More Schulz and WSU research stuff

[Loyal Coug1]

Sorry - the first thread was getting off track.

I was rooting around and stumbled across this.

So in the other thread, Schulz's "Drive to 25" initiative has failed. I referred to Elson Floyd's unsuccessful efforts to get WSU into the AAU. Which of course you all know as the Association of American Universities. The top research universities in the country.

So, Floyd failed. Did Schulz do better? Well let's see. Since Schulz became President in 2016, what universities have been invited? Not us.
ASU
U of Cal, Riverside
U of Cal, Santa Cruz
U of S. Florida
Utah
Dartmouth
George Washington U.
Tufts (?)
Miami
Notre Dame
Washington U. St Louis

For comparison, from 2006 to 2016 two universities were invited, and since 2006 two have been kicked out (Nebraska and Iowa State).

So, by this barometer WSU under Schulz has failed miserably. But I'm sure he will pick up the pace now that he has moved to the Tri-Cities

https://www.aau.edu/americas-leading-research-universities-numbers

https://www.aau.edu/sites/default/files/AAU-Files/Who-We-Are/AAU%20Member%20Universities%20listed%20by%20year_updated%202023.pdf

 

[95coug]

Sorry - the first thread was getting off track.

I was rooting around and stumbled across this.

So in the other thread, Schulz's "Drive to 25" initiative has failed. I referred to Elson Floyd's unsuccessful efforts to get WSU into the AAU. Which of course you all know as the Association of American Universities. The top research universities in the country.

So, Floyd failed. Did Schulz do better? Well let's see. Since Schulz became President in 2016, what universities have been invited? Not us.
ASU
U of Cal, Riverside
U of Cal, Santa Cruz
U of S. Florida
Utah
Dartmouth
George Washington U.
Tufts (?)
Miami
Notre Dame
Washington U. St Louis

For comparison, from 2006 to 2016 two universities were invited, and since 2006 two have been kicked out (Nebraska and Iowa State).

So, by this barometer WSU under Schulz has failed miserably. But I'm sure he will pick up the pace now that he has moved to the Tri-Cities

https://www.aau.edu/americas-leading-research-universities-numbers

https://www.aau.edu/sites/default/files/AAU-Files/Who-We-Are/AAU%20Member%20Universities%20listed%20by%20year_updated%202023.pdf

AAU has moved toward an emphasis on medical schools and associated research. Getting that accreditation without a strong medical school will be quite unlikely going forward.

Schulz’ initiative was always an unlikely goal. The top 25 research institutions don’t have that much turnover, and we had a big hill to climb. The reduction in funding from many of our bread & butter agencies & resources wasn’t within our control, and largely wasn’t foreseeable. Our lack of diversification made us vulnerable to that, but that’s always been an issue, and in some ways we’ve been limited in how much we could diversify (such as not being allowed to even have a med school before 2015).

So, yes…both goals you mention failed. But I wouldn’t pin those too firmly on the presidents.

 

[WillieThePimp]

Sorry - the first thread was getting off track.

I was rooting around and stumbled across this.

So in the other thread, Schulz's "Drive to 25" initiative has failed. I referred to Elson Floyd's unsuccessful efforts to get WSU into the AAU. Which of course you all know as the Association of American Universities. The top research universities in the country.

So, Floyd failed. Did Schulz do better? Well let's see. Since Schulz became President in 2016, what universities have been invited? Not us.
ASU
U of Cal, Riverside
U of Cal, Santa Cruz
U of S. Florida
Utah
Dartmouth
George Washington U.
Tufts (?)
Miami
Notre Dame
Washington U. St Louis

For comparison, from 2006 to 2016 two universities were invited, and since 2006 two have been kicked out (Nebraska and Iowa State).

So, by this barometer WSU under Schulz has failed miserably. But I'm sure he will pick up the pace now that he has moved to the Tri-Cities

https://www.aau.edu/americas-leading-research-universities-numbers

https://www.aau.edu/sites/default/files/AAU-Files/Who-We-Are/AAU%20Member%20Universities%20listed%20by%20year_updated%202023.pdf

this is extremely alarming;

• Losing 50% of our research faculty? While we continue to build new research and other buildings (don't forget declining enrollment)? What the F?

