Arts & Sciences College Forum

Three year graduation

2012-01-26T10:16:00.000-08:00

There seems to be a lot of discussion wandering its way across campus about being able to graduate in three years. Word has it that this is a state requirement. I have seen one possible schedule for such a student. It would require a full summer and at least one semester where sthe student takes 30 hours. Before everyone jumps up and down the thirty are split between two 8 week sessions. I think at one time we called those quarters. There are all sorts of issues that present themselves including having both lots of 8 and 15 week classes and the pressure on both students and faculty. I am not going to really argue for or against such a plan, but I do believe there are lots of consequences for the student and that it will take a special student to make it work. My argument is rather, why go through this? If you allow students to take 18 hours a semester for no extra charge then after six semesters that have accumulated 108 hours. With one summer, they have achieved the necessary hours and should be able to graduate.That would really be true if the number of hours required to graduate is lowered to 120. Just a thought.

Posters

2012-01-18T08:27:00.000-08:00

Just a couple of quick notes. First, read the article below. However, when you do make certain you are not close enough to strike the family cat. It will anger you as it did me. It will verify what most of us who have been in higher education for a while have known but not had the facts to state. Administrations and staffs at universities have grown at an enormous rate. Please read it.

Second, you may have noticed the posters around campus explaining to students that the Higher Learning Commission is coming to town. Since the HLC may stop and talk to students, the University wishes them to be informed. There is a web site students can go to in order to read all of the fun reports. I have a much simpler road for students to take:

1. If asked questions, be friendly
2. If asked questions, be honest
3. If all this fails, throw your arms in the air and run away yelling, "its all Tucker's fault."

Big Appetites

2012-01-16T08:22:00.000-08:00

Features, Washington Monthly Magazine

September/October 2011

Administrators Ate My Tuition

Want to get college costs in line? Start by cutting the overgrown management ranks.

By Benjamin Ginsberg

No statistic about higher education commands more attention—and anxiety—among members of the public than the rising price of admission. Since 1980, inflation- adjusted tuition at public universities has tripled; at private universities it has more than doubled. Compared to all other goods and services in the American economy, including medical care, only “cigarettes and other tobacco products” have seen prices rise faster than the cost of going to college. And for all that, parents who sign away ever-larger tuition checks can be forgiven for doubting whether universities are spending those additional funds in ways that make their kids’ educations better—to say nothing of three times better.

Between 1975 and 2005, total spending by American higher educational institutions, stated in constant dollars, tripled, to more than $325 billion per year. Over the same period, the faculty-to-student ratio has remained fairly constant, at approximately fifteen or sixteen students per instructor. One thing that has changed, dramatically, is the administrator-per-student ratio. In 1975, colleges employed one administrator for every eighty-four students and one professional staffer—admissions officers, information technology specialists, and the like—for every fifty students. By 2005, the administrator-to-student ratio had dropped to one administrator for every sixty-eight students while the ratio of professional staffers had dropped to one for every twenty-one students.

Apparently, as colleges and universities have had more money to spend, they have not chosen to spend it on expanding their instructional resources—that is, on paying faculty. They have chosen, instead, to enhance their administrative and staff resources. A comprehensive study published by the Delta Cost Project in 2010 reported that between 1998 and 2008, America’s private colleges increased spending on instruction by 22 percent while increasing spending on administration and staff support by 36 percent. Parents who wonder why college tuition is so high and why it increases so much each year may be less than pleased to learn that their sons and daughters will have an opportunity to interact with more administrators and staffers— but not more professors. Well, you can’t have everything.

Of course, universities have always employed administrators. When I was a graduate student in the 1960s and a young professor in the 1970s, however, top administrators were generally drawn from the faculty, and even midlevel managerial tasks were directed by faculty members. These moonlighting academics typically occupied administrative slots on a part-time or temporary basis and planned in due course to return to full-time teaching and research. Whatever their individual faults and gifts, faculty administrators seldom had to be reminded that the purpose of a university was the promotion of education and research, and their own short-term managerial endeavors tended not to distract them from their long-term academic commitments.

Alas, today’s full-time professional administrators tend to view management as an end in and of itself. Most have no faculty experience, and even those who have spent time in a classroom or laboratory often hope to make administration their life’s work and have no plan to return to teaching. For many of these career managers, promoting teaching and research is less important than expanding their own administrative domains. Under their supervision, the means have become the end.

Every year, hosts of administrators and staffers are added to college and university payrolls, even as schools claim to be battling budget crises that are forcing them to reduce the size of their full-time faculties. As a result, universities are now filled with armies of functionaries—vice presidents, associate vice presidents, assistant vice presidents, provosts, associate provosts, vice provosts, assistant provosts, deans, deanlets, and deanlings, all of whom command staffers and assistants—who, more and more, direct the operations of every school. If there is any hope of getting higher education costs in line, and improving its quality—and I think there is, though the hour is late—it begins with taking a pair of shears to the overgrown administrative bureaucracy.

orty years ago, America’s colleges employed more professors than administrators. The efforts of 446,830 professors were supported by 268,952 administrators and staffers. Over the past four decades, though, the number of full-time professors or “full-time equivalents”—that is, slots filled by two or more part-time faculty members whose combined hours equal those of a full-timer—increased slightly more than 50 percent. That percentage is comparable to the growth in student enrollments during the same time period. But the number of administrators and administrative staffers employed by those schools increased by an astonishing 85 percent and 240 percent, respectively.

Today, administrators and staffers safely outnumber full-time faculty members on campus. In 2005, colleges and universities employed more than 675,000 fulltime faculty members or full-time equivalents. In the same year, America’s colleges and universities employed more than 190,000 individuals classified by the federal government as “executive, administrative and managerial employees.” Another 566,405 college and university employees were classified as “other professional.” This category includes IT specialists, counselors, auditors, accountants, admissions officers, development officers, alumni relations officials, human resources staffers, editors and writers for school publications, attorneys, and a slew of others. These “other professionals” are not administrators, but they work for the administration and serve as its arms, legs, eyes, ears, and mouthpieces.

Before they employed an army of professional staffers, administrators were forced to rely on the cooperation of the faculty to carry out tasks ranging from admissions to planning. An administration that lost the confidence of the faculty might find itself unable to function. Today, ranks of staffers form a bulwark of administrative power in the contemporary university. These administrative staffers do not work for or, in many cases, even share information with the faculty. They help make the administration, in the language of political science, “relatively autonomous,” marginalizing the faculty.

While some administrative posts continue to be held by senior professors on a part-time basis, their ranks are gradually dwindling as their jobs are taken over by fulltime managers. College administrations frequently tout the fiscal advantages of using part-time, “adjunct” faculty to teach courses. They fail, however, to apply the same logic to their own ranks. Over the past thirty years, the percentage of faculty members who are hired on a part-time basis has increased so dramatically that today almost half of the nation’s professors work only part-time. And yet the percentage of administrators who are part-time employees has fallen during the same time period.

Administrators are not only well staffed, they are also well paid. Vice presidents at the University of Maryland, for example, earn well over $200,000, and deans earn nearly as much. Both groups saw their salaries increase as much as 50 percent between 1998 and 2003, a period of financial retrenchment and sharp tuition increases at the university. The University of Maryland at College Park—which employs six vice presidents, six associate vice presidents, five assistant vice presidents, six assistants to the president, and six assistants to the vice presidents—has long been noted for its bloated and extortionate bureaucracy, but it actually does not seem to be much of an exception. Administrative salaries are on the rise everywhere in the nation. By 2007, the median salary paid to the president of a doctoral degree-granting institution was $325,000. Eighty-one presidents earned more than $500,000, and twelve earned over $1 million. Presidents, at least, might perform important services for their schools. Somewhat more difficult to explain is the fact that by 2010 even some of the ubiquitous and largely interchangeable deanlets and deanlings earned six-figure salaries.

If you have any remaining doubt about where colleges and universities have been spending their increasing tuition and other revenues, consider this: between 1947 and 1995 (the last year for which the relevant data was published), administrative costs increased from barely 9 percent to nearly 15 percent of college and university budgets. More recent data, though not strictly comparable, follows a similar pattern. During this same time period, stated in constant dollars, overall university spending increased 148 percent. Instructional spending increased only 128 percent, 20 points less than the overall rate of spending increase. Administrative spending, though, increased by a whopping 235 percent.

hree main explanations are often adduced for the sharp growth in the number of university administrators over the past thirty years. One is that there have been new sorts of demands for administrative services that require more managers per student or faculty member than was true in the past. Universities today have an elaborate IT infrastructure, enhanced student services, a more extensive fund-raising and lobbying apparatus, and so on, than was common thirty years ago. Of course, it might also be said that during this same time period, whole new fields of teaching and research opened in such areas as computer science, genetics, chemical biology, and physics. Other new research and teaching fields opened because of ongoing changes in the world economy and international order. And yet, faculty growth between 1975 and 2005 simply kept pace with growth in enrollments and substantially lagged behind administrative and staff growth. When push came to shove, colleges chose to invest in management rather than in teaching and research.

A second common explanation given for the expansion of administration in recent years is the growing need to respond to mandates and record-keeping demands from federal and state governments as well as numerous licensure and accreditation bodies. It is certainly true that large numbers of administrators spend a good deal of time preparing reports and collecting data for these and other agencies. But as burdensome as this paperwork blizzard might be, it is not clear that it explains the growth in administrative personnel that we have observed. Often, affirmative action reporting is cited as the most time consuming of the various governmental mandates. As the economist Barbara Bergmann has pointed out, however, across the nation only a handful of administrators and staffers are employed in this endeavor.

More generally, we would expect that if administrative growth were mainly a response to external mandates, growth should be greater at state schools, which are more exposed to government obligations, than at private institutions, which are freer to manage their own affairs in their own way. Yet, when we examine the data, precisely the opposite seems to be the case. Between 1975 and 2005, the number of administrators and managers employed by public institutions increased by 66 percent. During the same time period, the number of administrators employed by private colleges and universities grew by 135 percent (see Table 4). These numbers seem inconsistent with the idea that external mandates have been the forces driving administrative growth at America’s institutions of higher education.

A third explanation has to do with the conduct of the faculty. Many faculty members, it is often said, regard administrative activities as obnoxious chores and are content to allow these to be undertaken by others. While there is some truth to this, it is certainly not the whole story. Often enough, I have observed that professors who are willing to perform administrative tasks lose interest when they find that the committees, councils, and assemblies through which the faculty nominally acts have lost much if not all their power to administrators.

If growth-driven demand, governmental mandates, and faculty preferences are not sufficient explanations for administrative expansion, an alternative explanation might be found in the nature of university bureaucracies themselves. In particular, administrative growth may be seen primarily as a result of efforts by administrators to aggrandize their own roles in academic life. Students of bureaucracy have frequently observed that administrators have a strong incentive to maximize the power and prestige of whatever office they hold by working to increase its staff and budget. To justify such increases, they often seek to capture functions currently performed by others or invent new functions for themselves that might or might not further the organization’s main mission.

Such behavior is common on today’s campuses. At one school, an inventive group of administrators created the “Committee on Traditions,” whose mission seemed to be the identification and restoration of forgotten university traditions or, failing that, the creation of new traditions. Another group of deans constituted themselves as the “War Zones Task Force.” This group recruited staffers, held many meetings, and prepared a number of reports whose upshot seemed to be that students should be discouraged from traveling to war zones, unless, of course, their home was in a war zone. But perhaps the expansion of university bureaucracies is best illustrated by an ad placed by a Colorado school, which sought a “Coordinator of College Liaisons.” Depending on how you read it, this is either a ridiculous example of bureaucratic layering or an intrusion into an area of student life that hardly requires administrative assistance.

