Destroying University Of Alaska Not Just With Huge Budget Cuts - 9 of 11 Regents Now Dunleavy Appointments

An article by Iris Samuels in the ADN highlights the links between Seth Church's far right philosophy and campaign contributions to Dunleavy.

But I want to emphasize a slightly different issue - the drift over the years from the Board of Regents being advocates of higher education to being supposed advocates of running the University like a business, and now to being totally non-academic conservatives who look on higher education with suspicion.  The combination of the recent trends has led to a Board of Regents devoid of people with the highest academic credentials, with serious teaching, or academic experience.  

Samuels quotes newly appointed University of Alaska Board of Regents member Seth Church, "who does not have a university degree":

“The university is a diverse place and diverse opinions and diverse educational backgrounds all can have a positive impact on the university, as long as you have people that are committed to its success,” 

It's not clear whether this statement was a response to a question about his lack of a college degree.  (Samuels hasn't responded to an email sent four days ago.) If it is, I'd point out, that Church does not add any sort of diversity that I can detect to the Board of Regents.  

"The University of Alaska Board of Regents is an 11-member board, appointed by the Governor and confirmed by the Alaska Legislature. Members serve an 8-year term, with the exception of the student regent who is nominated from his/her campus and serves a 2-year term. The 8-year term begins on the first Monday in February; student regent term begins on June 1. Regents serve until their successor is appointed." (from UA)

 

The governor's website says that “As a business owner, Seth brings a perspective to the Board of Regents that will ensure the University of Alaska is effectively preparing students for productive careers.”

My sense of what the governor means by "productive careers", based on Church's background and the relentless budget cuts to education over Dunleavy's administration is people who will work in positions that serve employers in construction, oil and gas, mining, and such fields.  He's not interested in people who study liberal arts or science fields that yield experts who might challenge industry on environmental or safety or equity issues.  

Again, what perspective is does Church bring, that isn't already represented?

There are already two Board members who don't list any university degrees - Dennis L. Michel and Ralph Seekins.  (They haven't responded to emails asking if this was an oversight.)

There are already Board members who appear to represent concern for the workforce that requires technical skills but not academic degrees - Dennis L. Michel and Joey Crum.  

If it's ethnic diversity, there's no explanation of how his nomination expands that.  The only Regent whose bio reflects anything beyond white is Michel who notes that he was 'raised by an Athabascan mother."  Obviously there could be others who haven't highlighted their ethnicity in their bios.

It's not gender diversity.  The Board already has six men and four women (one of whom is the student regent, nominated by students and serving only two years.)

It's not geographic diversity.  At this point all the Board members come from places on the road system. A total of eight from Fairbanks (3), Anchorage (3), Matsu. (2), and one from Soldotna, and one from Juneau.  Church makes the fourth from Fairbanks.  

Professional background, expertise?  Five have business degrees and have been involved in large (Conoco Phillips) or small businesses. 

What's conspicuously missing?  People with academic experience.  People with PhD's.  People with teaching experience.  People with science backgrounds and research backgrounds.  

Can you imagine the Board of any organization filled with people who do not have experience and expertise in the field?  One or two members with other experience, sure, but there's no one with academic work experience (Regent Purdue has university administrative experience) on the Board as far as I can tell.    

While the media have focused (rightfully) on the large budget cuts the University has suffered (along with K-12) under Dunleavy, they haven't focused on the elimination of people who understand how universities work.  The stuffing of the Board with people from business began well before Dunleavy.  Dunleavy's contribution seems to be political hacks who are loyal to Dunleavy.  The legislature didn't approve Bethany Marcum, who was a senate aide to Dunleavy and then went to the libertarian and Koch supported Alaska Policy Forum, and was part of the Dunleavy appointed redistricting Board team that tried (unsuccessfully) to gerrymander Eagle River senate seats.  When she was not approved, he appointed another far Right member of his team, Tuckerman Babcock.  You know, the guy who helped the Governor set up a loyalty oath and fired those who wouldn't sign it.  This cost the State high level professionals in law and medicine and eventual court ordered payments. 

And now we get Seth Church (who also worked for the Alaska Policy Forum.)  Babcock and Church were appointed too late for the legislature to approve them, so they become members of the Board, at least until the legislature returns into session in January 2024 and has a chance to vote on their appointments.   

Dunleavy has now appointed nine of the eleven members of the Board of Regents (though one was originally appointed by Governor Parnell and the student Regent was nominated by her campus.  Three of those appointments appear to have no college degrees.   

Nationally, Republicans have worked hard to take over local school boards and taking over the Board of Regents fits with that strategy.  The Board of Regents is easier because the governor appoints those members.  

Below is the list of University of Alaska Board of Regents members from their website.  I've edited the bios to focus on the professional experience and educational background.  You can see all the details here.   [Click on bio and contact links below each picture to get individual board members' details.]  Church's appointment would fill the eleventh seat.  

Dale Anderson

Juneau

Regent Term 2012-2029

appointed in 2012 by Governor Parnell and re-appointed by Governor Dunleavy in 2021.

"He brings to the board extensive life experiences from both the private and public sector. He has owned and operated numerous enterprises as well as served as a member of the City and Borough of Juneau Assembly, legislative aide for the House Finance Committee in the Alaska State Legislature and as com."

Education:  BA in Business Administration from Oral Roberts University,  a certificate of judicial development in administrative law from the University of Nevada

Tuckerman Babcock

Soldotna

Regent Term 2023-2031

Appointed in May 2023 by Governor Mike Dunleavy. Regent Babcock has a B.A. in government from Wesleyan University.

Regent Babcock is retired from public service, where he most recently served as the governor’s chief of staff. His business and professional experience includes being the commissioner of the Alaska Oil and Gas Conservation Commission and ten years in management with the Matanuska Electric Association.

Joey Crum

Palmer

Regent Term 2023-2031

Joey Crum was appointed by Governor Dunleavy in 2023. 

As President & CEO of Northern Industrial Training in Palmer, Regent Crum has dedicated his professional life to training and promoting workplace skills. 

 Bachelor of Arts in psychology from the University of Puget Sound, a Juris Doctorate from Gonzaga University School of Law, and a Master of Science in organizational leadership from Columbia Southern University. 

Paula Harrison

Anchorage

Regent Term 2023-2031

Paula Harrison was appointed by Governor Dunleavy in 2023. She has 40 years of experience in human resources and labor relations across the public and private sectors. Regent Harrison is the past chair of the Alaska Labor Relations Board. She earned her Bachelor of Arts in political science/economics from the University of Colorado-Denver and her Master of Arts in management from Webster University.

Mary K. Hughes

Anchorage

Regent Term 2002-2025

Mary K. Hughes of Anchorage, was appointed by Governor Knowles in July 2002, re-appointed by Governor Palin in January 2009 and re-appointed to a third term by Governor Walker in 2017. She graduated from the University of Alaska with a BBA in Management in 1971 and earned her juris doctorate from Willamette University College of Law in 1974.

Scott Jepsen

Anchorage

Regent, Treasurer of the Board  2021-2031

Appointed in March 2021 by Governor Mike Dunleavy, and reappointed in February 2023 by Governor Mike Dunleavy. Regent Jepsen has a B.S. and M.S. in chemical engineering from the University of Texas at Austin.

Regent Jepsen is retired from ConocoPhillips Alaska, where he was Vice President of External Affairs and Transportation. He has nearly 41 years in the oil and gas business with 31 years in Alaska. 

Dennis L. Michel

Fairbanks

Regent Term 2023-2027

Dennis L. Michel was appointed in 2023 by Governor Dunleavy. Regent Michel is a lifelong Alaskan, born and raised in Fairbanks, and is an accomplished businessman with years of experience and knowledge in the construction industry.

His financial prowess has led to numerous successful business developments and multiple active companies that currently serve the Fairbanks community and the State of Alaska. From the influences of being raised by his Army Air Corps father and Athabascan mother, to influential figures in his life, like his Uncle Morris Thompson, and Regent Michel’s business agent experiences in the early days of the pipeline, he understands the complexities and unique opportunities of Alaska.

