|
Post by TOPPDOGG on Feb 24, 2009 19:10:43 GMT -5
Battle wasn't my choice. Aggies appeared to warm very slowly to Battle. I do think he helped make progress with our Nursing program. For that I'm thankful. This turnover isn't really good for the University.
|
|
trues
Official BDF member
Posts: 4,322
|
Post by trues on Feb 24, 2009 21:35:28 GMT -5
Man everytime you look around someone get fired. If I was WB I would be looking for another job by next year.
I am so sick of the turnover we have at A&T.
|
|
|
Post by subtlebutfun on Feb 24, 2009 21:57:19 GMT -5
No. Velma was not behind his resignation.
The bottomline is that Dr. Battle should have never been selected as the Chancellor. One only has to look at his CV. His CV will indicate to you that he should have never been selected. I knew this after sitting in one meeting with him!!! Yes, he presents well but he is like an onion, there is no core(no depth or substance) Also, Coppin is distinctively different from NCAT in every way. Just look at the two websites and read about the programs and the students!!!
Here are my reasons for why Dr. Battle should not have been Chancellor at NCAT and why he was forced to resign. 1) He lied about his experience at Coppin. The faculty and the students did not respect him. That thought he used Coppin as a "stepping stone". In addition, he did not raise the money that he said he raised for Coppin. Cosby has yet to give Coppin a cent!!! . Many of the programs attributed to Dr. Battle were started by the previous president!! The School had audit problems that were never shared with the NCAT search committee. However, had the Search Committee "searched", they would have found out about this and other problems that Dr. Battle had at Coppin.
2) Dr. Battle had no vision for NCAT. This is evident by the lack of a Strategic Plan;. Do you see one on the Website. Not the one from Renick.
3) His leadership style was one of creating distrust and competitition among his senior staff. Therefore, the morale among the group was at an all time low.
4) He chastised the students in public and he belittled them and their families.
5) He is arrogant and self-centered when he talks to individuals(including parents): He thinks he knows everything and you know nothing.
6) He has no social skills(how can you raise money if you cannot "meet and greet" people?)
7) He is more concerned about promoting himself than NCAT. Had the search committee vetted his candidacy, they would have heard these complaints from those of us who knew him when he was in Baltimore.
8) He professes to be a Christian but he is a hypocrite. He is one of the most uncharitable individuals I have ever met. Explain to me why you would wait to fire two of his senior staff before the Christmas vacation. To add insult to injury, he did not have the courage to do it himself even though he was the one who wanted the two individuals to go. Finally, he told anyone who asked about the firings lies about "why" these individuals were fired.
9) He has no creditability. I already cited one instance. However, there are too many to enumerate in this email. Just ask people who had to deal with him during his period at NCAT. It is heartbreaking. 10) He could not raise money for NCAT. What is $22,000 for a concert? Most chancellors can raise that amount with a call to contacts. By the way, he cannot raise money for NCAT because he does not have the background nor does he have the personality for raising money. Hey folks, the man's experience was one of being a Dean of Students and Vice President of Multicultural Affairs. He did not raise money at Coppin. The best prediction of the future is the past!!! Yes, the students like him because he functioned as Dean of Students. He was not the Chancellor!!
11) He does not know Academic Administration. Therefore, he fails to include faculty when he should. He does not know academic protocol so he makes mistakes in the formation of commitees, invitees, etc. The sad thing about this is that he did not ask for help or he asked the wrong person(s)
12) Had he not resigned NCAT would be UNC-G(NCAT). This would have occurred either by default or design. In addition, by selecting underqualified people to "battle with UNC-G" , NCAT loses to those at UNC-G who are "more experienced, skilled, and knowlegeable". The Alums should be furious with NCAT for allowing this to happen!!!
13) Dr. Battle does not manage or make decisions the decisons that affect NCAT. Instead he had two of his cabinet members "run the university". For example, when he traveled to a a week long conference instead of turning the University over to the Provost(which is what other Universities do), he left the unversity in the care of two "non-academic administrators. These are his "yes" people. One of these individuals is tells him who should be hired and who should be fired. It is unfortunate that this person is still on board since the person does not have a clue about HR and related policies and practices, but will "form the University" if left unchecked. Another person who presents well, but knows very little. The other person "running the University" has served his usefulness and should retire tomorrow. It is time for new blood and new directions. He was great "in the day" but it is a new day!!
14) Dr. Battle has a legal council who did not pass the bar and was given paid leave to study for it so she can pass the next time!!! This person has made so many legal gaffes, I am afraid to discuss them because of the pending lawsuits.
As someone who has been at NCAT and heard this man make inappropriate statements and poor decisions, I was delighted by the decision announced today and I am excited about the future of NCAT AB(After Battle)
|
|
|
Post by Bornthrilla on Feb 24, 2009 22:05:51 GMT -5
Wow.
BTW: welcome to the board. Please stick around for a while. LOL
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 24, 2009 22:14:42 GMT -5
Well, as long as those incoming freshmen get those scholarships that A&T said were going to be given, I will not have a problem. But 3-4 chancellors in a 4-5 year span is not a good thing.
