SACS Reaffirmation Report - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Jun 18, 2006

RE: SACS Reaffirmation Report

Date: Jun 18, 2006

stephen--the faculty senate executive committee at best represents those senate members who vote for them, and in turn, the faculty senate members represent those who vote for them. do they represent the faculty? doubt it. i know too well how many people vote in such elections. i know too many faculty members who see the senate as not representing them but the individual senator's point of view. if the senate did a better job of talking with its constituency and possibly surveying them on some issues, you might have a point. but the senate doesn't, sadly.

to simply say that a body is elected says little. stephen--do trent lott, thad cochran, and gene taylor represent your views nationally? they're elected.

Date: Jun 18, 2006

There you go again Stinky, beating the drum about the unrepresentative Faculty Senate. Every regular faculty member is on the initial ballot. Every regular faculty member gets a ballot. That's as good as it gets in any democracy. Would you prefer the deans or administration appoint the FS? You are barking up the wrong tree.

If you look at the U.S. senators from Mississippi and the senators from New York, it is clear that in both cases they represent their state. They may or may not represent the views of one citizen.

If you look at the U.S. News list of Tier I schools and the list of Tier IV schools, it is pretty obvious that they are on to something. It is also obvious to anyone in higher education that USM belongs toward the bottom of any list of national universities.

Date: Jun 18, 2006

oh curmudgeon--i don't believe the fs or many other of the "elected" councils can really claim they represent the "faculty." when it may take 10 or 12 votes out of a large college to get elected, they don't represent the faculty. no, i don't want the administration to appoint people. but let's not let the leadership of these councils that supposedly represent faculty claim that they represent the faculty until they do a better job of polling their constituents.

a representative democracy means just that--you represent people. why not poll faculty on issue? talk to your constituency. that was done in the past. the reason the faculty vote of no confidence against thames carried/carries so much weight is that is was a vote of the entire faculty.

Date: Jun 18, 2006

stinky cheese man wrote:

stephen--the faculty senate executive committee at best represents those senate members who vote for them, and in turn, the faculty senate members represent those who vote for them. do they represent the faculty? doubt it. i know too well how many people vote in such elections. i know too many faculty members who see the senate as not representing them but the individual senator's point of view. if the senate did a better job of talking with its constituency and possibly surveying them on some issues, you might have a point. but the senate doesn't, sadly. to simply say that a body is elected says little. stephen--do trent lott, thad cochran, and gene taylor represent your views nationally? they're elected.

Obviously, the represent those who choose to vote. But in the sense that any representative government can be said to represent the broad interests of an electorate then yes they do. I disagree with you about representing an individual senator's point of view". We have had many votes in which senators recorded that their votes were made after consultation with their faculty, even though the senator may have disagreed. Obviously there are senators who do not represent well . . . or sometimes senators must cast their votes as best they can with their faculty in mind, given that things up up for a vote with little or no time to consult. Not perfect -- but I think the senate represents the faculty better than you may know.

I discuss these issues freely with my faculty. They give me general authority to vote my conscience in the sense that they believe I understand their sentiments and consult frequently with them to ensure that I do. On crucial votes or votes where I believe the facuulty sentiment may be split or is not clear to me, or on votes in which I need their advice, they trust me to bring those issues back to them and not just to "vote my own point of view."

I'm not sure when you were on the senate last, but many senators take this fairly seriously. It isn;t a full time job, as you know, so trying to know everyone's express wishes n every vote isn't simply possible. I believe that much depends on how well a senator communicates and is in tune with his/her faculty.

Date: Jun 18, 2006

stinky cheese man wrote:

oh curmudgeon--i don't believe the fs or many other of the "elected" councils can really claim they represent the "faculty." when it may take 10 or 12 votes out of a large college to get elected, they don't represent the faculty. no, i don't want the administration to appoint people. but let's not let the leadership of these councils that supposedly represent faculty claim that they represent the faculty until they do a better job of polling their constituents. a representative democracy means just that--you represent people. why not poll faculty on issue? talk to your constituency. that was done in the past. the reason the faculty vote of no confidence against thames carried/carries so much weight is that is was a vote of the entire faculty.

But you can't have an entire faculty vote on every issue.

Even in national government, Trent Lott doesn't consult me personally on my vote. But though I diagree with him on many things, he is still my representative in the Senate. I do know that he seems to have a pretty good handle on the general sentiments of people in the state, even though he doesn't poll on every vote -- even i can see that.

Clearly, if those who were "represented" by a senator felt that the senator was not generally doing as they wished, it seems to me they'd be motivated to vote -- and to vote the senator out. Or, conversely, to go directly to the senator. If your senator isn't representing you -- go talk to him/her. You act as though the only responsibility here is the senator's to communicate and not your own. Represenative government is two-way.

Date: Jun 18, 2006

stephen-note my comment about polling the faculty. and note my comment about the small number that vote. it's the elephant the room some dont want to discuss. just as the issue comes up in national elections--are those that don't vote uninterested or do they lack confidence in the process' i.e., if i vote for person X will they represent my interests? we aren't talking about thousands of votes here. i know many faculty who don't vote any more, and did before, because they believe these bodies don't represent them and don't communicate with them. and i'll avoid my comment about fs minutes.

