A good university president (a world class one) would take it upon him/her self to make sure that the populace (or stakeholders as we now call them) understands this. At what is one of the country's most rabid football schools, the radio broadcasts feature faculty research profiles. That sort of visibility/explanation has to be initiated from the university leadership.

Date: May 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Plant Manager
"USM could be run like a business. In fact, USM is being run like a business. The problem is that USM is currently being run like a badly run business. SFT is a bad manager. We have models of what happens to good businesses when bad management takes over, so the current USM situation should be no surprise. The manager is the key to it all. A good manager would say to his or her employees: Your job is to teach, research, and do service. At the end of the year, you will be evaluated on your accomplishments in those areas. Now, let's talk about what constitutes progress in those areas. Let's define what types of accomplishments we are looking for. Let's benchmark ourselves against some "competitor firms." Let's make sure that everyone is on the same page and that everyone is clear on what their role is in the organization. Now, you guys go to work. And the manager would allow the employees to work unfettered as long as they met the deadlines (i.e., turning in grades, FARs, etc.) and would not micromanage. The manager would realize that the English department knows how to run an English department. The manager would allocate funding to each department via his or her controller/treasurer/vp of finance. The manager would step back and watch as the departments did their jobs. At the end of the year, the manager would analyze progress reports/FARs/etc., and would reward (through money or encouraging words or both, whatever is available) those who achieved and would have serious discussions with those who did not. I am sure that many on this board are freaking out over the use of the business model in my post. However, there are many businesses that operate in just this manner. Professors ARE employees. Professors SHOULD do what they're told and not meddle in administrative affairs. These statements are true when there is a good manager in place, but the manager makes all the difference. If you're not here to educate students first, do research second, and perform service third, then you SHOULD leave, because that's the mission of this university. When there is a bad manager, however, stockholders often have to vote him or her out and tell the board of directors to get rid of that manager. The problem with that is that the USM faculty has shot its wad with the IHL. "Get rid of Fleming" now appears to be a really stupid movement, successful though it was. In that sense, I really can't blame the IHL for not listening to the USM faculty. The IHL gave the USM faculty what it wanted before. I don't think the IHL will make the mistake of letting faculty have a large say again. Faculty just don't want to see the big picture: the average Mississippian doesn't care about sociology or astronomy or business classes or education in general. The average Mississippian thinks that getting paid $40,000 per year to teach 6 math (or English or business or whatever) courses per year is an outrage. The average Mississippian has to work 40+ hours per week. The average Mississian gets about 2 weeks of vacation. The average Mississippian begrudges doctors their high salaries less than he begrudges professors their salaries because, to paraphrase LVN, when is the last time a history professor saved your life? Faculty are just expendable. They serve no real purpose to the average Mississippian. You don't matter. Why is this? Because for years academics have been violating the wishes of the people who pay their salaries. Because almost every college-educated person in this state has a story about a run-in with an unreasonable professor. Because teaching 3 courses per semester (9 hours per week) plus office hours is a pretty sorry workload. [I understand about research. Hold on.] The average Mississippian has no idea that any research is going on at USM because the research that has been produced at USM isn't tangible to them. That's why they love SFT. They know what paint is. They don't like the paint smell. SFT created a paint that is odorless. They know what that research was about. It produced something they can use and that may make someone's life better in the long run. But the Donne varorium? What the hell is a Varorium, anyway? John Donne? Why didn't he just spell his name "Dunn" like everyone else does? The average Mississippian looks at a college professor and says, "He (or she) makes so much money for teaching a couple of classes at the university. Then he complains about when spring break is. I wish I got a spring break. I wish I got summers off. I wish i got off every holiday. I wish I got a month off during the winter holidays. Man, those professors are lazy." And they're right. Professors appear lazy to the average Mississippian because profs do gripe a lot and they don't do much in the way of promoting themselves to the public. I know, I know. PR isn't your job. You have to give the people what they want. If they want enlightenment, then fine. The average Mississippian wants an extension of high school (which is what the "normal" concept was, anyway) from USM. You, the faculty, haven't delivered that. The average Mississippian sees that as a failure to do your job. Just teach facts. Don't introduce commie/hippie/queer culture to our children. Give them skills they can use to get a job and have a better life. Maximize the dollar return on their college "investment." Back to the business analogy. The average Mississippian can understand the business model and has no idea about the academic model. Trying to explain that model to them is like trying to teach a bear to talk. Perception is reality. If you want to be trreated better, then you have to work to change the perception that you're lazy, disgruntled, counterculture, dope-smoking communists who try to lure young minds into a life of free thinking instead of the job-oriented life the taxpayers of Mississippi want. It's your choice, but choose wisely. This may be your last chance to keep USM from becoming Mississippi Southern College again."

