Its not so much destroy the UI as to consolidate it down to one system with no duplication in programs. ie all engineering at ISU, Business and Liberal Arts at Iowa, Education at UNI....
University of Iowa faculty leader warned regents about choosing Harreld
- Thread starter cigaretteman
- Start date
Nothing necessarily wrong with it. Never should have made the ag school and teachers college into universities. The UI would be diminished in the breadth of its offerings.
Having read all the posts, and only going off what folks have said.
It seems to me the biggest problem is the way this fellow was presented to the U of I, including his own error on his CV.
I'll say, it is much easier to accept a person who walks through the front door after being invited that it is to say "Hello" to someone caught sneaking in through a window.
Now yeah, it may all turn out roses and kittens. But the way the whole thing was set up!?!? With angry forums and appearances of Johnny Don't Give a Dang What You Think! Just, not a good start. The responsibility of course is on those at the U of I to be bigger than the circumstances and give this new fellow a chance.
It seems to me the biggest problem is the way this fellow was presented to the U of I, including his own error on his CV.
I'll say, it is much easier to accept a person who walks through the front door after being invited that it is to say "Hello" to someone caught sneaking in through a window.
Now yeah, it may all turn out roses and kittens. But the way the whole thing was set up!?!? With angry forums and appearances of Johnny Don't Give a Dang What You Think! Just, not a good start. The responsibility of course is on those at the U of I to be bigger than the circumstances and give this new fellow a chance.
Cig ol' buddy, I deplore the ignorant, redneck, mouth-breathing, GED-failing wingnut responses as much as you do but I do have to ask: If Harreld was so totally unacceptable, why did she and the rest of the 21 member committee put him among the four finalists? That still baffles me.
Sorry - I was making fun of the COGS statement = "The Board of Regents’ unanimous election of Bruce Harreld as President of the University of Iowa shows how far the Branstad-appointed Board is willing to go to destroy public education at the University of Iowa."
Do you support such patently ludicrous rhetoric?
I'm not a big fan of Brandstad politically, but I sat in a suite with him in Kinnick last year and he was definitely acting like an Iowa fan that day.
I'm not a big fan of Brandstad politically, but I sat in a suite with him during the Wisconsin game last year and he was definitely acting like an Iowa fan that day.
This would only hurt UNI and ISU. Losing their business schools would be pretty killer.
The BOR did not poison the waters, if that's being done it's the educators. Times are changing and educators, more than any other employment group, like to try and stand in the way and impede any progress. Education and how we get it is changing, It's coming whether they like it or not. They best stop bitching and get on board.
Things will be different since they have their steppinfetchit in place. Although I have a feeling, after listening to Harreld speak, that he may not be running in place with bumstead as much as the other two presidents. I think this was a set up orchestrated by our dimwitted governor, that may blow up in his face.
Harreld certainly has been doing and saying all the right things, and, for the good of the university, I truly do hope that people will give him a chance and work with him in good faith unless and until, after giving it a genuine opportunity to succeed, it proves impossible.
Fat cat, left wing loon professors are put on notice. Good for the BOR.
Have you seen anything so far that leads you to believe they will be tolerant and open to an "outsider"?
Oh I read his posts and completely agree. I posted earlier that I felt the selection of Harreld was a direct thumb in the eye by the Regents.
You are assuming hiring this guy means progress and that people from within the current framework are incapable of leading change. Neither is necessarily correct.
The only encouraging sign is that the no confidence statement was restricted to the Board of Regents, and did not include Harreld. As I said, he seems to be doing and saying all the right things and it is my hope that cooler heads will prevail and the anger and resentment will remain directed toward the Board, where it belongs.
By the fatcat right wing loon BOR of which the president has used tax dollars to make himself very wealthy.