Was that in the letter? Is there a link to the full letter that’s not on Facebook ( only link I can find and I do not do Facebook)?

 

[Loyal Coug1]

this is extremely alarming;

• Losing 50% of our research faculty? While we continue to build new research and other buildings (don't forget declining enrollment)? What the F?

Was that in the letter? Is there a link to the full letter that’s not on Facebook ( only link I can find and I do not do Facebook)?

Haven't found the actual press release (letter). Here is the article:

WSU faculty call for new president, administration

Hundreds of WSU faculty members issued a press release Wednesday morning arguing for new leadership, including a new president, administration and board of regents. The group is concerned about the 16% decrease in enrollment numbers since President Kirk Schulz took his position in 2016...

dailyevergreen.com

 

[WillieThePimp]

Haven't found the actual press release (letter). Here is the article:

WSU faculty call for new president, administration

Hundreds of WSU faculty members issued a press release Wednesday morning arguing for new leadership, including a new president, administration and board of regents. The group is concerned about the 16% decrease in enrollment numbers since President Kirk Schulz took his position in 2016...

dailyevergreen.com

Thanks. There’s a link to the open letter on Facebook from the spokesman article;

Washington State University faculty members publish open letter calling on WSU President Kirk Schulz, other administrators to step down

A group of long-time professors is calling on Washington State University President Kirk Schulz and other university administrators to step down.

www.spokesman.com

 

[SaveFerris]

Sorry - the first thread was getting off track.

I was rooting around and stumbled across this.

So in the other thread, Schulz's "Drive to 25" initiative has failed. I referred to Elson Floyd's unsuccessful efforts to get WSU into the AAU. Which of course you all know as the Association of American Universities. The top research universities in the country.

So, Floyd failed. Did Schulz do better? Well let's see. Since Schulz became President in 2016, what universities have been invited? Not us.
ASU
U of Cal, Riverside
U of Cal, Santa Cruz
U of S. Florida
Utah
Dartmouth
George Washington U.
Tufts (?)
Miami
Notre Dame
Washington U. St Louis

For comparison, from 2006 to 2016 two universities were invited, and since 2006 two have been kicked out (Nebraska and Iowa State).

So, by this barometer WSU under Schulz has failed miserably. But I'm sure he will pick up the pace now that he has moved to the Tri-Cities

https://www.aau.edu/americas-leading-research-universities-numbers

https://www.aau.edu/sites/default/files/AAU-Files/Who-We-Are/AAU%20Member%20Universities%20listed%20by%20year_updated%202023.pdf

One thing with Floyd. We were basically somewhere in the middle of his vision when he had the reoccurrence of cancer. Who knows where he gets us if he didn’t pass away. It also seems likely he continued to push ahead with his vision rather than receive treatment that could have extended his life. Regardless, he passed before he was done.

Did he “fail”? IMO that doesn’t capture what he brought to WSU. He changed the law for the betterment of WSU and the state of Washington. We accomplished other things under his watch, but that alone is a an impressive legacy.

 

[Loyal Coug1]

One thing with Floyd. We were basically somewhere in the middle of his vision when he had the reoccurrence of cancer. Who knows where he gets us if he didn’t pass away. It also seems likely he continued to push ahead with his vision rather than receive treatment that could have extended his life. Regardless, he passed before he was done.

Did he “fail”? IMO that doesn’t capture what he brought to WSU. He changed the law for the betterment of WSU and the state of Washington. We accomplished other things under his watch, but that alone is a an impressive legacy.

I did not intend to speak bad about Floyd. I worked 2 notches down from the guy. I guess my point was that he was engaged in pursuing AAU status, a worthy venture somewhat parroted by "drive to 25". Instead why not continue the AAU quest? Floyd did get the Medical School pushed through while damn near on his deathbed. Regardless of whether some of us approve of it or not, it was a helluva lift.

