|
Post by Ray Higgins on May 7, 2014 11:31:36 GMT -6
More to come..... Attachments:
|
|
|
Post by pink12 on May 7, 2014 12:28:02 GMT -6
www.gram.edu/life/news/?p=985www.gram.edu/life/news/?m=201404Does this means that Dr. Pogue is reshuffling the deck, doing some of the lite lifting, to clear the way for the next baby-sitter, I mean, GSU President to bring their people; or, it is the ULS Board/President trying to soothe the natives/stakeholders? If nothing else, the timing of these personnel actions indicate more, who is really calling the shots at GSU.
|
|
|
Post by gmanwest on May 7, 2014 14:02:54 GMT -6
www.gram.edu/life/news/?p=985www.gram.edu/life/news/?m=201404Does this means that Dr. Pogue is reshuffling the deck, doing some of the lite lifting, to clear the way for the next baby-sitter, I mean, GSU President to bring their people; or, it is the ULS Board/President trying to soothe the natives/stakeholders? If nothing else, the timing of these personnel actions indicate more, who is really calling the shots at GSU. Huh?......It makes you think.
|
|
|
Post by mrevans on May 8, 2014 0:48:09 GMT -6
www.gram.edu/life/news/?p=985www.gram.edu/life/news/?m=201404Does this means that Dr. Pogue is reshuffling the deck, doing some of the lite lifting, to clear the way for the next baby-sitter, I mean, GSU President to bring their people; or, it is the ULS Board/President trying to soothe the natives/stakeholders? If nothing else, the timing of these personnel actions indicate more, who is really calling the shots at GSU. This semi-change was Dr. Pogue's idea. Understand that the System forced Dr. Pogue out. When most of us were growing-up, that was called being fired. The culminating event was the SGA consideration of a Bill of No Confidence against President Pogue and his Administration. However, Dr. Pogue had done things over the last two years or so that earn the ire of the ULS Board and new ULS President Sandra Woodley. The students' primary target was former V. P. for Student Affairs Stacy Duhon. Dr. Pogue had been urged to remove her since he walked on campus in 2009. The students' secondary target is Provost Connie Walton. Also, the state of the School of Nursing and other academic programs on campus earned the Provost the ire of various State agencies and alumni who care about our endangered programs. Dr. Pogue was only the tertiary target--as far as the students were concerned. Dr. Pogue had become a target because he had steadfastly refused to replace these two vice presidents. Stacy Duhon had already been named as Interim Associate Vice President for Advancement. She held this position along with the position of V. P. for Student Affairs. However, she is no better qualified to be GSU's chief fundraiser than she is to run Student Affairs. The best theory is that Dr. Pogue kept her in Advancement after being forced to remove her from Student Affairs in a move to preserve her salary. This is a classic example of worrying about the wrong people. Since being fired as President, Dr. Pogue has engaged in a series of activities that has solidified the wall between the students and him. The students want Stacy gone--a lot. Keeping her in a vice presidential position really angers the students. It was a slap in their faces. My information, however, is that Duhon will be out of Administration completely come July 1.
|
|
|
Post by pink12 on May 8, 2014 10:30:15 GMT -6
In response, as a layperson/stakeholder, not to discount the influence and impact of the proactive actions of the GSU student-body and the closely related stakeholders (i.e. parents, faculty, staff, alumni); however, the GSU Vice President or equivalent positions (i.e. Athletic Director) and significant/political personal changes, those recommendation(s) must be approved/rubber stamped, by the ULS President/Board.
I question the timing of the recent personnel matters and who actually making the senior personnel decisions at GSU. Logistically, normally senior or significant (I.e. Mr. Douglas Williams) personal decisions/recommendations are forwarded to at least to the ULS President prior to a formal presentation to the ULS Board for formal approval, when such item is placed on the agenda by the ULS President or Chairperson.
I lament will any of these personnel recommendations/decisions be approved by the ULS Board/President and placed on the agenda under Dr. Pogue’s tenure or by July 1, 2014 accordingly. If so, you mean to tell us, that these managerial revelations just occurred to Dr. Pogue after he offers his resignation or in an attempt to save his job at age 73/74. Did Dr. Pogue have the ULS Preisent/Board support (not authority or power) to replace any senior management at GSU, unless directed, accordingly?
I suggest the VPs were baby sitters or placeholders along with Dr. Pogue, until ULS Board/President/Governor Office continue to decide what to do with GSU, how to best deploy GSU’s assets and resources in the master-plan for the higher educational landscape in the state of LA, and while, politically maneuvering, accordingly.
Question: do you believe, that GSU’s former head coach of GSU football would have acquiesced quietly and without greater political fanfare, along with the unofficial/desirous axillary organizations, if and when GSU Athletic Programs and the related funding levels are that of a lower division/classification?
Question: do you believe the present GSU head coach of GSU football or GSU AD will have any problem with such or cause adversities?
Question: do you believe that eventually GSU Leadership will be required to visit in earnest GSU’s athletic position/affiliation/classification, even with the recently passed student-body athletic assessment?
It all ties together. The picture is becoming clear by the day.
|
|
|
Post by mrevans on May 8, 2014 16:27:30 GMT -6
In my world, when you add two and two, you get four. You do not get twenty-two. If indeed you end up with twenty-two, then it was because you had not accounted for the eighteen.
