Eat pizza, then squawk

☞

● THE FACULTY UNION wants faculty's presence felt at next Monday’s board meeting. The Faculty Association website informs us that

The [union] is delivering its initial contract proposal to the Board on Monday, March 26th, to begin the negotiations process. To encourage faculty participation, the FA is hosting a pre-board meeting pizza party at Boosters on Marguerite Parkway … at 5 p.m. After the pizza, attend the public comments portion of the Board Meeting at 6:30 p.m. We need to send a message to the Board that the faculty [are] united, and supports ou[r] negotiating team in securing a new contract.

I’ve been to some of these union pizza parties, and they’re pretty good. I’m not a member—I quit when the FA endorsed John “Junket” Williams for Public Administrator—but I do like to see faculty from the two colleges get together, laugh, eat pizza, drink beer, and then march boisterously up the hill with torches to set fire to an enormous Tom Fuentes effigy out in front of BGS.

You don’t wanna miss that.


● Recently, Chancellor Raghu P. Mathur and his board enablers adopted changes to the monthly board meetings—supposedly, for the sake of “streamlining.” These innovations don’t seem to be working thus far: the last meeting went on for days.

But you can still make comments at the head of the meeting, and they end up on local cable TV, too. Now, I know that you don’t care about that audience, but the trustees do.

If you speak, do try to sound like a Republican. Wear one of those little flags. Mention that you love freedom and you hate people who aren't willing to kill hundreds of thousands of innocent people just for a chance to thrust it on their society.

● I checked out the meeting’s agenda (available here), and there isn’t much there’ ceptin’ for one or two things.

Trustee TOM FUENTES will do the invocation. You never want to miss that. It’s like time travel to listen to the fellow invoke the Lord. Or maybe it’s like gagging on a maggot. One time, the Reb heard him thank the Deity for "the taxpayers." He never thanks God for faculty. He hates ‘em. I think he wants 'em all to burn in hell. He's very pious.


She's a kind hearted woman,
she studies evil all the time.
She's a kind hearted woman,
she studies evil all the time.
You're best to quit me baby
as just to have it on your mind. —Rob't Johnson

● Near as I can tell, the only interesting agenda item is “discussion item” 6.2:

Saddleback College and Irvine Valley College: Outcome of November 2006 Accreditation Progress Visits and Implications for October 2007 Accreditation Midterm Reports
Recommendation that Board of Trustees discuss and identify strategies to conduct a Special Board meeting on April 5 2007 with focus on addressing the accreditation recommendations.

OK, it’s like this. The “outcome” of the visits was that, according to the Accreds, there’s still a plague of “despair” at the colleges, and the trustees are still micromanaging. (So is the Chancellor.)

Naturally, trustee Don Wagner, a notoriously prickly and peevish fellow, recently proclaimed that the notion that HE micromanages (as the Accreds had in fact charged) is absurd. He even seemed to say that, whatever he was doing that counted as micromanaging to the Accreds—well, gosh darn it, he’ll do it again, if he feels moved to.

At least in the past, his pal Tom Fuentes, too, has made it pretty clear that, in his fevered mind, the whole Accreditation process is rigged by, or at the behest of, faculty. The fellow seems to embrace conspiracy theories—you know, as did Steve "What Holocaust?" Frogue, whom Fuentes replaced nearly seven years ago. I think nutty people shouldn't be entrusted with hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars, don't you?

Plus, according to Tom, the Accreds won't pull our ticket, and only a fool would think they might. So he explained to the student trustee last year.

That sort of talk makes Chancellor Mathur nervous. Mathur obviously wants the trustees to just give the Accreds what they want. You know, just jump through those goddam hoops, make this thing go away.

Hence this agenda item. At least there's a paper trail. "See, we fretted about it in March, then again in April!" he'll tell 'em.

So it will be interesting to see what comes out of these people's mouths. I think. They're not all on the same page, and they're mostly mean and plug-ugly. Maybe somebody's head will pop.

See you all Monday afternoon.

What's with these community college trustees?

☞
Not so long ago, Chancellor Raghu Mathur of the SOCCCD was caught trying to sneak a raise into an oddly labeled board agenda item. (See Raghu's stealth agenda item.) Luckily, faculty were on the ball that time.