 

[Loyal Coug1]

Thanks. There’s a link to the open letter on Facebook from the spokesman article;

Washington State University faculty members publish open letter calling on WSU President Kirk Schulz, other administrators to step down

A group of long-time professors is calling on Washington State University President Kirk Schulz and other university administrators to step down.

www.spokesman.com

View embedded media

Thanks Willie. The letter is pretty damning - even harsher than the news reports.

 

[95coug]

Thanks. There’s a link to the open letter on Facebook from the spokesman article;

Washington State University faculty members publish open letter calling on WSU President Kirk Schulz, other administrators to step down

A group of long-time professors is calling on Washington State University President Kirk Schulz and other university administrators to step down.

www.spokesman.com

View embedded media

#1 - Faculty. If we’d risen to #22, some of them would still find a reason to complain. I find it telling that 204 faculty members (permanent? Tenure track? Adjunct?) didn’t sign, and the 3 who did used their personal e-mails rather than their official ones.
#2 - Their complaints pretty much only look at the bare surface of the issues they’re bitching about. There’s little looking beneath the surface to see if these are truly local systemic failures. A lot of the things they mention are being seen across higher education, it’s not just WSU.
#3 - the US News rankings are well known and easily referenced…but they’re not really a good ranking source. The scope, scale, and criteria change every year.
#4 - their complaint about all campuses giving a WSU degree has no basis. That’s not a change, that’s how it’s been. Academically, it’s a single system. Operationally, they’re separate. Which leads into…
#5 - I agree, funds and resources should be distributed more proportionally. Right now, allocations go to Pullman. They take most of them and dole out some crumbs to where they think they should go…and then they tax the amounts they dole out. The regional campuses are largely supported by their own tuition dollars (which Pullman also taxes), and then when the campus spends those funds, Pullman levies fees for vaguely defined “administrative support.” This should be fixed, because Pullman now takes more than their share.
#6 - all of that being said, “OneWSU” is stupid. It’s really just a cover for forcing everyone to do what Pullman does…whether it fits or not…so that Pullman can charge more fees.

 

[Loyal Coug1]

#1 - Faculty. If we’d risen to #22, some of them would still find a reason to complain. I find it telling that 204 faculty members (permanent? Tenure track? Adjunct?) didn’t sign, and the 3 who did used their personal e-mails rather than their official ones.
#2 - Their complaints pretty much only look at the bare surface of the issues they’re bitching about. There’s little looking beneath the surface to see if these are truly local systemic failures. A lot of the things they mention are being seen across higher education, it’s not just WSU.
#3 - the US News rankings are well known and easily referenced…but they’re not really a good ranking source. The scope, scale, and criteria change every year.
#4 - their complaint about all campuses giving a WSU degree has no basis. That’s not a change, that’s how it’s been. Academically, it’s a single system. Operationally, they’re separate. Which leads into…
#5 - I agree, funds and resources should be distributed more proportionally. Right now, allocations go to Pullman. They take most of them and dole out some crumbs to where they think they should go…and then they tax the amounts they dole out. The regional campuses are largely supported by their own tuition dollars (which Pullman also taxes), and then when the campus spends those funds, Pullman levies fees for vaguely defined “administrative support.” This should be fixed, because Pullman now takes more than their share.
#6 - all of that being said, “OneWSU” is stupid. It’s really just a cover for forcing everyone to do what Pullman does…whether it fits or not…so that Pullman can charge more fees.

How long have you worked for the WSU Media Relations office? Signing with personal e-mails is standard fare - to do otherwise would risk "use of WSU resources for personal reasons". The guys did say that many faculty are not tenured and fear retribution - a real and existing concern.

 

[Observer11]

Academics hate admins. Tale as old as time.

There’s a lot to hate. But nothing new.

 

[Loyal Coug1]

Academics hate admins. Tale as old as time.

There’s a lot to hate. But nothing new.

Well this is true. But sometimes they are correct in their bitching.

