Search News


Browse Archives

News

Cruel Irony

August 14, 2009

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement

Amid the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression, the University of Southern Mississippi is poised to eliminate -- of all things -- its economics department, faculty were informed this week.

The elimination of economics, along with five tenured and four tenure-track faculty positions, is part of a plan to reduce spending by $11 to $12 million, universitywide, within a year. While university officials stress the plan isn't yet final, they are slated to decide by September 1 whether to go forward with the proposed cuts, according to a news release. Tenured and tenure-track faculty are legally required to a year's notice prior to termination, and economics faculty say they've already received such notice.

The proposal was crafted by a provost-led committee, which also included faculty. The committee’s proposal recommends 12 tenured or tenure-track positions be cut across the university, and three quarters of those will come from economics.

George Carter, a professor of economics at Southern Mississippi, sent a letter to colleagues proclaiming that “USM will stand alone as a major university without an economics faculty.” He went further, attesting that “due process has been denied” to economics professors who were unrepresented on the budget committee and kept in the dark about its deliberations throughout the process.

Much of the justification for eliminating the economics department was tied to student demand. An outline of the plan drafted by the committee notes that the program has “less than five graduates per year,” but that number is in dispute. Until recently, the department housed the university’s international business program, which produced 17 graduates in 2007-8. If those graduates were added to the total, economics would have produced 20 graduates that year.

Even with the international business graduates included, however, economics trails all other departments in the college in the number of degrees awarded. The highest degree producer in 2007-8 was Management and Marketing, which had 293 graduates. The second-lowest was Tourism and Management, which had 29 graduates -- nine more than economics, even with international business included in the tally.

While faculty in the department acknowledge the need to boost degree numbers in core economics programs, they note that the economics courses they teach support many other majors.

“We actually have, I believe, the highest student credit hours per [full-time equivalent faculty member] in the College of Business, and maybe one of the highest at the university," said Mark Klinedinst, a professor in the department. "[Administrators] were constantly complaining 'Oh, we're overstaffed.' How can we be overstaffed if we teach one of the heavier course loads at the college and the university?"

Southern Mississippi did not provide universitywide data on teaching loads requested by Inside Higher Ed, but the teaching loads economics faculty carry are actually relatively close to two of the four other departments within the college, according to data provided by the faculty and Lance Nail, dean of the college. About 275 credit hours were produced by each full-time equivalent economics faculty member in 2007-8, according to slightly differing data supplied by both the dean and faculty. That ratio is similar to the load carried by the Department of Accountancy and Information Systems -- 310 credit hours per FTE -- and Management and Marketing -- 307 per FTE, Nail's data show.

To Nail, the credit hour data illustrate that faculty in other departments are producing just as many credit hours, while also producing more degrees than economics.

"So, ECON was right in line with Accounting, Management, and Marketing for [Credit Hour Production]/FTE -- three degree programs that produced over 300 graduates last year compared to 3 for ECON," Nail wrote in an e-mail to Inside Higher Ed.

Dean's Process Criticized

Economics faculty are still smarting that the international business program was moved to another department, but their primary complaint is about the process by which that change took place. The move was part of an overall redesign proposed by Nail, who went ahead with the plan over the objections of the university’s Academic Council, December meeting minutes indicate. While the council acknowledged that it did not have governing authority over the redesign, it nonetheless voted against the proposal in a symbolic gesture. The Mississippi Board of Trustees of State Institutions of Higher Learning, however, endorsed the redesign, and it went forward.

"There have been a number of issues where we thought appropriate policies were not being followed," said Klinedinst, president of the university's chapter of the American Association of University Professors.

Southern Mississippi can’t simply stop teaching economics, but by eliminating tenured faculty it can lean on more adjunct professors and deliver the courses at a lower cost, according to Klinedinst. Klinedinst speculates that the new model will not only be a disservice to students, but also provoke a response from the accreditors of both the university and the College of Business.

“I’m just sort of baffled,” he said. “It seems to me similar to not having an English Department or a biology department. Here we are in the worst economic mess in 70 years, and to not give our students a chance to understand their own personal economic situation -- their finances -- and understand what some of the remedies are that are being talked about by the president and Congress and state legislators, I think is a shame.

“You can’t bring in people [to teach] who don’t have the educational backing and expect quality results. I think we’re going to be in trouble with accreditors -- with [the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools], with [the Association to Advance Collegiate Schools of Business]. I think we as a university could be facing serious accreditation problems.”

While Nail says he's "very pained" to contemplate the demise of the department, he does not agree that the college can't deliver relevant information to students about economics through other business courses.

"There seems to be an assumption that economic theory is not revisited and built upon in higher level business courses and this is inaccurate," Nail wrote in an e-mail. "In all of our disciplines we would build upon the principles of economics in an applied fashion oriented towards business.... The loss of the Economics degree does not minimize the critical nature of economics principles in business decision processes."

See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Matching Jobs

Comments on Cruel Irony

  • Inconvenient facts
  • Posted by Carlos , Distinguished Professor at MooU on August 14, 2009 at 7:45am EDT
  • 1. There are "economists" (no one agrees) and there are "business economists" (someone is accountable -- yes, that awful, terrible word).

    http://www.nabe.com/

    2. "Economics" departments have split with "business colleges."

    3. A review of teaching sites of "economics" and "finance" show similarities.

    Life will go on.

  • Good decision, but ...
  • Posted by wintercow20 on August 14, 2009 at 7:45am EDT
  • If the department is as unproductive as the article claims, then this is a good decision. But would USM or any other school for that matter have the fortitude to shut down the Department of Cherokee Poetry Studies for the same reason?

  • Good for them
  • Posted by bevo on August 14, 2009 at 9:30am EDT
  • USM should be applauded for their decision. Has there been a discipline whose theories and measurement have been more calcified? If you cannot take the first derivative, then you cannot model it. Consumers and markets behave rationally. Firms produce to their marginal cost. And the list goes on.

    Remember, Marshall was not a Marshallian economist.

  • The value of education
  • Posted by EconMajor on August 14, 2009 at 9:30am EDT
  • I can understand the elimination of the degree program due to low interest, but not that of the department and teaching faculty. Nowhere does the article state that enrollment in economics classes (frequently taken as electives by other liberal arts students and more math-oriented students like engineers) was down from expected or previous levels. This is a huge detriment to students pursuing a liberal arts education at the university who will now be unable to have even a cursory understanding of economics upon graduation. Furthermore, accounting and finance students will have an incomplete education without economics, unless USM is deleting those programs next. Given the relevance of economics today, this is an egregious error on the part of USM.

  • Paranoid? You bet!
  • Posted by Lil Johnny on August 14, 2009 at 10:00am EDT
  • One of the first things my college did when it was about to start eliminating programs and positions was first get rid of the paralegal program and the instructors for that program. Some have speculated that this was done so that none of the people who were about to be "rifted" (AKA - fired) would have anybody knowledgeable to talk to about due process and employee rights. Call me paranoid, but this sounds like it could be a similar approach. If you are a college administrator and want to appear to be the authority on economics and don't want to hear or respond to any difficult questions related to the economic situation of the college, you get rid of those who are the most knowledgeable about economics. I wonder if the professors in the economics department have been a pain the butt of the administration during the recent economic recession.

    Sounds to me like the economic professors should simply be absorbed by the business and management department. Everybody knows that those students need to understand economics. It is normally part of the business and management curriculum, isn't it?

  • Cannibal Studies 101
  • Posted by Prof Red on August 14, 2009 at 12:15pm EDT
  • Beware of a 3rd-rate administrator talking about "making the difficult decision." Translation: "I'll use my job title to make the decision that ensures someone else will bear the difficulty." This sounds like lunatics promoting an atmosphere in which there is sufficient fear so faculty will panic and eat their own. It takes an institution decades to recover from such people.

  • Remarkable how Mississippi confirms YANKEE PERCEPTIONS!
  • Posted by Joe Beckmann , consultant to schools & universities on August 14, 2009 at 12:45pm EDT
  • Economics at a record depression; with health reform they can replace their medical school with prayer circles! This is what Yankees have always thought of Mississippi.

    It's clear how well Mississippi-like economics worked that they may as well get those prayer circles going as soon asw possible.

  • Economics is life
  • Posted by A. Stute , Teacher/Researcher at Public on August 14, 2009 at 1:15pm EDT
  • The study of Economics is the study of life's everyday decisions.

  • Don't cry for them, Oskar Morgenstern
  • Posted by Hoosier Prof on August 14, 2009 at 1:30pm EDT
  • I'm sitting on multiple search committees and it's pathetic how many faculty out there are only job hunting because they got laid off somewhere else. The ivory tower is a myth.

    But don't feel too bad for those in Econ. Government is always hiring economists, and our Econ department is hiring too. In fact, I'm signing off now so I can rush over to the USM website and see who is poachable...

