Last updated on 06/13/2019
6/13/2019 letter to campus from Provost Phillips:
Dear Colleagues,
Although I don’t start in my role as provost until July, with the term winding down I wanted to connect now before many of you turn your attention away from campus for the summer.
First, let me tell you what an incredible honor it is to be asked to serve as provost. I thank everyone who contributed to the search process. While I am very excited to get started, I do so with a strong sense of humility born both by the scope of the task at hand and, more importantly, by a recognition of how much I have to learn about the entire breadth of the university from this point forward. The success of our university is not about any one position or person, but about the strength, knowledge, experiences, and ideas of the people who make such important contributions across all of our academic and administrative units.
I am eager to roll up my sleeves and will begin diving into key issues and initiatives immediately. Over the course of the summer and well into fall, I will host various orientation and onboarding sessions with a wide variety of campus stakeholders. Listening will be the first order of the day, and I know that each of the colleges and schools have existing plans and dreams that I am eager to hear about. One of my primary goals as provost is to make sure that we weave together previously unconnected strengths and ideas in a way that advances the institution as a whole.
The UO is a great university that can and must continue to get even better as we strive to become one the nation’s top public research institutions. It is my firm belief that our best path toward achieving this goal is to fully embrace our mission as a public university, one firmly grounded in the strengths, values, opportunities, and challenges of our very unique state.
You, the faculty and staff, are the bedrock of these aspirations, and my nearly 20 years at the UO have proven to me time and again just how dedicated everyone at the university is to the success of our research, educational, and service missions. It is only by working together, in the spirit of camaraderie and trust, that we can and will make great strides toward these goals. It is in this spirit that I will serve you and the entire academic community as the UO’s provost—always working to build trust and confidence, always seeking collaboration and innovation, while also being willing and prepared to make tough decisions.
I believe deeply in the UO’s foundation and mission as a liberal arts university and have experienced firsthand the profound benefits of the UO’s unique interdisciplinary faculty culture, and I have interacted broadly across many colleges and schools during my time here. My own educational history is grounded in the liberal arts in every dimension. Although my research has been centered in the natural sciences, I am committed to being a provost for the entire academic enterprise, including the arts, humanities, social sciences, and professional programs. The provost position is often described as chief academic officer, and it is the engagement of the academy as a whole that is one of the most exciting aspects of the position.
A top challenge for this—and every—university is the increasing cost of education and the rising question of whether what we do is worth it to the student. One of my top goals is to ensure that the provost’s office never loses sight of the UO’s broader mission and the fact that, in all that we do, we must serve students first through outstanding teaching, research, and service. And we do that by making sure that we are helping all students reach their full potential in terms of intellectual and professional growth. The changing landscape of higher education is an incredible challenge, but one that I think the University of Oregon is uniquely positioned to help determine.
You may have ideas, thoughts, or questions. I hope you will share them with me, and ask that you please do so via email to [email protected].
Again, it is an honor to be UO’s next provost. I look forward to working with you, my colleagues, in this new capacity.
Patrick Phillips
6/12/2019 update: I’m sure the administration’s well paid flacks at Around the O will post the party line soon – meanwhile The Daily Emerald’s Zach Demars has a real news report, here:
After a closed-door internal search, Patrick Phillips, a professor of biology and former acting executive director of the Knight Campus, has been selected to replace Jayanth Banavar as University of Oregon provost and senior vice president. ….
“Although the UO clearly faces a number of challenges today, I believe that the only way to address these challenges in a sustainable way is to build a long-term vision of what University of Oregon can be–and should be–based on what and where we are,” Phillips wrote in his application for the position. “Specifically, we need to make sure that we capitalize on being a University in Oregon as much as we are the University of Oregon.” …
That last is a pretty good line. I wonder who wrote it.
6/12/2019: Former Interim Knight Campus Director and Biology Prof. Most of the faculty didn’t even know he was a candidate. Google scholar citations here, lab page here.
Dear University of Oregon colleagues and students,
The University of Oregon’s academic enterprise has grown and strengthened over the last few years as we have, together, worked to cement the institution’s position as Oregon’s top research university and make progress toward our aspirations to become one of the nation’s preeminent public universities. What we have achieved in this shared endeavor is quite remarkable, but our ambitions are even greater. To help realize those ambitions, the UO’s next provost needs a deep appreciation of our existing academic strengths, a clear vision for what we can become in the future, and the administrative acumen to get us there. The search for those unique-to-Oregon traits, combined with our need to act quickly and maintain momentum, were a driving force behind my decision to conduct an accelerated internal search for provost. I could not be happier with the results.
