Interim Coast Provost Named - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Aug 16, 2005

RE: Interim Coast Provost Named

Date: Aug 16, 2005

Music Patron:

Yep -- I should have remembered that. There are always those exceptions, dang it!

Do you think the DMA dissertation is as major at the Ph.D disseration (I am asking this for my own information). I'd be knocked over if it was considering the rigor of the applied side.

I've met some DMA's who continued their research but most seem to end up working somewhere where they teach and play and use the research tool in a secondary sense.

Thanks for the heads up.

Date: Aug 16, 2005

The academic degree hierarchy can be seen at commencement. There is an order in which the degrees are presented. The distinctions are sometimes subtle, but they do exist. Unless USM has lost that part of its institutional heritage, it still exists here. Take a look at this year's commencements and see. The M.A. degree, for example, is a higher degree than the M.S., and the B.A. is a higher degree than a B.S. Professional degrees (e.g., M.D., Ed.D., D.O.) have their own positions, but none is higher than the Ph.D. which is a research degree.

Date: Aug 16, 2005

Wikipedia Man wrote:

"Although a Ph.D is the highest academic qualification available..........Medical schools may offer research Ph.D. degrees as part of their M.D. programs, although an M.D. by itself is frequently enough to teach medicine."

In this message board's early history somebody jokingly suggested that M.D. means "minus dissertation." At least I think it was a joke.

Date: Aug 16, 2005

My immediate question is why you didn't use the "original research" paper from your MD studies to (at least in a large part) complete your Ph.D. dissertation.

It wouldn't have worked that way in my program since the PhD was completed first. I don't know about now, but in the dark ages when I was in school, the "Mud-Phud" program went like this. First, two years of classroom basic medical science, with hospital clerkships during the summers and breaks (ergo, there were no breaks), then 5-6 years in the Ph.D. program, followed by the final two clinical years of the MD program. Followed by a residency, then possibly a fellowship. In other words, a total of about 12-16 years of training. The Ph.D. and M.D. programs didn't cross-pollinate. They were independant of one another, other than both being scientific in nature. However, many students did use their dissertation research as a foundation for the senior research paper. The MD research was different, but often either tangentially or directly related to the Ph.D. research. Does that help, or have I confused matters even more?

It's no longer accurate to characterize the MD as a practical degree. Most of the better med schools have practice and research tracks, with the student choosing after the second year which track is preferred. Those selecting the research track spend less time with patients and more time pursuing original research and a senior thesis, comparable to a dissertation, is required before a degree is awarded. These students typically don't even bother with medical licensure, but follow med school with a post-doc research fellowship, then pure bench research.

Getting back to the post that prompted my response, while I know nothing about the Ed.D. degree, all of the other terminal degrees I mentioned are research degrees, with the possible exception of the Psy.D. You'd have a hard time convincing me that they're somehow hierarchically or otherwise inferior to a Ph.D., and in making this argument I mean absolutely no disrespect to those who have sweated blood earning a Ph.D. Historically I think you're correct, but there are many first rate US institutions now offering research-based doctorates other than the Ph.D.

Date: Aug 16, 2005

stephen judd wrote:

Music Patron:

Yep -- I should have remembered that. There are always those exceptions, dang it!

Do you think the DMA dissertation is as major at the Ph.D disseration (I am asking this for my own information). I'd be knocked over if it was considering the rigor of the applied side.

I've met some DMA's who continued their research but most seem to end up working somewhere where they teach and play and use the research tool in a secondary sense.

Thanks for the heads up.

Stephen,

Well, the answer is that always dependable "depends." In some schools it is; in others, its not. I think that USM has adopted the term "document" for its final DMA project, and in general, the research component, while required, is not at the heart of the paper. In other words, one does reserach, throws out new ideas, etc. but the advancement of knowledge is not at the core of the paper. Musicians correct me if I am wrong. But I know several of the USM faculty who did heavy duty research on their DMA's---Ragsdale, Redfield, Stringer (Mrs. Dr. Stringer) and Kimber--now gone,
Fuller, among others.

