SACS contradicts Hobbs and CastellFaculty got an ear full yesterday during the first day of the Faculty Planning Conference-- "Institutional Effectiveness, Assessment and Accountability." The opening State of the University address was much ado about nothing. Initially, Castell wanted to bring in a $25,000 motivation speaker to motivate our cadre of faculty to be all they can be. The highlights of yesterday's events are the sessions chaired by the UFF and held at the Faculty Clubhouse and the keynote speech by Dr. Belle Wheelan, President, SACS Commission on Colleges. Dr. Wheelan answered some very key questions regarding FAMU's reaffirmation process and hopefully Castell, Debra and Vivian were listening. The reaffirmation process is a self-study that is faculty driven. Repeat, the reaffirmation process is a self-study that is faculty driven. Faculty develop the provisions for satisfying peer's ability to teach. Secondly, Dr. Wheelan verified that SACS will not look at one single transcript. This is the responsibility of a faculty driven process. However, SACS does have provisions that allow SACS to look at the credentials of senior administrations, i.e., president and chief academic officer, the provost.
In other news, Marty Khan, director of internal audit, University of North Florida should be picking up the investigation that deposed IG Michael Brown.
Belle Wheelan? Hmmmm former President of Northern Virginia Community College?
ReplyDeleteHmmm......, with a PhD to boot and real experience in higher education.
ReplyDeleteLicensed to lead; Dr. Belle S. Wheelan, former president of Northern Virginia Community College, leads Virginia's Department of Education - Special report: women in higher education - Interview
Black Issues in Higher Education, March 28, 2002
Dr. Belle S. Wheelan had been president of Northern Virginia Community College, the second largest community college in the nation, since 1998 when she was tapped in December by the newly elected Democratic governor of Virginia, Mark R. Warner, to serve as the commonwealth's secretary of education. Six years earlier, when named president of Central Virginia Community College in Lynchburg, Va., Wheelan became the first African American woman to serve as president of a two- or four-year public institution of higher education in the commonwealth of Virginia.
"Belle's energy and willingness to build bridges between the worlds of business and education impressed me greatly," said Warner at the time of Wheelan's appointment. "She has taken Northern Virginia by storm over the past three years with her enthusiasm, energy and ability to get the job done."
Shortly after her appointment, Black Issues Editor in Chief Frank Matthews spoke with Wheelan at her Northern Virginia Community College (NOVA) office.
Posters, please do not mislead the masses who werent in attendance at the speech. I'm no blind follower of the current administration, but I must admit that one thing that Dr. Wheelen said to Dr. Tucker scared me. She said that all it takes is for ONE teacher to be out of compliance, ONE, and the accreditation could be in jepoardy.
ReplyDeleteAlso, dont mislead the massses on her definition of "peer driven" She specifically said that the peers are drawn from institutions with similar missions (she was not commenting on the internal process that has been discussed to death on this board concerning the university-wide SACS team and the indivdual deans who must review the SACS teams findings. The "peers" that she referred to are the site visitors who will determine whether our teachers are in compliance. It is good that we have time to let some faculty get their houses in order, because i dont think that forty or more folks are going to cut the "alternative credential" requirement, especially when the example that she gave was Nikki Giovanni teaching English at Virginia Tech, with a B.A. (She is internationally famous).
Dr. Wheelen did not come close to suggesting that alternative credentialling is easy, in fact, she said that the university has to be able to justify any alternative credentials to the independent site review team. I find it hard to believe that 40 or more folks are going to be able to be justified. Therefore, I hope that the list of those who are in question is quickly distributed by the Deans so that those who are in question can take some classes to get up to speed.
I misspelled jeopardy, forgive me
ReplyDeleteI hope that Da Insider is a Cookman graduate, because if he/she is writing from having heard Dr. Wheelen personally, then he/she needs remedial comprehension classes. I was at the meeting and I heard Dr. Wheelen say that she does not personally review transcripts, but she never said that the site team does not. She said that the university must justify its faculty members compliance to the SACS site team.
ReplyDeleteInteresting, looks like Dr. Wheelen has an extensive community college background too, but nobody is questioning her credentials to preside over SACS.
So it's still up to the Cassy and the care bunch to certify that our faculty credentials are in order? Is that what you are saying?
ReplyDeleteSecondly, what did she say about the credentials of the current administration, will their credentials be reviewed as well?
Thanks for the response.
The way FAMU is operated currently, in comparison the prez @ BCC is doing a hell of a job. We are in no position to cast aspersions on BCC right now.
