2025-2026 MELA Minutes

pull it out until the next fiscal year. She mentioned that they went through fiscal year 2029 because the costs associated with AspireEDU and Brainfuse were pulled in, which put Brainfuse into fiscal year 2029. Dr. LeBrun stated that she will continue to review the budget annually, but they went ahead and approved it so that they could see from a fiscal standpoint, to see if they have enough funds to cover it. She mentioned that what she had presented with the group versus when she met with the MACC group, she had met with Jason, and they realized that on the most recent version that had been provided to her, they actually didn’t carry over but $600,000. So, we actually have an extra $600,000. So, in fiscal year 2029, we have a little over $1 million available. Dr. LeBrun mentioned that she will place the budget into the MELA course so that the group will have access to it. 2. BrainFuse – Dr. Krista LeBrun, MCCB, mentioned that they did approve BrainFuse as part of the budget, proceeding with a three-year renewal, looking at $345,000 annually. Only being charged for what is used. If only 12,000 hours for fiscal year 2027 are used, we will have those hours to roll over through the next two fiscal years. Dr. LeBrun mentioned that she submitted Brainfuse to ITS as a revision request, which has been submitted. She is waiting to be assigned a technology consultant. Brainfuse will be required to go before the ITS board. As an approval procedure: the group will approve, MACC will approve, submit to ITS, their board has to approve, and approval by their board as well. Dr. LeBrun stated that she will keep the group updated as the process proceeds. 3. Artificial Intelligence (AI) – Dr. Krista LeBrun, MCCB, mentioned that there was discussion regarding artificial intelligence. The discussion was related to proctoring, and she didn’t have much to provide on artificial intelligence because she was not prepared to discuss it. She stated there were a lot of concerns about the use of artificial intelligence, specifically as part of proctored exams, and what we are doing to prevent the use of artificial intelligence in relation to proctored exams, which led to a deeper conversation about artificial intelligence and academic integrity. She mentioned that she didn’t have more to provide on that subject, but just wanted the group to know that the topic was of conversation. She stated that she did inform the presidents that, as part of the proposed modification to the PMP manual, there were some conversations about projects, based learning, proof of learning versus proctored exams. This will be presented to the presidents when and if that does get formally approved by the group. She mentioned that she did want to bring this to the group's attention about the concern regarding artificial intelligence and academic integrity. She mentioned that