“It [corporitzation of higher education] is alienating, sterile, and ultimately masculine.”

The author needs to explain this statement. What is masculine about sterility? It sounds as though she has an issue with maleness. If the author wished to attribute traditional gender roles to academia, I could see that universities as institions are both feminine in that they are nuturing as well as masculine in that they offer protection in order that students may prepare for a life outside of academia. But I do not believe that assigning gender roles in this case is particularly helpful.

I also do not understand the intent of the article other than a vague wistfulness and a desire not to “view faculty as labor and students as customers” without discussing the actual forces which have shaped the current consumer model and which include obscenely high tuition and correspondingly high student debt, the rise of for-profit colleges, the extreme pressure from tax payers and state legislatures to cut costs at public universities, the rising admission rates, grade inflation, the continual erosion of tenure lines in all faculties and the increase in the employment of adjunct faculty. It is not that the deans and provosts at all universities just woke up one day and decided to adopt a (mis-named) corporate model (“consumer model” is preferable as there are many types of corporations including non-profits although Lord Chancellor Edward Thurlow (circa 1775) noted that corporations “have neither bodies to be punished not sould to be condemned..”).

Also, the author states that the problem occurs when “we view faculty as labor and students as customers…” as if we have a choice. The consumer model has already been adapted. We have student-as-customer reviews of courses, grade inflation and all the rest. It’s fairly clear that if you don’t act within the given system, your services will no longer be required.

And if the recipients are under 25 years of age, do NOT send them an email, send them a text message. Email is for us “old people.” My students and my daughter have taught me that.

I like the answer by another commenter to another recent article about citation styles – that it’s the academic version of a hazing ritual. I really can’t come up with a better explanation. Whatever you do, please don’t pass on the ritual to your undergrad students in the form of taking off points for such minor errors in whatever style you require them to use.

I too use Scrivener, and its a joy. Hell for me only happens when I am forced to use MSword (on a Mac) for no other reason other than for integration with EndNote in the final formatting. I wish it wasn’t so, I wish Apple Pages had full EndNote support and I could format my final document in something (simple) actually designed for document layout.

Sixty-five is the new forty-five. 

Jeff Selingo reports, in part, that “The question remains whether this generation of college presidents, who in some ways contributed to the myriad problems facing colleges today—especially on cost, are in the best position to lead innovation in the future.”

For details of the appalling inability of our elderly president to control costs, see usmnews. This week’s example follows:

Thanks largely to The Hattiesburg American’s veteran higher education reporter Ed Kemp’s recent work, members of the USM family perhaps now have their best glimpse at the character, or lack thereof, of USM president Martha Saunders. With the latest USM scandal – improper use of hundreds of
thousands of dollars in state funds to provide Samsung Galaxy Tabs to students, faculty, and politicos – growing in scope and seriousness, Saunders is spending her time and energy in an effort to completely distance her name from the malfeasance associated with events surrounding that scandal. Kemp’s 23-November-2011 news report for The Hattiesburg American entitled “Auditor looking at tablet program,” the Mississippi (and wider) public learned that the program not only provided hundreds of USM students with the Samsung technology devices, both faculty and state officials were recipients, including Mississippi Higher Education Commissioner Hank Bounds. According to Caron Blanton, Mississippi IHL spokesperson, Bounds was sent one of the Samsung tablets by USM officials earlier in the fall (2011), however Blanton claims that the tablet was returned to USM in unused condition by Bounds. Still, the actions by USM executives have prompted a state audit that is being handled by both State Auditor Stacey Pickering and officials with the IHL. That audit is, among other things, looking into whether the $400,000+ contract effected by USM violated state law, part of which states that university contracts as large as $250,000 must receive IHL Board approval. Blanton told Kemp that the USM contract never appeared before the IHL Board, which is represented by the Mississippi Attorney General’s office.