ReplyDeleteIf we keep it up, I wouldn't be surprised to see us looking like Texas Southern.
Something is definitely wrong on the hill. If it wasn't so, we would not be hearing all of these complaints, rumors, horror stories, etc.
Shit ain't right and very soon we are going to have to recognize.
This site has over a 100,000 hits. You can't go anywhere without someone black, white, alien or whatever telling you have jacked up FAMU's administration is. Face it. It is true, something is wrong with our alma mater. Look at the number of hits this site along has. That should tell the masses something.
ReplyDeleteFrom my understanding its not just Cassie and the care bunch (LOL), but the deans have a role in offering the appropriate justifications when someone does not have the 18 graduate hours in the field provision. If any faculty member doesnt have the hours then their department chair/dean is responsible for offering the justifications. If there are none, the faculty member has to be in compliance or risk losing a job. I wasn't at the meeting, but if the previous comment that one non-credential teacher can screw up the whole batch, then we need to make sure every one's stuff is tight...
ReplyDelete>>> Dr. Wheelen did not come close to suggesting that alternative credentialling is easy, in fact, she said that the university has to be able to justify any alternative credentials to the independent site review team. I find it hard to believe that 40 or more folks are going to be able to be justified. <<<
ReplyDeleteSimply because Castell Bryant, Debra Austin, and Vivian Hobbs have questioned 40 faculty members' credentials does not mean that there should be reason for panic. Bryant, Austin, and Hobbs have been botching this process since day one.
Belle Wheelen clearly contradicted Bryant, Austin, and Hobbs' previous assertion that 18 graduate credit hours is the ONLY way to qualify to teach an academic discipline. This proves that Bryant, Austin, Hobbs missrepresented the faculty credentialing requirements - pure and simple.
Again, FAMU passed the 1988 and 1998 SACS reviews and received full reaffirmation both times. The reason so many faculty credentials are in question this time around is because the people running the process do not know what the hell they are doing.
Will Castell & Co still be at FAMU when the SACS visit is conducted?
ReplyDeleteWheelan said, exactly, "When faculty do not have the qualifications, the university must make a case for considering that faculty member qualified."
ReplyDeleteThen (and I didn't get this written down) she added that the university could choose to hold faculty to the 18 hour rule.
Since these answsers kinda cancel one another out, the net result is, we still don't know how SACS certifies faculty who happen not to have 18 hours in their teaching discipline, or who exactly defines teaching discipline.
Lots of folks are teaching courses that were not offered 20 years ago. Some grew into the field as it changed, either as teachers or practitioners.
Who decides whether someone is qualified to teach when they have no graduate hours in the subject but have taught graduate courses in the subject on the basis of other kinds of qualifications than coursework?
Will the evaluation committee ask such faculty to present additional evidence to justify their qualifications?
Or will they base their decision on what they can find in a transcript and a vita?
Has anyone been contacted and asked to provide additional justification of their qualifications?
This is SUCH a demoralizing situation. If any faculty are going to be put on notice, they deserve to receive that notice immediately.
>>>Then (and I didn't get this written down) she added that the university could choose to hold faculty to the 18 hour rule.<<<
ReplyDeleteDr. Wheelan was clear in stating that SACS permits the alternative qualification process. The problem in FAMU's case was that Castell Bryant had claimed that SACS does not permit alternative qualifications (research, professional experience, etc.).
That is absolutely false and Wheelan's statement proved it.
>>>Since these answsers kinda cancel one another out, the net result is, we still don't know how SACS certifies faculty who happen not to have 18 hours in their teaching discipline, or who exactly defines teaching discipline.<<<
We do know exactly how SACS evaluates faculty who do not have 18 graduate hours in their teaching discipline. SACS reviews the alternative credential information that the university provides on those faculty members (C.V., publications, employment records that prove professional experience, etc.)
Again, FAMU did not have any problems with this alternative qualifications process during 1988 and 1998 because competent, experienced university administrators were in charge of the reaffirmation process.
>>>I have never read on Rattler Nation or in the press where Dr. Bryant Dr. Austin or Dr. Hobbs ever said that 18 hours was the ONLY way. I dont remember any of the three saying 18 hours was the ONLY way at the board meeting that I attended every second of.<<<
ReplyDeleteBryant, Hobbs, and Austin have tried to keep this dirty little secret from the public. However, even Roosevelt Wilson - once one of Bryant's most vigorous supporters - noted in this problem in the Capital Outlook. He stated very plainly that Bryant, et. al. were refusing to consider alternative qualifications and that this was a grave injustice.