I am pleased to announce that Biology Professor Patrick Phillips will be the UO’s next provost and senior vice president. From a pool of tremendously strong internal candidates, Patrick emerged as the next provost due to his nearly two decades of distinguished service as one of the UO’s most respected faculty members, a track record of success as an administrative leader, and clear vision for what it will take for this institution to achieve new levels of academic excellence and distinction. Patrick will begin his term July 1.
Patrick, who joined the UO in 2000, is one of the UO’s most productive and prolific scientists—an expert in ecology and evolution, the biology of aging, molecular biology, and the genetics of complex traits. He has served as the director of the UO’s Institute for Ecology and Evolution, the head of the Department of Biology, and associate vice president for research. He also served as the acting executive director of the Phil and Penny Knight Campus for Accelerating Scientific Impact from 2016-2018, successfully launching the most important research initiative in UO history. In that role, Patrick was responsible for leading the design and construction process for new facilities, establishing governance and educational policies, and initiating and supporting innovative graduate internship and entrepreneurship programs.
Prior to coming to the UO, Patrick was a professor of biology at the University of Texas at Arlington. He earned his Bachelor’s Degree in biology from Reed College and his PhD in evolutionary biology from the University of Chicago.
Patrick has also demonstrated that he greatly values and appreciates the UO’s liberal arts foundation and long-standing history of interdisciplinary collaboration. While he is often associated with our efforts to enhance the UO’s basic and translational science capabilities, Patrick fiercely believes that achieving our academic ambitions and serving the next generation of students will require a holistic approach that requires world-class offerings from the arts, humanities, and professional programs. Patrick is committed to nourishing and fortifying the entire institution. He believes that the UO can be an unmatched catalyst for both economic development and societal good throughout our state, the nation, and the world. It is a compelling vision that I share.
The provost is the institution’s chief academic officer, charged with working with me, the deans, and the faculty to set the academic priorities for campus and for managing the human and capital resources to support those priorities. I look forward to helping Patrick hit the ground running. During the next year, we will welcome dozens of new faculty; oversee the launch of an innovative approach to student success at Tykeson Hall; open the Knight Campus; create new academic offerings in biomedical engineering and data science; plan an interdisciplinary research and teaching initiative in resilience and climate change bringing together the humanities, arts, social and natural sciences, and professional schools; and begin searches for new academic leaders in the College of Arts and Sciences, College of Design, and UO Libraries. We do not have the luxury of slowing down, and I am confident that Patrick will smoothly step into the role of provost to advance those priorities and much more.
I want to thank Senate President and Professor of Psychology Elizabeth Skowron and Professor of Geography Alec Murphy, who both took time from their busy schedules to lead the search process. I also want to express my appreciation to the other members of the search committee, which was primarily comprised of members who hold a tenure-related or career-faculty appointment (TTF or NTTF) at the UO. This search was truly led by our faculty, and I believe that was a significant factor in the strength of the candidate pool and ultimately in my selection of Patrick for the role.
To help ensure a seamless and effective transition for Patrick, and allow him a brief window to wrap up and manage his current work, an e-mail account has been created for his transition. Please send any notes, questions, ideas, etc., to him at [email protected].
Please join me in welcoming Patrick to this new role with the UO.
Michael H. Schill
President and Professor of Law
I’m so disappointed that I couldn’t find anyone to take my bet that the whole “internal search” was a ruse in the first place. Mike Schill just wanted to hire Patrick Phillips as Provost. No one would take my bet because they all believed the same thing. I guess we all get to be satisfied by the fact that we weren’t fooled by Schill’s shameful ploy.
Three reasons why Schill wanted to hire Phillips.
1 – Phillips shares Schill’s general contempt for the humanities and social sciences. If faculty in these areas wondered before whether they were being marginalized, well, wonder no more! You have your answer.
2 – Phillips will be exactly the yes-man that Schill dreams about. Not to worry Mike, you’re doing a great job of surrounding yourself with yes-men and pushing out those who contradict you.
3 – And of course, we definitely needed another white male in central administration.
Shame on you Mike Schill. Shame on you UO Board of Trustees for taking the Schill spin and not asking the questions you need to ask.
I think “general contempt” is a bit over the top.
If it looks like general contempt, talks like general contempt, and acts like general contempt, don’t try to gaslight us into believing it isn’t
What’s an example of “talks like general contempt”? What do you base that statement on?
