University Council Refusal to Participate

Date: May 5, 2004

University Council Refusal to Participate

Date: May 5, 2004

I really agree with this... and thank you...

Date: May 5, 2004

present professor, any word on where dyer is heading?

Date: May 5, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: present professor
" "

GOOD FOR YOU!!!

NO QUARTER!

Date: May 5, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: babbs
"present professor, any word on where dyer is heading?"

yep but I spilled the beans a little early -- my source let it out of the bag a little prematurely. I'll let you know as soon as becomes really official.

Date: May 5, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: present professor
" "What I hope will come from this is a direct line of communication between the president and the three groups," says Elliot Pood, Dean of the College of Arts and Letters. "And the direct line of communication will provide him with information about how the general faculty, or how a student or staff member is feeling, what's on their mind, what's bothering them, and what the issues are that need to be addressed immediately." Dean Elliott Pood on WDAM Wednesday May 5 2004 I think we need to encourage the departments to reject this new proposal, clearly designed to weaken what little hold the advisory organizations have over the administration. As the call to submit names has been put on a very short timeline, it will be tough to get this to every department or to conduct a discussion. And of course, it will be nervewracking if a majority of departments elect not to participate. Each department, of course, can use its own wording but I believe we need to short-circuit this action. Those of you getting this on FS please encourage your departments to refuse: this action is NOT a way of "healing" but is simply a way to end run around what should be the "direct communication" of administration to the constituency through their elected bodies. The Department of ______________________ believes that the most direct line of communication between the administration and faculty, staff and students is the elected body representing each constituency. We believe that communication can be most efficiently conducted when the administration meets the Faculty Senate which represents the faculty, the Staff Council which represents staff, and the Student Government which represents the students. We reject any concept of a line of communication that is more direct than these bodies. We therefore refuse to participate in the so called "President's Council," recognizing that it is a device to avoid engaging with the appropriate elected organizations. We respectfully request that all business between administration and faculty, staff and students be conducted with the Faculty Senate and its committees, Staff Council and its Committees, and the Student Government and its committees. "

present professor, well said! you make very good points... i almost missed the forest for the trees. a BIG thank you!

Date: May 5, 2004

PP,

A wonderfully worded statement against this thinly-veiled attempt to bypass the elected voices of elected, truly representative university communties.

Here we yield no quarter. Disenfranchisement cannot, will not be tolerated.

Date: May 5, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: present professor
"
"What I hope will come from this is a direct line of communication between the president and the three groups," says Elliot Pood, Dean of the College of Arts and Letters. "And the direct line of communication will provide him with information about how the general faculty, or how a student or staff member is feeling, what's on their mind, what's bothering them, and what the issues are that need to be addressed immediately."
"

How is one appointed faculty member from each college (5) going to do a better job telling how the general faculty is feeling as compared to 40 elected faculty members?

Date: May 5, 2004

Flash,

Great question, if viewed logically.

What we have here is a game to communicate - with the public. Nothing like an end run around the Faculty Senate, along with other elected councils. Plays well with IHL Board, among others. "Look, everybody, we're communicating. Only those 'fringe groups' out there aren't cooperating."

This new UC needs to be thrown back into their faces.

Date: May 5, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Flash Gordon
" How is one appointed faculty member from each college (5) going to do a better job telling how the general faculty is feeling as compared to 40 elected faculty members?"

Flash, that was a pithy and incredibly right on setence: far more concise than what I wrote. Thanks.

They key on this is to get the departments to either refuse or balk. Maybe ask for more time because they are rushing this too fast. That would give us time to form a unified front so that we can't get divided and cut up so easily.

Also -- someone on staff council might try to get word out to them, although I know they are very much more vulnerable.

Even though I disagree with the SGA's stand and don't really believe they are honestly representing their constitutency (mostly because I can't believe they aren't all over this email thing which I believe students are concerned about) -- never the less it IS the elected body of the students and if we are going top be consistent it must be supported as the represntative body.

