A Dialog with Seeker - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: May 31, 2005

A Dialog with Seeker

Date: May 31, 2005

I also have found this a puzzling charge. There is no more rational, sane person than Neil McMillen. Another of the early speakers, Wilbur Moreland, has been one of the best campus citizens. And Gary Stringer, apart from his international reputation as a scholar, was known to be one of the hardest workers at USM. As a member of the vestry in the Episcopal church, married for over forty years, active in his children's community life, he certainly was/is no radical.

Date: May 31, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: LeftASAP
"Seeker stated . . . "I understand that he's a hero to most everyone on this board, but how many of you can look in your heart and say that you actually liked Noel Polk?"

Seeker, you still don't get it.

You continue to confuse your personal likes and dislikes with sound professional practice. It's good that you were not a pre- med student who went on and completed medical school. The personal like/dislike biases you seem to have wouldn't be good for those of your patients who do not suit your personal tastes.

I have known quite a few faculty members that I did not particulary like personally. But they were extremely competent. valuable and nationally visible scholars. I did whatever was necessary and reasonable to keep them in our department. It's good you are not a supervisor in a large corporation that hires hundreds of workers. The personal like/dislike biases you seem to have wouldn't be good for your corporation as you encountered competent workers who did not suit your personal tastes.

You have lots of growing up to do, young man, before you are prepared to assume a leadership role in the real world.

Date: May 31, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Former Chair
" Seeker, you still don't get it. You continue to confuse your personal likes and dislikes with sound professional practice. It's good that you were not a pre- med student who went on and completed medical school. The personal like/dislike biases you seem to have wouldn't be good for those of your patients who do not suit your personal tastes. I have known quite a few faculty members that I did not particulary like personally. But they were extremely competent. valuable and nationally visible scholars. I did whatever was necessary and reasonable to keep them in our department. It's good you are not a supervisor in a large corporation that hires hundreds of workers. The personal like/dislike biases you seem to have wouldn't be good for your corporation as you encountered competent workers who did not suit your personal tastes. You have lots of growing up to do, young man, before you are prepared to assume a leadership role in the real world. "

Although I agree with much of the substance of this post, I wish its tone were less condescending. This tone reinforces the common charge that we abuse anyone who disagrees with us.

Date: May 31, 2005

Just for the record, I like Noel Polk. I have no idea what his "politics" are beyond USM, but I read his memoir, and there was nothing wildly "liberal" in it.

Date: May 31, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Dale Carnegie

"Although I agree with much of the substance of this post, I wish its tone were less condescending. This tone reinforces the common charge that we abuse anyone who disagrees with us."

It didn't sound particularly condescending to me. It sounded like something an exasperated might say in desparation to a wayward child when all of the sound and established methods of communication had failed. We've tried to communicate with Seeker by reason, by facts, by questions, by persuasion, by praise, and by correction. Nothing has worked. What strategy do you suggest?

Date: May 31, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Exasperated Parent
"We've tried to communicate with Seeker by reason, by facts, by questions, by persuasion, by praise, and by correction. Nothing has worked. What strategy do you suggest? "

There's little left to do short of the old fashioned method, and we wouldn't even want to think about that. Maybe Seeker should just be left alone with his own perception of the real world. He'll probably fall down and skin his knees a few times, but hopefully he'll be able to profit from the unpleasant life experiences he is likely to face.

Date: May 31, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Exasperated Parent
"What strategy do you suggest? "

We could tell him we agree with everything he says. That might work.

Date: May 31, 2005

The concept of "professionalism" can be challenging, especially for younger people. I only understood "professionalism" when I worked for physicians, and I was probably older then than Seeker is now.

Also, we live in a culture where everything is subjective -- all judgment is based on what we like or agree with. I remember trying to talk about objective reality with a group of students, and getting blank stares at first.

Date: May 31, 2005

It is clear that Seeker does not much care for Professor Polk. But I don't think that was the point he was trying to make.

Seeker is expressing his opinion that, like himself, "the community" doesn't care for the antics and letters of Polk, Scarborough, and nameless others. He is trying to explain why he believes there has been no groundswell of popular support for the faculty cause.

I don't agree with Seeker, but only because I think the community doesn't give a general rip one way or the other about much of anything -- except higher taxes.

