MELA Meeting Minutes 2003 - 2017

iv. Attachment B (p8)

1. Interpretation of policy regarding on-ground requirement and college’s pulling in all sections versus choosing what sections to pull in. Christian Pruitt noted that under SACS we have the right to say that a course without the same objectives or grading scale may be refused. He also noted that we should not violate the policy. If we are making the section list available to students, then we are in compliance. Discussion ensued regarding the flexibility colleges have under the current statement. Audra Leverton made the point that while Christian is indicating that college’s have the right to refuse a course if it’s grading scale isn’t the same or it doesn’t require the same amount of work, the state board came down on Hinds for this exact situation. She wanted to ensure that the state board, and its representatives, were all aware of the interpretation of the policy as discussed and agreed upon in the DLC meeting. It was also discussed that our presidents already believe we are filling our own sections first and then pulling in other sections and that to change that would need to go before that group. Wording to specifically state this should not be included because it nails us down to something we may not want to do. Has there been a fundamental change that requires us to change the wording on any of these issues? Tish Stewart indicated that we need to include wording that allows us to refuse a course. State board is concerned that every college is looking out for themselves and not for MSVCC. They feel like we’re operating fairly so there is no need to change the wording. They don’t want the wording to bind our abilities. Christian indicated that in the goals, deans have the right to approve or refuse a course. Christian indicated that all state board administrators are now aware of the policy and of its intent. Motion made by Bruce Ingram for #5 to remain the way it is currently stated; Tish Stewart seconded the motion. Motion carried. 2. Item #4 needs to be clarified because the state does not reimburse for hybrid courses and online courses should be 100% online. Discussion ensued regarding hybrid courses. Christian suggested that we add language to clarify that hybrid courses cannot be offered through MSVCC and will not be funded through MSVCC. Jennifer Leimer suggested that we make this addition, as well. This discussion was tabled until June. 3. Item #1 will remain. 4. Item #2 - discussion ensued about the calendar. We should be sticking to the dates on the calendar for registration, drop/add and withdrawal. Item #2 will remain as it is. 5. Item #3 will remain as is. 6. Item #6 needs to be changed to reflect the practice that the DLC’s agreed to last year of determining class closures and communicating that to other colleges and to the state director no later than noon on the Friday before classes begin. Discussion ensued about what day to have as the cutoff for closing classes. Another option that was considered is to say class closures

265