HA, 3/18/06: USM faculty voice concerns over proposals - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Mar 19, 2006

RE: HA, 3/18/06: USM faculty voice concerns over proposals

Date: Mar 19, 2006

Jerry McGuire wrote:

Denise vH wrote:
OK, I should note--I'm not saying I agree or disagree with Dr. Thames' goals or his approach. I'm just saying what his goals ARE, as opposed to many posters I've read who seem to think he has different goals...

Likewise, I may be "only" a faculty member now, but I know an awful lot about the entire "Liberal Arts" and can't stand to hear this bull about how expensive these programs are! Liberal arts is, and has long been, the "cash cow" of the university (and of nearly all universities).

cheers!

If this is true, then SHOW ME THE MONEY!!!! Provide us all with some data to back up your claim? Are we supposed to take your word for it when you won't take another poster's supposition?

Denise vH's post seems like a "Shelby has a plan to make USM great" post. She claims to neither post agreement nor disagreement, but her first post sure does sound like a good little cheerleader.

Date: Mar 19, 2006

It's almost like starting over again. Here's a scientist with a plan to make USM great. Let's give him 4 years and see if he can do it.

Date: Mar 19, 2006

Denise vH wrote:

OK, I should note--I'm not saying I agree or disagree with Dr. Thames' goals or his approach. I'm just saying what his goals ARE, as opposed to many posters I've read who seem to think he has different goals... Likewise, I may be "only" a faculty member now, but I know an awful lot about the entire "Liberal Arts" and can't stand to hear this bull about how expensive these programs are! Liberal arts is, and has long been, the "cash cow" of the university (and of nearly all universities). cheers!

Thanks for your very fine contribution to this thread! It sounds as if 2 Out of 3 wants a glorified community college rather than a real university. If he really wants to see his community improve, economically and in all ways, he should familiarize himself with the kind of research being done (for instance) by Richard Florida (www.creativeclass.org). It sounds as if 2 Out of 3 is content with the idea of Mississippi remaining 50th out of 50th in most measures of success; the kind of university he envisions is not the sort envisioned (and supported) in places where universities really are the engines of economic growth and cultural achievement.

Date: Mar 19, 2006

It's simple, really. (I'm not in the office today so don't have the details--I'm happy to share the actual data with anyone--just email me at work denise.vonherrmann@usm.edu).

But basically, take the average new USM lib arts faculty member salary of $42,000. Add in the benefits which at USM run about 30%. Add a few thousand more dollars for the travel support, long distance, etc. costs s/he uses each year, and it comes to a total package per faculty member of about $55,900.

If this prof teaches six classes per 9-month year, (the common load) of 35 students each, at the current USM tuition of $2156 that means our little prof has just generated $103,488 in tuition alone. Add to that the state's share of funding, which is just about 28 percent of all costs at USM, and you can see that this liberal arts professor MORE than pays for himself.

We have a large number of classes taught by Instructors who make far less and teach 8 classes a year, plus some taught by part-timers who make considerably less per class. Certainly, we have some full professors whose salaries are higher, but unfortunately they are not that much higher--the Full Professors with 20+ years' experience typically make in the $70-90,000 range, and we have relatively few left with more than 10 years of experience due to retirements and folks going elsewhere.

So, there you go. As I said, I can provide infinitely more detail privately upon request.

Date: Mar 19, 2006

Let me consult my strategic plan...Yes! Four more years will work out nicely for us!

Date: Mar 19, 2006

USM Sympathizer wrote:

Thanks for your very fine contribution to this thread! It sounds as if 2 Out of 3 wants a glorified community college rather than a real university. If he really wants to see his community improve, economically and in all ways, he should familiarize himself with the kind of research being done (for instance) by Richard Florida (www.creativeclass.org). It sounds as if 2 Out of 3 is content with the idea of Mississippi remaining 50th out of 50th in most measures of success; the kind of university he envisions is not the sort envisioned (and supported) in places where universities really are the engines of economic growth and cultural achievement.

Just another reason that academics shouldn't be allowed to govern themselves. No connection with the real world.

Haven't you figured it out yet? Mississippi just can't afford to support USM so that you all can play like you're big shot researchers. USM is going to become a t-e-a-c-h-i-n-g school, and those of you who can't get another job had better get used to more teaching and less work.