Just a few weeks ago, all Bryant's supporters were trying to defend her false claim that alternative qualifications cannot be considered. No that Bryant's assertation has been discredited, "god bless castell" and others are trying to retract their statements.
Here is the statement that "God Bless Castell's" made under the topic "Faculty Credentialing Process Misunderstood" @ 8/07/2006 3:36 PM:
ReplyDelete"My reading of the last post leads me to conclude that "primary consideration" means that Dr. Bryant and company is right when they informed the board that 18 graduate hours is needed-- not optional as some on this board would suggest."
But today, GBC claims: "I have never read on Rattler Nation or in the press where Dr. Bryant Dr. Austin or Dr. Hobbs ever said that 18 hours was the ONLY way. I dont remember any of the three saying 18 hours was the ONLY way at the board meeting that I attended every second of."
Face it! You were dead wrong in believing Bryant's misinformation about the faculty credentialing process. Why not simply admit that you never knew what the hell you were talking about instead of trying to go back and change your story?
You have no credibility on this blog. You make irrational statements, unsubstantiated claims, and then tell lies when you are proven wrong!
Castell Bryant and Debra Austin, with their Ed.D. degrees shouldn't even be calling the shots on this thing. Everyone in academia (and outside academic, for that matter) know that the Ed.D. degree is a non-research-based degree. I don't know how these folk can call the academic shots, administrative experience or not, on PhDs and/or other terminal degrees. I think both of them shuold go back to the community college system. PhDs are research-based programs. There are a numbers of academic requirements that are required in those programs that are simply not required for the education degree. Apples & oranges. The point of all this? I think each of these people should stick to what they know best: remaining in the throes of the community college system. And leaving the big academic stuff to those persons who are qualified. Period.
ReplyDeleteGive God Bless Castell a break. I think that whoever GBCVB is actually made a good point about faculty pitching in to help with analyzing credentials.
ReplyDeleteGod Bless Castell said...
ReplyDeleteWith some of you peer review will never work because some niggardly folks want to argue all day about why the evaluators aren't qualified to evaluate---it never ends. I have never read on Rattler Nation or in the press where Dr. Bryant Dr. Austin or Dr. Hobbs ever said that 18 hours was the ONLY way. I dont remember any of the three saying 18 hours was the ONLY way at the board meeting that I attended every second of.
Ask ole girl for a copy of the June 29th minutes. It's in there unless they deleted it. That was the crux of the Faculty President/Trustee line of questioning. As a matter of fact, she read the SACS 3.7.1 (may be incorrect) definition into the record. Even, Liverpool was confused.
Talk is cheap, sweat equity is expensive. The last thing we need is to have an accreditation issue like Edward Waters College a few years back. I'm sure that the Edward Waters faithful never thought that they would suffer accreditation problems since they had passed it on previous attempts.
Guess what? This is exactly where we are headed under Cassie and Debbie's leadership.
A bunch of ---
The faces of Castell & Co. revealed that they were all caught off guard by the Dr. Wheelan's comments.
ReplyDeleteCould it be they forgot to plan their work and work their plan?
Ladies:
When you tell lies - it will come back to haunt you.
8/17/2006 8:51 PM has proven his/her case. The inconsistent statements are the smoking gun: GBC is a fraud. Plain and simple.
ReplyDeleteDr. Wheelan accurately stated that it is upto the university to justify its faculty's credentials. If the university decides that eighteen hours minimum graduate credits is their standard, I believe it is within their right to use it. When you start trying to translate subjective criteria, you will never reach any concensus. I am sure that If FAMU has someone who clearly stands out, I believe we would be citing that person. Maybe if someone know of such a person, it will help the discussion to name one such person. Many of you know that FAMU has been a place where family connection was more important than credentials, and if you have been at FAMU long enough, you can see that many people working at FAMU are there not because of their competence, but because of their connections. Under those conditions, it would not be surprising that many people may have been hired not because of their credentials, but in spite of their credentials. It is easy to throw stones, but let everybody remember that we have many dead woods at FAMU, and maybe we are having these discussions because some of those dead woods are friends to some people.
ReplyDeleteMy issue with CB is that she has not been truly transperant in her decision making process. Her motives might be right, but a good practice of inclusiveness, which in higher education translates into share governance, would be helpul in reducing the suspicion going around.
