this isn't exactly true in my opinion:
He got most of them off their asses and made them earn their ******** paycheck.
there isn't much of a way to tell if he did that. research productivity has been on an incline even before doc. anything big that occurred while he was here most likely took years to come to fruition (i.e. completion of projects, awards, nsf grants, etc.). he wasn't here long enough to "get them off of their asses" as most people like to believe.
also i haven't seen any global numbers on teacher evaluations that would suggest that students received better instruction during his tenure. if anything, he distracted the faculty ...or.... better yet they distracted theirselves with him.
you guys don't actually believe that he was going by to see if people were doing research or teaching with more enthusiasm do you?
the faculty hating him because they had to do their jobs seems to be a myth of epic proportions. from what i heard they hated him because he wasn't one of them and because he got **** done by command rather than by committee (which means he
actually got **** done).
i am not defending the faculty or doc, just trying to explain what i heard and saw while he was around.