Wednesday, June 11, 2008

Historical updatery

What follows is the latest UPDATE in Dissent's Very Short History of the District's Troubles:

.....Saddleback College has been oddly quiet re its accreditation problem (its report to the Accreds is due in October). I'm told that their Accreditation task force, which includes trustee Dave Lang, doesn't even have faculty representation. Good grief.
.....Meanwhile, IVC has approached its parallel accreditation challenge with great seriousness and industry. Its focus group, which includes a cooperative Don Wagner (President of the Board), meets every two weeks or so. It has wide representation (faculty participate in a manner that honors the existing "work to contract"). The group even gave a fine and well-attended presentation of its work at an all-college meeting at the end of April.
.....It appears that the ACCJC has brought it about that someone will visit our colleges/district to scope things out. Mathur is insisting on calling this person a "consultant," but that's just obfuscation. The visitor is liable to finally arrive (the original guy was delayed by an emergency) some time this summer, which is unfortunate, since, during summer, the colleges are ghost towns.

.....Re our looming and inevitable violation of the 50% Law: we've heard almost nothing about it for some time. I'm told that a delegation went up to the state to plead for leniency and whatnot, but that profited them nothing.

.....Late in the Spring, the Faculty Association, unhappy with the district's failure to bargain the contract in good faith, called for a "work to contract," which ended up affecting the massive (and absurd) effort to hire 35 to 40 new full-time faculty (a ploy to bring instructional costs up to the 50% mark). But, owing to the usual union SNAFU, the WTC affected IVC much more than Saddleback and thus caused tensions among faculty. We seem to be getting past that now though. (Essentially, owing to fortuities and adjustments, the hires turned out OK, even at IVC.)
.....No contract yet. There is no way, of course, to approve a contract during summer anyway, owing to the usual faculty diaspora. Our 50% situation clearly calls for serious salary increases (our salaries do not compare well with those of faculty at contiguous districts), but this board just will not go there.
.....Contempt for faculty is the norm as far as the policies of this board are concerned.

.....There's been quite an administrative exodus of late, adding no doubt to "administrative instability"—one of the Accreds' worries. VC Andreea Serban bolted for the President job back in Santa Barbara (she'd only been on the job for two years). ATEP Provost Bob Kopecky was essentially canned—no doubt made a scapegoat by the wily Mathur. (Bob will return as faculty in the Fall.) VC Bob King left for greener pastures. Several IVC deans left in the course of the Fall and Spring (Feldhus, Cooper, Corum, et al.).
.....Essentially, IVC is experiencing deanlessness. It's like an experiment or something.
.....No doubt I've left somebody out. Whatever.

.....Board President Don Wagner really stepped in it at the recent Saddleback College "scholarship" event, where, in the minds of many observers (including some doners), he "politicized" the occasion by lecturing in defense of prayer. Evidently, he had just received a missive from a "church/state separation" organization suggesting that prayer at college/district events is inappropriate, and so he felt the need to rebut.
.....Don seems to lack self-control.
.....Someone posted Don's scholarship remarks on YouTube, and then the shit hit the fan. At the May board meeting, Nancy Padberg opined that Don should apologize; she challenged him to make up the loss in moola after the exodus of doners. (Don't know how many, if any, doners are actually bolting.) Lots of community members came to carp at 'im. He responded with defiance. Wrong move, Don.
.....Don doesn't apologize. He doesn't recognize his mistakes. Still, I like 'im. He's like a smart but recalcitrant little bro. Let's call 'im "Donny."

.....Trustee Tom Fuentes, who has liver cancer, received a liver transplant—which surprised everyone, since he was quite obviously a poor candidate (owing to his age, diabetes, etc.). People have muttered their suspicions in the hallway, but that's all. But I don't buy it. My theory: the Lord intervened on Tom's behalf, owing to the fellow's manifest goodness.

.....The Faculty Association (union) is gearing up for the November election, at which time they hope to unseat Lang and Fuentes (Bill Jay is a friend, and John Williams has supported faculty with regard to the contract). Late in Spring, the FA held a lunch at the Spectrum at which time its candidates spoke and spoke well.

.....Amazingly, the board continues to support Mathur, despite the ample reasons to can him. Mathur, of course, committed the massive "50%" blunder and is heavily implicated in our accreditation woes (which are grave). It is by no means obvious that both colleges will have their accreditation renewed in early 2009. If you suppose otherwise, you're just not paying attention.

.....Leaving aside IVC's Wendy Gabriella and her crew, faculty leadership seems to be disintegrating—no big deal: faculty effectiveness historically waxes and wanes. It seems that, at Saddleback College, faculty have collapsed into consternation and despair. Am I wrong?

.....On the up side: the weather's been nice, and some of us our flourishing. I sense no despair at IVC—shared governance-wise, we're doing fine—though it may exist in buckets at the administrative level. I wouldn't know.

.....Dissent the Blog is flourishing and growing in stature. Trivia, I know, but true nonetheless.

BILL O'REILLY CONTINUES TO O'REILLYize the airwaves:

20 comments:

Anonymous said...

no faculty involvement in Saddleback's accreditation?

Finally there's hope that at least one college (Saddleback) will remain accredited.

Roy Bauer said...

12:45

--Evidently, you are unfamiliar with the accreditors, whose officials will not be impressed by a report written essentially by administrators.

I suspect, however, that you are not interested in becoming informed.

Anonymous said...

GOOD LORD.

Anonymous said...

WIll TF now repent his evil ways and put his new lease on life to work in a benevolent way, or will he stay the malevolent little prick he's always been?

Anonymous said...

PLAINLY NOT.

Anonymous said...

