Thames approves the digital MBA program - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Nov 11, 2005

Thames approves the digital MBA program

Date: Nov 11, 2005

The story I heard is that the commitment from Thames for this program is at least $1,000,000 and that CoB officials are moving at light speed to extend the idea to the undergraduate offerings. More resources --- maybe twice as much as for the MBA --- will come from Thames for the undergrad courses.

Date: Nov 11, 2005

The deal now is that they are about to name a new Associate Graduate Director to assist Daniel. The new post would cover the digital offerings.

Date: Nov 11, 2005

Could someone post the e-mail?

Date: Nov 11, 2005

What was the faculty vote in the college? Has this program been approved by academic council? Has anyone seen the details? Has nothing changed at USM?

Date: Nov 11, 2005

Recipients such a degree should have a the letters DIGITAL firmly embedded in red on their forehead, on their transcript, and on their diploma.

Date: Nov 11, 2005

Doty to the South Florida business faculty:

"There are gonna be controversial issues that come up, and I'm a big believer in faculty votes .."

Date: Nov 11, 2005

When faculty changed from only lecture to use of chaulkboards there was no vote.

When faculty changed from only the use of chaulkboards to overheads there was no vote.

When faculty changed from the use of overheads to powerpoint slides there was no vote.

When faculty are changing from the use of older technologies there was no thought of these changes being a new program; now a new technology = a new program.

Many outsiders would believe that faculty are unwilling to change how classes are taught.

It seems that for some sitting under a tree at the foot of their mentor is the only true method form of education. For others if they are not the decision maker then the change is wrong.

Date: Nov 11, 2005

Technology Observer wrote:

When faculty changed from only lecture to use of chaulkboards there was no vote. When faculty changed from only the use of chaulkboards to overheads there was no vote. When faculty changed from the use of overheads to powerpoint slides there was no vote.

The key phrases in your post, Technology Observer, is "When faculty changed . . ." Note that the word that makes the difference is faculty, not administration. What business does the administration have telling the faculty how to teach their subject matter?

Date: Nov 11, 2005

Teacher wrote:

Technology Observer wrote: When faculty changed from only lecture to use of chaulkboards there was no vote. When faculty changed from only the use of chaulkboards to overheads there was no vote. When faculty changed from the use of overheads to powerpoint slides there was no vote. The key phrases in your post,

Teacher wrote: Technology Observer, is "When faculty changed . . ." Note that the word that makes the difference is faculty, not administration. What business does the administration have telling the faculty how to teach their subject matter?

Teacher is right. The faculty can use chalkboards or leave them alone;they can use powerpoint or leave it alone. The faculty, not the administration, determines the method of delivery.

Date: Nov 11, 2005

Beholder's Eye wrote:

Teacher is right. The faculty can use chalkboards or leave them alone;they can use powerpoint or leave it alone. The faculty, not the administration, determines the method of delivery.

Correct Beholder's Eye. But I must make one correction. It should read: "The faculty, not the administration, SHOULD determine the method of delivery." But as us fieldhands know it's dat man in de big house dat says what de fieldhands do. Dat's de plantation style of management used at dis institution.

Date: Nov 11, 2005

hazard wrote:

The deal now is that they are about to name a new Associate Graduate Director to assist Daniel. The new post would cover the digital offerings.

Pounders?

Date: Nov 12, 2005

This is all a horrible idea on many fronts.

This will radically change how professors administrate their courses and interact in the classroom (they will tell you it won't but it does!). It will be difficult to recruit new faculty on top of it all. Come to USM and teach our digital offerings! Joy.

The value of a USM degree will weaken even more. The USM "name" does not carry high market value, meaning other online options will be preferable to prospective students searching to pay-for-credentials. Expect student quality to deteriorate even more. This is also a Phoenix vs. USM scneario. Funny thing is, many more people have heard opf Phoenix.

USM is ignoring or unaware of the number of digital experiments that have already taken place at many other b-schools and have not succeeeded. This will be a huge waste of money in the end.

In my view, Thames is getting his revenge on the CoB once and for all. In fact, this move almost seems desperate. The CoB is in Chapter 11 of sorts.

Welcome to the 21st century at USM, home of the digital plantation.

Date: Nov 12, 2005

Is the question here the concept on an online MBA program or the way that it has been implemented?