Regent Michel and his companies have served and given back to the youth of the community for decades through employment, sponsorships, and as a vital leader and coach for youth sports. He believes in developing leaders and the future of his community. Regent Michel embraces new opportunities and ideas with vigor, striving to always adapt and develop to changing environments.

Karen Purdue

Fairbanks

Regent Term 2017-2025

Karen Perdue

Karen Perdue, vice chair of the board, was appointed in 2017 by Governor Walker. She is a lifelong Alaskan with a background in health care, public policy and interests in the history and culture of Alaska.

Regent Perdue is a graduate of Stanford University. She is semi-retired, focusing her work on critical public health issues and serves on the board of the Fairbanks Memorial Hospital Foundation.

Ralph Seekins

Fairbanks

Regent Term 2021-2029

Ralph Seekins, chair of the board, was appointed in 2021 by Governor Dunleavy. Regent Seekins is president and owner of Seekins Ford-Lincoln in Fairbanks. In addition to being elected to the Alaska State Senate from 2003-2006, he has served on the City of Fairbanks Permanent Fund Review Board,

Albiona Selimi

Wasilla 

Student Regent Term 2023-2025

Albiona Selimi was appointed as the Student Regent in 2023 by Governor Dunleavy. Regent Selimi is from Wasilla, Alaska, and has experience representing students as she served as the Chief Activities Officer for the Union of Students at the University of Alaska, Anchorage.

 Regent Selimi is currently pursuing a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science with minors in Justice and Women's Studies.

University of Alaska New President Virtual Meet & Greet Today, 2:00pm

The appointment of the current interim president of the University of Alaska happened without my paying much attention.  There are just too many things going on in the world.  I did notice a number of hits on some of my older posts on University of Alaska president and chancellor searches, particularly one: Search Committee History 1990, 1998, 2010, 2015 - From Open To Closed
There's also one that looks at the change from academic to business culture:  University of Alaska President Search Part 1: The Cultural Conflict

On paper, or pixels, it would appear that this search continued those trends.  This appears to have been carried out solely by the Board of Regents with some interviews with selected folks around the university and the state.   The new interim president's background isn't easy to review on line - because there isn't much there.  Here's pretty much what I could find - her bio on the university of Alaska president's pages.

Interim President Pat Pitney

"Pat Pitney

The University of Alaska Board of Regents selected Pat Pitney to serve as the university’s interim president beginning on Aug.1, 2020.

Previously Pitney served as the state’s Director of the Division of Legislative Finance. She was the former Vice Chancellor of Administration, University of Alaska Fairbanks and worked at UA Statewide for 17 years. In all, Pitney spent 23 years with the University of Alaska before leaving to serve as the State Budget Director in the administration of former Governor Bill Walker. 

Pitney is expected to serve as interim president for a minimum of a year or up to 18 months or until the appointment of a president, whichever comes first.

Pitney moved to Fairbanks in 1987 from Billings, Montana. She earned her MBA from UAF and an engineering physics degree from Murray State University (Kentucky). She has three adult children and two grandchildren. All three of her children are UA graduates, with degrees from UAF, UAA and UAS.

Before moving to Alaska, she was a member of the 1984 U.S. Olympic Team and won a gold medal in women’s air rifle."

I've never met her or recall seeing her, though she may have been at a Board Meeting I tended, but who knows?  What I'd note here is that it's clear the preponderance of Regents from business is once again reflected here.  We seem to have a President without of terminal degree: the highest degree is an MBA, yes, business.  Nothing mentions her ever teaching at any level or doing research.  

This reflects a national trend to corporatize universities.  I do believe that universities should be run efficiently and effectively, but business tends to emphasize the efficient part.  Universities have traditionally seen their jobs as to educate human beings.  That's hard to measure quickly and quantitatively.  But there seems to be an emphasis of metrics around productivity - number of students per faculty, number of students graduating in four years.  But little concern about what they learn, particularly as human beings and citizens.  Today their job is seen more as producing workers for American corporations.  

But often people have unique qualities that rise above the traditional qualifications of a job.  We are at a time where budgets are a major concern and Pat Pitney has experience there.  And as the former state budget director she has connections with the administration that are potentially helpful in advocating for the University.  And she has an Olympic Gold Medal which means that at one time in her life, if not still now, she could be highly focused on her goal.   But such focus often comes with the necessity to shut out everything else that is happening, such as other important values that a university should strive to  uphold.  

Not having any teaching experience (I'm assuming if she had it her official bio would mention it) is troubling.  University presidents have traditionally risen from the ranks of academics.  I can't imagine the military hiring a general who hadn't risen through the ranks.  Nor are there many, or any, examples of corporate CEOs who have been plucked from a life without lots of business experience.  But nowadays, corporate heavy boards of regents, seem to believe non academics are well qualified to run universities.  Just as Republican voters thought that a business man with no previous government position, would make a good president.  

But this afternoon, the University is offering a chance to see Pat Pitney in the COVID-19 equivalent of 'in person."  

Here's the link to this afternoon's online meet and greet.    

I'd note it is scheduled for 30 minutes - from 2pm to 2:30pm.  So even though you can submit questions, obviously the answers won't be very detailed.  As I think about this, really, a half an hour is a joke.  This is a quick show and tell, and just like I can't find a real, serious resume up for her online, this meeting will just allow us to hear her voice, see what she looks like, but not get serious.  

University Of Alaska President Resigns - Good Time For Board of Regents To Eliminate Statewide

The Anchorage Daily News just announced that UA President Johnson is resigning as of July 6.

 Johnson was making $325,000 in salary so I'm guessing with his 12 years of previous employment at UA plus his five years as president he'll get an annual retirement of somewhere between $70,000 and $110,000.  (It says he's retiring on July 1 and his appointment was announced July 28, 2015, which is just short of five years. I'm not sure if his pay is based on highest 3 years or highest 5 years.  He first worked at UA in 1996 and July 1, 1996 appears to be the cutoff for counting 3 years of 5 years.  But I'm sure the Regents could give him credit for the missing month if they chose to.) And I'm not even considering bonus pay which he appears to have received.  While he says he donated that back to the University, it would still count (at least it used to) toward his highest salaries.   (Calculating pensions is relatively straight forward, but there are some variables you have to know and I haven't been involved for 14 years now.)

Note: COVID tab above for daily updates on state case counts

Why Not Leave Position Unfilled?
 It had occurred to me when he was the finalist for the University of Wisconsin statewide presidency that it would be a good time to rethink whether we even need a statewide president.


Better Yet, Why Not Cut Out Statewide Altogether?
I also wondered why we couldn't just cut back on most of the positions in Statewide and use that money for faculty who actually teach students and do research and service?

The 2020 Alaska State Budget says , if I'm reading it right, that Statewide had 142 employees making a total of $16,385,300 in salary and benefits.  (That's an average of $115,389 per person).

Instead of having a backup bureaucracy in Fairbanks for every administrative function, they could cut back to just do the things that need to be done to coordinate the three campuses as a whole?  Oregon has already done this.  

"Established in 2011 and vested with its current authorities in 2013, the Higher Education Coordinating Commission is a 14-member volunteer commission appointed by the Oregon Governor, with nine voting members confirmed by the State Senate. The Higher Education Coordinating Commission is supported by the state agency by the same name, comprised of eight distinct offices led by Executive Director Ben Cannon.
The HECC develops and implements policies and programs to ensure that Oregon’s network of colleges, universities, workforce development initiatives and pre-college outreach programs are well-coordinated to foster student success. It also advises the Oregon Legislature, the Governor, and the Chief Education Office on policy and funding to meet state postsecondary goals.
Agency Mission and Values
Agency Mission Statement
By promoting collaboration and coordination between Oregon’s education and workforce partners, as well as through our own programs and policy leadership, HECC staff ensure that Oregonians experience increased access, equity, and success in completing their higher education, training, and career goals.
Agency Values
Transparency, Equity, Integrity, Trust, Collaboration, Accountability, Lifelong Learning"

So there's a volunteer commission and a state agency with 8 offices, each of which presumably has a few staff members.


