Is there a need to reorganize USM in the Post SFT era?
I hope that we will reorganize this institution. I don't know what I would propose but I do remember the days when we had more schools and colleges. Faculty and staff seemed to be more productive, happier, and felt a closer tie to the unit they were in. Students also seemed to be better served in our past organizational structures.
This is just my observation. Our new president, whenever that occurs, will need to lead us into a better organizational pattern than we now have.
How should the task be undertaken? Should it be undertaken? What direction should it take if it is undertaken? Are there deans that should retained? What changes need to made in the cabinet? How about the coast? Are there some professors and administrators that have left that should return?
There is more work for our faculty and staff to do in the next five years. We have not been allowed to do anything for the past five years and I look upon the next five years, hopefully after May 07, to help begin to get this institution back to where it needs to be.
What should stay? Who should stay? What should go? Who should go?
Is there a need to reorganize USM in the Post SFT era?
I've been through several reorganizations here and each one seems to be more cumbersome and inappropriate. The most recent reorganization is the the worse I've seen. Maybe next time those in charge won't try to second guess departments by placing square pegs into round holes.
One scenario suggested by some faculty friends is to have seven colleges. Nursing should go back to being a college. Arts should go back to being a college. International and Continuing Ed don't need to be a college (that was always strange.)
If there is anything left of the arts after this fiasco is over, they should be grouped together in a separate college, perhaps with 5 rather than the original 3 departments--dance added as a free standing unit and interior design incorporated as it is in many places. The arts have been such a strength at USM over the years, with music getting recognition many years ago and with theater and the visual arts coming into their own in the last few years. They deserve their own college.
One scenario suggested by some faculty friends is to have seven colleges. Nursing should go back to being a college. Arts should go back to being a college. International and Continuing Ed don't need to be a college (that was always strange.)
I personally agree with all three of your suggestions for reorganization, but I hope no reorganization takes place without first soliciting the opinion of the respective departments or units. During previous reorganizations, some departments or units were subject to hijacking or shotgun marriages.
Totally agree, Fish. "Reorganization" that makes sense would have to take place in an environment where shared governance is practiced. And I repeat, that was not my original suggestion, it was mentioned to me by several faculty at a social function.
State Line Louie wrote: Is there a need to reorganize USM in the Post SFT era?
I hope that we will reorganize this institution. I don't know what I would propose but I do remember the days when we had more schools and colleges. Faculty and staff seemed to be more productive, happier, and felt a closer tie to the unit they were in. Students also seemed to be better served in our past organizational structures.
This is just my observation. Our new president, whenever that occurs, will need to lead us into a better organizational pattern than we now have.
How should the task be undertaken? Should it be undertaken? What direction should it take if it is undertaken? Are there deans that should retained? What changes need to made in the cabinet? How about the coast? Are there some professors and administrators that have left that should return?
There is more work for our faculty and staff to do in the next five years. We have not been allowed to do anything for the past five years and I look upon the next five years, hopefully after May 07, to help begin to get this institution back to where it needs to be.
What should stay? Who should stay? What should go? Who should go?
What should we become?
ALL the present deans should be canned. They should not be offered teaching positons and drain our budgets. The cabinet should be cleaned.
Bring back Cotten, G and S, Fleming, and many of the honorable people that left. Whatever it cost us in dollars.
Okay, if a university can be re-organized without chair, faculty, or dean input, and by the seat of the pants, I certainly have the requisite tools at hand to give it a shot. Dr. Meredith, paying attention? Here you go:
Take all the social and behavioral science stepchildren and put them together in a college with a somewhat common mission (College of Social and Behavioral Sciences). This could include anthropology, sociology, psychology, economics, child and family studies, social work, political science (come on over Ken!), and criminal justice. The College of Health will be refocused to be the College of Nursing and Allied Health Sciences (come back Jane!). Carl Martray years ago thought a building shared by education and business made sense--how about going a step farther? Take the leadership and CISE folks and roll 'em into a College of Business and Education, with education as a school within the college. Are those jeers I hear emanating from JGH?. Well, hold on-the CBED (bad acronym I guess), would be among the highest doc granting colleges on campus, and the leadership, finance, and management folks should be able to find some commonalities. LIS and TECH ED on over to A&L (LIS may not like going home again, though). No more COEP. Oh, we move the Arts back to their own college, and rename A&L the College of Humanities. The latter two will be smaller but more focused colleges.
Okay, I'm done. You now have six more focused colleges. Where do I send my consultation bill for payment?
In every reorganization scheme I hear, there is recognition that both Arts and Nursing need to be restored to their former autonomy. It amazed me that this administration took over USM, surveyed its kingdom, and immediately began the destruction of the best things it had going for it. Almost makes you believe Invictus' conspiracy theory
..."Bring back Cotten, G and S, Fleming, and many of the honorable people that left. Whatever it cost us in dollars. ..."
Yeah, the three musketeers.
Those guys are done. Toast. Including the one who posts on here. They are a symbol of everything wrong with the university in the past, and the reason Dr. Thames has catapulted us into a new realm for the 21st Century.
While the liberals on this board whine about "following the money", why don't you go follow the trail of those three chicken livers you exhaulted above. Watch them run all the way to Canebrake and Georgia, with their "wuttle" tails tucked.
I hope the board is enjoying my little stay. It is time someone brought you liberals back to the planet earth.
thamesbeliever, I notice that you ignored my question. You can say "liberal" all you like, but you know that I am not a liberal, nor is Dr. Glamser, nor are many of those you seem to dislike. What's that old saying? If the cat has kittens in the oven, that don't make 'em biscuits. Slapping an inaccurate label on something doesn't change the truth.