WLOX 12/27/05: Hurricane Damage May Send USM Gulf Park Packing - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Dec 31, 2005

RE: WLOX 12/27/05: Hurricane Damage May Send USM Gulf Park Packing

Date: Dec 31, 2005

Googler wrote:

Is it Tommy Gollott?

http://www.gulfcoastnews.com/MDOTexposed/mdotNorthSouth.htm

GCN Special Report - A History of Deception

...A SUN HERALD news article dated January 31, 1997, indicated that the House Transportation Committee voted for the construction of a $49.7 million four-lane connector in Biloxi. The bill did not specify where the highway would intersect I-10.

A SUN HERALD news article dated February 6, 1997, indicated that Senator Tommy Gollott, who sponsored a bill in the Senate, to fund a Biloxi four-lane connector, specified that the highway would intersect I-10 at the Woolmarket Exit and that Senator Gollott owned property north of I-10 that would jump in value if the bill was passed. Senator Gollott’s bill ignored the findings of the City of Biloxi’s Planning Commission recommendations and the recommendations of Biloxi’s Comprehensive Plan called Vision 2020 for which Biloxi had just paid $160,000.

After the above disclosure, a SUN HERALD news article dated February 12, 1997, reflected that Representative Bobby Shows stated that he would kill the bill if the final compromise requires that the four-lane intersect at the Woolmarket exit. Shows was quoted as saying, “We’ve never (specified an exit) before. We’ve left it with the state Department of Transportation. Shows probably did not know that MDOT already had a preference for the Woolmarket exit.

A SUN HERALD dated February 21, 1997, reflected that Senator Tommy Gollott had dropped the specification of the Woolmarket exit from the Senate Bill for the Biloxi Connector. The article pointed out that Gollott owned about 30 acres north of the Woolmarket exit. In addition, the article pointed out that a company that Gollott was president of owned 47 adjacent acres....

Date: Jan 1, 2006

So, its been pretty well established that a state senator owns and controls a considerable amount of land at or near the Woolmarket exit on I-10. Did he buy the land with the intent of selling it to the state? Why are we so paranoid about the fact that state officials may own private property? If he has land that the state needs, he should sell it at a fair price to the state. Nuff said.

Date: Jan 1, 2006

The Woolmarket Shearer wrote:

Why are we so paranoid about the fact that state officials may own private property? If he has land that the state needs, he should sell it at a fair price to the state.

Woolmarket Shearer, It's not state officials owning private property that concerns us. It's state officials inappropriately using the influence of their office to swing an unfair deal that concerns us.

Date: Jan 2, 2006

Quoting: The USM faculty has been spoiled for too long, especially those in the arts and letters, science, and education. Faculty at USM in these areas historically make above-average salaries for their disciplines, have above-average facilities, and have their opinions carry above-average weight in discussions.

USM faculty (across the disciplines and colleges) have among the lowest average salaries in the country (please see any of the annual Chronicles of Higher Education which list average the country's salaries to see the gap). In addition, the fact is that the gap among the arts and letters faculty, as well as those in education, is the widest. Our department recently had a one-year (hired at the same pay as incoming tenure-track asst. profs). He was subsequently offered posts at bottom tier schools elsewhere (teaching 4 + 4, with little or no research expectations), but the pay ($49,500) was close to what associate professors at USM make. Non-academics do not seem to realize that professors could make a much higher salary in the "real" world, but choose to go into academia for other reasons, including job security (not too many universities actually do close or relocate and tenure is supposed to provide a degree of job security increasingly absent in the outside world).

To follow the business model, any professor with talent would leave Mississippi to follow the higher pay and better benefits of other states. The result would reinforce the state's status at the bottom of the economic, lifestyle and other rankings and further preclude the relocation of any businesses or industry (especially high-tech) to the state except perhaps more casinos. In the "real" world, companies must invest in new products and technology and seek to hire the best possible candidates or they are unable to compete. By not not investing in higher education, Mississippi is increasingly unable to compete even with states in the region with similar demographics.