The number of administrators and staffers on university campuses has increased so rapidly in recent years that often there is not enough work to keep all of them busy. To fill their time, administrators engage in a number of make-work activities. This includes endless rounds of meetings, mostly with other administrators, often consisting of reports from and plans for other meetings. For example, at a recent “president’s staff meeting” at an Ohio community college, eleven of the eighteen agenda items discussed by administrators involved plans for future meetings or discussions of other recently held meetings. At a gathering of the “Process Management Steering Committee” of a Midwestern community college, virtually the entire meeting was devoted to planning subsequent meetings by process management teams, including the “search committee training team,” the “faculty advising and mentoring team,” and the “culture team,” which was said to be meeting with “renewed energy.” The culture team was apparently also close to making a recommendation on the composition of a “Culture Committee.” Since culture is a notoriously abstruse issue, this committee may need to meet for years, if not decades, to unravel its complexities.

When they face particularly challenging problems, academic administrators sometimes find that ordinary meetings in campus offices do not allow them the freedom from distraction they require. To allow them to focus fully and without interruption, administrators sometimes find it necessary to schedule off-campus administrative retreats where they can work without fear that the day-to-day concerns of the campus will disturb their deliberations. Sometimes these retreats include athletic and role-playing activities that are supposed to help improve the staff’s spirit of camaraderie and ability to function as a team. For example, at a 2007 professional development retreat, Michigan Tech staffers broke into teams and spent several hours building furniture from pieces of cardboard and duct tape. Many staff retreats also include presentations by professional speakers who appear to specialize in psychobabble. Topics at recent retreats included “Do You Want to Succeed?” “Reflective Resensitizing,” and “Waking Up the Inner World.” In all likelihood, the administrators and staffers privileged to attend these important talks spent the next several weeks reporting on them at meetings with colleagues who had been deprived of the opportunity to learn firsthand how to make certain that their inner worlds remained on alert.

Administrative budgets frequently include travel funds, on the theory that conference participation will hone administrators’ skills and provide them with new information and ideas that will ultimately serve their school’s interests. We can be absolutely certain that this would be the only reason administrators would even consider dragging themselves to Maui during the winter for a series of workshops sponsored by the North American Association of Summer Sessions. Given the expense and hardship usually occasioned by travel to Hawaii, it is entirely appropriate for colleges to foot this sort of bill.

Another ubiquitous make-work exercise is the formation of a “strategic plan.” Until recent years, colleges engaged in little formal planning. Today, however, virtually every college and university in the nation has an elaborate strategic plan. This is typically a lengthy document— some are 100 pages long or more—that purports to articulate the school’s mission, its leadership’s vision of the future, and the various steps that are needed to achieve the school’s goals. The typical plan takes six months to two years to write and requires countless hours of work from senior administrators and their staffs.

A plan that was really designed to guide an organization’s efforts to achieve future objectives, as it might be promulgated by a corporation or a military agency, would typically present concrete objectives, a timetable for their realization, an outline of the tactics that will be employed, a precise assignment of staff responsibilities, and a budget. Some university plans approach this model. Most, however, are simply expanded “vision statements” that are often forgotten soon after they are promulgated. My university has presented two systemwide strategic plans and one arts and sciences strategic plan in the last fifteen years. No one can remember much about any of these plans, but another one is currently in the works. The plan is not a blueprint for the future. It is, instead, a management tool for the present. The ubiquity of planning at America’s colleges and universities is another reflection and reinforcement of the ongoing growth of administrative power.

There is, to be sure, one realm in which administrators as a class have proven extraordinarily adept. This is the general domain of fund-raising. Even during the depths of the recession in 2009, schools were able to raise money. On the one hand, the donors who give selflessly to their schools deserve to be commended for their beneficence. At the same time, it should still be noted that, as is so often the case in the not-for-profit world, university administrators appropriate much of this money to support—what else?—more administration.

The stress on fund-raising has enabled more than a few university presidents to acquire luxurious offices, lavish residences, and an assortment of perks in addition to princely salaries. Some enjoy the services of a chauffeur when they commute to work and a household staff when they entertain or even relax at home. These and many other perquisites are usually defended by administrators as needed to carry out their social duties and, particularly, to impress their schools’ wealthy benefactors. Yet no study has ever proved that presidents who arrive at fundraising events in chauffeur-driven limousines are more likely to succeed in their capital campaign goals or in any other endeavor than their counterparts who drive their own cars or come by taxi or, for that matter, by subway. I have personally known university presidents who were outstanding fund-raisers but, nevertheless, lived frugally and always traveled as cheaply as possible. Among college officials, though, the spendthrifts seem to outnumber the penny pinchers.

College presidents are usually the guiltiest parties, since they are in the best position to authorize expenditures, and many are more than happy to use school funds to burnish their own images. One recent case in point is that of Benjamin Ladner, the former president of American University in Washington, D.C. Soon after arriving on the campus in 1994, Ladner and his wife, who dubbed herself AU’s “first lady,” declared that the president’s official residence was inadequate and had the university build an expensive new house, which included a waterfall and pond behind the patio, a few blocks from the campus. They outfitted the house with expensive furnishings, china, and stemware. At university expense, the Ladners employed a chauffeur, a cook, a social secretary, and numerous other personal staff members. They hosted gala events to which they invited prominent Washington figures. They traveled abroad frequently, generally charging their first-class tickets to the university.

Matters came to a head in March 2005, when an anonymous whistleblower wrote to the board of trustees accusing the Ladners of “severe expense account violations.” An extensive audit subsequently revealed hundreds of thousands of dollars in questionable spending, some personal but most associated with President Ladner’s frenetic image-polishing efforts. Over the previous several years, the Ladners had charged the university for $6,000 in club dues, $54,000 in drivers’ costs, $220,000 in chefs’ services, $44,000 for alcohol, and $100,000 in services from their social secretary.

After months of bruising battles within the AU board, Ladner’s contract was terminated—though he and the first lady received a generous severance package. While Ladner mingled with the rich and famous at the school’s expense, faculty members had to settle for miserly annual salary increases and students saw their tuitions rise markedly every year.

he expansion of college and university administration has not been coupled with the development of adequate mechanisms of oversight and supervision, particularly for senior managers. University boards, which technically oversee the administrations, are generally not well prepared for the task. One recent study found that 40 percent of university trustees said they were not prepared for the job and 42 percent indicated that they spent less than five hours a month on board business. Many trustees serve because of loyalty to their school and say they have “faith” in its administration. They do not go out of their way to look for problems, and administrators are generally able to satisfy trustees with the rosy pictures of college life presented at weekend board meetings.

Moreover, university boards do not have the same legal responsibilities borne by corporate boards. Most federal regulations establishing management standards for private-sector firms, such as the 2002 Sarbanes-Oxley Act, do not apply to nonprofit entities, and state regulation of university administration is spotty. At the same time, while schools have developed many internal rules and standards applying to the conduct of faculty members and students, few if any have established standards governing administrative conduct or established oversight mechanisms. For the most part, senior administrators police themselves.

The result of this lack of supervision is that a number of college and university administrators have, in recent years, succumbed to the temptation to engage in corrupt practices. In 2008, for example, the director of Tufts University’s Office of Student Activities, Josephine Nealley, was indicted on three counts of larceny for embezzling more than $300,000 in student activities funds. She allegedly transferred the money to her personal bank accounts and used it for purchases and trips. While acting on an anonymous tip regarding Nealley’s activities, university auditors uncovered a second, apparently unrelated case of embezzlement. Raymond Rodriguez, a budget officer, allegedly stole more than $600,000 from the university, which he spent on trips and luxury goods. Rodriguez was indicted on two counts of larceny for his alleged thefts. Both Nealley and Rodriguez entered guilty pleas and were sentenced to prison terms.

In a similar vein, the president of the University of Tennessee was forced to resign when an audit revealed that he had spent hundreds of thousands of dollars in university funds on personal trips, entertainment, and purchases. The president’s travel at university expense allegedly included trips to Birmingham, Alabama, where he was said to have a “personal involvement” with the president of another school.

Often, frauds go unnoticed for years because the perpetrators are the accountants and financial officers responsible for fiscal oversight. When fraudulent conduct is discovered, university officials often prefer to allow the perpetrators to resign or retire quietly rather than risk a public brouhaha that might upset donors and lead to questions about the quality of the school’s leadership. Many professors can point to cases at their own school when crooked administrators were allowed to leave quietly, sometimes even without being compelled to make restitution for their offenses.

When fraud is exposed and restitution demanded, the sums can be considerable. In January 2008, Roy Johnson, chancellor of Alabama’s community college system, pled guilty to bribery and was required to forfeit the $18 million he admitted receiving in direct and indirect benefits from companies doing business with the colleges he oversaw. As the U.S. attorney who prosecuted the case observed, “Taxpayers must wonder how many more Alabama students could have been educated had money not been wasted on fraud.”

he priorities of the hyper-administrative university emerge most clearly during times of economic crisis, when managers are forced to make choices among spending options. Thanks to the sharp economic downturn that followed America’s 2008 financial crisis, almost every institution, even Harvard, America’s wealthiest school, has been compelled to make substantial cuts in its expenditures. What cuts did university administrations choose to make during these hard times?

A tiny number of schools took the opportunity to confront years of administrative and staff bloat and moved to cut costs by shedding unneeded administrators and their brigades of staffers. The most notable example is the University of Chicago’s Pritzker School of Medicine, which in February 2009 addressed a $100 million budget deficit by eliminating fifteen “leadership positions,” along with 450 staff jobs, among other cuts. The dean also emphasized that faculty would not be affected by the planned budget cuts. Chicago’s message was clear: administrators and staffers were less important than teaching, research, and—since this involved a medical school—patient care; if the budget had to be cut, it would be done by thinning the school’s administrative ranks, not by reducing its core efforts.

Unfortunately, few if any other colleges and universities copied the Chicago model. Facing budgetary problems, many schools eliminated academic programs and announced across-the-board salary and hiring freezes, which meant that vacant staff and faculty positions, including the positions of many adjunct professors, would remain unfilled until the severity of the crisis eased.

Perverse administrative priorities were even more in evidence at a number of schools that actually raised administrative salaries or opted to spend more money on administrative services while cutting expenditures on teaching and research in the face of budget deficits. For example, in January 2009, facing $19 million in budget cuts and a hiring freeze, Florida Atlantic University awarded raises of 10 percent or more to top administrators, including the school’s president. In a similar vein, in February 2009, the president of the University of Vermont defended the bonuses paid to the school’s twenty-one top administrators against the backdrop of layoffs, job freezes, and program cuts at the university. The university president, Daniel Fogel, asserted that administrative bonuses were based on the principles of “extra pay for extra duties” and “pay for performance.” The president rejected a faculty member’s assertion that paying bonuses to administrators when the school faced an enormous budget deficit seemed similar to the sort of greed recently manifested by the corporate executives who paid themselves bonuses with government bailout money. Fogel said he shared the outrage of those upset at corporate greed, but maintained there was a “world of difference” between the UVM administrative bonuses and bonuses paid to corporate executives. He did not specify what that world might be.

In the meantime the president of Washington State University, Elson Floyd, accepted a $125,000 pay raise, bringing his 2009 salary to $725,000 per year, soon after announcing that financial circumstances required the school to freeze hiring. At another university that had just announced a large budget deficit and mandated salary and hiring freezes, the outgoing president was feted by the board of trustees at a gala 350-person dinner, to which trustees, senior administrators, alumni, donors, and other notables—but no students or faculty—were invited. The dinner, which might as well have been held on the promenade deck of the Titanic, featured musical performances, videos, and a lounge area with hundreds of Chinese newspapers and a tea set to recognize the president’s many trips to China. (No wonder university spending was frozen.) Later, this same university placed restrictions on the use of copy paper by graduate students. Maybe the Chinese newspapers should have been recycled.

n any given campus, the only institution with the actual power to halt the onward march of the all-administrative university is the board of trustees or regents— which, as we’ve seen, tend to be unprepared or disinclined to make waves. But they need to do so if their institutions are to be saved from sinking into the expanding swamp of administrative mediocrity.

