(09-01-2018 03:04 PM)Bearcat 1985 Wrote: (09-01-2018 12:25 PM)Not Duane Wrote: (09-01-2018 10:04 AM)Bearcat 1985 Wrote: (08-29-2018 07:04 AM)bearcatdp Wrote: One word...Nancy Zimpher. I'll hang up now and will let you guys run with this.
I'll take a stab at finishing the sentence.
............did more to improve the University of Cincinnati than any President in its history and what we're seeing now is the benefit of her dragging many of the university's constituencies kicking and screaming into a future where UC could be more than what people had limited it to being for far too long.
No...that would be Joe Steger.
NZ slapped a filter on enrollments, ran around acting like that was a great accomplishment, destroyed MBB, and then left a smoking hole in her wake. She was so popular that local sentiment ran her out of town in one of the shortest tenures in UC history.
She also alienated a large swath of alumni by implying that the "brand equity" of UC was negligible prior to her arrival. Not only untrue, but absolutely tone-deaf locally and nationally.
Don't re-write history...even if you are secretly in love with NZ.
Joe Steger was an embarrassment. He spent a lot of money, let Huggins run wild and did nothing to actually implement policies that improved the university. "A filter on enrollments?" You mean actually having admission standards and not just being the University of Toledo--South? Without selective admissions, we're still a regional commuter school with some nice buildings that Joe borrowed some money to build.
A filter on enrollments means that if you only let in the cream of the crop you don't serve the public, and after all, UC is a PUBLIC institution.
Anyone with half a brain knows that what counts coming out of an academic institution is the END PRODUCT and not the STARTING MATERIAL.
In fact, if you can convert struggling students into productive members of society and find them gainful employment, you are doing a much better job of teaching than if you only let geniuses into your classroom and crow about grad rates.
I'm a teacher--you work harder to turn those kids into good students than the smart kids..it shows your academic mettle and your technique as an educator.
It's easy to teach a smart kid--they know how to study, they don't have to work hard to grasp concepts, and they do well in almost any testing environment--you can't say the same for students who struggle.
Try this sometime--try to teach someone with difficulties grasping a subject enough material to turn them into an average student--you'll work a piss-load harder at that than someone who is gifted.
I know--you are probably an elitist who wants to point to metrics and say that the Zimph improved the quality of education at UC.
This is complete bull$hit...she didn't do squat to improve the quality of faculty and serve the general public, and she had NO impact on the academic rigor in the classroom.
She just filtered out the "dummies".
I'm sure that made you feel good...after all you probably don't like to be associated with those type of people.
They aren't worth your time.
Sounds like the typical thinking of an arrogant a$$.
Did I peg it?
Here's Steger's obit:
http://www.fox19.com/story/22212092/form...eph-steger