Hedgehog wrote:

---

I wrote:  Following your med model. new USM faculty would be asked to teach about 1 course per year initially, and supported for three years of research and minor service work before any external funding is required to appear. Failure to do so would result in an increased teaching load and more service. 

Hog wrote:

I don't think anon said anything about supporting the medical school teaching model at USM. But it is not unusual for good doctoral-level universities to require two courses per semester as a normal teaching load. It would not be unreasonable to give new faculty members a course reduction of one course per semester for a limited period of time.

---

You are correct in that Anon did not say that he was supporting a med school model at USM, but was using the analogy of clinical work as part of med school contract obligations to hypothesize that our institution is in dnager of providing 1/2 time contracts to teach, with the rest supported by external sources or internal service. My point was that this was a poor analogy--too many differences in fiscal structures, mission, professional obligations and so forth.

I agree that a 2/2 is not unusual at all. My department has a 2/2 load at USM for "research active" faculty prior to any grant buy outs. Higher teaching loads are given to those who are less research productive. If you look at the MSU and UM websites, you will see that this is their standard also for doctoral granting departments. The "big boys" (another poster used this phrase) in my discipline can be much more supportive (1/1 or 1/2 first two years is not unusual, first summer paid for research, summer before tenure paid, plus about 4 times the start up money and better lab and office space). 

Deep Probe wrote:

---

ANON2, Do you think the current Midas program is good or not good for the University of Southern Mississippi? For your college? For your department?

---

I wrote on another post that I have mixed feelings about MIDAS. I have been the recipient of 1 MIDAS check, but have bought out for years without a MIDAS check. I would be seeking external funding with or without MIDAS--so, at least for me, it wasn't a big incentive. Many institutions have similar programs, but USM isn't most institutions. We have many open sores that need to heal, and allowing about 10% of the faculty to recover some money they brought in rubs a lot of people the wrong way. The issue in my department (and I agree with this needs to be fixed) is that people who bring in cash but not course buy outs can't recover money. For the university, we have many wonderful scholars who, by the nature of their disciplines, are not in a position to compete for grant dollars in the same way that some of us are. I think that there are many ways of rewarding these people also (including raises). I think the recent trend toward increasing the cash amount of various awards and honors across the university is a good start--and this should be expanded--and shared. I think that all researchers and scholars need greater access to F&A recovery--when you can pay for various and sundry items (journals, membership fees, travel) off prof dev accounts, this is akin to a raise.

But I think some of the angst related to MIDAS goes to a very basic issue-I, as a university faculty member, really do not want to think of myself as a cash generating machine. I got into this business because I love to teach and to do research. But the times they are a changing--I need to think about student FTEs and SCHs generated, outlay for various and sundry items I need to do research, making sure my grad students can eat... I am told that I need to think like a businessman and that I need to look for sources of cash to support my department and college. It's not what I set out to do, but it is now what I do.   

I think that MIDAS, in some ways, has become a symbol for what many of us believe ails higher ed. It's not just USM--it's happened at Universities across the nation. The almighty dollar and "accountability" have become so much of the center of our discussions (waiting for the yearly budget has become so much a part of our lives), that it's easy to forget why we chose this profession in the first place.

The "current" MIDAS program needs to be re-visited. I see nothing wrong in rewarding people for their efforts, and using a pool of F&A (not current MIDAS) and salary recovery money (current MIDAS) to do this. But this needs to be spread around more equitably. If 25% of my measly MIDAS check were diverted and matched by F&A funds to reward a faculty member who published an award winning series of short stories that took years to write, I'd be way cool with that (my wife might complain though). I like to think that we are a University "community." Programs and people that divide us need a good, hard look.