Address to the Faculty Senate - April 4, 2002
Thank you, Dr. Hill, and members of the Faculty Senate, for inviting me to speak both to you and to your colleagues here at the University of Louisiana at Monroe this afternoon. I have intentionally avoided commenting publicly since my selection in December about our hopes and plans for ULM and its future. I have done that out of respect for you, the faculty, because I wanted you to hear from me directly first, rather than read about my issues and ideas within the media.
Since most of you are seeing and hearing from me for the first time, I want to tell you a little about who I am. Before my father's death, he asked me to trace his family history, which I did --- all the way back to the late 1600's when my early ancestors came to this country. I do not plan to bore you with my complete story, but an anecdote or two should help to set the stage for understanding my most recent history.
I come from a line of Mississippi planters, as it was recorded in the 1840 Census. Now throughout literature, the word "planter" causes one to envision cotton plantations, Tara, Scarlet O'Hara, and the like. However, according to the tax rolls of 1840, the three Cofer brothers who settled in Coffeville, Mississippi, as planters had one mule, one pocket watch, and $1.40 among the three of them - all of which leads me to believe they may have been "planters" for someone else.
In any event, my father was from Lake Providence, Louisiana, where his father had worked as a surveyor on the railroad. My mother was from West Monroe, Louisiana, where her father settled and ran a 40-acre dairy farm. Mother attended Ouachita Junior College in the late 1930's and a faculty member of that great institution suggested that she would be better served by attending Louisiana Tech. She graduated from LA Tech in 1944 and went to work for the Cooperative Extension service in Transylvania, Louisiana, where she met my father.
After World War II they married and moved to Vicksburg, Mississippi, where I was born in 1949. In 1950, they moved with their infant son and young daughter to a neighborhood located on the south side of Jackson, Mississippi, a collection of pre-World War II houses. My father was a working-class man who saved few dollars from his job as a warehouseman for Standard Oil Company. He never had a college degree or even a high school degree, but he had a healthy respect for learning. As I prepared to go to college, he took a second job as a department store security guard at night to help pay my tuition. My mother was a lunchroom worker and manager in the Jackson public schools for twenty years before she took a position as director of food service for the Headstart organization in Jackson, Mississippi, when I entered college in 1967.
This story is probably similar to that of many of you. Some of you are first or even second-generation college graduates, and so are many of our students. I tell you all of this so that you might begin to get a glimpse of my values. The university experience means much, much more to me than turning students into alumni or ideas into publications. For me, a college degree is the "great equalizer". Graham Spanner, the President of Penn State, perhaps said it best when he stated that ". . . Education is society's mechanism of turning despair into hope, for raising the social consciousness of the community, and for improving the quality of life."
Values other than those I learned from the examples set by my parents are relevant to me as well. These have been developed over the last 30 years as I have served as an executive in state government, the private sector, and higher education. Each of the many institutions with which I have been associated has afforded me a variety of professional and personal experiences that have fine-tuned my value system. It is important that you know that I base all of my decisions on these values. It is equally important that you know and understand what they are and why I weigh the choices I am faced with against each of them.
Academic Excellence
The first of these values is academic excellence --- excellence, which is approached through diligent effort, both individual and collective. Pursuing excellence means being satisfied with no less than the highest goals that we can envision. Pursuing excellence involves being informed --- as well as influenced --- by regional, national, and global standards, in addition to our own personal expectations. We must recognize and accept the sacrifices, risks, and responsibilities involved in the pursuit of excellence, and because of that price, we should eagerly celebrate each other's successes. Finally, I believe that we should all commit ourselves to this pursuit in an ethical and moral manner.
The decisions we make --- and the direction we take --- here at ULM must first be governed by this pursuit of excellence. This means recruiting and retaining the best, and expecting the best from them. It means that we must be willing to support excellence in our reallocation decisions. Excellence means making hard personnel decisions, so that when we defend tenure --- and we will defend tenure --- we can explain the rigorous evaluations that stand behind those critical faculty personnel decisions, both before and after the granting of tenure. Other decisions --- whether they be program elimination in the short-term or program additions in the long-term --- must be intellectually sound. Mindless change is meaningless, short-lived, and generally not worth the effort. By the same token, avoiding necessary change for the sake of satisfying internal or external critics is equally harmful and will slowly destroy the very fabric of this university.
I urge you to remember that --- like each of us --- ULM will never be what it was, and it is not what it is going to be. The nexus between the two is the challenge that must be faced by all of us and should be a hallmark for our decision-making.
Respect
The second value that I use as a measure when I am faced with difficult decisions is mutual respect. I believe that respect for one's self and for others is the foundation of honor and the basis of integrity. A hallmark of our academic community is, and must be, respect - for the process by which we seek truths, and for those who engage in that process. Such respect is essential for nurturing the free and open discourse, exploration, and creative expression that characterize a true university.
