Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
A MUST READ FOR ALL ACADEMICS! Now on Amazon Kindle. Click on Professor Goat above to be directed to the book.
DON'T BE A SHEEP
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
Search This Blog
NEW!!! Hard Eight by Professor Extreme
HARD EIGHT
Hard Eight: Auto-Ethnographic Essays on Academic Culture Featuring the End of the Arts & Sciences College, University of Toledo, 2010
Daily Koan
Should the newly discovered black hole be named in honor of UT BOT?
Swamp Bubble
Do you agree or disagree that University of Toledo suffers from administrative bloat?
How do you feel about the proposed UT Degree Guarantee program? (Reposted to allow more people to vote.)
How do you feel about the proposed UT Guarantee program?
How would you grade the overall performance of the Jacobs' administration on running the University of Toledo?
COMMENT OF THE WEEK
Bloggie applauds this perspicacious observer:
"The administration is in a panic mode to implement controversial and irreversible structural and curricular changes campus-wide by early February fiscal plan deadlines with only the vaguest notions of their impacts. The plan is, according to an interview with a top administrator published in the most recent Independent Collegian, to cast out many seeds and "see what grows." This experimental garden, as most senators articulated in many different ways, seems a costly recipe for disaster. Utter madness. Stay tuned."
Print Version of Dictionary of Academia Available on Amazon.com
The profound ruminations of the goaty Sage are now available in this 119 page satirical masterpiece. See: http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1480292494/ref=pd_lpo_k2_dp_sr_2?pf_rd_p=486539851&pf_rd_s=lpo-top-stripe-1&pf_rd_t=201&pf_rd_i=B009RC0SJA&pf_rd_m=ATVPDKIKX0DER&pf_rd_r=1JV8N5BYAYY9WC9SJWD2
"Dictionary of Academia" Read it While it's Hot
A MUST READ FOR ALL ACADEMICS! Now on Amazon Kindle. Click on Professor Goat above to be directed to the book.
Comment of the Week
"This is that old tension between the corporate way of doing things and the academic way of doing things. In the corporate world, you sweep everything under the rug to make your b.s. as shiny, pleasing to the nose, and profitable as possible. In the academic world, you operate with a higher moral standard. Veritas and all that."
Comment of the Week of August 13
Re UT academic posers and hypocrites:
Have their checks calculated in units of postmodern theoretical currency and issued in photocopied legal tender notes signed by Walter Benjamin with a photo of Karl Marx and a seal stamped “In Derrida We Trust”.
Comment of the Era
Wow! Ain't that something.
-Anonymous
Comment of the Week
Mention goes to the the anonymous commentator of Feb 7, who, regarding UT President Llloyd Jacob's "Investing in Faculty" letter, stated: "If we could use the same criteria for 'investing in administrators' we could cut most of those positions."
Comments to HLC
Make sure you address your comments to HLC to the email address listed below in the "Higher Learning Commission Wants to Know" post. This may be the only chance you have to be heard. Bloggie hears that UT administration has discussed giving faculty "training" so that faculty members know how to "properly" talk to the HLC folks. How's that for stacking the deck? Does everyone get a little script to read? Make sure you practice before a mirror at being bright-eyed and bushy-tailed.
Comment of the Week!
Definitely, the Comment of the Week award goes to Anonymous 12:14 pm, Dec 3, under the "Higher Learning Commission Needs to Know" posting by Diogenes. Pithy and pointed!
--Love,
Bloggie
MESSAGE OF THE DAY:
DON'T BE A SHEEP
Independent Collegian Article on Dicey Administrative Spending
IC reporter Casey Cheap looks at bow ties, apartments and movie tickets purchased by UT administrators at university/public expense. See
TO CONTACT BLOGGIE . . .
Bloggie is always glad to consider submissions to this blog. If you have something that you wish posted please send it to:
ascbloggie@gmail.com
Letter and Petition from Foreign Languages Faculty Member
A couple weeks ago, at the beginning of summer break, we in the Department of Foreign Languages were informed that our secretary's position was being eliminated and that while she will not lose her job (she'll be transferred), that position is not to be filled. We apparently will be expected to do our own jobs plus what we can of the secretary's. That is clearly not acceptable, and so one of the steps we in FL are taking against it is an online petition now available for any who want to (including those who for whatever reason--not a registered Ohio voter, not a US citizen, etc.--cannot sign the petition against SB5), to read and sign.
I know not everyone on the blog will be interested in this; I'm not asking anyone who doesn't want to, to sign or even read the petition. I do think that there are many who would be interested and would want to sign it--if they knew about it.
