If you are a regular DtB reader, you have encountered angry and concerned reader comments about what's happened to business, to the MRC, etc. Much of this anger has been directed at the VPI and the President.
One aspect of the situation is a seeming lack of transparency: things keep happening without public discussion or explanation—even at the academic senate. I’m in the academic senate, but I have received no information that sheds light on these worrisome events. Prima facie, that's troubling.
WELL, it has come to my attention—through informal channels—that many of the actions that have caused concern are responses to serious problems that have recently come to light. Evidently, the State Chancellor’s Office felt it necessary to send down an “audit” team, and their inquiries have revealed some excesses and deficiencies, including troubling behavior on the part of some faculty.
Evidently, whole curricula must now be rewritten, a process that cannot occur overnight.
The audit, I’m told, is now completed, and it is only a matter of time before its contents will be revealed. Look for that.
Faced with a situation in which long-established highly problematic practices have come to light and a serious state response was afoot (I guess we haven't seen that yet), administration has had to proceed carefully, quietly, etc.--and also decisively. No doubt, it’s a delicate and difficult situation. I’m in no position to assess whether our administrators have proceeded responsibly and wisely, but I have no reason to suppose that they have not.
I'll see if I can get more information.
12 comments:
That is the story line. And a "line" it is. Don't swallow it. Check the facts.
Since you are in the Senate, did these things surfact there? If not, why not?
No, it seems to me that little or none of this surfaced in the course of the Academic Senate's business (the senate does not meet during the summer). It seems likely, however, that the senate cabinet is aware of some of these doings. If so, they (and the senate Prez) have decided not to communicate with the senate about any of this. Perhaps they have their reasons.
5:01, either there is an audit or there isn't. If there is an audit, if it did bring serious excesses to light, then there was indeed a problem that had to be handled carefully. As I said, I don't know that our top administration has acted wisely in this regard; but I do not know that they have failed to do so. Let's see what happens.
How about their own excessive administrative salaries?
That makes absolutely no sense bvt. Shared governance is tossed by the wayside, because of a supposed crisis, when it was the lack of shared governance for which the acred. commission originally cited us?
What “troubling behavior on the part of some faculty" could warrant a State Chancellor's audit? Are we talking misappropriated funds? Kickbacks?
All academic programs are under the purview and supervision of the Rocky Justice team. Is that the reason for the recent dean’s removal? Are they saying things were done illegally under their watch? No wonder they've gone underground with this “misappropriationgate.“
I hope they hang the scoundrels that tainted the IVC name from the clock tower. Or maybe a beheading in the new outdoor amphitheater (mud hole) would suffice.
The unexpected summer departures provide some answers.
Sounds like the Rocky Justice Horror Picture Show! B. Sick (BSTIC, sans the T)
Perhaps all the conflicts of interest that exist?
Be clear. I'm not saying that Glenn and Craig are good guys. I'm saying that something surprising has happened--an audit by the State Chancellor's Office--and it revealed very troubling facts. I'm suggesting that much or all of what Justice/Roquemore have done (over in BSTIC) is a response to what was brought to light.
I did not assert that their response was appropriate. I said that I have no facts suggesting that their response was inappropriate.
With regard to "shared governance": I have consistently criticized Justice/Roquemore on that score, and, as I said today, that these actions have been taken without explanation is prima facie troubling.
But it is at least possible that Justice, et al. are responding appropriately to, yes, a crisis.
It is possible that they (or the academic senate) should let us in on what they're up to. For now, I'm an agnostic about that. I just don't know.
Exactly because our administration has established a pattern of acting unilaterally and secretly (and, in general, contrary to the spirit of shared governance--I'm thinking of such cases as their endless and inexplicable promotion of Early College, their consistent disregard of faculty judgment about such things), I'm not especially inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt in this case. On the other hand, it seems to me that people often throw around charges without evidence, and they also start piling on a guy when they think others are doing so. It's all very ugly, if you ask me. So I'd like us to return to the sober business of proportioning our claims and charges to facts.
So, yes, let's keep a suspicious eye on these guys re shared governance. But let's not be excessive. Let's not pile on, and let's not regard mere speculation as fact.
In an earlier draft of this post, I included a paragraph that asked why this (alleged) unfortunate situation was allowed to occur in the first place. But I don't really know anything just yet. I suspect that we will know something soon. And then, perhaps, it will be fair to ask that question.
I heard about the audit as well--all very hush. The figure, $100,000, was bantered about. I, too, would keep it quiet if that happened on my watch.
The results of state audits are public documents, so it shouldn't be difficult to find out what happened.
By the way, the audit is district-wide, so I wouldn't be throwing rocks at Rocky just yet.
Post a Comment