Yes, Amy's right. And it's a little hard to imagine how a settlement that explicitly says, in exactly these words, that the professors will be "reinstated,'" can be read to say they will not be reinstated!

The comments by Shelby Thames in a CL story, his indication that Stringer and Glamser have been removed from campus appears to me to be in violation of the agreement, see Section 8 below.

8. The parties agree to refrain from making public comments about this agreement until final approval by the Board. The parties agree not to make any public comments about this agreement designed to reflect negatively on the opposing party. The parties acknowledge and agree that the Hearing Officer will make certain detailed statements to the media regarding this agreement.

The remarks by that man in the dome are designed specifically to reflect negatively on Professors Gary Stringer and Frank Glamser.  I am outraged and hope the IHL Board members are watching how quickly he violated the terms. 

This is more evidence that Shelby Thames is out of control.

"Under the terms of the agreement, the professors will not be reinstated (yes, Shelby they were - they were not terminated, you jerk) or allowed (they won't have offices, but what in the world do you mean by using the dictatorial word "allowed"??) to return to campus."

What a pompous arrogant little man.

Shelby Thames attempted to TERMINATE Professors Glamser and Stringer.  What happened this week is that HE WAS NOT ALLOWED TO DO SO!

This is not about their "reinstatement" as much as it is about his INABILITY to accomplish his objective.

The subtle difference is an important one and a victory.

I love the new rallying cry - Webster take note - No Quarter!

quote:

---

Originally posted by: dunno
"Just a simple, possibly ignorant question: If Glamser and Stringer are "reinstated," but are not allowed to have offices or teach students, what are they going to do at USM when they return?  "

---

Nothing.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: educator
"Nothing."

---

Well, that seems like a load of crap to me.  What good will they do for the university?  Stringer is deeply involved in research, I realize, but won't the Sociology department need a teacher?  What will happen with that?

quote:

---

Originally posted by: dunno
"Well, that seems like a load of crap to me.  What good will they do for the university?  Stringer is deeply involved in research, I realize, but won't the Sociology department need a teacher?  What will happen with that?"

---

<SARCASM>
Don't worry about it. Sociology has nothing to do with training technicians to work in a polymer plant. It's just an elective course anyway. Nobody majoring in anything "serious" has to take sociology.
</SARCASM>

I offer that Shelby's set of academic values don't include sociology. If he had a basic comprehension of sociology, psychology & management theory, he would handle the affairs of the University in a considerably different fashion. In his mind, the only reason USM has a sociology department to begin with is that some "backwards" external accrediting agencies expect it to be in the curriculum.

Here's a great model for the "New USM": a four-year version of the Associate of Applied Science degree.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: dunno
"Well, that seems like a load of crap to me.  What good will they do for the university?  Stringer is deeply involved in research, I realize, but won't the Sociology department need a teacher?  What will happen with that?"

---

The load of crap is an administration that reduces its best people to nothing and to doing nothing.  The load of crap is people who don't understand how vicious this whole thing is, essentially holding a person's career hostage with slanderous claims, failing to produce any evidence of any wrongdoing whatsoever, and then proclaiming that your failure to terminate employees is somehow proof that the employees were in the wrong.

Alum, you are missing the point if you think the professors are getting away with something and that Thames is doing a good thing to limit their involvement at USM.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: dunno
"Well, that seems like a load of crap to me.  What good will they do for the university?  Stringer is deeply involved in research, I realize, but won't the Sociology department need a teacher?  What will happen with that?"

---

When I said the above statement, I was thinking of the sociology dept.  Either they will have to reduce the number of classes offered or run the soc. teachers ragged to get all the classes taught.  I didn't know if (or I doubted that) Thames had allowed for something like that in the agreement. 

So I wasn't meaning to insult either of the two professors, I was merely implying that it sucked for all those involved.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: dunno
" When I said the above statement, I was thinking of the sociology dept.  Either they will have to reduce the number of classes offered or run the soc. teachers ragged to get all the classes taught.  I didn't know if (or I doubted that) Thames had allowed for something like that in the agreement.  So I wasn't meaning to insult either of the two professors, I was merely implying that it sucked for all those involved."

---

From "Sellouts or heroes? Faculty debates deal"
By Nikki Davis Maute of the HM:

"Meanwhile, USM spokeswoman Lisa Mader said the dean will review the needs of the department and if more people are needed the university will provide the necessary faculty."

My response (maybe a bit repetetive) to Mader's above quoted statement: If you were trying to fire them already shouldn't the "needs of the department" already have been reviewed?

quote:

---

Originally posted by: elliott
"hellgirl, another response is that she can only provide the funds for another faculty, but she make someone to come to USM and fill the position.  That's a whole other story."

---

I meant "...she can't make someone...." of course.

Speaking of accreditation, in discussions with a person at one of the major Florida Universities, the current situation of USM was described. The FL university had just gone through SACS. The response was "USM is dead in the water for SACS. In additon to the lack of attention that is now being paid to details at the University, the faculty governance issue and vacant faculty lines will loom large. Unlike accreditation for a college, SACS has people from all areas such as library and other supporting activities. It will not take them long to determine the problems because they talk to faculty groups as well as administrators.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: elliott
"Invictus, you are right.  Here's a model SFT and the IHL ascribe to: they believe that about 12,000 of USM's 15,000 students would attend USM even if none of its programs (except those in science) were accredited.  Running unaccredited programs in all of these areas would be very much less expensive to do, thus saving USM millions in the process.  This is truly their plan.
 "

---

The reality is that Shelby, through his encouraged attrition of faculty, is weakening accredited programs and making it more difficult for them to remain accredited. Once they lose their accreditation, the university has no reason to keep them around. So they can close the program, fire the tenured and non-tenured faculty and save a bunch of money. Brilliant, Shelby!

quote:

---

Originally posted by: Anonymous
" The reality is that Shelby, through his encouraged attrition of faculty, is weakening accredited programs and making it more difficult for them to remain accredited. Once they lose their accreditation, the university has no reason to keep them around. So they can close the program, fire the tenured and non-tenured faculty and save a bunch of money. Brilliant, Shelby!"

---

It just doesn't make any practical sense. Save money by losing accredidation? Lose money by having accredidation? Save money by reducing faculty and programs? You can't have a school without students to go to it. Why would a student want to waste the tuition money?Even Phoenix online is accredited to some extent.

quote:

---

Originally posted by: sphere
"And Nova - the original (or at least best known) mail order, now internet, university is still not credible to academics.  How devastating  it will be for USM if it continues down the Phoenix On-Line path."

---

I hugely enjoyed reading this thread -- you guys are brilliant. Amy Young -- you are on to something and I think FacSen and AAUP need to begin a list of things that we found offensive, abusive, or unehtical during the hearing and the post hearing phase. I see yet another indictment coming up.

Here is something to consider: Let's try to toal up all the money spent on this campign in the way of advertsing bought, defense funds, (all legal payments -- remember the consult on the drug and alcohol policy) PR costs (T shirts, etc.) I think that would be pretty impressive. I think we could do a lot to publicize that figure as an indication of 1) committment and 2) the reason why every tenured professor is intimidated every day that Shelbo stays in office: how many of us make that kind of money?