tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30130444.post116472562805379998..comments2024-02-16T09:00:32.845-06:00Comments on FromDC2Iowa: UI President Search IXUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger10125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30130444.post-1166192602848350532006-12-15T08:23:00.000-06:002006-12-15T08:23:00.000-06:00I was intrigued by the "DC 2 Iowa" title because I...I was intrigued by the "DC 2 Iowa" title because I believe it reflects a larger problem with presidential searches than simply UI. Consider the Gallaudet search which was a fiasco. Another DC area search at Montgomery College, two year community college, was conducted by the same search firm that did Gallaudet's; two of the final candidates withdrew, leaving the "last man standing" as the Board's "choice"--but not the faculty's. Is there a major disconnect between Board and their colleges? Are search firms, especially those with ties to an institution, the best way to find a college president??Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30130444.post-1164844419941439202006-11-29T17:53:00.000-06:002006-11-29T17:53:00.000-06:00Another problem is the response of the Faculty Sen...Another problem is the response of the Faculty Senate. To add to the secretive nature of the presidential search process, the senators most involved with the search are clamming up. They discouraged open communication at the Faculty Senate meeting.<BR/><BR/>So this is what a public university has come down to? Secrets, deals,and handshakes behind closed doors.<BR/><BR/>God bless the public and the students, and the teachers, because apparently they are mindless debit-card carrying sheep to be led by the paternalistic leadership.<BR/><BR/>God bless those public servants who use the public monies to conduct secret business.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30130444.post-1164844072007126172006-11-29T17:47:00.000-06:002006-11-29T17:47:00.000-06:00Again, one of the Anon's here.I don't think we sho...Again, one of the Anon's here.<BR/><BR/>I don't think we should dismiss out of hand, the business aspect of a university. Although I am a business idiot, we have to face it that athletics, health care, and some other things are a 'business'. There is no going back.<BR/><BR/>Having said that, I agree that times have changed a great deal. In many ways, academia is somewhat bogus. You point out some of the ways the various departments here fight for dollars. <BR/>- departments in the hospital open duplicate services, to steal each others business, in a struggle to survive.<BR/>- tuition increases as 'face time' for real professors decreases<BR/>- advisors for students are often vacuous, leaving students baffled about the application of their education, leaving them with a large debt, and no career<BR/><BR/>Now is a time for real leadership to assert itself to lead the Univ of Iowa to something better. Dynamic, energetic, creative leadership.<BR/><BR/>This is a time when there should be sessions for students and faculty and the community to meet the candidates to ask them serious quiestions about serious issues.<BR/><BR/>Rather than a dynamic search process, we get a coup to replace a health-industry unfriendly president with a friendly president. That is so disappointing it hurts.<BR/><BR/>Look at our current Board of Regents. Other than the obvious ties to Wellmark, not that many of them have actual educations in Iowa colleges, or ties to Iowa campuses.<BR/><BR/>You are going to tell me Ruth Harkin who hasn't lived here in 20 years is an effective Regent? That Gartner is in touch with the issues in Ames, Cedar Falls, and Iowa City? Wahlert has no Iowa school on her resume.<BR/><BR/>Downer does. And Connelly does.<BR/><BR/>The Univ of Iowa will live thru this crisis. Wellmark will get some kind of deal with the UIHC, although maybe not the sweetheart deal they want, to skim off profits. But I come to a couple conclusions:<BR/><BR/>1. Why doesn't Wallmark just be honest with people, instead of trying to stack the board. Now they have proven themselves to be devious and manipulative. I would say they deserve some tighter regulation.<BR/><BR/>2. And Vilsack has proven he is not a visionary leader. He is unable to manage a critical part of his responsibility to the state, that is the state's trust that he keep an INTELLECTUALLY HONEST educational system.<BR/><BR/>Vilsack and the Regents can try damage control as much as they wish. People in the state who are paying attention will not forget this episode.