The situation with the previous coach was both simple and complicated. He was given and signed a contract that violated ULS guidelines. The Board has a pay schedule that it does not waive. Who is responsible for the out-of-compliance contract, I don't know. The person that I would look first to is Monica Bradley, Associate V. P. for Human Resources. She either knew better or should have known better. It could also have been President Pogue who told Monica that he could get through a contract whether it followed guidelines or not.
Doug's position, I respect. He said he was presented with a contract. He signed the contract that had been mutually agreed upon. A contract is a contract. He had no reason to reconsider. Obviously, something had to give, but it was not the Board. I gather that the University and Doug identified external funds to make-up for the State ceiling. However, Doug felt that he had been lied to and used by the President. Whether is was right on the particulars, I don't know. He was certainly right about the big picture.
The Board approved the contracts of both the AD and Coach Fobbs as well as the contracts of Fobbs's coaching staff. Those contracts complied with State guidelines.
Grambling State University's coaching staff is one of the highest paid in the Football Championship Subdivision if not the highest paid. It is higher paid than the staff at the University of Louisiana-Monroe, a Football Bowl Subdivision school. The people that I talk to do not believe that this is sustainable.
|
|
|
Post by pink12 on May 8, 2014 17:40:33 GMT -6
So the Board approved a contract; and, subsequently directed/approved a personnel action to redress an approved-noncompliant contract, due to subsequent determination that the contract was outside the state of LA guidelines. We are supposed to believe or accept those circumstances at face-value as happenstance and coincidental? Really?
Question: Would not a personal service contract of this nature and considering the visibility of the position and person involved go through extensive legal review by both parties?
Confused, but that is okay for now.
What is purchased or attached to the premium (and supposedly unsustainable) compensation to the present football staff?
Organized chaos!
|
|
|
Post by mrevans on May 9, 2014 0:24:27 GMT -6
So the Board approved a contract; and, subsequently directed/approved a personnel action to redress an approved-noncompliant contract, due to subsequent determination that the contract was outside the state of LA guidelines. We are supposed to believe or accept those circumstances at face-value as happenstance and coincidental? Really? Huh? I specifically said that the Board did not approve the contract that Doug had signed originally. That contract was generated by GSU. Because it was not in compliance with ULS guidelines, the ULS Board refused to approve Doug's contract when GSU submitted it for approval. Question: Would not a personal service contract of this nature and considering the visibility of the position and person involved go through extensive legal review by both parties? Confused, but that is okay for now. Doug signed an employment contract, not a service contract. A service contract is very different. What is purchased or attached to the premium (and supposedly unsustainable) compensation to the present football staff? Organized chaos! Going back to the Judson Error, GSU's athletic programs have been running annual deficits that have grown each year. The University's athletic programs are subsidized out of GSU's State appropriation. However, the State appropriation has also been cut each year. FY2013-2014 saw the largest cut to date. The student body just voted in a new athletic fee. Let us hope that the new fee eliminates the deficit. It is my understanding that Coach Fobbs's staff is larger than it should be with more full-time coaches that he should have making more money than they should receive. One example is the position held by Lee Fobbs, his father. Robb had no equivalent person. Neither did Doug. To fill some of the other positions, Fobbs should be using some graduate assistants and and part-time coaches whose salaries are paid in part by other units at the University.
|
|
|
Post by pink12 on May 9, 2014 7:04:26 GMT -6
Mr. Evans:
I sincerely apologize for my misstatements and incorrect conclusions.
Thank you very kindly for this information shared.
This appears to be an example of incompetence or negligence; or, was the administration bullied or browbeaten into creating and entering into a noncompliant contract and evading normal protocols? It appears that the former GSU AD did pay a price for this condition/recommendation or was he used as a fall guy/scapegoat and sacrificed?
I continue to lament why Dr. Pogue was ever appointed to lead GSU for five years.
I hope history does not repeat itself with a similar interim/permanent appointment, commencing on July 1, 2014.
Are we as GSU stakeholders are to presume that Head Coach Fobbs' and his staff's employment contracts or personal service contract, as applicable, are compliant, and meet state of LA guidelines? On the other hand, are GSU looking at the same personnel/contract situation down the road? The student assessment funding will only for so far and GSU cannot forget about meeting Title IX requirements. What is GSU's primary academic mission going forward, in your opinion?
Where do you see GSU's future in the higher educational landscape, in the state of LA?
Again, thank you very kindly for sharing your input and insight.