It was almost a classic Mathurian moment.

I figured only Raghu would try something like that. And I figured only our benighted board would let it pass.

I figured wrong.

Yesterday’s San Diego Union-Tribune reported that

Grossmont-Cuyamaca Community College District Chancellor OMERO SUAREZ will not be disciplined for changing his contract without board approval. The district's Governing Board made that clear Tuesday night when it voted 4-1 in closed session against a proposal by trustee Timothy Caruthers to discipline Suarez.

The board was criticized last month for not revealing whether it was considering any action against Suarez. Board President Rick Alexander, who announced the vote in open session, said the board wanted the public to know the issue had been discussed.

Suarez admitted deleting the buyout clause from his contract without board approval last year, but he denied doing it so he could negotiate a more lucrative deal, as Caruthers has contended. Suarez said he did it to bring his contract in line with those of other high-ranking administrators who don't have buyout clauses.

Mathur survived his sneaky prehensile episode too. What’s with these boards?

In the past, when a raise for the Chancellor has been openly contemplated, Mathur has argued that a raise would bring his salary "in line" with salaries of other chancellors in the state.

Mathur makes about $300,000 a year! Some community college chancellors make that kind of money, but their districts comprise many colleges. SOCCCD comprises only two.

If you have any queries about Mathur's salary, you might contact trustees Tom Fuentes, Dave Lang, John Williams, and Don Wagner. They love the guy.

Simplistic and unfair?

☞

HERE IN CALIFORNIA, there’s been lots of talk of late about the low “transfer rates” at community colleges. Community college insiders complain that the criticism is fallacious and simplistic.

But what about the rest of the country? Same squabble, evidently. But a new study might throw some light on the subject. Or not. This morning’s Inside Higher Ed reports on a study that addresses, in particular, the inadequacies of the Feds’ transfer measures as applied to community colleges across the nation.

The study focuses on schools in Florida:

…The issue of graduation rates is one that is increasingly important in higher education, as politicians and others seek more ways to gauge colleges’ performance and hold them accountable. But as the study notes, community colleges have complained for years that the rates that the federal government uses aren’t appropriate for their institutions and lead to simplistic and unfair criticisms. The study was done by scholars at the Community College Research Center of Teachers College, Columbia University.

The study examines the validity of the “Student Right to Know” graduation rates, which all colleges must report under federal law. These rates measure graduation within 150 percent of the standard time for a degree — six years for a four-year institution and three years for a community college offering associate degrees. The study focused on Florida’s 28 community colleges….

The first part of the report walks through the major criticisms made of the federal rate: that it doesn’t take into account the transfer mission of community colleges, that its time period is too short to fairly track non-traditional age students, that it doesn’t include part-time students, that definitions are inconsistent, and so forth. By and large, the study finds the criticisms valid and points to ways that the federal definition shortchanges community colleges and implies that they have very low graduation rates, which in some cases isn’t true and in other cases (where students are transferring) may not be relevant.

“Simply saying that the graduation rate for a particular community college is 25 percent provides very little useful information to anyone,” the report says. And the report concludes that reporting these rates can be dangerous to community colleges in terms of public perceptions, since so many people unfamiliar with community colleges assume all colleges are educating traditional undergraduates who have the ability and means to finish a bachelor’s degree in four years.

But the scholars also used Florida’s data to construct alternative graduation rates — avoiding some of the flaws identified in the federal system. … Then the researchers compared the rates using the federal system with the more sophisticated approach. And they found that the rankings don’t change significantly.

As a result, the researchers conclude that however flawed the federal data are for community colleges, they may still represent “a reasonable first approximation of relative college performance.”

The report ends by endorsing the creation of a national “student unit record” system — which would track students from institution to institution and across state lines. With such a system, analysis like that done in Florida could be done elsewhere. While many community colleges — not to mention key members of the Bush administration — favor that concept, it has been opposed by many student groups and private colleges, who fear that it would result in a huge loss of privacy rights. (See Community Colleges and Graduation Rates.)

In a possible world, more hellish than our own

☞

A question re the Chief of Police search

☞

● We at DISSENT the BLOG get all sorts of information, some of it offered anonymously. Most of the anonymous stuff we simply ignore, since, often, we are in no position to verify it.

