The unofficial online home for fans of the UAB Blazers. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

AL and UAB are also up for recertification in 2015.

http://www.sacscoc.org/pdf/081705/complaintpolicy.pdf

(11-27-2014 10:28 AM)UABGrad Wrote:  AL and UAB are also up for recertification in 2015.

http://www.sacscoc.org/pdf/081705/complaintpolicy.pdf

They mean every word of the strictures against defamation and individual grievances. To carry weight, the complaint needs to be drafted by a professional and backed with documentary evidence.

I would not worry on those scores.

SACS (according to their own guidelines) considers itself as an option of last resort. The documentary evidence needs to include official written complaints to UA, UAB, UAH, the governor, state officials, etc.; these will need to be stapled to the SACS complaint. And they need to be complaints that were not addressed officially.

How in the world did Cliff Ellis manage to get all that done in getting SACS to sanction the AU program because of AU's BOT and Bobby Lowder?

(11-27-2014 01:16 PM)BAMANBLAZERFAN Wrote:  How in the world did Cliff Ellis manage to get all that done in getting SACS to sanction the AU program because of AU's BOT and Bobby Lowder?

As others have explained:: SACS did not sanction the "AU program." SACS does not sanction athletic programs. SACS put Auburn University - the academic institution, not the sports program of which it is a wholly-owned subsidiary - on probation for failures in governance procedure.

Wasn't Lowder also doing some odd things on the academic side... like squeezing the arts and humanities in favor of the more practical offerings like business and engineering... ticking off half the faculty and student body?

Lowder tried to destroy the Econ PhD program. The Econ Phd is a joint program between the Ag College, School of Forestry and Econ Department. My understanding was that Lowder didn't allow the Econ Department to issue the degree for close to 10 years. Only once he left the board were they able to bring it back.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As 58-56 has stated, what got AU into trouble was that complaints about Trustee Lowder's meddling in AU's internal operations. Someone made written complaints to AU administration and the AU BOT. No one did anything about them and SACS proceeded to drop the hammer on the University for improper governance. Lowder's interference was not the trigger for the SACS investigation. The trigger was a complaint to SACS that official complaints about Lowder's interference were not being properly addressed by AU or their BOT.

It is against the SACS accreditation standards for university Board trustees to interfere in matters that are the purview of university administrators.

If there is a 3rd party complaint there had better be copious documentation. I doubt anyone internally is going to go that route

(11-27-2014 02:10 PM)Doktyr X Wrote:  It is against the SACS accreditation standards for university Board trustees to interfere in matters that are the purview of university administrators.

However, the creation and deletion of programs is specifically within the purview and actually requires the approval of the Board of Trustees. I wish folks would drop this SACS thing because they have zero power in this and the UAB situation is nothing like the Auburn/Lowder situation.

Hence the reason the BOT chose to operate in this fashion.

1) Install puppet (a la Portera at UAH)
2) Kill program in the name of fiscal responsibility
3) ???
4) Profit!

Bump

(11-27-2014 01:40 PM)legalblazer Wrote:  Wasn't Lowder also doing some odd things on the academic side... like squeezing the arts and humanities in favor of the more practical offerings like business and engineering... ticking off half the faculty and student body?

Sounds like someone else I know.

Any more movement on this?

(12-03-2014 01:36 PM)hooverblazer Wrote:  Any more movement on this?

It may be left up to us. Where do we start? First question may be to make sure the Foundation hasn't already got a plan for this.

(12-03-2014 01:42 PM)UABGrad Wrote:  

(12-03-2014 01:36 PM)hooverblazer Wrote:  Any more movement on this?

It may be left up to us. Where do we start? First question may be to make sure the Foundation hasn't already got a plan for this.

I think that's the most prudent thing to do. If we could divert and/or raise money to start something with the backing of the people that started the foundation then I think we could definitely get something off the ground. I believe people mentioned as much before.

I'd like to help, but I don't know of any points of contacts and I didn't want to bother Mr. Filler without even having a basic understanding of the protocols and what not for securing the things we'd need so I didn't think it'd be right to reach out to him myself.

I think the shenanigans at the Collat school could get SACS attention. If tied to SYSTEM board could effect value of a UAT degree, leading to more legal problems for the BOT