|
|
|
Post by mrevans on May 9, 2014 18:47:15 GMT -6
... I continue to lament why Dr. Pogue was ever appointed to lead GSU for five years. I hope history does not repeat itself with a similar interim/permanent appointment, commencing on July 1, 2014. I have very good information from inside the search that resulted in Dr. Pogue's selection as GSU President. My sources assure me that the Search Committee was overwhelmed by letters from GSU alumni who pleaded that Dr. Pogue's be named President on a permanent basis. Nobody objected to keeping him on. This was hardly a surprise. After being chosen as Interim President after the Judson Error, Dr. Pogue cultivated GSU stakeholders. The truth is that we are easy touches. There is no guarantee that a better candidate would have emerged if the search had continued. But many of our fellow alumni were just so gosh darned happy with Dr. Pogue that they did not want to risk selecting someone worse. It has been explained to me that a search is an expensive and time-consuming proposition. The search committee, Board staff, University staff, and the contracted search firm exert considerable effort during the search. If the Board believes that it can end the process, then it will and it did. You have to remember that we were very satisfied with President Pogue for most of his tenure. A considerable number of GSU stakeholders are still satisfied with him. People may be telling you that they are against President Pogue or that they never supported him, or whatever. However, they are probably lying. Are we as GSU stakeholders are to presume that Head Coach Fobbs' and his staff's employment contracts or personal service contract, as applicable, are compliant, and meet state of LA guidelines? On the other hand, are GSU looking at the same personnel/contract situation down the road? The student assessment funding will only for so far and GSU cannot forget about meeting Title IX requirements. The football coaching staff's contracts have been approved. You may rest assured that they have no issue with respect to State guidelines. Title IX and NCAA mandates such as APR are different issues. A good AD and a good compliance officer will take care of these issues. I have nothing personal against our current AD, but it is not telling tales out of school that we can do better. What is GSU's primary academic mission going forward, in your opinion? Where do you see GSU's future in the higher educational landscape, in the state of LA? Again, thank you very kindly for sharing your input and insight .The state of GSU's academic programs trouble me greatly. Robert Dixon set us on a downward spiral. He is gone to be replaced by his protege Connie Walton. She has kept us on a downward spiral. The rumors are heavy that she will soon be gone. I hope so. We lost several academic programs due to a Jindal-mandated low-completer review. Walton did nothing to reinforce our surviving programs. If there is a follow-up review, then we may lose additional programs. However, I see no enthusiasm by the Jindal Administration to mandate such a review. Takeaway the danger posed by Jindal's budgetary chicanery, the signs out of Baton Rouge give me some reason for optimism. I would include the current search for a new GSU President is just one of these signs. I am also very impressed with ULS President Sandra Woodley. President Woodley is working with the other system leaders to modify the GRAD Act to add sensitivity to each institution's role, scope, and mission. GSU's assessment under the GRAD Act would compare GSU to its peer institutions rather than to a single standard that applies to all public universities in the State. Having said that, the University claims to have passed its GRAD Act assessment each year since it was implemented. From where I sit, the key to GSU's survival is us. Some of us have a tendency to demand certain things. When we get what we ask for, we cry about it. The Grambling State University that I graduated from was a forward-looking progressive institution. We were pioneers that developed education models for the Nation. Over the last few decades, GSU has become backward looking and regressive. We now need help to implement things that we pioneered. This situation was not created by Pogue, Judson, or Jindal. It was created on Grambling's campus by people who are mostly Gramblinites. When Gramblinites decide that we don't want to slide backwards any longer, we will begin to move forward once again. Our future will be assured.
|
|
|
Post by pink12 on May 9, 2014 21:28:23 GMT -6
Mr. Evans:
Again, thank you very kindly for your insight and perspective. I suspect my expectations are too high or naïve.
Do you believe Grambling State University will remain a “comprehensive” institution of higher learning?
Do you believe there is any plans/designs/desires by the ULS Board/President independently or via the Governor Office to reduce/repurpose Grambling State University from a “comprehensive” institution of higher learning to an institution with a primary mission of a community college, junior college, or quasi-comprehensive with limited Bachelor Degree Offerings?
Do you believe a scenario can ever exists where GSU is appropriated/budget more funds to support 1XX and 2XX coursework (i.e. general studies/ basic requirements) than 3XX and 4XX coursework? I intently watched the search committee conference at GSU on May 8, 2014 and the speakers were as polite and politically correct as vested Gramblinites/stakeholders can be; however, the above questions/matters need to be talked about publically and address directly by the ULS Board/President.
Call me paranoid or skeptical, if matters were forthright towards GSU and the search for the next leader of GSU, let us address Grambling State University as a whole beforehand, in all aspects, in an open forum Town Hall Forum with representation from the Governor’s office, ULS Board/President and Elected Officials/Political Representatives and GSU Stakeholders (Students, Parents, Faculty, Staff, Alumni, Friends).
Let us discuss what the Governor’s plan is for GSU and its mission relative to the comprehensive/master plans for the higher education landscape, in the state of LA.
Once these types of dialogues are held in earnest, then, it would be more appropriate to dialogue on leadership and president. The leader and president of what or just another baby-sitter/placeholder while the stakeholders hope/pray for an administrative change, in the Governor’s Office and there is not any guarantees in the state of LA, the successor does not follow suit based on the current political leanings of the state.
Dr. Woodley appears genuine and astute, however, she works for a ULS Board that members are appointed by the Governor’s Office.
After the ULS Board/President has defined or reassured GSU’s mission, I would like to see a 2014 version of Dr. Joseph B. Johnson with some experienced VPs. Or, an experienced President on the back end, with a young successor in waiting appointed concurrently, assessing, cultivating preparing to lead in 12 or 24 months, a comprehensive and sustainable managerial/leadership approach.
It is my understanding that a young mid 30ish Dr. Joseph B. Johnson was at Grambling State University for almost a year cultivating and assessing matters before succeeding President R.W.E. Jones. It was before my time, but, I do not believe President Jones was in the twilight of his career or close to 70, when he became the President of Grambling College.
I recalled progressive, innovative, interactive and prideful, and yes, chippie leadership at Grambling State University.
Looking at the YouTube video left me more confused than ever, because it reminded me of a similar video I watched about 10 plus years ago, led by Dr. Sally Clausen, Former ULS President.
Some of the old timers around Grambling shared a saying when discussing GSU matters/problems, “politics got us in this mess; "politics" will get us out.”
My concern is it appears the “politics” in the state of LA has drastically changed. No Governor Edwards to GSU's rescue, and the 2014 Gov. Bobby Jinbal and his constituents’ "politics" are much different/divisive than former Gov. David Treen’s and his constituents, when GSU continued to progress, and flourish in spite of the inequities.
The tough questions need to be asked and adequately addressed by the ULS Board/President before addressing leadership.
Hell, how does the ULS Search Committee truly identify and convey to the search firm the desired skill-set, qualities and temperament, kind of experience, to lead/administer WHAT........... a comprehensive institution of higher learning or something less?
It is time to address Grambling State University in comprehensive and forthright manners, for the sake of all stakeholders, especially for the young people/parents and the taxpayers, relative to providing adequate educational opportunities effectively and efficiently.
The University's Brand and academic programs/offerings are deteriorating. The visions, sweat equity and sacrifices, of the Grambling, Adams, Jones, Johnson, Robinson, Cole, Nicholson, Hutchinson, etc. are being negated, instead of being advanced.
Either GSU progress or GSU retrogress.
|
|
|
Post by gmanwest on May 10, 2014 2:13:56 GMT -6
Mr. Evans: I sincerely apologize for my misstatements and incorrect conclusions. Thank you very kindly for this information shared. This appears to be an example of incompetence or negligence; or, was the administration bullied or browbeaten into creating and entering into a noncompliant contract and evading normal protocols? It appears that the former GSU AD did pay a price for this condition/recommendation or was he used as a fall guy/scapegoat and sacrificed? I continue to lament why Dr. Pogue was ever appointed to lead GSU for five years. I hope history does not repeat itself with a similar interim/permanent appointment, commencing on July 1, 2014. Are we as GSU stakeholders are to presume that Head Coach Fobbs' and his staff's employment contracts or personal service contract, as applicable, are compliant, and meet state of LA guidelines? On the other hand, are GSU looking at the same personnel/contract situation down the road? The student assessment funding will only for so far and GSU cannot forget about meeting Title IX requirements. What is GSU's primary academic mission going forward, in your opinion? Where do you see GSU's future in the higher educational landscape, in the state of LA? Again, thank you very kindly for sharing your input and insight .Pink 12 Mr. Evans has given you some incorrect information.....Doug contract was basically the same contract that was offered to Rod Broadway before he left for NCA&T......I know because I have seen them both.....ULM's coaches salary is higher than GSU's.....Let me give you 2 examples; both the offensive and defensive coordinaters at ULM earn $108,000 each plus an additional $12,000 each from other sources for a total of $120,000 annually......Neither of GSU current coordinaters under Fobbs earn $80,000 annually......Dirt Winston only earned about $66,000 working for Doug and Vyron only earned around $68,000, so Mr. Evans is incorrect......Everitt Todd was earning a total of $65,700 plus $7300 from other sources for a combined salary of $73,000 just to be the DL coach at ULM.
|
|
|
Post by gmanwest on May 10, 2014 2:17:20 GMT -6
... I continue to lament why Dr. Pogue was ever appointed to lead GSU for five years. I hope history does not repeat itself with a similar interim/permanent appointment, commencing on July 1, 2014. I have very good information from inside the search that resulted in Dr. Pogue's selection as GSU President. My sources assure me that the Search Committee was overwhelmed by letters from GSU alumni who pleaded that Dr. Pogue's be named President on a permanent basis. Nobody objected to keeping him on. This was hardly a surprise. After being chosen as Interim President after the Judson Error, Dr. Pogue cultivated GSU stakeholders. The truth is that we are easy touches. There is no guarantee that a better candidate would have emerged if the search had continued. But many of our fellow alumni were just so gosh darned happy with Dr. Pogue that they did not want to risk selecting someone worse. It has been explained to me that a search is an expensive and time-consuming proposition. The search committee, Board staff, University staff, and the contracted search firm exert considerable effort during the search. If the Board believes that it can end the process, then it will and it did. You have to remember that we were very satisfied with President Pogue for most of his tenure. A considerable number of GSU stakeholders are still satisfied with him. People may be telling you that they are against President Pogue or that they never supported him, or whatever. However, they are probably lying. Are we as GSU stakeholders are to presume that Head Coach Fobbs' and his staff's employment contracts or personal service contract, as applicable, are compliant, and meet state of LA guidelines? On the other hand, are GSU looking at the same personnel/contract situation down the road? The student assessment funding will only for so far and GSU cannot forget about meeting Title IX requirements. The football coaching staff's contracts have been approved. You may rest assured that they have no issue with respect to State guidelines. Title IX and NCAA mandates such as APR are different issues. A good AD and a good compliance officer will take care of these issues. I have nothing personal against our current AD, but it is not telling tales out of school that we can do better. What is GSU's primary academic mission going forward, in your opinion? Where do you see GSU's future in the higher educational landscape, in the state of LA? Again, thank you very kindly for sharing your input and insight .The state of GSU's academic programs trouble me greatly. Robert Dixon set us on a downward spiral. He is gone to be replaced by his protege