WAYS TO MOVE USM FORWARD - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Jul 17, 2005

WAYS TO MOVE USM FORWARD

Date: Jul 17, 2005

relevant thread SHOULD HAVE BEEN other thread

Date: Jul 17, 2005

USM Sypathizer wrote:

1. Find a new president with solid academic credentials who also has a proven track record as a successful and trusted academic administrator.

That won't occur for at least two years. In the meantime?

Date: Jul 17, 2005

Waiting game wrote:

USM Sypathizer wrote: 1. Find a new president with solid academic credentials who also has a proven track record as a successful and trusted academic administrator. That won't occur for at least two years. In the meantime?

Good question! I guess my answer would be "keep up the pressure on Shelby Thames" in the hope that (a) he will resign (fat chance); (b) he will be replaced sooner than has been announced (a possibility, probably remote); (c) he will do some other really bone-headed thing and his sponsors will finally decide that the time has come to bid him adios.

Date: Jul 17, 2005

USM Sypathizer wrote:

On another thread, Robert Campbell suggested that a thread such as the present one be established. I'm happy to oblige. Here are three suggestions I offered on that relevant thread. Others are very welcome. 1. Find a new president with solid academic credentials who also has a proven track record as a successful and trusted academic administrator. Shelby may have had the first; he surely never had the second. 2. Let this new president behave as good presidents do: let him (or her) consult widely with all the appropriate "stakeholders" (faculty, staff, alumni, students) and then, after such wide consultation, help him enact whatever policies may have been agreed upon. 3. Announce as loudly and widely as possible that a new day has dawned for USM, that the era of Shelby Thames is definitely over, that the new administration wants to avoid the kinds of mistakes Shelby specialized in. Making this change widely known will help the university to (a) recruit talented faculty; (b) begin to win back some of the reputation Shelby squandered; (c) help begin to restore the morale, trust, and confidence of the faculty and staff who stuck it out through The Shelby Fiasco.

1) We first need a Commissioner with solid academic administration experience.

2) A Provost with solid academic credential and the respect of the faculty.

3) Some new deans that have the trust and respect of faculty and staff.

4) Policies to mend the rift created by policies such as MIDAS.

5) A Dialog between faculty, community and the IHL Commissioner.

Date: Jul 17, 2005

Two Cents Worth wrote:

1) We first need a Commissioner with solid academic administration experience. 2) A Provost with solid academic credential and the respect of the faculty. 3) Some new deans that have the trust and respect of faculty and staff. 4) Policies to mend the rift created by policies such as MIDAS. 5) A Dialog between faculty, community and the IHL Commissioner.

This is worth alot more than $.02.

Date: Jul 17, 2005

There are plenty of positive steps that the Faculty Senate and other faculty bodies can take, over the next few months, that will position USM for the better years ahead.

One of these, as I suggested a while back, would be to draw up a model computer use policy to replace the draconian nightmare that Thames imposed. Then challenge Thames to approve the policy.

If he refuses to, he will draw more bad publicity, and his successor will score a slam-dunk by approving a similiar policy as soon as Shelby is gone.

It is worth putting effort into developing better policies and practices now, even though Thames has the power to block them--and while he is still on the throne he will block at least some of them.

Robert Campbell

PS. It remains the case that the single action that would do the most to enhance USM's prospects over the next two years would be for Thames to announce his resignation, effective immediately. But since Thames and his supporters insist on clinging to the remnants of power, everyone else will just have to work around them.

Date: Jul 17, 2005

Two Cents Worth wrote:

USM Sypathizer wrote:
On another thread, Robert Campbell suggested that a thread such as the present one be established. I'm happy to oblige. Here are three suggestions I offered on that relevant thread. Others are very welcome. 1. Find a new president with solid academic credentials who also has a proven track record as a successful and trusted academic administrator. Shelby may have had the first; he surely never had the second. 2. Let this new president behave as good presidents do: let him (or her) consult widely with all the appropriate "stakeholders" (faculty, staff, alumni, students) and then, after such wide consultation, help him enact whatever policies may have been agreed upon. 3. Announce as loudly and widely as possible that a new day has dawned for USM, that the era of Shelby Thames is definitely over, that the new administration wants to avoid the kinds of mistakes Shelby specialized in. Making this change widely known will help the university to (a) recruit talented faculty; (b) begin to win back some of the reputation Shelby squandered; (c) help begin to restore the morale, trust, and confidence of the faculty and staff who stuck it out through The Shelby Fiasco.

1) We first need a Commissioner with solid academic administration experience.
2) A Provost with solid academic credential and the respect of the faculty.
3) Some new deans that have the trust and respect of faculty and staff.
4) Policies to mend the rift created by policies such as MIDAS.
5) A Dialog between faculty, community and the IHL Commissioner.