Excellent post, Plant Manager. One of the best ever seen on the message board. But it does raise some questions:

Do you think the man-on-the-street in North Carolina, Georgia, or Texas views universities and professors any differently than they are viewed here in Mississippi? Assuming that they don't, what is different about our state? Why do those states have first-class universities with academic freedom and shared governance? The difference may be the leadership. The elites in those states understand the importance of nationally competitive universities to the welfare of their people and their economy. There are, of course, notable exceptions within Mississippi. The leadership at Ole Miss understands and has adopted a national perspective of university quality. Their pursuit of a Phi Beta Kappa chapter is a case in point. But for whatever reason, the Mississippi IHL does not seem to match the standards of the other states. To say that the problem is the people of Mississippi is not accurate. They are no different than the people of those other states. Does the faculty at Chapel Hill have to "sell" itself to the people of North Carolina? Does the faculty at Georgia Tech have to sell itself to the people of Georgia? The answer to both of those question is No.

Date: May 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Plant Manager
"...The average Mississippian can understand the business model and has no idea about the academic model. Trying to explain that model to them is like trying to teach a bear to talk. Perception is reality. If you want to be trreated better, then you have to work to change the perception that you're lazy, disgruntled, counterculture, dope-smoking communists who try to lure young minds into a life of free thinking instead of the job-oriented life the taxpayers of Mississippi want. ...."

I don't think it possible to change this perception. It is the perception of the masses everywhere outside academia. (Oh, History profs do save lives, usually by the thousands, when wise leaders decide not to go to war because they understand History.)

The "lesson" you suggest teaching the public requires tough measures. I will contribute to this "lesson" by leaving As Soon As Possible. If others do the same the "lesson" may be learned.

Date: May 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Plant Manager
"
.... Faculty just don't want to see the big picture: The average Mississippian thinks that getting paid $40,000 per year to teach 6 math (or English or business or whatever) courses per year is an outrage. The average Mississippian has to work 40+ hours per week.

. . . Because teaching 3 courses per semester (9 hours per week) plus office hours is a pretty sorry workload . . .

. . . The average Mississippian looks at a college professor and says, "He (or she) makes so much money for teaching a couple of classes at the university . . .
."

What I'd like to know is if Plant Manager really believes any of the stuff s/he credits that vaunted "average Mississipian" w/believing about college profs. A lot of it is historically wrong of course, as Angleine pointed out. The Faculty Senate, for instance, sent forward a vote of CONFIDENCE in Horace Fleming when the good pavers, car dealers and assorted other booboisie of H'burg, were sharpening their knives for him (metaphor alert)

But what really gets me is all that booshwa, quoted above, about the 12 hour week (three classes plus office hours). Do people really believe that? Most studies of the academic work week show an average of 55-60 hours. A 40 hour week would be a relief for most profs, and 60-70 hours is not unususal. Do people really beleive profs don't work outside of class on things like course preparation and grading? Guess those Mississippians must also think that once a prof teaches a class s/he's always gonna teach the same class the same way forever and ever, time without end? Is is really possible that people think that?

Then and only then, after all the reading and grading and syllabus tuning and conferencing with the good future anti-intellectual citizens of the state (ie. the students) comes research, lab, online and library work, writing, editing what you've written and corresponding with collaborators. Then comes committee after committee after committee, etc. especially at this time, when SFT and posse have reduced the place to rubble tottering on the edge of a precipice called loss of accreditation and the only thing keeping us from the abyss is . . . faculty committees.

Man, it makes me tired just thinking about all that, and yet the only thing the good citizenry think faculty do is teach 9 hours a week, keep a few office hours and go do . . . what? Play golf? Worship the devil? Mainline drugs? What? The 12 hour week? That's not stupidity, it's a mass delusion.

Who does such an egregrious delusion serve? And how is it maintained in the face of all available evidence to the contrary? Those are the questions.

Date: May 12, 2005

Anyone who thinks academics is "hard work" hasn't done enough heavy lifting. Responses to my original post are indicative of the very reason the average Mississippian dislikes profs.

