USM's reward system

Date: May 13, 2004

USM's reward system

Date: May 13, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: elliott
" . . .yet when merit raises and other reward-based resources are dispensed, some go to loyal letter-writers and those that "give good interview." No world class institution operates this way. "

well, not always true. But world class institutions tend to have mechanisms that are more self correcting and transparent . . . valid peer review processes; open hiring practices; shared governance; genuine committment to faculty authority on matters of curricula.

They also tend to be unashamedly able to articulate a kind of "ideal" that is half tongue in cheek but also quite genuine about the larger, more spritual and philosophical sensibility of what a university is . . . in fact the ongoing discussion of what makes a university is one of the great subjects that never ends at a great university. It is the thread that unifies discussions about the daily trivia of how classes are administered . . . grades given . . . changes in the core enacted . . . the academic calendar, . . . . merit raises.

At the center of every decision is that often unvoiced but very true question of "is this the right way for a university to operate . . . is this the right way for our university to operate . . . .?" --- which always takes us back to what a university is.

Great universities don't dodge the question. They embrace it. They don't let the asking of the question paralyze them -- they use their actions to define themselves and redefine themselves. But the actions of a great university are always connected to the posing of that question over and over, renewed in different ways and at different times by the faculty as the faculty itself changes.

A world class institution never mistakes action for thought . . . but it also does not concede that thought alone is sufficient . . .

Date: May 13, 2004

Yes, PP, and all of that is precisely what has been missing here. I wasn't here under Aubrey Lucas, but I have a sense that those ways of thinking were a part of the general discussion, in part because the corporate culture under Lucas was optimistic and gentlemanly.

I am struck by just how much USM does not know itself as an institution. SFT has tried to substitute simply striving, just achievement of any kind anywhere anyone, for the sake of achievement. But almost embarassingly so. The Anytime, etc. slogan is a parody, especially when it motivates other (football) teams to then kick our a--. It all reminds me of just what SFT reminds me of, basically white trash who made good but for whom any success is never enough. One of the saddest aspects of his presidency is that he seems to be imparting some of his worst personality traits onto the institution as a whole, so that USM becomes simply striving for its own sake. You see it in student leaders. But actually, this is so transparently a form of over-compensation. And in the end, just what or who is USM? There is no noble ideal there. Like the old description of Oakland, there is no there there. That creates a vacuum, and where striving is the (only) goal, then nothing succeeds like success and you should be willing to run over your own dang grandma to get where you need to go. Where is the soul?

Date: May 13, 2004

Doug--I've been teaching here 20+ years in the same college you're in. It isn't just since SFT, but USM doesn't know what or who it is. Never has. Has had a "make do" philosophy for years. We've spread our resources "a mile wide and an inch deep." I don't expect it to change in my lifetime here.

Date: May 13, 2004

Bingo, Iddad

Date: May 13, 2004

RE: RE: USM's reward system

Date: May 13, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: NoGnome
" True, there has been a search for an identity, but that quest yielded a spirit of search itself. USM was aggressive and in many aspects innovative, just the characteristics that could have led to progress. Now, in the name of 'advancement,' we're stymied and regressing. Ironic."

OK. So I get to play the role of Polyanna tonight.

What has happened in the two years of our occupation is the coalescing of an intellectual community. Not that intellectuals and thoughtful people weren't here -- but we didn't get to talk much to each other. We worked hard, but didn't walk over to the next building. But oppression has forced us to go underground, to find each other, to begin to develop a language by which we can address and dismantle power -- and a language to rebuild. The thinking so many of us have done in private -- the dreams we have dreamt about the kind of university we'd like to work in . . . or to make . . . . have broken into a public discourse. Sometimes when I go back and I read some of the things being said here . . . the intellectual traditions being tapped . . . the cross connections being made, I think Shelby was right in a way that he never forsaw. He created a synergy all right --but that synergy is a synergy of resistence and then reclamation.

What follows this day? What follows the day after? What follows the day we can openly talk about the kind of university USM might be, and the kind of President who can take us there?

We (and other probably whom we do not know) are building the new USM even though there are no buildings, no classrooms . . . but a vision that is emerging from so many conversations of anger and hope . . .

Date: May 13, 2004

quote:

Originally posted by: present professor
" OK. So I get to play the role of Polyanna tonight. What has happened in the two years of our occupation is the coalescing of an intellectual community. Not that intellectuals and thoughtful people weren't here -- but we didn't get to talk much to each other. We worked hard, but didn't walk over to the next building. But oppression has forced us to go underground, to find each other, to begin to develop a language by which we can address and dismantle power -- and a language to rebuild.

--but that synergy is a synergy of resistence and then reclamation. What follows this day? What follows the day after? What follows the day we can openly talk about the kind of university USM might be, and the kind of President who can take us there? We (and other probably whom we do not know) are building the new USM even though there are no buildings, no classrooms . . . but a vision that is emerging from so many conversations of anger and hope . . . "

Two quotations come to mind, and I cannot remember either one accurately. One is something about the tree of liberty being watered with the blood of patriots, and the other is similar, about the blood of martyrs being the (something) of the faith.

Date: May 13, 2004

Well put, PP. I don't think it's in the least pollyannish to think that the commitment and concern exhibited on FS and elsewhere over the last two years will give us tremendous momentum once we emerge from these darker days. You're right that SFT et al have created a more unified, focused campus in spite of themselves.

Date: May 14, 2004

I agree with Present Professor. While in the midst of suffering Shelby Thames,we have gained something priceless, a meeting of the minds and a strong desire to communicate and work together effectively.

I have had the priviledge of watching and working on committees and councils where those who disagree are able, in the spirit of collegiality, to come to consensus.

That's why I was so irate at the communication workshop at PUC.

Date: May 14, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: LVN
"Two quotations come to mind, and I cannot remember either one accurately. One is something about the tree of liberty being watered with the blood of patriots, and the other is similar, about the blood of martyrs being the (something) of the faith. "

Oh dear, it’s hard for a researcher to refuse to pick up this gauntlet.

Both quotations have had a life of their own, being variously quoted and misquoted. The first one, by Thomas Jefferson, was surely refers back to the second one, by the early Christian writer Tertullian.

The handy website www.bartleby.com provides the Jefferson phrasing from Respectfully Quoted: A Dictionary of Quotations (1989): "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure." letter to William Stephens Smith, November 13, 1787.—The Papers of Thomas Jefferson, ed. Julian P. Boyd, vol. 12, p. 356 (1955), adding that "a related idea was later expressed by Bertrand BarPre de Vieuzac in a speech to the French national assembly, January 16, 1793: ‘L’arbre de la liberté… croît lorsqu’il est arrosé du sang de toute espPce de tyrans (The tree of liberty grows only when watered by the blood of tyrants),’ Archives Parliamentaires de 1787 B 1860, vol. 57, p. 368 (1900)." Then it adds the links to Tertullian, (b. 160–d. ?) an early North African Christian writer. "And much earlier Tertullian had said: ‘Plures efficimur quotiens metimur a vobis; semen est sanguis Christianorum (We multiply whenever we are mown down by you; the blood of Christians is seed),’Apology, trans. T. R. Glover, pp. 226–27 (1931)."

The version of Tertullian’s quote we know was apparently recast by St. Augustine. See e.g. <http://www.tertullian.org/articles/mohrmann_jerome_eng.htm>.