Non-academics also seem to not understand the principle of shared governance. We had SACs problems before. USM needs to be able todemostrate to the next group of SACs reviewers that the faculty have input in decisions (since through the committee structure, it is the faculty that undertake most of the adminsitrative duties and functions that would be handled by middle-level managers in the business community). Otherwise, we could again be put on probation. I am not aware of too many businesses that have the equal of a faculty senate (a body chartered by the university). In addition, rules on curriculum, promotion and tenure, and so forth are all handled by faculty committees. But we have had this argument before--in the end, if SFT's management style was the correct one, we would have him to kick around for a few more years, instead of being able to witness his coming departure.

Date: Jan 2, 2006

Reality Calling wrote:

Quoting:
To follow the business model, any professor with talent would leave Mississippi to follow the higher pay and better benefits of other states. . . . In the "real" world, companies must invest in new products and technology and seek to hire the best possible candidates or they are unable to compete. By not not investing in higher education, Mississippi is increasingly unable to compete even with states in the region with similar demographics.

"Reality Calling" You're right on the money. In my deparment, we've been devestated by losses over the last three years. We can hardly cover out classes.

Turnover will continue to be high as most of my deparment is actively on the job market. You know things are bad when tenured associates are applying for positions at the assistant level at smaller, less reserarch oriented campuses. But salaries are so low in my department, these folks will still get substantial raises.

I think there is an entire cohort of USM faculty that arrived in the late 1990s believing that Mississippi had reversed its historical course of neglect of higher education. We were fooled by a few good years of strong economic growth.
We know now it was an abberation. Its time to move on.

Date: Jan 2, 2006

On the job market wrote:

Reality Calling wrote:
Quoting:
To follow the business model, any professor with talent would leave Mississippi to follow the higher pay and better benefits of other states. . . . In the "real" world, companies must invest in new products and technology and seek to hire the best possible candidates or they are unable to compete. By not not investing in higher education, Mississippi is increasingly unable to compete even with states in the region with similar demographics.

"Reality Calling" You're right on the money. In my deparment, we've been devestated by losses over the last three years. We can hardly cover out classes.

Turnover will continue to be high as most of my deparment is actively on the job market. You know things are bad when tenured associates are applying for positions at the assistant level at smaller, less reserarch oriented campuses. But salaries are so low in my department, these folks will still get substantial raises.

I think there is an entire cohort of USM faculty that arrived in the late 1990s believing that Mississippi had reversed its historical course of neglect of higher education. We were fooled by a few good years of strong economic growth.
We know now it was an abberation. Its time to move on.

..."can hardly cover your classes." The FAR will solve that problem for the faculty. Faculty that are presently teaching one class will have to teach two classes (increasing work your week from three to six hours.) Faculty presently teaching two classess will teach three classes (increasing your work week to nine hours). Faculty prsently teaching three classes will teach four classes (increasing your work week to 12 hours.) Faculty presently teaching four classes will continute to teach four classes and work 12 hours a week.

This new policy may enable us to reduce the number of overall faculty. Money saved from this plan will go toward the new plane and increased emphasis on athletics.

This policy will be revisited after May, 2007.

Date: Jan 2, 2006

I hate to keep trotting out my brief stint as an adjunct last year, but then again I'm fairly immune from retribution.

One class in freshman composition which requires three hours per week of class time requires additional hours spent grading, preparing, and meeting office hours. For an adjunct there are no demands for committee work or research, but nevertheless the three-hour work week is closer to twenty hours. Extrapolate that to regular faculty who have these other demands and you have a llong week.

Why do we have to have this discussion over and over and over??

Date: Jan 2, 2006

LVN wrote:

I hate to keep trotting out my brief stint as an adjunct last year, but then again I'm fairly immune from retribution.