• Have we really lost almost 50% of our research faculty? That's easily vetted. Someone needs to do that
• This BS about Schulz moving to the TC to be with his wife? This is absolutely wrong. Regardless of anything else, a firing offense. The Regents and their nambly pambly defense of the status quo should not stand. But it will because there is no oversight. Is Inslee going to fire the BOR? Is that even possible?
• Vacating the President's house and letting the Provost/Pullman Chancellor move in? WTF? And moving your office downtown - which you will never be in anyway because you live 130 miles away at I believe our next to smallest branch campus. Really?
• This Chancellor and Provost, as panned and dissected correctly by the Professors in their letter, seems like a nice lady. But her background (anthropology) at an Ag/Vet Med/Engineering/Comm, etc. land-grant university? Really? Then you put her in charge of Athletics for what - 2 years? Really? Then you make her Pullman Chancellor? Really?Go look at her Vita
• Provost and Chancellor combined? Let me explain. The Provost represents the Academic side of the house (uh like why WSU exists). As opposed to the rest of Executive Administration, who are, well. allegedly administrators. By being both, she basically shits on academics and all these allegedly whiny professors.
• And Administration? Oh my F-ing Gawd. I have to stop now, because as I look at the bloated and nonsensical org charts at WSU, with associate Vice Presidents and Vice Provosts and Executive Directors right and left, quite a few of whom I know personally, I want to puke. Not that they are bad people, but shit when your university is shrinking, and your administration is being increased and elevated, while academics is being cut, what do you say? And it is the "go along to get along", and "just hang out and kiss ass" mentality that allows decent but not stellar mid-level staff to become these AVP's and Executive whatever's, doing the same or less than more reasonably titled staff would do. Often the same people. At way more money

Yes Schulz is a disaster. And we are stuck with him.

 

[Wazzubrooz]

I’m ready to move on from our so-called leadership. They are incompetent and have earned being canned.

 

[95coug]

How long have you worked for the WSU Media Relations office? Signing with personal e-mails is standard fare - to do otherwise would risk "use of WSU resources for personal reasons". The guys did say that many faculty are not tenured and fear retribution - a real and existing concern.

If I’m writing a message in my official capacity, about my official concerns with my official position….I'm using my official e-mail address. This isn’t personal.

Besides, WSU shifted gears a couple years ago and said all communication has to be through WSU e-mail addresses. They won’t even send students messages on personal accounts anymore. It’s all @wsu.edu.

I definitely understand the fear of retribution, and I expect that they’ll see it. But if you’re going so far as to say that the president and the regents need to be replaced, it’s time to put on your big boy pants and sign your name. Especially if you’re signing with 200+ others…it’ll be pretty easy to show if retribution occurs.

 

[95coug]

Well this is true. But sometimes they are correct in their bitching.

• Have we really lost almost 50% of our research faculty? That's easily vetted. Someone needs to do that
• This BS about Schulz moving to the TC to be with his wife? This is absolutely wrong. Regardless of anything else, a firing offense. The Regents and their nambly pambly defense of the status quo should not stand. But it will because there is no oversight. Is Inslee going to fire the BOR? Is that even possible?
• Vacating the President's house and letting the Provost/Pullman Chancellor move in? WTF? And moving your office downtown - which you will never be in anyway because you live 130 miles away at I believe our next to smallest branch campus. Really?
• This Chancellor and Provost, as panned and dissected correctly by the Professors in their letter, seems like a nice lady. But her background (anthropology) at an Ag/Vet Med/Engineering/Comm, etc. land-grant university? Really? Then you put her in charge of Athletics for what - 2 years? Really? Then you make her Pullman Chancellor? Really?Go look at her Vita
• Provost and Chancellor combined? Let me explain. The Provost represents the Academic side of the house (uh like why WSU exists). As opposed to the rest of Executive Administration, who are, well. allegedly administrators. By being both, she basically shits on academics and all these allegedly whiny professors.
• And Administration? Oh my F-ing Gawd. I have to stop now, because as I look at the bloated and nonsensical org charts at WSU, with associate Vice Presidents and Vice Provosts and Executive Directors right and left, quite a few of whom I know personally, I want to puke. Not that they are bad people, but shit when your university is shrinking, and your administration is being increased and elevated, while academics is being cut, what do you say? And it is the "go along to get along", and "just hang out and kiss ass" mentality that allows decent but not stellar mid-level staff to become these AVP's and Executive whatever's, doing the same or less than more reasonably titled staff would do. Often the same people. At way more money

Yes Schulz is a disaster. And we are stuck with him.