We speculate that this could never happen at Ole Miss or Miss State. Maybe that is true, but it is speculation, nevertheless. Yesterday was a good day to remember what all can happen while folks sit passively by, believing that "things can't really be all that bad." Or, "It couldn't happen here."

If Seeker is right about the grand design of the IHL being to test their plan on USM, at least UM, MSU and the others are on notice and can see what could happen. We get to play Poland in this re-enactment.

Who has a barometer for "community support?" Not me. I get a two totally different reads in my Sunday School class and at my job. Besides, how much difference does community support make, anyway? If the IHL and the legislature have decided to assault USM, the community is not going to be able to do much to sway them. Especially if the authorities can cloak the attack as they have done.

USM has been abused. The IHL is the abuser. The faculty said "No!" -- several times. It can't be rape, because the board has the legal authority; but it's abuse, nonetheless. For the most part, the community is that bystander that just doesn't want to get involved. Shelby Thames is just a little thing: a tool, you might say.

Date: May 31, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: LVN
"The concept of "professionalism" can be challenging, especially for younger people. I only understood "professionalism" when I worked for physicians, and I was probably older then than Seeker is now. Also, we live in a culture where everything is subjective -- all judgment is based on what we like or agree with. I remember trying to talk about objective reality with a group of students, and getting blank stares at first. "

I had a similar experience. The student was a Liberal Arts major in a science course. She thought everyone was entitled to their opinion even if they couldn't provide evidence or logical arguments for the opinions. She even wrote a letter to my chair complaining that I didn't respect her opinions. Boy, did she get an education.

The high schools seem to give some students so much self esteem that they believe they don't have to do any thinking.

Date: May 31, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: I'll Never Find Another Ewe
"It is clear that Seeker does not much care for Professor Polk. But I don't think that was the point he was trying to make. Seeker is expressing his opinion that, like himself, "the community" doesn't care for the antics and letters of Polk, Scarborough, and nameless others. He is trying to explain why he believes there has been no groundswell of popular support for the faculty cause. I don't agree with Seeker, but only because I think the community doesn't give a general rip one way or the other about much of anything -- except higher taxes. We speculate that this could never happen at Ole Miss or Miss State. Maybe that is true, but it is speculation, nevertheless. Yesterday was a good day to remember what all can happen while folks sit passively by, believing that "things can't really be all that bad." Or, "It couldn't happen here." If Seeker is right about the grand design of the IHL being to test their plan on USM, at least UM, MSU and the others are on notice and can see what could happen. We get to play Poland in this re-enactment. Who has a barometer for "community support?" Not me. I get a two totally different reads in my Sunday School class and at my job. Besides, how much difference does community support make, anyway? If the IHL and the legislature have decided to assault USM, the community is not going to be able to do much to sway them. Especially if the authorities can cloak the attack as they have done. USM has been abused. The IHL is the abuser. The faculty said "No!" -- several times. It can't be rape, because the board has the legal authority; but it's abuse, nonetheless. For the most part, the community is that bystander that just doesn't want to get involved. Shelby Thames is just a little thing: a tool, you might say. "

The issues must be kept clear. The Faculty Senate never once stated it was against change. There would be no problem at USM, State or Old Miss if the IHL brought in changed using the principle of shared governance.

It is the SFT's side that tells the public the faculty oppose change. That is the big lie. The faculty oppose bypassing shared governance. If the IHL and SFT's plans for change can't stand up to the debate under shared governance, then maybe the change is not progress. In addition, the faculty will not stand for change that threatens academic integrity, and neither would the public if they knew abouit it.

Date: May 31, 2005

Reporter--you are right on target. Someone early on suggested that as faculty we have not done a very good job at educating our students as to how THE university works--what gives it enduring value. Others said that the president must take the lead in this. In any case, it seems that faculty governance is a concept most don't understand. Perhaps if they could be shown the value of it?

Posted on another thread by Still Amazed

One thing that continues to amaze me is the outspoken segment of the public's misunderstanding of the faculty response to reorganization. The letter writers (and all Thames supporters) can't understand that we were not reacting to change. The university had been reorganized before and though there were some unhappy folks, it was done correctly--with input from the people who really understand the organization of the university. In several cases, these few (5 at most?) made huge mistakes. Just one--the dismantling of the graduate school--and I would wager that the solution is costing more money that the original unit did.