And some of it is not anonymous. We ignore lots of that, too.

Someone recently visited me and told me something disturbing that I cannot easily verify, but the person has been reliable in the past, and their claim, if correct, is important. So let me just report it to you as such. They are making a claim. Is it true? Dunno.

This person, person X, asserted that the search committee for the new IVC Chief of Police is packed with cronies of the old Chief of Police, Owen Kreza, who left us not long ago amid an investigation and a cloud of controversy. There had long been stories and charges circulating regarding Kreza’s alleged unprofessionalism, cronyism, and abuse of power. Most of us at IVC were happy to see Kreza go.

The worry here is that, if the hiring process yields a Kreza crony, at least some of the same old problems with our security/police department will persist.

Now, again, I have no reason to believe that X’s charge is accurate, other than the fact that X makes it. So those of you who have something relevant to offer, please weigh in on this. Is the committee overly friendly to Kreza? Is it liable to focus on a pool of candidates that will give us more of the same?

UPDATE: a member of the committee told an associate, who told me this afternoon, that the search committee is strictly on the up and up. In fact, said the member, the committee is proud to have among its members Irvine Police Chief David L. Maggard, Jr., a respected law enforcement figure. I do believe that the idea here is this: Maggard represents a high standard of police professionalism, no funny business.

FLY CATCHER? OK, I admit it, this isn't really fair. In truth, there have been one or two good administrative hires in the district in recent memory. But I found these old fly catchers in a drawer—my dad handed 'em to me a few years ago as though they were the greatest thing since sliced bread—and I couldn't resist whipping something up. Let's hope the big new searches/hires—the IVC VPI, comes to mind—will yield some good & competent people.

● Lots of people on campus (here at IVC) seem very happy about Wayne Ward's exit—that'll happen next week Friday. I'm surprised they haven't broken out the blue and white balloons.

● An article in this morning’s OC Register (Irvine expects growth spurt) discusses the debate concerning managing the growth of the city of Irvine:

The county's fourth-largest city will add at least 70,000 people by 2025, according to the latest city population estimates.

The city's growth is spurred by 6,781 acres that have yet to be developed into villages such as Portola Springs, Orchard Hills and Stonegate. Additionally, the city has two redevelopment areas–the old El Toro base and the industrial area near John Wayne Airport–where thousands of residences are being built.

And the population estimate–made by city planners using birth, death, development and other figures–could rise….

…The city's last and largest development decisions are now being made by the City Council. And council members have two different visions for Irvine in the year 2025.

Councilman Larry Agran once was touted as a "slow-growth" advocate–or as he now says, a promoter of "controlled or carefully managed growth." … Today Agran sees the city's future differently. He said two things have changed his vision: more market demand for housing and the closure of El Toro and defeat of efforts to build an airport there.

…The city can manage to add at least 70,000 people – in part by focusing on mass transit, he said. Creating a system of pedestrian and bicycle trails, bus routes, light rail and heavy rail, Agran said, will help residents depend less on vehicles.

Councilwoman Christina Shea disagrees. Shea supports mass transit, but said it should add to, not substitute for, regular traffic planning. The city is adding too many residences without properly planning for quality of life areas such as traffic and city services, she said. "I believe our development is leading the city on a downhill spiral," she said….

Waning Waynitude

☞
CAMPUS WAS ABUZZ this afternoon with the news that Wayne Ward, Irvine Valley College's unpopular Director of Facilities and Maintenance, has announced his departure later this month from the college. He did so earlier today at a staff meeting.

Evidently, Wayne has secured a new and similar position at UC Irvine. He begins there next month.

People seemed generally pleased about this development, though they also expressed amazement that UCI would choose to hire the fellow. Said one colleague, "I hate to say it, but the bigger the institution—"

She didn't finish the sentence. She didn't have to. Everyone nodded.

There's talk of a Wayne Ward "Hit the Road Jack" party. It will feature a water-filled condom "toss off," a series of faux public humiliations, and a brief seminar on "free gasoline."


