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

Date: Nov 13, 2005

RE: Thames approves the digital MBA program

Date: Nov 13, 2005

DC Comics wrote:

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.

And they know students can't learn anything of substance in that format. You may as well open a drive thru window and give out diplomas.

Date: Nov 13, 2005

You know Phoenix is shaking in its online boots now.

On to 20,000 students!

To the top!

Date: Nov 13, 2005

The Digital MBA is the greatest threat to shared governance since Thames arrived. He has found a weakness in Doty and is exploiting it to dictate how courses and programs will be taught.

I can't wait for Cossack's "online public speaking" course to take effect.

Date: Nov 13, 2005

go to the mississippi virtual community college site and you'll find almost all community colleges teach public speaking online.

Date: Nov 13, 2005

*** wrote:

go to the mississippi virtual community college site and you'll find almost all community colleges teach public speaking online.

So let's turn USM's College of Business into a Community College. That will go a long way to fulfilling Doty's mission of getting the CoB into the top 100 -- the top 100 university-level business schools that provide a decent community college-level education.

Date: Nov 13, 2005

omg--you must have problems with the other online courses being taught at usm. want to see what we offer this fall? go to this site: http://www.usm.edu/de/ . i'm not saying a digital mba is the way to go, but online education is here (at usm and other universities) to stay.

Date: Nov 13, 2005

*** wrote:

online education is here (at usm and other universities) to stay.

That's what people used to say about Correspondence Courses...until everyone figured out how meaningless that type of "education" is. Face-to-face education is the only way to deliver intensive subjects so that students get a real education. Of course, if you're into increasing enrollment and selling degrees, then online education is just fine.

Date: Nov 13, 2005

"Move With The Cheese And Enjoy It!"

Date: Nov 13, 2005

*** wrote:

online education is here (at usm and other universities) to stay.

Those degrees constructed predominately dependent on online courses are not worth the paper they're written on. They serve a purpose similar to a union card. Pretty soon a college degree will be viewed as no better than a high school degree.

Date: Nov 13, 2005

*** wrote:

online education is here .... to stay.

Is that you again, Stinky?

Date: Nov 13, 2005

The Usual Suspect wrote:

*** wrote:
online education is here .... to stay.
Is that you again, Stinky?

Bingo...that's a goodie.

Date: Nov 13, 2005

Old Fashioned, Traditional, and Not afraid of Work wrote:

Pretty soon a college degree will be viewed as no better than a high school degree.

Um, I don't want to be the one to break the news to you, but I think that point was passed around 1975.

Date: Nov 14, 2005

It is not clear that online courses are less expensive for the University to produce since there is an increase in the fixed costs due to the extra hardware, software, and additional personnel. What is clear is the reduction in effort that students make to acquire an education. If a student takes an online course that they would have taken on campus, USM loses since resources have been expended that are unnecessary. If the student only would take the course if it were offered online, then commitment to becoming educated is lower than students that would attend a class on a campus site. Moreover, the effectiveness of the faculty member is less. Unless, of course, there is no value in the face-to-face contact between faculty and students. If that is the argument, then why does the university place great emphasis on faculty meeting their classes, having office hours, and "being available". I assume that a faculty member does not have to hold office hours (be in the office) for an online class. Once we have a faculty teaching all online courses, they can be like the bloggers and work from home in their pajamas.

Date: Nov 14, 2005

We can debate the virtue of face-to-face vs. online all day. Come to any conclusion you want.

Deep down we all know this is watered down education with purely economic motives, with little thought for quality. In schools of business across the nation there is an emphasis on teamwork and projects, for better or worse, and many elements such as these will not be able to be incorporated into the curriculum. This will change how face-to-face course are taught as well. The digital will dominate the face-to-face.

Online course are an expensive proposition, in terms of time, money, and even reputational capital. A bottom tier university like USM can only hurt itself by making this a core part of its intrsuctional delivery. If one wanted to raise the status of USM, a different approach would be taken entirely. Obviously, we know where we belong.

We just need to get real about what is going on at USM and the CoB.

A last point: as if the world needs another person with a cheap MBA that adds no value beyond what one learned as an undergrad. This is USM's program.

Date: Nov 14, 2005

Cossack wrote:

It is not clear that online courses are less expensive for the University to produce since there is an increase in the fixed costs due to the extra hardware, software, and additional personnel. What is clear is the reduction in effort that students make to acquire an education. If a student takes an online course that they would have taken on campus, USM loses since resources have been expended that are unnecessary. If the student only would take the course if it were offered online, then commitment to becoming educated is lower than students that would attend a class on a campus site. Moreover, the effectiveness of the faculty member is less. Unless, of course, there is no value in the face-to-face contact between faculty and students. If that is the argument, then why does the university place great emphasis on faculty meeting their classes, having office hours, and "being available". I assume that a faculty member does not have to hold office hours (be in the office) for an online class. Once we have a faculty teaching all online courses, they can be like the bloggers and work from home in their pajamas.