Date: May 31, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: I'll Never Find Another Ewe
"Seeker is expressing his opinion that, like himself, "the community" doesn't care for the antics and letters of Polk, Scarborough, and nameless others. He is trying to explain why he believes there has been no groundswell of popular support for the faculty cause."

"The community" knows very little about the USM situation outside of what it reads in the press. I seriously doubt that many community members even bother reading the letters to the editor. I know I never did.

Kids go straight to the comics, jocks go straight to the sports, nursing home residents go straight to the obituaries, the unemplolyed go straight to the classifieds, and debutantes look for their picture. Most readers probably go straight to the news and then trash the paper.

Who goes straight to the letters to the editor? Two groups: (1) those who care about the university, and (2) those who take joy with what is happening at USM and are looding for fodder to support their cause.

Date: May 31, 2005

Well put. Universities have adopted new technology far more aggresively than the business world. They led the entire internet movement, make more extansive use of distance learning, have moved to all-electronic enrollment, pay, etc.

At any university there will be a sginificant number who are on the cutting edge of change, doing beta testing for all of the products out there.

Date: May 31, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Exasperated Parent
"It didn't sound particularly condescending to me. It sounded like something an exasperated might say in desparation to a wayward child when all of the sound and established methods of communication had failed. We've tried to communicate with Seeker by reason, by facts, by questions, by persuasion, by praise, and by correction. Nothing has worked. What strategy do you suggest? "

Exasperated Parent,

You just don't get it. You have a lot of growing up to do before you can understand a post like mine.

Now, to be serious: I would suggest addressing seeker, or anyone else who seems to want to engage in a serious dialogue, in the same way that any one of us would want to be addressed. In other words, I would not include sentences like the ones in my first paragraph above.

Date: May 31, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Reading Habit
" "The community" knows very little about the USM situation outside of what it reads in the press. I seriously doubt that many community members even bother reading the letters to the editor. I know I never did. Kids go straight to the comics, jocks go straight to the sports, nursing home residents go straight to the obituaries, the unemplolyed go straight to the classifieds, and debutantes look for their picture. Most readers probably go straight to the news and then trash the paper. Who goes straight to the letters to the editor? Two groups: (1) those who care about the university, and (2) those who take joy with what is happening at USM and are looding for fodder to support their cause. "

Counting letters to the editor is a very poor index of community perception. It consists of a small non- random sample. I hope that the IHL does not think it has a handle on community perception by looking only at letters to the editor,

Date: May 31, 2005

I'm enjoying this dialogue with Seeker. Seeker, Seeker, where are you? Come join the discussion. This thread's for you, bud.

Date: May 31, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Reporter
". . . She thought everyone was entitled to their opinion even if they couldn't provide evidence or logical arguments for the opinions. . . . The high schools seem to give some students so much self esteem that they believe they don't have to do any thinking. "

I don't think the high schools are necessarily to blame. What you have described is what Mr. Moulder seems to be saying in his letter today: "I'm the taxpayer, and I get to express my opinion irrespective of how unsupported it is." I dare say Moulder is the product of an earlier educational system.

I am disappointed that the HA is letting this faculty baiting continue. Maybe the paper's stable of the usual "provocative" contributors are all weary from running political campaigns.

I hope my earlier post that you quoted did not indicate that I confused the issues of "change" and "shared governance." I do not, but I apologize if I appeared to.

Date: May 31, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: I'll Never Find Another Ewe
"It is clear that Seeker does not much care for Professor Polk. But I don't think that was the point he was trying to make. Seeker is expressing his opinion that, like himself, "the community" doesn't care for the antics and letters of Polk, Scarborough, and nameless others. He is trying to explain why he believes there has been no groundswell of popular support for the faculty cause."

The only thing that puzzles me about Seeker's relationship with Noel Polk is that he apparently managed to get a B from Polk, which is somewhat shocking given the way Seeker (by his own admission) spells.

Date: May 31, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: I'll Never Find Another Nom
" ... I hope my earlier post that you quoted did not indicate that I confused the issues of "change" and "shared governance." I do not, but I apologize if I appeared to. "

Not at all, I'll Never Find Another Nom. After today's letter in the H.A., I just wanted to make the issue clear. No apology needed.