Date: Aug 16, 2005

A couple of semi-unrelated comments...

First, IIRC the statistics provided by Census 2000, MD & JD degrees are not considered "terminal." PhD & EdD degrees are "terminal." (And yes, the phrase "terminal degree" always amuses me. My own PhD was purt' near "terminal!")

Second, historically the EdD is viewed as somewhat "inferior" to the PhD because it is not as rigorous an overall program in many institutions. Although USM did require dissertations for the EdD, there was no foreign language requirement & some EdD dissertations were not experimental-type research projects but rather were "reviews of the literature." To this day, the dissertations in educational administration (with which I am familiar) tend to gravitate toward surveys rather than projects that require sophisticated designs & statistical analyses. Personally, I regard that type of study as inherently "softer" & less demanding, but your mileage may vary.

Date: Aug 16, 2005

Nil Illegitimi Carborundum!

Date: Aug 16, 2005

Pat wrote:

Nil Illegitimi Carborundum!

And while we're at it, what is IIRC (Investigate if Roman Catholic, Insert Into Round Catheter, Illusory Information Randomly Collected, etc., etc.)?

Date: Aug 16, 2005

1) From the online Times Educational Supplement discussion board:

...Much more fun, however, is 'Dog Latin' - the creation of a phrase or jargon in imitation of Latin, often by directly translating English words into Latin without conjugation or declension.

A well-known humorous example — frequently confused with real Latin — is the aphorism Nil illegitimi carborundum (and several simple variants), which is said to mean "don't let the bastards grind you down". "Carborundum", the abrasive, has a Latinate ending and suggests grinding, but in fact is a nineteenth century trademark constructed as a portmanteau of carbon and corundum (a Hindi word). "Illegitimi" sounds as if it might mean "illegitimate children" in the literal sense (and hence imply the modern English idiom), but the actual Latin word for "bastard" is nothus. And "nil" sounds as if it might be a negator adverb for the grinding of "carborundum", but actually is the noun, "nothing".

http://www.tes.co.uk/section/staffroom/thread.aspx?story_id=2044568&path=/the+classics/&threadPage=1

2) From Wikipedia:

? IIRC — "If I recall correctly", or "if I remember correctly"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IIRC

Date: Aug 16, 2005

If I remember correctly, "IIRC" stands for "if I remember correctly."

Date: Aug 16, 2005

MD, PhD wrote:

My immediate question is why you didn't use the "original research" paper from your MD studies to (at least in a large part) complete your Ph.D. dissertation.

It wouldn't have worked that way in my program since the PhD was completed first. I don't know about now, but in the dark ages when I was in school, the "Mud-Phud" program went like this. First, two years of classroom basic medical science, with hospital clerkships during the summers and breaks (ergo, there were no breaks), then 5-6 years in the Ph.D. program, followed by the final two clinical years of the MD program. Followed by a residency, then possibly a fellowship. In other words, a total of about 12-16 years of training. The Ph.D. and M.D. programs didn't cross-pollinate. They were independant of one another, other than both being scientific in nature. However, many students did use their dissertation research as a foundation for the senior research paper. The MD research was different, but often either tangentially or directly related to the Ph.D. research. Does that help, or have I confused matters even more?

It's no longer accurate to characterize the MD as a practical degree. Most of the better med schools have practice and research tracks, with the student choosing after the second year which track is preferred. Those selecting the research track spend less time with patients and more time pursuing original research and a senior thesis, comparable to a dissertation, is required before a degree is awarded. These students typically don't even bother with medical licensure, but follow med school with a post-doc research fellowship, then pure bench research.

Getting back to the post that prompted my response, while I know nothing about the Ed.D. degree, all of the other terminal degrees I mentioned are research degrees, with the possible exception of the Psy.D. You'd have a hard time convincing me that they're somehow hierarchically or otherwise inferior to a Ph.D., and in making this argument I mean absolutely no disrespect to those who have sweated blood earning a Ph.D. Historically I think you're correct, but there are many first rate US institutions now offering research-based doctorates other than the Ph.D.

