Let's try this again . . . - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Jun 15, 2004

Let's try this again . . .

Date: Jun 15, 2004

Endgame, I think this is all very true, and your points are well taken. Just a couple of observations:

First, we're experiencing the lull of summer and a general loss of momentum. This could change in the fall.

Second, I'm not sure the alumni or the community as a whole understand what these losses of faculty mean. At least not until their children don't get into a particular degree program because it is closing down, or have to transfer because they can't get the classes they need as there is no one to teach them. They don't understand that universities require highly trained specialists (who more often than not come from other states) and must be recruited to live in Mississippi. (This was true _before_ Shelby came in with his sledge hammer.) They don't understand that when people with years of experience leave, they are not easily replaceable. Heck, Shelby doesn't even understand that.

Honestly, I don't think working with Thames will save USM, but it is not up to me. I think he has to go and that won't happen for two more years, by which time USM will be devastated.

But, I'm sure everyone is open to more specific suggestions from you. HOW does the average person reach the alumni? I can't just write to them like I can write to the papers or to the IHL board.

Date: Jun 15, 2004

Soldier,

Excellent points. I agree that the summer lull is in full swing, but I would also suggest that this is exactly the time for the one's who truly care to take some action, so that when fall does arrive, there will be a plan of action in place.

As far as contacting the alumni goes, I would suggest getting in touch with the Alumni Assn. and seeing if they have a list available to the public. If not, I feel sure that there is at least one concerned alumnus who both reads this board and supports the cause who may be able to help. As I understand it, 206 Front Street is the place to meet . . .

Concerning SFT, I cannot disagree with your views about him since I share most of them. However, I think that we have reached a point where we need to do whatever must be done in order to save what is left, if possible, even if it means robbing Peter to pay Paul. I think that it would amount to making a deal with the Devil, but if that's the only way to save what's left, then we need to, terrible as it may be.

Date: Jun 15, 2004

I have a discouraging comment. Chatting with a Hattiesburg real estate agent -- she told me she is showing a lot of houses to incoming faculty. When she asks them what they think about the situation at USM, they don't know what she's talking about.

For me the sad part is seeing the for sale signs in my end of town (SW H'burg.) Lots and lots of them.

Date: Jun 15, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: LVN
"I have a discouraging comment. Chatting with a Hattiesburg real estate agent -- she told me she is showing a lot of houses to incoming faculty. When she asks them what they think about the situation at USM, they don't know what she's talking about. For me the sad part is seeing the for sale signs in my end of town (SW H'burg.) Lots and lots of them."

Some questions, if you don't mind:

1) Any idea of about how many "incoming faculty?" (I realize this may not have come up.)

2) Any idea of where they are comming in from?

3) Do you know anything about what departments they are going into?

We already have a pretty good idea of how many are leaving, but I for one am not discouraged to learn that some are comming in. They will find out all too quickly what is going on here, although it boggles the mind to learn that there are faculty who would not know about the situation here.

Thanks!

Date: Jun 16, 2004

Sorry, Endgame, it was just a casual chat. What was surprising to both of us though, was that at least a few new young profs are not being told the truth. This is one real estate agent, so I have no idea how many people "a lot" is. I suspect some departments may be afraid to tell their new hires, lest they have no one come fall.

If I see her again, I'll ask.

Date: Jun 16, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: LVN
"Sorry, Endgame, it was just a casual chat. What was surprising to both of us though, was that at least a few new young profs are not being told the truth. This is one real estate agent, so I have no idea how many people "a lot" is. I suspect some departments may be afraid to tell their new hires, lest they have no one come fall. If I see her again, I'll ask.

It's interesting to note that some departments have to resort to either concealing information or outright lying in order to lure in faculty. If they're at this point now, where will they be in the next few months?

Thanks again, LVN. I hope that you see her soon.

Date: Jun 16, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: EndGame
"
It's interesting to note that some departments have to resort to either concealing information or outright lying in order to lure in faculty. "

This is horrifying in two ways: first, that a search committee would not even mention the recent events. (I know one search committee member who did but provided a positive spin: "the faculty here are more united than ever before.") But probably committees feel desperate to fill positions. If they don't, they can loose the positions, and after you loose positions, you loose programs and . . . you get the picture.

The other thing horrifying that is the incoming faculty haven't done their homework on the school. They obviously don't read the Chronicle of Higher Education, or haven't googled USM. This is the sort of thing you should do _before_ you interview. Maybe they are all recent, unexperienced PhDs who've had their heads in their dissertations.

May I suggest that current USM faculty take the new hires to lunch at 206 and have a chat with them, ASAP.