Amen, Brother Cossack. The only problem is some administrators have no problem talking out of both sides of their mouth.

Date: Nov 14, 2005

"Digital" instruction will be able to rival face-to-face when they perfect the microsoft & biosoft sticks & everyone gets a simstim port installed behind their ears. But when that happens & holoporn is readily available, who's gonna want a digital MBA anyway?

Date: Nov 14, 2005

Pedagogical Rhetoric wrote:

Online course are an expensive proposition, in terms of time, money, and even reputational capital. A bottom tier university like USM can only hurt itself by making this a core part of its intrsuctional delivery.

The key problem here is that USM management has consistently failed to understand that "remote education" is expensive, because they leave out "getting the hardware" from their cost-benefit equation. This goes back to "compressed-video" classes, and continues through the ever-increasing pressure to "put classes on the Internet." Money has never been allocated to departments to "upgrade" computers to those capable of the "cutting-edge" technologies required for these remote classes, and we're still coming out of the Aubrey Lucas technology model ("if they need it in the classroom, and we don't give it to them, they'll have to find some way to get it on their own").

Even iTech's vaunted "wireless network" was installed without making sure that every building had sufficient computers to take advantage of "Eagle Talk."

SFT and his henchcrew view online courses as their means to reach 20,000 students, regardless of the cost to the faculty and staff who are expected to do this, in addition to the routine teaching overloads.

Date: Nov 14, 2005

already gone wrote:

Even iTech's vaunted "wireless network" was installed without making sure that every building had sufficient computers to take advantage of "Eagle Talk."

Well, I suppose if one can't access Eagle Talk via the wireless network, one certainly can't access this board.

Date: Nov 14, 2005

hurry please wrote:

Could someone post the e-mail?

Hi all, and TGIF

I had a meeting yesterday with President Thames at which I presented a funding proposal for our digital MBA project. The President accepted the proposal and agreed to fund the project at the level I requested. He understands that the university cannot recoup the investment on the MBA program alone, but believes that the CoB can develop a capability that can be used university wide to help increase access to higher education for citizens across south Mississippi. This would help to fulfill the university’s state mandated mission.

One constraint that the President will probably impose is that we erase recorded lectures at the end of each semester so the lectures cannot be reused. He believes that program quality cannot be protected if lectures are allowed to become dated. I believe that this constraint has another benefit – it will address the intellectual property concerns that have been expressed. Clearly we still have many details to sort through, but I believe that concerns about resource constraints have now been put to rest.

And the story continues …

D. Harold Doty

Dean, College of Business

University of Southern Mississippi

Date: Nov 14, 2005

Too many people want to make this about ONLY face-to-face vs. online. There are several issues here.

1. There has been no faculty vote on this program. Until there is a CoB faculty vote in favor of an online MBA, there should be no such program being enacted. No equipment bought, no courses designed.

2. This online MBA is repetitive. MSU already offers an in-state online MBA. Offering an online MBA from USM is merely a marketing tool. MSU's online MBA gets to Taylorsville just as well as USM's online MBA would. The only reason to have an online MBA from USM is for "vanity" reasons.

3. CoB resources, like resources in almost every other college, are scarce. Why waste scarce resources on this dog of a program?

4. Unless you believe that there is no value added by face-to-face contact and real time interaction with and feedback from an instructor, then face-to-face dominates online every day. And twice on Sunday.

To boil this down to #4 alone, though, is to play Doty's game of distract, divide, and deceive. #1 needs to be addressed first by the dean who publicly proclaims his belief in faculty votes and shared governance.

Date: Nov 14, 2005

Well - it is obvious why Doty is pushing this. This is a resume building exercise. So on his next interview, he can say "I instituted an online MBA program". Undoubtedly, he assumes that he will have another job before this gets actually implemented, and leaves the mess for the next Dean.

I don't know the faculty in CoB. But if this gets voted down, it will not matter. What I can't understand is we are STILL on probation and here is a program being rammed down the throat of the faculty, with no data to support it. What are the ramifications for SACS? - no one knows. Where is the data to support this huge expenditure? - none exists. How will faculty work within this process? - no clue.

Truly amazing

ole' dead eye

Date: Nov 15, 2005

I love in Doty's letter the acknowedgement that we will never recoup investment in the hardware. Then why are we doing this?

Also, I plan on filming my lectures once and just replaying them to the class and the online students--every time! This is what I think Thames and Doty are afraid of, faculty using the technology in their favor. Get ready for a fight here, because I am a tenured and I will run my class how I want to. Videos everyday if this goes through. My TA will hit play while I may move out of state and still collect a pay check.

Date: Nov 15, 2005

Where's the other memo?

Date: Nov 15, 2005

Full Disclosure wrote:

Where's the other memo?

What other memo?