It's scary to post this under my own name; I'm as afraid as anyone of repercussions. But this is simply too important to keep quiet on, and we have to do something! FL is not the first department that this has happened to, and it's almost certain not to be the last if we don't speak up in a way that the administration will hear us and in a way that makes clear that other people are seeing that it's going on.
Here's the link to the online petition:For those who can make it, there will also be an informational meeting--including lunch and petition-signing--next Friday, May 27 in FH 2420, 12:00 - 2:00 p.m.
I know not everyone on the blog will be interested in this; I'm not asking anyone who doesn't want to, to sign or even read the petition. I do think that there are many who would be interested and would want to sign it--if they knew about it.
It's scary to post this under my own name; I'm as afraid as anyone of repercussions. But this is simply too important to keep quiet on, and we have to do something! FL is not the first department that this has happened to, and it's almost certain not to be the last if we don't speak up in a way that the administration will hear us and in a way that makes clear that other people are seeing that it's going on.
Here's the link to the online petition:For those who can make it, there will also be an informational meeting--including lunch and petition-signing--next Friday, May 27 in FH 2420, 12:00 - 2:00 p.m.
Katherine Best
Wave of the Future or Merely Sometime Later This Week?
The Chronicle of Higher Education ran a deeply fascinating article called, "When to Dissolve a Faculty Senate." Apparently this is any time that it becomes "adversarial" to administration.
The online comments to the article are priceless.
Nemeth on Mammon in IC
David Nemeth's most recent tour-de-force
Professor Nemeth has another fabulous and timely article in the new and increasingly wonderful Independent Collegian. See http://www.independentcollegian.com/forum/the-kraken-attacks-1.2340091
Nemeth Does it Again
See the forum article in The Independent Collegian at:
Nemeth's New Article in Collegian
The Independent Collegian has run another of Professor Nemeth's fine and provocative articles in its latest edition. This one discusses the double-talk by mouthpieces for the current UT administration concerning the effects of and reasons behind so-called strategic reorganization. Make sure you get the latest version of Newspeak 5.1 if you want to decode what UT administrators are really saying.
UT Ranks 13th Nationally on Administrative Bloat
See Appendix B of the Administrative Bloat report posted on 8/28 for evidence, but UT now has a higher proportion of administrators to students than all but 12 public universities in America. President Jacobs has finally put University of Toledo in the top tier. With Strategic Organization he may be aiming for number one.
This Blog is a free and independent information source. Contributions and comments are welcome. Contact: ASCBloggie@gmail.com WARNING AND DISCLAIMER !!!! This blog is entirely non-official!! People may express opinion here, exercising freedom of speech and association.
Recent Letters from The Blade
Jacobs' arrogance is astonishing
Recently, President Lloyd Jacobs of the University of Toledo stated that bonuses were justified because his administrators "took all the risks."
As a professor at UT, I am outraged that President Jacobs claims that administrators take all of the risks. What risks do they take that the other faculty and staffs on campus do not?
Administrators are protected by state and federal employment laws and by their contracts.
When ex-President Vik Kapoor was terminated, he remained a professor with a salary near what he was paid as president.
As president emeritus, Dan Johnson retained a salary greater than his pay as president.
In the recent layoffs, exceptionally few administrators were terminated. It seems to me that low-level personnel at UT have far more risks because the greater proportion of the layoffs have come from their ranks. And they did not have continuing salaries.
President Jacobs' answer to questions on two occasions regarding relinquishing part of his bonus was to the effect that he earned his bonuses and what he did with them was his business.
Administrators do not risk their personal money in their duties: they use taxpayer money and funds collected through donations and grants to the university.
Administrators take home salaries in the hundreds of thousands of dollars and then add bonuses for longevity and whatever else the president decides is fitting for their contracts.
However, the lower-level personnel have much lower salaries and no such bonuses. Where is the risk?
It seems to me that these bonuses are convoluted: The lower-level personnel are taking the greater risks with no bonuses while the administrators with very rewarding jobs with little risk receive large bonuses.
Am I missing something here?
WALTER W. OLSON,
Mechanical, Industrial, and Manufacturing
Engineering,
University of Toledo
It's the same old, same old at UT
I could hardly believe the arrogance of Dr. Lloyd Jacobs, president of the University of Toledo, when a reporter asked if he would be willing to forgo his bonus in light of the layoffs, raise in tuition, etc.
His comment was that he worked for it. Is that to say that the ones being laid off did not work for their pay?
All I can say is, business as usual at UT. Some things never change.
SANDY FLICK
Rose Acres Drive
UT also has checks, balances
In response to letter titled "Professors must focus on teaching," I would like to point out that the University of Toledo operates on the basis of shared governance.
This means that faculty members participate in the administration of the university.