I'd hope if anyone from SGA is reading this you might reconsider cooperating -- it may seem like an olive branch but it is a very cynical appeal to our want to make things better and to heal. This administration is vicious -- it has proved it in action (the terminations and public gouging of the two professors) and in word (Hanbury's memo). Is this the kind of world you future leaders really want to live in? Are these the kind of people you want to work with? Are these the kind of people you want to become?

We have been sitting here for two months while the adminsitration could have made peace overtures, even as we were waiting for a hearing. It did not require settling the hearing for those overtures to occur. But suddently the administration is rushing to make peace -- and when it rushes us it means IT controls how this will unfold.

Rememeber before the faculty no confidence vote when it was announced to the papers that the professors "might be allowed back into the classroom." Remember that some people thought that was darn nice of the administration? Remember what they did? As soon as the vote was in they "changed their minds" -- which was easy because that peace overture didn't work.

It wasn't a true peace overture. It was a gimmick, pure and simple.

So is this Council. Pure Propaganda. And they will use it to draw the members in and to prove to the university and the community that the Senate and the other elected organizations are radicals who don't represent their constituencies.

Sorry for the tirade. Think I'm a little ****ed?

Date: May 5, 2004

Wonderful as always, PP! Couldn't have said it better myself. My concern is, as well, with the SGA. I have confidence in the faculty senate (I know several people on the senate and have seen their contributions to this problem we are facing). I do not know much, or really anything, about the staff council. What I do know is that I do not trust the members of the SGA. I am not trying to rag on the SGA again, but they do not seem to have the nerve to stand up to the administration, or to us (the students) for that matter. It is simple. Call a meeting and decide on a resolution stating "confidence" or "no confidence" in the current administration. Still, though, I do not trust this new council to be put in place in a fair manner either. I feel that it is a lose-lose situation for us students in either way.

Date: May 5, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: usmstudent
"Wonderful as always, PP! Couldn't have said it better myself. My concern is, as well, with the SGA. I have confidence in the faculty senate (I know several people on the senate and have seen their contributions to this problem we are facing). I do not know much, or really anything, about the staff council. What I do know is that I do not trust the members of the SGA. I am not trying to rag on the SGA again, but they do not seem to have the nerve to stand up to the administration, or to us (the students) for that matter. It is simple. Call a meeting and decide on a resolution stating "confidence" or "no confidence" in the current administration. Still, though, I do not trust this new council to be put in place in a fair manner either. I feel that it is a lose-lose situation for us students in either way. "

Yeah -- I agree that it is a pretty bad deal to be a student here these days and to get caught between these contending forces.

On the other hand, usmstudent, I don't know if it ever gets more "real world" than this. Here is an opportunity to see hardball power politics in action -- and to see why having a say in how you are ruled (or "managed") actually matters. If you really look at this as an academic civics lesson, then you get a laboratory in political science, psychology, and government. And, if you happen to like the high ol speechifyin' rhetoric of Neil McMillan, or the passionate call to arms of Noel Polk, or the finely honed, cleareyed, and penetrating analysis of Ann Wallace . . . then you've even got a lot class!

And hey -- none of these folks is charging you tuition!So . . . maybe not such a loss but maybe just an "out of the box" course in critical thinking and activism.

I think usm is a hot place to be right now, if you want to be where the real action is!

Date: May 5, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: present professor
". . . then you've even got a lot class! "

damn fingers . . . killed my punch line. "LIT class!"

Date: May 6, 2004

kick

Date: May 6, 2004

Shelby Thames wants to hear our concerns. He thinks we haven't been asking questions and communicating our legitimate concerns. Yeah, right.