Growth in higher education administration and administrative salaries is a key factor that many people point to as the reason for the increase in college tuition.  Here are just a few references:

The Reason Behind Colleges' Ballooning Bureaucracies
Universities’ executive, administrative, and managerial offices grew 15 percent during the recession, even as budgets were cut and tuition was increased.

​​​Colleges Must Cut Administrative Costs to Survive This Crisis

There are other articles that say the cost has gone up because of student loan programs or  that for public universities the biggest factor is legislatures cutting budgets.  I'd note that Johnson's here - the UA president he wrote his doctoral dissertation on - was known for going down to Juneau and convincing Republican legislators that money spent on the University was an investment rather than an expenditure, and he reversed cuts.  Johnson was never able to do that.

However, it would appear among the costs universities have direct control over, the biggest factor is administrative costs.  The $16 million figure is just salaries, not any other expenses like upkeep for the buildings they occupy or travel to see what's happening on the various campuses.

If the Board decides to keep the president position, I hope they make fund raising the primary job and let the campuses run themselves with minimum interference.

Blast From The Past - Charter for the Development of the Alaska North Slope

This was originally posted on February 2, 2009.  It's been read a few times in the last day or two by people whose computers leave the following tracks: "Alaska State Government."  It's about a fund that was set up at the merger of ARCO and BP that was required to donate a certain amount to the University of Alaska annually.

Just so interested parties know what's being considered by someone in our state government.

..............................................

When I wrote a post about the Conoco-Philips ads in the ADN some time ago, the "Charter Agreement" came up and I wrote:

I also know that CP makes other contributions to the community such as $100,000 to the Museum in 2007. And there was a $3.68 million gift to the University of Alaska also in 2007. But we need to put an * on that. The University of Alaska press release on the gift also says,

The annual gifts stem from a charter agreement between the oil companies and the state regarding the BP merger with ARCO in the late 1990s. Part of the charter agreement identifies public higher education as a top priority for charitable donations . . .

So a minimum amount of contribution is required by this Charter Agreement that was a condition for the BP-ARCO merger. I called Scott Goldsmith, the author of the ISER report, to find out how to get access to the Charter Agreement.He wasn't sure if he ever actually saw a copy, but said he'd check for it tomorrow. [Update: I also called UAA Advancement and later the UA Foundation called and said they would find the Agreement and email it to me .] On the internet, nearly all references I find about BP or ConocoPhillips contributions to the University have that standard clause in them.

Well, a few days later, I got an email from the University of Alaska Foundation with a copy of the charter. But we were in high gear preparing to go to Thailand and what with the traveling and getting into things here, I didn't get around to posting that agreement. (It's down below) I haven't had a chance to study the whole charter, but I expect there is plenty to chew on.

For the time being, let's just look at the part that discusses community charitable contributions:

D. Community Charitable Commitment. Within three months after the merger is completed, BP and ARCO [what BP wasn't allowed to buy of ARCO because it would have given BP monopolistic power in Alaska eventually became Conoco-Philips if I got this right] will establish a charitable entity dedicated to funding organizations and causes within Alaska. The entity will provide 30% of its giving to the University of Alaska Foundation and the remainder to general community needs. Funding decisions by the entity will be made by BP and ARCO, with the advice of a board of community advisors. BP and ARCO will provide ongoing funding to this entity in an amount that is equal to 2% of BP's and ARCO's combined aggregate net Alaska liquids production after royalty times the price for WTI. Specific entity funding levels will be calculated annually on the same date each year, referencing the liquids production and the average NYMEX WTI prompt month settlement price for the 12 months immediately proceeding the calculation.

So here are some questions I have:

1. Who monitors these contributions to be sure that they are making the contributions required?
2. How do members of the public find this out?
3. Are they contributing what they are required to contribute?
4. Are they contributing more than they are required to contribute? (If not, can either company seriously claim to make charitable contributions? This was simply a business deal, a required cost of doing business in Alaska and not really charitable donations.)
5. Who is on these boards and are the meetings announced and public?

A quick Google search got me to the BP website. Searching there for charter agreement I got a copy of the 2007 annual report on the Charter Agreement for 2006. It is four lines over four pages - for the whole charter agreement. Plus a cover letter to Governor Sarah Palin. The part on charitable giving says this:

COMMUNITY CHARITABLE GIVING

The BP Board of Community Advisors met in February, 2006, at which time they
reviewed 2005 community spend [sic] and plans for 2006.

BP spent more than $10.2 million in support of community programs in 2006,
consistent with the formula detailed in the Charter.

Approximately $3 million was contributed to the University of Alaska Foundation
(1/3 of community investment).

ConocoPhilips's website gave me this message:

Connection to server www.search.conoco.com failed (The server is not responding.)

Why do I think that is the extent of the oversight? Even BP didn't think it was important enough to proof read it carefully. Am I being too cynical? Did the Governor's office demand back up information so they could see how the 2% times the price of WTI? I don't know. What about all the other issues in the Charter? What sort of scrutiny do they get? Just this brief annual report?

Since I'm pretty busy right now in Thailand, I'm going to have to hold off on pursuing these questions. Though I might send them to my representatives in the State Legislature.

Meanwhile, here is the rest of the Charter. I hope other bloggers and non-bloggers start reading it carefully to see whether the oil companies are living up to the agreement. I guess first we ought to figure out which state agencies are responsible for keeping track.

Charter for Development of ... by Steve on Scribd

University Of Alaska Cuts Part Of Koch Plan To Cripple Climate Science in Alaska?

Alaska Public Media had a story this morning on how the cuts to the university budget could decimate the climate change research being done by University of Alaska faculty.  Research that is critically important to our understanding of climate change and how fast it is happening.  It's important to the state, but also important to climate change research worldwide.

In a previous post I speculated that the hit Dunleavy made on the University was intended to wipe out expertise that could challenge the reports Outside corporations submit for permitting their extraction of Alaska resources.  That's totally consistent with the goals Dunleavy's patrons - the Koch brothers and others.

But I wasn't thinking big enough.  A hit to the climate change research being done in Alaska would also be consistent with the Kochs' climate change denial agenda.  (See the Koch sponsored climate denial organizations list here, for example.  Or here.)

Right now, the President of the University of Alaska should be tapping foundations and large donors around the country and around the world to help keep the university running until we get rid of our governor.

But it seems to me that saving the climate change research in Alaska should be a top priority and a great way to gather support for the University of Alaska in general.  Alaska is one of the most climate affected states.  Maybe not so much by numbers of people affected, but by the huge physical impact climate change is having on our land, oceans, sub-surface permanent-frost, our glaciers and ocean icepacks.

The Public Media piece featured one climate change researcher from Juneau.  He talked about how his research funding from Outside of Alaska brought in way more money than his salary.  How many other such researchers can there be in Alaska?  Let's make a wild guess of 50 statewide - researchers who are regular UA faculty.

Let's say their average salary and benefits come to $100,000 apiece.  It could be more, but that's an easy round number to work with and will give us a ballpark figure.

$100,000 X 50 = $5,000,000.   In today's world, that's not a lot of money.  Forbes say there are 5000 families in the US with over $100 million - and that's just "cash deposits, securities and life and pension plans." Not real estate or businesses or art.

Surely amount those 5000 there are people who would be willing to pay the salaries of Alaska's climate researchers for a year.  Even if my estimate is way off and we need $10 million, that's chump change for billionaires.

Jim Johnson, how many million dollar donations have you brought to the University since you became president?  Now's the time to huddle with Rasmuaon'a Diane Kaplan to get some leads on where to get the money to save our climate researchers.  Not to mention the other threatened faculty.

Meanwhile, I'd call on retired faculty in the state,  many of whom get good pensions, to volunteer to teach classes for free in the fall if there are gaps in their specialties so that students can get the classes they need to graduate.  I've already sent a message to UAA's chancellor offering to teach and to help sign up others..  (And if we're really lucky, we won't have to because the legislature and the governor will find a way to avoid these big cuts.