A focus on teaching requires faculty to address administrative issues such as policies, procedures, and yes, finances, because these all affect classroom outcomes. A university with solid and equitable finances benefits everyone, including and especially the students. Just as the U.S. government is constituted to have checks and balances, so is our university government.
The UT-AAUP is one of those checks against UT administrators who most recently have displayed more concern for their own profit rather than a concern for the common good.
LINDA M. ROUILLARD,
Associate Professor
of French,
University of Toledo
Quote of the Year (so far)
The following is excerpted from the recent UT AAUP newsletter concerning the official university response to news of the bonus scandal:
. . . . 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." |
How to Contribute
The Blog is now under new management, a consortium of ASC faculty who pooled their longevity bonuses to purchase it from its original owners. Your comments are still welcome but look for some changes. Contact: ASCBloggie@gmail.com. Your contributions might include new posts, images, comments to existing articles/posts, concerns about process and substance at UT's College of Arts & Sciences. This blog is entirely non-official, for which you can be thankful, unless you enjoy reading self-serving bureaucratic propaganda, and is intended as a discussion and commentary forum for UT A&S faculty and community.
Another Claim and Disclaimer
A blog is a blog is a blog. Information, comments and opinions found here don't represent official views, instead they represent truthful and sincere ones. If you want the official line on things go elsewhere. This is a discussion and comment page. You may even read things here that you disagree with, and then, maybe not.
ASCBloggie
Google News for "University of Toledo"
Google News for "Higher Education Ohio"
Blog Archive
Links
72 comments:
If members of the UT Professional Staff Association ever needed an example of the underclass status they enjoy in higher education—disposable employees who have little or no basic job projection or support—they need look no further than 140 miles to the east to the Ohio Polytechnic Agricultural, Technical and Industrial State University and Institute—dba as University of Akron.
Earlier this year, OPATISUI, pleading poverty, threw more than 200 presumably loyal, committed employees under the bus, part of a $60 million cost-cutting effort.
Now—viola!—money has magically been found to hire 55 new faculty members.
What a classist, prejudicial, divisive way to run a university!
With UT now facing an $11.5 million budget shortfall as a result of still another enrollment decline, the new president says she wants first to speak to the Faculty Senate, that hard-working body does such a superb job of posting its meeting minutes in such as timely fashion, presumably to get some ideas.
Hmm...
I guess the new president is too busy to meet with the PSA. Doesn’t the staff have the right to be offered participation in discussions that directly relate to their futures at UT?
William Gladstone, the 19th-century British prime minister, once said that the first requisite of the job is to be a good butcher.
Gladstone’s maxim also holds true for university presidents.
So suit up your armor, PSA. Long knives are being sharpened. You are the easiest targets for the third-floor U. Hall crowd to make cuts.
There will almost certainly be cuts coming to UT. Why any ongoing personnel searches are being allowed to move forward is odd given the situation. There needs to be some restructuring to reduce administrative costs and to push some faculty who hold administrative jobs back to the class.
All UT personnel cuts from here on out should be alphabetical.
In looking at the UT HR website, IHE and the Chronicle I am seeing under 20 faculty jobs currently open (some may already be in the interview stage), and only a few academic administrative positions campus wide, so appears the number of ongoing personnel searches is not extensive especially considering UT has 6,000+ employees and likely dozens of open positions at any time. Perhaps a hiring freeze may be on the horizon, but a $11 million mid FY deficit against a $600 million academic annual budget could be addressed by a 2% cut across the board. Also appears that the College of Medicine has already received the first payment from Promedia in the order of $20 million so at least their financial situation looks solid and they are no longer a drain on the main campus academic finances. Yes more administrative trimming needs to occur but doubt that will involve more than a handful of positions with small number of faculty heading back to departments with more than a few faculty gaps to be filled.
You can't fix the University of Toledo economy on the expense side of the ledger, unless you close programs. The cost of instruction (including faculty compensation) is the single largest expense category in the budget. Financial health will only come from increased revenue. That means figuring out how to offer degree programs that will attract students, you know, paying customers! Faculty should quit kvetching about the academic management structure, number of deans, Jacobs and Scarborough, etc., and get to work making the academic program portfolio more attractive.
You most certainly can fix UT's economy on the expense side of the ledger: we don't need a boatload of deans and associate deans. We don't a boatload of VPs and associate provosts. We do need faculty and staff who interact daily with students and who enhance academic programs.We don't need administrators who retire one day and come back the next, some at 100% of their "pre-retirement" salary or even 60% of their salary.