Date: Mar 19, 2006

Liberal arts classes also tend to be relatively cheap to teach. The only equipment needed consists of books and a chalkboard and maybe a computer projector and screen. No need for expensive lab equipment, expensive computer software, etc. I value the sciences very highly and think that they are quite central to a university's mission, but they and the technological disciplines tend to cost more per student than is true of the liberal arts. Besides, the liberal arts departments tend to teach a large proportion of the "core" courses required of almost all students, so the liberal arts departments tend to contribute a large share of the "service" courses at any institution.

Date: Mar 19, 2006

2 Out Of 3 Ain't Bad wrote:

Just another reason that academics shouldn't be allowed to govern themselves. No connection with the real world.

Do some "research" about which kinds of universities produce real economic growth (start with the Richard Florida site), and then come back and tell me who's GENUINELY out of touch with "the real world." Your idea of a university will simply guarantee that Hattiesburg will be an economic and cultural backwater; the main thing the area has (had) going for it is (was) USM.

Date: Mar 19, 2006

Denise vH wrote:

It's simple, really. (I'm not in the office today so don't have the details--I'm happy to share the actual data with anyone--just email me at work denise.vonherrmann@usm.edu).

But basically, take the average new USM lib arts faculty member salary of $42,000. Add in the benefits which at USM run about 30%. Add a few thousand more dollars for the travel support, long distance, etc. costs s/he uses each year, and it comes to a total package per faculty member of about $55,900.

If this prof teaches six classes per 9-month year, (the common load) of 35 students each, at the current USM tuition of $2156 that means our little prof has just generated $103,488 in tuition alone. Add to that the state's share of funding, which is just about 28 percent of all costs at USM, and you can see that this liberal arts professor MORE than pays for himself.

We have a large number of classes taught by Instructors who make far less and teach 8 classes a year, plus some taught by part-timers who make considerably less per class. Certainly, we have some full professors whose salaries are higher, but unfortunately they are not that much higher--the Full Professors with 20+ years' experience typically make in the $70-90,000 range, and we have relatively few left with more than 10 years of experience due to retirements and folks going elsewhere.

So, there you go. As I said, I can provide infinitely more detail privately upon request.

Alright, then, where does all that money go? If the little liberal arts prof is turning a profit, where does the excess go? CoST? CoH? CoB? CoEP? Or does it pay for new athletics facilities? Streetlights? Paving? Sidewalks? Sorority Village? Shelby's Lincoln Navigator? Where does it all go?

Date: Mar 19, 2006

Ahh, now that IS the question, isn't it?

It's one I've been asking for nearly six years and one which none of the former (nor to my knowledge the current) CFO/Vice Presidents for Finance could ever answer.

I've poured through university budget books for years. Certainly as USM Sympathizer notes, some disciplines are more expensive. Some of the money most assuredly goes to Athletics, to general facilities, etc. Once in a budget committee we pressed the former CFO for a figure on what percentage of total costs at USM comprise "overheads" and he said he could hazard a guess that it was around 40-50%.

At any rate, my initial point--that the liberal arts are the core of the university not only for what they teach but also for the excess tuition dollars they generate--is key. Does the President go around crowing about it? No. Why not? Maybe that's a question we should be asking.

Date: Mar 19, 2006

I can show that before Katrina the average profit per CoB faculty member was over $13,000 considering only tuitiion and salary. Add in other expenses and other sources of funds, and I'm sure the CoB is comparable to CoAL.

Date: Mar 19, 2006

Denise vH wrote:

It's simple, really. (I'm not in the office today so don't have the details--I'm happy to share the actual data with anyone--just email me at work denise.vonherrmann@usm.edu). But basically, take the average new USM lib arts faculty member salary of $42,000. Add in the benefits which at USM run about 30%. Add a few thousand more dollars for the travel support, long distance, etc. costs s/he uses each year, and it comes to a total package per faculty member of about $55,900. If this prof teaches six classes per 9-month year, (the common load) of 35 students each, at the current USM tuition of $2156 that means our little prof has just generated $103,488 in tuition alone. Add to that the state's share of funding, which is just about 28 percent of all costs at USM, and you can see that this liberal arts professor MORE than pays for himself. We have a large number of classes taught by Instructors who make far less and teach 8 classes a year, plus some taught by part-timers who make considerably less per class. Certainly, we have some full professors whose salaries are higher, but unfortunately they are not that much higher--the Full Professors with 20+ years' experience typically make in the $70-90,000 range, and we have relatively few left with more than 10 years of experience due to retirements and folks going elsewhere. So, there you go. As I said, I can provide infinitely more detail privately upon request.

dvh, is the 35 students correct. it seems too high.