To begin with, trustees interested in trimming administrative fat should compare their own school’s ratio of managers and staffers per hundred students to the national mean, which is currently an already inflated nine for private schools and eight for public colleges. If the national mean is nine administrators per hundred students at private colleges, why does Vanderbilt need sixty-four? Why does Rochester need forty and Johns Hopkins thirty-one? Management-minded administrators claim to believe in benchmarking, so they should not object to being benchmarked in this way.

The right kind of media coverage would embolden boards to ask the right questions. In particular, the various publications that rate and rank colleges—U.S. News is the most influential—should take account of administrative bloat in their ratings. After all, a high administrator-to-student ratio means that the school is diverting funds from academic programs to support an overgrown bureaucracy. I am certain that if Vanderbilt or Duke or Hopkins or Rochester or Emory or any of the other most administratively top-heavy schools lost a few notches in the U.S. News rankings because of their particularly egregious administrative bloat, their boards would be forced to act.

But given the general fattening of administrative ranks in recent years, even schools with average administrator-to-student ratios could stand to see major cuts in their administrative staffs and budgets. This could help not only to fill budget holes but, more importantly, to begin a healthy shift in the balance of bureaucratic power within universities. A 10 percent cut in the staff and management ranks would save millions of dollars but would have no effect whatsoever on the operations of most campuses. The deanlets would never be missed; their absence from campus would go unnoticed. A 20 percent or larger cut would begin to be noticed and would have the beneficial effect of substantially reducing administrative power and the ongoing diversion of scarce funds into unproductive channels.

With fewer deanlets to command, senior administrators would be compelled to turn once again to the faculty for administrative support. Such a change would result in better programs and less unchecked power for presidents and provosts. Faculty who work part-time or for part of their careers as administrators tend to ask questions, use judgment, and interfere with arbitrary presidential and provostial decision making. Senior full-time administrators might resent the interference, but the university would benefit from the result. Moreover, with fewer administrators to pay and send to conferences and retreats, more resources might be available for educational programs and student support, the actual items for which parents, donors, and funding agencies think they are paying.

Benjamin Ginsberg is a professor of political science at Johns Hopkins University. This article is adapted with permission from The Fall of the Faculty: The Rise of the All-Administrative University and Why It Matters, by Benjamin Ginsberg, published by Oxford University Press, 2011.

Welcome Back

2012-01-10T08:25:00.000-08:00

Well here we are in a new year. I heard on the street that enrollment is down as is retention. I suppose we will be told that the falloff was either planned or really didn't happen. As to retention, that will be our fault. The greedy lazy shifless faculty have once again done in the University's best efforts to grant an education to some of its students. Sometime in February the HLC (sounds like a cable channel) will visit for accredidation purposes. The excitement is palpable. I'm on the edge of my chair. Actually I'm on the edge of my chair because I had double hernia surgery and it's a lot easier to sit that way. Remember these are the fine folks who have had us do all this work on assessment. These are the fine folks who expect us to follow our graduates and somehow connect what they have done in life with my Mass Communication class. While I'm all in favor of improving the human condition, I don't feel personally responsible for it five years down the road. I doubt the owners of the blog will be invited to any of the dinners, meetings, etc. while the crew is in town. To save the administration time and worry, I am now going to include what I believe will be the crux of the visitation report.

We, the visitation committee from on high, would like to compliment the University on its continued efforts in the area of assessment. While you aren't there yet, you are certainly committed to the process. Secondarily we would like to note your committment to faculty relations. You have successfully drug the faculty kicking and screaming into the late 20th century. You have managed to stifle dissent quite nicely and we will recommend you as a model to others. Your ability to have a medical school take over an entire university is likewise noteworthy. The shifting of money and resources away from the liberal arts without a peep from your BOT is truly remarkable. We will send others to learn at your feet.

Sincerely,

Those Happy Olympus Visitors

Aargh!

2011-12-18T14:22:00.000-08:00

Faculty Senate vs. Jacobs Inc.

What happened to "EARN a college education"?

2011-12-11T05:14:00.000-08:00

The Rosetta Stone of the Jacobs' Administration

2011-12-05T19:48:00.000-08:00

The website listed immediately below generates academic gibberish that resounds of the linguistic and faux-programmatic style of the current UT administration. Please see:

http://www.sciencegeek.net/lingo.html

Learn what it's like to experience the illusionary power of the phrase, "In the beginning was the Word," and see the futility in the current administrative policy of, "Words-without-end-amen."

verbs, adjectives, nouns

agendize
aggregate
assess
benchmark
cultivate
deliver
deploy
disaggregate
disintermediate
drive
embrace
empower
enable
engage
engineer
enhance
envision
evolve
expedite
exploit
extend
facilitate
generate
grow
harness
implement
innovate
integrate
iterate
leverage
maximize
mesh
morph
optimize
orchestrate
recontextualize
reinvent
repurpose
revolutionize
seize
strategize
streamline
synergize
synthesize
target
transform
transition
triangulate
unleash
utilize
visualize
assessment-driven
authentic
bottom-up
brain-compatible
child-centered
classroom-based
collaborative
collegial
compelling
competency-based
constructivist
cooperative
critical
cross-curricular
developmentally appropriate
discipline-based
dynamic
efficient
global
group-based
hands-on
holistic
impactful
innovative
inquiry-centered
integrated
interactive
interdisciplinary
intuitive
learner-centered
learning-intensive
literature-based
mastery-focused
meaning-centered
metacognitive
mission-critical
multidisciplinary
multi-media
objective
open-ended
outcome-based
over-arching
peer-based
performance-based
performance-driven
proactive
problem-based
process-based
real-time
real-world
research-based
revolutionary
school-based
school-to-work
shared
site-based
standards-based
strategic
student-centered
subjective
synergistic
technology-enhanced
thematic
top-down
visionary

action plans
action-items
alignment
applications
articulation
assessment
business partnerships
cohorts
communities
competencies
content
convergence
critical thinking
curriculum compacting
curriculum integration
curriculum
decision-making
dialogue
differentiated lessons
education
enrichment
ESLR's
experiences
facilitators
functionalities
goals
higher-order thinking
infrastructures
initiatives
instruction
interfaces
learning
learning styles
life-long learning
living documents
manipulatives
mastery learning
methodologies
models
multiple intelligences
networks
niches
objectives
outcomes
paradigms
paradigms
pedagogy
problem-solving
processes
relationships
risk-takers
scaffolding
schemas
solutions
staff development
stakeholders
strategies
styles
synergies
systems
teaching
technologies
units

The Higher Learning Commission Needs to Know

2011-11-29T12:28:00.000-08:00

utcommentstohlc@gmail.com

In Memoriam

2011-11-18T09:47:00.000-08:00

Dean Alice Skeens

Thanks Ben!

2011-11-17T10:47:00.000-08:00

Inviting food into Carlson Library? This thuggish administration has already trash-canned most of our main campus library’s scientific books and journals in short order. Now this! Call it “creeping desecration" and yet another example of how Jacobs Inc. is failing the students and faculty of this campus by deliberately undermining its once-dignified quality learning environment and by bulldozing its traditional landscapes of intellectual decorum.

Dr. Carlson may have to return from the grave to personally to right these wrongs. First on his list of things to do is knock on the door of a certain derelict library dean who perceives his primary duty to be pimping for Papa John and campus food services instead of preserving and protecting sacred library space.

Visionary Leadership

2011-11-01T09:43:00.000-07:00

UT Senior Leadership Team Group Photograph

2011-10-30T14:24:00.000-07:00

Most Definitely a Classic Case of a Trick Rather than a Treat

Who's Really Left Behind?

2011-10-27T12:37:00.000-07:00

A friend of mine showed me this; I thought it would be of interest to blog readers and contributors, especially in light of the current situation in education, higher and otherwise.

Lessons to be learned

2011-10-26T07:09:00.000-07:00

Hi folks. I realize it's been quite a few days since last we talked but life has a way of getting in the way.

Since last we spoke I've learned a couple of valuable lessons that I would like to pass on to those who visit our little corner of the internet. The first is that Ideology and Vindictiveness will trump almost everything, particularly at a university.

Last January our department became a part of the College of LLSS. Our erstwhile chair became an associate dean and an interim chair was named. The interim chair did an excellent job but did not want the job on a permanent basis having held the position for ten years in the past. I applied and the department voted 10-0 to let me do the job. We were told the vote was not legal because a member of the dean's office had to be present. We reheld the vote and again I won, 10-0. No one else was interested. The department then waited and waited and waited. Finally in June, the Dean called me in for a chat and said the Provost's Office had found me "too negative" for the position. I have written the Provost for a further explanation and after many weeks have not received an answer. Surprise, Surprise. (Another faculty member did step forward and is doing a marvelous job.)

As many of you know I have been a vocal critic of the administration. I do not agree with many of the things that have happened here. Ideologically, we are in different worlds. I do not see the connections between STEMM and economic growth. I believe it to be similar to the building of a huge stadium for a professional sports team and claiming huge economic benefits. I was a member of the Roundtable, the extended roundtable and various and sundry meetings that discussed the Arts and Sciences report that eventually found its way to the A & S Council. I voted against accepting the report. I believed that too much emphasis was being placed on technology and not enough on the hiring of high quality faculty. I believe students in the humanities, social sciences and liberal arts in general are getting the short end of the stick.

The goal seems to be to teach less expensively and claim it's better for them. If all that's being "too negative" then I plead guilty as charged. After all the effort that went into the A & S report and our 100 year celebration the administration broke us up anyway. Those of you who remember the vote of no confidence will now understand the vindictiveness part of the story. If you spend your money on technology and not on high quality faculty no organizational style will save you or your students.

UT Transparency: As Clear as Mud?

2011-10-07T13:30:00.000-07:00

The UT Administrative Wallow

Bloggie hears rumors of important events that have been covered over.

It is said by the Knowledgeable that UT administrators recently surveyed a fairly large number of our students to probe the topic of decreasing enrollments and that administrators are dismayed at the results.

Students blasted the Jacobs administration, skipping over the survey questions and going straight to the comments section to report their ire in no uncertain terms. These surveys and their results apparently have been covered up by administration.

Secret meetings--at least undisclosed to the rest of the University and public--were held involving deans and other administrators on this matter

Is this true? Can anyone provide further intelligence?

Is it the case, as far as truthful and forthright information is concerned, that the Jacobs administration professes the Orthodox Orwellian faith?

Transformative Change

2011-09-15T18:24:00.000-07:00

Before:

After:

Question From Grad Student

2011-09-06T18:33:00.000-07:00

The Blog received this query. Any takers on providing answers? Please use the comments function below for your responses.

Hello,

I'm currently a UT student in my 2nd year of grad school and my 6th year at UT overall, and I often read and enjoy your blog.

I've heard the diversionary rhetoric in the e-mails, and I've also heard a few of the popular conspiracy theories. Why was the College of Arts and Sciences "reorganized?"

New UT Parking Patrol

2011-08-31T12:23:00.000-07:00

An expenditure of a mere $200,000 will save the university hundreds of dollars.

The Ongoing Epistemological Crisis in UT Higher Administration

2011-08-19T09:18:00.000-07:00

Welcome back students and faculty!

The New UT

2011-08-08T12:20:00.001-07:00

UT Art Appreciation Week

2011-07-29T09:49:00.001-07:00

A WEEK AT UT

Contributed by a gifted anonymous psychoanalytically perspicacious artist.

This is an interactive exercise! Your job is to say what is happening in each frame!

(Click on image to enlarge.)