Will Dunleavy’s Budget Lower Alaska’s Carbon Footprint?

Alaskans use more energy per capita than residents of any other US state.*  Much of the total energy use comes from the development of oil and gas, which is part of the total divided by the population to get average/person.  However, Alaskans are also dependent on most food and goods being shipped in from Outside.  So the transportation costs for those goods mean we use more energy than others in the US.

So, with Dunleavy’s massive cuts, there is surely going to be an equally massive out-migration from the state.  For people losing their jobs, an extra $1000 in PFD isn’t going to pay the mortgage, rent, or other expenses.  Most will not find equivalent jobs in Alaska and will find much better opportunities Outside.

So Alaska’s carbon footprint is likely to go down.  

That’s the silver lining, thin as it might be.

While the blog has focused on Argentina lately, I have been paying attention to Alaska’s summer of heat, fire, and dire budgetary actions.

I watch with dismay [unlike a number of politicians and social media agitators, I tend to understate things] as Alaskans throw logic on the Dunleavy fire, thinking that will make a difference to him.  Logic has already turned those Republicans in the legislature who are not immune to it, and the same for everyday Alaskans.


But it’s my sense of all this that logic has no effect on Dunleavy.  Well, not the logic that starts with assumptions that Alaska matters.   He’s solely listening to his Outside financiers whose agenda is to exploit the resources of Alaska (and anywhere else with exploitable resources) with no concern for the impacts on the state, the climate, or people.  Their Ayn Randian beliefs are that their personal self-interest is all that matters.  They assume their wealth can shield them from the worst of the remnants of a once civilized society.

So, destroying the university is a good thing for them.  It means that there is no independent intellectual, scientific base in Alaska that is capable of raising questions about resource extraction policies, or to question industry reports saying that ‘no harm will be done.’

Cutting government watchdog agencies is good too.  The fewer government employees watching over corporate compliance, the more corporations can get away with.  The cruise ship on-board inspector program, which cost the state nothing, was vetoed out of existence.  So cruise lines can illegally pollute all they want without anyone watching.

Today’s Anchorage Daily News says the department that oversees the  development of the natural gas pipeline is cutting half its staff.  Let’s see how well they’ll be able to spot problems down the line.  Remember when Shell included stuff on manatees in their Chukchi Sea environmental impact statements?  They’d just lifted the language from EIS from Florida.  And it got through the first round of regulators as I recall.

The Koch brothers are making a hostile takeover of Alaska.  This is about power.  The ability to get done what they want.  Logic plays no role.  Well, that’s not quite true.  Their logic is about what they can get away with.  It has completely different assumptions than the logic of most Alaskans.  Their logic is about making as much money as they can, with no concerns about Alaska.  The appeals of all the Alaskans hurt by the cuts are irrelevant to them.  They’re reveling in their power a)  to destroy Alaska as we know it and b) to then exploit it freely.  

And as for Alaska’s carbon footprint?  With increased oil, gas, and other mineral extraction, there may well be an increase despite the people who leave the state.


*The assertion that Alaskans have a larger carbon footprint first came to me in an article by a close relative that looked at the alliance of some environmental groups with anti-immigration groups based on the logic that when poor immigrants come from Central American use more carbon in the US than they did at home, and thus they shouldn’t be let into the country.  That, of course, begs the question about US residents’ moral entitlement to use more carbon than their southern neighbors.  The article also raised the issue of Alaskans using even more carbon  than average US residents.   The link unfortunately only goes to an abstract - I haven’t found free access to the whole article.  People with UAA or Loussac library cards should be able to get access to the article.

"The legislature now has a balanced budget before them THEY now can decide priorities of the budget. My administration is agnostic on this."

A short one today, I hope.  Some reactions to the governor's letter to the university community.

"The previous administration burned through nearly every dollar in the state's savings account."

Actually, he wanted to increase revenues with appropriate taxes but the Republican controlled Senate banned the word taxes.  And he did cut the budget each year.  But rather than destroying the state, the way your budget will, he got some money from the PFD account (lowering the checks) and from savings accounts.  You, governor, also refuse to consider increasing revenues.  That's a serious problem.

 "While some wish to ignore Alaskans and propose billion-dollar taxes and PFD grabs, I've made clear that this is out of line with the core beliefs of most Alaskans."

Whether it's out of line with people's core beliefs, I can't say. If that's true, you're saying the core beliefs of most Alaskans are:  we want our services and our free oil money, but we refuse to pay for any of it.   Taxes are certainly NOT against the core beliefs of most educated Alaskans who understand the numbers and the impacts these proposed cuts will have and who understand that there are some things - like roads, police, schools, public health - that are a much better bargain for a society if the public pools their money (as in taxes) to buy collectively.  Yeah, some with lots of money can buy private security guards and send their kids to private schools, but society as a whole needs everyone to get a decent education.  Only con artists benefit from an uneducated public.

And those who believed Dunleavy's campaign promises that he'd balance the budget and pay out the old PFD cuts and keep the state running - they desperately need  good education and mental health systems.

"The legislature now has a balanced budget before them  THEY now can decide priorities of the budget.  My administration is agnostic on this."  

As strategy, I guess this is a good move on the governor's part.  He's basically saying, I've balanced the budget and the legislature can decide on where to cut.  They'll get the blame, he hopes.  But really, to tell the university they can work out with the legislature where to cut is like telling your kids, "Hey, here's 50 cents, go buy yourself dinner.  I'm agnostic about what you eat, but just keep it within our budget."  You can't buy dinner for 50 cents and you can't run a university on 40% of last year's budget.  It's a disaster for years to come.   (Dermot Cole has already addressed the governor's claim that it's only 17%.)

I don't know who's helping the governor do all this.  Well aside from Donna Arduin.  Or if he really thinks - "the sky won't fall" because government is bloated.  This is like not believing in gravity.

I once asked my students - as we discussed ontology - if the University was real?  They all agreed it was.  I argued it was just something that people made up. And they could make it up into something entirely different.   That the state could decide to sell all the buildings to some company and they could call it whatever they wanted and the university simply wouldn't exist any more.

But that was a philosophical argument to make a point about the nature of reality.  It seems our governor is trying to prove my point.   Some people will die.  Others will suffer needlessly because of the cuts this budget requires.  Even if the legislature restores half the cuts.

In a letter to the editor the other day, someone wrote this was simply the governor's opening gambit of a chess game.  There is no opening gambit in chess that compares to this.  Well, there's one - knocking over the board and all the pieces.

What the governor does have going for him is that his letter is in good English, it's polite, and if you don't know anything about the situation, it might sound reasonable.

Irony -No Smoking, But Guns OK

We went to see Stalking The Bogey Man at UAA tonight.  Get tickets and go.  Not only is it a powerful play, but Anchorage is the locale for most of it, and the topic is one of the most important for our children.  You won't be bored.  You can get tickets here.  There's no one who shouldn't see this play - unless you're a rape victim and can't deal with it yet.  More on it later.   I don't have time to do it justice tonight.

But as we were walking to the theater on campus I was struck by this big sign.

We have a smoke free campus here.  You can't take a break any more and stand outside when it's 10˚F out and puff with your fellow smokers.  You have to actually get off campus.  I'm not sure if that isn't taking things a little too far, but I started pushing for no smoking in class back in the mid 1970s, so I definitely like the indoor ban.

But I was thinking about the headline in this morning's paper as I passed this sign.

I try to be objective and look at all sides of an issue.  Here's the kind of 'rational' article on guns on campus that  I would normally write.  And here's one that explains why guns on campus is a bad idea. But at some point, you have to stop being polite and rational and just say it like it is.

There's no real middle ground here.  There are national organizations, like ALEC  and Americans for Prosperity that are anti-worker, anti-regulation, anti-public school, and other right wing legislation at the state level.  It's far cheaper to influence state officials than national ones.  I don't know that either of these organizations is helping with this drive.  I don't know who's helping Pete Kelly with this bill. But I know the people of Fairbanks are responsible for electing Pete Kelly and the other Republican legislators who have supported this bill are all culpable in this.