Why has MIDAS created such a "rift"? It seems to me that MIDAS is designed to reward anyone who meets certain criteria. If you do not have the opportunity or choose not to, then you won't get rewarded. It doesn't preclude you from getting a merit raise.

I am constantly amazed at how every benefit program has to be "fair" and "balanced" for some on this board to be satisfied. The problem is that there is no such thing as a "fair" policy.

Date: Jul 17, 2005

I thought the trouble with MIDAS was that

(1) It creates perverse incentives--get a grant or contract with buyout provisions, instead of one that doesn't include them, otherwise no bonus;

(2) It has not led to significant increases in grant and contract funded research at USM;

(3) It depletes resources that USM needs to spend on other things;

(4) It breaks the rules of some granting agencies (specifically, NSF);

(5) It apparently extends to researchers whose funding is "earmarked" (i.e., secured via the pork barrel, instead of through a competitive process).

Robert Campbell

PS. Any MIDAS advocate needs to explain how other universities that are trying to increase their grant and contract funded research (and are having more sucess meeting that goal than USM) do not offer MIDAS-type bonuses.

Date: Jul 17, 2005

Huh?? wrote:

The problem is that there is no such thing as a "fair" policy.

Sure there is. It sounds like you've never taught at the right school.

Date: Jul 17, 2005

robert--i'm not sure what your problem is with #1 (buyout provisions). i know faculty here for years (10+) who got competitively selected grants (NIH and others) with buyout provisions. i suspect gary stringer's NEH grant had buyout. the logic being that they couldn't conduct the research in the grant without a teaching load reduction. because MIDAS didn't exist in the cases i'm familiar with, they didn't receive a bonus--although they could get paid for the summer at about 1/3 of their 9-month salary instead of the usual summer school rate.

Date: Jul 17, 2005

stinky cheese man wrote:

robert--i'm not sure what your problem is with #1 (buyout provisions). i know faculty here for years (10+) who got competitively selected grants (NIH and others) with buyout provisions. i suspect gary stringer's NEH grant had buyout. the logic being that they couldn't conduct the research in the grant without a teaching load reduction. because MIDAS didn't exist in the cases i'm familiar with, they didn't receive a bonus--although they could get paid for the summer at about 1/3 of their 9-month salary instead of the usual summer school rate.

Robert and SCM:

I think I mentioned this before on the board, and no one picked up on it. We (the University Research Council) gave input on MIDAS, and were aware of its many warts and limitations (some changes were made based on our feedback though--primarily to get more grant funded researchers in this boat). I would have preferred to base this on F&A, but we were told that this would have been a definite no starter (I was not privy to the regulation specifics that led to this conclusion).

I can tell you that one of the motivators for MIDAS was that too many grant funded researchers chose to twist chair and dean's arms and demand buy outs as in kind, or at a level that would not support enough salary recovery money to pay for instructional replacements (I had seen this first hand in fellow researchers). MIDAS was intended, in part, to change that culture. The question is whether there has been a net increase (minus MIDAS payouts) in salary recovery post MIDAS (I don't know). You could argue that our SPA and VP should have twisted back and demanded that all researchers include appropriate funded release, but that would have had to be a university wide mandate that might have left little flexibility at the unit level for such decisions. Who knows... I'd like to see the outcome data...

Date: Jul 17, 2005

A modest proposal: I wonder if it might be a good idea to start a separate MIDAS thread and keep this one focused on its announced purpose. Just a thought . . . .

Date: Jul 17, 2005

USM Sympathizer wrote:

A modest proposal: I wonder if it might be a good idea to start a separate MIDAS thread and keep this one focused on its announced purpose. Just a thought . . . .

FYI, I just created such a separate MIDAS thread.

Date: Jul 19, 2005

kick

Date: Jul 19, 2005

Detroy It.

Date: Jul 20, 2005

How about putting in place better reporting standards for

-- How many faculty and how many administrators USM has

-- How much USM is really spending on instruction, research, and administrationn

Robert Campbell

PS. "Scorched earth" seems to be enunciating the strategy of the Thames administration.

Date: Jul 20, 2005

Robert Campbell wrote:

"Scorched earth" seems to be enunciating the strategy of the Thames administration.

As my old pal Log Truck Driver says, "10-4 on that!"

Now, as an alumnus, I'd like to see USM make a concerted effort to involve all alumni in college activities, planning, etc., not just the ones who can afford make big pledges (that they can later renege). The way it is now, folks "buy" the right to give advice.

Date: Jul 20, 2005

Invictus wrote:

I'd like to see USM make a concerted effort to involve all alumni in college activities, planning, etc., not just the ones who can afford make big pledges.

The schools with which I am acquainted want to increase the percentage of alumni giving. USM, on the other hand, doesn't seem to give a frizzle about the little alum. Give 'em the big bucks and USM is your oyster. Make a modest contribution within your immediate means and they don't give you the time of day.