Seems to me there is a lot more wrong with a program being dictated "top down" without appropriate faculty review than with online programs per se. As I understand it, some CoB faculty already teach online & it's a gross insult for those of us on the "outside" to suggest that they couldn't pull it off if they want to. Good faculty can deliver quality programs online just as well as they can in the traditional classroom. But it's also a gross insult for administration to say, "Thou shalt develop this program whether or not you think it's a good idea."

Again, I believe that good faculty members can do almost anything they put their collective minds to doing. What's wrong with an online MBA program if the faculty have approved it through established channels & are gung-ho about making it work? The answer is, "Nothing."

The problem isn't online teaching/learning. The problem is shared governance.

Date: Nov 12, 2005

Withering's recommendation was a good one.

Date: Nov 12, 2005

What some may not know is that in the past Continuing Education ran much of the nontraditional delivery courses. A Dean would approach a chair to get a faculty member to teach a course in some format. The faculty member would be offered "big" money to do some particular "special delivery" course. There were (are?) no checks and balances in that the department members were not asked to pass on the course format nor was the Academic Council or Graduate Council.

This was discussed yesterday at the Faculty Senate meeting. Some senators were outraged to learn that some semester courses were being taught in one or two weeks between sessions by faculty getting $4k or $5k a pop. The senate passed a resolution asking Academic Council to review these issues.

It was during the past yea, in preparation for SACS, that Continuation Education was changed so the academic departments had control of these courses. Apparently faculty are just now finding out how corrupt the system has become. One senator questioned how a semester course could have intellectual content if it was taught in just a week or two. Apparently if they meet the number of contact hours, no one questions if there is time to read or contemplate.

Date: Nov 12, 2005

I hope someone is keeping track of money invested into this program. The motive for this is obviously cash, not some academic ideal of reaching those who can't be reached. If they haev a computer and a high speed internet, which they will need it looks like, than they are doing alright to begin with.

If $1,000,000 is being invested, interseting that it is in budgetary tight times, what is the additional number of students taking CoB courses for break even to result? How long will this take with the estimates? Where is this money coming from? Will there be new faculty lines or will current faculty absorb the additional student load?

Who will make any of this and so much other transparent?

Date: Nov 12, 2005

Break Even Point wrote:

If they haev a computer and a high speed internet, which they will need it looks like, than they are doing alright to begin with.

My emphasis. It's important to remember that a significant part of USM's service area does not presently have high-speed capability (Lumberton, for example.) You really can't do these courses effectively on dial-up.

Date: Nov 12, 2005

for the intersession courses (1-2 weeks) ask Ole Miss how they do it. some universities would (have) question(ed) teaching courses in the summer on a 5-week basis.

Date: Nov 12, 2005

Please folks-please-all right and at other times a lot, not alright and alot.I don't think I have ever seen these words written correctly on this board-but could be mistaken there-anyway even the trailers on the tv news use the wrong form- Good Grief!

Date: Nov 12, 2005

*** wrote:

for the intersession courses (1-2 weeks) ask Ole Miss how they do it. some universities would (have) question(ed) teaching courses in the summer on a 5-week basis.

On the basis of "minimum number of instructional minutes," I can see how they pull it off. However, SACS used to have a requirement that courses encompass at leas one week per credit hour for "reflection." I have not checked my (brand new)) copy of the Principles of Accreditation to see if that guideline is still in the rulebook.

However, as someone who earned credit for a 2 semester comparative anatomy course at USM during the summer of 1973, I don't think this is a particularly new issue. Does USM still offer what we used to call "Q-QQ" classes during summer term? If so, there ain't a shipload of difference between that & Ole Myth's intersession...

Date: Nov 12, 2005

The King's English wrote:

Please folks-please-all right and at other times a lot, not alright and alot.I don't think I have ever seen these words written correctly on this board-but could be mistaken there-anyway even the trailers on the tv news use the wrong form- Good Grief!

It's alright, Ma, I'm only singing "Don't Think Twice, It's All Right."

Date: Nov 12, 2005

yes (not yep)--usm still offers the half term summer classes. used to be q-qq, now called s-ss. about 10 years ago, we offered intersession classes, particularly in may between the end of spring semester and the beginning of the summer semester. don't know what happened to them.

