Wednesday, December 18, 2019

And finally—a disheartening beginning for the new IVC?


Wed, Dec 18, 2019 1:50 pm
     The Faculty Association and IVC Academic Senate Presidents, in collaboration with one another and in sounding the IVC faculty at large, are pleased to announce the two faculty members serving on the IVC President Search Committee: [PS, a counselor] (F[aculty]A[ssociation]) [union] and [CK, a member of the Business faculty] (A[cademic]S[enate]).
. . .
     Bringing their knowledge, experience, diversity, and integrity to evaluating and advancing outstanding Presidential candidates, [P] and [C] will serve our faculty and college most admirably.

Respectfully Yours, 
Kurt Meyer,
Faculty Association President 
June McLaughlin,
IVC Academic Senate President

Wed, Dec 18, 2019 3:04 pm
     One thing is clear: after over twenty years of administrative oppression of academics, we now need to hire an actual academic as president.
     And so what do we do? For faculty to serve on the search committee, we select individuals from the least academic areas on campus.
     Just F-ing great.
     Very, very disappointed. 
—Roy Bauer

9 comments:

Anonymous said...

I am disappointed not by these choices so much as the number of faculty on the committee. If there were 4 faculty reps other areas could be represented.

Anonymous said...

I think we are still hobbled by the old processes. I do have faith that no matter what this will get a good result. Still two faculty members seems a rather small number. Non-instructional faculty should have representation but there are so many others of us as well and so many disciplines with different needs. I trust that these reps will do their best.

Anonymous said...

Well, there is much more gender balance than ever before in the selections. Just last year, the Senate was still forwarding mostly white all male hiring committees. So this is progress. But I see your point. When we put together a contract negotiating team, we strive for fuller faculty representation. Two positions is a really, really small number. I do think these two will be good reps. But yes, Raghu's revenge is seen in this policy.

Anonymous said...

Oh yes, if we only had an academic area like philosophy instead of that useless stuff in business...

Anonymous said...

8:01: I think Roy's point is that there is more to education than business, but you knew that didn't you? We educate people, citizens, not only not employees.

Anonymous said...

Although you are trying to be clever, 8:01, what you are saying is, ironically, completely accurate.

Anonymous said...

Is business a discipline? How is it academic? Agree that we could have done better here.

Anonymous said...

I hear others were asked but their schedules didn't allow them to participate.

Anonymous said...

Can't please everybody.
No matter what you do people complain.

8-14: do you regret all the lying?

✅ Trump Encourages Racist Conspiracy Theory on Kamala Harris’s Eligibility to Be Vice President NYT ✅ Orange County Sees Overall Coronavirus...

Goals and Values and Twaddle

blather: long-winded talk with no real substance*
The whole concept of MSLOs [measurable student learning outcomes] as the latest fad in education is somewhat akin to the now discredited fad of the '90's, Total Quality Management, or TQM. Essentially, the ACCJC adopted MSLOs as the overarching basis for accrediting community colleges based on their faith in the theoretical treatises of a movement.... After repeated requests for research showing that such use of MSLOs is effective, none has been forthcoming from the ACCJC [accreditors]. Prior to large scale imposition of such a requirement at all institutions, research should be provided to establish that continuous monitoring of MSLOs has resulted in measurable improvements in student success at a given institution. No such research is forthcoming because there is none….
The Accountability Game…., Leon F. Marzillier (Academic Senate for California Community Colleges, October, 2002)
In the summer of ’13, I offered a critique of the awkward verbiage by which the district and colleges explain their values, goals, and objectives —aka SOCCCD'S G&V (goals and values) blather.
I wrote a post each for the district, Saddleback College, and Irvine Valley College efforts. (See the links below.)
This verbiage—stated in terms of “values,” “missions,” “goals,” “visions,” and whatnot—is often badly written. It is sometimes embarrassingly trite.
It occasionally communicates something worthwhile.
No doubt you are familiar with the usual objections to jargon. Higher education, too, has its jargon—an irony, given typical college-level instruction in writing, which urges jargon eschewery.
Sure enough, SOCCCD G&V blather is riddled with jargon and with terms misused and abused. For instance, in the case of the district’s dubious blather, the so-called “vision” is actually a purpose. Why didn't they just call it that?
As one slogs through this prattle, one finds that "visions" tend to be awfully similar to “missions,” with which they are distinguished. The latter in turn are awfully similar to “goals,” which must be distinguished from “objectives.” But aren't goals and objectives pretty much the same thing?
These perverse word games will surely perplex or annoy anyone armed with a command of the English language. In fact, readers will be perplexed to the degree that they are thus armed. Illiterates, of course, will be untroubled.
Here's a simple point: the district and colleges’ G&V blather tends to eschew good, plain English in favor of technical terms and trendy words and phrases (i.e., it tends to be bullshitty and vague). Thus, one encounters such trendy terminological turds as “dynamic,” “diversity,” “student success,” and “student-centered.” Even meretricious neologisms such as ISLOs and “persistence rates” pop up, unexplained, undefended.
Does anyone see a transparency problem with all of this? Shouldn't the public, or at least the well educated public, be able to comprehend statements of the colleges' goals and values?
In the case of the district, to its credit, all it really seems to want to say is that it wants to teach well and it wants students to succeed. Admirable!
So why all the ugly, common-sense defying, buzzword-encrusted claptrap?

Districtular poppycock: our “vision” and our “mission” and our tolerance of twaddle - July 31, 2013

THEY BUZZ: Saddleback College's "Mission, Vision, and Values" - August 4, 2013

IVC’s vision, mission, and goals: nonsense on stilts - August 5, 2013

THE IRVINE VALLEY CHRONICLES: no ideas, just clichés & buzzwords - Sep 30, 2013

*From my Apple laptop's dictionary