It will take much more then eliminating VP, Dean and Assc Dean positions to tackle a $11 million mid FY deficit. For example lets say four less VPs plus four less Deans and four less Assc Deans. Total annual savings (salary and benefits) could be as high as say $2 million(keeping in mind some of the VPs and all of the Deans/Assc Deans would return to departments as high paid faculty). Yes UT needs to tackle the expense side and address administrative bloat but lets not fool ourselves into thinking that alone it is a solution or major expense saving.
That is very true in re cutting the budget by just relying on administrative bloat. Some other steps have recently been taken. For instance, some low enrollment graduate programs have already been closed in LLSS. It is highly unlikely that they will be restarted. The remaining faculty involved in those programs have been reassigned to more productive tasks (undergraduate education). I expect that some additional steps will occur on this front because undergraduate only departments should be on higher teaching loads. This will cut the need for faculty hiring.
C'mon people, own up to the fact that our academic programs aren't attracting enough students. You can't blame the Admissions Office when you aren't giving them an attractive product to sell. The onus for low enrollment starts with the faculty who design the program offerings. Enrollment is driven by distinction and distinctiveness. The former derives from the accomplishments of faculty, staff, students, and alumni; the latter, from programmatic differentiation from the competition. Neither derive from senior management.
That is a bunch of B.S! Senior management is responsible for providing the resources to make programs attractive. You cannot maintain accreditation from an external organization when the university's administration fails to provide the clear set of faculty requirements and program resources set forth in the accreditation guidelines. At least one program in LLSS lost their accreditation for this reason and it has subsequently shut down. You cannot blame faculty for things that they don't control. You can't even blame a dean. These problems sit at the presidential and provost level.
Has anyone heard if the History Department's graduate program will remain open. The doctoral program appears to be on life support right now.
Yes we can place blame on the Admissions Office when recruiters know very little about our programs (some are not even aware of our colleges and departments) and end up talking to high school students and parents only about medicine, engineering and the sciences. I know this to be a fact as a parent I have attended high school college recruitment events and listened to the UT recruiters. Wake up people the majority of high schools either are not interested, academically prepared or motivated for STEM degrees (many start there but end up in other colleges after a few years at UT), same can be said for higher ed across the country. And yes good non-STEM students can graduate from UT with great career opportunities, I know many of them. Plus UT marketing focused on sports, the campus, and UTMC while completely disregarding the many excellent faculty and students across our many excellent programs. Many of the college are provided little or no assistance, staff or budget for recruitment, we can not even get help in updating our recruitment materials or updating websites. The new President understands all these issues and that you can not build UT only upon STEM but we need to do a much better job promoting ourselves with focus on student success and academic excellence. By not replacing faculty and failing to support good programs UT has instead over the last decade started to kill off many attractive degrees for many students or making if very difficult for students to complete degrees.
In the 'new contract, good or bad' discussion, here's my contribution, now that the actual figures are showing up in pay stubs and the open enrollment info on our contributions are available. Using Medical Mutual CDHP, 9mo tenure track, the cheapest available. Previously, my contribution each paycheck was $19 and change, with 0 for vision and dental. Now its about $56, which includes new contributions for vision and dental. The pay raise is bringing me about $130 more each paycheck, so it looks to be that I'll be receiving about $148 a month extra each month ($74 each paycheck) after subtracting the increase in health/vision/dental costs. My initial impulse was to yell "whoopee" but I didn't. I did vote "no" on the new contract by the way, because I felt that the university had delayed the new contract so that we would all feel desperate. I also felt that the new increases in health care costs would disproportionally impact the people at UT with the lowest salaries, but I don't know what lecturers, for example make, and how much the new health care contributions will reduce their actual "raises." I have a suspicion that there are employees at UT who will see no meaningful increase in their salaries. I've also noticed that if I wanted to stick it to UT, I could switch back to Paramount and cause UT to have to contribute more to my Health Care plan now than before the new contract.
What's the problem. Stick it to UT.
What happens to superfluous deans?
http://www.thedevilstrip.com/home/blog-attention-to-detail-and-public-accountability/
Does anyone know if the new president has met with the Faculty Senate to get its ideas on how to deal with the $11 million budget deficit that UT is facing?
The minutes of the Faculty Senate are so hopelessly tardy and out out of date that it's hard know why that group even exists.
I don't know if she has met with faculty or not but I was not real thrilled to see a $750,000 contract given to some space planning consultant given the budget situation. That would have closed 6.8% of the deficit by itself. If this is mandated by the state or the board, UT has a campus loaded with engineers and it has a planning program. Use the resources that you have rather than run for a consultant.
Let's not forget that another high-priced consultant is being used to try to remedy UT's chronic enrollment problems.