Date: Mar 19, 2006

It's statistics--the mean is about 35. That's because a few disciplines teach a number of very large section classes--HIS 101 and 102 are good examples.

Date: Mar 19, 2006

The recent contributions to this thread have been interesting, and they have also been highly typical of the kind of "discussion" that often occurs on this board. One side presents facts, data, and sources; the other presents charges, undocumented claims, and fevered questions. Moreover, the second group never responds to the first. It is easier for them to rest in their anti-intellectual prejudices.

Date: Mar 19, 2006

Just an opinion wrote:

The recent contributions to this thread have been interesting, and they have also been highly typical of the kind of "discussion" that often occurs on this board. One side presents facts, data, and sources; the other presents charges, undocumented claims, and fevered questions. Moreover, the second group never responds to the first. It is easier for them to rest in their anti-intellectual prejudices.

There's no data being presented here. There's only one person's word being taken over others. I thought you scholars had rules about citing your sources and such. Apparently a post on an internet message board is gospel if posted by the right person.

Date: Mar 19, 2006

2 Out Of 3 Ain't Bad wrote:

There's no data being presented here. There's only one person's word being taken over others. I thought you scholars had rules about citing your sources and such. Apparently a post on an internet message board is gospel if posted by the right person.

Denise von H presented plenty of data, but you ignored it. USM Sympathizer cited a website full of data, but you never responded. I guess it's easier to be ignorant (but opinionated) than to offer informed counter-argument, as you just proved once again in this latest post.

Date: Mar 19, 2006

I agree with DVH on the point that, in general, profs are money making machines for the university and community--across the colleges. If you add in the 70 million plus in grants and contracts to tuition dollars, the labor costs to profit ratio is not bad for our "stockholders." My college contributes boatloads to the economic development of the community via our involvement in health care service provision, education, and consulting for business, government, and industry. Given salary ranges far lower than those available to many of these same folks in the private sector (not to mention other institutions), the taxpayer is getting good bang for the buck in the 'burg. To suggest otherwise is just silliness.

Thamesbeliever talks about us being transitioned to a "teaching" institution. I'm not sure if he of she knows whereof he or she speaks. The undergraduate instruction at USM across the board is pretty darn good-despite the bimodality of our admitted students. I'm less enthusiastic about SFT than dVH and Thamesbeliever, because SFT has earned a failing grade on a number of important outcomes for which a university president is ultimately responsible (for example, fund-raising; setting the bar for academic standards and aspirations; accreditation).

Date: Mar 19, 2006

I'd bet there are other areas that more than pay their own way and that the extra money has to go to subsidize the departments that suck up resources.

The #1 sucker of funds from other parts of campus? - Athletics, of course! Gonna cut that? Talk about unnecessary to the mission of the university. But, necessary to local bidness? You bet. So, you all benefit from a bit of socialistic tax-payer funding and athletics still doesn't turn a profit.

Denise is right on the money - we in the CoAL are some of the worst paid but most productive. Without CoAL the university closes its doors tomorrow - end of story. Which college has the most majors? Even after the reorginzation that attempted, in part, to dilute the high money-generating units on campus, CoAL is still #1 (as I understand the figures). Student demand says give that college more funding instead of bleeding it dry to fund other parts of campus. But it isn't sexy enough for you corporatists, so you attack it and say get rid of it. Who is the true supporter of education here? As opposed to the money leacher?

Date: Mar 19, 2006

Angeline wrote:

The #1 sucker of funds from other parts of campus? - Athletics, of course! Gonna cut that? Talk about unnecessary to the mission of the university. But, necessary to local bidness? You bet. So, you all benefit from a bit of socialistic tax-payer funding and athletics still doesn't turn a profit.

Often I disagree with Angeline, but I think she's onto something here. I've never quite understood all the emphasis on (essentially) pro athletics in American higher education. Very few of these programs pay for themselves, and a lot of the money thrown at them could be spent on academic scholarships for deserving students. I realize, however, that this will never happen.