My Senator - Berta Gardner - pointed out the other day that while the Senate is forcing the University to change it's concealed weapon policy, they aren't themselves allowing guns in the capital building.  I guess that's next year.  And I'd bet there are a few legislators who have guns in their offices.

The legislature has ignored the warnings about oil and the state budget for years.  And now, instead of seriously working on raising revenue to keep the University strong as well as other important government services, they're refusing to consider raising revenues like responsible states do - through an income tax.  But they do have time to pass legislation to allow concealed carry on campus.  Even the highly corporate Board of Regents don't support this law.    This isn't about safety on compass, it's about power - and what better symbol of power than a gun.

But, in the mean time, concealed carry, or any carry, is not allowed on campus.  But if Pete Kelly gets his way, while you won't be able to light up on campus, you can take your gun when you talk to your professor about your grade on the last exam.

I realize that posts like this will probably cause a group to sponsor legislation to allow smoking on campus.

“Without exception, totalitarian states invariably reject knowledge in the humanities, and states that reject such knowledge always become totalitarian.”

That's from an editorial in the Japan Times as reported in ICEF Monitor, in reaction to the Japanese government's call for

"universities to close social sciences and humanities faculties." 

According to the article,

"Higher education policy in Japan is now reportedly determined via the President’s Council on Industrial Competitiveness, a special body composed of government ministers, business executives, and (two) academics. And it appears that the Minister’s June letter to universities emerged from deliberations within that group and, more fundamentally, from the President’s conviction that Japan’s higher education institutions should be more directly focused on the country’s labour market needs." 

(Another factor in this debate is the decline of the student age population in Japan which means there are fewer applications to universities.  The article also mentions a threat of loss of funds from the government to universities that don't comply.)


This is happening in the US as well and which we see here in Alaska.  As I reported in a series of posts on the selection of the University of Alaska president this year, our Board of Regents has become populated with mostly corporate executive types.

And the University of Alaska Fairbanks is shutting down the philosophy department and others.  Budget cuts give good cover for making such moves. "We wish it was not necessary to reduce the number of programs we offer, but our state budget scenario leaves us few choices."  Of course, Alaska's legislature, like many others, is under constant anti-government and budget cutting pressure from right wing lobbyist organizations based on so called 'think tank' studies.  But that's another story.  (The Anchorage International Film Festival had a documentary, The Brainwashing of my Dad, which chronicles how the right is pumping out this sort of propaganda, that eventually leads to this sort of regretful, handwringing apology for shutting down such programs.)

I recall when the Masters of Public Administration (MPA) program worked with its advisory committee - made up of active executives in state, federal, local, military, and non-profit organizations - the faculty were surprised by the outcome.  While our existing program emphasized thinking and problem solving skills, our then existing objectives focused on practical management skills such as human resources, budgeting, supervisory, and planning, and public involvement skills.  But our advisory board was more interested in students who could think, solve problems, were flexible, and could deal with ethical dilemmas, than it was with a mechanical understanding of the budgeting process or personnel rules.  And so we adjusted our program learning objectives to reflect those processes we taught already, but hadn't explicitly identified in our learning objectives.

And apparently this is the case too among key Japanese business leaders.  Again from the ICEF Monitor article:

"The powerful business lobby group Keidanren was also quick to respond to the government’s assertion that the business community only requires people with practical skills. “Some media reported that the business community is seeking work-ready human resources, not students in the humanities, but that is not the case,” said Keidanren Chairman Sadayuki Sakakibara. He added that Japanese companies desire “exactly the opposite” – that is, students who can solve problems based on “ideas encompassing the different fields” of science and humanities."

 And in the US, while some universities are shutting down humanities programs to focus on vocational preparation, the US military academy, West Point, isn't. Brigadier General Timothy Trainor, West Point’s academic dean:

“It’s important to develop in young people the ability to think broadly, to operate in the context of other societies and become agile and adaptive thinkers,” Trainor said. “What you’re trying to do is teach them to deal with complexity, diversity, and change. They’re having to deal with people from other cultures. They have to think very intuitively to solve problems on the ground.”

That's more or less what our advisors were saying in the MPA program back in the 1990's.

There's a lot more to say on this.  Is this just the task-oriented types narrowly trying to eliminate what they see as useless philosophizing wasteful programs, or are these more calculated attempts to stop universities from teaching students to think?  Which harkens back to the quote on totalitarianism in the title.  But my job here in LA is to clean out my mom's house and play with my granddaughter for the few more days she's here.  So consider this post, like many posts, just notes on the human condition and how we know what we know.

[Sorry for those seeing this reposted - Feedburner problems again.] [And the reposting got it onto other blog rolls in three minutes this time. The original post had not gotten picked up after several hours.]

How Not To Improve The University

The title of Dermot Cole's article in the ADN today set me off already:  University needs to stop running campuses like independent fiefdoms.    It's fine til we get to the word 'fiefdom.'  That word is loaded.  I imagine faculty at all campuses are much more united on the idea of that word applying to the university's statewide administration.  But that has me falling into the same trap.  Fighting words make people defensive and they swing back.

OK, headlines are usually written by editors, not by the columnists, so let's not hold Cole responsible there.  And I'd note, that more often than not, I tend to agree with Cole and like how he writes.  And I'd further note that Cole's brother is a faculty member at UAF, so he has a little more access to what's happening at the university than most reporters.

Fairbanks versus Anchorage Rivalry

But the Fairbanks/Anchorage rivalry is long and deep.  Fairbanks was the original campus.  Anchorage came later.  But as time progressed, the city, then municipality, of Anchorage grew to surpass Fairbanks in population and as the center of business and government in the state.  Anchorage has a population of 300,000 while Fairbanks (the North Star Borough)  is one third of that  at about 100,000.  (Juneau's population is around 31,000.)

Yet despite Anchorage's student body long ago growing larger than Fairbanks', Fairbanks has continued to get a higher budget allocations than Anchorage.   For example:

From UA Budget Proposal for 2016 p. 52

UAF had $40 million more than UAA, though the Fairbanks community is have the size of Anchorage (not counting Matsu even).  And that doesn't include the extra $30 million for Statewide that is also housed in Fairbanks.  I understand that the University is everything to Fairbanks and that all the legislators coalesce around it at budget time.  And the natural gravity of the state favors Anchorage and that appears to make Fairbanks more protective of what it has.  Fairbanks fought really hard to prevent UAA from having doctoral programs, for example.  Fairbanks has seen its strength, and rightfully so, in research.  They still get maybe six times the external research funding that UAA gets.  Though Anchorage faculty would note that they have heavier teaching loads and many came to UAA because they wanted to teach.  Blocking UAA from getting doctoral programs, was seen in Anchorage, as a way to preserve that research advantage since doctoral students are helpful when you're trying to get grants to do research. 

So there is a lot of tension between UAA and UAF.  From the Anchorage perspective, it seems like UAA is fighting for what its size and location rightly deserve and that UAF is fighting to preserve what it has against natural forces for more to flow to Anchorage.  Fairbanks sees itself as 'the flagship campus'  as the serious research campus.    This is the background to anything about the University of Alaska system.  Much of the discussion here makes no sense without knowing it.   

Cole's Article
 
But let's get to Cole's basic argument in the article:  that the University of Alaska should just be, in essence, one institution with, satellite campuses that are run centrally, from Fairbanks, I guess.  And specifically all the campuses should have the same calendar each semester.

Centralization versus Decentralization
A basic truism in organizations is the ever present tension between centralization and decentralization.  Centralization helps make things consistent over a whole system which has advantages.  Up to a point, quantities of scale and lack of duplication make a centralized system more efficient.   But decentralization allows for much more flexibility and the capacity to meet local needs.  Change is much slower with centralization because everything has to be approved from the top.   All organizations go through a continual struggle to balance the forces for centralization against the forces for decentralization.