Tying One On

2011-07-22T07:49:00.001-07:00

Leadership Paradigms

2011-07-06T08:11:00.001-07:00

Ideal Paradigm

UT Administrative Paradigm

The Acme Relevant University

2011-07-01T04:41:00.001-07:00

Astrology and Strategic Planning

2011-06-26T07:31:00.000-07:00

Online and Decline

2011-06-26T07:09:00.000-07:00

Mystery of Synergy Explained

2011-06-22T13:06:00.001-07:00

As everyone knows the Arts & Sciences College was dismantled for the sake of something the President repeatedly called "Synergy." What a misunderstanding!

Apparently he just wanted the BOT to buy him a new car. Above is the new Chevrolet Camaro in "Synergy Green."

400 to #1: Please do the right thing!

2011-06-22T05:45:00.001-07:00

http://www.PetitionOnline.com/flsec11/

Are We Laughing, Too?

2011-06-21T14:41:00.000-07:00

Below is the Blade article (and link to it) mentioned by Anon 6:10 am under "... Pants on Fire? ..."

Some things in the article I found interesting:

1. "Trustee S. Amjad Hussain told the board it was a mistake for anyone to accuse UT of giving exorbitant raises to administrators. He said that, comparatively speaking, Dr. Jacobs' salary package was 'in line or below' that of presidents at comparable public universities.

"According to the the Chronicle of Higher Education, the median total compensation for college presidents in 2009-10 was $375,442."

But: "UT President Lloyd Jacob is paid $392,700 a year."

I'm glad Dr. Hussain is a medical doctor and not an accountant, if average is $375,442 and "in line or below" is $392,700!!!

2. "Dr. Jacobs drew laughter when he told the board, 'I would do this job for nothing. I love it so much. I love the institution. I care for all of you.'"

Oh, make me barf!
I agree with Anon 6:10: let him do it for nothing!
I also laughed, but for way different reasons: it's so phony and ridiculous. It's very strange how he shows us he "love[s] the institution" and "care[s] for all of [us]." Believe it? Line up to lose your job, or be furloughed or transferred.
The sad thing is, if I could afford to--and if my work and I were respected--I probably would do my job for nothing. I do love it that much.

3. "On a more serious note, Dr. Jacobs said this would be the third year in a row that neither he nor other members of his leadership team have received a pay increase."

Is this one even true???

4. "'Times are tough,' he said after the meeting. 'I'll take it [pay increase] when all the rest of these guys get a salary increase.'"

So who are "all the rest of these guys"? What about the people whose jobs are being cut while administrators get a pay raise and/or a bonus? Have a look (my italics):
"Approved an $800.6 million budget for next year that includes a 3.5 percent tuition increase for undergraduate students and eliminates more than 100 positions at the main and health science campuses. About a third of the staff reductions were made by not filling vacant positions, while the remainder involved layoffs of current personnel, said David Dabney, interim senior vice president for finance and administration. Scott Scarborough, senior vice president and executive director of the University of Toledo Medical Center, the former Medical College of Ohio, said no faculty or nursing staff were laid off."

5. "Carroll Ashley, vice chairman of the board, said he was concerned UT could risk losing good administrators by not granting them salary increases."

Again: make me barf! We've already lost great faculty and staff, though I doubt salary increases alone would have been enough to keep them, given the general treatment and lack of respect given them by administration.

So, what do you all think?

UT chief Jacobs forgoes pay raise
But he'll soon get $150,000 bonus
BY JENNIFER FEEHAN
BLADE STAFF WRITER

UT President Lloyd Jacob is paid $392,700 a year.
University of Toledo President Lloyd Jacobs is to receive no raises in the next five years under a contract extension approved by the board of trustees Monday.

Saying there had been a lot of "erroneous rhetoric" surrounding a possible pay increase for Dr. Jacobs, board Chairman C. William Fall said he only talked with the president about extending his contract through June 30, 2016 -- not increasing his salary.

"In fact, both privately and publicly, prior to that event, since that event ... Dr. Jacobs has religiously declined any change in possible compensation, and I wanted to go and make a few comments this afternoon to make sure we're all clear on that and frankly, [Dr. Jacobs] our gratitude for your position simply considering the economic times within which we're dealing."

Dr. Jacobs, who is paid $392,700 a year, also receives a car, house, and expense account from the university. His existing contract also calls for him to receive a longevity bonus of $150,000 after June 30 this year and again after June 30, 2013.

Meghan Cunningham, a spokesman for UT, said Dr. Jacobs had taken the longevity bonus in the past, and she didn't have any indication that he wouldn't take this one.

Larry Burns, vice president of external affairs for UT, did not immediately return phone calls seeking comment.

The president's contract extension was among a long list of personnel moves approved by the trustees that included former UT President Dan Johnson's return from a leave of absence and appointment as director of global initiatives at an annual salary of $200,000. Mr. Johnson, who spent the last three years as provost, chief operating officer, and chief academic officer at Zayed University in the United Arab Emirates, retains his titles of president emeritus and distinguished university professor of public policy and economic development at UT.

Trustee S. Amjad Hussain told the board it was a mistake for anyone to accuse UT of giving exorbitant raises to administrators. He said that, comparatively speaking, Dr. Jacobs' salary package was "in line or below" that of presidents at comparable public universities.

According to the the Chronicle of Higher Education, the median total compensation for college presidents in 2009-10 was $375,442.

E. Gordon Gee of Ohio State University was the highest-paid, with $1.8 million in "total cost of employment," which factors in all costs including salary, retirement, bonuses, car allowances, and retirement benefits.

At the University of Cincinnati, a public institution that also has a medical school like UT, the president's total cost of employment was $490,415, while it was listed as $412,500 at Bowling Green State University and $453,406 at UT.

Dr. Jacobs drew laughter when he told the board, "I would do this job for nothing. I love it so much. I love the institution. I care for all of you."

On a more serious note, Dr. Jacobs said this would be the third year in a row that neither he nor other members of his leadership team have received a pay increase.

"Times are tough," he said after the meeting. "I'll take it when all the rest of these guys get a salary increase."

Carroll Ashley, vice chairman of the board, said he was concerned UT could risk losing good administrators by not granting them salary increases.

"Higher education is a competitive community. For us to fall behind only subjects our better people to other opportunities and creates inequities as we replace them with current staff," Mr. Ashley said. "I respect what Dr. Jacobs is doing and appreciate the leaders who are foregoing any kind of request for increases, but I think for the institution's long-range benefit it's something the board needs to look at very carefully."

Also Monday, the board of trustees approved a one-year contract extension with the UT chapter of the American Association of University Professors, which represents some 600 lecturers and tenured and tenure-track professors at UT. The extension continues wages and benefits at their current level.

Dr. Jacobs said union members overwhelmingly ratified the contract extension in voting over the past week.

"It is evidence of us finding common ground," he said. "It is evidence, in my opinion, that we're improving our partnership, that we're able to work together."

Harvey Wolff, president of the AAUP chapter, said after the meeting that he believes faculty supported the extension because of the uncertainty of Senate Bill 5, a measure that would prohibit public employee unions from striking and limit what they can negotiate, among other things. An attempt is under way to ask Ohio voters to repeal the law on Nov. 8.

"I think the driving force was the unknown issue involving Senate Bill 5 and what that might or might not mean," Mr. Wolff said.

If Senate Bill 5 is repealed in November, the union and UT would resume negotiations by Jan. 16, 2012, under the terms of the contract extension.

In other business, trustees:

Approved an $800.6 million budget for next year that includes a 3.5 percent tuition increase for undergraduate students and eliminates more than 100 positions at the main and health science campuses. About a third of the staff reductions were made by not filling vacant positions, while the remainder involved layoffs of current personnel, said David Dabney, interim senior vice president for finance and administration. Scott Scarborough, senior vice president and executive director of the University of Toledo Medical Center, the former Medical College of Ohio, said no faculty or nursing staff were laid off.

While the budget is 1.2 percent larger than this year's $791 million spending plan, it took into account a reduction in state funding projected at $20.2 million.

Named a new Parkinson's disease center the Gardner/McMaster Parkinson's Center after donors Philip J. Gardner of Findlay and the Harold and Helen McMaster Foundation. Both Mr. Gardner and the foundation pledged $500,000 for construction of the 5,100-square-foot facility.

Thanked outgoing trustees Joseph C. High and Baldemar Velasquez as well as student Trustee Treyken M. Addison.

http://www.toledoblade.com/Education/2011/06/21/UT-chief-Jacobs-forgoes-pay-raise.html

"... Pantalon est en feu? ..."

2011-06-13T12:41:00.000-07:00

Why Cancel Town Hall Meetings?

2011-06-10T14:18:00.000-07:00

Why is Pres. Jacobs cancelling Town Hall Meetings? There might be legitimate reasons, but it does look funny to me—especially with two cancellations in a row. Does it have anything to do with the upcoming BOT meeting, where some pretty loaded issues are to be disussed and decided on? Based on what I've experienced as to how Jacobs tries to control things, it wouldn't surprise me if this is a way to eliminate dialogue about things that could be uncomfortable for him to have to deal with--but that's just speculation on my part. Does anyone really know?

From recent issues of UT Update:

Monday, June 6, 2011

Town Hall Canceled: The Town Hall Meeting scheduled for Thursday, June 9th has been canceled.

Friday, May 20, 2011

Town Hall Canceled: The Town Hall scheduled for Tuesday, May 24, 2011 to be held on the Main Campus, Student Union, 2nd Floor Lounge, from 11:00 a.m. to Noon has been canceled.

The next Town Hall will be held on the Health Science Campus in the Skyview Cafeteria Atrium from 4:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m Thursday, June 9th

... or maybe not ...

Interesting Article

2011-05-26T11:58:00.000-07:00

From "Minding the Campus," an article called "Why University Presidents are Clueless About the World."

Even more interesting, the current UT administration seems to embody the negatives of both sides of the divide discussed in the article: Overpaid cronyism meets over-reliance on state support, the welfare-business model.

$o what?

2011-05-23T13:12:00.000-07:00

Preposterous Rumor Put to Bed

2011-05-20T13:15:00.000-07:00

Dedicated to the "New" Provost

2011-05-17T13:58:00.001-07:00

"Just when I thought I was out . . . they pull me back in!"

Always on the Menu . . .

2011-05-10T06:18:00.001-07:00

It seems to have become the speciality of the house. Too rich for Bloggie! However the BOT (Board of Truth) seems to subsist wholly on it. Gobble, gobble, gobble!

Can we look forward to three more years?

Blowin' Smoke

2011-05-06T11:49:00.000-07:00

Have you noticed that the "educational model" that now informs administrative thinking at the University is the old 1930s-40s public health model? Everybody stands in line and gets a shot from the same hypodermic. Very advanced!

M.D. = "Master of Deception?"

2011-05-02T11:23:00.000-07:00

Bloggie always thought that M.D. was the abbreviation for "Medical Doctor." What a silly assumption! Bloggie is so embarrassed!

Reading this article we see that the president boasts top level UT administrators "will forgo" raises again for the third year. This shallow equivocation sidesteps the generous (lavish) bonuses and other forms of compensation they have been rewarding themselves all along. Sources claim they have even set up deferred compensation packages for themselves.

Sources also maintain that Logie and McMillan were pounded out after disagreement with the president, despite recent great face-saving public praise.

Let's see? M.D? Master of Disingenuousness? That would seem to apply, too.

What does the BOT think of what appears to be a systematic policy of deception? Certainly no one can now be imagining that BOT means "Board of Truth." And aren't "Trustees" people in whom one can trust? Bloggie would like to see Trust in the Board restored and preserved.

Jake's New Wheels

2011-04-29T09:38:00.000-07:00

Lots of room under there ...

P-Card Testimonial

2011-04-26T13:03:00.001-07:00

"The P Card helps expedite my slither."

