Sounds like his raise, which he did rescind, is the very least of the issues there. Talk of retribution, retaliation and "don't know why we keep coming to work" is more than unpleasant to hear when it concerns the team of educators that are already underpaid in comparison to other Universities.

If the Board doesn't continue to support Dr. Gordon, and Ivey, the critical need for change at SFA won't happen. The silos are real, and destructive. Expect more behind the scenes, and public, attacks on athletics next.

I like Dr. Gordon a lot. I don't doubt that there are things that he needs to be doing better. I fear the chances are very high that if he is not successful, SFA will continue to be "stuck" for the balance of my life.

From reading between the lines by my conversations with faculty, my perspective is that there seems to be a fear that Gordon's vision is one of changing the university from a "transformative residential educational" experience to a "commuter la carte transactional" experience.

One is a traditional, idealized view of a university as a place where like-aged, like-minded individuals are all striving to better themselves at a critical juncture in their lives. The mainly on-campus experience becomes a formative development step in their personality. They change their world and the world around them as Lumberjacks.

The other is a low-cost, fast road to an academic degree. It is a realization that in today's world that a degree helps with your business leverage and earning potential. Helping students complete this goal as quickly and efficiently as possible makes us more marketable. It is the understanding that education is like the Amazon marketplace where those who deliver will be successful.

I think both those viewpoints are actually false conceptions of both traditional and modern collegiate experiences. However, I do believe the disconnect between Gordon and the faculty keeps being framed this way. There has to be common ground made up between the two sides in the terms of appropriate financing and workplace communication. I think it can be resolved, but it's going to take work by both sides. Hopefully the last few days are the start of good changes and not lines in the sand.

Like 76 said, change is needed. Here's to the board, administration, faculty, and staff all finding a way to see a brighter future for SFA together.

nacluth said:

---

From reading between the lines by my conversations with faculty, my perspective is that there seems to be a fear that Gordon's vision is one of changing the university from a "transformative residential educational" experience to a "commuter la carte transactional" experience.

One is a traditional, idealized view of a university as a place where like-aged, like-minded individuals are all striving to better themselves at a critical juncture in their lives. The mainly on-campus experience becomes a formative development step in their personality. They change their world and the world around them as Lumberjacks.

The other is a low-cost, fast road to an academic degree. It is a realization that in today's world that a degree helps with your business leverage and earning potential. Helping students complete this goal as quickly and efficiently as possible makes us more marketable. It is the understanding that education is like the Amazon marketplace where those who deliver will be successful.

I think both those viewpoints are actually false conceptions of both traditional and modern collegiate experiences. However, I do believe the disconnect between Gordon and the faculty keeps being framed this way. There has to be common ground made up between the two sides in the terms of appropriate financing and workplace communication. I think it can be resolved, but it's going to take work by both sides. Hopefully the last few days are the start of good changes and not lines in the sand.

Like 76 said, change is needed. Here's to the board, administration, faculty, and staff all finding a way to see a brighter future for SFA together.

---

Gordon is trying to thread the needle. This faculty senate movement seems to come every 7-8 years. I hope we can develop a more robust platform for non traditional students. We need them.

Good stuff, nacluth. Thanks.

nacluth said:

---

From reading between the lines

---

That was a lot of reading between the lines. We shall see if you're clairvoyant.

nacluth said:

---

From reading between the lines by my conversations with faculty, my perspective is that there seems to be a fear that Gordon's vision is one of changing the university from a "transformative residential educational" experience to a "commuter la carte transactional" experience.

One is a traditional, idealized view of a university as a place where like-aged, like-minded individuals are all striving to better themselves at a critical juncture in their lives. The mainly on-campus experience becomes a formative development step in their personality. They change their world and the world around them as Lumberjacks.

The other is a low-cost, fast road to an academic degree. It is a realization that in today's world that a degree helps with your business leverage and earning potential. Helping students complete this goal as quickly and efficiently as possible makes us more marketable. It is the understanding that education is like the Amazon marketplace where those who deliver will be successful.

I think both those viewpoints are actually false conceptions of both traditional and modern collegiate experiences. However, I do believe the disconnect between Gordon and the faculty keeps being framed this way. There has to be common ground made up between the two sides in the terms of appropriate financing and workplace communication. I think it can be resolved, but it's going to take work by both sides. Hopefully the last few days are the start of good changes and not lines in the sand.

Like 76 said, change is needed. Here's to the board, administration, faculty, and staff all finding a way to see a brighter future for SFA together.

---

I kinda figured that there was some "he's an agent of change" disagreeableness that got blown up here. Anytime you change things, folks will react.

And I think you're right that there's a happy middle ground between the traditional college experience and being WGU. Might come back and expand on that later in a longer post.

But I also think the faculty and staff are rightfully PO'd at the regents and president for proposing and accepting a raise while folks were getting furloughed.

I hope he can turn it around because that fundraising announcement in Oct is supposed to be big, but he needs to avoid stepping on any more landmines and the raise was certainly in poor judgement for all decision makers.

Wonder how much of this has to do with him being an outsider and the faculty/staff upset because that's not how things were done for 12 years. It seems like they've brought in more people from outside SFA in recent years as well.

Just my thoughts.

I am deeply disturbed by stories I am hearing about professors publicly berating, belittling, and bullying student-athletes. Simply because they are athletes, and they are blaming almost all of the fiscal difficulties on athletics.

I've followed this forum for years and I felt this was the time to jump in because this topic makes my heart sad. I was one of the 200+ who watched a blank screen for 6 hours. I've worked in higher education my entire career, the last 14 as a VP for both private and public universities. Some observations: 1) however the Regents want to play the PR game, a no-confidence vote in a president ends his effectiveness. The faculty control academics and there will be no new programs or changes if the faculty and the president can't get along; 2) a president who is on thin ice is a very ineffective fundraiser; 3) my best man worked with President Gordon at another university. How he is being portrayed is not how I thought he would be.

Thanks to everyone for helping an alum from a thousand miles away stay connected to my beloved SFA. I hope this turns out well. Go Jacks!