Date: Nov 12, 2005

Invictus wrote:

*** wrote: for the intersession courses (1-2 weeks) ask Ole Miss how they do it. some universities would (have) question(ed) teaching courses in the summer on a 5-week basis. On the basis of "minimum number of instructional minutes," I can see how they pull it off. However, SACS used to have a requirement that courses encompass at leas one week per credit hour for "reflection." I have not checked my (brand new)) copy of the Principles of Accreditation to see if that guideline is still in the rulebook. However, as someone who earned credit for a 2 semester comparative anatomy course at USM during the summer of 1973, I don't think this is a particularly new issue. Does USM still offer what we used to call "Q-QQ" classes during summer term? If so, there ain't a shipload of difference between that & Ole Myth's intersession...

I guess the Mississippi public is correct. No one, even the educators, respects and appreciates real education. It is all for the money-- any way you can get it.

Yes, USM still has the Q and QQ classes. I don't know if the faculty ever approved these classes. I can't imagine anyone objecting because the burden of proof would be on them to show there is no time for contemplation in opposition to the instructor of record who has been paid off.

Date: Nov 12, 2005

I really hate to shut down the alarmists who are causing some of you to make such foolish statements, but since USM is still on SACS probation no new distance learning programs can be approved or implemented. Such programs cannot be submitted to SACS until after the December SACS meeting and must have SACS approval before implementation. Even the USM President has acknowledged this point -- review articles that appeared in your local paper. What's most troubling is that it appears some people who post on this board are just out to cause an uproar over nothing, and others have not learned much about SACS during the last year. What does this suggest about potential SACS reaffirmation problems?

Date: Nov 12, 2005

Much ado... wrote:

I really hate to shut down the alarmists who are causing some of you to make such foolish statements, but since USM is still on SACS probation no NEW distance learning programs can be approved or implemented. ...

Yes, but much had already (all ready?) been done with nontraditional delivery systems without faculty oversight at the department or Academic Council level. Word is out, quailty students are going to William Carey or out of state. USM is in the nontraditional student and nontraditional delivery business. Quality? Ha!

Date: Nov 12, 2005

Reality Check wrote:

Yes, but much had already (all ready?) been done with nontraditional delivery systems without faculty oversight at the department or Academic Council level. Word is out, quailty students are going to William Carey or out of state. USM is in the nontraditional student and nontraditional delivery business. Quality? Ha!

If you would really learn about the higher education industry in the US you would understand that almost all quality universities are in the nontraditional student and nontraditional delivery businesses. Examine the quality players such as Michigan, Northwestern, Tulane, Chicago, UCLA, Maryland etc. USM should provide services to the nontraditional students in southern Mississippi.

If a faculty member is teaching the class with a department chair's and dean's knowledge, there is clearly faculty oversight -- at a minimum three faculty members have reviewed the offering. Shared governance does not require a vote on everything. Academic content and learning objectives perhaps, class format probably not.

Date: Nov 12, 2005

*** wrote:

yes (not yep)--usm still offers the half term summer classes. used to be q-qq, now called s-ss. about 10 years ago, we offered intersession classes, particularly in may between the end of spring semester and the beginning of the summer semester. don't know what happened to them.

MINI-SESSION 2006

ACADEMIC CALENDAR

Students may enroll for a maximum of 4 hours during the mini session. Mini-session hours are included in a student's spring enrollment.

Mini session begins Monday, January 2, and concludes Friday, January, 13.

Mini session courses are scheduled in one-week and two-week format. One-week courses meet every day from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. (with a one hour lunch break)

According to SOAR, there are 36 courses scheduled for the January mini session:

https://soar.usm.edu/servlets/iclientservlet/guest/?cmd=start&

Date: Nov 13, 2005

Googler wrote:

... One-week courses meet every day from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. (with a one hour lunch break) According to SOAR, there are 36 courses scheduled for the January mini session: https://soar.usm.edu/servlets/iclientservlet/guest/?cmd=start&

Oh, I didn't know they had a "one hour lunch break". That will give students enough time to review notes, read text and other books, contemplate issues and do the homework assignments that will be graded and returned in time for students correct misunderstandings.

I hope they don't plan to sleep and eat during that week. No wonder students at USM can flunk XXX101 in the fall and be able to take xxx102 in the spring.

I wonder if the med schools are using this format? If not, why not?

Date: Nov 13, 2005

Joker wrote:

I wonder if the med schools are using this format? If not, why not?

Because the curriculum format at medical schools is determined by the faculty.