SACS New program violations - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Feb 2, 2005

SACS New program violations

Date: Feb 2, 2005

Hasn't Invictus been saying this for months?

Like a blind man pi$$ing into the wind, it all comes back to me now.

Date: Feb 2, 2005

I got a forward of some emails sent out in the COB that discuss some type of new graduate program that they call the "hybrid" model. I believe it boils down to an MBA by correspondence, though I am not too sure of all the details. The person who sent it to me is not on the COB faculty, so he/she couldn't answer my questions regarding this program except to say that the COB dean is trying to beat Kenbot to the punch, getting an MBA program in place that will make Kenbot's ExMBA unnecessary. Mention was made that many faculty (all faculty?) in the COB do not want this new program but are having it rammed down their collective throat by the COB dean and his minions.

My point is that perhaps someone should tell SACS about this program, Kenbot's program, etc., and let the chips fall where they may. I personally think it's stupid to initiate new programs while under SACS probation, especially those with little or no faculty input and/or shared governance attached.

I'll post more when/if a friend in the COB can confirm/deny/explain more of the situation.

Date: Feb 2, 2005

the SACS consultant told people that no new programs should be initiated until USM is off probation. as i've said, they won't say you can't do it, they will only tell you it isn't advisable.

Date: Feb 2, 2005

You know what is so cool about the post from Pig above? If the faculty don't like the dean's hybrid MBA proposal, THEY CAN VOTE IT DOWN in the CoB! That's shared governance and that's what these industry pseudo-profs/administrators DON"T GET!

Forgive the wanton capitalization, please!

Date: Feb 2, 2005

First of all, Pig Roast, I stated that I did not have full information regarding the "hybrid" program, but your response tends to lend creedence to the thought that such a program is important to the COB dean.

Second, shared governance is not getting proposals to vote down. It is, however, shared governance when the faculty's concerns are listened to up front. If the faculty really hate this idea, why not just shelve it now? Why waste time and effort on an idea that the faculty will vote down? That's one of our biggest problems at USM: administrators ignore issues faculty perceive as problems and run around doing things that, in the end, are unnecessary.

If a shill like you is willing to jump in and flack for the administration at any level, then the proposal must be important to somebody.

Date: Feb 2, 2005

You're behind the curve again Pig...heard it's already been "shelved"!

XXOO

Date: Feb 2, 2005

Just wondered if Pig Roast had gotten his chores done today. When he gets done with his Boss's chore list, he can go home and work on mine.

Date: Feb 2, 2005

The list is long, my friend, but I'll see what I can do for you.

Date: Feb 2, 2005

quote:
Originally posted by: LABMPITWIACBTMN
"Hasn't Invictus been saying this for months? "

Actually, no, I've not been saying that every new program has to undergo a substantive change review. What I've been saying almost as long as this board has existed is that USM's distance learning program was overdue for a substantive change.

According to the rules -- U.S. Department of Education rules & not "merely" SACS rules -- when an institution offers 50% or more of a degree program through electronic delivery & electronic delivery didn't account fdor 50% or more of the program at the time of the last regular self-study, or if an institution offers at least 25% of a degree program by distance learning & anticipates reaching the 50% threshold within 18 months, it must complete a substantive change review.

USM did not complete such a review, but it has been actively promoting new online degree programs & strutting around as if those programs were fully & completely accredited, which they aren't.

There are also substantive change rules related to new campuses & off-campus sites which are applicable to USM-Gulf Park, especially after it's "elevation" to co-campus status. To the best of my knowledge, USM has never addressed this issue either.

Date: Feb 2, 2005

Squeal Like A Pig
Date: 3 hr, 6 min. ago
Views: 149

Mention was made that many faculty (all faculty?) in the COB do not want this new program but are having it rammed down their collective throat by the COB dean and his minions

Squeal Like A Pig
Date: 2 hr, 16 min. ago
Views: 112

Second, shared governance is not getting proposals to vote down. It is, however, shared governance when the faculty's concerns are listened to up front. If the faculty really hate this idea, why not just shelve it now? Why waste time and effort on an idea that the faculty will vote down? That's one of our biggest problems at USM: administrators ignore issues faculty perceive as problems and run around doing things that, in the end, are unnecessary.

The proposed hybrid MBA program was developed by a faculty member on the graduate curriculum committee after discussion with some faculty and administrators to address current problems associated with the MBA program on the coast. Any faculty member in COB may write his or her own proposal and for submission to the graduate curriculum committee for approval. They may also bring their friends to support their proposal. The proposal discussed in this thread will likely be submitted to the graduate curriculum committee of COB for input, revision and ultimately a vote by the committee members only after a full hearing by the faculty. In addition, graduate students in the MBA program on the coast and in Hattiesburg will review the proposal for additional input. The proposal will be presented to the BAC for further input by the business community. If the graduate curriculum committee in COB approves and recommends the proposal, the faculty in COB will have an opportunity to provide additional input during a faculty wide meeting and to vote approval or disapproval on the proposed program. The next step in the process is to seek approval from the Graduate Council. If approved by the Graduate Council, the approval would specify that the planned program must be submitted to a SACS visitation team for approval before implementation and would not be implemented without their prior approval and consistent with SACS standards. A lengthy process to implementation but necessary to insure a quality program consistent with SACS and AACSB standards. The process is also an integral part of faculty governance.

The hybrid MBA proposal is not a secret and there is no conspiracy. It has been in development since early last fall and if approved is not likely to go into effect until the fall of 2006. On the other hand, the MBA program at Jackson County has not gone through this process nor has the substantive change in the Stennis MBA to all IVN classes. Furthermore, the substantive change in mode of delivery at the Gulfpark campus has not utilized this process. The “Executive MBA” which has been discussed on this thread did not originate within COB and has not been a part of this process. We have seen a number of changes implemented within the MBA program in the fall of 2004 without faculty input and this should cause considerable level of concern to the faculty. The proposed “hybrid MBA” is an attempt to seize the momentum from administrators who have implemented programs without faculty involvement. These programs and program changes are short changing our students and depreciating the COB public image with potential long term negative consequences. While the faculty, students and alumni should react to these changes on the coast, it is essential to also be proactive which is what the proposed “hybrid MBA” attempts to accomplish. While the proposal may not be the best approach to attempting to mitigate the disaster on the coast, it is a proactive step and the first proposal brought fourth by the faculty to address the problems being encountered on the coast.

Doc-In-The-Box
Date: 2 hr, 43 min. ago
Views: 113

Just wondered if Pig Roast had gotten his chores done today. When he gets done with his Boss's chore list, he can go home and work on mine.

One of the problems plaguing COB is the needs of some individuals to attack colleagues to settle some perceived unadentified old score. Attacking individuals with innuendo, devoid of facts is counterproductive to addressing the serious issues facing our University. Racism, sexism and mean spiritedness has closed more than one thread attempting to address serious issues in COB. A better use of your time is to develop and put forward solutions to the myriad of problems before the College and not use this board as a venue for vindictiveness.