I still can't understand how a search committee that was a majority faculty/staff/students can recommend harreld as a finalist - and then after the fact the faculty and students be outraged at the BOR for choosing from the finalists that were recommended. And even worse, try to claim the process was rigged
Being a lifer in academic administration should not automatically qualify you over someone from the outside who as actually run something from the top
Do you even know anything about the BOR? The idea they are some diabolical group out to destroy public education is truly laughable. (see the COGS statement)
Take a look at the BOR and use a little bit of reason/common sense. Maybe, just maybe, an ounce of sanity will creep in and you will begin to reject this outlandish behavior by certain members of the faculty and students.
http://www.regents.iowa.gov/BoardMembers/boardmembers.html
For one thing, I have never mentioned the activity of faculty and students during the introduction as being acceptable. For another my comment was directed to a somewhat moronic post by someone else. No where did I ever say they were out to destroy public education. As far as the Board of Regents, I seriously doubt Branstad appointed who he did, but for the only reason of extending his agenda. I also have mentioned elsewhere that I am looking forward to see what Harreld is able to do. I mentioned that my early perception is that he may not be the lackey which I believe Branstand and Rastetter want him to be.
The only regent who seems to ever talk publicly is the main one. Are the others just window dressing? Do they have thoughts?
Well, Bruce knows that he is a pretty important guy and probably runs the BoR the way he runs his businesses, i.e., He is the Man what AM. If there is talking to be done, he'll do it. I think at least 4 or 5 of them were new appointees this year and so are still busy basking in the honor.
Its a little ironic that a guy who is a major republican backer and supposed supporter of free market economics makes a big part of his living off government subsidies.
I don't think anybody (at least those who are thinking rationally) would want to be obstructionist. Several members of the faculty and student government have voiced their opinion of this hire to the Board of Regents and that's within their rights. But, choosing to not give the man a chance and/or work with him seems awfully petty to me and is counter-productive to making the University of Iowa an even better institution. I've made my opinion known to the relevant parties, but also indicated a willingness to move forward and would actually appreciate the opportunity to speak with Harreld and present some ideas that I have.
I never said it did. If you read it more carefully I suggest that 3 of the candidates have tangible expertise that is directly comparable to the job for which they were interviewing. The 4th has a lot of experience, but in industries that are not necessarily directly comparable to president of a large university. His expertise and skills may end up transferring just fine and I certainly hope he does a great job. But, there is a leap of faith in order to accept the premise that his non-traditional skills will prove successful. Note, I'm not condoning the behavior of several students/faculty during his open forum and I'm not entirely pleased with the public rebuking of of the BoR; I think it'll end up doing more harm in the long run. But, that's over and done with.
A perfect example has just arisen. United-Continental Airlines CEO has just stepped down and replaced by Oscar Munoz. Munoz has no background in the airline industry, but he does have a background in the railroad industry. Both industries are highly comparable due to logistical systems, government oversight, unions, etc. However, what do you think the people of United would think if someone completely inexperienced in the field of transportation (let's say an executive from Barnes & Noble) were hired as CEO? I'm quite certain there would be some disgruntled employees from management to pilots to mechanics to ticket agents. It's certainly possible the B & N CEO would be very good at the job, but it wouldn't be readily apparent from the get-go.
Then stop perpetuating the idiocy with multiple posts and threads that help poison opinions about him.
Not to speak for Cig'man, but I think most have issues with Rastetter and Rastetter only (I guess the entire Board, really). The unfortunate part with these 'no-confidence' statements is that even though the statements claim these are not admonishments of Harreld, they certainly don't come across that way. Nor does the media help in that portrayal. I can't remember which front page it was (might've been the DI, somebody in the lab always brings one in) but it showed a picture of Harreld with a big banner across the front saying "NO CONFIDENCE". How in the world is anyone NOT supposed to take that to mean the no confidence is directed at Harreld?
I know they don't have to, and I certainly don't expect them to, but I and many others would definitely appreciate some more honesty from Rastetter regarding the selection process. If they (the BoR) had no intention of giving consideration to the 3 academics, and were already convinced they would hire Harreld, why go through the whole charade of bringing in the candidates? Why ask for input from the university community? A secret selection would have avoided a great deal of turmoil and saved a whole lot of money.
I would really like Rastetter to address the lack of transparency on the part of the Board during this process. I'm perfectly fine that Harreld as the new president and hope he does a great job, but the Board made his introduction much more difficult than it needed to be.
Does Rastetter have any more say on the board than any other member? Does that girl from Cedar Falls have any say at all as the student rep? I read the bios of the others, the 2nd in command is a former school superintendent. As I recall Michael Gartner was similar when he was chair. They could do without these strong personalities.