Respect embraces the diversity in our society. Diversity means we must learn from our differences and not be polarized - or paralyzed -- by them. Exclusionary policies and practices deprive us both of a greater understanding of the complexities of our fellow human beings as well as potentially beneficial talent to tap for the good of the institution. If we isolate ourselves from those who seem different, then we have failed to make the University a place that truly furthers understanding of our society.
Responsibility
Finally, I believe that accepting responsibility and acting responsibly are interrelated virtues. Personal responsibility requires first a careful, honest reflection on one's moral obligations. Being responsible and acting responsibly impose on us and our University the duty to make decisions by both acknowledging the context and considering consequences -- both intended and unintended -- of any course of action. Being responsible requires us to be thoughtful stewards of those resources accountable to ourselves, each other, and the many publics we serve.
After taking into account those values that my parents taught me and those that I have embraced as an adult, I hope that every decision I make here will be weighted against one additional criterion: is it in the best interest of the University?
I have been blessed for the last 32+ year by living and learning with a most extraordinary individual, my wife Deborah. I learned from Deborah to put principle ahead of politics, put people first, and to understand the value of compassion. I have also had the opportunity to work for a number of visionary leaders --- William Winter in Mississippi, H. Dean Propst at The University of Georgia System, and Manuel Pacheco at the University of Missouri. I learned from them to take a stand, communicate with the people whom I have promised to serve, and welcome every opportunity to explain my decisions.
You will soon discover that I will always be willing to cooperate, but I do not avoid intellectual or philosophical confrontation. Men or women of character can disagree without being disagreeable. This university will progress more rapidly if we transcend the "we" and the "they" mentality that exists and instead seek solutions that are best for the institution. If we ever disagree - and we will -- I will have a good reason why and I will tell you exactly what that reason is.
Early in my career, I took an especially firm stand on an issue --- probably one of little significance. After the department meeting, the wise older department chair took me aside and said, "Jim, you need to be able to defend both sides of the issue. If you won't, I do not want you here. If you can't, you do not deserve to be here." Those words stuck with me for many years as the essence of collegial decision-making. Please do not be surprised if during our conversation I ask you to argue my point while I argue yours. When we can convince each other of the mutual benefit of both sides of the issue, then we can make an informed decision.
I will meet often with not only the Faculty Senators, but also with you as individual faculty members, departments, Colleges, students, and staff. I will make a report at every Faculty Senate meeting I am fortunate enough to be able to attend, and I will stand for your questions. I believe in open and frequent communication if we need to talk, I will make myself available, if at all possible; however, all decisions must go through the operational hierarchy. I believe very strongly in hiring good people, letting them do their jobs, and holding them accountable. Therefore, I ask you to deal professionally with the appropriate department, College, or University administrator on administrative, personnel, or other business matters. By all means, however, if you wish to communicate with me directly, send me a message. My email address is cofer@ulm.edu. Please use it.
Shared governance
Before the question is asked, let me say that yes, I believe in shared governance. Specifically, I believe in the concepts as stated in the 1966 Joint Statement on Governance of Colleges and Universities, which this campus has adopted. The 1966 Joint Statement clearly includes faculty in the governance process and emphasizes their role and expertise in matters of academic standards and curricula. However, it states unequivocally that the faculty recommends to the President who then, in turn, recommends to the governing board. The Chautauqua Nexus, the Faculty Senate, and other equally distinguished faculty forums will provide us with excellent opportunities to contemplate and debate the 1966 Joint Statement if there is disagreement among any of us on what it says and how we intend to interpret the document. In matters affecting students and/or staff, it is equally important that their collective and individual voices be heard.
There are times, however, -- and I want you to understand this clearly -- when the process of shared governance simply will not work. Time constraints, often created by demands imposed by ultimate decision-makers including our System and the Board of Regents, will occasionally make the full process impossible. At those times, and at all others, I ask you to join me in being ever mindful that we are part of the University of Louisiana System as well as Louisiana's public college and university infrastructure, and that these officials have an important role to play within this institution. On some occasions, delays created by the current process will require that decisions must be made. I will keep you informed when this happens, I will tell you why it happened, and we will work diligently to improve our processes so that we can avoid this type of interruption in the future.
Each of us has a primary and a secondary responsibility. Your primary responsibility as faculty is academic preparation; mine is the effective and efficient administration of the institution. When we sit down together at the shared governance table, we must replace our department and disciplinary hats with a corporate hat. Shared governance denotes we are involved in a process that will eventually benefit the institution as a whole even if it does not help our specific department or discipline. The implementation of the privileges of shared governance brings concomitant responsibilities. If we are to participate in the decision-making process, so, too, should we support those decisions. This doctrine is especially sacred when the decision is for the betterment of the institution, but is disadvantageous to our personal, departmental or disciplinary motives.
