April 2020

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
      1 2 3 4
5 6 7 8 9 10 11
12 13 14 15 16 17 18
19 20 21 22 23 24 25
26 27 28 29 30    

« Movie night | Main | Hagan in the spotlight »

Jun 28, 2009


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.


i do..where do i send you log info?

Ed Cone

you can email it to me at by clicking on the "email me" link at the top of the left column. thanks.


I do not work at G.C. but suspect that some faculty and staff heard rumors but chose to keep their heads in the sand regarding the financial health of their institution. I feel for those faculty who took "tenure" for granted and stopped being innovative in the classroom, ceased faculty development activities etc as if this institution fails, it will be hard for them to find positions at other nearby institutions. Although we have many institutions of higher learning in the area, their missions and what they have in promotion and tenure documents differ from campus to campus. I hope the institution can hang on until tuition dollars come in August...and then let's hope a tight leash on expenditures in the upcoming year will right the ship


What struck me about the article is that, apparently, the administration made no effort to contact faculty or department heads to ask them to help trim the budget. I can't blame the faculty too much--they got 2% raises when lots of others in academia and industry were getting nothing and there appears to have been no effort to bring them into the cost cutting process. What were they supposed to believe--"rumors...all over town" or their own experience?


Yes it is a bit surprising that faculty/department heads were not involved in discussions about trimming the budget. If I recall, the guy in charge of finances left G.C. sometime this past spring. I suspect: 1) he was in over his head OR 2) he saw that drastic cuts were required and made recommendations but was over ruled so quit or was fired. My guess is then that the upper administration saw how bad things were and then rather take the time for cost cutting ideas to be decided by consensus just did what they thought "best" (although not cutting dues to a country club and other non-student first activities is mind boggling). The trustees though stepped up and contributed but unfortunately it looks like that won't be enough to keep them afloat til fall.


mc - What makes you think the faculty "stopped being innovative in the classroom, ceased faculty development activities etc"?

The second part may be partially true because such activities require money and there wasn't much money available. The college stopped funding staff development activities years ago. Part of this recent cut was faculty sabaticals, even those already approved were eliminated. But, to say the faculty wasn't/isn't innovative in the classroom is a stretch, and for the most part, untrue.


I think you misunderstood my comments. Iwas not suggesting that ALL faculty "stopped being innovative in the classroom, ceased faculty development activities". Rather, those that did will have trouble finding new positions if the financial crisis facing GC extends to the point that GC ceases to function.

I believe those faculty who remained innovative and continued their faculty development will be able to find other positions in academe.

I am sorry that sabbaticals were cut but there are plenty of low costs ways to maintain faculty development- lots of conferences, workshops at UNCG, NCA&T, UNC-CH, NCSU, Duke etc...even podcasts!

The comments to this entry are closed.