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30130444.post-1164753025631142242006-11-28T16:30:00.000-06:002006-11-28T16:30:00.000-06:00Anon 2,I agree that the "big" cash cow is the UIHC...Anon 2,<BR/><BR/>I agree that the "big" cash cow is the UIHC and that is perhaps indeed what gets the Regents drooling.<BR/><BR/>However, there are many other, admittedly smaller considerations. And they add up. <BR/><BR/>The UI, in general, has become more "business like", using more marketing approaches to recruitment, entering in exclusive contracts, lavishing $$$ on high-profile ventures, curtailing course offerings because of low student-to-faculty ratios (i.e., unprofitable courses), and putting more pressure on faculty to get grants. While the UI gets more top-heavy with administrators, those administrators really love grants -- and their F&A monies.<BR/><BR/>Finally, there has been a general push for various support organizations within the UI to act as their own "profit centers", which results in shifting work loads on to someone else. Example: anyone who's traveled on business knows that the UI travel office now requires the traveler to do a lot more the work that the travel office used to do. That's cost shifing. Another example: cut-backs on secretarial support. So staff and faculty end up doing a lot more piddly crap than they did 30 years ago. <BR/><BR/>My point is that the Regent debacle might concern the UIHC, but there is also this slow transformation of the university away from its roots. Building new buildings and sucking up to the sports behemoth doesn't necessarily advance the educational mission, but they seem to be perennial top priorities. These priorities do little to attract dedicated teachers and honest, smart researchers. The UI should, of course, run on budget, but should shun the "profit center" notion.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30130444.post-1164748884339069162006-11-28T15:21:00.000-06:002006-11-28T15:21:00.000-06:00Anon 1,This is Anon 2. Thank you for your elabora...Anon 1,<BR/><BR/>This is Anon 2. Thank you for your elaborations. It is ashame that we don't have more concerned entities out there to <BR/><BR/>(1) further investigate and document this entanglement of interests and<BR/><BR/>(2) inform the public as to what's at stake here.<BR/><BR/>I've been disappointed at the Press-Citizen's non-investigative stance during this time.<BR/><BR/><BR/>It seems that "our" standard of living is so high that "we" tend to get lazy about defending and supporting worthwhile ventures. Higher education is one such venture. Many smart people are attracted to university environments NOT to make big bucks, but to pursue intellectual puzzles and share knowledge. Yes, that sounds idealistic, but I personally know that that is a real component of some academics and researchers.<BR/><BR/>Since the Reagan era, there has been a tremendous emphasis on "co-modifying" everything -- seeing every venture as a potential money maker. <BR/><BR/>If that notion is applied to higher education, we will destroy the essential, unique, element of better institutions and we will be teaching our children not the value of learning but the value of making a buck. (sigh).Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30130444.post-1164748188602600372006-11-28T15:09:00.000-06:002006-11-28T15:09:00.000-06:00Anonymous #1 here:1. Google 'Debra Freund' and you...Anonymous #1 here:<BR/><BR/>1. Google 'Debra Freund' and you will see that she was involved in searches as UCLA and Arizona. Those searches, like most, are held out in the open, somewhat. There are early confidential sessions, but once it gets down to 4 or 6, usually there are extentive sessions with students and faculty. I was amazed that people expected a president to be named without any sessions in Iowa City.<BR/><BR/>2. The Univ of Iowa is not a cash cow. This is an important point. Do the Regents give a hoot who runs Home EC, or History, or Spanish? Well, yeah, but they are not that interested.<BR/><BR/>The 'cash cow' or the business is the UIHC. Since the onset of managed care, a huge economic issue is the financing and delivery of health care. One of the largest businesses in the state is Wellmark. Wellmark NEEDS UIHC like a baby needs milk. Because of the demographics of Iowa, a UIHC dominates health care unlike almost every other academic center in the country. Therefore the IUHC is critical to Wellmark, as well as a sweetheart deal with the UIHC.