Call it an organizational correction.
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." |
14 comments:
Remember: deans have tenure. They have a job after they step down from the dean's position.
That's ok. They will do less damage when they are stepped down.
Is there any evidence (or poor evaluations) that show the current Deans of CLLSS, COCA and CNMS are doing "damage" to their colleges or faculty?
Evaluations are mixed. Go back and look at the evals posted quite a while back on this blog. Guess it depends on who is a buddy of whom. The deans are unquestionably superfluous. Apparently the idea was for a time the more bureaucracy, the better. Times they are a changing. No more lifetime job program. Put' em back on faculty where at least they may generate some tuition income to justify their salaries.
The main dean wastage is time.
So you put current Deans back to faculty and hire new Deans to replace them, and you just end up with different deans wasting time, what is the point? (I am not even sure what time they are wasting that you are concerned about?). Plus chances are good you would have the same problems and again complaining about the Deans.
From The Collegian:
The colleges which are confirmed to be merging are the College of Social Justice and Human Services with the College of Health Sciences, and the College of Adult and Lifelong Learning with YouCollege.
The College of Communication and the Arts may also be merging with the College of Languages, Literature and Social Sciences, but the decision has not yet been finalized.
Rearranging deck chairs...SMH
I heard that the President's meeting with LLSS folks on Friday saw strong vocal support for a reforming of all of A&S including the scientists, will be interesting to see how they respond to an enquiry by the President about coming back to A&S.
Will someone please tell me how the restructuring advanced the academic mission at UT?Instead of breaking down siloes, the tri-college structure has created them. And instead of more efficiently promoting programs, enrollment keeps dropping!
Yet enrollment is also dropping in other colleges that were not the focus of previous breakups or mergers, and the with the largest drops this year in graduate programs. especially education and business. Mergers or not, enrollment drops will remain an issue. Also with the break up of A&S no support or resources were provided for marketing, promotion and recruitment as it has been noted many times that those funds were used always exclusively for sports and UTMC. Reforming A&S or some version of it will only be successful in the area of enrollment if sufficient funds are provided to address it. A merger alone is not going to solve those problems. And as the new President has already said publicly many times in different venues, UT Marketing is now going focus more on academic programs and their faculty, research and students. Evidence of this has already occurred in just the last week with a $10 million grant to a LLSS faculty member highly promoted in media and UT News.
I appreciate the interim provost's point about it being deal breaker if curriculum standardization for COCA and NSM is a deal breaker. It should be. Foreign languages are important but they cannot solely drive the entire college's curriculum discussion. Some students do need additional foreign language courses. Others need more math. Other need more time for science. COCA students may need extra time for their discipline specific things.
I think that the poster at 9:04AM was typing while distracted. How about this: I appreciate the interim provost's point about it being deal breaker if curriculum standardization for COCA and NSM is required. It should be. Foreign languages are important but they cannot solely drive the entire college's curriculum discussion. Some students do need additional foreign language courses. Others need more math. Others need more time for science. COCA students may need extra time for their discipline specific things. Few people are suggesting that we eliminate foreign language requirements. One year might be sufficient for some disciplines though. One could also argue that math is a language as well and that taking more math should satisfy language proficiency requirements.
We can debate whether students need one or two years of foreign language, but please do not insult our intelligence by suggesting for even a moment that math is or should be considered a foreign language (besides it is a moot point since the State of Ohio does not allow it to meet that requirement)
Post a Comment