Friday, January 30, 2015

Response to "Save South Central College Individual Concerns"

In my view, there are some legitimate concerns expressed in the articles on the "Save South Central College" site. However, there are also numerous errors and misconceptions which need to be corrected. As a faculty member and Department Chair at SCC, I'd like to offer my perspective.
No Support for Immigrant Students
I know that there has been little to no support with this administration in working with the growing immigrant community and in helping them be prepared for college unless it is to train them for manufacturing jobs … Now the classes supporting these classes have been cut with no other option available.
This is greatly overstated. There are numerous immigrant students enrolled at SCC in readiness classes, liberal arts courses and technical programs. Although it's true that two EAP (English for Academic Purposes) courses were canceled this semester due to low enrollment, it doesn't follow that SCC provides “little to no support” for immigrant students. Also, the claim that “the only employees protected ... are those who support the administration without question” is simply false. I've criticized the administration very explicitly in the past, as have several other faculty members whose jobs are not in jeopardy.
Fear and Intimidation through Job Terminations
Of the 40 or so individuals included in the list of employees who were “fired or forced to leave or who have left because of deplorable conditions,” at least eight are still teaching at the college. One was not retained because of credentialing issues, and three others retired. Four of the staff members listed are still working at SCC, and five left for better positions elsewhere. Four were let go because they were deemed ineffective at their job (a view which was widely held). Although I'm not familiar with the circumstances regarding several of the others, I'm only aware of actual controversy surrounding the exit of three individuals—7.5% of the total. This hardly seem scandalous.
South Central College and Accreditation: Storms on the Horizon?
Who is doing it now? You want the short and long answer? A consultant living in West Virginia is doing our reporting to HLC for us. 
This “consultant” has worked at SCC for many years and was/is a valued employee. She agreed to continue part time in that position after moving with her family.
We had an administrator who was an HLC Peer Reviewer. This means that he traveled around the country reviewing other colleges accreditation efforts. He was an invaluable resource that Annette Parker chose to ostracize, misuse, and ultimately terminate for no reason. Well, other than the fact that Jay hated him. Historians. What can you do? 
Although I have concerns about how and why Dean Fors was let go, he and the administration had serious differences of opinion which made if difficult for him to continue in his position. The claim that he was terminated because “Jay hated him” is flatly false. For the record, it's common for new college presidents to get rid of all administrators and start fresh. Dr. Fors was retained for a year and a half because of his impressive record and support from many of the faculty members he supervised.
Hiring Issues
Only the President will make all hiring decisions from now on – from the janitors, to the faulty to the Deans and Vice Presidents. The hiring committees can only recommend three candidates and if she doesn’t like those three she will go through the pool of applicants and choose her own or fail the search. It has been made very clear that no one has the authority but her. 
The college President has *always* possessed this authority—it's in the contract. He or she decides what role (if any) hiring committees will play in the process, and procedures vary greatly among MNSCU institutions.  That said, SCC recently hired the Math instructor who was recommended by the search committee.
Leadership Lacking Ability
Low enrollment, programs offering certifications in fields you don't need them in, money poured into Faribault campus that's non-existent …. 
Enrollment at SCC is down 3% compared to last Spring, which is less than the drop at almost every other college in the system. If we are in fact offering certifications in fields that don't require them, I doubt we'll do so very long—students won't pay certifications they don't need! The money spent on Faribault was dictated by a bonding bill submitted by the previous President, Keith Stover. Dr. Parker has proposed a comparable investment in the North Mankato campus.
Reflections from the Cellblock
History dictates that the easiest way to overcome an enemy is to divide and conquer. Well, we are divided, and we may be conquered because of it.
 If this is true, it's because of personal attacks like those launched by “Georgia Fayne” and unfounded accusations leveled against the union. I find it quite ironic that she (or he) claims to be “the quiet one on the row” and proceeds to criticize me, Jay and Peter for discussing our coworkers “in belittling and disparaging fashions.” What, exactly, is “Georgia” doing? At least I have the courage to state my position forthrightly instead of posting anonymous and inaccurate rants.
Jay spent a good amount of our fall union meetings defending Annette Parker and her administration’s actions at union meetings … Annette also gave him power (or a feeling of power) by 'including' him on some decisions, such as which administrative personnel had to go.
As explained in my comments at the bottom of this page, the union has repeatedly and successfully challenged the administration. Should faculty representatives *not* be included in decisions? Were we better off under the previous administration, when faculty requests (like the reinstatement of Department Chairs) were routinely ignored? If the majority of the faculty are dissatisfied with Jay and Darci's leadership, they can be removed with a two-thirds vote of union members. If she (or he) is confident that most faculty agree with her, I'd encourage “Georgia” to pursue this course of action and stand for President herself (or himself). Will faculty be better served by an intransigent representative who assumes the worst about Dr. Parker's motivations and regards her as the enemy? I sincerely doubt it.
Jay, who was rarely on campus before, was suddenly on campus every day and was actively talking to members, preaching the religion of Annette. 
As union President, Jay walks around campus speaking to the faculty members he represents. Should he remain in his office instead? Should he actively disparage Dr. Parker because a small number of faculty hold very negative opinions of her? Again, if “Georgia” is convinced that the “disgruntled minority” (in my terms, the “radical fringe”) actually constitute the majority, I encourage her (or him) to step up and lead instead of sniping from the sidelines. Please, have the courage of your convictions and stand behind your statements.
One last thing to discuss, which again was something I silently took umbrage to, was our grievance rep’s statement at our last meeting regarding the need to work together and get along with administration. That is fine, until you become a union rep. Your job is not to 'get along' as this can lead to compromises that should not be reached. Your job is to represent faculty members in the manner befitting the contract and the union member’s wishes ... Why haven’t grievances been filed?  Because the rank and file membership feels you are too 'chummy' with administrators and would not be a strong advocate on their behalf. 
This misrepresents what Diann (the grievance rep) actually said: she was encouraging unity among the faculty. Grievances have, in fact, been filed. Moreover, faculty only have themselves to blame if the administration violated the contract in ways which affect them and they've failed to approach Diann because they assume she's too “chummy” with administrators. Many faculty members have, in fact, gone to Diann for assistance and feel that she was very supportive.
Student Concern:
For any potential students considering attending SCC . . . save your money, time and a lot of headaches and find another secondary education institution ... The campus is rife with misinformation, poor planning and program accreditation questions. Zero leadership and plenty of lies. Walk the halls, talk to people if you can find them, and you will discover why nobody's around. 
Although I respect this student's opinion, I think it's been influenced far more by the rhetoric of the “radical fringe” than the reality of what's happening at SCC. We have real problems, which I summarize in my comments below. But SCC remains a strong institution with faculty, staff and administrators who are committed to the success of students.

No comments: