ppt课件-faculty responseto h.4632and mergerwith collegeof（教师的幻想h。4632年,mergerwith collegeof）.pptVIP

下载本文档

1
0
约3.18千字
约 12页
2017-01-25 发布于四川
举报
版权申诉

ppt课件-faculty responseto h.4632and mergerwith collegeof（教师的幻想h。4632年,mergerwith collegeof）.ppt

1、原创力文档（book118）网站文档一经付费（服务费），不意味着购买了该文档的版权，仅供个人/单位学习、研究之用，不得用于商业用途，未经授权，严禁复制、发行、汇编、翻译或者网络传播等，侵权必究。。
2、本站所有内容均由合作方或网友上传，本站不对文档的完整性、权威性及其观点立场正确性做任何保证或承诺！文档内容仅供研究参考，付费前请自行鉴别。如您付费，意味着您自己接受本站规则且自行承担风险，本站不退款、不进行额外附加服务；查看《如何避免下载的几个坑》。如果您已付费下载过本站文档，您可以点击这里二次下载。
3、如文档侵犯商业秘密、侵犯著作权、侵犯人身权等，请点击“版权申诉”（推荐），也可以打举报电话：400-050-0827(电话支持时间：9:00-18:30)。
4、该文档为VIP文档，如果想要下载，成为VIP会员后，下载免费。
5、成为VIP后，下载本文档将扣除1次下载权益。下载后，不支持退款、换文档。如有疑问请联系我们。
6、成为VIP后，您将拥有八大权益，权益包括：VIP文档下载权益、阅读免打扰、文档格式转换、高级专利检索、专属身份标志、高级客服、多端互通、版权登记。
7、VIP文档为合作方或网友上传，每下载1次，网站将根据用户上传文档的质量评分、类型等，对文档贡献者给予高额补贴、流量扶持。如果你也想贡献VIP文档。上传文档

Faculty Response to H.4632 and Merger with College of Charleston Tom G. Smith, PhD Professor and Faculty Senate President February 13, 2014 Following the filing of the legislation… Near immediate solicitation of faculty feedback via email. Cleared Senate meeting agenda in order to discuss merger. Based on email feedback and prior to the Senate meeting, drafted a resolution. Consulted with CofC senate counterparts and reviewed CofC survey. Drafted MUSC survey modeled after CofC survey. MUSC Faculty Senate Resolution on H. 4632MUSC/College of Charleston Merger Legislation Before embarking on the costly and complex process of merging these long established and widely respected South Carolina institutions, all relevant constituencies must first have the opportunity to consider the merits or otherwise of a merger. The Faculty Senate of the Medical University of South Carolina therefore opposes the current legislation before the South Carolina General Assembly (H.4632) that would merge MUSC with the College of Charleston. Key Points Raised in Senate Deliberations Senate resolution intentionally and explicitly focused on current legislation, with no intent to comment on the ultimate wisdom of increased collaboration and a potential merger. Indeed, there is great support for at least increased collaboration and interest in possibilities of merging. The joint white paper was broadly praised as providing a path forward that does not put marriage before dating. Great concern over loss of MUSC brand. Great concern about limited benefit for MUSC’s mission. Bewilderment over the lack of existing programs or available funds at either institution that could meet the supposed business interests used to justify a merger. Consternation at the recklessness of the proposal’s timing, with its strong likelihood of undermining both institutions’ presidential searches—and reducing the likelihood of finding willing candidates with the skill and vision to make any future merger successfu