 Do we need a single UA main campus?
The specific failing of the university system that Cole was upset about was the lack of a single calendar for all the campuses.   I'm not convinced this is a critical problem.  I do know that attempts to make all courses across the state with the same name equal is a big deal.  Just in Anchorage, as part of the UAA system, I know lower level course taught at Eagle River with the same name as those taught on campus, weren't the same course, because say, the UAA econ department,  didn't have control over who taught the courses in Eagle River.  So when students moved to the higher level courses, they didn't have the same preparation as those taught on campus.  And Cole acknowledged this as a harder nut to crack.

Do we all need the same calendar?
But I'm not convinced everyone having the same calendar is a critical academic problem.  I do know that not being able to get the classes they need to graduate in four or five years can be a problem for students.  Some of this is a program issue.  When I counseled students, we set up a schedule for all their classes over the two to four years (this was a graduate program with mostly part time students), I made sure they knew which classes were offered which semester and the consequences of not taking them in a particular sequence.  Programs need to articulate that better and make sure students understand that from the beginning.

For students taking distance classes at another campus?  Why does the calendar have to be the same?  A later start and finish in one campus may give a student more time to get the work done.  In some ideal world, this would be nice, but the benefits of everything being the same don't seem to me to outweigh the loss of flexibility and responsiveness to local needs.  For people who have a strong need for order, I get it.  But we're in the business of education, not in the business of making everything orderly.  I think there is some sort of vision that students should be able to switch from one campus to the other as if they were all the same.  Given the distance between campuses, this is not something that will happen with in class classes.  With distance classes it's doable, but it doesn't require the calendars to be identical.  There are other kinds of coordination that seem more practical.  For instance UAA and the Anchorage School District have coordinated their spring breaks which means Anchorage families with kids in K-12 and UAA are off at the same time.  Would we want to tell every school district in Alaska they have to coordinate with the University schedule?   And there are a number of shorter courses or intensive courses that start or finish at different times. 

The sentence that got me to write this post was

"Experience elsewhere demonstrates that statewide programs can be run out of a single campus and exist in multiple places.  Private businesses and state agencies do this."  

I'll skip the issue of how businesses run or even state agencies compared to universities.  They aren't the same animal and I've written about this before. 

Where are state college calendars coordinated?

Let's focus on 'experience elsewhere.'  Which statewide university systems is Cole talking about?  I started checking to see which western states have a single calendar across all their state campuses.

University of California and the California State University are totally different systems.  But even in the University of California system, not only do UCB (Berkeley) and UCLA (Los Angeles) have different schedules, but UCB is on the semester system and UCLA is on the quarter system. 

OK, Cole will say, rightfully, that California is so much bigger it shouldn't be the comparison.  So I looked at other states in the West.

Wyoming just has one main campus.

Nevada Reno and Las Vegas each have different calendars.

The University of Arizona has a different calendar from Northern Arizona University and both are different from Arizona State.

Washington State is on semesters and so its calendar is very different from the University of Washington's which is on quarters.  Evergreen is also on quarters, but has its own calendar.

Boise State, Idaho State, and the University of Idaho each has its own calendar.

Montana State University at Bozeman's  calendar is different from MSU at Billings'.  And the University of Montana (Helena) has its own calendar.

Utah State University campuses seem to have the same calendar, but they're different from the University of Utah and Southern Utah University.  They're all fairly close, but not exactly the same.

At the University of Colorado at Denver, I found different colleges (Dental, Pharmacy, and Nursing calendars all popped up first on google and were all different) within the Denver campus that had different calendars.  So it wasn't a surprise that the Boulder campus calendar was different.

The only western state where all the public universities had the same calendar was Oregon.
And they have a very small statewide coordinating organization that might actually be a good model for Alaska.

I get that for many the idea of tight coordination across campuses seems like a really good idea.  But why don't all the western state universities have it?   I suspect because the effort to coordinate isn't worth the benefits.  It seems to me to distract from more important issues - like the budget imbalances between UAA and UAF and the  statewide administration whose budget is the same as the Juneau campus!  If we want to look at Oregon - where all the campuses have the same calendar - let's look at their statewide administration.

So I looked for more information.  Here's what I found:

Screenshot from here

 So, there's no central administration any more - you should contact the individual campus 'fiefdoms.'


And what is HECC?

The HECC is a 14-member public commission, supported by the HECC agency. The agency includes the Offices of:  Executive Director, Policy & Communication; Student Access & Completion; Community Colleges & Workforce Development; Operations; Private Postsecondary Education; University Coordination; and Research & Data. For more information, see About Us.

But before we jump on the Oregon bandwagon, I'd note that the Oregon legislature pays a much smaller percentage of the total budget of their state universities than does Alaska and many states.


I'm not saying that coordinated calendars would be a bad thing.  I'm just surprised at the focus on something that seems to me to play a relatively insignificant role in our statewide system.  And it distracts from the really important issues.   If UAA is not rated as highly as other universities, as pointed out by former regent Kirk Wickersham last week, a large part of that is due to the fact that the university takes seriously its role to serve all of Alaska's potential students, including many who are not prepared for higher education.  This is not to blame the students, but to say that for many reasons our K-12 is unable to prepare all their students for college level education.  Perhaps we need a bridge institution between university and K-12.  (The regents got rid of the community college system as a budget saving move in 1987.)  Or we need a better way to provide K-12 education.  Or our whole society has to rethink the idea that everyone needs to go to college and figure out much better post K-12 vocational training for those who don't want college or don't have an aptitude for it, but feel that's what they have to do.  I wrote about these issues too in the link I gave above.

My experience at UAA was that there were a lot of first class faculty and many much smaller classes than you get at Outside state universities.  A student who picked her classes well could get an incredible education at UAA for a bargain price.  But the quality of her fellow students would not be what it would be at an Ivy League school or at the best public universities where admission standards are much more rigorous.  That UAA takes its job to serve all Alaskans seriously, is a good thing.  Though we aren't doing as good a job as we should be.

Compared to these issues, coordinating calendars is trivial.  A distraction. And, if the UA system did become "one central campus existing in multiple places" (unlike Oregon with the unified calendar) where would that one central campus be?  If you think agreeing to a unified calendar is hard, wait until we have the fight over the location of the central campus.  It's a solution, but not to the real problems we face.

Board of Regents Appoint Jim Johnsen To Be President Of The University Of Alaska

From the University press office:

"With a unanimous vote of all regents participating, the University of Alaska (UA) Board of Regents appointed Dr. James R. Johnsen as the 14th president of the UA system. The vote took place during a special meeting of the board on July 28."  [Note:  the link seems to go to the press releases in general.  I couldn't find a way to link to this specific one.  It's July 28, 2015 if you try to find it later.]

Here is most of the position description the Board put out for this job.  I've bolded those parts that speak to what the president must be or do:

 The board seeks an accomplished, astute and effective leader who can provide strategic, innovative and collaborative leadership for the university.

The Presidency of the University of Alaska is an outstanding opportunity for a leader who enjoys the challenge of moving a  complex  academic  organization  to  greater  levels  of  achievement.
The  board  seeks  a  highly  experienced,  politically savvy leader  who  understands  how  to  advance  agendas  in  higher education  and  to  manage  a  multifaceted  university system.
As  one  of  the  most  influential  and  visible  leaders  in  Alaska,  the  President  of  the  University  of  Alaska  must constantly draw the connections between higher education and the state’s economic viability.  He or she must be a tireless, persuasive advocate willing to travel widely within Alaska to encourage support for education and training beyond high school. The  president  should  be  a  visible  participant  in  national  higher  education  issues  and persuasive  with  federal agencies.
He  or  she  must  be  a  coach  for  chancellors,  a  wise  counselor  for  the  board  and a  trustworthy  resource  for  the legislature. He or she should work effectively with University of Alaska Foundation leaders.
The next President should think  creatively,  develop  collaborative  and  innovative solutions  to  challenging  issues and  be  technologically  informed.  With an approachable style and a genuine respect for others, the next President should be dedicated to earning public and private support for the University of Alaska.

