|
Replies: 8
| visibility 1
|
All-Pro [698]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 654
Joined: 10/31/04
|
Barker Highs and Lows...
Apr 17, 2013, 3:13 PM
|
|
The Highs-
1) Developed Clemson at ICAR.
2) Developed Clemson MBA Greenville
3) Numerous new buildings and infrastructure.
4) Good Ambassador for Clemson.
5) Raised a lot of money.
The Lows-
1) The "Slush Fund".
2) The obsession with US News Top 20. This led to basically cheating and manipulating numbers in an effort to get there.
4) The $4 million wasted to keep Tommy Bowden.
5) Backing down from a "lawyering up" TDP.
6) Sending many of your kids to Tri-County-TEC.
7) Diminished success of overall athletic programs during his tenure.
Overall, IMO, I rate his tenure a C.
|
|
|
|
 |
Starter [367]
TigerPulse: 65%
Posts: 820
Joined: 9/20/04
|
Re: Barker Highs and Lows...
Apr 17, 2013, 3:24 PM
|
|
8. Nepotism in hiring with kin making 6 figures.
9. Pre-game handshake with Carolina, letting USC folks dot the "I" in tigers.
10. Allowing potentially illegal off campus housing with forcing bridge students to stay in condos owned by board of trustee members.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [28802]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58393
Joined: 11/14/03
|
most of the lows you posted are debatable...
Apr 17, 2013, 3:46 PM
|
|
For instance, a lot of us believe #2 in your lows has been a net positive, as has #6. #5, I think, is based on speculation and an overly low view of Terry Don Philips. #7 is kind of hard to maintain, given the improvement of some programs, and the fact that some of the ones that have gotten worse have only gotten worse recently.
What isn't debatable is that Clemson's academic reputation has soared during his tenure, athletic and academic facilities have greatly improved, Clemson's marketing and outreach has greatly improved (which isn't saying much), and football has greatly improved.
That seems good enough for at least a B+, to me.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Scout Team [193]
TigerPulse: 87%
Posts: 120
Joined: 2/5/02
|
My personal experience has been that...
Apr 17, 2013, 3:46 PM
|
|
In general, people respect and recognize my degrees more now than they did 10 years ago. In the past, when I said I graduated from Clemson, I sensed a ho-hum attitude. Now, I have more interactions with people who acknowledge good engineering, solid MBA and greet me with more admiration for the brand. In fact, I interact with more people who seek me out because they have bosses who also graduated from Clemson. Our brand, in my experience, has been elevated.
Call it "gut feel" but I believe Clemson University is more broadly respected on a national stage now than it was 10 years ago. I give credit to Barker.
I work in NYC and travel abroad by the way, so my perspective is not localized. I truly believe Barker added great value to Clemson and I believe my Clemson degrees have positively impacted my income.
I wish Barker nothing but happiness in his retirement and thank him for his positive contribution to Clemson
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [28802]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58393
Joined: 11/14/03
|
Re: My personal experience has been that...
Apr 17, 2013, 3:53 PM
|
|
This is why I don't think people really understand why the Top 20/Top 25 thing was important, even if it didn't necessarily mean the overall education was a whole lot better (which, again, ought to be debated). The rankings are, at least initially, about perception. Once you're perceived as being a more selective institution where you can get a good education, employers and potential students begin to do the work of actually increasing your value. Clemson went up in the rankings not only because it increased its selectivity on its own, but because better potential students perceived Clemson has being a better school, and then applied in greater numbers to Clemson. Employers, in turn, recognized Clemson as graduating more quality students. Faculty, who want to have good students, also became more attracted.
You can certainly get carried away with all the rankings and forget about the importance of the actual education you're providing, but I think it's wrong to say that any focus on moving up in the rankings was a bad thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Pro [698]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 654
Joined: 10/31/04
|
Re: My personal experience has been that...
Apr 17, 2013, 4:10 PM
|
|
It has been documented in the press Barker manipulated numbers and Class size to move up toward Top 20.
The fact that he basically decided to cheat to get there, to me, negates the whole issue.
More people may recognize Clemson due to the fact there are now more graduates in the marketplace. The school does have a good reputation, yes I think he helped develop that. Some of the things he did in my "highs" list help that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-Pro [698]
TigerPulse: 81%
Posts: 654
Joined: 10/31/04
|
10 in Eric the Red...
Apr 17, 2013, 4:23 PM
|
|
I am surprised this has not blown up on him. You hire a Developer who was on BOT at TTC, he gets to fill up his units with Bridge Students???
Was this an open bid process?
This same guy is also a big CU doner and advertiser.
Looks like a conflict of interest.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [28802]
TigerPulse: 100%
Posts: 58393
Joined: 11/14/03
|
it's not just about more graduates in the workplace...
Apr 17, 2013, 4:32 PM
[ in reply to Re: My personal experience has been that... ] |
|
it's also because Clemson has been recognized, and thus ranked, among the top public university in the countries by different magazines/ ranking methodologies. You can say things were manipulated or whatever, but that's the way it is.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Recruit [89]
TigerPulse: 92%
Posts: 142
Joined: 1/6/06
|
Mostly agree, but some points need more context (long)...
Apr 17, 2013, 5:17 PM
|
|
The "Top 20" obsession was not an end goal, but rallying point for those that don't follow the day-to-day minutia of Clemson's academic and athletic programs. It generated public interest and private funding to better Clemson University as a whole. All of the "highs" you listed were in large part due to increased visibility and funding prompted by the Top 20 initiative.
Secondly, the "diminished success of the overall athletic program" is hardly on Barker. Football was in the tank, and had been for a decade, when he took office. Basketball lost Barnes before he took office, and rapidly approached a similar state. Women's basketball never recovered from the resignation of Jim Davis, track and field the retirement of Bob Pollock, soccer the legal troubles and resignation/firing of Trevor Adair. All of this was beyond the immediate control or oversight of Barker, and I place them more squarely at the feet of Bobby Robinson and TDP. He has also presided over the resurgence of Clemson football, the continued stability of Clemson baseball, and a widely successful basketball tenure under Purnell, whose resignation again had little or nothing to do with Barker.
In short, I'd grade Barker's tenure a solid B+/A-. There were some flaw, shortcomings, and bungled decisions (TB's rehiring then subsequent firing chief among them), but many of those lay at the feet of TDP rather than Barker. He's increased the value of a Clemson education and degree tenfold, and has given Clemson an academic AND athletic brand it can be proud of in the process. I'd say he's leaving University and the athletic program in much better shape, with a long-term vision, than when he inherited the presidency.
Just my $0.02...
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 8
| visibility 1
|
|
|
50
