Klumb forgets Auburn

Date: May 20, 2004

Klumb forgets Auburn

Date: May 20, 2004

klumb only knows that auburn is a hair color.

Date: May 20, 2004

He is not that smart. He probably did not even know that Auburn is a university, just a FB program.

Date: May 20, 2004

I wonder if he even has a clue about SACS and what the implications of losing SACS accreditation would mean for an institution. But then again, from what I understand from December's SACS meeting, neither does Auburn!

Date: May 20, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: ram
""SACS was called to investigate the board in April 2001, when an ad hoc faculty committee asked SACS for "an external, objective and independent assessment of Auburn University — with special attention to the performance of the Board of Trustees ... and shared governance." Lovely quote, huh? The actual article from which it was taken is about Auburn and the fact that their board got a bit too close to micromanaging the athletic department. Might this be anything like Mr. Klumb looking over the shoulder of State President Lee and saying the board may not "rubber stamp" the contract renewal of your AD? For further entertainment, see: http://www.theplainsman.com/vnews/display.v/ART/2003/12/09/3fd65615cd64a"

Could this be an option for USM Faculty Senate? To go to SACS about USM's shared governance concerns?

Date: May 20, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Hotty Toddy
"I wonder if he even has a clue about SACS and what the implications of losing SACS accreditation would mean for an institution. But then again, from what I understand from December's SACS meeting, neither does Auburn!"

It would be interesting to know.

He strikes me as the kinda guy who'd decide to see if he couldn't overthrow the unholy alliance between the US Dept of Ed & regional accrediting agencies out of that peculiar amalgam of ideology & pure spite that has marred the politics of our fair State since the end of Radical Reconstruction.

Klumb's a scally-wag in my book.

Date: May 21, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: Athena
"Could this be an option for USM Faculty Senate? To go to SACS about USM's shared governance concerns?"

Thanks, Athena. I wondered the same thing when I read the quoted passage.

Was the Auburn faculty request an aberration? Do accreditation bodies typically respond to expressed concerns of acute crisis, or do they expect to uncover chronic problems during routine, scheduled visits?

Date: May 21, 2004

quote:
Originally posted by: ram
"Was the Auburn faculty request an aberration? Do accreditation bodies typically respond to expressed concerns of acute crisis, or do they expect to uncover chronic problems during routine, scheduled visits? "

The Auburn faculty request was unusual but not an aberration. More chronic problems are uncovered in routine, scheduled visits simply because most chronic problems are either so systemic that nobody, faculty or administration, thinks they are problems or because faculty is just as desperate as the admin to hide the problems & maintain the accreditation of the institution.

"Irregardless" of whether USM gets any special attention from SACS at this time, you can bank on the next routine review being, um, "interesting." Sadly, that will fall in the lap of the person who follows the Shelboid.

Locate a copy of "A Centennial History of the Southern Association of Colleges & Schools, 1895-1995" & read the chapter about the North Carolina Speakers Ban. After re-reviewing that chapter, I think that SACS wouldn't likely get too interested in what's going on at USM unless Gov. Barbour started trying to influence what the IHL board is doing. That would be "undue outside influence."

Klumb's statements about the AD position at State might actually prove more problematic for the board vis-a-vis SACS than the controversy at USM.

Date: May 21, 2004

http://www.clarionledger.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20040521/SPORTS030102/405210364/1079

His boss wanted a three-year extension.

His opponents wanted him relieved of his duties upon his contract's expiration June 30.

What resulted instead Thursday at the state College Board meeting in Jackson was a compromise that gave Mississippi State athletic director Larry Templeton a one-year contract extension that includes a joint review of the Bulldog athletic department run by Templeton for the past 17 years.

MSU president Charles Lee and board member Scott Ross of West Point, who held opposing views on Templeton's contract renewal, will lead the evaluation. Ross, the chairman of the board's intercollegiate athletics committee and a 1982 graduate of Mississippi State, has expressed concern about Templeton's leadership and the direction of the school's athletic program. Board president Roy Klumb of Gulfport, also an MSU alumnus, offered a similar sentiment.

"We've set up a forum by which we hope we can answer those questions in the future," Klumb said. "

"There's no pre-conceived notions, no witch hunt," Ross said. "I don't anticipate the committee going on the campus and looking through the books or anything like that. I think it's just a review of overall operations. There's always room for improvement, not only in the athletic department but in any other unit on a university campus. Hopefully we'll be able to assist in moving the department forward in a positive way."

Lee said the board didn't say when the review would begin or how the process would work.

"We haven't talked about that yet," said Lee, who had the interim tag removed from his title 16 months ago. "I certainly hope the framework could be settled in a reasonably short period of time so we can move on it.

"I respect the responsibility of the board in its oversight. ... There are certainly different views out there about our athletic program, so this will provide us an opportunity to look at these in a serious and hopefully fairly public way."

Templeton, whose one-year extension includes a $9,000 raise to $175,000, couldn't be reached for comment. He did not attend Thursday's meeting.

Templeton, 57, has worked at his alma mater for all but three years since 1969. He oversees a department that offers 13 intercollegiate sports and has a $23.2 million budget. Although the department has finished in the black every year under Templeton, Klump and Ross said there are concerns about fund-raising and the ongoing NCAA investigation into the school's football program that included allegations of major rules violations. Templeton is among the MSU officials expected to appear before the NCAA's Committee on Infractions on June 12 at Indianapolis.

"It is troubling with a second round of violations (since 1996)," Ross said. "I don't know what the outcome of that is going to be."

When asked if that outcome would have a significant effect on Templeton's future beyond June 2005, Ross answered, "Probably."

Board member D.E. Magee of Jackson said the compromise decision was initiated by IHL commissioner David Potter. The extension was approved 12-0, Ross said.

"It was something he felt everybody could vote for," Magee said. "Some people felt micromanagement (by the board) was an issue. I guess that was an issue for me. I wasn't able to say the contract shouldn't be renewed, which was their (Ross and Klumb's) position."

Klumb insists he'll make an about face if the review of the athletic department — and thus Templeton — is positive. "I'll be the first to be willing to offer an extension and move on," he said.