quote:

---

Originally posted by: take it back
"Will she be an influence (despite leaving the gamimg board)on whether or not USM will be allowed to teach gaming courses?"

---

Just heard Robin Robinson on WDAM -- I think she is not going to be such a great friend. She doesn't believe in universities getting major support from the state -- she is a supporter of univerisities becoming self-sufficient through research products, grants, etc.

So, what the IHL seems to want is to convert the STATE universities to private universities, in essence. That is an interesting concept -- that the state doesn't have an interest in paying for the higher education of its citizens.

Hmmm . . . lets think about this. I wonder how many universities like usm can support themselves through generating their own revenue? And if they cannot, and public money gets to be a smaller percentage, then what happens? Tuition goes up? Or if not, the universities cut to the bone and the quality gets less.

This is REALLY  a joke folks -- Barbour did us NO favor from what I can see.

Someone HAS GOT to hold to state (beginning with the IHL whise job is to protect, defend and grow the universities) responsible for support. This is becoming a moral issue -- Mississippi children need higher education, they deserve an opportunity that is fast slipping away  . . .

quote:

---

Originally posted by: former-staffer
"Does anyone have any info on who Musgrove would have appointed, and whether they would have been any better?  In the meantime, let's give these folks the benefit of the doubt for now -- sometimes appointees turn out different from what they were assumed to be.  Virginia Newton needs at least ONE ally! (BTW, when does her term end?)  "

---

Sorry, that should be

what certain members of the IHL Board have in mind

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Robert Campbell
"Sorry, that should be what certain members of the IHL Board have in mind"

---

First: sorry: private should be "private." I don't mean we will become a private university in name. But our funding will look more and more like a private university -- meaning less and less from the state. The problem with that is -- there isn't that much private funding out there to pick up the tab. We don't produce those kinds of rich alums . . . . and our research will never approach the level of MIT or Cal Tech.

Secondly --I wasn't attacking Barbour per se. My point was what his appointee SAID. At this point it is not time to wait and see what happens. That's how we ended up with SFT.

She's another appointee coming into a job she doesn't understand is my point. And the people who are educating her are the same people who are saying: the univerisites need to be self sustaining.

They can, perhaps, contribute a larger portion. But they can never be self-sustaining. And if you make them try -- you can kiss any major that doesn't bend itself toward the production of wealth goodbye.

Maybe that is the paradigm we want for the modern public university --only those disciplines that can make money deserve to survive. Hey, its as good a philosophy of education as any other . . . .

quote:

---

Originally posted by: former-staffer
" Gotcha, Present Prof.  Although we have no choice but to wait and see, as least as far as this board is concerned.  But I hear you saying, and I think most of us agree, that our fundamental problem is this: power is in the hands of people who do not grasp the value of liberal education.  It's just like school boards in some places, where the people in control think school is about sports.  Don't get me wrong, I don't favor total control by academics -- you need the "business mind" as well as the "scholar mind" to keep things balanced, but there is just no sympathy for the larger aims of liberal education.  Is there anyone on the Board who has ever taught in a college?  Has a humanities major?  But here's a reality check:  people in Mississippi won't and/or can't pay the taxes needed to support education big-time.  This is a poor state.  And when it comes to spending money, it doesn't help that 2/3 of the white people around here came from Scotland!  (yes, that's a joke)"

---

Former Staffer:

Your point about the people of this state not being able to afford to support education big time is well-taken. It IS a poor state.

I think my concern is based on the usual issue: that if downsizing and decisions about things like duplication of programs need to be made, the Board could go about it by utilizing the intellectual power of eight trained faculties (and staff members as well)  to help. Obviously the faculties and staffs have some vested interested in self preservation. So even I agree that the final decision cannot lay with them -- that is what a Board is for, among other things. But people tend to get less cranky when they feel they have been able to have some say in the outcome of the decisions, even when the decisions aren't in their favor. And the Board and Presidents can then articulate arguements for change that everyone has a share in. Right now, we have no idea why any decisions are being taken concerning reorganization (except money)_ There is no underlying academic philosophy here. We have no idea why English should be downsized and geography grown (I just took a couple of things out of the air -- not real examples!). We have no idea why there is suddently a new degree in Music Industry being introduced on the coast (in collaboration with the film department, no less!) -- that is real life. Things seem to grow into existence because there is some hot new fad in industry or academia, only to wither and die once the fad passes, never having made a deep impression on the campus. Its like we are an academic Wal-Mart. But there is no underlying unity (that has been explained to us) for what are to be considered the "flagship programs".

The Board needs to solicit the expertise of its faculties better -- and it can't assume, as it seems to, that the univerity Presidents either speak with great knowlege or don't themselves sometimes have an agenda when they are asked to represent their university interests. We can certainly see from our experience that we have a President who doesn't speak for a significant majority of faculty on many things.

And yes, you are right about the underlying idea in my previous -- power is in the hands of technocrats who really do have a pretty limited vision of what an academic community can be . . . . 

Incidently, one wonderful thing about this board is that it has become a pretty unique forcum for discussing the nature of higher education in both theoretical and practical terms. That is pretty inspiring and gives me great hope. Lots of our conversations are threads occuring elsewhere, repeated and commented upon here, then taken back out and amplified among collegues, faculty, student, staff, alums and members of the community and other academics from the "outside world." I think this board will be very important when the change we are all looking for happens.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: USM Sympathizer
"Present Professor writes as follows: "Incidently, one wonderful thing about this board is that it has become a pretty unique forum for discussing the nature of higher education in both theoretical and practical terms. That is pretty inspiring and gives me great hope. Lots of our conversations are threads occuring elsewhere, repeated and commented upon here, then taken back out and amplified among collegues, faculty, student, staff, alums and members of the community and other academics from the 'outside world.' I think this board will be very important when the change we are all looking for happens." ========================== I couldn't agree more!  In spite of all the depressing aspects of the mess at USM, this board (indeed the whole site) is a source of great inspiration.  Anyone who has not yet listened to the recording of the faculty meeting on this site needs to do so; if you ever wanted to witness some real "profiles in courage," that is the place to go!  We all owe a huge debt to FS, and I hope, when this is all over, that we can all toast him/her appropriately!  It must take a great deal of time and effort to operate this board, and the fact that someone is willing to devote such time and effort anonymously to an unpaid task says loads about the character of the person involved AND about the character of the two men who have been capable of inspiring such loyalty.  Would the PR folks for SFT defend him if not paid to do so?  "

---

I was just checking in once more before bedtime, and I came across this post.  I am speechless.  All I can say is "Thank YOU--very much--to everyone who has expressed such kindness to me."

Sympathizer, when we have the party to celebrate the achievement of our two objectives (getting Glamser and Stringer back, and getting RID of Thames) I will send you a special invitation.  What a party it will be!