Not to mention the new position of Clery Act Compliance Officer, Meredith Blaine
Here is something to be proud of... We have the highest ranking of Ohio schools in the Social Mobility of the students we serve. The University of Toledo is Rank 107. You can sort the list by state.
http://socialmobilityindex.org/
Here's a ranking not to be proud of: 629 in Forbes Magazine rankings of U.S universities and colleges.
Time to get to work, folks.
Back of the envelope calculation:
Enrollment consultant cost $750,000. Let's add another $250,000 to the price for travel and rounding errors. So the consultant will cost one million dollars. Sounds like a lot, but is it? Let's investigate.
In round numbers a student generates $10,000 in tuition and fees, plus perhaps another $2,500 in state subsidy. So let's round down to $12,000 per student/per year.
Let's assume that becasue of less than perfect retention, the average student is with us for three years. (Granted that is a bit optimnistic, but if we work together we can achieve that).
So for each recruited student UT gains $36,000 ($12,000 per student multiplied by 3 years).
So to recoup the one million dollars invested in the consultatnt, he will need to generate an addition net increase of 1,000,000/36,000 or 28 students.
I think that is easily within reach. It seems to me that if you look past sensational headlines and look at the data objectively it was a wise decision.
Even a one percent increase in enrollment would generate about 180 additional students or nearly 6.5 million dollars over the course of three years. That is greater than a 6 to 1 rate of return.
Clearly the reasonable upside for out weighs the downside risk.
one problem with your math is that the enrollment consultant Ruffalo Noel Levitz is not being paid $750,000 but $431,000.
And 629 out of total of 7,200 four and two year post secondary institutions in the US puts UT in the top 10%
Except that our talented faculty could it for free, and better. That is what we get paid for.
I'll tell you how to increase enrollment for free.
Stop accepting students with 15, 16 and 17 ACT scores. Although you do get a student increase, these students have a poor chance of remaining in school, and the hit UT takes from its poor national rating ends up costing the University thousands of well-prepared students who won't consider Toledo.
Is a crappy 18 ACT score too much to ask?
How about lower tuition by the amount earmarked for consultants and let that mysterious thing called the market attract the students?
The furnished home “creates an environment for fund-raising and elevates the stature of the university,” said Brenda Lee, foundation president.
--The Blade, Oct. 17, 2015
For the UT Foundation to assert that the opulence of the president's house somehow improves the status and reputation of the university is one of the silliest statements I've ever heard.
If that were true, why didn’t the foundation really work to create an imperial lifestyle for the new president by hiring a French chef, butlers and maids for the new house? Or build an indoor swimming pool and some handball courts? How about a waterfall and pond in the back yard nestled among the shade trees?
Wouldn’t heavy-hitter UT donors love to drink some wine in Waterford Curraghmore crystal--$200 a glass--before sitting down to the main courses of Alaskan black cod and salmon, followed by Muscovy duck breast, then roasted rack of Colorado lamb. Make sure the waiters are wearing tuxedos.
C’mon, folks. The only way that UT is going to elevate its national reputation is though the hard work and success of faculty, staff and students. The foundation must always maintain fidelity to other people’s money and always keep the needs of those three groups in the forefront.
In the end, substance always trumps style, glitz and flash.
Has a provost search committee been named? What about a new search committee for the vice president for finance?
Anonymous back of the envelope: now let's take full time faculty on the main campus...lets divide $1 million by the number of full time faculty (or better yet full time faculty who teach undergraduates on the main campus) and let's give the money to them as a negotiated bonus in exchange for increased enrollment year 1 to be made permanent part of base if it materializes year 2. Faculty who wish to abstain may do so, publicly. Maybe this is not perfect reasoning, but it is sure better than giving the money to a consultant-company whose sole emphasis is going to be on admissions issues. If enrollment increase was easy enough for a formula and a consultant and a cost benefit ratio of 28 students, would not every university pay for it? Oh, you are right, if every university paid $1 million dollars for 28 more students...they would have to go overseas, or drop admission standards, which open admission places do not have to begin with. Let's go overseas.
The 750k contract was to a "space consultant", SmithGroupJJR. Not enrollment. That is a different 18 month contract for $431k with Ruffalo Noel Levitz.
Faculty? Faculty? Let me tell you about the faculty. Let me tell what I've learned about our faculty from being on this campus for decades.
The overwhelming majority are brilliant people who know their fields and genuinely care for their students. The vast majority are hard workers. Too many of them are too focused on their own research, or their own little fifdoms to see the big picture or let alone care about it or do anything to advance it. Most faculty barely know what is happening in their departments, yet alone their college or God forbid the entire University (unless of course it negatively impacts the above mentioned research or fifdom). Maybe this is the price to pay for excellence in scholarship, I don't know. I hope not.