“didn’t even know he was a candidate”? Even the homeless guys at the downtown library had that part figured out.
Seriously, though, best wishes to Dr. Phillips in his new role.
The scruffy guys with beards? They’re mostly emeritus bio profs, plus a few math/physics.
This comes as zero surprise – especially since we now have no College of Sciences for Phillips to be Dean of.
Schill does just want a) a yes man and b) a KC perception devotee
I think Phillips will shortly be in over his head but of course, he will continue to reassure is that he is not …
Would love to hear more, now that it is over, from the hiring committee or other insiders . . . What pushed him over the top compared to the other excellent and experienced candidates? Can you dispel the rumor mill, or confirm it?
KC Devotee
but, no one will ever confirm that publicly
I think Patrick will make an excellent Provost.
He could be really good. He worked hard on the front end of the KC project to help make it integrated with and a benefit to existing campus entities, at least as much as anything like that could be. I can see why humanities/social sciences might be worried, but he seems to respect those areas and now that they’re in his portfolio, he could be really good for supporting them along with the rest of campus.
I wonder if he’ll stop the $2M subsidy for Jock Box tutoring from the provost’s budget? Athletics is flush with cash, and that would be enough to save LERC and the museums, and pay for some of the new science prof start-ups.
Phillips comes from the same rotten-to-the-core mold as nearly all of our previous provosts. He particularly resembles Moseley. Since Phillips arrived on campus, he has been ambitious ladder-climber, shamelessly adhering to the management credo of kissing up to those above him and kicking those below him. Ask the staff in the Bio dept how he treats them. Or his students. He doesn’t care about anyone’s opinion (except those above him on the org chart) and does not work well with others. His KC it’s-my-way-or-the-highway management style exemplifies his attitude and behavior. If you are expecting something different from him now that he is King of this little Hill, you will be sadly disappointed. We are in for a Trumpian treat. I suggest those who can develop an exit strategy just in case the walls start to close in on you.
I have served on a few committees with Patrick and most of Sun Tzu’s characterization I find to be consistent with Phillips observed actions and attitudes, but he is better at hiding his agenda than JTM ever was and yes, definitely ask staff in Bio – often this kind of treatment is an indicator of other things.
I should clarify – what this means to me is that Phillips will be no different than previous provosts like Coltrane, Bean, Brady, Moseley
a. there will be no thinking outside of the box
b. there will be preferential favorite units
c. there will be a party line
All of the above maybe normal for this position, but I would argue that this doesn’t move the institution forward – then again, I don’t think the institution really wants to move forward
OK, I know this was a shotgun wedding arranged by Pres Schill, but shouldn’t we give the guy a brief honeymoon anyway?
Coaltrain and the bean…. Ahh, all the hits you loved and great memories!!!! ALMOST, makes me wish JTM and Dave were back.
If we’re going to get nastalgic, last I looked Lorraine Davis was still on the payroll – ~$75K from the Ducks, and ~$75K from the general fund. I’m sure she’s playing a central academic role over at the Jock Box.
A brief honeymoon? Does a zebra change its stripes 3/4 of the way through its life? Do we need even more evidence that Phillips is an egotistical, self-serving, overly-ambitious, vindictive, step on everyone else jerk? He’s been here doing his nasty thing for 20+ yrs. The probability that Phillips will be a truly good Provost is about the same as UOMATTERS doing a 180 and cease being an apologist for all of Schill’s terrible decisions. Sure, let’s give the new guy a chance. I give him one week before he starts being himself again. With Schill and Phillips at the helm, God help the students, the unions, the OAs, NTTF, grad students, GEs, classified, untenured faculty, and all of the humanities, social sciences, dance, music and any other group or unit that those two deem “unproductive” . Bean was not very bright and blundered his way through his job. Like Moseley, Phillips knows exactly what he wants and how to achieve it. It won’t be pretty.
Jeez, what he do to you? Take away your lab space or something? Chill.
Prof UOM doesn’t really strike me as a Schill lickspittle.
Re “Trumpian treat”, I do think an occasional “free McDonald’s for all” buffet at Johnson Hall would be a great idea. Don’t forget the ice cream!
Now that the process is over, there’s a farcical quality to this whole thing — gasp, the KC interim director was named provost after a rushed and private internal search? Who could have guessed!
There could indeed be a honeymoon period… but it should be a cautious one. JH-style platitudes like the ones in Phillips’ well-timed reassurance email should make folks nervous. They read like nonsense PR, which is fine, I suppose, for a sanitized introductory message.