• Not sure about the 50% number. Seems high, but could be padded by some of those low end “research associate” positions that are technically faculty but don’t teach and aren’t leading PIs. There’s also been a lot of longstanding faculty who have retired or moved to emeritus, and whose shoes are tough to fill.
• I don’t get this one. Word was that Schulz bought a house in Spokane after the med school started, and when the Pullman chancellor position was created word was he had a condo in Seattle to be closer to the alumni mass and to Olympia. My assumption at this point is that he’s planning to retire and let her bring home the bacon.
• Also don’t get the move downtown…especially when combined with the move to Richland. He doesn’t need a suite, he needs a landing space. I can tell you he does not have an office in Tri-Cities. Vacating the president’s house makes sense in the context of their restructuring…but the restructuring doesn’t really make sense.
• The Chancellor/provost thing was supposed to be temporary, and they were going to hire a new provost. Not sure what happened with that. The two positions really shouldn’t be in the same office, much less in the same head. Conflicts are unavoidable.
• The administrative bloat is my biggest issue. The sheer number of positions created for the sake of having a position is mind boggling, and far too many of them have no real function or responsibility. But they all have staffs and assistants doing things to prop them up.

 

[Loyal Coug1]

If I’m writing a message in my official capacity, about my official concerns with my official position….I'm using my official e-mail address. This isn’t personal.

Besides, WSU shifted gears a couple years ago and said all communication has to be through WSU e-mail addresses. They won’t even send students messages on personal accounts anymore. It’s all @wsu.edu.

I definitely understand the fear of retribution, and I expect that they’ll see it. But if you’re going so far as to say that the president and the regents need to be replaced, it’s time to put on your big boy pants and sign your name. Especially if you’re signing with 200+ others…it’ll be pretty easy to show if retribution occurs.

Wait a minute. So you accept that retribution will occur, but you think that these scared non-tenured profs should throw themselves out there anyway? And when retribution (denial of tenure, which I think is BS anyway - tenure that is) occurs, and they have just blackballed themselves to other universities, that is putting their big boy pants on?

I'm a bit confused. And 95 - do you work for WSU? While I try to stay anonymous, I did work there for 17 years. You seem to have a lot of insight that only a WSU employee would have. Not trying to out you at all - I certainly don't want to be outed - but your perspectives seem close to (WSU) home.

I have an Elson Floyd story. So back when "they" shoved through this I think $10 million project to astroturf the playfields down on Valley Road, using student fee reserves, there was backlash. Mainly campus folks that pointed to a student survey that indicated that students didn't think the playfields were that bad and didn't need this major overhaul. With their money.

So, as a father of a student at the time, and a WSU employee, I corresponded with one of the instigators on my WSU e-mail, expressing my agreement with their position "as a father of a student, not in my WSU capacity".

Well a couple of days later I was called out of a meeting by Dr. Floyd by phone, who chewed my ass bigtime and basically threatened my job for disagreeing with what turned out to be a pet project of his. "Do you want to be a father or a WSU employee?" I think is how he put it.

Edit - missed your just posted message - I was typing....

 

[95coug]

Wait a minute. So you accept that retribution will occur, but you think that these scared non-tenured profs should throw themselves out there anyway? And when retribution (denial of tenure, which I think is BS anyway - tenure that is) occurs, and they have just blackballed themselves to other universities, that is putting their big boy pants on?

I'm a bit confused. And 95 - do you work for WSU? While I try to stay anonymous, I did work there for 17 years. You seem to have a lot of insight that only a WSU employee would have. Not trying to out you at all - I certainly don't want to be outed - but your perspectives seem close to (WSU) home.

I have an Elson Floyd story. So back when "they" shoved through this I think $10 million project to astroturf the playfields down on Valley Road, using student fee reserves, there was backlash. Mainly campus folks that pointed to a student survey that indicated that students didn't think the playfields were that bad and didn't need this major overhaul. With their money.