Poor Mickey, & the rest of the Fab 5, what have they ever done to be lumped in w/the likes of the scum of Goo & his board cronies? At least Walt's creations are fun & entertaining, where as these class clowns are just plain scary. I'm just teasing, I know the point you are trying to get across.:-)

Anonymous said...

You should provide a box of Cleanex when you write that kind of slop, Chunk. You really are a depressing chap aren't you? I know, the depressing issue is the fucked up administration in your district. But you and the sheep that follow you are sadly misguided.

But let's put our differences aside, old boy. Pick yourself up some of that good sensimilla Trabuco Canyon is noted for. A few tokes on a good joint will help cheer you up.

Hey, Reb! Get Chunk some munchies!

Roy Bauer said...

Idjit.

AOR said...

I was put on the Saddleback accreditation committee, but am not there because I'm working to contract, and my committee hours are way done.

Anonymous said...

Misguided how, 6:01? Put down the bong for a little while and compose an answer.

Roy Bauer said...

My criticism isn't directed so much at faculty--I applaud those who have stuck to the "work to contract"--as it is to general leadership who should know better than to proceed with the report, even viewing it as nearly complete, without having secured faculty involvement. Based on what I know about the accreds, they're liable simply to reject any such report.

But who knows. Maybe there's something I'm missing here. Nobody's prevented from straightening me out, right?

Anonymous said...

Chunk, they have to proceed with the report regardless of faculty's willingness to participate.

Faculty participation is not a requirement for a progress report. Submitting before the deadline, however, is a requirement.

Roy Bauer said...

Yes, but the due date for the report is Oct. 15. That's four months away.

Anonymous said...

yes but you're forgetting the timeline. draft has to go to campus for comment in July. They need a couple weeks to comment. A couple more weeks to incorporate campus comments. Then the draft goes to Board in August. Final goes to Board in September. Final goes to Accreds October 1.

If they're nearly done writing the report as you mentioned, then they're right on schedule. Kudos to the members of the Saddleback accreditation committee. I look forward to seeing their report.

Anonymous said...

Chunk is right about waning faculty participation--WTC not withstanding. Faculty senate "leadership" these days is dangerously residing in the hands of a very few who just cycle through. We need new blood, and we need to infuse it quickly or risk the entrenchment and lack of trust that produced the previous cycle of betrayal by the former union faculty. It's not that the senates don't offer opportunties, it's that they discourage many, shut out others, and assume all responsibilities themselves. All faculty have an obligation to step up--and faculty leaders sometimes need to say "No, someone else will have to shoulder this task this time." The Union PAC was deluded by Board Member promises in prior elections; IVC senate had better be wary about the cozy relations it now has with Don Wagner on the Accred report team. Further betrayals will put us right back where we were a few years ago, only this time, it will be the best and brightest who will have let us down.

Anonymous said...

why and how does the IVC senate have a cozy relationship with the likes of Wagner?

Roy Bauer said...

I don't think it's fair to say that the IVC senate has a "cozy relationship" with board President Wagner, if that is meant to imply an unreserved and foolish trust by the former in the latter. Perhaps that notion is inspired by faculty (and others) working more-or-less well together with Wagner on the Accred focus group. But, from the beginning, Wagner has made clear his commitment to approaching the group's difficult task in good faith, and nothing that's happened, as far as i know, has caused anyone to question his commitment.

There is no reason to think that the trust faculty have invested in Wagner re the group's work has led to some sort of general trust in him about all issues. I am continually pleased to hear of ongoing tensions between faculty/classified and Wagner, tensions that are wholly consistent with good faith on Wagner's part re the group but that indicate, at least to me, that our faculty are not falling into any traps or forgetting the profound differences that exist between the Board Majority/Mathur and faculty.

On the other hand, nothing, in my view, could be better than there emerging real and lasting trust and camaraderie, even if somewhat circumscribed, between faculty and the board president. I have always felt--as I told Wagner back in '98--that among our fundamental problems in the district is a lack of understanding between the board and the faculty. Back then, I advised continuous communication and interaction between trustees and faculty to overcome silly prejudices and whatnot. I tried to get the ball rolling by inviting Wagner and Padberg to campus, showing them around, introducing them to lots of faculty.

Unfortunately, Wagner did not take me up on that. He remained aloof, evidently preferring to believe what Mathur told him about faculty.

With his involvement in this group, Wagner is coming to see who faculty really are, namely, very intelligent, serious, hard-working people who want to do the right thing. Unless he's an idiot, and he isn't, he is coming to see that Mathur has been feeding right-wing prejudices and lying to him all these years. This is Mathur's one true talent.

As Dissent readers know, I was very skeptical of the focus group idea (as defined) from the very beginning. Soon, though, I became a believer. The group is doing good work. Plus, again, Wagner is coming to understand who our faculty really are.

Could Wagner betray us? Sure. But sometimes you've got to take risks. I applaud our faculty leadership in this instance. I think their gamble--to trust Wagner and to work with him with openness--was wise.

Anonymous said...

We'll see, won't we?

We trusted Lang too.

Anonymous said...

any perceived coziness is the result of legitimate efforts on both sides to work together collegially for the sake of accreditation.

You can hate Don and Raghu all you want but if you want to continue being a college instead of a satellite campus you must support these efforts.

Frankly, I have started to wonder whether losing accreditation is some sort of manifest destiny for ivc. We've been trying for so long that I think that we simply don't know anything different.

I am comforted, however, with the possibility of us becoming saddleback north once again... Perhaps the next time we get accredited we won't take it for granted.

Anonymous said...

funny thing - chunk posted his comment while i was drafting mine. he said it better.
-11:48

Roy's obituary in LA Times and Register: "we were lucky to have you while we did"

  This ran in the Sunday December 24, 2023 edition of the Los Angeles Times and the Orange County Register : July 14, 1955 - November 20, 2...