Sunday, March 8, 2009

Presidential Search Advisory Committee

So I was cleaning out my email inbox and found some emails from the Faculty Senate President Yan Searcy about the Presidential Search Advisory committee. The emails took me back to late 2007 when I first suspected that the now former President would not be rejoining us for the 2008-09 school year. I heard two names pop up repeatedly as replacements which was surprising because if true it eliminated the need for any type of search process. If the Board of Trustees had settled on a replacement, then why form an advisory committee and waste the time of faculty and staff who are already working hard. Why hire a executive search firm at a cost that could be spent elsewhere in the university, perhaps recruiting students more likely to stay and graduate within the 4-6 year window we are evaluated on? Why perpetrate the illusion of transparency when it is clear that the Board of Trustees has its collective eye on two candidates whose names have kept re-emerging since 2007? Thus, I was intrigued when the Advisory Committee was formed as to what advice they might give to the Board. I was dismayed upon hearing from Advisory Committee members that there was no discussion about candidates once the original 33 applicants was whittled down to 12. And again no advice was given when the five candidates who would receive “airport interviews” were selected. So I am left to ask what was the purpose of the Presidential Search Advisory committee except to give the illusion that what faculty of this university think is important. If that is true then what can we expect from the next ten years at Chicago State? Maybe broken up and sold to the City Colleges or private educational concerns???


  1. Yes, that's sound like the Chicago State University I came to know. Since arrival, I have witnessed time and time again people in positions hiring their friends, cousins, frat brothers or sorority sisters (the list goes on)to do jobs and placed in positions they're not qualified to have or hold. In my opinion the state need to appoint a new board and that new board meet with the Presidential Search Advisory Committee to discuss new candidates. If the state can eliminate the mess the former Governor of Illinois caused in their yard then they can eliminate the mess he caused right on the campus of Chicago State.

  2. A year ago, after Dr Daniel resigned, there seemed to be a lot of optimism from many corners about "changing the culture at CSU." Is anyone out there optimistic any longer? I'm disheartened that at CSU we are going to see more of the same: another presidential administration, chosen by Trustees who are afraid to let faculty have a say in anything significant, that see the faculty as the enemy. [And by the way, is anyone else out there fed up with that tiresome administrative plaint that dealing with faculty is akin to "herding cats?"]
    The top/down administrative culture at CSU has to end. It should begin with a show of good faith by the Trustees. Maybe more than this, CSU would be greatly helped if faculty would show that they care about how their university is being run aground.