Date: Jun 18, 2006

stephen--i'm not saying that the faculty be polled on every issue, but i also ask why not on the important issues. why didn't the fs executive committee think, given SACS was coming, to poll the faculty on the issue of governance? wouldn't that be an incredible bit of data to present to the visiting team?

Date: Jun 18, 2006

Curmudgeon wrote:

There you go again Stinky, beating the drum about the unrepresentative Faculty Senate. Every regular faculty member is on the initial ballot. Every regular faculty member gets a ballot. That's as good as it gets in any democracy. Would you prefer the deans or administration appoint the FS? You are barking up the wrong tree. If you look at the U.S. senators from Mississippi and the senators from New York, it is clear that in both cases they represent their state. They may or may not represent the views of one citizen. If you look at the U.S. News list of Tier I schools and the list of Tier IV schools, it is pretty obvious that they are on to something. It is also obvious to anyone in higher education that USM belongs toward the bottom of any list of national universities.

The association between the USNWR and NRC rankings for specific disciplnes is pretty good. The association between the FS's take on SFT after the G&S fiasco and the faculty's take as reflected in a vote of no-confidence was also very strong.

I appreciate SCM for playing the devil's advocate on this board, but it is easy to forget the misery we have experienced when niggling over such details. A bit of a reminder (in no particular order):

1. The ill conceived and executed university restructuring.

2. The 7 AM slaughter of the deans.

3. The D&A fiasco.

4. SACS probation.

5. Destruction of the teacher ed governance structure.

6. Failure to submit paperwork relevant to the USNWR.

7. Hiring of a "risk manager" hit man.

8. The amazing instability of upper staff and administration (play count the Provosts for fun).

9. The stealth mission statement--including the out of the air goal of 20,000 students.

10. The enrollment numbers fiasco.

11. The friends and family raises.

12. The mottled SACS re-affirmation report.

13. The medical school trial ballon that burst.

14. The Trent Lott building mess.

15. The failure to sufficiently attend to university development--including endowments and foundations.

16. The faculty brain drain.

17. Attempting to place a wedge between town and faculty.

18. Sucking up to Roy Klumb's nonsense.

19. The decline in USM sports.

20. The G&S mess.

That's my top 20 all time faves. Feel free to add other fun experiences.

Date: Jun 18, 2006

variance--given the last NRC rankings and USNWR rankings, how can you say they are related? the last NRC rankings were years ago.

Date: Jun 18, 2006

and let me add this--although every faculty member is listed on the fs election sheet for their college, how many times when the vote comes in does the appropriate fs member running the elections having to go from faculty member to faculty member to see if they are willing to serve? many on the ballot get "elected" because of the open ballot system, but when elected don't want to serve. i know cases where 3 or 4 people had to be contacted before a representative was found. "representative" democracy???

Date: Jun 18, 2006

Willingness to serve is a normal part of any representative democracy system whether it's a school board election or the House of Representatives. So what's new?

Date: Jun 18, 2006

so tell me--how many elections do you know of where anyone in the group can be nominated or is on the ballot (me for city council) and if the person elected (the most votes) doesn't want to serve (because they haven't been asked) we go to the next person on the list. representative democracy and the fs elections are not parallel. sorry.

Date: Jun 18, 2006

stinky cheese man wrote:

variance--given the last NRC rankings and USNWR rankings, how can you say they are related? the last NRC rankings were years ago.

Correct that the last NRC rankings were quite awhile ago (can't wait for the new ones), but if you look at these rankings and the USNWR over a period of years, there is a good relationship. In my field, the big players stay at the top of the heap, and we stay at the bottom (there is little chance that USM and Stanford will swap spots, and minor changes in position are irrelevant except for bragging rights).

Date: Jun 18, 2006

stinky cheese man wrote:

the last NRC rankings were years ago.

And USM's position in those NRC rankings back then was simply terrible (just as USM's position in the USNews most recent rankings were simply terrible).

Date: Jun 18, 2006

variance--no sh*t sherlock. don't know your point.

Date: Jun 18, 2006

ring--agreed, except english did pretty well (like 63rd in its area).

Date: Jun 18, 2006

stinky cheese man wrote:

variance--no sh*t sherlock. don't know your point.

I just responded to your earlier point, which seemed self evident to me. You seem a bit out of sorts this evening, so I hope all is okay.

One of my horses has a sudden case of colic, so we have a minor crisis here (colic can be dealy in horses), so I apologize if my post(s) were in anyway offensive--I am reading and writing while walking the horse and waiting for the vet.

Date: Jun 18, 2006

variance--my point was that your observation that our graduate programs (that's what NCR rates--USNWR does a limited ranking) would not meet the muster of stanford, harvard, yale, etc. is self-evident. i wonder why folks go back to all of these rankings and ratings, when for years (20+) we haven't done well. what is new?