Question for Higher Administration - USM Forum -- Message Board

Date: Dec 1, 2005

Question for Higher Administration

Date: Dec 1, 2005

I see people are interested in this topic, but no one is responding.

Date: Dec 1, 2005

Perhaps this question can be put to the administration via Faculty Senate and the budget committee. I believe FS meets next week.

Amy Young

Date: Dec 1, 2005

As a former employee of CICE, I recall stating on this board last year that CICE was a "cash cow" -- therefore I am not surprised that it was disbanded and the money has (apparently, I have no direct knowledge) been "reallocated."

No one can answer your question, Concerned, but it was worth asking.

Date: Dec 1, 2005

I have been asking around and I am hearing that the old continuing ed money is going in the direction of so-called "educational enhancement" and Dr. Cynthia Moore. This is more rumor than fact at this point and I'd sure like to hear more. I think that this is potentially controversial but facts would be really nice here!

Amy Young

Date: Dec 1, 2005

Amy Young wrote:

I have been asking around and I am hearing that the old continuing ed money is going in the direction of so-called "educational enhancement" and Dr. Cynthia Moore. This is more rumor than fact at this point and I'd sure like to hear more. I think that this is potentially controversial but facts would be really nice here! Amy Young

No facts to supply, but the old admonition applies here full force -- "Follow the money." Demand transparency of cental administrative budget allocation. Demand it publicly of Thames and Lassen, and if the demand is not satisfied, raise cain with the new commissioner. He has stated that he will hold presidents accountable; well, Dr. Meredith, start holding!

Date: Dec 1, 2005

My understanding of the continuing education funding model is that the vast majority of their credit course revenue involved receiving a percentage of the tuition students had already paid for full time enrollment. For example, undergraduate students pay a flat tuition rate for 12-19 semester hours. If a student enrolled in 12 "regular" semester hours added a three semester hour course scheduled through continuing education, (s)he did not pay any additional tuition, but continuing education received a percentage of the tuition rate for three semester hours. Not only was this not generating new tuition dollars, it reduced the amount of tuition revenue going into the general fund because of the percentage that was transferred to continuing education.

Was continuing education a "cash cow?" Not in terms of generating new revenue, because it appears that most of their enrollments consisted of students who were already full time.

Date: Dec 1, 2005

But wasn's a significant portion of CE non-USM students?

Date: Dec 1, 2005

Third Witch wrote:

But wasn's a significant portion of CE non-USM students?

No. The vast majority of credit course enrollments attributed to CE were students already enrolled full time at USM.

Date: Dec 1, 2005

I don't know the numbers, but CE generated enough revenue to help pay for the new International Building. In my own office, Independent Study, most students were not USM students, and tuition was above and beyond. That changed with the advent of the new computer system.

Date: Dec 3, 2005

LVN wrote:

I don't know the numbers, but CE generated enough revenue to help pay for the new International Building. In my own office, Independent Study, most students were not USM students, and tuition was above and beyond. That changed with the advent of the new computer system.

Through its funding model, CE received tuition revenue for the vast majority of its credit courses in the form of transfers from the general fund that ultimately helped fund the construction of the International Center.

This was not revenue generation in the sense of bringing in new dollars, although the CE leadership always spoke of it in terms of revenue generation. This is why it is not surprising to hear that there is no money now to fund alternative learning. It was not really there in the first place.

Yes, Independent Study consisted primarily of non-USM students, and many years ago (prior to the Mississippi Department of Education reducing the number of high school units accepted through correspondence courses) it was the "cash cow" that truly generated revenue for the CE department.

Date: Dec 3, 2005

Independent Study also had college courses. When I came in, there were 300-350 students enrolled and each had paid a fee for the course above and beyond regular tuition. Most of them were not USM students. That changed with the advent of SOAR. As I left in 2002, I have no knowledge of what happened next.