During the course of his testimony at the hearing, Shelby Thames, reputedly the shortest president USM has ever had, said he asked Jack Hanbury to look into the matter of the AAUP-USM Dvorak investigation in order to ascertain “how deep” it went. To answer that ridiculous question, Thames ordered a snooping operation that may have been illegal, and is certainly immoral, in order to uncover a suspected conspiracy. Evidently Shelby Thames believed that a few disgruntled faculty were secretly conspiring not to communicate.

Yet Shelby Thames has asserted that had we, the faculty, only asked, we would have been provided A. Dvorak’s resume or vita. If we had only asked…

We asked. On numerous occasions, faculty asked questions of Shelby Thames about the decisions he was making about USM. There were no answers and no real opportunities to participate in any meaninful way in those decisions. We asked many questions. We asked and asked and asked. We asked questions like:

1. How specifically does the reorganization save money?

2. How much money went to refurbish the home of the provost on the coast and the provost in Hattiesburg, and what exactly was done?

3. Why was the president opposed to faculty input in the Faculty Handbook?

4. Who are these people you are hiring?

5. What is the Faculty Activity Report going to be used for and who will have access to it?

We received no answers, but we continued to ask:

6. Because communications are non-existent and because good communication between faculty and administration is critical in any good university, can we have an outside mediator?

Later we asked:

6. How were the recent mid-year raises awarded?

7. May we have an organizational chart of the personnel at this university?

8. May we have a look at the vita that A. Dvorak submitted to the Graduate Council for graduate faculty status?

Now we are asking:

9. Whose emails have been read and who read them, and how were these emails chosen to be read, and why were they read?

We asked, but from the very beginning of his reign of terror, we received no answers. We asked, we pleaded. We communicated through all legitimate channels. We have communicated through the Academic Council (through a resolution asking for reinstatement of Glamser and Stringer until the hearing process had been completed), through the Graduate Council (through a vote to rescind the Graduate Faculty Status of Dr. A. Dvorak), through Faculty Senate (through a series of resolutions, and more), and through AAUP-USM (more resolutions).

But Shelby Thames had a question. How deep does the so-called faculty conspiracy go?

Shelby Thames need only have asked. Here are some of the answers:

1. In April 2002, AAUP-USM sponsored a faculty poll of the three presidential candidates (Shelby Thames, Terry Hickey, and Ann Weaver Hart. Of the 218 faculty who weighed in on Shelby Thames, 190 believed he was unacceptable, while only 14 strongly approved of him as president, and only 14 found him acceptable. Neither he nor the Board members listened. That’s how deep it goes.

2. On Sunday, March 7, 2004 the Faculty Senate voted 40-0 no confidence in Shelby Thames. Neither he nor the board members listened. That’s how deep it goes.

3. On Wednesday, March 10, 2004, the faculty at the University of Southern Mississippi voted 430-32 no confidence in Shelby Thames. Still he did not listen. That’s how deep it goes.

4. On Monday, April 26, 2004, the Graduate Council voted 14-0 to rescind the graduate faculty status of A. Dvorak. That’s how deep it goes.

Now, the faculty, staff, and students are astounded to discover that Shelby Thames proposes to set up a new university council of 15 hand-picked folks who cannot possibly represent these three important groups, so that he can “legitimately” ignore the communications we have been sending him for two years! How dense.

Does Shelby Thames want answers? Hell no. He has no intention of listening.

Date: May 6, 2004

ANOTHER excellent post, full of facts and very substantive! Many thanks! Now I will have something else to forward to the IHL and legislators.

In addition to his other services to the cause, SFT is inspiring a lot of eloquence on this board!

Date: May 6, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: USM Sympathizer
"ANOTHER excellent post, full of facts and very substantive! Many thanks! Now I will have something else to forward to the IHL and legislators. In addition to his other services to the cause, SFT is inspiring a lot of eloquence on this board!"

Blue Grass Professor:

That was fantastic! I want to meet you (actually I think we might already be colleagues on a certain soon to be outlawed faculty body . . . ) hmmm . . .

Date: May 6, 2004

Shove.

Don't let this happen.