Connie Walton. She has kept us on a downward spiral. The rumors are heavy that she will soon be gone. I hope so. We lost several academic programs due to a Jindal-mandated low-completer review. Walton did nothing to reinforce our surviving programs. If there is a follow-up review, then we may lose additional programs. However, I see no enthusiasm by the Jindal Administration to mandate such a review. Takeaway the danger posed by Jindal's budgetary chicanery, the signs out of Baton Rouge give me some reason for optimism. I would include the current search for a new GSU President is just one of these signs. I am also very impressed with ULS President Sandra Woodley. President Woodley is working with the other system leaders to modify the GRAD Act to add sensitivity to each institution's role, scope, and mission. GSU's assessment under the GRAD Act would compare GSU to its peer institutions rather than to a single standard that applies to all public universities in the State. Having said that, the University claims to have passed its GRAD Act assessment each year since it was implemented. From where I sit, the key to GSU's survival is us. Some of us have a tendency to demand certain things. When we get what we ask for, we cry about it. The Grambling State University that I graduated from was a forward-looking progressive institution. We were pioneers that developed education models for the Nation. Over the last few decades, GSU has become backward looking and regressive. We now need help to implement things that we pioneered. This situation was not created by Pogue, Judson, or Jindal. It was created on Grambling's campus by people who are mostly Gramblinites. When Gramblinites decide that we don't want to slide backwards any longer, we will begin to move forward once again. Our future will be assured. SMH
|
|
|
Post by gmanwest on May 10, 2014 2:28:50 GMT -6
In my world, when you add two and two, you get four. You do not get twenty-two. If indeed you end up with twenty-two, then it was because you had not accounted for the eighteen. The situation with the previous coach was both simple and complicated. He was given and signed a contract that violated ULS guidelines. The Board has a pay schedule that it does not waive. Who is responsible for the out-of-compliance contract, I don't know. The person that I would look first to is Monica Bradley, Associate V. P. for Human Resources. She either knew better or should have known better. It could also have been President Pogue who told Monica that he could get through a contract whether it followed guidelines or not. Doug's position, I respect. He said he was presented with a contract. He signed the contract that had been mutually agreed upon. A contract is a contract. He had no reason to reconsider. Obviously, something had to give, but it was not the Board. I gather that the University and Doug identified external funds to make-up for the State ceiling. However, Doug felt that he had been lied to and used by the President. Whether is was right on the particulars, I don't know. He was certainly right about the big picture. The Board approved the contracts of both the AD and Coach Fobbs as well as the contracts of Fobbs's coaching staff. Those contracts complied with State guidelines. Grambling State University's coaching staff is one of the highest paid in the Football Championship Subdivision if not the highest paid. It is higher paid than the staff at the University of Louisiana-Monroe, a Football Bowl Subdivision school. The people that I talk to do not believe that this is sustainable. Grambling State University football staff is not the highest at the FCS level.....You might need to do your homework a little better.....I would advise you to check FAMU, Jackson State(who just recently gave Harold Jackson atleast $260,000 per year), Tenn St., Liberty University, Appalachian St., NCA&T, PVU, BCU,and a few others.
|
|
|
Post by pink12 on May 10, 2014 7:53:50 GMT -6
Deleted - edited below.
|
|
|
Post by pink12 on May 10, 2014 7:54:51 GMT -6
It was alarming as a stakeholder to learn that "The Place Where Everybody is Somebody", GSU’s graduation rate is 31 percent.
I was aware of some difficulties with the student-athletes, but, this appears to be an university problem.
My focus is what are the reasons and what is happening with the 69 percent?
What is the percentage of the 69 percent that transfer to other institutions of higher learning to complete their requirements and earn a degree? Are these students leaving GSU due to increased desires/concerns for the quality of the educational opportunities offered or lack thereof at the 3XX and 4XX levels; coupled with parental influence and/or the students' increased maturity and awareness of the future, being prepared and qualified to compete in the marketplace or acceptance in professional schools.
What is the percentage of 69 percent that dropout of college due to personal reasons, such as, lack of interest, lack of proficiencies, professional opportunities, economics, family/personal crisis or hardship. This distinction is important to consider because if a significant number of these students are transferring after getting their basic coursework or demonstrating he or she can handle the rigors of the coursework at college level to qualify for admissions elsewhere, is not GSU functioning more or less like a junior college or community college, in actuality and effectiveness. This is not in any way to discount the merits of the 31 percent that earned a degree from GSU.
I am presuming that a great percentage of the degrees awarded (31% graduation rate) are Bachelor Degrees awarded opposed to Associate Degrees awarded. If that 31 percent graduation rate includes a material percentage of Associate Degrees awarded, such only further undergird the actual transitioning/repurposing of GSU as a "comprehensive" institution of higher learning in the state of LA. If 50 percent of the 69 percent leave due to academic concerns/shortcomings, such would exceed the 31 percent graduation rate. This is systemic and problematic.
Am I wrongheaded, overstating matters or missing something?
I sincerely apologize as an inherent steward/stakeholder of GSU for being so unaware of what is really important, and actually happening on the ground.
I continue to contend that GSU is being managed and budget whipped/shaped in a manner towards repurposing.
