I have just returned from the presentation/discussion with the second provost candidate. As with the first, I have gone in cold. I did not read the resume or talk to anyone who had spoken with her. I wanted a true first impression. On the plus side there was no formal power point presentation. She just spoke. While this appeals to my aestetic public speaking side, it did not give us the same amount of information the first candidate did. While this is probably unfair, the first candidate seemed to have done a lot of thinking about universities and where he thinks they are going. I admit to being biased in that I am not really all that happy with his conclusions. He still seemed to imply that I was in a service discipline. Candidate two has probably done the thinking, but it was not as apparant in the presentation. She did seem more interested in the liberal arts as real disciplines. She also seemed to have a lot of first hand experience in trying to make the university "relevant" to its community and the outside world. The question to which I believe I already have an answer, is whether this administration has any real interest in spending real money on non STEMM disciplines. The answer, from the previous four years is NO. I just don't believe candidate two will have any more luck changing the spending habits of this administration than did a previous provost. Candidate one will probably not be interested in changing where the money flows. As a result we in those "other" disciplines can probably expect little change with him as provost. At least that's the way I see it at 4 p.m. on a warm Thursday afternoon.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
16 comments:
Scarborough was announced as a candidate for provost? His open meeting was announced with less than two business days' notice? This university is going to look like the real bottom of the barrel if that dud gets the job. Oh my.
This is just a waste of time: I am willing to bet that the new Provost will be Dr. Scott Scarborough. In order to make your transition smoother, have a look and start to appreciate his lovely family:
http://site.scottscarborough.us/About.html
Now that Scarborough has become the newest, nearly-last-minute candidate, none of the rest of 'em matter anymore, do they?
Next up, Scott Scarborough on Tues.
Read his comments about the hospital in the Free Press.
http://www.toledofreepress.com/2012/07/19/local-hospitals-improving-areas-of-hygiene-communication/
So, according to the Free Press article, is Scott Scarborough saying that UTMC could be a better hospital and enjoy better rankings if it just didn't have so many really sick patients?
From the report of the Higher Learning Commission: "The team recommends that most of the senior administrative positions (Deanʼs level and up) be filled following national searches ... that often validates the perceived quality of those selected and may increase the stability of those positions over time."
Come on, search committee, you found two worthy candidates. Now sell them on UT so we don't have to settle for Scarborough.
Candidate 3 2 practically said we could have creative revenue bake sales to support the "arts"
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2012/07/23/faculty-accuse-wayne-state-trying-kill-tenure-rights
EcDisv
Wonder if we'll be hearing about HigherEd Holdings or boutique courses in the near future.
Here is a comment about a link posted above on HigherEd:
I feel for the Wayne State faculty. However, what their administration proposes is mild compared to what their colleagues down I-75 at Bowling Green State University in Ohio are facing. In their contract negotiations, the BGSU administration put forward the following "post-tenure review" plan which also effectively eliminates tenure:
1. Every year, chairs must review the past 5 years of performance evaluations of every tenured faculty member.
2. If the chair decides that 2 of the 5 past years' performance fail to meet "departmental standards", the faculty member is presented with a remediation plan created by the chair.
3. If in the next year, the chair unilaterally decides the remediation plan has not been met, a comprehensive evaluation is initiated. This evaluation is akin to another tenure review--the faculty member produces a portfolio that is reviewed by a faculty committee, dean, and provost.
4. If the provost "makes a negative determination", a second remediation plan is produced. The provost can discipline or fire a faculty member deemed not to live up to this plan.
There is nothing here about discontinued programs or financial troubles. If your chair or provost doesn't think you "fit in", doesn't understand or respect your scholarship, if you have high expectations in the classroom and therefore have less-than-stellar student evaluations, you can be terminated, even though you earned tenure.
Oh, and tenure-track faculty? They'd be on annual contracts, and could be terminated for any reason at the end of each academic year pre-tenure.
Every year, every faculty member would be vulnerable. Imagine what the atmosphere in departments would be like, and what this would do to notions of academic freedom and collegiality.
Contract negotiations are on-going so we'll see what the final outcomes are, but I'd expect in the near future for many universities to try what Wayne State and BGSU are doing this year.
Yea, imagine faculty being held to account. It is outrageous!
Faculty held to account by administrators gone wild!? There should be an R-rated movie.
Tenure has worked well for 1000 years. I'm not going to go around imagining that Lloyd Jacobs or any of his clones around the nation has a better idea.
Tyranny has been around longer.
Oddly enough, if you missed the Gov's attempt to rid himself of annoying unions, you missed the fact that one of the purposes of that bill was to make administrators at public universities less accountable. Apparently Jacobs, et al are deeply insulted by the fact that their precious time is occasionally taken up by request for public documents and the like. They don't want the public to know how they reach their decisions and where the money goes. It is deeply ironic that all the while they flout this idea of "accountability" they themselves do not want any transparency in their own offices. What did Jacobs learn from the infamous "throw the dean under the bus" fiasco: a directive to all admins and staff not to put anything in writing or emails.
Boycott the businesses employing BOT members! This is capitalism and only money (or the loss of it) will speak to these greedy thugs!
Post a Comment