Some of the hurdles that the work teams faced were timeline, presentation, support and moral.

The short timeline has necessitated many work team members volunteering 10% to 20% of there time during the work week for meetings over the last 3 or 4 months. Additionally, they needed to spend time outside of those meetings to review information(data) that is still being delivered from the consultants and campus feedback, while still performing their job on campus.

The business case template provided by project leadership or Huron was not the optimal way to present the details of the recommendations to campus. It was cumbersome and repetitive. The work teams have spent a lot of time fleshing out these recommendations so including more details of the rational and examples of how they see things working would be very helpful. I suspect that the teams have discussed in great detail most aspects that are being presented as feedback. Unfortunately, #1, they can’t list every conversation they’ve ever had on the case study, and #2, with the cases so dense and repetitive, it is easy to overlook some of the details that show they discussed these aspects.

I heard complaints about problems of having enough support for work teams to get data they wanted from project leadership or Huron in a timely matter or until it was too late. One of ASECs complaints was they would of liked to see more data but collecting data takes a long time which isn’t available. For the work teams further time, unfortunately, is not available. It may be time for governance groups to ask for this data collection and ensure it is obtained.

After the phase 1 recommendations were released work teams were given less than a month to obtain feedback and incorporate suggestions. This put a lot of pressure on everyone to review and submit feedback as quickly as possible. Given that the work teams didn’t have a lot of time to review lengthy feedback many of us kept feedback brief and focused on the things we wanted fixed rather then identify all the elements about the case studies that we liked and wanted to ensure was preserved. Seeing all the negative feedback and not much positive feedback on something that so much time has been invested has to be demoralizing.

It is great seeing campus so engaged and able to provide feedback on all of the recommendations being put forth.

http://chronicle.com/blogs/percolator/is-psychology-about-to-come-undone/29045

And why is it that educators resist evalaution more than any other professional group? They always have 100 reasons why it cannot or should not be done. Most of know there is no perfect way to evaluate people but it has to be done and we do the best we can. And it is usually good enough.

The low expectations for faculty in other words may be a symptom of a larger problem and a cause of this one.

Alyson Sewell
TA/PA/graduate student in the German Department

This is exactly what has happened in Europe….Europe is not poor, so why so many crises and “austerity” measures? It’s to simply grab the loot. In one country, 60% of the pension fund was forced by government to “buy” 99% stocks of a failed bank and is now paying out full amounts to all prior corrupt investors. In a few years, no more pensions…..

Well, it’s clear what has happened- elite are stealing the pension after stealing from the banks. As long as the politicians are not held personally responsible for abetting the robbery, it will continue. That is why the recall is the first step as a warning other politicians. The fight is much bigger than saving union rights.

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/05/education/beyond-the-college-degree-online-educational-badges.html?_r=2&scp=5&sq=Stanford%20internet&st=cse

“Wisconsin University Union, in conjunction with the AFSCME unions, is offering two additional presentations on the Wisconsin Retirement System. Please note that this message has been sent to a very limited list of contacts. As such, your colleagues would benefit from sharing this information with them.

“The presentations will be held at:

Monday, March 19 // 12 PM-1 PM *Union South (TITU)
Monday, March 26// 5-6 PM HSLC Rm 1248

“We hope your schedule will permit you to join us.”

On Tuesday, students rallied on Capitol Hill to protest a pending interest rate increase in subsidized loans made to low- and moderate-income undergraduates under the federal Stafford program. The rate is scheduled to increase to 6.8 percent from 3.4 percent for new loans made after June 30.

How can this be? A law called the College Cost Reduction and Access Act of 2007 reduced the interest rates on subsidized Stafford loans incrementally over four academic years, from 6.8 percent at the time to the current 3.4 percent. But the rates are scheduled to jump back up on July 1, unless Congress acts to extend the current rate — a tall order, in the charged election year political climate. (Representative Joe Courtney, Democrat of Connecticut, has introduced a bill to extend the lower rate.)

Student advocates have been worried about the level of student debt. And they warn that the Stafford increase will further burden borrowers by adding thousands of dollars to the cost of financing a college degree. Rich Williams, higher education advocate with the U.S. Public Interest Research Group, said nearly 8 million students take out the loans each year.