See the recent UT-AAUP Newsletter on UT administrative P Card expenses at:

http://archive.constantcontact.com/fs013/1101630372476/archive/1105277280129.html

Photo credit to L.

Organizational Behavior

2011-04-16T06:43:00.001-07:00

For those who wanted a closer look....

Snake of the University Address 2011

2011-04-14T02:52:00.000-07:00

Doonesbury

2011-04-05T06:39:00.000-07:00

Did you see "Doonesbury" this past Sunday? Have a look here:

http://www.doonesbury.com/strip/archive/2011/04/03

I especially like the next-to-last panel. Doesn't apply only to bankers!

Heard on the Mall

2011-03-22T10:26:00.000-07:00

So you wonder where all the money's gone? After extensive investigation, a little bribery and several shots of bathtub gin we don't have a clue either. However, with our ear to the muddy ground we did pick up this rumor. The University does not pay property tax, but each year must apply for a waiver to avoid doing so. This year the waiver was not applied for, and then to top it off, someone actually sent payment in to the city totalling around two million dollars. The University is now trying to get its money back. I personally hope this rumor is wrong. Two million is a lot of bucks for those of us not receiving bonuses.

Union Rally

2011-03-21T11:13:00.000-07:00

Congratulations to all those who showed up for the union rally. It is too bad that only one BOT member actually showed up and spoke. The rest avoided coming out and explaining to their employees what on God's green earth is going on here. This great economic engine of northwest Ohio seems intent on outsourcing decent paying jobs while giving themselves bonuses. They seem intent on outsourcing the faculty as well. They'll just put it all on the computer and then they won't need all those nasty union faculty. If they work this right all they'll need will be 2500 vice presidents and a bunch of computer stations in the library where they used to have books. I am willing to bet lunch on two things: first, the budget will have increased over what it is today and, two, the education won't be worth a dime.

The First Ostrich of Spring

2011-03-15T10:04:00.001-07:00

"Save UT" / "Shame on U" Rally!

2011-03-08T06:27:00.000-08:00

"We are being buried

beneath the avalanche of your inadequacies!"

Time and Location:

Centennial Mall, Steps of the Student Union

Monday, March 21, "Noon till One"

(and then some?)

Feel free to "cut out and wear" this funky

"'V' for Vendetta" mask if you are shy --

or just to enliven and enhance

your surreal rally experience!

Bring your Facebook friends!

Bring drums to bang!

Cymbals to clang!

& Horns to

blaze away!

Kids

are

Senate Bill 5

2011-03-03T12:06:00.000-08:00

Senate Bill 5 has now passed the Ohio Senate and moves on the House. Basing its language on the Yeshiva Decision it states:

"any faculty who, individually or through a faculty senate, or like organization, participate in the governance of the institution, are involved in personnel decisions, selection or review of administrators, planning and use of physical resources, budget preparation, and determination of educational policies related to admissions, curriculum, subject matter, and methods of instruction and research, are managment level employees."

We have all just been promoted to management. There is a requirement that we do service here at the university. Our participation in personnel decisions even at the department level makes us managment. Our involvement in curriculum makes us management. What the legislature has done is give us a Hobson's choice. We can remain in the union and do nothing toward service, have no control over our curriculum, and not serve on any committees at all or leave the union, watch it get decertified and have no bargaining power whatsoever. Needless to say we have a university president who thinks the bill is just dandy. For those of us who remember the years in which we received no raises, this represents an awful choice. We did not create the problems of this institution. We have little to no control over how the money is spent either here or at the state level. We have been become the fall guys and gals for the failures of our university president, the state legislature and the governor.

Core Competencies?

2011-03-01T06:29:00.000-08:00

As I stare over the new UT Core Experience that Dr. Pryor has placed before the BOT, I am reminded of the traveler in Ireland who asked directions of a local. The response was, “If I wanted to go there, I would not start out from here.” The “here” in this case is what appears to be the unalterable belief in the goodness of technology for the education of our students. Let me add another cliché to the mix: “You can lead a student to an education, but you can’t make them think.” No matter how you package whatever it is you are putting together, it is still incumbent on the student to work at it. We seem to treat all our educational problems as if technology will solve them by, as one administrator is supposed to have said, “Putting teaching back in the classroom.” Please allow me several comments:

1.) I have no idea where teaching supposedly went or how exactly technology is going to bring it back
2.) While the audience may assume I am Luddite by nature, this does not mean that I fail to use the available technology. I teach on-line and have used computers and the Internet in classrooms for some time now. It makes for a certain convenience but not necessarily for a smarter student or a better educational environment. I will note here that some major law schools have banned laptops in the classroom because students have ceased to pay attention to the professor.
3.) If we have narrowed the core competencies as was stated in the press release, what got left out? I would like to see the original list.
4.) Again there is this great belief in the ability to measure the learning of humans. The Higher Learning Commission wants this, the Governor wants this, Deans, Provosts and College Presidents want this. Given that we have been at assessment for over thirty years, one might assume that it is necessary. It is not. There has been no great leap forward in higher education. Administrators keep promising some form of measured achievement and we, the faculty, will be the fall guys in this process. The measurement of human activity/learning is incredibly difficult under the best circumstances. This is particularly true in the Humanities and to some degree in the Social Sciences. How does one measure ethical decision making? And, how does one measure the difference between a 90 percent and an 80 percent on such measurement. Is such a differentiation even meaningful?
5.) How much have we spent on assessment and technology over the last thirty years? Where has it gotten us?

Jacobs Administration: Running on Fumes

2011-02-28T10:47:00.000-08:00

Board Resolution

2011-02-17T08:25:00.000-08:00

Below is part of the BOT's resolution number 11-02-02:

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,

that while the Board of Trustees of the University of Toledo continues to recognize the three components of faculty workload--teaching, professional activity and service-- The University of Toledo faculty shall be assigned a 15 credit hour or equivalent teaching load per semester as part of their normal faculty workload.

BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED,

that The University of Toledo President or his designees shall have the authority to creat faculty workload standards and measurements that may serve to implement or offset the 15 credit hour or equivalent teaching load per semester.

Any reduction in teaching load will constitute a reassignment to engage in other tasks as part of his or her workload, such as research, outreach and/or engagment, approved service, etc., and such workload reduction will be proportionate to the reassignment.

Exceptions to and departures from the faculty workload standards and measurements created by the President or his deignees will require written approval from the President. Approval of excetions to and departures from the faculty workload standards and measurements that have been created by the President or his designees is a non delegable duty of the President.

I am going to make a few comments and then open the floor for discussion. First, no institution I am aware of that has a research component has a fifteen hour requirement. That equates to five three hour classes per semester. I did five three hour classes once. You spend all, let me repeat that, all your time teaching the class, coming and going to the class, preparing for the class or dealing with the students in the class. If I had wanted to that I would have taught junior high school. There is no time for writing or research or even committee activities. What is even more problematic is that there is little time to be creative in the classroom or to develope new classes. At a time when the administration is encouraging the development of new schools, new majors and at the very least a reworking of the curriculum you will have no time to do that. You will be just too busy teaching what is right in front of you to think about anything else. Second, no young scholars will consider taking such a position. It would be occupational suicide. There will not be enough time to write anything and as a result he/she will never receive tenure and have no record of scholarship that will enable them to go elsewhere. Third, there will be favoratism toward particular individuals, particular departments and particular programs. What better way for administrators to take out their displeasure at those who have disagreed with their policies than to have them teaching fifteen hours a week. Let's face it, those that receive outside funding will get release time. The rest of us will not. Fourth, those departments who tend to attract those students who are least prepared will have the least amount of time to personally help those students. We will all be in class. I suggest we create a new college. I even have a name for it: The Community and Technical College.

Trip Down Memory Lane

2011-02-16T12:19:00.000-08:00

The more things change, the more they stay the same:

What's Wrong With This Picture?

2011-02-15T14:34:00.000-08:00

From the Toledo Blade, Feb. 11, 2001
http://www.toledoblade.com/article/20110211/NEWS16/102100370

A $12 million dollar gateway!

See it for yourself:
http://www.toledoblade.com/apps/pbcs.dll/misc?url=/templates/zoom.pbs&Site=TO&Date=20110211&Category=NEWS16&ArtNo=102100370&Ref=AR

Yep, there’s money for that!

UT Update, Feb. 15, 2011:

Outsourcing Food and Nutrition Services, the UT Medical Center gift shop: UT jobs lost!
Increasing faculty workload!

UToday
Board committee OKs police contract extension, asks for faculty workload discussion
With a difficult budget cycle ongoing statewide for fiscal year 2012, University of Toledo trustees discussed several items designed to help plan for providing services with reduced funding.
During a Feb. 14 Academic and Student Affairs Committee meeting, UT officials announced they had reached a tentative one-year contract extension with the UT Police Patrolman’s Association (UTPPA), pending board approval; were exploring the outsourcing of Food and Nutrition Services and the gift shop at UT Medical Center; and asked that the administration and faculty begin a conversation considering increasing faculty workload from 12 to 15 credit hours or equivalent per semester.
The agreement with UTPPA, now extended through Dec. 31, 2012, calls for a 0 percent wage increase, eight furlough hours, and a one-time retirement cash incentive if notice is submitted by March 31. Additionally, members have an increased off-campus prescription co-payment, which is an effort to encourage usage of the UT Pharmacy and reduce the University’s prescription coverage costs. The extension was approved by a 27-1 vote of the union membership.

[Continue Reading]

Gotta save money somehow!

Loss of Rob Bruno and other essential staff!

Gotta save money somehow!

Hire more administrators!

Yep, there’s money for that!

Give administrators bonuses!

Yep, there’s money for that!

Cut janitorial staff: “Unwanted guests” in buildings! Trash collects around campus!

Gotta save money somehow!

A student-centered university???

Communication Across the Curriculum

2011-02-15T10:29:00.000-08:00

At a recent meeting of the WAC (writing across the curriculum) committee of the Council formerly known as Arts and Sciences, there was a short discussion of the concept of communication across the curriculum or CAC. Just so the discussion does not wander too far down the road before we get a word in, here is what the National Communication Association has stated about such programs: (1996)

Resolved, That Communication Across the Curriculum programs should not be approved as substitutes for basic communication instruction provided by the discipline.

Resolved, That Communication Across the Curriculum courses are endorsed as useful extensions of and supplements to courses taught in departments of communication.

Resolved, That courses in Communication Across the Curriculum programs should be developed in close consultation with the communication faculty on the campus, and with ourside consultants as needed. These cross-disciplinary efforts must be acknowledged with resources, administrative support and recognition of faculty effort.

The Brains Behind Reorganization

2011-02-09T10:24:00.000-08:00

Two for the space of one

2011-02-01T14:28:00.000-08:00

Last week or so, in the UT News of January 21, we were informed that

"Geography student places at national science competition

"A University of Toledo geography student recently competed against some of the nation’s most intelligent young scientists and engineers from top U.S. colleges, including Harvard, Stanford and MIT.

"Jeff Kodysh, a senior at UT, placed third in the energy division of the U.S. Department of Energy’s 2010 Science and Energy Challenge."

...

(See
http://utnews.utoledo.edu/index.php/01_21_2011/geography-student-places-at-national-science-competition
for the whole article.)

This is terrific news in and of itself--congratulations to Jeff and to his adviser, Dr. Nemeth! And I personally am also pleased to see some attention given to someone in a field other than totally STEM(M) or sports. We of the former A&S--whatever college we're in now--should think about tooting our own horn a bit more. (No one else will do it for us!) We have a lot to be pleased with and proud of that the rest of UT should hear about. I don't know how things are chosen for the UToday, but maybe someone out there does.

And now to my second post-within-a-post: Last week, while I was home sick, I read the book In the Pond by Ha Jin. It's quite an interesting--and fairly quick--read about corruption. Worth a look at least.

Highlights from the Second LLSS College Council Meeting

2011-01-26T14:41:00.000-08:00

The Stoning of St. Davidus

A & S Coun oops, sorry LLSS Council

2011-01-26T11:09:00.000-08:00

There was an intriguing discussion at yesterday afternoon’s council meeting. It involved a resolution from an individual member of council about the leadership of a university committee. It essentially voiced a concern that the administrator in charge of this committee was a relative of the president’s and did not have the qualifications, in this case a college degree, to be in charge of a committee that will be slashing budgets for what is now being called the academic enterprise (which apparently excludes the hospital). Most of the council leapt to the defense of this administrator doing their best to act indignant, outraged, sad, and righteous pretty much all at the same time. For the record, I opposed the resolution in the executive committee meeting. Had it come to a vote yesterday I would have opposed it again. Having said this, there are several issues that still need to be addressed.

I am concerned that there is very little academic representation on the committee. As I understand the purpose of this committee the members are recommending major budget cuts. At the very least there should be some CPAs from the College of Business.
One of my outraged council colleagues said we should be discussing more important issues—I believe the makeup of major university committees to be important. However I do believe he is correct that there are other important issues facing us. (See next entry)

The Chair noted that the BOT voted pay increases (bonuses?) to 19 administrators at its December meeting. I assume that has happened because now these fine folks can take furloughs and not be out any real money. It is sort of a paid vacation in advance. The rest of us will be portrayed as ugly union members eating at the public trough during negotiations.

We teach and work at a public institution. Transparency should be in the mission statement. Alas it is not. The whole brouhaha yesterday could have been avoided with a simple response. The taxpayers of this state have a right to know our qualifications for doing what we do and whether the rumor of nepotism is true or not. An individual has been asked repeatedly whether he is related to the President and what are his academic qualifications. Again, for the record, let me state that I really do not care if he is related to the President. And, I only care about his academic qualifications because he is in charge of a committee that will be examining things that will have a direct impact on how I do my job. And, even then I would not care were there more academic representation on the committee. But this is a public university and we need to be forthcoming with information. This could have been solved with a single simple response.

Since I am asking folks about their relations let me state: I am not related to the Tuckers of Tucker Hall, the Tucker automobile, Tucker Carlson or even Forest Tucker. My Ph.D. is from BGSU, August, 1977. Now, wasn't that simple?

The UT Administrative Paradigm

2011-01-21T10:31:00.000-08:00

Bonus Babies in the Time of the $100 Million Budget Cut to the Academic Enterprise.

Rumors and Questions

2011-01-18T10:30:00.000-08:00

I heard on the street that bonuses for the bigshots have once again happened. "All the animals are equal. It is just that some are more equal than others."

What money went into the solar plant in China?

Heard that Provost Gold's brother is working here.

Why has someone with little or no academic background been placed in charge of cutting programs?

Given the unemployment rate in Lucas county, how well is our business incubator working? How much in the way of tax money has gone into this project?

Why do we have to pay consultants to do job searches?

When over 100 people apply for a job, what constitutes "market value?"

The same question applies, only in reverse: when only 10 people apply, why do we pay minimum wage?

I hope all of you are enjoying our solar panel weather here. I understand the sun comes out around April 15th.

Lest we forget ...

2011-01-17T14:44:00.000-08:00

... in our madcap race to become 'relevant' ...

"History is a great teacher. Now everyone knows that the labor movement did not diminish the strength of the nation but enlarged it. By raising the living standards of millions, labor miraculously created a market for industry and lifted the whole nation to undreamed of levels of production. Those who attack labor forget these simple truths, but history remembers them." -Martin Luther King, Jr.

In our glorious fight for civil rights, we must guard against being fooled by false slogans, as 'right-to-work.' It provides no 'rights' and no 'works.' Its purpose is to destroy labor unions and the freedom of collective bargaining... -Martin Luther King, Jr. (speaking on right-to-work laws in 1961).

Please support your AAUP throughout the tough contract negotiations ahead of us. Help us preserve the sacred heart the soul of this public university. Help protect us from a strategic plan that aims without remorse to deliver us into the greedy hands of privatization and corporate thugs.

Rumors

2011-01-12T06:44:00.000-08:00

I tried keeping my ear to the ground but it's a little cool for that. However, after putting a glass to the wall we here at the blog have heard a couple of things. Chuck Leonard has been placed in charge of the budget cuts. This is hardly news but the fact there is only one academic on the committee is more than a bit disheartening. If we are an educational institution, then shouldn't the faculty have more real say in how all this comes down? Rumor has it the budget cuts may run as high as 100 million. Along those same lines, the College (?) advising office has lost two advisers in the last year and has not been authorized to replace them. That may tell you all you want to know about how extremely student centered we really are. The President wants Schools but folks have no idea how to put them together. Who runs them? Who's responsible for the curriculum for such schools? Who's responsible for advising students interested in such programs? Will they get to advertise as much as the hospital does? You know, some days it's just not worth gnawing through the restraints.

New Ad for the LLSS College

2011-01-05T17:26:00.000-08:00

Welcome back!

2011-01-05T16:13:00.000-08:00

Here is something a friend of mine put me onto--maybe it will help brighten your return to classes! I thought these were all pretty good, but 2, 5, 8, 11, 13, and 14 seem particularly appropriate for our situation at UT. Hope you enjoy this!

New Words and Definitions from the Mensa Contest

October 21, 2009 @ 4:37 pm › O.
↓ Leave a comment

A correspondent has alerted us to some of the results of the Washington Post‘s Mensa word-challenge:

“The Washington Post’s Mensa Invitational once again invited readers to take any word from the dictionary, alter it by adding, subtracting, or changing one letter, and supply a new definition.

Here are the winners:

1.   Cashtration (n.): The act of buying a house, which renders the subject financially impotent for an indefinite period of time.
2.   Ignoranus : A person who’s both stupid and an [ a-----e].
3. Intaxicaton : Euphoria at getting a tax refund, which lasts until you realize it was your money to start with.

4. Reintarnation : Coming back to life as a hillbilly.

5.   Bozone ( n.): The substance surrounding stupid people that stops bright ideas from penetrating. The bozone layer unfortunately, shows little sign of breaking down in the near future.
6.   Foreploy : Any misrepresentation about yourself for the purpose of getting laid.
7.   Giraffiti : Vandalism spray-painted very, very high
8.   Sarchasm : The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn’t get it.
9.   Inoculatte : To take coffee intravenously when you are running late.
10. Osteopornosis : A degenerate disease. (This one got extra credit.)
11. Karmageddon : It’s like, when everybody is sending off all these really bad vibes, right? And then, like, the Earth explodes and it’s like, a serious bummer.
12. Decafalon (n.): The grueling event of getting through the day consuming only things that are good for you.
13. Glibido : All talk and no action.
14. Dopeler Effect: The tendency of stupid ideas to seem smarter when they come at you rapidly.
15. Arachnoleptic Fit (n.): The frantic dance performed just after you’ve accidentally walked through a spider web.
16. Beelzebug (n.): Satan in the form of a mosquito, that gets into your bedroom at three in the morning and cannot be cast out.
17. Caterpallor ( n.): The color you turn after finding half a worm in the fruit you’re eating.”

enduringsense1.wordpress.com/.../washington-post-mensa-international-ii/

then click on

New Words and Definitions from the Mensa Contest

New Acronym/Items Found in Hallway

2011-01-05T09:40:00.000-08:00

Proper Pronunciation of New College Acronym Overheard in Hallway: "College of Less."

Three dense spherical metalloid objects found in University Hall third floor hallway. Can anyone identify these?

Blade Article of Interest (Excerpt)

2011-01-03T12:06:00.000-08:00

Article published January 02, 2011
Ties between The Blade, UT should be disclosed

Andrew Jorgensen, an associate professor of chemistry at the University of Toledo, is unhappy with the newspaper's Dec. 20 story about ongoing clashes between the faculty and UT President Lloyd Jacobs, primarily over reorganization efforts at the school.

Essentially, President Jacobs is reforming the College of Arts and Sciences into three new, smaller colleges. Many of the faculty aren't happy about that, and are less happy with what they feel is the high-handed way in which he went about it.

"The article did not present a fair, balanced, and appropriately-researched story," said Mr. Jorgensen, a former president of the academic senate. He then lists a number of problems he had with the story. He thought the story wasn't tough enough on President Jacobs, and didn't devote enough space to concerns from groups such as the faculty senate and the arts and sciences council.

The professor had other concerns too, some of them clearly niggling, some not. He would have liked more space given to items such as a resolution passed by the faculty senate, for example.

So, was he right?

Your ombudsman has been a faculty member at Wayne State University for many years, and knows that faculty members and university presidents rarely are completely happy with each other.

As a longtime journalist, I also knows it is somewhere between hard and impossible to write a story about conflicts at a university that would satisfy everyone. I also know that if the newspaper included every detail about internal bureaucratic infighting over what are, essentially, organizational changes, it would put readers to sleep.

But was this story fair?

Having studied it in detail, my conclusion is that writer Christopher Kirkpatrick actually did a fairly balanced job -- though I have a few niggles of my own.

I don't agree with Mr. Jorgenson's apparent perception that the story wasn't tough enough on President Jacobs.

The fourth paragraph had one longtime professor calling the university's leader "a petty tyrant." Other academic voices indicated dismay at which the changes were rammed though in an arrogant, high-handed way that really didn't make them feel part of them.

The story wasn't perfect, however.

The front-page headline "Judge's ruling rekindles fight over reorganization at UT," was misleading. Three days later, the newspaper did publish a correction, noting that the lawsuit, which the faculty union filed to try and block the reorganization, did not "rekindle a fight." The suit had in fact been filed months ago, and a judge had ruled in favor of the university, meaning President Jacobs' reorganization efforts, before the story went to press. The headline on the online edition, "UT president and faculty at odds over academics," is much more accurate.

Professor Jorgenson did raise one concern involving an apparent conflict of interest involving The Blade. "Blade President (and General Manager) Joseph H. Zerbey IV sits on the UT Board of Trustees and is, in fact, chair of the Academic and Student Affairs Committee … this fact should have been disclosed in the article."

The ombudsman agrees with the professor. When asked, Mr. Kirkpatrick, the staff writer who wrote the story, said his reporting indicated "Mr. Zerbey did not factor into it and did not come up with the changes, [President] Jacobs did."

In any event the story ought to have mentioned the relationship, and the reporter, in my view, should have asked Mr. Zerbey for a comment and included it in this story.

The controversy over the academic reorganization is unlikely to end any time soon.

Dave Murray, Blade managing editor, says the newspaper will continue to cover the story, and that he has asked Mr. Kirkpatrick to seek additional comment from faculty members.

Toledo Blade Makes Front Page of Blog

2010-12-20T16:46:00.000-08:00

See http://toledoblade.com/article/20101220/NEWS16/12190369/0/images

How many UT administrators does it take to change a light bulb?

2010-12-20T12:03:00.001-08:00

a. First, there has to be an administrative committee to discuss and decide what to do. This means a bonus for everyone on the committee, which means they also have to decide what staff and programs to cut to be able to afford the bonuses.

b. The committee decides to hire an outside consulting firm to assess the situation. This means more cuts at UT to pay the members of the consulting firm--per person, more money for a week than most faculty make in a month.

c. The committee decides to change not just the faulty bulb, but all the bulbs at UT! This involves changing them around and renaming them in the process! Forget the cost! Why bother figuring that out? ! Some that have served faithfully for years, truly illuminating UT, are pitched out, and the ones with a slightly brownish tinge are relocated to the best, most glorious sites.

d. This leaves UT in the dark--which the administration likes very much, but which the faculty rightly see as profoundly dangerous, and call the leader on it. The leader sheds crocodile tears about being grieved that it has come this far--not because his actions endanger UT and threaten to leave it in a shambles, but because the faculty had the audacity to call him on his 'misbehavior.' And, amazingly, he manages to convince a court judge that what he did was right--as people at UT stumble around in the darkness he left them in.

e. Actually, just skip all that stuff above--why bother changing the light bulb at all? The more UT is kept in the dark, the better the administration likes it.