Fisher Report
Having said that, let us now turn specifically to the Fisher Report. The fifty-three recommendations in the Fisher Report speak to the very heart of this institution. There was a rumor on campus last month that when the Fisher Report was issued, I would be so shocked at the magnitude of the problems that I would renege on the appointment and stay in Columbia. Since -- and frankly even before -- my appointment, I have spent many hours reviewing the available publications, reports, newspaper articles, and memorandum from and about ULM. As a result, I find very little in the Fisher Report that I did not already know. Notice, please, that I am here.
Just in case you have not had the opportunity to review these additional materials, I have brought with me the first SACS report, the second SACS report, the Report on Information Technology, the last two financial audits, a copy of the Operating Budget, and accompanying quarterly financial reports. If there is anything I've left out, please call me and I will get the Faculty Senate a copy. If you have not had an opportunity to read these reports, I encourage you to take the time and do so.
Taken together, they basically indicate that we are not sized appropriately for our current mission and enrollment level. Certain administrative functions are badly understaffed which have a direct relationship on student recruitment and retention, and overall service to the campus community is adversely affected by these shortfalls.
There are many reasons for our problems: revenue declines associated with student declines, poor fiscal management, poor decision-making, lack of proper planning for the short- or long-term. I prefer Henry Ford's philosophy: "Don't find fault. Find a remedy." However, our most vocal critics apparently find it preferable to find fault, probably because that's easier and they are not interested enough in the success of the institution to try and understand all of the issues well enough to offer a solution anyway. Our job - yours and mine - is to seek appropriate remedies.
Many of those remedies will require great change, and change itself has enemies. The question, then, is how are you going to solve our problems? My answer is very definite --- we are going to solve them one at a time, and we are going to do that together - administrators, faculty, staff, students, alumni, and the community at large. We must make change quickly, but not in a hurry. There is no way that we can address all of these recommendations at the same time. We do not have the financial, administrative, nor intellectual capital to do so. In addition, many of the recommendations require a proper, collegial planning process and a well-conceived academic direction, something that we must develop very soon.
What do I see as my most immediate challenges? At the top of that list is to meet and get to know you. I want you to tell me what you do and how you do it. I plan to spend a lot of time in your offices, and with our students. You will hear me ask many times, "What are the top four most important issues on this campus?" I need to learn from the campus community its history, culture, and traditions. I want to discuss with you the future of this institution. I want to hear your dreams for ULM. What is your vision for ULM? I've shared my values --- what are yours? What do you want from me as your president?
Also near the top of that list would be to restore confidence in ULM among those who have lost it. I intend to travel to communities across our state throughout this first year. I need to meet our alumni and friends, and hear firsthand about the history and traditions of this great state, region, and of this wonderful institution. I want to meet with -- and listen to -- community leaders, alumni, industrial and agricultural leaders, members of the media, prospective students, and their parents, school principals and superintendents. I want them to tell me how we can help them, and I want to tell of the many contributions this institution makes to their lives. When I go out around Louisiana I want to be able to tell the people whom I meet all of the good things that are going on at ULM. The most significant untold good story is you -- the dedicated faculty and staff.
I have already started an effort to reexamine our recruitment efforts. The Dean of Enrollment Management together with the Deans are looking at a series of questions I posed that will help us develop an effective recruitment plan. When we have our new Vice President for Student Affairs on board, we will begin to develop -- with your help -- effective retention programs. The research on that subject is very clear: the number one indicator of student retention is interaction with faculty both in and out of the classroom.
At the same time, I am going to evaluate very carefully how well we are managing our funds. I expect members of this institution to be good stewards of the precious funds that are entrusted to us. In seeking public and private support for ULM, I want to be able to say that we are operating as effectively and efficiently as possible. To say that will take some change, and I intend to implement that change in our administrative areas.
We are going to clean up this campus -- our buildings and residence halls. I am today calling upon the community, both on- and off-campus, to join with us in reclaiming the pride that a clean, neat campus instills. If we are to "clean up" ULM's image in the public's mind, I believe that we must begin that process at a practical, highly visible point: cleaning up our residence halls, buildings, and grounds. Dr. Joe McGahan, Professor of psychology, and his colleagues have begun a clean-up and beautification effort that I propose become a model for the larger campus. I have charged my staff to develop a plan to that effect. You and I may have to grab a rake, or a paintbrush, but we are going to clean up this campus. I certainly salute those among the faculty who have already taken this as a project, but this will take more than just a few of us. We may have to reallocate funds from other parts of this institution, but we are going to clean up this campus.