Thanks for the response. I agree that there are many research-oriented MDs out there, as well as research-oriented doctorates in other fields.

Just being nosey, do you claim your MD or your Ph.D. as a matter of daily course? Or do you claim them both equally? I find that non-doctorate types hold MDs in much higher esteem than Ph.D.s.

Date: Aug 16, 2005

Disk Q wrote:

Just being nosey, do you claim your MD or your Ph.D. as a matter of daily course? Or do you claim them both equally? I find that non-doctorate types hold MDs in much higher esteem than Ph.D.s.

I'll answer this delicately, so as to not disclose my semi-secret identity. I don't claim either as a matter of daily course. Let me explain. I never practiced medicine, having directly entered medical research. In the corporate world I, or should I say we, weren't addressed as "Dr.," but simply as "Mr. or Mrs. So and So." Early on my personal letterhead reflected both credentials, but proved to be a problem. I found that many people, including friends who should have known better, sought me out for medical advice I was neither qualified nor legally allowed to provide. I removed the MD from my letterhead and cards but the problem continued, the assumption I suppose being that since I was employed in the medical field, one doctorate was the same as another. Finally I removed any reference to academic credentials from my stationery, and that is still the case. Now our friends and neighbors know me only as a guy who works in a research lab and I'm rarely asked for a medical opinion. If I were to claim one credential, it would probably be the Ph.D., for the reasons cited. Occasionally, when I'm trying to accomplish something by telephone and it's apparent that I'm about to be placed on hold for an interminable period, I'll introduce myself as "Dr. So and So," which usually gets me through. Recently at a family gathering I fielded a phone call from my lab, during which I probably used some obscure medical-scientific jargon. My brother-in-law, a well educated professional whom I've known for 30 years, and who knows where I work, overheard the conversation and later asked "Are you some kind of a doctor or something?" I think his question pretty well illustrates the scant understanding of the public as to the significance of holding a doctorate of any type, and what it takes to earn it. They haven't a clue.

Date: Aug 16, 2005

PAT JOACHIM

She is a good person. She at least has centered her entire life in education of some sort, and even taught at USM GC for two or three years maybe-- in ed. leadership full time. That she not a chemical company budget specialist or a career federal grant approver..may not be all that bad.

THese are superior qualifications to the likes of Ken Malone and she will certainly not be so "out of it" as Jay Grimes appears to be all of the time.

I dare hope that Pat Joachim will do a decent job until Tom Meridith gets a grip on the USM problem and gives us the chance for some coordinated pro-active direction. Two years from now it will not matter who the interim at Gulf Park was.

I also dare hope that her administrative exp--(although nothing could really prepape anyone for the Shelby funshop)--will serve her well in organizing things that need organizing at Gulf Park -- like maybe the always disjointed class schedule, or the contract for the Science building.

I venture the suggestion that a mature woman such as Pat J. will not be sucked into the moral vacuum of the regime. The Games that have been played around USm seem alien to what I know of Pat J.

Faculty who give her a chance may find her a breath of fresh air. And she will not do classroom reprimands a la Ken Malone.

Date: Aug 16, 2005

" also dare hope that her administrative exp--(although nothing could really prepape anyone for the Shelby funshop)--will serve her well in organizing things that need organizing at Gulf Park -- like maybe the always disjointed class schedule, or the contract for the Science building."

And this tells the whole story--for everyone. Good luck and God bless.

Date: Aug 16, 2005

A question, if anyone knows or can offer reasonable conjecture - was this hire in the works in early July when Jay Grimes indicated there would be an announcement "the following week" or has Dr. Joachim just recently entered the picture?

Date: Aug 16, 2005

thanks beach eagle for getting this thread back to the basics....the appointment of Pat Joachim as the__________associate provost at usmgp.

if every usmgp faculty and staff member, every usmh faculty and staff member, would give as much effort, diligence, enthusiasm, drive, and determination to their roles as Pat will give to her role, USM WiLL SOAR LIKE AN EAGLE (sorry about the caps sj).

she is a mature leader.....she has experience in higher ed at our institution....has had a stellar record in every professional role that she has held.... and is a good person (as beach eagle said.)

i am probably among the most anti-sft persons that exist.....but thanks sft for this practical appointment.

i do know that Pat can work with anybody.....she is savvy....is a good listener and a good communicator. she will have no problems articulating the needs and challenges of USMGC to anyone that needs to hear. furthermore, she is very politically connected on the coast and in the state....she can hold her own with anybody, anywhere, anytime.

and she cares....about teaching and learning, people, usm, the state, and progress.

if each of us had contributed as much to education in Mississippi as Pat has, we would not have as many problems as we have....

get to know her....she is really a great person!!!!!!!!!!!!

just call her Pat....she is not interested in titles....that's the kind of person she is.

Date: Aug 16, 2005

You'd think that the coast faculty would view as outrageous the idea of appointing as chief academic officer someone with their terminal degree from USM, with no meaningful experience in academic administration at the university level, and very little experience as a university faculty member. Why can't we operate like a real university? Will we never learn? Are there no senior faculty members on the coast?

Date: Aug 16, 2005

You have to think of the pool of applicants available. Then think of Ken Malone. She's probably the only person who didn't laugh at them. It's an imperfect world. Sometimes you take what you can get (and we hope this works out.)

At least she has administrative and teaching experience.

Date: Aug 16, 2005

Little old lady wrote:

She's probably the only person who didn't laugh at them......At least she has administrative and teaching experience.

If those were characteristics appeared in the formal job description, I hope the position wasn't advertisted in the Chronicle.

Date: Aug 16, 2005

Little old lady wrote:

Sometimes you take what you can get

You're not from the IHL are you?

Date: Aug 16, 2005

I suspect it went down like this:

1) Jay and Ken round up the usual gang of sycophants

ANSWER) all of whom see the writing on the wall that this position is a great way to get blamed for everything, so no biters,

2) Jay pleads to a few others "for the good of the Univ"

ANSWER) see above

3) SFT calls in a few out-of-towners who can be "controlled"

ANSWER) see above

4) Search for some local talent, and hope for the best (Joachim)

ANSWER) she accepts, but the answer above still applies.

Look, I'm sure she has great leadership abilities and management skills. What must be recognized is that when you work for this administration, those abilities and skills will be thrown out, and fealty and control will be paramount. It doesn't really matter what her capabilities are - in the end, she will be required to "toe the line" without resistance.

Innovation and understanding are subsumed, and she will be torn between knowing what might be best for the Coast, and what she is TOLD is best. The reason - SFT knows what's best, and you don't.

Count

Date: Aug 16, 2005

Count, what about the possiblity that SFT & Co. no longer give a hang for the coast and are willing to hand it over to somebody who will keep them from being bothered? Farfetched for sure, I know.

Another question -- maybe already and answered and I missed it. How old is this lady and how close to retirement? Is she in a position life-wise and career-wise where she's perfectly free to tell them bye-bye?

Date: Aug 16, 2005

Little old lady wrote:

Count, what about the possiblity that SFT & Co. no longer give a hang for the coast and are willing to hand it over to somebody who will keep them from being bothered? Farfetched for sure, I know.

LoL I agree - farfetched. Since when has SFT handed over anything? If he wants his second extension or another 4 yrs (Don't think that this is absolutely his intention), he must control the coast.

Another question -- maybe already and answered and I missed it. How old is this lady and how close to retirement? Is she in a position life-wise and career-wise where she's perfectly free to tell them bye-bye?

Don't know her at all. However, after a bit of internal struggle, I would bet she realizes what her role is, and she will have to decide whether it is better to "do as your told" or move on.

