WebCT - USM Forum -- Message Board

Godless Liberal · Status: Offline

WebCT

Magnolia · Status: Offline

I've recently spoken with a parent of a new student who was surprised to find $110 in course fees on his child's bill for the fall term. You usually expect a course fee for a lab, but for freshman English?

Godless Liberal · Status: Offline

Magnolia wrote:

I've recently spoken with a parent of a new student who was surprised to find $110 in course fees on his child's bill for the fall term. You usually expect a course fee for a lab, but for freshman English?

It is sort of like a stealth tuition increase...

LVN · Status: Offline

This is disturbing. Trying to do end runs around the faculty is one thing, but students are another matter. I predict trouble.

Anybody from a school that uses WebCT care to comment? How is this handled at your place?

stinky cheese man · Status: Offline

i was not going to register until i saw this thread. i am as concerned as GL is about this policy. i heard about it in one of the councils. the policy was initially an IHL policy that applied to online or hybrid courses. i did not know that thames decided to extend it to traditional courses using WebCT. if all you do is use WebCT to post your course syllabus, the fee applies. it is essentially a backdoor mechanism to fund the LEC. a word to the wise--Meredith wants to increase the fee to $25 per SCH. (as an aside, your question about tuition waivers has been answered)

now, i don't use WebCT and don't need to. i use my personal website as a means of distributing syllabi, providing hyperlinks to relevant sites, and the like. if i want students to read something online, then i would use e-reserves. but my chair was encouraging me to use it. unlike GL, i didn't feel encouraged to use WebCT--i didn't receive whatever information GL did encouraging it. for me, WebCT is a nice but unnecessary element of my teaching. as GL says, the policy was not communicated downward.

as a counterpoint--i also have problems with departments creating "lab" fees for courses where the lab is optional and there is little tangible, other than a TA, that the fee pays for. it's not like the sciences where you have to take a lab and the fee covers things in the lab.

but as myron henry's summary said--the budget is going to be a big issue in a year.

Godless Liberal · Status: Offline

Another point-in many ways WebCT is more useful for the faculty member who teaches large classes than the student (I am not a great advocate for WebCT as a supplement manager--it is a nice little tool with a big price tag). People report liking the grade book and e-mail management features, however. And it is easier to organize a lot of files than programming a webpage (if you use PP). All nice, but as SCM says, not really necessary--and for WebCT folks it is more of a convenience to them than the student.

Glad you decided to register, SCM. What is the story with the grad fees?

stinky cheese man · Status: Offline

check with your chair.

Status: Offline

I, too, was charged a mysterious course fee for a low-level spanish course. I can't imagine what it's used for apart from being put in someone else's pocket.

Invictus · Status: Offline

Just my

but surcharges for online courses aren't uncommon & I'm surprised this is a new thing for USM. Charging online fees for hybrid or "enhanced" classes is not quite as common but again, not unheard of.

My institution places all online fees in a restricted budget & monies from that fund are used for instructional computing (outfitting labs, etc.) Faculty office PCs are budgeted from this fund but administrative office PCs are not. Repeating: our online fees are not just dropped in the E&G budget.

Godless Liberal · Status: Offline

Invictus wrote:

Just my but surcharges for online courses aren't uncommon & I'm surprised this is a new thing for USM. Charging online fees for hybrid or "enhanced" classes is not quite as common but again, not unheard of. My institution places all online fees in a restricted budget & monies from that fund are used for instructional computing (outfitting labs, etc.) Faculty office PCs are budgeted from this fund but administrative office PCs are not. Repeating: our online fees are not just dropped in the E&G budget.

Point of clarification Mr. Zimmerman. A surcharge for online classes has been in existence for awhile at USM--this wasn't the thrust of the post (my apologies if I implied that). The charge for using WebCT to post a syllabus or a couple of readings as supplemental materials is new (these courses are fully traditional courses, not really even "hybrid courses"). OF course, the notion of alternative learning versus on-line learning versus "hybrid" learning versus distributed learning versus distance learning versus just plain old learning is pretty controversial and worthy of its own thread.

The issue isn't the fee per se, but the inept way it was implemented and the bit of chaos for students and faculty that resulted. But this is par for the course. SCM mentioned how budget issues will drive a lot of decisions in the next few years. My hope is that we get a more competent and trustworthy team in place before the next FY budget is finalized.

In one of the council's minutes, there was some mention that a few dollars of this fee would be given to the IHL for a tech project of theirs. I also suspect that the loss of some big time grant money that supported our LEC has something to do with this move. But the reality is that no one in my department has a clue how proceeds from this fee are to be allocated.

CoBster in Residence · Status: Offline

It's my experience that the more control you cede to administrators, the more you (and your students) get screwed. I understand and have been trained on WebCT. However, I refuse to use it for my traditional delivery courses. The current issue is only one problem. The paranoid among us can envision many abuses facilitated by WebCT and similar programs.

Southern Belle · Status: Offline

As a staff member on campus, I have taken two online courses during the past year and have been charged $30 per class. As you probably know the faculty/staff scholarship does not cover any added fees to the courses - just the basic tuition charges. I don't mind paying the extra fee for a totally online class. But I don't feel that it's right to be charged an extra fee if an instructor requires a student to use WebCT for course supplements.

Even though the university depends on tuition dollars for operations, the students should not have to foot the bill for everything.

Cossack · Status: Offline

I agree with many other posters about using a personal/professional website to communicate with students rather than WebCT. Even more now that the administration is imposing yet another tax that students cannot avoid on something that there is little reason to use. While I blame the administration for imposing the tax, I blame the professor for creating a situation where a student has to pay the tax.

Silver Surfer · Status: Offline

I think there should be a concerted effort by faculty to minimize the profits gained by SFT and his corporate buddies at the expense of students.