GSU is being managed via organized chaos and constant change. When such ends, it appears no one knows.
|
|
|
Post by mrevans on May 10, 2014 9:24:45 GMT -6
... Grambling State University's coaching staff is one of the highest paid in the Football Championship Subdivision if not the highest paid. It is higher paid than the staff at the University of Louisiana-Monroe, a Football Bowl Subdivision school. The people that I talk to do not believe that this is sustainable. Grambling State University football staff is not the highest at the FCS level.....You might need to do your homework a little better.....I would advise you to check FAMU, Jackson State(who just recently gave Harold Jackson atleast $260,000 per year), Tenn St., Liberty University, Appalachian St., NCA&T, PVU, BCU,and a few others. Learn how to read. Nowhere in my post did I either state or imply that GSU's coaching staff is the highest paid in the FCS. What I did say is that Grambling's athletic program has been operating for years on a growing annual deficit. Increasing the pay scale of the coaching staff without also increasing revenue is a prescription for disaster. If you don't agree, then we will just have to agree to disagree.
|
|
|
Post by mrevans on May 10, 2014 10:20:48 GMT -6
It was alarming as a stakeholder to learn that "The Place Where Everybody is Somebody", GSU’s graduation rate is 31 percent. I was aware of some difficulties with the student-athletes, but, this appears to be an university problem. My focus is what are the reasons and what is happening with the 69 percent? What is the percentage of the 69 percent that transfer to other institutions of higher learning to complete their requirements and earn a degree? Are these students leaving GSU due to increased desires/concerns for the quality of the educational opportunities offered or lack thereof at the 3XX and 4XX levels; coupled with parental influence and/or the students' increased maturity and awareness of the future, being prepared and qualified to compete in the marketplace or acceptance in professional schools. What is the percentage of 69 percent that dropout of college due to personal reasons, such as, lack of interest, lack of proficiencies, professional opportunities, economics, family/personal crisis or hardship. This distinction is important to consider because if a significant number of these students are transferring after getting their basic coursework or demonstrating he or she can handle the rigors of the coursework at college level to qualify for admissions elsewhere, is not GSU functioning more or less like a junior college or community college, in actuality and effectiveness. This is not in any way to discount the merits of the 31 percent that earn a degree from GSU. I am presuming that a great percent of degrees awarded (31% graduation rate ) reflects Bachelor Degrees awarded opposed to Associate Degrees awarded. If 50 percent of the 69 percent leave due to academic concerns/shortcomings, such would exceed the 31 percent graduation rate. This is systemic and problematic. Am I wrongheaded, overstating matters or missing something? I sincerely apologize as an inherent steward/stakeholder of GSU for being so unaware of what is really important, and actually happening on the ground. I continue to contend that GSU is being managed and budget whipped/shaped in a manner towards repurposing. GSU is being managed via organized chaos and constant change. When such ends, it appears no one knows. I don't think that you should fixate on a number. That said, of the students who entered Grambling College with me, the only ones that I know who did not graduate dropped-out for personal reasons having nothing to do with either academics or finances. Times have changed. I would like for 100% of GSU students to graduate in four years or less. Reality says that this is impossible. Louisiana public universities have a mandate to raise their retention and graduation rates to the SREB average. In 2010, the SREB average graduate rate was 53%, two points behind the National average of 55%. However, the average Louisiana graduation rate was 38%. Thank God for Arkansas which came in at 37%. African Americans in Louisiana had a graduation rate of 24% which was a slight drop from five years earlier. The 2005 graduation rate for African Americans in Louisiana was 24.4%. Can we do better? Heck yeah. Our goal should be a 100% graduation rate. However, we must do it in the right way. Otherwise, we run the distinct risk of converting our universities into diploma mills. In fact, there are many elements of the GRAD Act that appear to be designed to do just that. People enroll in higher education institutions for many reasons. African Americans have traditionally gone to college to learn. I would hate to see this change. GSU students leave for several reasons. One is financial. Something that many GSU stakeholders may not be aware of is that there is a private school in Louisiana that with a lower cost of attendance than GSU. For a student living on-campus, Louisiana College in Pineville is cheaper than GSU--at least it was the last time I checked. One of the biggest issues in the students' complaints against the Pogue Administration are their perception of the Administration's attitude toward financial aid. I don't have a copy of the Bill of No Confidence handy. If you can get hold of a copy, then read it. You may quibble about financial issues. However, the University will argue that this is an issue largely outside its control. That is not entirely true, but you need to be versed on the issues to carry the case. What is within the University's control is how it treats its students. Mistreatment of students--particularly during registration--has been an issue at Grambling since I was a student and probably before. However, we cannot get away with it. Even when I was a student, some students called their parents to bring them home. However, many bowed their heads and plowed through. Students and parents today is much less willing to put-up with the crap. You may know that we had a large number of students from St. Lucia and other Caribbean Islands. Most of our valedictorians over the last few years have been from St. Lucia. Those student feel that they have been so mistreated that the Government of St. Lucia refused renew its contract with GSU. St. Lucia has entered into a contract with Ft. Valley State University of Georgia. Dominica is sticking with GSU. However, the 500 students that GSU enrolled from St. Lucia will be no more. Nothing more needs to be said.
|
|
|
Post by pink12 on May 10, 2014 11:38:50 GMT -6
Mr. Evans:
Thank you very much for your very informative response.
Without FIOA requests to GSU or ULS is there any public forums where GSU's vital statistics may be viewed relative to GSU's graduation rates and related detailed data?