<BR/><BR/>The Principal can live without U of I. John Deere can live without the U of I. Aegon and Maytag (LOL) don't need the U of I.<BR/><BR/>Would it matter to Des Moines businessmen who is President of the U of I if there were no UIHC? No, and they would think it would be a pointy-head academic anyway.<BR/><BR/>However, the inclusion of a dominant medical center, when health care is a huge industry, then makes who is U of I President important, and important to money men.<BR/><BR/>3. Google 'Wellmark' and 'UIHC'. Check out the stories. 'Contentious' would be a mild word to use.<BR/><BR/>25% of the UIHC's revenues comes from Wellmark. Wellmark did set reimbursement rates without input or negotiation in the past. When former President Skorton objected to this, he was faught by Regent's members Forsyth (supposedly recused) and Neil. Later Skorton was run off by the Board of Regents (including former Wellmark board member Wahlert, and Arbisser, husband of Wellmark board member arbisser), and the 'friend of the industry', Gartner.<BR/><BR/>The conclusion is that the coup against Skorton is not complete until a health-industry favored president is installed at U of Iowa. <BR/><BR/>The condition in which such a president will be choosen needs secrecy, and influence from Wellmark on the Board of Regents.<BR/><BR/>Both have been established.<BR/><BR/>Gov Vilsack, and Iowa Govt should be ashamed of their role in this duplicity.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30130444.post-1164744825901893202006-11-28T14:13:00.000-06:002006-11-28T14:13:00.000-06:00I've never been terribly impressed with Vilsack (c...I've never been terribly impressed with Vilsack (can you think of anything positive that he's done while in office?).<BR/><BR/>But this debacle is the last straw. Not only should the Regents be "dissolved", but Vilsack, in the interest of not embarrassing his political party, should give up on his quixotic race to the Presidency.<BR/><BR/>Tom: Wellmark should not control UIHC and you should not try to be prez.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30130444.post-1164744369286529452006-11-28T14:06:00.000-06:002006-11-28T14:06:00.000-06:00It seems to me that the real issue that needs to b...It seems to me that the real issue that needs to be brought out is the role of Wellmark and of people from the Board of Regents and their involvement.<BR/><BR/>I want to know, what was the reasoning for not giving Skorton the 5% raise the ISU and UNI presidents got? One regent has come forward and basically said this involved Wellmark. <BR/><BR/>Now they are talking of dusting off an eliminated position to provide political cover?<BR/><BR/>I am sorry to say that nothing will do in this case but a total change in the regents. Including Bob Downer whom I respect a great deal. Appearance becomes reality. Give the interim president an extension and let the new governor name a new Board of Regents, totally free of Wellmark connections, and let them do a new process. I know this is not perfect, but sadly I can't see another way to do it.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30130444.post-1164742998012504082006-11-28T13:43:00.000-06:002006-11-28T13:43:00.000-06:00I'm wondering how frequent it is for a major unive...I'm wondering how frequent it is for a major university to:<BR/><BR/>1) have its presidential search conducted in secrecy and <BR/><BR/>2) conduct interviews off campus? I am assuming no finalists was even given a tour of the very facility that he/she would lead. Certainly the candidates were never exposed to the general faculty, student body, or general public.<BR/><BR/>Given the fact that state is providing less and less support to the UI, it is troubling that the Regents/Vilsac want to exert ever increasing control. Seems like they see the UI as a cash cow (or even a source of personal wealth?)<BR/><BR/>I wish more faculty members would speak out. They are among the most protected class of employees. It'd be nice to see that privilege (tenured freedom) exercised at this time when the UI is being threatened.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-30130444.post-1164732497748893292006-11-28T10:48:00.000-06:002006-11-28T10:48:00.000-06:00Interesting comments.Just consider this entire pro...Interesting comments.<BR/><BR/>Just consider this entire process as a coup. This is one episode. The coup dumped the offending President, David Skorton. The coup has not been completed.<BR/><BR/>If you follow this analogy, the pieces start to fit into place.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com