One class in freshman composition which requires three hours per week of class time requires additional hours spent grading, preparing, and meeting office hours. For an adjunct there are no demands for committee work or research, but nevertheless the three-hour work week is closer to twenty hours. Extrapolate that to regular faculty who have these other demands and you have a llong week.

Why do we have to have this discussion over and over and over??

and the beach front land is for sale at bargain prices in Montana.

Date: Jan 2, 2006

Faculty Activity Reporter wrote:

Faculty that are presently teaching one class will have to teach two classes (increasing work your week from three to six hours.) Faculty presently teaching two classess will teach three classes (increasing your work week to nine hours). Faculty prsently teaching three classes will teach four classes (increasing your work week to 12 hours.) Faculty presently teaching four classes will continute to teach four classes and work 12 hours a week.

And lawyers who appear in court for only 12 clock hours each week can loaf the rest of the week, huh? And preachers who preach only 3 hours each week (an hour on Sunday morning, an hour on Sunday evening, and an hour on Wednesday evening) can loaf the remainder of the week, huh?

Date: Jan 2, 2006

Time Keeper wrote:

Faculty Activity Reporter wrote:
Faculty that are presently teaching one class will have to teach two classes (increasing work your week from three to six hours.) Faculty presently teaching two classess will teach three classes (increasing your work week to nine hours). Faculty prsently teaching three classes will teach four classes (increasing your work week to 12 hours.) Faculty presently teaching four classes will continute to teach four classes and work 12 hours a week.
And lawyers who appear in court for only 12 clock hours each week can loaf the rest of the week, huh? And preachers who preach only 3 hours each week (an hour on Sunday morning, an hour on Sunday evening, and an hour on Wednesday evening) can loaf the remainder of the week, huh?

yep, professors, preachers, and lawyers......you hit it right on the head. All in the same boat. You may have given the preachers the benefit of the doubt and I've know lawyers that didn't work that much. You did forget the state employees.

Date: Jan 2, 2006

On the job market wrote:

Turnover will continue to be high as most of my deparment is actively on the job market. You know things are bad when tenured associates are applying for positions at the assistant level at smaller, less reserarch oriented campuses. But salaries are so low in my department, these folks will still get substantial raises.

Yes, things are bad enough that I left a tenured full professorship, which has yet to be replaced at USM. The years of progressive IHL neglect; the Thames "disestablishmentarianism" policy of faculty input into governance; and the prospect of 1999-vintage salaries for the rest of my career, no matter what my accomplishments in scholarship, research, and service; was enough to make me "leave the vested retirement" in the PERS bank, and move onward. It was a difficult but rewarding decision for me, and I have sympathy for all my former colleagues still stuck in Hattiesburg by economic considerations.

Date: Jan 2, 2006

Faculty Activity Reporter wrote:

Time Keeper wrote:
Faculty Activity Reporter wrote:
Faculty that are presently teaching one class will have to teach two classes (increasing work your week from three to six hours.) Faculty presently teaching two classess will teach three classes (increasing your work week to nine hours). Faculty prsently teaching three classes will teach four classes (increasing your work week to 12 hours.) Faculty presently teaching four classes will continute to teach four classes and work 12 hours a week.
And lawyers who appear in court for only 12 clock hours each week can loaf the rest of the week, huh? And preachers who preach only 3 hours each week (an hour on Sunday morning, an hour on Sunday evening, and an hour on Wednesday evening) can loaf the remainder of the week, huh?
yep, professors, preachers, and lawyers......you hit it right on the head. All in the same boat. You may have given the preachers the benefit of the doubt and I've know lawyers that didn't work that much. You did forget the state employees.

Whether we like it or not this may be the public perception.

Date: Jan 2, 2006

faculty activity reporter wrote:

and the beach front land is for sale at bargain prices in Montana.

I can get you a note from my mother, if you like. She watched me in action and fussed over the stacks of essays on my kitchen table. You're either being sarcastic, or you have never taught.

Date: Jan 2, 2006

academic monitor wrote:

Whether we like it or not this may be the public perception.

If that is also your perception about your lawyer, and if you want a good representation, don't tell her that as you are walking into divorce court

Date: Jan 2, 2006

academic monitor wrote:

yep, professors, preachers, and lawyers......you hit it right on the head. All in the same boat. You may have given the preachers the benefit of the doubt and I've know lawyers that didn't work that much. You did forget the state employees.
Whether we like it or not this may be the public perception.

I agree, the Mississippi public is deeply hostile to higher education. They don't see its value and, consequently, don't support it with state funds. This will never change. That's why its time to move on. Mississippi will continue to be at the bottom of every ranking in our lifetime and in our children's children's lifetime. It won't change.

Date: Jan 2, 2006

LVN wrote:

faculty activity reporter wrote:

and the beach front land is for sale at bargain prices in Montana.

I can get you a note from my mother, if you like. She watched me in action and fussed over the stacks of essays on my kitchen table. You're either being sarcastic, or you have never taught.

LVN, you have just not learned the ropes yet. We have all those teaching assistants and graduate assistants that do all of that work. Hang in there, your time will come.

Date: Jan 2, 2006

MoveOn.org wrote:

" ......the Mississippi public is deeply hostile to higher education."

You're dead wrong about that, buster. Maybe you've spent too much time wandering around college campuses and not enough time out in Mississippi's real world where there are lots of folks who value education highly and hold it in great esteem but who didn't have the opportunity to attend college. See the smiles on their faces when they speak of their child's college experience. They're bust their bu**s to defray at least a portion of their child's tuition and other expenses related to higher education. Don't blame the "Mississippi public." The Mississippi public is no different than the public of any state when it comes to valuing higher education.

Date: Jan 2, 2006

First generation is right. Those who are holding Mississippi higher education back seem to be those who already hold college degrees. Some of them are in your own community. Some of them are even on boards appointed by the governor.

Date: Jan 2, 2006

MoveOn.org wrote:

academic monitor wrote:

yep, professors, preachers, and lawyers......you hit it right on the head. All in the same boat. You may have given the preachers the benefit of the doubt and I've know lawyers that didn't work that much. You did forget the state employees.
Whether we like it or not this may be the public perception.

I agree, the Mississippi public is deeply hostile to higher education. They don't see its value and, consequently, don't support it with state funds. This will never change. That's why its time to move on. Mississippi will continue to be at the bottom of every ranking in our lifetime and in our children's children's lifetime. It won't change.

This has been the case for fifty years. Don't you new professors know anything about the history of this state?

Date: Jan 2, 2006

faculty activity reporter wrote:

LVN, you have just not learned the ropes yet. We have all those teaching assistants and graduate assistants that do all of that work. Hang in there, your time will come.

Adjuncts do not have teaching assistants, nor do many "real" professors. Adjuncts also do not get much compensation.
Actually, I probably won't teach again, unless some non-PhD full time lines open up in my field. Since they weren't able to advertise or hire, maybe that will happen. But not that much work for adjunct pay, never again.

Date: Jan 2, 2006

It is the responsibility of the university presidents to educate the public about the value of education. They have the ear of the public. During the broadcast of my alma mater's football and basketball games, they spotlight the work--research, creative activity-- of at least two or three faculty researchers--and the president speaks of their value.

Date: Jan 2, 2006

Big Tenner wrote:

It is the responsibility of the university presidents to educate the public about the value of education. They have the ear of the public. During the broadcast of my alma mater's football and basketball games, they spotlight the work--research, creative activity-- of at least two or three faculty researchers--and the president speaks of their value.

Big Tenner,

I agree. David Boren is pivotal to the overall health of the University of Oklahoma campus. In all of their athletic teams' televised games, academic and creative depth and breadth continues to be heralded as the cornerstone of the university's mission.

I don't believe that SFT could ever even begin to decode the significance of that.