Again, distancing from out-of-state and international students may be apart of the broader agenda. It appears undermining. Just saying.
It appears that the percentage of out-of-state students (28%) enrolled at GSU has decreased compared to the historical averages.
I suggest the adverse impact of the management and administering of GSU and it affairs are cumulative and far reaching. I continue to believe with earnest efforts and unmixed mission with attached funding/oversight/intentions the ship can be righted at GSU towards providing adequate educational opportunities with proficient results, to young people, in some format.
I am not one that easily discern that highly educated, well paid, and successful people get dumb or incompetent overnight. Now, yes, we may slow or lose a step or two with father time; however, the relationship with the Government of St. Lucia and it students just does not happen accidently, especially when these students are excelling at a high level and value-added to the University's Brand. I must believe some dialogues took place beforehand and discounted with purpose.
As the old-timers say, politics got GSU in this mess, just maybe, politics will get GSU out of this mess, in time.
Your responses are eye opening and perplexing when considering what would appear to be the best interests of GSU, its stakeholders, moreover, GSU's effectiveness as a proficient provider of higher educational opportunities to young people.
I really appreciate your time to respond.
|
|
|
Post by gmanwest on May 10, 2014 15:30:07 GMT -6
Grambling State University football staff is not the highest at the FCS level.....You might need to do your homework a little better.....I would advise you to check FAMU, Jackson State(who just recently gave Harold Jackson atleast $260,000 per year), Tenn St., Liberty University, Appalachian St., NCA&T, PVU, BCU,and a few others. Learn how to read. Nowhere in my post did I either state or imply that GSU's coaching staff is the highest paid in the FCS. What I did say is that Grambling's athletic program has been operating for years on a growing annual deficit. Increasing the pay scale of the coaching staff without also increasing revenue is a prescription for disaster. If you don't agree, then we will just have to agree to disagree. You need to learn about athletics......Most FCS athletic programs in the country are operating with a deficit as well as the lower tier FBS schools.....Stick to academics because your knowledge is very limited with athletics.....If you think Grambling is better off without athletics, then please be quiet and stay silent.....Kids have a choice of where to attend college and you can bet that most of them are going to attend schools with academic and athletic offerings.
|
|
|
Post by mrevans on May 10, 2014 21:10:21 GMT -6
Learn how to read. Nowhere in my post did I either state or imply that GSU's coaching staff is the highest paid in the FCS. What I did say is that Grambling's athletic program has been operating for years on a growing annual deficit. Increasing the pay scale of the coaching staff without also increasing revenue is a prescription for disaster. If you don't agree, then we will just have to agree to disagree. You need to learn about athletics......Most FCS athletic programs in the country are operating with a deficit as well as the lower tier FBS schools.....Stick to academics because your knowledge is very limited with athletics.....If you think Grambling is better off without athletics, then please be quiet and stay silent.....Kids have a choice of where to attend college and you can bet that most of them are going to attend schools with academic and athletic offerings. I see that you just want to stick your fingers in your ears, close your eyes, and shout "I can't hear you!" OK. Cool. No skin off my teeth.
|
|
|
Post by mrevans on May 10, 2014 23:32:04 GMT -6
Mr. Evans: Thank you very much for your very informative response. Without FIOA requests to GSU or ULS is there any public forums where GSU's vital statistics may be viewed relative to GSU's graduation rates and related detailed data? Again, distancing from out-of-state and international students may be apart of the broader agenda. It appears undermining. Just saying. It appears that the percentage of out-of-state students (28%) enrolled at GSU has decreased compared to the historical averages. I suggest the adverse impact of the management and administering of GSU and it affairs are cumulative and far reaching. I continue to believe with earnest efforts and unmixed mission with attached funding/oversight/intentions the ship can be righted at GSU towards providing adequate educational opportunities with proficient results, to young people, in some format. I am not one that easily discern that highly educated, well paid, and successful people get dumb or incompetent overnight. Now, yes, we may slow or lose a step or two with father time; however, the relationship with the Government of St. Lucia and it students just does not happen accidently, especially when these students are excelling at a high level and value-added to the University's Brand. I must believe some dialogues took place beforehand and discounted with purpose. As the old-timers say, politics got GSU in this mess, just maybe, politics will get GSU out of this mess, in time. Your responses are eye opening and perplexing when considering what would appear to be the best interests of GSU, its stakeholders, moreover, GSU's effectiveness as a proficient provider of higher educational opportunities to young people. I really appreciate your time to respond. Let me begin by saying that I was surprised by GSU's 28% out-of-state enrollment. As you have already stated, this is a significant drop from our historic average. The public forum with the Presidential Search Committee was the first that I had heard of this. It is possible that the drop is a consequence of our annual 5-10% tuition increases. I would love to get an explanation from Enrollment Management. The reason that St. Lucia refused to renew its contract with Grambling is simple. Its citizens were mistreated on our campus. Make no mistake. Students from St. Lucia were not singled-out for mistreatment. Enduring mistreatment is a rite of passage for Grambling students. The Government of St. Lucia is responsive to its citizens. It dropped GSU where their children were mistreated and established a relationship with Fort Valley State where they won't be mistreated--hopefully. Do not confuse knowledge with wisdom. As someone who has worked in higher education most of his adult life, I have seen too many people in too many places do too many stupid things to ever again confuse the two. Former V. P. for Student Affairs Stacey Duhon is a prime example. How she got to be V. P. is a revolting tale. How she stayed in her position is a monument to our President's personal arrogance. For a time, I worked at an institution that faced over $1 billion in lawsuits. I was informed that the complaints were generated by a small number of people. How does a small number of people generate so many legal complaints? Connections. Somebody's cousin. Somebody's boyfriend. Somebody's fraternity brother. Somebody's childhood friend. Somebody's someone. I could go on for pages about the state of university leadership. Most GSU stakeholders that I know want to believe that Grambling's problems are isolated to Louisiana politics and are unique to GSU. I see a structural problem in higher education leadership that is National in scope. An institution's HBCU status is an aggravating factor, but it is not the primary cause of the problem. Dr. Pogue and Dr. Judson before him were examples of the problem. So too was former UL-Monroe President James Cofer. By coincidence, Louisiana Tech has up to now avoided this issue with the selection of President Leslie Guice and President Dan Reneau before him. Guice and Reneau are both alumni of the institution who received either all or nearly all of their degrees from LaTech and then worked their way up through the ranks to the Presidency. This is in-breeding on a massive scale. However, it seems to have avoided to trap of the leadership consultant/client club that counts a disproportionate number of failed presidents among its membership.
