Wednesday, May 7, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
UT's Officially Disapproved Information Source and HISTORICAL ARCHIVE. The only source of truth, where Paradox Manifests: Hundreds of thousands of visits. Yet No One Admits to Reading It. Welcome to the "Grey Area" where "Unethical Utterances," i.e., criticisms of administrators, are commonplace. Make U.U. here where genuine civility still reigns, a.k.a., freedom......................... UNIVERSITY OF TOLEDO'S EQUIVALENT TO RADIO FREE EUROPE
Jacobs' arrogance is astonishing
It's the same old, same old at UT
. . . . Either Jacobs is misleading the media or he has misled the Board of Trustees. President Jacobs objected to "the general tone" of the UT-AAUP Newsletter. Many persons on this campus object to the "general tone" of the Jacobs Administration. During his tenure as President, he has introduced an administrative culture of fear and intimidation. . . . A point of logic must be raised here, with all respect to UT AAUP, the conclusions that President Jacobs has (1) misled the media and (2) the Board of Trustees are not mutually exclusive. Both would seem likely given his considerable talent at spinning "visions." |
1 comment:
Well folks, the President of the University of Toledo showed his true colors today. He is all about power and control and cares nothing about the academic integrity of the University.
The Executive Committee of the Arts and Sciences Council requested a meeting with Provost Haggett to clarify the circumstances and events that led to the NC vote on the Dean. This was several weeks ago. The meeting was set for this afternoon, May 9 at 2:00. By early this week it was clear that Jacobs had taken control of the terms on which the meeting would take place.
Not only did he invite members of the BOT, but he allowed the press to come in, had a rep from Student Affairs, the Provost from the Health Science Campus--I kept expecting Jacob's aunt from Cleveland to speak up...(I know, he probably does not have an Aunt from Cleveland, but who was that woman in the corner?)
So, he turned a personnel issue into a public spectacle, effectively hanging the Dean out to dry in the name of sustaining King Jacob's control over the hiring and firing of personnel on the UT campus.
The executive committee of council, made sure the meeting took place around tables in the back of the room rather than in chairs facing a podium which the Pres probably had set up in advance.
He opened the meeting with a 10-15 minute "response" to the vote.
He said several things of note:
1) that the NC vote is taken seriously as input (to what he did not say...he never said we were there to evaluate the job performance of the Dean)
2) that he cares about the Arts and Sciences (we've heard that before...I always put my guard up when I hear it.)
3) that he will gather information over the summer and
ta da...this is what we should really focus on, folks,
4) that in the fall (yes, in the fall...) he will hire an outside consulting firm from the University of Pennsylvania (we think...) to review and assess the College of Arts and Sciences.
5) that then, and only then, he will make a decision about the Dean of the College of Arts and Sciences.
Well...this speaks for itself, no???
The Exec Comm responded, not with questions, but with statements. Our Chair of Council made very clear that the NC vote is not simply input among other inputs. That we represent 300 faculty. That an external review under these circumstances will only be regarded as a threat and as punishment. That we have worked with and supported the Dean, and can no longer do so if we are to continue to sustain the administrative and academic integrity of the College.
Others spoke clearly and concisely about the meaning of the vote, the significance of the vote, about our amazement and bafflement that the Pres would turn a personnel issue into a public spectacle. And that there is NO logical connection between a performance evaluation of the Dean and an outside review of the College.
No one from the admin spoke except the Pres, the Provost and the Dean.
The Pres said that we WOULD continue to support the Dean and work with him through the summer and review process. We suggested we already tried to make it possible for the Dean to lead the College, for 10 months, in fact, and that his basic incompetence made that impossible.
We made clear that he will lose the trust of faculty if he proceeds in this manner. He suggested we could work with him to spin the review process in a positive way and make it appear as an opportunity. We said that we would not engage in spinning his strategy for trying to control us.
This is going to be a battle, folks. We have to stay focused in spite of his aggressive efforts to make us look like the problem. We are on the right side of this. We have to make clear that if the Dean had any dignity or self-respect he would resign quietly. We have to make clear that if the President cared about the College he would ask the Dean to resign quietly. We have to make clear that we are not interested in a battle over power and control but are defending the academic and administrative integrity of the College, and by extension, the University.
Post a Comment