Somebody really must have it out for this university.
|
|
lilboy
Official BDF member
Posts: 368
|
Post by lilboy on Feb 24, 2009 22:49:37 GMT -5
4) He chastised the students in public and he belittled them and their families. I can attest to that. At Graduation rehearsal he pretty much fussed at us about what not to do at graduation and how he would shut it down if we behaved "inappropriately". He never once said "I'm proud of you all" or "good job" or gave any kind of praise for our accomplishments, he even said if any one dances across the stage or any fraternity member stomps while crossing the stage he would tackle them. Then at the ceremony after acknowledging the parents he then proceeded tell them to "hush it up" after they cheered for a while. I can't speak for all students but I can say that most of the students that I know didn't really care for him and felt that Chancellor Renick would always be our chancellor.
|
|
|
Post by Bornthrilla on Feb 25, 2009 0:32:44 GMT -5
blog.news-record.com/staff/outloud/archives/2009/02/battle_to_walk.shtmlBattle to walk away, but why?Chancellor Stanley Battle's tenure at N.C. A&T is ending barely before it could get started. Battle will step down on June 30, after only two years on the job for "family and personal reasons." Almost no one knows what that means and the few people who may know aren't saying anything, including Battle. A&T officials flatly denied that Battle was resigning Tuesday, over and over, until finally admitting in a news release that he was. It is hard what to make of this news. Did his boss, UNC President Erskine Bowles, decide that he wasn't working out? Did Battle decide the job wasn't right for him? Did he clash with the university's trustees? Or some of all of the above? Or is what we're seeing what we got? Is he truly leaving for truly personal and family reasons (that phrase has become a PR cliche in many circles, much like Hollywood people splitting over "creative diffrerences," so please forgive the skepticism). One thing is certain: This is not good for A&T. It needs stable, steady leadership. Now it must start over again in the search for its next CEO -- who will be its fourth in four years. Posted by Allen Johnson on February 24, 2009 11:43 PM |
|
|
bluehaze
Official BDF member
Posts: 6,005
|
Post by bluehaze on Feb 25, 2009 7:42:51 GMT -5
4) He chastised the students in public and he belittled them and their families. 5) He is arrogant and self-centered when he talks to individuals(including parents): He thinks he knows everything and you know nothing. 6) He has no social skills(how can you raise money if you cannot "meet and greet" people?)
I agree with these three. I can't say that I'm upset that he's leaving. The stability is a problem, but he wasn't the right man for the job.
|
|
|
Post by aggiejazz on Feb 25, 2009 8:44:13 GMT -5
Potential hires for top jobs are never vetted properly when you hire them in secrecy. A&T's Board of Trustees have committed this sin, time-and-time-again along with the previous Chancellor. They do it to prevent opposition to whom they want to hire and in the process hire people who are not fit for the job.
A&T has had three major hires conducted in secret that resulted in complete failure and embarrassment for the university with Chancellor Battle being the latest example. There is no reason for A&T not to release the names of finalists. If one of the candidates doesn't want to be named in public then he or she has something to hide or the person had not been honest with its current employer. I am talking only about finalists for the highest or most visible jobs at A&T.
No one can 'vette' a candidate like the public, simply because there are more of us than the 2 people hired to do it and there are people who know things about a candidate that only they would know and are really to talk about it. Plus, people can tell when a resume is filled with fluff or simply not filled with anything and will let it be known well before the hiring is complete thus possibly preventing a bad hire.
Finally, if I and others can read a resume of an A&T top hire and ask "where's the beef?", why hasn't the BOT done the same thing before signing on to such an hire?
|
|
|
Post by Bornthrilla on Feb 25, 2009 9:08:03 GMT -5
A&T has had three major hires conducted in secret that resulted in complete failure and embarrassment for the university with Chancellor Battle being the latest example. Who were the other two?
|
|
Gator
Official BDF member
Posts: 3,554
|
Post by Gator on Feb 25, 2009 9:09:45 GMT -5
This is very interesting. I'm just surprised that we are just being made aware of these things. I can understand the decision to select him by the BOD, so I will reserve judgement. What I don't understand is how a man can blow one of the best jobs in the country. Well, we'll just have to move forward and not dwell on the past.
Who's out there? Martin, Renick, the sista that went to NSU...
|
|
|
Post by The Professor on Feb 25, 2009 9:26:14 GMT -5
Wow. BTW: welcome to the board. Please stick around for a while. LOL I know right. Dang. I have got to get up with this person. I got scooped on my own story geesh
|
|
|
Post by dj98 on Feb 25, 2009 9:59:38 GMT -5
Dee Todd??? LOL, LOL...
|
|
|
Post by AggiePride on Feb 25, 2009 10:22:16 GMT -5
Oh well moving on, I hope that there is not too much fall out. But we all know who and what we are dealing with. I thought Harold Martin always wanted the job. It is about time for an alum to head A&T.
|
|
christy
Official BDF member
It's gonna be mean...
Posts: 291
|
Post by christy on Feb 25, 2009 10:50:43 GMT -5
I get the feeling that nobody on campus will miss him. What's that about?
|
|