In my department, for example: ten percent of the faculty account for ninety percent of the community outreach, undergraduate recruitment, and contributions to the "culture" of the department.
News flash: High school students don't read journal articles. Excellence in scholarship and teaching will not increase enrollment alone. You need to promote yourself, your department, your college and your university. That means boots on the ground. Go to high schools, invite students to your department, have open houses, give tours, reach out to high schools. I see some amazing faculty memebers doing that, sadly they are a very small miniority.
Recruitment and retention need all of us working together. From faculty, to staff, to administation, to alumni, to community members, and yes even consultants.
And regarding ACT scores. Read the damn Mission Statement. We are METROPOLIATAN University. That means serving the needs of our community. Sadly our community is not the most educated and talented. Instead of bitching about the quality of our incoming students, and trying to exlude them, why don't we work with OUR community and improve their educational attainemnt in high school and at the University?
The only thing UT has more of than talent is negativity.
President and Provost meeting with LLSS faculty on October 30th to discuss merger with Communication and Arts
would you like your merger with a side of fries and an ice cold COCA-cola?
Only cost savings (if that is the only intent for merger) would be one Assc Dean position, as very likely a director for a School of the Arts is a likely outcome of any such merger so as to maintain and foster the alumni and donor support for the Arts that has been underway since the A+&S split. One has to ask how would students benefit as they are the ones we all should be thinking of when we consider college structures and whether recruitment, retention and graduation rates (and the associated revenue monies from state and tuition) would be improved as the overall cost savings with a merger are minimum in reference to the UT academic budget.
This should not be the only restructuring move. The social justice and human services college should be shut down and its programs sent to other units. If done, that would likely bring criminal justice and social work to the new Humanities and Social Sciences college. Other programs would go to Education.
Students would benefit by making them learn useful skills in our multicultural society...such as "foreign" languages.
From the University Council website: “Following the August 17, 2015 Board of Trustee Committee meetings, the Office of the President has notified the UT community that University Council will no longer exist.”
Did I miss the e-mail from the President’s Office concerning this decision about a governing structure?
Was there an e-mail?
Was there an article in UT News about this?
So much for real shared governance, participation and transparency at UT; for the values of collaboration and consensus; and for the idea that UT non-teaching staff should have a voice in issues related to the university and that opinions of all members of the university matter and are valued by the administration.
Perhaps the time has come for the Professional Staff Association to explore whether their interests would be better served through collective bargaining. I have no doubt there would be plenty of unions ready to talk to the staff.
To 9:03 am:
How about saving a dean's salary, preferably the one who just got a $10,000 raise? The same one who helped to split A&S in the first place on the dubious argument that smaller colleges would be better able to promote their programs? How much enrollment have we seen in LLSS? in Coca? Remember, CVPA had to siphon off Communications since they weren't generating increased enrollment on their own. I say, merge the two and get a new dean. The current deans have not lived up to their promises.
I agree,it's time that PSA did consider collective bargaining. It's clear that this group is vulnerable to heavy-handed administrators who expect their directives to be enacted immediately with no questions asked. PSA does the heavy lifting and VPs and other administrators don't bother to ask for input from the people who truly know what goes on in this institution.
My recommendation for PSA is to stop voting for Republican leaders who continue to disembowel anything public, especially public education,....as I know so many of you do....
I'm a yellow-dog democrat, neo-socialist, pro-labor PSA member. I can't help but chuckle at the notion of PSA organizing in an attempt to fight the bad old administration. We've all seen how effective AAUP, CWA, and the other unions have been.
In case you missed it. Jacobs and Scarborough are gone. This new administration deserves the benefit of the dobut for now and our support.
Again, the negativity here is overwhelming.
https://stateimpact.npr.org/ohio/2015/09/30/task-force-on-efficiency-and-affordability-on-higher-education/
https://www.jacobinmag.com/2013/11/the-end-of-classical-music/
The subject is music but easily applies to public education
As to the Deans, I have been at UT for over twenty years and faculty who complain about the current Deans have done the same about every Dean they ever had. It may be a personal vendetta they have against the current Deans due to their roles in the break up of A&S, but rest assured that before long they will be complaining about the next Dean.
Bloggie believes that it was H.D. Mencken who said that the dean stands in relationship to the faculty as does a fire hydrant in relationship to a dog.
But I am reasonably sure that Mencken never met the like of some of our deans.
Louis
Henry Louis Mencken.
The problem is that the whining faculty want deans to function as union bosses.
To Anonymous 12:55:
Bloggie thanks you for the correction.
The faculty want deans to care about academics more than about their contract extensions and raises.