Date: May 31, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: spellbound
"The only thing that puzzles me about Seeker's relationship with Noel Polk is that he apparently managed to get a B from Polk, which is somewhat shocking given the way Seeker (by his own admission) spells."

But sum of Seeker's posteings are pitcher pefuct grammaer-wise. Sumtimes I suspecct he has a gostewriter.

Date: May 31, 2005

Or he is purposely misspelling and using bad grammar.
Seeker writes some interesting items, but he is compromised because of his loathing of Professor Polk.

Date: May 31, 2005

Sometimes bad spelling is actually just bad typing. For instance, yours truly wrote "Artic Ocean" in a post last night. Of course I know it's "Arctic" but it didn't seem worth a whole new post to correct.

Date: May 31, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: LVN
"Sometimes bad spelling is actually just bad typing. For instance, yours truly wrote "Artic Ocean" in a post last night. Of course I know it's "Arctic" but it didn't seem worth a whole new post to correct."

I agree, and am often guilty myself, but Seeker has raised bad typing to a unique art form.

Date: May 31, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Reporter
"
The issues must be kept clear. The Faculty Senate never once stated it was against change. There would be no problem at USM, State or Old Miss if the IHL brought in changed using the principle of shared governance.
It is the SFT's side that tells the public the faculty oppose change. That is the big lie. The faculty oppose bypassing shared governance. If the IHL and SFT's plans for change can't stand up to the debate under shared governance, then maybe the change is not progress. In addition, the faculty will not stand for change that threatens academic integrity, and neither would the public if they knew abouit it."

Excellent post. To take it a step farther, how many of SFT's "changes" might have been more successful & efficient had he bothered to get input from folks who are closer to "where the rubber meets the road?"

Remember, the infamous reorganization wasn't done with input from the "bidness community", either. It was presented to them as a fait accompli, before the affected deans (who also had no input) were informed. I don't think reorganization per se was the point but rather how that reorganization was planned & implemented.

Date: May 31, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Invictus
" Excellent post. To take it a step farther, how many of SFT's "changes" might have been more successful & efficient had he bothered to get input from folks who are closer to "where the rubber meets the road?" Remember, the infamous reorganization wasn't done with input from the "bidness community", either. It was presented to them as a fait accompli, before the affected deans (who also had no input) were informed. I don't think reorganization per se was the point but rather how that reorganization was planned & implemented."

Agreed Invictus. I always thought that SFT invented the story, "faculty oppose change to their soft jobs" and "they don't want to give a day's work for a day's pay" because he had to have an answer to an important question. He had to tell his supporters why the faculty opposed his presidency from the very beginning. He couldn't say they knew he was a terrible administrator.

Remember even Klumb put this line out very early in a TV interview or Letter to the Editor. It is the "basic issue" always given by his supporters for the fight at USM.

Too bad this has become a monolog. Maybe Seeker will join the thread when he gets off of work. Hope so.

Date: May 31, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: Dale Carnegie
"I would suggest addressing seeker, or anyone else who seems to want to engage in a serious dialogue, in the same way that any one of us would want to be addressed."

Good idea! We'll address him like the adult college graduate he is. It worked last year.

Date: May 31, 2005

Seeker,

I agree with some of what you are saying about the IHL Board attempting a "major social experiment" at USM.

However, I doubt that the entire Board ever signed on to extending the experiment to MSU and Ole Miss if it appeared to work at USM. I expect that Roy Klumb wanted to run all 8 state universities on an "economic development" model after Thames (his "Jackie Robinson," if you remember those weird quotes) showed everyone how to do it. As another poster noted after Thames was given his final two years, Klumb thought he was going to become "king of the universities" in Mississippi. But Klumb isn't very smart, and while he could get a majority of the Board to foist Thames on USM--an institution that most of the Board members have never valued anyway--he would have found it much harder to foist Thamesian presidents on Ole Miss and MSU.

I also think that, while Thames could have gotten some things done with a minimum of fuss, had he bothered to show respect for shared governance, much of what he wanted would never be accepted by faculty members anywhere, so he had to try to impose it by fiat.