Here we come to save the daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay!

2010-12-18T09:49:00.000-08:00

The Goat of Christmas Future

2010-12-15T12:32:00.000-08:00

A Modern Metaphor

2010-12-15T08:08:00.000-08:00

The story is told of the three Ph.D.s who are out walking through the woods. They come upon some tracks. The first says the tracks are of a fawn that is starving and unable to find food in the diminished forest. The second says no, the tracks are from a polar bear driven south by warming in the arctic. The thirds says no the tracks are from an alligator that has been driven out of the swamp by development. They were still arguing when the train hit them.

Please allow me to use the above as a metaphor regarding our present position. The injunction has been denied. While this does not mean the law suit will fail, it is important that we understand where we as faculty are, and what is important to us now versus what may be important to collective bargaining in the future. Please don't read this as diminishing the importance of legal action when the CBA seems to have been challenged. However, as readers of this blog know, I have long been of the opinion that organization means relatively little in terms of outcomes. If you have the right people, the organization works. If you have the wrong people, it doesn't. Treating reorganization as either a silver bullet or a deadly one is wrong and pretty much a waste of time and resources. While I believe this administration has made a hash out of the process, it has really amounted to a smokescreen that has blinded us to more important issues.

There is a financial reckoning (here comes the train) about to occur January 1st when our new Governor takes office. It is unlikely that he will agree with the present system of financing higher education in Ohio. We need to insist on a transparent University budget. We are all taxpayers and should have access to public information. Also, we need to insist on real input in terms of who gets resources and who does not. Make no mistake, there will be cuts. It is our job to see that these take place with our students first and foremost in everyone's mind.

Speaking of our students, that brings me to a second and even more important issue. What constitutes a quality university level education? This has not been addressed. STEMM departments have gotten resources while the rest of us are told to do more with less. With the number of graduates produced each year by the great unwashed departments, I would suggest that we are every bit as much a part of that great economic engine so often referred to in PR releases as anyone else. In addition, here at the University of Extreme Student Centeredness, we continue to increase class size, as well as the number of visiting assistant professors and part-time instructors. This is not meant to slam those groups, but they are here for three years and sometimes fewer than that. While some part-times have been here forever (without a raise) most come and go. At a University that has been discussing an undergraduate research requirement, how do these two match. Research means tenure and tenure track faculty--and not just in STEMM departments.

The final item for today is assessment. This almost invariably has to do with me deriving a number for the sake of outside evaluators (read as Higher Learning Commission). First I tell the student what outcomes he/she should gain from the class. These must appear on my syllabus. Then, I have to show whether or not the students actually achieved said outcomes. For years I thought these were called grades, but no I'm wrong. I have to specifically show which questions and assignments dealt with which outcome and how well everyone did or did not do and hence show whether my class was successful. Implied here is whether I was good at my job. More and more legislatures, administrators and bureaucracies in general want a number, a metric if you will. Former Bush Secretary of Education Spellings thought you should be able to place a number next to every college and university in the country so that parents would "know" where the best value was for their child. I won't begin to explain the absurdity of it all. The problem is we must address this in some formal way. I was in a meeting where it was stated that the Higher Learning Commission eventually wants us to follow our graduates so that we can assess whether our curriculum has been successful or not. So let me make this as simple as possible. The department curriculum and I have a student for 43 hours of classes over a period that usually ranges from four to six years. The world has him/her the rest of the time. Then, five years down the road my curriculum and I are going to be held hostage to the responses (probably non random) from these former students. To believe that such results will have any validity is nonsense. There has been little statewide or national movement to tell the Higher Learning Commission, legislatures and others what a grand wast of time and effort this is. There has been little movement to tell others that learning is a two-way street and that despite my best efforts some students refuse to come to class, do the reading or even consider the subject matter. And yet, I am going to be held responsible. Excuse me, but I think I hear a train.

Guilty as charged

2010-12-07T10:35:00.001-08:00

It is noted below that evidently the names of the new deans (Skeens, Davis and Bjorkman) were published via the web site for UT News. While I would never attempt to defend myself for such a lack of research, let me note a couple of things. I tried the university web site and myut portal. Obviously I don't have the skills to find the information. Second, the University sends out all sorts of announcements via e-mail and, silly me, I assumed they might do this for our new erstwhile deans. I know, one should never assume. Third, if this is truly a big deal then why not treat it that way as opposed to an "oh by the way you have a new dean." Guilty as charged.

Names

2010-12-07T08:44:00.000-08:00

It has been pointed out below that the names of the new deans have not been circulated on the University's web site. They seemed willing to let the Blade publish these but nothing to the rest of us. Shall we start an office pool on how long it takes before we are all actually informed? Or, are they waiting for the judge to decide on the reorg plan?

New Deans

2010-12-07T04:51:00.000-08:00

Congratulations to the newly named deans. I wish you all well.

Blog for Democracy and Against Tyranny

2010-12-05T10:34:00.000-08:00

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P8q4atArQhU&feature=channel

Our professional colleague, Lauri Essig, Assistant Professor of Sociology at Middlebury, reminds of the importance of blogging for democracy.

Just a question or two

2010-11-30T05:38:00.000-08:00

As we move into the corporatization of the American University I have two questions, "Aren't we (the taxpayers of Ohio) now doing through our universities what venture capitalists used to do?" "Why do we think the state bureaucracy is better at choosing winners than the aforementioned venture capitalists?"

more consultants

2010-11-23T04:47:00.000-08:00

So, we're going to hire more consultants to help reorganize the place. I assume that's because the Zemsky crowd did such a bang up job two years ago. The President keeps claiming he wants faculty input but then decides someone from the outside knows the place much better than we do. Our dean has moved. The college has been disbanded and now more consultants. Happy Holidays all.

I'm impressed!

2010-11-20T10:13:00.000-08:00

Note how Jake's propaganda machine exploits every opportunity! This, from a fortune cookie at Ipoh Szechuan & Cantonese, corner of Byrne and Dorr.

Arts & Sciences College: Before Reorganization

2010-11-09T06:22:00.000-08:00

Cute Little Baby Seal Awaiting Reorganization

Paranoid?? Me??

2010-10-28T10:22:00.000-07:00

Some have asked that this blog attempt to explain what's going on to those who are "not in the know." I don't know how to break this to everyone, but I'm generally the last person to know much about anything. However, as you all know, lack of the knowledge has never stopped me. So, here is the take of someone who admits to being looped, sorry out of the loop, about the goings on. I have been here for 23 years and been in higher education for 31 years. I have watched shenanigans from McComas to Jacobs and dare to say this is the most spin I have ever experienced. That scares me. Allow me please to explain. When an organization spends as much time and effort (round tables, transformative force, etc.) as this one has and it results in as little as this represents so far, I keep waiting for what's really going on. When an organization blames a faculty union for wanting its rightful role in reorganization and refers to the faculty as standing in the way of progress I keep waiting for what's really going on. Anyone who believes that this modest reorganization is in any way transformative or sets new trends in higher education is nuttier than a fruitcake. So again, there must be more. The question is what constitutes more. There are several possibilities some of which have already been listed by readers of the blog. The first of those is divide and conquer. There is some plausibility to this argument because more layers of bureaucracy have been created between upper administration and the rest of us. Shared governance then becomes more difficult because you have a variety of voices rather than one council. It also makes threats more real because you are part of a much smaller entity. Along these same lines, there is supposed to be another committee that will analyze all of the departments and programs that were a part of the old college. The goal is to see who best fits with whom. Actually the goal will probably entail decisions on downsizing. Remember, you already have a smaller college so you have less power to prevent whatever they think should be done to you. Also please examine next year's projected budget problems and this piece of paranoia actually makes some sense.

This leads into the second issue--the budget. Remember the good old days when one could actually see the budget in the library? Now you have to know exactly what you want and then request that. Perhaps the Gods will then condescend to send you some of it. As a taxpaying citizen of the great state of Ohio (I also vote--early and often) I believe I should have access to how the money is being dispersed by our administration. The budget issue is a bit like reading the Bible back in the middle ages. If you could not read you had to trust those, the priests, who could about the content of what was in the Bible. That practice helped lead to the Reformation. Today, we are supposed to trust those who have access and therefore can read the budget as to what is in the budget. I have no idea where that will lead.

The third explanation we received is that the reorganization is going to make programs more visible and hence help our students. We as faculty need to understand what a wonderful thing this is and merely shut up and accept it. I guess the administration doesn't think much of programs in HHS because, following this logic, they are about to become less visible because they are being merged. What's good in one case must not work in the other. It has been my experience that what benefits students is access to good faculty and good facilities. The actual organization rarely affects them.

Downsizing, the budget, and shared governance are my initial three. There are undoubtedly other reasons behind the reorganization but this is enough paranoia for one entry.

TRANSFORMATIONAL CHANGE?

2010-10-19T04:55:00.000-07:00

I would like to point out that rearranging deck chairs does not constitute transformational change. The Declaration of Independence, the Emancipation Proclamation and the Civil Rights Act all were and are transformational. This is not. Ohio State puts together a College of Arts and Sciences; we take one apart. Whoopie. But, as they say, that train seems to have left the station. Understand what will now happen. Anything good that transpires over the next millenium will be credited to the change; anything bad that happens will be charged to laggards unwilling to accept change. That's PR folks.

Perhaps someone can explain this. I heard the BOT passed a resolution that allows them to toss cash into an employee's tax free account without really having to call it a raise or tell many of us that they're doing this. Sounds like a great way for someone to claim that they too are taking the financial hit the rest of us will be asked to take while the BOT tosses them some extra cash. I'm just asking for a little guidance here. Afterall, I am a taxpayer and would like to know how my money is being spent. Along those same lines, it would sure be nice if the budget were back in the library. Again, as a taxpayer, why do I not have the right to see the entire budget for a state institution? All I ask is a little guidance.

Reorganization's New Clothes

2010-10-16T19:00:00.000-07:00

In Memoriam

2010-10-14T08:25:00.000-07:00

Synergy Boots

2010-10-13T09:18:00.001-07:00

Newspeak move over! You can't make this stuff up:

. . . President Lloyd Jacobs said the proposed plan will build synergy and creativity and is a student-centered plan for a student-centered university.

“If we do this, the synergy I believe is great,” he said. “The energy will make it worth it. The creativity will make it worth it. The ability to hear voices in the organization will make it worth it.”

And below find even more. Perpetual strategic planning?

From: Jacobs, Lloyd
Sent: Tuesday, October 12, 2010 11:19 AM
Subject: Implementation of Board Direction

Yesterday the Trustees of The University of Toledo pointed us in a new direction. They clearly stated their resolve and commitment to excellence and their willingness to take risk for its achievement. It is now for us to carry out their mandate.

I wish to reiterate that Institutional Structures are about human relationships and are one tool for the implementation of strategy. As we begin implementation we must recognize “Directions 2007” and “Directions 2010” as our clear guide(s) to the creation of our future.

There are literally thousands of decisions ahead of us. What are the first steps? Who will be appointed to leadership roles? How will they be chosen? What will be the milestones, the metrics, and the deadlines? When will former structures cease to exist? How will we attain unity of purpose? When will we know when we are finished?

I think we need a pause to reflect and think. I plan not to take any significant implementation steps for the next month. I would like to have some initial personnel actions and other steps ready for the December 6 meeting of the Board’s Academic and Student Affairs Committee. In the interval I invite your input and action. This should not be seen, however, as an opportunity to reopen the debate on whether or not the university should reorganize its academic structure.