It is obvious that ULM has a budget problem. Your department may appear to be just fine, but the institution as a whole has a budget problem. The financial constraints that we face are not insurmountable if we all work together and we all put on that corporate hat I spoke of earlier. When we make a decision, we have to work together to ensure that that decision is implemented. When we make a decision that is in the best interests of the institution, we all have to support and defend that decision.
We expect to be criticized by others because they have the easy task: they can complain without restraint because they don't have to answer to, or for, others. Ours is the more difficult task: we must make the decisions and we must accept the responsibility for having done so. In short, the critics are not accountable -- we are.
Groups outside of ULM will take this opportunity to find fault with our solutions, recalculate figures, and call into question our motives for making decisions that are in the best interests of the institution. Those who aid and abet that criticism and do not support the decisions made that are in the best long-term interests of the institution because those decisions are not in their own personal best interests, are infringing upon the academic freedom of this institution to govern itself. Make no mistake: if individuals outside of this institution can launch a successful assault upon ULM's academic freedom, then the faculty's academic freedom is equally vulnerable. When we allow individuals outside of the academy to unduly influence institutional decision-making for their own self-interests, then we cease to be a university. Budget and athletic problems topple administrations; the loss of academic freedom topples universities and we cannot under any circumstances, no matter how difficult the times, allow intrusion into our academic freedom.
We are going to have to build a budget for next year that will reflect some reallocations. I need and expect your help in developing that budget. We have to solve our budget problems and we have to do it together. There are a hundred ideas I have about academic outreach, and economic development, and curricula change, and community outreach, and I know you have just as many that are probably better than mine. But to do any of these new initiatives, we have to solve the immediate budget problems, restore the confidence of the community, and reinvent this University to attract a greater number of qualified students.
And there is much more we will need to do. We must select a new Provost for we need a strong advocate for the faculty. We must move with some dispatch to identify a leader who can move us forward. In the meantime, however, we must have a faculty voice at the table. Therefore, I will be recommending, pending the formal approval of the University of Louisiana System Board of Supervisors, that Dr. Steve Richters be confirmed as Interim Provost and Vice President of Academic Affairs. Dr. Richters has a distinguished record of service at ULM, and has graciously agreed to serve in this capacity. There are two principal reasons why I have specifically selected Dr. Richters. First, he has no desire to seek the position permanently, and that is a fundamental criterion I require of all interim appointees. Secondly, he and I share the same view of every person a leader. Specifically our Deans should and must be more involved and accountable in College fiscal issues, and our faculty should have a voice in discussions regarding resource allocations. I look forward to working with Dr. Richters and others during the coming months to put in place a mechanism for meeting both of these goals.
In addition, I am also pleased to announce the appointment of Dr. Luke Thomas, Professor and Head of Health and Human Performance, as Chairman of the Provost/Vice President of Academic Affairs Search Committee. Dr. Thomas has served with distinction on a number of campus committees and will bring to this group the steady leadership so essential to this very important process. I will be naming the remaining members of the search committee shortly after consultation with our Faculty Senate and others. I thank Dr. Thomas for accepting this critical leadership position for ULM, and I also look forward to the good work that his group will accomplish on behalf of the institution.
ULM is fortunate, indeed, to have two strong leaders such as Dr. Richters and Dr. Thomas who are willing to step forward and take these extra responsibilities in this time of change at ULM. I value their counsel, as I value yours, and believe that we will move forward under their leadership.
In addition to the Provost search, we must begin an academic planning process, renew the strategic planning process, restructure our development efforts, increase the number of minority faculty and administrators, take our case for additional funding to Baton Rouge, seek increased community support for intercollegiate athletics, and address the other 40 odd recommendations in the Fisher Report. I started the process of seeking additional funding yesterday when I spent the day in Baton Rouge meeting with Governor Foster as well as members of our northeast Louisiana Delegation and Dr. Clausen. We have the Delegation's support to get additional funding, and I believe that the groundwork has been laid to achieve that important goal. There will be many more trips to Baton Rouge, and I will seek your input concerning the messages that we will be taking there.
It will take time to solve these many issues. We must build a team. I must learn about you, the community, and the state; determine what our potential really is; and define what our dreams are. We must rebuild confidence in this institution, and attract and retain students. We must learn to trust each other and work together.
ULM is a great institution, members of this faculty are among some of the most distinguished in the state, the programs are well respected, and our alumni are successful. The task of getting that message across to our constituents has been severely hampered by the disharmony on campus and the cacophony of criticism from off-campus. Perhaps never has the task been greater or more challenging, for the responsibility for addressing it lies squarely on our shoulders - yours and mine. You may expect much from me; I assure you that I expect much from you, as well.
James E. Cofer, Sr.
ULM President