>>>Dr. Wheelan accurately stated that it is upto the university to justify its faculty's credentials. If the university decides that eighteen hours minimum graduate credits is their standard, I believe it is within their right to use it.<<<
ReplyDeleteI believe that Dr. Wheelan was clear in stating that SACS expects each university to have a process for evaluating alternative teaching credentials.
But, for the sake of discussion, let's entertain your position:
Even even if it were the case that FAMU can chose to only consider graduate education hours for teaching qualification, then this is a policy issue that is the preorgative of FAMU's BOT. The existing policy and precendent, extending back for decades, is that FAMU considers alternative qualifications for credentialing faculty.
If FAMU is ONLY going to consider 18 hours (which I still contend is not permitted by SACS), then the BOT would have to change the existing policy permitting consideration of alternative credentials. The interim president could not make such a policy change on her own.
Here is the specific language concerning faculty credentials. It clearly indicates that alternative qualifications are to be considered along with graduate education. Consideration of alternative qualifications IS NOT OPTIONAL:
ReplyDelete3.7 Faculty
3.7.1 The institution employs competent faculty members qualified to accomplish
the mission and goals of the institution. When determining acceptable qualifications of its faculty, an institution gives primary consideration to the highest earned degree in the discipline in accordance with
the guidelines listed below. The institution also considers competence, effectiveness, and capacity, including, as appropriate, undergraduate and
graduate degrees, related work experiences in the field, professional licensure and certifications, honors and awards, continuous documented excellence in teaching, or other demonstrated competencies and achievements that contribute to effective teaching and student learning outcomes. For all cases, the institution is responsible for justifying and
documenting the qualifications of its faculty.
I am currently a student at FAMU and I stumbled onto this site. I am sincerely upset, disappointed and just out right confused at what is going on at FAMU. Though I don't know everything as to what is going on with the SACS process (though I know it is extremely important), I do know that the comments posted on this site about that issue is simply about how you feel about that process is directly related to how you feel about Dr. Bryant and Ms. Austin. It sounds like you don't like them so anything they do you won't like either. I am a student that was recruited to come to FAMU. I talk to other students and I do know that several of us have had problems with some of the teachers, some of you who may be posting on this site, and the President and Ms. Austin's office have been so helpful. Actually, in comparison to other offices on campus, these offices have people in them that actually take time to hear and help us. Isn't that what the administration is about? With all of the other offices (Financial Aid, i.e.) who don't care a hoop (but I don't hear anyone trying to address that) I do know that I know what students are saying, they appreciate someone who takes the time to care. SACS may be important to the University's survival. But so is retaining quality students, or students period. Please take it from me and I know that I am just a mere student but I hope you hear me. Students, the university's main customers, really appreciate someone who just cares, listens to them and help them. I don't know what Dr. Bryant and Ms. Austin is not doing but I do know that when you go to their office, they help you. Can I say the same about you?
ReplyDeleteIf you are such as concerned student, why don't you state your name and classification?
ReplyDeleteConcerned student said......8/19/2006 6:02 PM
ReplyDeleteSMH, at one time FAMU students were critcal thinkers, the next generation of shakers and movers in the making things happen, today they are just......easily fooled.
>>>With all of the other offices (Financial Aid, i.e.) who don't care a hoop (but I don't hear anyone trying to address that) I do know that I know what students are saying, they appreciate someone who takes the time to care<<<
ReplyDeleteAnd who do you think hired the people who are running financial aid right now? When Bryant came into office, she immediately fired financial aid director Bryan Terry (who was getting the office in order and implement more customer friendly business practices). She then hired her grossly incompetent Miami-Dade friend Ken Tague.
Tague turned back the clock on all the reforms Terry had made. Internal communication came to a halt, lines went outside Foote-Hilyer and towards Lee Hall, and information processing became hopelessly log-jammed.
Bryant used to march down to the office and publicly curse out Tague. Eventually, Bryant fired Tague and let financial aid languish on without a director.
Now, Joe Harrell, Bryant's replacement for Tague, has resigned from the university. FAMU is about to have its FOURTH new financial aid director since Bryant has been in office.
Bryant has consistently failed to hire competent individuals. Financial aid isn't customer friendly because Bryant has refused to replace the people she fired with customer-friendly employees. She is wrecking havoc on this institution by making instability the norm.
Those of us who truly care about FAMU will not sit by idlely while this interim president lies to us about FAMU's finances, destroys the recruitment program, decimates the research division, botches the SACS reaffirmation process, spurns shared governance, and denies employees basic due process and human dignity.
Instead of attacking the messengers, you should become involved in the efforts to hold FAMU's interim administration accountable for its actions.