But the honeymoon should end quickly unless there’s some effort to get past the Around the O corporate-speak and articulate some details about how these commitments to the mission of a liberal arts university (and not just a brand support system for a football team) are going to be demonstrated.
Given the names in the Emerald piece of the other two finalists (who would have also been a Schill “yes (wo)man”), Phillips was a no-brainer choice for the job as he has a proven track record of getting stuff done. Love him or leave him, the other two are simply visionless bureaucrats.
Agree with XDH that Phillips was the best of these three choices.
For the record,
1) we should have looked outside again
2) I did suggest Susan Wente – current provost at Vanderbilt
a) Vandy is a good school
b) she initiated a model women in science program that the rest of the country should imitate
c) Vandy has one of the best funded Neuroscience research and grad programs in the country
d) Vandy has just launched an interdisicplinary undergraduate major in Neuroscience
e) she would have had a much broader vision of the KC and its overall opportunity for the UO
f) Vandy is a good school, but its hard to live in Tennessee …
but whatever, again, no one wants to hear dogs bark
And with all that why would she come out our way?
The UO is self sabotaging in the most obvious ways right now. The constant pats on the back and praise from UO Communications is like Trump repeating “no Collusion”. Good people are resigning and finding jobs that will give them the respect (and pay) they deserve. 9 people are leaving so far this month in my unit. 9!! We haven’t even heard about the people that are being laid off yet… everyone should just go into real estate. This is dumb (because it is so frickin obvious). Good job, Oregon.
My interactions with Patrick have been consistently good, and almost everyone I have talked to thinks he’ll be a fine Provost. I guess angry people are more likely to comment.
Yes, angry people who have direct knowledge of bad actors are more likely to comment. Do you like to post comments on appointments where there are no perceived problems? You must have a lot of time on your hands.
Another data point: Patrick Phillips was an unabashed supporter of Kimberly Andrews Espy while she siphoned space and resources for his projects and her own conflicted vanity projects. He is every bit the opportunist others above have revealed.
and Patrick was an associated VPR under her and I am guessing
that most people don’t seem to know this …
Guilty by association? Come on.
no this is another example of being a Yes man – he was a constant defender and sometimes co-conspirator of Espy’s policies which
most of the research community was abhorrent of – this is not
trivial “guilt by association” this was an example, of given the chance to change the party line for the common good, Patrick aggressively stuck to the part line. There are plenty of other researcher’s out there that can say the same thing, and one of the things that eventually suffered from this was research computing – an area that should be state of the art for KC, but I see no evidence of thinking like that. State of the art is not a machine, it is professional programmers.
Dogs may not know anything and be tossed aside as superficial idiots, but sometimes dogs have a lot more experience than those judging the merits of dogs appreciate
“shamelessly adhering to the management credo of kissing up to those above him and kicking those below him” … this is pretty much the right description. And this is why Bill had no chance.
You can’t be at all surprised that the person who has blind ambition climbs over others to get to the fat salary?? It’s corrupted but has always been corrupted.
The actual, day-to-day UO is run by the people who get paid 44,000 a year to teach. The students who come in for a specific major are here because of the valuable and grossly underpaid work profs do. “Gee I’ll go to Oregon because of their Provost” said no student ever. The actual *thinking* and *research* is done by the people who don’t get paid squat and their students.
I would like to suggest there is direct inverse ratio between one’s salary and the direct effect they have over people’s lives.
I once saw a person send back their food three times at a Denny’s…. brave person… Some people are never happy. You all wouldn’t be happy if the greatest provost in the world dropped out of the sky in glowing regalia. Your culture is broken. If this blog is any indicator you all hate each other and spend most of your energy attacking and defending. It must be exhausting. There is fault everywhere….your adminstration, your faculty, your unions….fault all over. Until you all can be reasonable and KIND to each other you’re going to have a tough time. Take off your hats…. adminstration, faculty, ataff, United academics, SEIU, etc and just come together for what is best for the U of O. Until you all can do that you’ll be in the same spin.
1. The world of academics is traditionally petty and highly judgmental
2. Please tell us what you think is “best for the U of O” as its very difficult for the rest of us to determine this.
Now for me I will answer what I think its best for the UO
1. a 75% 4 year graduation rate (like UVA)
2. New degrees in interdisciplinary areas that enhance the prospects of immediate and good employment upon graduation
3. New kinds of graduate student programs that will double or better triple the current number of grad students we have. (yes the KC could do this, but again, I don’t see that vision)
I would be quite happy if a provost did a sky drop and enabled the above.