Thames could easily have privatized the bookstore without running roughshod over the faculty--it's been done at countless other universities. By announcing the privatization as a fait accompli, after he'd already faked enrollment numbers, imposed a draconian computer use policy, hired an unqualified VP for Research, and tried to fire Gary Stringer and Frank Glamser, he merely succeeded in getting most faculty members to question the move. I know from my own experience at Clemson that Barnes and Noble isn't going to jack up the prices of textbooks after it takes over the university bookstore--but Thames' history of arbitrary acts and deals with cronies that don't pass the smell test made such an outcome look plausible.

However, the core of Thames' vision was making USM an "economic development university." Only those programs that brought in research grants and contracts or Congressional appropriations would be allowed to grow. Tuition revenue would be diverted from the units that brought it in, because a Thamesian university commits as little as possible to educating undergraduates, and spent on Polymer Science, Economic Development, or the Dome. Private donations (except maybe for athletics) would be ignored because Thames is hopeless at donor relations.

This is simply not a viable model for a university. Either the university gets substantial revenue from instruction, or instruction is subsidized. Otherwise instruction might as well be abandoned. Scorning any program where professors simply get paid to teach and do research means scorning most of the university; diverting the tuition revenue away from them guarantees their future collapse, as we have already seen clearly with the School of Nursing. And there is no way to maintain a university where a handful of units do grant-funded research while everything else is pounded down to community college level, or destroyed completely. It wouldn't surprise me if USM's funded research totals for 2005-2006 and 2006-2007 stay at the same level as 2004-2005, or actually drop below it. Thamesian abuse is rapidly exhausting the capacity of most programs at USM to compete for any sort of grant funding. (I also agree with the poster who suggested that total enrollment at USM will plateau or drop during Thames' period of lame-duckitude.)

Wherever there is shared governance, the faculty will reject the "economic development university" model--for the simple reason that it is not viable. No university can be run on such a basis; most programs will end up being destroyed or reduced to the diploma mill level.

So it's not just that Thames is a supremely bad administrator; what he claims to be aiming at cannot work. A president with all the genuine administrative skills that Thames so obviously lacks would still fail miserably, if he or she tried to implement an "economic development university."

Unfortunately, I doubt that most of the Board understands any of this; the best we can hope for is a sense that Thames brought them more trouble than he was worth, so for a while they'll shy away from anyone else who talks the Thamesian talk. We know that Haley Barbour and Trent Lott believe in the "economic development university," as do some other movers and shakers in Mississippi. What can be done to disabuse them of these illusions?

Robert Campbell

PS. I don't know why you keep complaining about Noel Polk, as though he single-handedly makes the USM faculty look bad. I happen to like him. But even if I didn't like Noel, he would be one of the first people I would want on my side, if I were up against Shelby Thames.

Date: May 31, 2005

Reporter wrote:

quote:
Originally posted by: LVN"The concept of "professionalism" can be challenging, especially for younger people. I only understood "professionalism" when I worked for physicians, and I was probably older then than Seeker is now. Also, we live in a culture where everything is subjective -- all judgment is based on what we like or agree with. I remember trying to talk about objective reality with a group of students, and getting blank stares at first. "

I had a similar experience. The student was a Liberal Arts major in a science course. She thought everyone was entitled to their opinion even if they couldn't provide evidence or logical arguments for the opinions. She even wrote a letter to my chair complaining that I didn't respect her opinions. Boy, did she get an education.
The high schools seem to give some students so much self esteem that they believe they don't have to do any thinking.

The problem is that student WAS entitled to her opinion. Her opinion means just as much as yours or mine or anyone else's, regardless of how much or how little "support" she could provide for it. This infatuation with logical arguments is a sham concocted by academics to keep the little man down and only adds to the dislike of the "egghead" professor.

I love people for whom I cannot provide concrete evidence as motivation for that love. I have faith in a God that I cannot see nor have I met, and this faith is based on experiences that I cannot justify with words. I have opinions that are based on gut instinct -- the vibe I get deep down -- rather than cold hard facts. Nothing you can say will shake certain beliefs I hold, but the fact that I hold such beliefs scares many on this board because I refuse to let you define my being according to your terms.

If you couldn't present objective facts to the young lady you mention in a manner that she could understand and change her views on her own, then you're not much of a teacher. Maybe you should stick to teaching facts and not trying to brainwash the young adults of Mississippi.