Count

Date: Aug 17, 2005

To All:

If I understand correctly, here are three facts:

1. She has no meaningful experience teaching at the university level, only "a year or two" maybe. Almost all of her time has been spent at lower levels,

2. She has never done research of a rigorous academic nature, AND

3. She has never gone through a university-level tenure review process. There is an indication that she will be involved in reviewing USM faculty tenure portfolios.

Am I talking about Pat Joachim or Angie Dvorak?

While PJ has not falsified her record, her credentials are inferior to those of AD in a "where's her degree from" sense. This is not meant to pump up AD, but IF SFT was wrong to hire AD without her following the proper rites of academic passage, then for the same reasons he is wrong to hire Pat Joachim.

Date: Aug 17, 2005

Disk Q wrote:

To All: If I understand correctly, here are three facts: 1. She has no meaningful experience teaching at the university level, only "a year or two" maybe. Almost all of her time has been spent at lower levels, 2. She has never done research of a rigorous academic nature, AND 3. She has never gone through a university-level tenure review process. There is an indication that she will be involved in reviewing USM faculty tenure portfolios. Am I talking about Pat Joachim or Angie Dvorak? While PJ has not falsified her record, her credentials are inferior to those of AD in a "where's her degree from" sense. This is not meant to pump up AD, but IF SFT was wrong to hire AD without her following the proper rites of academic passage, then for the same reasons he is wrong to hire Pat Joachim.

she is heap mere qualified dan AD, she done got her a fine Southern Miss degree, don't need no experience when you got one of d'em

Date: Aug 17, 2005

Disk Q said "While PJ has not falsified her record." This is very important. I don't know this person, and her credentials don't look good. BUT she has one thing going for her that the lovely AD didn't----she didn't falsify them. I also suspect she's not nearly so mean.

Date: Aug 17, 2005

Heh heh wrote:

Disk Q said "While PJ has not falsified her record." This is very important. I don't know this person, and her credentials don't look good. BUT she has one thing going for her that the lovely AD didn't----she didn't falsify them. I also suspect she's not nearly so mean.

Nobody said AD was mean before she got to USM, but that's not the point.

The point is that IF opposing AD on the basis of her credentials was the right thing to do, THEN I fail to see how there can be any other alternative with PJ.

The fact that PJ is a nice lady is not germane to this situation.

Date: Aug 17, 2005

I agree. She may a "great" person, but she is a lightweight in academia. I also find disturbing hers and Grimes's kow-towing to the bidness community in the USM press release. Is she here to make academics better or to better serve (and I do mean be servile) to the bidness community? This seems to be more of Shelbyonics to me. Can't we ever get some real academic talent within the Admistration at USM? The faculty's credentials make most of the Administration seem like elementary school teachers . . . oops.

Disk Q wrote:

To All:

If I understand correctly, here are three facts:

1. She has no meaningful experience teaching at the university level, only "a year or two" maybe. Almost all of her time has been spent at lower levels,

2. She has never done research of a rigorous academic nature, AND

3. She has never gone through a university-level tenure review process. There is an indication that she will be involved in reviewing USM faculty tenure portfolios.

Am I talking about Pat Joachim or Angie Dvorak?

While PJ has not falsified her record, her credentials are inferior to those of AD in a "where's her degree from" sense. This is not meant to pump up AD, but IF SFT was wrong to hire AD without her following the proper rites of academic passage, then for the same reasons he is wrong to hire Pat Joachim.

Date: Aug 17, 2005

But look at the qualifications and compare it to the job description. AD as a VP of research??? At best she could have been an Ass VP of Econ Dev, but what experience did she have in externally funded, peer review research? Now, what is the job description of the ass provost for the coast? If you want somebody who can manage the day to day aspects of the campus, then I think Joachim is qualified. It would be nice if she was a tenured prof with some administrative experience, but you did get someone who knows the coast (which I have read many complaints that H’burg does not understand coast needs), has some experience teaching there, and has many years of education related administrative experience. Most importantly, she does not come in with baggage like the many internal appointments that are made. Also, I truly doubt that she will have a significant role in the tenure process. I foresee that she will be a local manager while the big decisions are made in the Burg.