Day in and day out I read about these vile, self-serving, corrupt, deans who are destroying UT and western civilization. Yet I seldom read who they are or what they have done (or not done). Surely it can't be each and every dean? I know my dean is awesome; the best dean I've served under in over 30 years.
The way this blog uses the word "deans" reminds me of how Fox News use the word "liberals".
If the deans (some or all) are the epitome of academic evil then name names, give examples of their crimes against humanity, cite sources, bring forth first hand accounts of their crimes.
All I see here is a lot of inunendo and people fighting old battles over and over.
After watching the faculty bicker and squabble for the past five years about what college structure is most appropriate to house a course entitled “Perspectives and Analysis Of 14th Century French Ballet,” I hope that UT News has a photographer posted outside the room on Oct. 30 when the president and provost are set to have a merger discussion with members of LLSS and the College of Communication and the Arts. It’s vitally important to capture the historic moment when the president emerges brandishing a piece of paper in her hand and declaring “peace in our time.”
Oops. Wrong quote.
Better for her to cite Columbia University political scientist Wallace Sayre. Sayre’s Law holds, “In any dispute the intensity of feeling is inversely proportional to the value of the stakes at issue—that is why academic politics are so bitter.”
Again, the faculty complaining about Deans are always complaining about a Dean regardless of whom that person is at any given time, mostly because a Dean has power and authority over them and their department in terms of resources, and the Dean makes more money than the faculty member. Plus since in recent years Deans have come out of the regular faculty, they take with them personal and professional conflicts with certain faculty in their departments or colleges.
And correction, the meeting of the President and Provist with COCA is actually Oct 23rd and separate from the meeting with CLLSS on Oct 30th
The fact remains that our deans tend to be failed, jumped-up academics who then became failed deans. Rationalize all you want.
Whether they are failed, jumped up academics is not the issue. How have they performed as Deans is the only relevant question and their recent evaluations as completed by faculty were not overly negative, keeping in mind the administration which they were forced to work under, that failed to give the support and resources, and often initiated changes without consultation of the Deans or college faculty.
Anon 8:32:
Wrong. Some of our deans are distinguished professors who are the top of their fields in research while being loved as instructors and advisors.
By what standard do you claim that they are failed academics?
I can think of one dean who fits your description and she's thankfully moved on to Akron.
I will grant you that some deans are effective. I would say that Dean Bjorkman is an example of a dean respected by her faculty and a dean who advocates for her college.
I cannot comment on the competence of Nagi or Early, but I have seen them advocate for their colleges.
Deans Barlowe and Davis? Let's just say their colleges have not made the leaps and bounds promised by the 2010 reorg. I see them advocating to keep the status quo, because otherwise they would have to admit that the LLSS and COCA structures have not delivered on the promise that smaller would mean better visibility and hence more enrollment. Former Dean Poplin-Gossetti? Gutteridge? Enough said.
Oh, and let's not forget former Dean Gaspar! The College of Nursing will rise again, but they are doing lots of cleanup up after him!
Deans are spamming the Blog hoping to keep their jobs. Desperate hours!
Annon 1:32: You're a frreaking idiot.
Others: Has it dawned on you that LLSS and COCA may not have thrived since the re-structuring because Jacobs and Company starved them of resources?
Hey folks. What the hell happened in 2006? UT also has a college of medicine and life sciences.
Chris Cooper is solid.
College of Medicine has been flush with cash and complete support from the previous administration since 2006, CLLSS and COCA had Deans appointed and controlled by the Provost and President, and insufficient budgets and resources to support their programs and not support for recruitment and marketing, within those colleges a number of staff positions were eliminated, and compared to other colleges the percentage of replacement faculty hired has been much smaller, some CLLSS and COCA departments are half the size they were ten years ago. You can attempt to place all the blame on the Deans (even though their recent reviews by faculty show evidence of support) but the reality is that LJ and SS did not give a damn about those colleges and programs, frequently undermined the Deans, introduced programs and initiatives with no consideration of the deans and faculty in those colleges.
And it is funny that some posters actually believe the Deans are posting here, while failing to even consider that some CLLSS and COCA faculty actually support the current college structure (over half of responds to recent COCA survey regarding future of COCA support current arrangement) and many actually feel their Deans are doing a good job, again look at their faculty reviews posted here for evidence of support.
The President and Provost met with COCA faculty today, it would be helpful if any of the regular A&S blog posters from that college (and there are some here) could provide a report of how the meeting went in terms of general tone, questions and issues raised and responses/feedback from administrators as to the pros vs cons of a CLLSS/COCA merger. Thanks.