Date: May 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Plant Manager
"Anyone who thinks academics is "hard work" hasn't done enough heavy lifting. Responses to my original post are indicative of the very reason the average Mississippian dislikes profs."

Anyone who thinks heavy lifting is "hard work" hasn't spend evenings studying during their early twenties while friends partied. Do this for four years of undergraduate and five years of graduate school. Work all day and study at night. Then at the age of 28 finish and become a professor and continue that pace. The only difference is now while you work and study your neighbors call you lazy. Why? Because they had fun while you worked and now they have heavy lifting to do while you read.

Date: May 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: LeavingASAP
" Anyone who thinks heavy lifting is "hard work" hasn't spend evenings studying during their early twenties while friends partied. Do this for four years of undergraduate and five years of graduate school. Work all day and study at night. Then at the age of 28 finish and become a professor and continue that pace. The only difference is now while you work and study your neighbors call you lazy. Why? Because they had fun while you worked and now they have heavy lifting to do while you read."

Mr. Wonderful?

Date: May 12, 2005

Anyone who thinks heavy lifting is "hard work" hasn't spend evenings studying during their early twenties while friends partied.

Or hasn't had to try to motivate and give individual attention to a class of 100 students at 1:00 on Mondays, Wednesdays, and Fridays in a hot classroom during the summer. Or had to grade 50 papers in one evening. Or had to respond to emails from 75 students in an online class--days, nights, weekends,holidays. Or had to spend hours doing what seems like senseless committee work. Or had to advise students who don't show up for appointments or who don't take your advice. Or had to publish X number of articles or bring in X grant money just to keep your job.

sometimes I'd like to lift a big rock

Date: May 12, 2005

Five years? That's pretty good for straight through. It takes some people a lot longer than that. You didn't just work hard, you worked extremely hard.

You know the joke: How many graduate students does it take to change a light bulb?
Only one, but it takes him nine years.

Date: May 12, 2005

...the average Mississippian dislikes profs.

Why? Because professors are highly educated? Because they earn a salary that is higher than the state's average? Because they don't toil long hours at physical labor?

So you're saying that the average Mississippian dislikes those who educate the state's youth?

Does this collection of "average" Mississippians include the college educated citizens of the state...do they dislike professors too?

Do average Mississippian dislike all who obtain higher education and whose work requires more "heavy lifting" with one's mind than with one's back... doctors, clergy, scientists, etc. ... or do they just dislike professors?

I realize that posters in this thread are just (like or friend Toy) "having fun" goading faculty. I regret that some faculty have seen fit to try to justify themselves to the fun-seekers.

Don't waste your time. There is no way to counter such mind-numbing ignorance.

Those "average Mississippians" who dislike professors include those who love to tell academics that they don't live or work in the "real world."

What, pray tell, is the "real world?" Is it a life of toil and low pay that often accompanies a lack of education? Is that real? I'm sure it is to those who live such a life. Is that the only reality?

Is it the life of a career military person? That life is very different from the life of a person in almost any other profession. Is it "real world" or not?

How about the "world" of a preacher. Is that real to non-clergy or to those outside the pastor's denomination.

Every professor I have known (and I have known many hundreds) worked hard to get to his or her career level. Every one pays taxes, buys groceries and cars and homes. Many, if not most, raise families just like factory workers or pulpwood haulers.

I can anticipate the posts that will respond top this attempting to explain why professors don't live in the "real world." Few will have much substance and most will be written by people who have no accurate idea whatsoever what an academic does.

Date: May 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: What have you done for me lately?
"Mr. Wonderful?"

Duly noted.

Date: May 12, 2005

Thanks for an excellent post, "Tired of this Crap".

Date: May 12, 2005

Tired of this crap, GREAT POST!!!!!!!!!!!!

Date: May 12, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Plant Manager
"Anyone who thinks academics is "hard work" hasn't done enough heavy lifting. Responses to my original post are indicative of the very reason the average Mississippian dislikes profs."

Actually it is hard work. Just a different kind of work. Working with the mind can be just as strenuous on the mind although perhaps not the body. On the other hand, the assumption that academics do not do physical labor in the job is simply wrong. Anthropologists in the field, archeologists, geologists . . . I can list whole categories of academics in which physical labor under often very unpleasant conditions is simply part of the deal. The fact that the public doesn't really know about this aspect of academic life should say something about how little time academics spend boring the public with the details or "whining", as the case may be.