Many speculate that Wayne's exit is related to the controversies that marked his tenure as Director. Several grievances have been filed against him, and many who serve under him tell tales of persistent & defiant Wayne Wardian unprofessionalism & high-handedness, as when he refused to fix equipment that posed a hazard to employees or apparently retaliated against grieving employees. Further, students and employees have long complained about the very poor condition of restrooms and other facilities over which Wayne is responsible, and the pattern of repeated SNAFUs, as when the CEC temporaries were not ready for use at the start of Fall Semester, leaving many classes without rooms.


(We'd love to give credit where credit is due. We'll try to find out just why this has occurred.)

Let us know what you think about Wayne's exit and what will or should come next.

I, for one, will miss seeing Wayne's Camaro parked—well, wherever the hell Wayne wants to park it.

I should mention that, according to reliable sources, recently, the CSEA (classified union) dropped a grievance against Wayne. No word yet on whether that decision was related in any way to Wayne's decision to leave.

See also:

● Abject finger pointage

● Tales of SNAFUery

● ”It’s a condom,” he said

● Wayne’s retaliation?

● The “flesh-eating cart from hell,” and other tales

New CECs: not ready for prime time

Sunny horns in on production of Dissent, Tuesday morning.

“They should work like a Kalashnikov”

☞

I FOUND THIS ARTICLE (below) about a Russian gas-powered boot in this morning’s New York Times.

My guess: it's an April Fool's joke that's arrived two weeks early.

Some excerpts (see These Boots Were Made for 22 M.P.H.):

…Mr. [Viktor K.] Gordeyev invented a gasoline-powered boot that looks like pogo sticks that strap to your shins….[His] boots — which use tiny pistons — became classified as a Russian military secret until 1994.

…[T]he boots became a military secret, as generals envisioned soldiers running swiftly and effortlessly alongside armored vehicles.

The boots were declassified in 1994, and Mr. Gordeyev and his partners imagined growing rich by selling their invention to a lazy public. Instead, the company went out of business in 2006.

[Demo: emitting small puffs and eliciting big stares]

... Instead of fastening a seat belt, the … runner … strapped on shin belts…. Then he flicked an ignition switch.

Before running down a university corridor, he jumped in place a few times to warm up the engine. [The runner] then ran laps for about 10 minutes, going about 12 miles per hour, with the two-stroke boots emitting small puffs of exhaust.

…The tanks in the shoes hold a third of a cup of gasoline each and will take the runner three miles; that means the boots get about 70 miles per gallon.

[Pesky hazards, comrade:]

…“The worst situation is when the spark fires as the runner just lands, and the force of the blast is absorbed by his body,” [the runner] explains flatly.

The two powerful engines tend to throw a wearer off balance or cause knees to buckle.

Mr. Gordeyev … disagrees that the boots are dangerous and still has visions of their mass adoption. “We’ve been running in them for years and we haven’t had one trauma,” he said….

[A little history, a little fear, a little Smirnoff in your ear:]

First, [Gordeyev’s] institute tried to interest the Soviet Army.

“We ran in the corridor of the general staff building, in front of the generals” and the minister of defense, [one of the designers] said. “They liked it, and were even a little frightened.”

An order came down for the paratroop command to test the boots, and the design became classified. This gave the [Ufa State Aviation Technical] university access to [the Russian] space agency.

One result … was a calculation that the energy in calories used to move the two-pound boot at a run would exceed the energy input from the gasoline engine. That meant, it was more tiring to run with the motorized footwear than without it….


Only if the weight could be reduced to below 2 pounds per boot would the wearer have a net energy gain. So far they have failed at this.

After the shoes were declassified in 1994, when capitalism was beginning to sweep across Russia, the inventors decided to market the boot.

[Not yet safe, like AK-47, comrade:]

A former student, Anfis G. Saibakov, formed a company called Ekomotor to design a user-friendly version. He imagined people might want to commute in the boots, as they do on bicycles or rollerblades. None of this happened.

When Mr. Saibakov demonstrated the boots at Disney World in Florida in 1998, safety came up as a concern, he said, and the company lacked money to fine-tune the product.

“They don’t have characteristics that would allow an ordinary person to use them,” Mr. Saibakov said glumly, admitting that running in the shoes would always mean “taking certain risks.”

“They should work like a Kalashnikov,” he said….