What is best for the U of O is for you all to work on together. It’s not for someone else to come and tell you what it is. At this moment your culture is not built or operating to support that. Your culture is adversarial, hateful, mixed with toxic cynicism. This blog author appears for all intensive purposes to be a watchdog of sorts and whenever he works with the president or admin he gets called a sell out or a softie. That’s part of the problem. Your culture doesn’t even allow for working together. If you do you’re a collaborator or a kiss up or a co-conspirator …. I stand by the statement your culture is broken.
Yes, nothing like a secret search and a $550k provost to fix the culture.
While our culture may be broken in some contexts, we still do manage to culturally function. If your view into our culture is strictly through the UOmatters blog, while that is hardly representative of anything …
It might be useful when making such a provocative statement as “your culture is broken” to provide context and a baseline upon which one can compare that which passes for culture around the UO, or even just around this blog.
So, by comparison, which campus in the higher education milieu exhibits a pristine, or at least un-broken, culture? You can choose from anywhere; in-state, PNW, nationally, or even somewhere along the Thames.
No, no…it’s fine – I’ll wait.
We’re all suppose to work together with an institution that refuses to disclose publicly funded information. Got it….
Whenever I hear the words “adversarial culture”, I raise tuition and hire another administrator.
Anony-mouse…do you even sense the irony of your content free snipe? Dog and others here have direct experience with the self serving and ineffectual efforts of Phillips, Espy, and the like. This is only one of many many examples why some “leaders” on this campus have received the richly deserved blame they’ve gotten here. Do you think Espy was canned for no reason at all? If so then you’re even more naive than you sound.
How many presidents have you all gone through since “The Hat” left? How many leaders have left? Deans? Good people? Good staff? Good faculty? Like it or not you all have a national reputation right now as a place that people should think two or three times about applying to. That boils down to culture. You can blame your administration entirely if you want to, but everyone owns culture. I realize you’ve had some ineffectual leaders, but your culture also plays a role in attracting them.
As others have pointed out, you still function. People still go to class, learn, study, graduate. Research still gets done. The walls haven’t fallen in. What level do you function at? Where is the trend, is it upward or downward? What is the future? What goals is everyone working collectively on?
Culture eats strategy for breakfast all day long. I am sorry if I touched a raw nerve or if it feels like I have no idea what I’m talking about. It is opinion and observation based on experience at a handful of campuses. If you don’t agree with me that’s ok. I’ll keep observing the national enquirer-esque stylings of this blog and enjoy the show.
P.S. the decision to hold a closed internal search for your next Provost might be one of the worst decisions I’ve ever seen on a campus. No idea what thought process went into that or who advised your president to do it. Nuts.
@Anony-mouse: And I want a pony.
It’s nice to see that the worst kind of false equivalence, that has been undermining any kind of honest discourse in our national political culture for years, has now made it to our campus.
FYI, I think we did use to have a culture where we tried to work together. Didn’t always agree, sometimes got annoyed, but listened and reasoned across boundaries. That doesn’t happen anymore. It is a broken culture, and one side broke it.
Let us give Patrick a break for now. He can not make this place any worse than it is now. Just look at the rankings. And if he can rid this university of social sciences, or at least force them to hire good faculty then good for him. Would any of us send our kids to study sociology or political sciece or econ at UO? Good luck to him changing that.
Shots fired! How would you define “good faculty” in sociology or political science or economics?
It is well known that all the “good faculty” are in Biology, you know
the professors with the lightest teaching load of all. So indeed,
it is “good” to be “faculty” in that department.
Only two courses a year for biology faculty? How did they ever pull that off?
The bio faculty I know seem to be working frantically every second of the day and night. So while I am sure it is true that they have a comparatively light teaching load, they seem to be feeling pressure to stay busy, maybe to stay research competitive with medical school faculty who have even lighter teaching loads.
For starters, you should be able to argue either side of an (arguably) open question of your field (e.g., Does rent control work?) with a barrage of fact-based arguments and critical thinking that most undergraduates would find utterly compelling. Then, in the next lecture, argue the other side in an equally compelling manner.
And, after those two lectures, no one should be able to guess which side you prefer.
Do that with fluency, and you will be on the road to “good”.
absolutely no one:
UO faculty: YEAH! SOCIAL SCIENCE IS GARBAGE!
I agree with Anony-Mouse.
