April 13, 2007

It's Mike Garrison

The WVU Board of Governors moved today (April 13) that Michael S. "Mike" Garrison, managing member of the Morgantown office of Spilman Thomas & Battle PLLC, be the next president of WVU following consent of the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission.

On the heels of the Bob Huggins hire ... well put the two together and it does appear that this place is so wildly provincial, and that academics comes second at this university ... if second (and not third, fourth or fifth).

Posted by armand at April 13, 2007 12:38 PM | TrackBack | Posted to West Virginia


Comments

I'm not sure how far down the list academics lies. As you know, I've never been a fan of Nellis; Garrison is mostly an unknown (improprieties in the process notwithstanding), so he looks more interesting to me. I guess we'll have to see.

(I think academics is sixth: money, alumnai, sports, grants, and increasing undergraduate enrollments all rank higher, I think.)

Posted by: baltar at April 13, 2007 02:31 PM | PERMALINK

Your ranking sounds right to me - sixth, if that.

It's not that I'm a Nellis fan. But I think there's a great deal of truth in the following question - "Would Garrison have made the list of finalists at any peer institution in the country?" My sense is that no, he wouldn't have. Hiring a guy without any experience in academia, and who's never worked at a university seems strange if one is really interested in building a great university. Garrison could end up being fine. But the process by which he has gotten the job appears yet another example of the rigged, provincial good old boy system that plagues the state and its reputation. Maybe Gov. Manchin should have changed the motto to "open for businesses run by and for the existing WV elite" instead of simply "open for business".

Posted by: Armand at April 13, 2007 02:51 PM | PERMALINK

Yeah, I'm more offended by the process than the selection. That really is par for the course.

I actually think that Garrison might have made a short list, or even a final list on his own merits - it all depends on the other candidates. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the only names we actually know were considered were the three finalists (Bernstein, Nellis, Garrison), right? We really don't know how anyone else stacks up (I liked Berstein the best, Nellis the worst, and didn't have any way of really judging Garrison).

Posted by: baltar at April 13, 2007 02:58 PM | PERMALINK

We had a big discussion of this issue in my class. The students (or at least some of them) have a pretty good grasp of the situation, which surprised me. "When the old boy network isn't working a well as it might, the solution is to get a better old boy."

Posted by: binky at April 13, 2007 10:52 PM | PERMALINK

So is their view that Garrison is that better "old boy" (I use quotation marks since he's younger than some members of the Coup).

Posted by: Armand at April 14, 2007 10:22 AM | PERMALINK

Yes. Not that he's old, but that since he's a politico, he will know how to work the network.

Posted by: binky at April 14, 2007 04:44 PM | PERMALINK

The network (state) that currently funds less than 1/5th of the university's budget? Did they have any other things to praise him for, aside from MAYBE having an ability to marginally increase the funding from sources that are rather minor players when it comes to contributing to the university's pocketbook?

Posted by: Armand at April 14, 2007 08:42 PM | PERMALINK

Nope. And I suggested that perhaps better long term strategy would be to just find independent alternatives to the legislature, particularly given national trends (ie that it isn't just our relationship with our leg, but uni relationships with leges in general). You know, I made my usual argument for someone from outside who had that whole "vision" thing.

Posted by: binky at April 14, 2007 11:53 PM | PERMALINK
Post a comment









Remember personal info?