Date: Mar 19, 2006

Denise vH wrote:

It's statistics--the mean is about 35. That's because a few disciplines teach a number of very large section classes--HIS 101 and 102 are good examples.

is that some disciplines in CoAL are cash cows, and they are subsidizing other disciplines in the CoAL and other parts of USM. Let's attaboy History, and not the whole CoAL.

Date: Mar 19, 2006

Nope. Not just History. Philosophy, Sociology, Political Science....

Only English, Foreign Language and Speech Communication have relatively low numbers--and for very good reason! Try teaching me to speak French and you'll see how small class sizes can be an absolute necessity for certain types of courses.

Note I did not address the Arts--only Liberal Arts--in all my former posts. The Arts are a different animal.

Date: Mar 19, 2006

big classes? wrote:

Denise, how many large sections are offered in LA? My impression was that the student/faculty ratio was quite small. I've never heard of Liberal Arts as a cash cow. I also wouldn't say its programs are expensive either. Maybe your beef is with the psychology folks who want 2/2 teaching loads as a base, and the ability to go down from there. I wonder what things would be like if they were in LA.

Not sure of your point here, BC. Not sure if it is merely a pot shot at psychology or what? Can you make yourself more clear?

Joe

Date: Mar 19, 2006

2 Out Of 3 Ain't Bad? wrote:

When my son goes to college I want him to get an education that will get him a job

__________________________________________________________________

Considering the type of school you seem to want USM to become, this will be a fine school for your son to attend when the time comes. There's always a market for someone skilled in a trade. What trade are you pushing him into?

Date: Mar 19, 2006

Denise vH wrote:

Liberal arts is, and has long been, the "cash cow" of the university (and of nearly all universities).

Yes indeedy. There are numerous well-known free-standing undergraduate colleges comprised solely of the liberal arts and sciences, but try to establish a college without that component and you'll fall flat on your face.

Date: Mar 19, 2006

Skillsaw Jack wrote:

2 Out Of 3 Ain't Bad? wrote: When my son goes to college I want him to get an education that will get him a job __________________________________________________________________ Considering the type of school you seem to want USM to become, this will be a fine school for your son to attend when the time comes. There's always a market for someone skilled in a trade. What trade are you pushing him into?

House-painter would be a good choice, as long as he uses polymer-based products.

Date: Mar 19, 2006

Sorry, guys, but you're asking me to take the word of a post on an internet message board at face value. Maybe if your AAUP union reps would put together a publication using her numbers, citing sources, and showing me the individual cases that make up the averages, then I'd buy into what you're saying. At this point, I'm left to take her word that the average CoAL prof teaches 35 students per class, that the average CoAL prof teaches 3 classes per semester, etc., etc. You all talk about critical thinking skills, but it seems to me that you are the ones who believe what you want to believe and question what you don't want to believe. I'm in the habit of being a cynic and questioning everything.

Date: Mar 19, 2006

Just an opinion wrote:

Skillsaw Jack wrote:
2 Out Of 3 Ain't Bad? wrote: When my son goes to college I want him to get an education that will get him a job __________________________________________________________________ Considering the type of school you seem to want USM to become, this will be a fine school for your son to attend when the time comes. There's always a market for someone skilled in a trade. What trade are you pushing him into?
House-painter would be a good choice, as long as he uses polymer-based products.

Actually, I was considering encouraging him to become an Liberal Arts Professor. In what other trade can you teach 9 hours per week with the balance free for research, fun, etc., while making an average salary of $45,000 for a 9 month contract AND get major holidays off? Most carpenter apprenticeship programs are 4 years long, but you have to work physically hard for the rest of your life. To get into the college professor trade, you need to work mentally hard for 10-12 years and then you can coast.

Date: Mar 19, 2006

2 of 3--maybe i can help. if you go to the following url: http://www.usm.edu/ir/ and go to the reports hyperlink and then go to the course load reports drop-down menu, you can find the relevant information. newest is fall, 2005. takes time to digest, but there it is.

Date: Mar 19, 2006

It doesn't take a Polymer Scientist to know that Gen Ed classes often have HUGE numbers. It's very easy to find out the caps on classes. Not every bit of information has to be delivered to everyone's door. Take some initiative and find out. Better yet, DVH gave you her number - and an invite to contact her. Do that.