This would involve boycotting B&N, WebCT, etc., when we order textbooks, make our course schedules and policies out, and assign readings.

Coffeedrinker79 · Status: Offline

I guess I am confused. If the student is not footing the bill for an academic enhancement, who is?

LVN · Status: Offline

Don't the students or the taxpayers foot the bill for everything?
(Excluding donated funds.)

LeftASAP · Status: Offline

Coffeedrinker79 wrote:

I guess I am confused. If the student is not footing the bill for an academic enhancement, who is?

Coffeedrinker, some profs say the "enhancement" obtained is not worth the cost. I'm sure it's great in some courses, but in many it is just so much "fluff".

Coffeedrinker79 · Status: Offline

Then would it be considered a matter of choice not cost? I would say some profs may say these types of applications are more than an enhancement but a necessary part of their course. Technology is becoming more pervasive in the classroom and integration into course delivery. Some profs may want to embrace it, some not. It should be the prof’s decision. However, ultimately the student should have the choice by signing up for that course or not. Paying that fee or not. Georgia Tech has every traditional class integrated with web based supplements to assist the instructor. However, tuition and demand to attend at GT is twice as much as Southern Miss. I guess you can you get what you pay for.

Godless Liberal · Status: Offline

Coffeedrinker79 wrote:

Then would it be considered a matter of choice not cost? I would say some profs may say these types of applications are more than an enhancement but a necessary part of their course. Technology is becoming more pervasive in the classroom and integration into course delivery. Some profs may want to embrace it, some not. It should be the prof’s decision. However, ultimately the student should have the choice by signing up for that course or not. Paying that fee or not. Georgia Tech has every traditional class integrated with web based supplements to assist the instructor. However, tuition and demand to attend at GT is twice as much as Southern Miss. I guess you can you get what you pay for.

And I bet GT's Provost would be nice enough to inform his or her faculty when a major change in policy actually goes into effect so they can make such decisions.

CoBster in Residence · Status: Offline

Coffeedrinker79 wrote:

However, ultimately the student should have the choice by signing up for that course or not. Paying that fee or not.

There's a huge hole in your logic, C79. You are assuming that there are multiple offerings of every course in areas where some profs are using tech to fluff up courses. In so many instances, there is no choice, because of the decimation of faculty under the Thames administration. I know for a fact that there are many courses in the CoB that are taught only by one prof. If that prof decided to use a lot of technology simply to make the course look fancy, what choice would students have? None, unless you're saying that they can always change their major, which is no solution.

Invictus · Status: Offline

Cossack wrote:

I agree with many other posters about using a personal/professional website to communicate with students rather than WebCT. Even more now that the administration is imposing yet another tax that students cannot avoid on something that there is little reason to use. While I blame the administration for imposing the tax, I blame the professor for creating a situation where a student has to pay the tax.

Just extending this a little -- and I'm sure it's been discussed here before -- what is USM's policy about course materials that are posted to WebCT? Do they become the property of the university or do they "belong" to the professor?

Rod Sterling · Status: Offline

Charging students full-fare for supplemental use of WebCt is short-sighted. The university saves money when syllabi, handouts, readings, etc are posted rather than copied and handed out in class. Students can also have real-time access to their grades and can use discussion boards to interact with other students. Our students are really savy when it comes to computer use, so the excuse that these supplemental students require a significant amount of support is...well....unsupportable. A small surcharge ($5-10) per student per semester might be reasonable, but charging the same amount as for online students is unfair and regressive.

Cossack · Status: Offline

Invictus

Just extending this a little -- and I'm sure it's been discussed here before -- what is USM's policy about course materials that are posted to WebCT? Do they become the property of the university or do they "belong" to the professor?

I do not know the official answer to your question. I teach one MBA course via IVN. Occasionally a student will ask for me to have the lecture taped because they were out of town. The IVN people handled it. At the end of the semester the IVN people send me the tapes indicating they were my intellectual property. However, it is an important question you ask. I remember several years ago there were tapes made of each MBA course session taught and they were on file. They were not returned to the faculty (it was not at USM). A colleague and I joked about the Administration creating a "College of the Dead" where they merely played the tapes after the faculty left and saved all the money in hiring a new professor. While unlikely, I have seen many things happen over the past five years at USM that makes me wonder if it might not happen here at some time.

qwerty · Status: Offline

Cossack wrote:

I remember several years ago there were tapes made of each MBA course session taught and they were on file. They were not returned to the faculty (it was not at USM). A colleague and I joked about the Administration creating a "College of the Dead" where they merely played the tapes after the faculty left and saved all the money in hiring a new professor. While unlikely, I have seen many things happen over the past five years at USM that makes me wonder if it might not happen here at some time.

Although Stephen Ambrose died in 2003, he still manages to teach the History of World War II course at UNO. A living instructor plays the tapes of his lectures to the class, and then leads discussions and takes care of the paperwork. Weird.

Resembling Red · Status: Offline

I agree with Silver Surfer and others on the WebCT issue. I wouldn't use it all all unless it was absolutely necessary, nor would I use any optional technology that put a superfluous expense on already financially strapped students and parents. Sure, there are conveniences associated with using WebCT, but do those conveniences really make it worth the extra fees paid by students who already pay tuition AND technology fees?

For the more paranoid, I can also see how WebCT's features might facilitate administrative spying on instructors (keeping tabs, if you will). I don't think it's worth it at all. You can still distribute course materials online via personal web page if you have to save paper and toner.

I know that the word "boycott" may be a bit too politically charged for the tastes of some on this message board, so I'll just say that if you care at all about the issue, just don't use the WebCT or any other services that are unnecessarily manipulative.

-- Edited by Resembling Red at 12:49, 2006-08-11