To 11:08: Bloggie's agent attended the COCA event and reported as follows. President Gaber handled herself quite well. Down to earth. personable, rational. The arts faculty treated the event as group therapy and gushed on (and on) about the lovely deans and the lovely college and so forth. COMM faculty were silent, and not in a way that seemed to indicate assent. It seems reorganization cometh,next year, likely, the exact organizational forms as yet unknown President Gaber seemed amenable to less deans, bigger college units and perhaps schools underneath a considerably larger overarching college, e.g, a she perception in the community and the BOT is one too many deans and bureaucrats and VPs. Bloggie says, Go Gaber.! The agent reminded Bloggie of the Hoover Institute study (neoliberal economists) of a few years back that ranked University of Toledo 13th nationally in terms of the ratio of administrators to students. This is not a good ranking to hold. The Gaber idea is to save money and improve perceptions.
Define who is an administrator? I get the impression that readers of this blog view everyone who is not faculty and who doesn't push a broom as an evil administrator. Let me tell you there is more to running a modern university than teaching class and mopping floors. I wonder if the Hoover Institute study considered ever PSA member as an administrator?
I'm sick and tired of hearing about administrative bloat as the reason higher education is so expensive and students graduate with so much debt. Wake-up. You've been fed a lie. You've fallen victim to a divide and conquor ploy (again!).
Tuition is so high because the state has cut the subsidy almost every year for the past thirty years or so. Compounding the student debt is the lifestyle of students today. Gone are the days of two students sharing a 150 square foot dorm room with common bathrooms down the hall. Today students are demanding luxury housing (on and off campus). Guess how they pay for it? Directly or indirectly it adds to their debt-load.
Republicans are destroyig public education and many on this blog seem to have bought into their reality distortion. Dean are not the enemy. Administrators are not the enemy. Unions are not the enemy, Faculty aren't the enemy. The enemies are the right-wing ideologues and their agents like Scarborough.
I'm not surprised that the arts folks clique put on a show for the president about how they loved the dean and college--the message the dean has been trying to put out for a while is the supposed wonderfulness of COCA. Weren't they once know as a college of performing arts? They put on a performance. At least it seemed quite staged to me, as an independent dispassionate observer.
I whole-heartedly agree with your statements. PSA may perform administrative functions, but they are NOT accomplishing those functions at bloated salaries. As a faculty member, I appreciate the hard work and the heavy lifting done by PSA to make this institution work. When Dave Dabney attempted to "cut" administrative costs, I believe he did so by cutting PSA positions, not by cutting the redundant higher level administrative positions. When PSA positions were cut in Rocket Hall, there was a noticeable rise in snafus, clearly because of a reduction in the number of people who did the actual work! Higher level management at this institution causes more problems than it solves. I am also worried for PSA members, given the current state of the HR office.
Bloggie:
Did your mole in the COCA meeting indicate whether the new president discussed or indicated how she plans to address UT's $11.5 million budget deficit?
Let me be clear: PSA are accomplishing their administrative functions, but they are NOT earning bloated salaries.
I see no problem with COCA faculty supporting the status quo in regards to their Dean and College, the forum was intended for them to have a voice in their future, clearly there are pro and cons to a COCA/CLLSS merger and the President needs to hear from both sides and both Colleges.
Setting aside PSA staff, it is clear (including public comments made repeatedly by President Gaber) that UT has too many Deans, VPs, Associate or Assistant VPS, Associate Provosts and other forms of upper administration when compared to comparative institutions of Higher Ed, so expect more reductions of these positions and merging of portfolios as one response by UT to the state mandate to reduce costs by 5%.
And the meeting of COCA with the President was not about the budget deficit but views of the faculty regarding college merger with CLLSS, so unless the question was asked of her I doubt it was a topic of discussion at that forum. But clearly cutting administrative postions (some of which have already occurred) and other cost saving measures are already underway with more to come.
The COMM department voice (a small minority of COCA faculty even though they have the large majority of majors in the college (think about the meaning of that) was drowned out by the show put on by the performance people. The president did in fact mention and acknowledge the shortfall. The COMM department faculty want out of COCA.
The the COMM faculty needed to attend the meeting en mass and be heard or ask for their own meeting with the President, or send her a petition with all their signatures. There simply is no excuse for the COMM faculty to sit by and let it happen without their voices being heard.
To 8:28. You are so self righteous! Try reading carefully. Sound out the words if that helps. COMM did attend en masse, and were drowned out because they have a very small number of faculty compared to all the COCA personnel, despite COMM majority of students. This apparently sailed over your head. Blaming the victims is what you are doing! Insensitive! A letter has been sent.
COMM faculty use the the victim and apathy cards, pathetic.
Post a Comment