So, as a father of a student at the time, and a WSU employee, I corresponded with one of the instigators on my WSU e-mail, expressing my agreement with their position "as a father of a student, not in my WSU capacity".

Well a couple of days later I was called out of a meeting by Dr. Floyd by phone, who chewed my ass bigtime and basically threatened my job for disagreeing with what turned out to be a pet project of his. "Do you want to be a father or a WSU employee?" I think is how he put it.

Edit - missed your just posted message - I was typing....

I think if you feel strongly enough about an issue to take a public position, you should be willing to put your name on it. It’s got more credibility that way. You’ve got to be prepared for the fallout though - and if you’re denied tenure (for example) be prepared to show that it was a case of retribution. You’re right though - tenure is completely BS.

14 years.

Story I heard about the playfields was that there were questions about whether the fee still needed to be collected, since there was so much money in the account…so it needed to get spent. No idea if that’s true.

You made that one easy for them, by using your university e-mail and saying in it that you weren’t communicating in an official capacity.

In the end, I take a pretty dim view of any complaints from faculty. Many of them are quite well compensated for very little return, and are practically bulletproof due to tenure. But they know that they can make the administration jump over the slightest concerns, and they take advantage of that. I think this particular faculty message has some very fundamental merit, but they have little actual knowledge or understanding of the issues they’re complaining about (again, not unusual for faculty). They’ve put far more effort into voicing their perception of deficiencies than they have into actually understanding the problem…and of course suggest the most radical solutions, because that’s what they always do.

 

[Loyal Coug1]

In the end, I take a pretty dim view of any complaints from faculty. Many of them are quite well compensated for very little return, and are practically bulletproof due to tenure. But they know that they can make the administration jump over the slightest concerns, and they take advantage of that. I think this particular faculty message has some very fundamental merit, but they have little actual knowledge or understanding of the issues they’re complaining about (again, not unusual for faculty). They’ve put far more effort into voicing their perception of deficiencies than they have into actually understanding the problem…and of course suggest the most radical solutions, because that’s what they always do.

Yeah I share much of the same about faculty. That said, I also think that there is and has always been a serious lack of full disclosure and transparency (particularly for public institutions) in Higher Ed. And I speak not just about WSU, I have worked elsewhere as well. Kinda the same drill - we know best, you don't need to be privy to the truth. So if there is little actual knowledge of the issues, how much of that is because the data and facts are hidden from view? Back to my alma mater - for example Institutional Research used to be a wealth of online knowledge and data. Now? A shadow of its former self. Administrative CYA and go along and line your pockets by doing so. This notion that Faculty and staff are prohibited from contacting Regents about anything is, well, kinda un-American IMHO.

I left WSU for another job on my terms. But I will tell you that it sickened me for all those years. Coming out of the private sector, I chafed under the yoke of that place - and found out after that it is everywhere in Higher Ed.

 

[95coug]

Yeah I share much of the same about faculty. That said, I also think that there is and has always been a serious lack of full disclosure and transparency (particularly for public institutions) in Higher Ed. And I speak not just about WSU, I have worked elsewhere as well. Kinda the same drill - we know best, you don't need to be privy to the truth. So if there is little actual knowledge of the issues, how much of that is because the data and facts are hidden from view? Back to my alma mater - for example Institutional Research used to be a wealth of online knowledge and data. Now? A shadow of its former self. Administrative CYA and go along and line your pockets by doing so. This notion that Faculty and staff are prohibited from contacting Regents about anything is, well, kinda un-American IMHO.

I left WSU for another job on my terms. But I will tell you that it sickened me for all those years. Coming out of the private sector, I chafed under the yoke of that place - and found out after that it is everywhere in Higher Ed.

The prevailing attitude in WSU admin seems to be that if we say “transparent” enough times, people will believe that we are.

 

[Stretch 74]

The prevailing attitude in WSU admin seems to be that if we say “transparent” enough times, people will believe that we are.

That sounds like Karin Grey Poupon. Transparent, top priority, attention, working hard-all go to lines for her.