Lecturer Calls Off Hunger Strike

Churchill: “I am a firm believer in the idea that including all voices in the mix creates stronger and more creative and innovative solutions to the problems we face. However, true inclusion requires respect and compromise—two practices that are sorely missing on campuses and in
contemporary society.”

Me, too. There’s a problem, though, if administrators and their ally colleagues refuse to participate in civil discourse. And it may get worse than simply refusing to participate in civli discourse.

University administrators and their ally colleagues may crush faculty speech—act to eliminate civil discourse, if you like. And not just for contingent faculty who have precarious careers indeed—they deserve “hazardous duty pay.” Administrators and their ally colleagues do not continence respect or compromise when they have “skin in the game.” When administrative misrepresentations or misconduct is discovered, financial and reputational motives will kick in to conceal it. Efforts even to discuss administrative misrepresentations or misconduct will be punished. See, “University and AACSB (Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business) Diversity” for details.

“University and AACSB Diversity” is a test of social reality in which institutional promises are compared to institutional practice, specifically with regard to the promises and practices of diversity of ideas at an AACSB institution. AACSB claims to advance diversity at its member institutions like University of Southern Mississippi and its College of Business and School of Accountancy. USM and AACSB together reinforce each other’s promises and could, if they chose to do so, support each other’s efforts to conform their behavior to their promises.

Given this background, the diversity research questions include: What do USM and its College of Business administrators and faculty do when they have “skin in the game” and are asked to consider ideas with which they disagree? “Skin in the game” includes discovery of misconduct and financial and reputational motives to conceal it. What does the AACSB do
when asked to consider a question of diversity of ideas at an accredited business college? If USM and AACSB fail their promises of diversity of thought and actively thwart policies in place to protect tenured professors who “speak truth to power,” what should society expect from others, contingent faculty, for example?

“A General Theory to Test Social Reality,” provides the structure and guidance for actual tests of social reality which, to date, include “Is Accreditation A Reliable Authority On Academic Quality?” and “University and AACSB Diversity.” The research reports are available online at the Social Science Research Network. See, http://ssrn.com/author=397169

Chauncey M. DePree, Jr., DBA, Professor, School of Accountancy, College of Business, University of Southern Mississippi, m.depree@usm.edu. An ongoing test of social reality can be reviewed at http://www.usmnews.net : “MS Open Records Request Reveals USM’s Actual Costs of President Saunders’ Plane.”