Meanwhile, USM president Martha Saunders is working feverishly to distance herself from the scandal, telling Kemp that she is “very, very, very saddened . . . that [her] employees . . . have been caught up in” this serious issue. Saunders is, of course, referring to former USM provost Robert Lyman, chief information officer Homer Coffman, and procurement/contract services director Mike Herndon, all of whom were placed on administrative leave by Saunders last week. Saunders also added (in her interview with Kemp) that, although she was aware of the Galaxy Tab program, she was in the dark about the contract and the details surrounding it. Saunders informed Kemp that iTech contracts do not come across her desk for review, and that she assumed that any contract involving the Samsung tablets had been administered properly by iTech. Sources tell USMNEWS.net that Saunders is clearly attempting to dodge any and all responsibility in this case, and, in doing so, she appears about as unpresidential as a university president can appear. They also add that her comments relating to how relaxed contracting procedures are at USM, thus implicating any and all state agencies/institutions in similar practices, seem to suggest that perhaps millions of taxpayer dollars are inappropriately spent each year, and such taxpayer fleecing is practically undiscoverable. Lastly, sources tell USMNEWS.net that, at the very least, USM faculty and staff now know much more about the character, or lack thereof, of the individual who is currently sitting atop the 100 year old institution of higher learning in Hattiesburg.

Chauncey M. DePree, Jr., DBA, Professor, School of Accountancy, University of Southern Mississippi

The economic slowdown and concomitant stasis in university hiring and advancement can be contributed directly to the aging boomer population. With a top-heavy, aging population, younger workers/faculty/etc. have tried to imitate the boom years of their parents and older peers in spending and lifestyle without having the expansive population boom behind it to support it. Riding the front of a large wave will get you where you want to go quickly and in grand style; trying to ride a ripple on the backside of that large wave won’t get you very far or look very good. It is not until that large wave crashes on the shore (or the retirement home) that the younger faculty can look for advances in leadership/prestige, etc. that the faculty a generation ago enjoyed. But younger faculty will never equal the pay scale of this generation.

I was hired 10 years ago and told that three of the faculty in our small department would be gone in the next three years. All three are still here pulling in about 150% more money than I am (which is fine, given their experience); however, I have not had the years of raises they had for the last several years and will make significantly less over the course of my career for that very reason. Unless we figure out how to make wine from water or magically recreate all the lost cash the boomers socked away and lost in the stock market, academia is going to have to figure out how to prepare for this future on a little ripple, not a big wave.

Academe does have a way of diversifying–hiring only at the assistant professor level. With respect to ‘blocking slots,’ don’t many institutions have ‘a’ slot and a budget for filling it, rather than using the retiree’s salary for more than one position?

Finally, when I retired in 2010, the wonderful person who replaced me started at about 80% of my salary. I had 30 years with the institution and the new guy is in his first position.

ps. He’s good and will do well.  I’m happily retired.

As many commentators have mentioned, people are living longer, so we should expect (particularly given the economic realities of this era) that more boomers will continue working.

However, where the system falls apart is in the boomers not working with/training the next generation. Or as Selingo quotes the younger president:

“The older baby boomers don’t want to give it up.”

Many Generation X faculty members and business leaders I have talked with relate stories about basically fighting/battling their boomer bosses for their entire careers and being held back with the old adage: “be patient…your time will come.” This kind of thinking works fine for the person saying it, but it means little to the one hearing it.

In contrast, I have recently spoken to some boomers about their mentors. These stories are full of nurturing/helpful people who paved the way for their younger colleagues to be fully prepared to take over leadership opportunities. If these anecdotes hold some level of truth, then the “pay it forward” mentality didn’t come through for the boomers.

As I type this, I think the dot.com era played a strong role in the “don’t want to give it up” mentality. Back then, Gen Xers seemed like they were taking over (though we look back and realize it was the older VCs that really had the power) and it scared the boomers to their cores. The media and popular culture played on those fears…remember the business magazines trumpeting the rise of Gen X and demise of the boomers?

What academe needs is a new way of training/preparing “younger” faculty for leadership roles, so that we will be ready in the future (though that future does look bleak given that one can imagine boomers hanging on into their 70s and 80s, potentially cutting Gen X completely out of the leadership picture). I would gladly serve an apprenticeship/professional internship with a college president or provost today, given the opportunity. I think others would as well, and the cost of a course load reduction or stipend would be paid back many times over via more capable, experienced young leaders being prepared.

Across higher education generally, the shortage of younger faculty is not due to elderly incumbents who refuse to leave: it’s due to administrations which continue to reduce tenure-track hiring. No lines, no new hires; and, of course, everyone we do have gets another year older.