Individuals, students, faculty, and staff; ad hoc groups, college counsels, The Senate, Deans, Chairpersons, Vice Presidents; please think about the best way to implement. Send your ideas. But, most of all perhaps, you can say “here’s a way to do this and I or we will get it done.” Let’s try for not only action items, but action itself. Everyone is empowered to “just do it.”

In so doing, keep in mind our institutional values; read the current draft of “Directions 2010” and the HLC Self Study. Remember we must be fiscally responsible. Remember our commitment to diversity. But feel free, indeed I urge you to move ahead. Attached please find a listing of the Colleges and Schools which now exist by virtue of the Board’s Action yesterday.

Finally, I urge the College Councils and the Faculty Senate to become implementors. Where Administrative action is needed please call or visit. I promise I will keep an open mind for the month’s moratorium. Thanks. lj

Operation a Success but Patient Dies

2010-10-11T17:06:00.000-07:00

Transformational Change: The Paradigm Begins, Berlin 1961

2010-10-08T13:21:00.000-07:00

Arts & Sciences Council Votes Unanimous No Confidence In Jacobs Partition Plan

2010-10-06T13:14:00.000-07:00

The resolution as passed by Council on Oct 5:

Resolved that the Arts and Sciences Council has no confidence in the reorganization plan proposed by President Jacobs on September 24. Its most serious problems are that it:

was developed without input from elected faculty representatives
was developed with little input from departmental chairs
was developed without input from students
was presented without calculating the costs
will make interdisciplinary cooperation more difficult
will set the sciences, languages & social sciences and arts in competition for resources
will threaten the writing across the curriculum program
will harm international preparation by threatening the study of foreign languages
will endanger reaccreditation in 2012 by the North Central Higher Learning Commission
lacks data to show it will improve learning
lacks clear goals, objectives and benchmarks to assess its success or failure

Seen at University of Toledo's Homecoming Parade

2010-10-02T16:45:00.000-07:00

Presidential Legacy?

Just a few questions

2010-09-30T10:37:00.001-07:00

While I hate to interrupt anything as intellectual as the art show Mr. Bloggie is running, I do have a few questions about the reorganization. We've just heard that a little over 7 million is going to disappear from this year's budget. Given that 2012 is supposed to resemble the great depression, I have a few questions. First, why reorganize and add bureaucrats who don't teach? It all sounds rather costly to me. Second, think of the expense for new stationary. There will be new stuff for the various colleges, schools, programs and departments. Third, how does any of this help our students? As you all know I hate to be the wet blanket at the party, but this is beginning to sound just a touch expensive at a time when we supposedly have a shrinking pool of cash. Finally, there is the law of unintended consequences. In any reorganization there will be unintended expenses. We have no real idea if this will increase the number of students, the quality of the faculty, and outside funding. Or, it might just confuse prospective students.

Worship of Mammon

2010-09-30T05:26:00.001-07:00

Chronology of UT Reorganization

2010-09-28T08:27:00.000-07:00

Before Reorganization

During Reorganization

Post Reorganization

Bloggie suspects this is why President Jacobs keeps speaking so ominously about the year 2012.

Love to all.

Saturn Reorganizes The College

2010-09-27T09:13:00.000-07:00

RIP UT College of Arts & Sciences 1909-2010

2010-09-24T13:31:00.000-07:00

Details on the death will be released as they become available.

Slides From Arts and Sciences College Death Announcement on 9/24

2010-09-24T09:48:00.000-07:00

Sexual Harassment Policy

2010-09-23T10:39:00.000-07:00

Please go the the UT web site and read the new proposed policy on harassment. There are places for comments.

Even Smaller Boxes

2010-09-23T07:45:00.001-07:00

Research About UT That Did Not Make The UT News

2010-09-22T13:54:00.000-07:00

The following item from USAToday was brought to Bloggie's attention by reader Jack Pumpkin. Thank you, Jack:

By Michael McCarthy, USA TODAY

When Katherine Ott completed her master's thesis on student fees at the University of Toledo during the 2008-09 school year, she discovered that her fellow students knew relatively little about how these mandatory charges were being used to help underwrite the school's athletics program.

She also discovered that the athletics program's share of the fee money was greater than the program's level of importance to the students.

Her findings are part of a growing body of academic research and writing about higher-education finances, including the use of student fees for athletics and other purposes. She says she believes that in today's tough economic environment, people throughout academia are seeking greater accountability from schools.

ANALYSIS: Percentage of tuition that goes to athletics

DATABASE: What NCAA schools spend on athletics

"Students are more interested in knowing where their money is going because costs are on the rise," she says. "It's difficult to find the money to go to college."

While she found that a little more than 90% of the 760 full-time undergraduate, graduate or professional students who agreed to participate in her survey were aware that they paid a "general fee" over and above their tuition payment, most were clueless that their fee money went toward the athletics department and cheerleading.

Through three separate fee allocations — athletics and cheerleading; the Glass Bowl stadium, and the football program's Larimer Athletic Complex — Toledo athletics received nearly half of the $19.9 million in general fee money the school distributed in 2007-08, Ott found.

Only one in four students in Ott's survey knew athletics and cheerleading received funding vs. nearly half who knew the recreation center and student union did. Fewer than one in three knew a portion of the fee money went toward the Glass Bowl, where Toledo plays home football games, and a little more than 1 in 10 knew it went toward the Larimer facility.

"Students didn't think their money went towards athletics and cheerleading — when actually that's where the majority of the general fee dollars went. So that was a really big surprise for me," said Ott, now associate director of the loan program at Christendom College in Front Royal, Va. The students "rated the rec center as the No. 1 (beneficiary) when actually it was athletics."

When asked to indicate the importance of 22 fee-funded organizations and activities, students put the recreation center at the top of the list and athletics near the bottom. Respondents rated each organization and activity as not important, neutral or important. The recreation center had the greatest percentage rating it as important (70%).

None of the three athletics-related fee recipients was rated as important by more than 21% of respondents; 16 other organizations or activities were rated as important by a greater percentage.

It is difficult to know whether Ott's findings can be extrapolated nationally. Her thesis adviser David Meabon, director of Toledo's Russel Center for Educational Leadership, has launched a four-part national survey that will include a study of the "collection, allocation and expenditure of student activity fees," he says. He says he has surveyed about 800 schools and hopes to publish his initial findings by November.

"We're in a major financial crisis in higher education. I call it the backdoor tuition increase," Meabon says. "For many people, this is a hidden tuition fee or cost — and a backdoor way to fund institutional activities."

The hidden cost of athletics in college education also was explored in a study published in April 2010 by Matthew Denhart and Richard Vedder of the Center for College Affordability and Productivity, a Washington, D.C.-based research group. Among the findings: NCAA Bowl Subdivision schools with less-affluent student populations, as measured by the percentage of students receiving need-based federal money called Pell Grants, are providing athletics programs relatively large subsidies. That money comes through forms of institutional or government support — which Denhart and Vedder describe as a diversion of financial resources from "traditional academic purposes" — and/or student fees.

Denhart and Vetter found that of the 11 FBS conferences, the four with the highest percentages of students receiving Pell Grants were Conference USA, the Western Athletic, the Sun Belt and the Mid-American. Those four conferences also have the second- through fifth-highest athletics subsidy rates (the Mountain West has the highest subsidy rate and the No. 7 Pell Grant recipient rate).

"Those who can most afford to pay a subsidy tax actually pay the smallest amount," Denhart says. "Those who can least afford it pay the most."

Dean's Plan

2010-09-20T13:02:00.000-07:00

Bloggie thought this might be of general interest and solicits comments.

Note that Dean McClelland is said to have presented this plan to President Jacobs this morning. Further note that Year One calls for the abolition of Arts and Sciences Council (the Vengance of Jake?); Year Two calls for the absorption of the Education College (where will poor Tom Brady lay his head?); and Year Three adds certain Engineering Departments.

Civilly yours,

Bloggie

From the Chronicle

2010-09-18T07:45:00.000-07:00

Of interest:

September 16, 2010

Southwestern College Halts Publication of Student Newspaper

By Josh Keller

San Francisco

Southwestern College, a two-year institution near San Diego, has temporarily halted the student newspaper from issuing a print edition, and student journalists allege it did so to prevent them from publishing articles before a heated election for the college's governing board. But the college denies any attempt at censorship and says the holdup is an administrative issue unrelated to politics.

The paper, The Southwestern College Sun, won several national awards last year from the Society of Professional Journalists for stories that were critical of the college's president and board members. One board member, Jean Roesch, sharply criticized the paper last month and asked for more positive coverage.

Staff members said on Thursday that college officials had barred them from publishing a paper before three members of the board face re-election on November 2. "We've been told we can't publish before the election," said Max Branscomb, the paper's faculty adviser. "It's outrageous, it's inexcusable, and it's flimsy."

Southwestern has suffered from a revolving leadership and nasty battles between administrators, faculty members, and students. Last year, the college suspended four faculty members who participated in a campus protest against cuts to course offerings. In February, Southwestern's accreditor put the college on probation, citing a "culture of fear and intimidation," among other factors.

A spokesman for the college, Chris Bender, said the allegations of censorship were "flat inaccurate." The college stopped publication of the The Sun because officials discovered this summer that the paper is in violation of a campus purchasing policy requiring administrative approval for printing costs, he said.

Once the newspaper obtains proper approval for its printing costs, the paper can resume printed publication, he said. Until then, the newspaper is free to publish its stories online, he said.

"It's not an issue of free speech or freedom of the press," Mr. Bender said. "It's a purchasing problem."

Yeah, right....

Also of interest, see concerning news on free speech on campus "The Fire" at http://www.thefire.org/

Arts & Sciences College Forum

Three year graduation

Posters

Big Appetites

Welcome Back

Aargh!

What happened to "EARN a college education"?

The Rosetta Stone of the Jacobs' Administration

The Higher Learning Commission Needs to Know

In Memoriam

Thanks Ben!

Visionary Leadership

UT Senior Leadership Team Group Photograph

Who's Really Left Behind?

Lessons to be learned

UT Transparency: As Clear as Mud?

Transformative Change

Question From Grad Student

New UT Parking Patrol

The Ongoing Epistemological Crisis in UT Higher Administration

The New UT

UT Art Appreciation Week

Tying One On

Leadership Paradigms

The Acme Relevant University

Astrology and Strategic Planning

Online and Decline

Mystery of Synergy Explained

400 to #1: Please do the right thing!

Are We Laughing, Too?

"... Pantalon est en feu? ..."

Why Cancel Town Hall Meetings?

Interesting Article

$o what?

Preposterous Rumor Put to Bed

Dedicated to the "New" Provost

Always on the Menu . . .

Blowin' Smoke

M.D. = "Master of Deception?"

Jake's New Wheels

P-Card Testimonial

Organizational Behavior

Snake of the University Address 2011

Doonesbury

Heard on the Mall

Union Rally

The First Ostrich of Spring

"Save UT" / "Shame on U" Rally!

Senate Bill 5

Core Competencies?

Jacobs Administration: Running on Fumes

Board Resolution

Trip Down Memory Lane

What's Wrong With This Picture?

Communication Across the Curriculum

The Brains Behind Reorganization

Two for the space of one

Highlights from the Second LLSS College Council Meeting

A & S Coun oops, sorry LLSS Council

The UT Administrative Paradigm

Rumors and Questions

Lest we forget ...

Rumors

New Ad for the LLSS College

Welcome back!

New Acronym/Items Found in Hallway

Blade Article of Interest (Excerpt)

Toledo Blade Makes Front Page of Blog

How many UT administrators does it take to change a light bulb?

Here we come to save the daaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay!

The Goat of Christmas Future

A Modern Metaphor

Guilty as charged

Names

New Deans

Blog for Democracy and Against Tyranny

More Questions

Just a question or two

more consultants

I'm impressed!