A lot of bureaucratic jargon, not much that's specific.  I mention this because the press release also says:

"The new president’s contract is for five years and provides for an annual salary of $325,000 for the duration of the contract.  An annual performance bonus of up to $75,000 will be tied to mutually-agreed upon metrics which are to be determined by September 30."

Exactly how are they going to get from that job description 'mutually-agreed upon metrics'? 

This sounds like an agreement that says, "If you do these things, you'll get a bonus."  And it can be up to 23% of your base pay.

Let's compare that to what faculty get (as outlined in the United Academics contract):

15.5 Merit Bonuses
In addition to the base salary adjustments provided in this Article, the University may, in its sole discretion, award nonrecurring bonus payments to unit members for extraordinary performance far beyond expectations. If the University determines that merit bonuses will be awarded, the dean/director shall recommend to the provost those unit members whose exemplary performance may warrant a bonus. The provost shall then determine the recipients and amounts of merit bonuses.
The University may provide up to one percent (1%) of the total base payroll for merit bonuses each fiscal year. The one percent (1%) of the total base payroll will be calculated as of July 1 of each fiscal year.
There shall be no merit bonuses during the term of this agreement after December 31, 2016.

Faculty bonuses are not based on mutually agreed on metrics, but at the sole discretion of the university, and they have to be 'extraordinary performance far beyond expectations.' 

It will be interesting to see the process for coming up with the metrics and to see whether they too reflect 'extraordinary performance far beyond expectations.'  Maybe like increase the university revenues by 30% per year.  But fund raising isn't even specifically mentioned in the job description.  It's only hinted at - good relations with the UA Foundation and the legislature.

In any case, we have a new president.  I offer my congratulations to Dr. Johnsen and wish him and the university community all the best.   I'm reasonably convinced he wants to do an outstanding job.  My hope is that a) he is able to do that and b) his definition of an outstanding job overlaps closely with that of faculty, staff, and students.  I wish Dr. Johnsen and the university well. The future of Alaska in many ways depends on how well the university performs.  I will do what I can to assist, including reporting on what I think needs attention.  

U Of Alaska President Search Part 4: Finalist Johnsen Meets With Community (and me) At UAA

My blogger identity and my human identity came together yesterday afternoon when I went to the newish sports center at UAA for the community forum with president finalist Jim Johnsen.  Fortunately, I thought it was at 4pm so, while I didn't get there until 4:10, I was early for the real time of 4:30.  I checked out the view from the Sports Grill looking through the glass wall down to the

arena floor.  (Someone later asked Johnsen whether more student residences wouldn't have been a better use of the money than this slick arena.  He diplomatically said he tried not to second guess past leaders' decisions, knowing that various factors come together in a way that make some decisions right in the context.)




Anyway,  I used my extra time to call my mom who went back on hospice earlier that day, and I waited for the tv interview to end, before I went over to talk to the finalist, knowing that neither of us were probably too excited about meeting given that I'd posted the day before my belief that he had padded his resume over publications.  He said, "Hi Steve" as I walked over and we shook hands as I acknowledged the awkwardness, he thanked me for at least giving him a heads up email before posting, and we got past it and chatted amiably.  If he would have preferred to make me vanish, it wasn't obvious, and I sincerely told him that if he becomes president that I would support him however I could.  I'm not a confrontational person and coming face-to-face with the man I'd just written about was uncomfortable, but we both worked to put each other at ease.

It wasn't til after the event that I thought back to several weeks ago when I asked if I could interview him then and he said the search committee had told him not to talk to folks before the campus visits.  I think my inability to talk to him (other than brief emails) prior to posting put us both at a disadvantage.  It set me up to wonder why the regents didn't trust him (or the media) enough to let us talk and made him less of a person and more of a character in a story where I had to fill in the details.  The email exchange we had over the publications was cordial but factual and we didn't discuss why he characterized them as he did in the resume.  If we had met and talked, I know we would have gone into more depth that would have given him a chance to give his view of the resume.   As I think about all this now, I realize that in our former interactions back in the late 1990's, we were cast in adversarial roles - he was labor relations director and I was grievance coordinator for the union.  And with him based in Fairbanks and me in Anchorage, when we met it was basically over business. 

There were appetizers out and people found their way up to the grill and by the time Chancellor Case introduced him there were about 40 people in the room.  He gave his introductory comments - which he's repeated maybe ten times in the last two days first in Juneau and yesterday in Anchorage [Fairbanks]- articulately.  He went on to answer people's questions - about graduation rates, how the university can participate in the state discussions about the economy, about tuition and other student fees, the residence halls v. the sports center - knowledgeably.  He spoke in detail revealing a good grasp of the Alaska situation and awareness about what's done Outside in similar situations.

He doesn't have the commanding presence of the generals - past president Hamilton, current president Gamble - which is not a bad thing.  Nor does he have the nice guy presence of the third general - Chancellor Case - who introduced him at the gathering.  He said he's used to thinking about himself as a bit of an introvert, but that he really has enjoyed the past two days getting to talk to so many people.  And perhaps that's a good description of his manner - the introvert working hard to pass in an extrovert role.  That's an observation, not a criticism; I can relate to that myself.

University of Alaska Presidential Search Part 3: Resume Padding -Or- When Is A Publication Not A Publication?

It's with a heavy heart that I have to conclude that UA President finalist Jim Johnsen has padded his resume.  In a section labeled "Selected Publications"  there are three items listed.  None of them can be legitimately called a 'publication.'  While this may seem trivial to some, in the academic world where he has spent a good part of his career and where this job would be, publications make or break a faculty career.

Dr. Johnsen, according to his resume, has never been in a tenure track position, so actually having publications is not something that would have been required of him.  Sure, having some publications might enhance his standing, but they aren't necessary.  My concern is that he padded his resume to make his accomplishments look like more than they were.  And while this section was labeled 'Selected Publications,' implying that there are other works that would be legitimately called publications in an academic setting, there aren't.  The rest of this post will give the details of the documents identified in the resume and discuss the issues of academic publications and resume padding.


Finalist Announcement

When the one finalist for the UA president was announced, I was partly surprised by who it was - someone I had interacted with in my role as a faculty union grievance representative - but even more so by the fact that there was only one candidate.  There was a search in 1998 that resulted in only two candidates, but the 1990 and 2010 searches had four and three respectively.

The Board of Regents webpage had a link to the resume.  As I looked through it I saw there were three items listed under "Selected Publications."  They were all topics that related to University of Alaska labor relations, my connection to Johnsen.

Screen shot from Jim Johnsen resume

So I googled to find them.  I got nothing.

The 'Publications'

I called the UAA Consortium library reference desk and the librarian said she had been looking unsuccessfully herself.  She suggested I contact the National Center for the Study of Collective Bargaining in Higher Education, where  "The Restructuring . . ." piece was supposed to be in their 2000 proceedings.  (I had already been to their website, but hadn't done more.)  So I called and asked if they had a copy. Michelle told me that they had copies of all the proceedings online, but that the organization had been in turmoil for about five years and their collection went from 1972-1999 and then 2006-the present.  The years 2000 - 2005 are listed as unavailable.

The next day my inbox had two copies of that paper.  Both the people I'd talked to had contacted Jim Johnsen.  The National Center sent me a copy they got from Johnsen and Johnsen himself sent me a copy with a promise to send the other two when he got home over the weekend, which he promptly did.

The first one - "The Restructuring . . ." -  looked like a rough draft, partially in outline.  Something that one might use as notes for a presentation.  I called the National Center for the Study of  Collective Bargaining in Higher Education back and asked about their proceedings; were they refereed or edited?  I was told they were, at best, loosely edited for typos, but were basically presenters' papers printed out for conference attendees.  Some conferences publish peer reviewed and edited conference proceedings.  That wasn't the case here.  And, the year that Johnsen presented this paper, the organization was in turmoil.  The Center didn't have any copies of proceedings for that year.  I later emailed Johnsen to see if he had a copy of the proceedings and he didn't.  That doesn't mean something wasn't printed up that year, but neither the Center nor Johnsen has copies.