Date: Jun 16, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: foot soldier
" Maybe they are all recent, unexperienced PhDs who've had their heads in their dissertations. . ."

. . . or so desperate for work that they will risk any position offered in their field.

Date: Jun 16, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: ram
""

The reason that search committees downplay the controversies here are precisely the original theme of this thread: departments are looking past the endgame, trying to position themselves to survive until the next administration. It would be unreasonable to expect search committees to bring a candidate to campus and then emphasize the current problems (why bring a candidate here and then encourage them not to look?).

Date: Jun 16, 2004

First, in answer to EndGame, SFT must go. It is impossible to rebuild USM with him holding any power or control. As long as he is on campus, it would be like trying to build a bridge with a demolition team.

As to hiring new faculty, our department made the situation very clear at the front and we had excellent response. The new faculty realize that for the next three to four years, they are invisible to the administration. For them, when tenure is becoming a reality, there will be a new administration. And they love the campus and the climate. Interviewing in February when you live in the 'frozen tundra' can be a big USM drawing card.

Date: Jun 16, 2004

I said it several times before and I will say it again. The CoST is aggressively hiring new faculty and expanding. I believe there is a shift going on between the colleges. Check the departures on Babbs list. Very few are from CoST.

Date: Jun 16, 2004

I agree with many of your points as well End, but the fact of the matter is that SFT's philosophy with respect to people (be they faculty, staff, student, or otherwise) is clear: You don't like my way, hit the road - I'll find someone else. Given that philosophy, recording the number of faculty leaving is a waste of energy. SFT views faculty recruitment as a buyer's market - there is always somebody with a Phd in a particular area desperate or in need of a position. I guarantee that when comments are made about "all of the faculty who are leaving", he will simply point out all of the "new" faculty USM has hired. Progress towards worl-class! My own college has filled slots - other colleges will fill theirs as well.

I have talked to faculty colleagues and more importantly staff, and the conclusion is clear - SFT will re-assign staff, move faculty, move departments, and if you don't like it - leave.

Given SFT's approach/philosophy towards people, no amount of effort will remove him from his position based upon the "people are leaving" argument. He is here to stay (at least for the next two years). The board and most of the alumni will back him, and he has little to fear concerning any arguments with respect to "lost" quality faculty. Improving the bottomline is all that counts.

Date: Jun 16, 2004

You have GOT to be kidding. USM was doing just fine before SFT planted his hind end in the president's chair; it had a fine regional and national reputation, which it can still possibly recover once he is gone.

Date: Jun 16, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: USM Sympathizer
"You have GOT to be kidding. USM was doing just fine before SFT planted his hind end in the president's chair; it had a fine regional and national reputation, which it can still possibly recover once he is gone."

This was originally written as a response to the ever-eloquent ProUsm, whose post has subsequently been deleted by our ever-vigilant web master.

Date: Jun 16, 2004

Unfortunately - there is no kidding involved....

You are absolutely correct on USM's standing prior to SFT - good school, good location, some top programs. But what has happened??? When IHL failed to remove him, and simply slapped him with the velvet glove, it empowered him. We can have faculty confidence votes once a week, it cannot touch him now. As long as he is appearing cooperative, he can't be touched. And get this - he gets to define to IHL what that cooperation looks like!!

Soooo... What do people do when their anger and frustration become defused?? They withdraw, and become less interested in giving one teaspoon of effort to support the place. That is what is occuring now. We are witnessing an entire faculty and staff psychologically withdrawing from USM. Some are resigned to their fate, others simply give in, while others leave.

Either way, SFT still gets what he always wanted - a subdued faculty and staff. HE WON! Now, he may realize that they aren't doing anything to support USM, but as I said earlier, SFT believes that there are plenty of people willing to do what he asks.

Count

Date: Jun 16, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: USM Sympathizer
"This was originally written as a response to the ever-eloquent ProUsm, whose post has subsequently been deleted by our ever-vigilant web master."

ProUsm is in dire need of professional counseling. I hope he/she is able to find help before a complete psychological meltdown occurs.

AE

Date: Jun 17, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Counting the days
"Given SFT's approach/philosophy towards people, no amount of effort will remove him from his position based upon the "people are leaving" argument. He is here to stay (at least for the next two years). The board and most of the alumni will back him, and he has little to fear concerning any arguments with respect to "lost" quality faculty. Improving the bottomline is all that counts. "

Has Shelby Thames improved the bottom line? Do you accomplish that at a university by hiring more expensive administrators and neglecting fundraising?

Robert Campbell