I’ll feel better when Patrick officially folds Marxist dialectics into the KC mission.
Difficult thread to interpret. Some serious general resentment issues cropping up. Some evidence that, at least for some people, P treats others poorly and kowtows too much to power, even when it is obviously wrong–but I see that in almost everyone who climbs the ladder, at least to some degree.
I will withhold judgment. Schill has done as much as any President to repair our essentially flawed revenue model, and the KC is part of this restructuring. Although I’m in the liberal arts, I’d be happy to see a turn toward the sciences and a little quasi-engineering. I was at a science school, and I liked working on committees and task forces with a heavy representation of scientists. They asked hard questions clearly and directly and openly, and I found that refreshing. They didn’t suffer fools. They went right after some of the softer social scientists and anything that smacked of ideological presuppositions or foregone conclusions on doubtful matters. Strangely, they often tended to be high on history and the arts. And they tolerated politics all over the map–and even a little off the map.
There seems to be a growing group of folks here that are angry about something, and that anger seems to be getting expressed at whatever new target stands up. I’m not sure exactly where all this is coming from.
and yet we had a Provost resign over our “essentially flawed revenue model” which in turn has just laid of a bunch of people on Monday and as forced several re-orgs
I seen absolutely no evidence that our revenue model has been
repaired. We are ostensibly in a budget crises due to lower numbers of students. How is that a repair?
Hi Dog; for an outsider like me the big puzzle is why Banavar resigned after just 2 yrs? Apparently the question cant be asked…in public anyway, including at UOM. Bit insulting to the previous search committee. I recall the glowing remarks, including UOM, when he was hired.
I know parts of his science, greatly admire it, and thought he brought some important new stuff to UO.
I have a very good relationship with Banavar and don’t want to say much here – mostly the job evolved to a NO FUN job for him and at this stage in his career he wanted to have more FUN. This “artificial budget” cut crap that he had to oversee, was most definitely not FUN.
He did bring an important new perspective to the UO but that perspective was often not appreciated.
Compensation notwithstanding, all of the top admin jobs look incredibly unrewarding to me. I don’t understand why anyone signs up for them.
If he thought he was coming here to have FUN while making nearly $500K, he showed poor judgment.
molding the KC could have been FUN
it was not …
Unless I read the salary document incorrectly, he will return to the faculty ranks making $376K/yr.
I think having fun is underrated as a scientific pursuit; scientific discovery can, and should , really be lots of fun.
KC does not seem like a fun place, however.
“KC does not seem like a fun place, however.”
Do tell!
Any significant restructure and repair is a long term project, with lots of moving parts. And, given the trail of Dead Presidents, the likelihood of success is not high. There will be pain and plenty of noise and setbacks. Taking a few steps back, though, I still think Schill is doing at least as well as anyone has.
Just to be clear, a large part of the criticisms here are coming from scientists. I thought this is a good point to bring up.
The school is sporting a nearly $12 million deficit this year. A finance department functionary told a public meeting that enrollment is falling, so prepare for cuts. The decision was made that despite falling attendance, new dorms, which will demand over $200 million in debt, need to be built. No adminstrator has given any explanation as to how the Hayward Field buildout, which has no academic purpose, is going to pay for itself. But you think the current Pres has repaired a flawed revenue model, one that’s premised on out of state students willing to pay nearly 3x more in tuition to attend a uni with lagging academic quality. Okay….
Anony – mouse has not experienced “the Oregon way” and how the University of Oregon zealously defends its right to gleefully torch its own earth. Anony – mouse opines:
Your culture is broken.
You all hate each other and spend most of your time attacking and defending.
Your culture is adversarial, hateful , mixed with toxic cyncism.
Like it or not you all have a national reputation right now as a place that people should think two or three times about applying to. That boils down to culture. You can balme your administration entirely if you want to, but everyone owns culture.
Culture eats strategy for breakfast, I am sorry if I touched a nerve… I stand by the statement, your culture is broken.
—–
Taking just one example, Espy was incompatible with “the Oregon way.” The UO culture wants you to believe she was canned. She accepted a promotion to Senior VPR with a generous raise at a more productive top 20 AAU public research university. Arizona had six times the research expenditures of Oregon and when she was recruited for a University of Texas Provost position, she left Arizona with seven times the research expenditures of Oregon.
Schill hired internally because no quality external candidates were interested. Good luck to Patrick Phillips.
For reference: http://colfa.utsa.edu/psychology/faculty/kimberly_espy