Then I got the other two papers.

The Essential Elements of a Faculty Collective Bargaining Agreement in Higher Education  says "30 September 2008 draft" at the bottom of each page.  In the text it says, "In this chapter . . ." but the citation didn't include the name of a book.  This was clearly not a publication.

Innovation in Faculty Collective Bargaining  is another conference presentation, but not a publication.

So I emailed Jim Johnsen and asked:

1.  “The Essential Elements of A Faculty Collective Bargaining Agreement in Higher Education”  Is there an actual published version of this?  It says Chapter and it says “draft” so I was wondering.

2.  "Innovation in Faculty Collective Bargaining"  - This says “Presented at” and begins, Thank you.  Good morning.  Is there a published version of this somewhere?

3.  “The Restructuring of the University of Alaska System”  - This mentions Proceedings.   Given the nature of the paper - lots of outline - I’m assuming this was not peer reviewed?  Was this anything more than all the papers at the conference were bound for attendees?  Do you have a copy of the proceedings?

4.  Your resume has these documents in a section called “Selected Publications.”  Are there additional publications as that suggests?  Can you give me links to them?

Jim Johnsen replied quickly:

"Happy to clarify, Steve.

"Elements" was written for a book, edited by Dan Julius, in faculty bargaining. Last I heard (several years ago) it was published by some academic press. Not sure of its status.

"innovations" was a presentation at the CUNY higher education collective bargaining conference that I was told would be included in the proceedings of the conference. I refer you to CUNY for those papers I presented there over the years that were in the conference proceedings.

As to other papers, I gave UA all the papers I managed to hold onto through numerous personal and job moves over the years."

I don't know of any faculty member who doesn't know if the chapter he wrote got published or not.  Maybe if they've got 30 chapters in various books they might not remember about one or two of them, but if it's your only publication, I'd think you'd remember for sure.  So I checked further.

I quickly found an email address for Dan Julius and asked him if the book had ever been published.  He also wrote back quickly:

"Good day. What Dr. Johnsen says is true. He did write that chapter and it was accepted for the book. The book has not yet been published due to a variety of reasons having to do with the editors, one of whom is myself. So the book has not been published yet, if it is, Jim's chapter will be included. I hope this helps.

Dan Julius"

So, it hasn't been published and 'if it is' Jim's chapter will be in it.


Does it matter? Publications

The tenure and promotion process in universities is excruciating for most faculty.  The worklife of a college professor these days is much more stressful than it was in the recent past even, and for many, particularly mothers, it can be impossible. (For example or example 2)  In UAA tenure reviews all the documents are scrutinized by the chair, by the college promotion and tenure committee, by the dean, by the campus wide committee, the provost, and then the chancellor.  The decisions can end someone's career.  Of the three parts of the faculty workload - teaching, research, and service - the most difficult for the majority of faculty, in teaching institutions like UAA, is research because research involves long-term projects that have to be squeezed out on top of the short term demands of teaching and service activities.  In some departments the criteria are vague and in other departments they are listed fairly clearly, such as "at least X peer reviewed articles or book chapters and Y  presentations." 

From Wikipedia:

Academic publishing is the subfield of publishing which distributes academic research and scholarship. Most academic work is published in academic journal article, book or thesis form. The part of academic written output that is not formally published but merely printed up or posted on the Internet is often called "grey literature". Most scientific and scholarly journals, and many academic and scholarly books, though not all, are based on some form of peer review or editorial refereeing to qualify texts for publication. Peer review quality and selectivity standards vary greatly from journal to journal, publisher to publisher, and field to field.

While different disciplines define their publications differently, by no stretch of my imagination, do the documents listed under 'Selected Publications' fall into the category of publications.  These are conference presentations, the first of many steps toward publication.

Does It Matter?  Enhancing One's Resume

From CNN article  "Resume Padding: Inconsequential or Inexcusable?":

"It may sound crazy.  Why would a high-ranking executive lie about his or her credentials, especially now, when all it takes is a quick phone call or Internet search to verify information?

Yet it happens more often than you might think. From a white lie about time spent as a customer service rep to a whopper about earning an MBA, résumé padding occurs regularly across industries, experts say. In a 2010 survey of 1,818 organizations, 69% reported catching a job candidate lying on his or her résumé, according to employment screening service HireRight."

The 2012 article goes on to ask readers what they think should happen to the then newly hired Yahoo CEO Scott Thompson.   A dissident shareholder had pointed out that Thompson's resume said he had BA degrees in computer science and accounting. Many called for his resignation, others defended him.

"Thompson has a degree in accounting, not computer science, but frankly at this point in his career does it really matter what he studied as an undergraduate?" Newsweek technology editor Dan "Fake Steve Jobs" Lyons asked in a Daily Beast column.

"(Thompson is) 54 years old, has been CEO of PayPal, and before that held high positions at Inovant, a subsidiary of Visa, and Barclays Global Investors. He's qualified to run Yahoo."

A 2014 BBC Capital article finishes the Scott Thompson/Yahoo story:

Remember Scott Thompson? He was the chief executive who had to leave Yahoo in 2012 for misstating his educational credentials on his resume. Thompson had said that he graduated with a computer-science degree, but it turned out that the university he attended didn’t offer such a degree until he had completed school. When this fact came to light, he left after just four months in the job.

In Scott Thompson's case, it probably didn't matter if he had a second degree in computer science.  He'd proven himself on the job since he graduated from college.

The real issue is integrity, honesty.  Is this someone who is straightforward?  If he lies in little things like this, when else might he sugarcoat the facts?

The same applies to Jim Johnsen.  Johnsen hasn't been in a tenure track position or any other job that required he have publications.  It's good that he has some conference presentations.  What's not good is that he felt the need to enhance his record by calling those papers, 'publications.'

Let me put this into context.  I was a grievance representative when Jim Johnsen was the university labor relations officer.  If I had had a faculty member whose resume had the same sort of 'Selected Publications" section, he would have been turned down for tenure and required to leave the university.  And if that employee would have appealed and it got up to the statewide appeal level, I have absolutely no doubt that Jim Johnsen would have had no mercy in his rejection of those publications.  And rightfully so.  I probably would have done my best to talk the faculty member out of making an appeal in the first place because there would have been no way he could have won.

I challenge the Board of Regents to take this issue seriously.  I know they are in a hard spot.  They've spent time and resources on this search since President Gamble announced his retirement last December.  They felt at the end that there was only one candidate who was worthy to be sent out to the campuses to meet with the university community. 

But I would argue that it doesn't bode well for the University of Alaska to hire a president who would pad his resume to make his record look better than it is.  Yahoo's board knew it probably didn't matter whether Scott Thompson had one or two degrees.  But he still had to leave.  It was about integrity. 

When Dennis McMillian retired recently as CEO of the Foraker Group, he wrote some parting thoughts in their newsletter, including some "Dennisisms" on hiring.  Here are three of the six:

Hiring:

• Stop hiring people based on superficial qualities — it’s easy to put lipstick on a pig. Rather, hire the person with the right values and attitude.
• Skills can be taught, attitude cannot.
• Obviously, some positions require credentials, but even in those situations, rate values and attitudes higher than degrees or experience, then you will minimize turnover and maximize your organization’s capacity.

People with the right values don't embellish their resumes. 

The Board of Regent has posted a Leadership Profile for the UA President (in part):

"The next president should continue to elevate UA’s national visibility and be effective with relevant agencies of the federal government. He or she should work effectively with University of Alaska Foundation leaders. He or she must be a coach for chancellors, a wise counselor for the board and trustworthy resource for the legislature."

I doubt that a person who has padded his resume would positively elevate UA's national visibility.  And the chancellors, the board, and the legislature would be constantly wondering whether his coaching and counseling was trustworthy.

This sort of post is troubling to publish.  It does not make me happy.  I'd rather this search were over and the university could move along to find creative responses its many challenges.  But I don't see that I have a choice.  It's better we know this before anyone is hired than afterward as in the Yahoo case.