|
|
|
Post by gmanwest on May 11, 2014 0:50:55 GMT -6
You need to learn about athletics......Most FCS athletic programs in the country are operating with a deficit as well as the lower tier FBS schools.....Stick to academics because your knowledge is very limited with athletics.....If you think Grambling is better off without athletics, then please be quiet and stay silent.....Kids have a choice of where to attend college and you can bet that most of them are going to attend schools with academic and athletic offerings. I see that you just want to stick your fingers in your ears, close your eyes, and shout "I can't hear you!" OK. Cool. No skin off my teeth. I gotcha.....You don't know what in the hell you are talking about regarding athletics, so stay in your lane and I am cool.
|
|
|
Post by gmanwest on May 11, 2014 1:25:41 GMT -6
Mr. Evans: Thank you very much for your very informative response. Without FIOA requests to GSU or ULS is there any public forums where GSU's vital statistics may be viewed relative to GSU's graduation rates and related detailed data? Again, distancing from out-of-state and international students may be apart of the broader agenda. It appears undermining. Just saying. It appears that the percentage of out-of-state students (28%) enrolled at GSU has decreased compared to the historical averages. I suggest the adverse impact of the management and administering of GSU and it affairs are cumulative and far reaching. I continue to believe with earnest efforts and unmixed mission with attached funding/oversight/intentions the ship can be righted at GSU towards providing adequate educational opportunities with proficient results, to young people, in some format. I am not one that easily discern that highly educated, well paid, and successful people get dumb or incompetent overnight. Now, yes, we may slow or lose a step or two with father time; however, the relationship with the Government of St. Lucia and it students just does not happen accidently, especially when these students are excelling at a high level and value-added to the University's Brand. I must believe some dialogues took place beforehand and discounted with purpose. As the old-timers say, politics got GSU in this mess, just maybe, politics will get GSU out of this mess, in time. Your responses are eye opening and perplexing when considering what would appear to be the best interests of GSU, its stakeholders, moreover, GSU's effectiveness as a proficient provider of higher educational opportunities to young people. I really appreciate your time to respond. Come on Pink12, I know you should be fully aware that our number of out of state students dropped along with our enrollment after Grambling raised the out of state fees through the roof after being directed by the state......If you didn't know that, I guess we can assume that you haven't sent many kids back to Grambling.....In 1993 GSU had about 3500 freshman or new students to enroll and our enrollment was around 8500.....At that time we had about 50% of our students that came from out of state.....We were the fastest growing university in the state because we had a very reasonable price for education.....Now I am not for sure if was coincidental or not that we had a president name William Jefferson Clinton that fought to put a lot of money into pell grants and affordable federal loans for higher education, but it happened during his time......All I can say is that after we were growing so fast that it seemed that our admission criteria started to get stricter and the out of state fees started to implode....It effected Grambling more because we had the largest percentage of out of state students at all public universities in the state of Louisiana.....We went on a decline after that enrollment wise.....The ULS System stated that we currently are down to 28% in out of state students whereas the other universities in the state average only about 8.2%.....Now, you can see that we are more nationally known and we get killed in state with all of the negative publicity that we get on a regular basis in state.....GSU must recruit better in state, but we can not take our feet off the pedal out of state. Now for some optimism, under new and effective leadership GSU can reclaim it's place amongst the best educational value in America especially for minorities.....The new president must roll up his or her sleeve and get to work retaining the great GSU employees and cutting loose the dead weight.....The new president must engage and challenge the state of Louisiana and the ULS board to fund Grambling proper and treat it fair because that has not been the case the last 5 years or more.....In order for GSU to reclaim it's greatness, we all must do everything we can to help......Gramblinites are good to criticize, but unwilling too help and to stop up and take progressive stances for Grambling.
|
|
|
Post by pink12 on May 11, 2014 6:01:31 GMT -6
I conclude it is complicated and truly not as simple as even I want it to be or imagine. There are many moving pieces and concerns. Step-back for a moment and look at matters objectively and progressively, as a whole, relative to access and lack thereof to educational opportunities historically and the results of such generationally.
|
|