The point is that it doesn't matter what kind of work you do -- if the conditions under which you work make you a less effective worker then that is something that needs to be addressed. If I am a factory worker and I have a quota and the line keeps shutting down because management is so concious of the bottom line that it doesn't supply the support to keep the machines running, then I am a victim of poor management. A university by definition is a community of the mind . . . the mind does not work very effectively or efficiently when it is forced into narrow paths of exploration, or when it is terrorized into confining itself to areas of inquiry that only have forseeable ends. One of the great strengths of American culture (including its educational system, however imperfect) in the past has been its ability to produce indepedent thinkers -- or at least to avoid completely squelching them. If my job is to produce educated, creative individuals ("freeing the power of the individual") then I'm not going to do it in the kind of atmosphere in which my work, my work ethic, and my integrity is constantly under attack -- that is exhausiting and demoralizing. And hardly condusive to my staying in the state. What kills is me is how many of our faculty come to USM with a track record of success outsdie the state -- then they come to MIssissippi and find themselves under attack because they dare to say what is patently obvious to anyone -- the conditions at USM are oppressive, chaotic, and full of academic mismanagement. I meet a fair number of faculty AND staff on this campus -- I meet very few people who tell me they are happier now than they were three years ago. Are ALL of these people lazy, unproductive, whiners? If so -- then you are right . . . we should export them all.

Why does this state seem to delight in devouring anyone who tries to develop any ability beyond the very narrow range of "skills" that have been defined as economically useful? This is idiocy -- success at any level in any field attracts more success in every field; excellence in any field attracts more excellence in every field. If Mississippi simply focused on helping every student find his or her ability and then actively encouraging that student to develop those abilities to the max, we'd have fewer students who either feel they need to leave to go study elsewhere or who, having graduated, leaeve the state where the work they do not only might not be compensated, but won't even be honored. And incidently, if you are going to do that with students then you need to have faculty who have also been encouraged to do that as well. This is the very opposite of the prevailing conditions.

Folks who understand innovation and creative research know that the most important thing is to stimulate creativity at all levels -- it is the unleashed creativity that generates ideas. If you try to harness creativity, it goes dry. That is the problem of totalitarian cultures -- too much control stifles the kind of thinking needed to be truly inventive. Creativity isn't efficient. But I'd rather have 3000 unusablel ideas to find the six really great ones than overcontrol my creative people, thereby making the pool of creative output smaller and thereby reducing the potential pool of ideas from which great ideas can emerge.

It is unfortunate that the current climate at USM (and I would add the now polarized community environment in which we find ourselves) does not lend itself to the kind of creative thinking needed to be a genuinely world class university. I think I know a little bit about this because in my time I've been associated with three such institutions . . . .

It is also unfortunate that somehow the test of a job seems to be that if you enjoy your job there must be something wrong with it, and with you. I think the climate now is that academics must be punished because they enjoy their work -- and the punishment begins by accusations leveled by people who should know better that faculties don't work hard, are overpaid, and have lots of free time not available to the ordinary worker. Most academics in America come from working class backgrounds . . . most of us feel very fortunate to be doing what we are doing. And many of my colleagues are so grateful and so driven by guilt by our own perception that this is a "softer" life compared to the lives of our parents that we tend to overcompensate and work longer hours than we are asked to do.

I will never forgive or forget an administration that has actually patted the faculty on the head with one hand while stabbing it in the back with another.

Date: May 12, 2005

Plant Manager: Do you also begrudge k-12 teachers working only 9 months, 2 week christmas holidays, 7 hour days? If not, why not? Exactly the same logic you use for professors.

Universities are an extention of high school? Why not just stop at the 3R's? Do you suppose someone studying algebra, physics, etc helped in the development of computers(I assume you use a computer)

Why do you suppose so many Americans(including average Mississippians) travel to foreign countries every year? Could it possibly involve the education they received in college? Maybe their education started a lifelong love of learning.

Hopefully your "plant manager" title is an aspiration rather than your occupation. Many companies pay for employees to continue their education (I would guess companies think there is value in an employee who wants to further their education) through tuition reimbursement. I am not sure from your comments you value an educated work force.

I dont really understand how you define an average Mississippian. Unfortunately Mississippi is ranked poorly in many socio-economic categories, so I would guess many Mississippians would prefer to better themselves and their familes through a better education.

One last point. I didnt completely agree with the last parking ticket I received, but that didnt cause me to have a total disrespect for the law. Why would a run in a professor evoke such disdain for higher education.