Where do we go from here?

Date: Apr 30, 2004

Where do we go from here?

Date: Apr 30, 2004

I am not a faculty member, but as a student, I would prefer a President chosen from a national search that does not use deceit and strong arm tactics with faculty and staff. Thames' use of "Its my way -or the highway" tactics have left many wonderful faculty heading for the open road. I'm sure that they would appreciate a President who is at least approachable and able to take strong criticism at times. These are definitely two qualities that are not present in our current admin.

Date: Apr 30, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Lanny Mixon
" I am posing this as a legitimate question. I hope to at least some legitimate answers. I also realize that I will probably get as much venom and hatred spewed at me as well...but maybe not. I admit I am a supporter of Dr Thames. I am not a blind supporter that believes that he dose no wrong. He has made plenty of mistakes. I don't care about any of that at this point. Because with the actions and rulings of the past couple of days...it appears to me a victory has been won by the "Fire Thames" crowd. They gained a small victory by the partial reinstatements of Glamser and Stringer. I say partial because they have pay and research funding reinstated, but will be in non-teaching rolls. The much bigger victory was won, because this in my opinion will greatly damage the effectiveness of the Thames admin. It very well may all but end his presidency..... Whether it is in the near future, or in two years. There is little doubt that the current faculty has little interest in working with Thames, and he has little interest in working with them. Now on to the next issue. Where do we go from here? What type of President would the faculty accept? As I recall that right before Dr Fleming resigned, the Faculty Senate had a non-confidence bill on the table for his administration. The faculty had very little to no confidence in the last two presidents at Southern Miss. What type of President would the faculty accept? I am asking this question, because I honestly don't know. I have some opinions, but I don't know if they are correct that is why I am asking the question. "

Okay, Lanny, I'll give you the benefit of the doubt here (in response to Fire Shelby's call for us to try to unite for the common good of USM).

Best practices at most top-notch research universities call for shared governance by all stakeholders. This means that, before making unilateral decisions with far-reaching consequences such as stripping deans of their positions and consolidating colleges, ideas are soliciting from ALL who have a stake in the matter. As Anne Wallace so eloquently pointed out in her superb editorial in the Student Printz on Tuesday, this process IS cumbersome and time-consuming. Yet, when you finish, you have an agreement that all factions can get behind. Much like the settlement that was announced today, everyone gets a little and everyone gives up a little. This is the way the best universities are run, it's what the USM administration should aspire to be.

Talk of disbanding Faculty Senate is the wrong way to approach this. A good president would take the criticism given to him and consider it...not plot behind her or his faculty members' backs. A good president would not be threatened with criticism. I attended a speech given by Donna Shalala (President of University of Miami) at Vanderbilt University recently, and she said just that--she gets paid the big bucks to take the criticism and move on. I can't imagine Donna Shalala monitoring emails and publicly attacking her students' integrity. It just isn't done at top-tier institutions.

If USM wants to move to the next level, then it needs to find a president with those sorts of credentials and expectations...someone from the OUTSIDE who isn't beholden to MS politicians and board members. Someone that everyone could rally around. I don't know who that someone is, but I do know that there must be at least a few talented administrators (Don Cotten comes to mind, though he isn't exactly an outsider) who would be up to the challenge. And get rid of the KY Mafia, for goodness sakes! The nepotism in the Dome is not to be believed right now.

Does this answer your question?

Fire Shelby · Status: Offline

Duplicate thread. Please post on the other thread. I am closing this one.

You can copy/paste your posts to the other thread.

Thanks for understanding.

Fire Shelby (moderator)

Date: Apr 30, 2004

Lanny, I sort of know who you are. You'd be shocked at who I am.

I do appreciate your comments, after a somewhat disappointing day, for both you and me. Isn't that odd?

I will not tell you that you are wrong and we are right. You admit the man has made lots of mistakes. We all want USM to be world class, better than Ole Miss or State, but we are going the opposite direction Lanny. Soon, we will be at or below Jackson State, and many on this board believe there was a conspiracy at IHL to use Thames to do just this.

You are right. He will never respect nor work with this, or any, faculty, for that matter, only those in 100% lockstep with him, and Lanny you well know as a businessman that such aint' gonna happen. Shelby is a good scientist, but not a manager. Ask those business profs.

The fact is, you and I both are BIG athletic supporters, we are both "conservatives", and we both LOVE USM. We differ in how to get there.

I do not know how to repond past this. I think you misunderstand how Shelby, in his own zeal to build a unveristity in his own polymer image, is going to destroy it. It is going down now in most ALL indicators of success. Read Lanny. Be smart. Look around you. Freshman entrance rates are down big time since Thames, but that does not make the news, only one example. No PhDs to teach nursing PhDs (HBurg American).

We well may have only Eustachy left as a success, and that is athletics (baseball maybe). I will leave football out of this.

A university is more than that, but yet no less than the sum of such parts. It is all of it.

I honestly believe if many of your side could live 6 months with some of the hard working faculty, you would see things differently, but that will never happen. It would make no diffence if said faculty were liberal or conservative. I know you have that one wrong.

Where do we go from here?

If Thames has his way, many colleges and programs will lose accreditation. Many will fall by the wayside. The nursing program and some music programs come to mind as does Crimminal Justice. The business school, contrary to popular opinion, is in severe risk of losing its accreditation and many Business Advisory Council (BAC) members are running away and severing support. I can go on and on if you like. The staff is so devastated that checks sometimes bounce and one time some faculty were not paid on time. That never happened before. I'll leave the many peccadillios like the enrollment miscalcuation out.

I think student enrollment will be flat next year, but when word gets out to parents that unqualified teachers are in the classrooms, and that whole programs have lost accreditation, the wheels will come off like at MUW. They are still down over 30%. They already are. But from the outside, things look as if they are working. That is the problem with bad management in the beginning stages.

We have had two bad presidents in a row, yes Flemming too. But Flemming's sins were not being a good ole boy and he was condescending to the likes of Roy Klumb, and he missed many appointments, which pales to the sins of Thames. Whatever.

Thames has failed too. You may disagree but it is true. Look at the paltry "evidence" at the hearing. He does not have a "vision" so much as "action" and "reaction." Get my drift? Much of that seems to be vindictiveness for those who do not agree 100% with him, and an a univeristy is a place of cordial disagreement. That is a means by which discovery of new ideas take place.

Your alma mater is becomming the laughing stock of the world. Lanny, I really wish you realized that.

What do we need? That is another email. I could give names, one of whom was on the list last time, but he was too good for Ole Miss and Miss State board members. They do not WANT USM to succeed Lanny.

You guys cannot see that, even as I am one of you.

We need an aggressive president (not Lucas) who will employ a "real" business model that recognizes the joint scholarship "product" of research, teaching, creativity, new knowledge, service, ecnonomic development, cultural enrichment, athletic dominance with standards (CUSA is another whole topic Lanny), the ability to know where the brightest and best are in their disciplines and to get them the resources, and finally, NOT to reward based on "loyalty", "cronyism", and "nepotism", but rather on "productivity" and "merit."

Read that last one again.

Thank you Lanny

God Bless America and President Bush