  • No Big Deal
  • Posted by Superdude on August 14, 2009 at 2:30pm EDT
  • Economists are nothing but Political Scientists and Sociologists (and maybe Psychologists) dressed up in suits and ties. Dissolve the Econ dept, farm the faculty out the relevant disciplines. You'll save money AND improve the scholarship of your economists!

  • missing the real irony
  • Posted by Chris on August 15, 2009 at 7:45am EDT
  • What is truly ironic is seeing economists ask for something other than at-will employment. Perhaps these economists actually believe in labor unions and worker protections, but I doubt it.
    This seems like the market at work though - a complete inability to attract "customers" and a firm may go out of business.

    Having said that MSU is an academic disgrace if they don't offer economics and I feel for these individuals families.

  • So, No CPAs from USM?
  • Posted by CT_Woods , Consultant on August 15, 2009 at 8:00am EDT
  • I note that the USM School of Business offers students to opportunity to major in Accounting. The structure and format of their courses seems to closely match those recommended for the undergraduate curriculum of by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, the body that sets national standards for the certification of CPAs. The usual goal of an Accounting department is to produce candidates for carers in public accounting.
    The AICPA sets a number of educational requirements beyond the core set of accounting courses, including required exposure to business law, finance, and, yes, Economics.
    So, if USM eliminates their economics faculty in one fell swoop, will they also destroy their ability to produce candidates for careers in public accounting? And thus be unable to provide the state of Mississippi with the accountants qualified to audit and certify the financial reports of businesses and governments there? So, what will that do to the state's bond rating?
    All too often these seemingly straightforward management decisions have substantial knock-on consequences. They might want to think a bit more before they take off the heads of all the two-handed economists.

  • Get all the facts
  • Posted by Social Scientist , Professor at USM on August 15, 2009 at 9:45am EDT
  • I am a USM faculty member from a different area and thought I could bring some perspective to this situation. Our International Development program in the College of Arts and Letters voted to create its own department and expand our Economics focus to the program and degree. The dean approached the dean of Business about this and the Business dean agreed to transfer the BA degree program to Arts and Letters and also agreed to transfer up to five of the faculty with their salaries to A&L. The five that we wanted for IDV unanimously rejected the offer stating that they were business economists and not liberal arts faculty. We already have Economics faculty in our college and there are others in Economic Development in another college. There will still be Economics faculty here at USM, but not in the College of Business. And the IDV and Economic Development degree programs are not affected by these cuts. So please do not believe that there will not be economists left at USM - there will just be none in the College of Business. If more research had gone into the story then all of this would have been reported. The letter posted in this story also contains inaccuracies that apparently were not checked. Journalism is also in the College of Arts and Letters - I can see about getting the reporter a refresher course.

     

  • Social Scientist,
  • Posted by DFS on August 15, 2009 at 2:15pm EDT
  • So there will be no economists in the School of Business.

    The ObamaNation has therefore succeeded.

    Death to private industries everywhere, and: Workers Unite!

  • Posted on August 17, 2009 at 11:15am EDT
  • The really unforgiveable part of this is the fact that students have not been informed. The dgree they are working and spending many thousands of dollars on will not exist when they graduate. Shame on you USM.

  • Posted on August 19, 2009 at 7:00pm EDT
  • A bad university just got worse.

    What's next--the math department?

  • A concerned student
  • Posted by AnonymousUSMEconStudent , economics at University of Southern Mississippi on August 24, 2009 at 2:15pm EDT
  • I am an economics student at the University of Southern Mississippi. I am very disheartened to find that our education system is more about business than the pursuit of, and sharing of, knowledge. I am uncertain of my future here at USM but have only this to say:
    I discourage anyone from attending USM as it is not an institution of HIGHER learning. Find another local university, but do not attend USM.
    They are not trying to cut costs. The school has approved many new building projects... all of which would bring in more revenue and publicity: new "green" dorms (that will take away half of my dorm's parking in an already crowded campus), a new parking garage (which will be OFF campus), and a new USM "arch". If this were truly about cutting costs, the school would simply put these projects on hold until they can afford them. Instead, they have placed the burden on the student by raising prices on everything while dumbing down the curriculum and cutting an entire department. Students do not receive what they have paid for.
    As an economics student at USM, it is not in my curriculum to take econometrics. Math courses have already been cut from business students' curriculum. If you are an investor, do not invest in USM. I am serious. I never should have come here.