AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs
This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!
-
Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!
Mark Kennedy new, but soon to be old CU President - Official CU president Thread
- Thread starter buff4bcs1985
- Start date
Yes, I would prefer someone less political and more academic. After long term successful business forward president, I think it’s time to recycle back to addressing the academic and research quality of the University.
Not that these areas have slipped dramatically but after the capital investments and projects under Benson its time to advance the classroom and laboratory aspects of the schools. CU is a mid-level Pac12 academic school, lift CU into the top 4.
Elevate CU Med to into the echelon on Duke, UCLA and Washington.
Elevate the Boulder academics to rival schools like Michigan, Washington, UCLA or Wisconsin. Fight for researches and grants to strength the academic thought published under the University
UC Denver is very much improved, but make it better. There are probably tons of PhDs who would not mind living and teaching in Denver vs Lubbock or Stillwater or Laramie.
I know President’s are now a “fundraisers” but they have to have a vision. Benson was good at this. Kennedy has put forth no vision, offered zero personal challenges and set no meaningful goals. He is collecting a paycheck by being friends with the donor class.
Kennedy has said he wants 20k to 30k fully online students in the next 5 years!
Sad reaction only because facepalm isn’t an option.
CU does not need to own the online space. However if CU could leverage online learning for Core classes or classes for Non Majors. That could grow the university and alleviate classroom crowding.
I look back on my PoliSci large lectures. They were large lectures but all power point. Online was definitely the platform best suited. Then have recitation once a week or bi-weekly as a capstone to the lecture and to justify supporting graduate students.
I tend to think, for instance, engineering professors would tend to be more conservative and, possibly, philosophy professors more liberal. I assume the more liberal voted for censure. So it would be interesting to see who voted and how they voted.
This is definitely happening, but CU is also trying to create dedicated online students. The problem is that 1) the market is viciously competitive at this point 2) CU is a decade behind and 3) Kennedy has chosen not to make an campus for dedicated online students, instead choosing a campus partnership for the online office. This presents a multitude of problems... Most notably that it becomes extremely difficult to holistically manage an online student when fragmented w campus services.
CU can pretty quickly kick CSUs ass in this space, they haven't evolved and their brand sucks... But it is the other peer and specialty institutions that will make this rough.
Just go google Online MBA and see all the good, reputable schools you have to grapple with.
The vote was 35-20 to censure. This from one article:
“Philosophy Professor Alastair Norcross noted his department was in favor of the motion, though not all faculty members were happy with its individual elements. He said the input from those in favor of the motion to censure Kennedy centered on a perceived lack of leadership on diversity, equity and inclusion.”
So I don’t believe I’m incorrect. And they voted on “a perceived lack of leadership” which seems pretty weak.
The regents aimed so low with the Kennedy hire. There is nothing in his background that screams big time university President.
What’s his contract term?
I thought that Benson did an outstanding job transitioning the Med School into position to be a world class asset as well as position all the campuses for the future.
Agree though completely with what you say about where the entire system needs to go in the future . Your comments about UCD could just as easily apply to UCCS as well and it is the fastest growing campus in the system.
Without substantial support from state government (and that support isn't coming) the grant and research money is going to be critical.
The problem for a school like CU in that area is that "above average" isn't going to move those needles. The bulk of that money is going to go to the schools that are "outstanding" or "elite." Outside of Aerospace Engineering what CU programs fall in those categories.
We need leadership that isn't okay with "above average." We need somebody at the top, and in the Chancellors offices as well who is willing and able to develop those programs that are elite, that draw the best students, the best professors, and importantly the best research sponsors.
This is one of the problems I have had with Dr. Phil as Chancellor in Boulder for the past decade. What has he done that associates the school with excellence? How has he made the school better than it's comparable institutions?
Now we need to ask those same questions about Kennedy. If they aren't finding somebody for the job of President of CU who doesn't bring a pursuit of excellence they aren't looking hard enough.
I would say it is 50/50. Changing the President of the University is a major disruption to University operations. Kennedy does have a number of active initiatives going at CU, and that has taken a lot of resources (both financial and otherwise). Hiring on a new President will change those initiatives. The BoR may truly believe in Kennedy's vision (online education and technology centralization primarily) and not want to deal with that disruption.
But this is where our Board of Regents model comes to hurt CU. The BoR are elected and political creatures and there seems a reasonable chance that the Democrats will want to please the the faculty groups AND place their own 'Democratic' stamp on the President's office for the first time in the last 40 years. A Board of Trustees might not face that same pressure, as they understand my first point more.
You make some very good points here.
It would require a constitutional amendment but those are easier at the state level.
A change to a Board of Trustees would reduce the likelihood of getting members who are only there to be elected as a political stepping stone, something we have seen multiple times in recent decades with individuals of varying political agendas.
A board of Trustees would still by nature be political but could be designed to minimize those impacts. Having individual seats rotate on and off in a staggered fashion could help encourage continuity and long term support of those initiatives that justify that support.
I've always thought an expert in the field, who understands the field, is a better executive. There are plenty of of people in the field who have leadership qualities. I've never been a big fan of plug and play executives. Especially in a not for profit field like education.
Right with you @MtnBuff.
I agree that UCCS should be at the same standards as UC-Denver.
- an oversight on my part.
One modification I think we can agree is the system should take most students, but place incentives to make them all better students.
As @Duff Man said the regents aimed low. The search chose to fish in a small pond and took first guppie they hooked.
Last edited: