[nfbmi-talk] FW: Colege policy board drafts
Elizabeth
lizmohnke at hotmail.com
Sat Jul 31 03:32:45 UTC 2010
Hello List,
Here is the final message that was sent out from Geri on the
college policy issue. As she explains in her message, there are two policies attached
to this message. One of them was edited by me and Fred, while the other one was
edited by Gwenn and Geri. I submit them both for your information, but if you could
please read over the policy that Fred and I worked on, I would greatly appreciate
it.
There was some discussion during the last phone conference about
whether or not we want to take an official position on this policy, and submit this
policy as a final draft from our organization. So if everyone could read over this
policy, and give your input on whether or not we as an organization want to submit
this policy as a final draft, I would greatly appreciate it.
Hopefully all of this makes sense, but if not, I am always happy
to answer any questions.
Elizabeth
From: geri.taeckens at isahealthfund.org
To: LuzenskiS at michigan.gov; alissa161 at gmail.com; cannonp at michigan.gov; dcgorton601 at comcast.net; mohnked at hotmail.com; wild-rose at sbcglobal.net; lizmohnke at hotmail.com; f.wurtzel at comcast.net; FurtonD at michigan.gov; grace at menzelcoaching.com; debate912 at gmail.com; mpvi at intergate.com; heibeckc at michigan.gov; jbrown at mpas.org; pilarskij at charter.net; jonesl2 at michigan.gov; kisiell at michigan.gov; president.nfb.mi at gmail.com; laury-johnsons at michigan.gov; lovep at michigan.gov; laschuck at juno.com; mcnealg at michigan.gov; mcvoys at michigan.gov; SilveyA at michigan.gov; smithd11 at michigan.gov; martzvir at msu.edu; whitee2 at michigan.gov; wilsond9 at michigan.gov
CC: jcscot at sbcglobal.net; brlbumps at sbcglobal.net; margwolfe at usa.net
Subject: Colege policy board drafts
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2010 17:26:57 -0400
Hi to all!
First of all, I want to take a moment to thank so
many dedicated staff and consumers for giving of their valuable time and passion
to work on this college policy. The open door process, facilitated by
Grace Menzel, has been both enlightening and effective. A special thanks
to Director Cannon for allocating the funds and staff time to make this
effort happen. It takes a special leader to recognize the need for trying
new things and working outside of the traditional box.
Now, to the commissioners. You have a little
work cut out for you. In order to keep this process open and fair, I am
sending you 2 drafts. Without going into the fine details, I have decided
to send a draft edited by Gwen Botting and myself, and a draft edited
by Elizabeth Monke and Fred Wortzel. I am running out of time to
weave the ideas of both drafts together, so I'm asking that you, as a board,
read both.
In the draft edited by G-B and G-T, I have put the
word, Note) where recommendations were given as part of the feedback
process from the June 21 work group meeting. The draft edited by E-M and
IF-W is actually very similar to the first, much of it taken from
the work group, but has many references sited.
It will be up to the board to decide if they want to add in any of the
staff or consumer recommendations and then vote on the final draft.
Hopefully, once you read these drafts, any confusion you may have at the moment,
will be alleviated.
I am sending you these drafts early, so you can be sure to review them, ask
any questions ahead of time, so we are ready to hear public comment and vote at
the 8-27 meeting.
Just so everyone is aware, I will be out of e-mail and voice mail contact
from 7-23 to 8-10. I will answer all messages when I return.
Okay, thank you again to everyone.
Geri
----- Original Message -----
From:
Luzenski,
Sue (DELEG)
To: Alissa Werner ; Cannon, Patrick
(DELEG) ; dcgorton601 at comcast.net ; Diana Mohnke ;
Donna
Rose ; Elizabeth Mohnke ; f.wurtzel at comcast.net ; Furton, Dan
(DELEG) ; Geri Taeckens ; Grace
Menzel ; Greg Botting ; mpvi at intergate.com ; Heibeck,
Cheryl (DELEG) ; Jeanette Brown ; pilarskij at charter.net ; Jones, Leamon
(DELEG) ; Kisiel, Lisa (DELEG) ; president.nfb.mi at gmail.com ; Laury-Johnson, Shawnese (DELEG)
; Love, Pat
(MDE) ; Lydia
Schuck ; McNeal, Gwen (DELEG) ; McVoy, Shannon
(DELEG) ; Silvey, Amber M (DELEG) ; Smith,
Danielle (DELEG) ; Virginia Martz ; White, Elizabeth
(DELEG) ; Wilson, Debbie (DELEG)
Sent: Friday, July 09, 2010 10:09
AM
Subject: FW: July 1 college policy
draft
From: Fred
Wurtzel [mailto:f.wurtzel at comcast.net]
Sent: Friday, July 09, 2010 12:36
AM
To: 'Geri Taeckens';
'Virginia Martz'
Cc: Cannon,
Patrick (DELEG); Jones, Leamon (DELEG); 'Jo Ann Pilarski'; 'Gwen Botting';
'Greg Botting'; 'Alissa Werner Williams'; 'Lydia Schuck'; 'Elizabeth'; 'Larry
Posont'; 'Donna Rose'; Luzenski, Sue (DELEG); Heibeck, Cheryl (DELEG); White,
Elizabeth (DELEG); 'JEANETTE BROWN'
Subject: RE: July 1 college policy
draft
Hi
Geri,
I don’t think
policies of other institutions need to be written into Commission policy,
except to say something like, “individual schools and colleges may have
timelines that govern the length of time for completion.” This seems the
responsibility of the student and can be negotiated between the institution
and the student, outside the rehab process.
Warm
Regards,
Fred
From: Geri
Taeckens [mailto:geri.taeckens at isahealthfund.org]
Sent: Thursday, July 08, 2010 7:50
PM
To: Virginia
Martz
Cc: Patrick Cannon;
Jones, Leamon (DLEG); Jo Ann Pilarski; Gwen Botting; Greg Botting; Alissa
Werner Williams; Lydia Schuck; 'Elizabeth'; Fred Wurtzel; 'Larry Posont';
Donna Rose; Luzenski, Sue (DLEG); Heibeck, Cheryl (DLEG); White, Elizabeth;
JEANETTE BROWN
Subject: Re:
July 1 college policy draft
Sue Luzinski, can you make sure
everyone on the college policy work group gets this? I lost my e-mail list and
don't want to leave anyone out. Virginia,
Thank you so very much for this
information. I can see that we need to add a summary of this mandate
into the college policy A number 4 on timelines. I will do that and send
just that portion out for folks review sometime this week end. I believe
we can maintain the spirit of the timeline as written, with clear
clarification about mandated consequences for financial aid if a student does
take longer than 150% of the expected time frame for a
degree.
To be clear, I am reading this as,
if a normal college program takes 4 years, the student is expected to complete
their degree with in 6 years if they want financial aid through PEL and other
grants or to request an exception. It also sounds like they must declare
a major with a goal for a degree. Is there anything written in regards
to when this major-degree type needs to be identified? I know many students
take a couple of years to figure out what they truly want to go
for.
Again, thank you so much. This is
some real tangible stuff we can use to support what is
written.
Geri
----- Original Message -----
From: Virginia Martz
To: Geri Taeckens
Sent:
Thursday, July 08, 2010 5:09 PM
Subject: RE:
July 1 college policy draft
Hello
Geri,
I have reviewed the second draft
of the “MCB College Policy, 7-1-10, Draft from Constituent Workgroup of
6-21-10, Edited 6-30-10, gb”. I am sorry I was not able to join the group on
Tuesday, 6-29-10, but I see many of the concerns I noticed in the first
draft were addressed in the second draft.
I wanted to share additional
information regarding the timeline students have to complete an
undergraduate degree program (the information is available at ED.gov). All
students are required to complete a FAFSA for the year they are planning to
attend a college or university (this is also in the MCB College Policy).
Once a student has completed a FAFSA, the following federal guidelines
apply:
Financial aid recipients must
complete their degree program within 150% of the "expected" time of
completion.
A student working on a 4-year degree would only be
eligible for financial aid for 12 semesters (6 years).
A student
working on a 2-year associate's degree would be eligible for a maximum of 3
years (6 semesters) of financial aid.
Financial aid recipients must
also pass a certain percentage of all classes that they register for
(generally 70%, sometimes 75%), and must maintain a cumulative GPA of 2.0 or
above.
The student’s social security
number is used to track students from school to school, so the financial aid
office of a university or college is able to track the number of semesters a
student has attended, even if the student jumps from one institution to
another institution. Universities and colleges want students to complete
degrees, and by law, students receiving financial aid must be in a degree
seeking program --- meaning they must be working towards
something.
If a student cannot complete the
associate’s or 4-year degree in the mandatory timeline, there is an
application for appeal/extension which the student must complete with the
college’s financial aid office. Requests/appeals are carefully reviewed
prior to a student receiving an extension and if the extension is granted,
the extension is closely monitored to assure the student is making progress
on completion.
Students who attend school
part-time are held to the same standards (150% of the “expected time of
completion”), but with an adjustment which is equivalent to the full-time
attendance.
Even if a student declines all
financial aid, grants, and government financial assistance, the 150% of the
“expected time of completion” is enforced from the first filing of the
FAFSA.
For Graduate degree candidates
the following standards are enforced:
The “normal time limit” is
published by the degree granting program and can be found in the college or
university literature/website. The college office of financial aid follows
the “normal time limit” as published by the degree granting program. The
“maximum time limit” for a degree granting program is individually assessed
by the degree granting program and the college office of financial aid.
Again, universities and colleges are assessed nationally on retention and
completion rates, including graduate and post-graduate students.
Universities and Colleges do not want students to remain in school for
extended periods of time and will enforce “expected time of completion”
limits.
Let me know if you have
additional questions regarding this
information.
I also appreciate the changes to
policy A, number 13, regarding the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU).
Michigan
State University has an “Interagency
Agreement” which was signed July 22, 2002. While we were approached by MCB
to sign the MOU in 2007, we found the original agreement to be much more
beneficial for both MSU and MCB, and thus the original agreement is still in
place. I know there are other colleges and universities which have
“interagency agreements”… should this language also be included, or do we
consider these agreements to be MOUs?
I have a question regarding
Policy B, number 2, regarding merit scholarships. RCPD offers several merit
scholarships which are intended to be used by the student for an educational
purpose of the “student’s choosing”. Example: 1. Purchasing equipment or
technology (talking blood pressure cuffs, talking medical equipment, GPS,
etc.), 2. Paying for the flight, spending money, or additional costs related
to participation in a study abroad program, 3. Paying the tuition of an
elective course not in their required field of study (adapted scuba), and/or
4. Paying for elective textbooks or materials and/or attendance to a
professional conference or workshop.
Would our language of
“educational purpose of the student’s choosing” be equivalent to the
language “has a specified purpose” and allow the student to use the funding
as we intended and not just for tuition? RCPD offers scholarships which
allow students the choice of “enhancing” their college experience, by having
the funding to purchase or pay for something otherwise not supported by
other entities. We believe students make very good decisions regarding how
to use the designated funds and should not be forced to use the funding only
for tuition. I am asking for an interpretation of “specified purpose”.
Last item; I do not see anything
in the language of the policy which states that “MCB students are not
required to accept loans” to supplement the cost of attending college. I
know students may take out a student loan, but clarification of this area
may still be needed.
Thank you for inviting me to be
a part of this process. I really appreciate the “thought filled” process of
developing a college policy.
Sincerely,
Ginger
Virginia L. Martz, M.A., CI &
CT
Visual Impairments,
Deaf/Hard-of-Hearing & Mobility Disabilities Specialist
Michigan State University
Resource Center for Persons with Disabilities
120 Bessey Hall
East
Lansing, MI 48824-1033
517-355-1293
Fax:
517-432-3191
martzvir at msu.edu
www.rcpd.msu.edu
From: Geri
Taeckens [mailto:geri.taeckens at isahealthfund.org]
Sent: Thursday, July 01, 2010 1:05
PM
To: Luzenski, Sue
(DELEG); Cannon, Patrick (DELEG); dcgorton601 at comcast.net; Diana Mohnke;
Donna Rose; Elizabeth Mohnke; f.wurtzel at comcast.net; Furton, Dan (DELEG); Grace
Menzel; mpvi at intergate.com; Heibeck, Cheryl (DELEG); Jeanette Brown;
pilarskij at charter.net; Jones, Leamon (DELEG); Kisiel, Lisa (DELEG);
Laury-Johnson, Shawnese (DELEG); Love, Pat (MDE); McNeal, Gwen (DELEG);
McVoy, Shannon (DELEG); Silvey, Amber M (DELEG); Smith, Danielle (DELEG);
White, Elizabeth (DELEG); Wilson, Debbie (DELEG); Virginia Martz; Lydia Schuck; Alissa Werner
Williams; 'Larry Posont'; Greg Botting
Cc: Luzenski, Sue (DELEG)
Subject: July 1 college policy
draft
I am elated to announce the the
second to final draft of the MCB college policy is done and attached for
your review. A huge thanks to Gwen Botting for reviewing this draft, several
times. Thanks to all of you who have given your time and energy to
this process. When all is said and done, we can all be proud that we
created a policy that truly reflects the consensus of all
concerned.
Please review and return any
feedback you have to me by July 15. Appropriate changes will be made and the
final document will go to MCB for distribution to the board for the August
27 meeting. As this document was not fully data driven, I will ask the
board to approve it for 1 year, pending data collection that will either
confirm or dispute any elements in this
policy.
Please note that there are still
a few small typing errors that will be fixed in the final draft. Sue
Luzinski, Gwen could not get out the weird dots that are hovering above the
word, Conclusion, in that section of the document.
Also, I have attached a
reference list of those items that need to be inserted into the policy.
Again, Sue, those need to be identified by MCB and inserted, with eventual
links created when the final document is put on the
web.
Okay, happy
reading.
Geri
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: MCB college policy edited E-M and F-W.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 70144 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/attachments/20100730/6b26f53d/attachment.doc>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: MCB College Policy edited G-B and G-T.doc
Type: application/msword
Size: 78848 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://nfbnet.org/pipermail/nfbmi-talk_nfbnet.org/attachments/20100730/6b26f53d/attachment-0001.doc>
More information about the NFBMI-Talk
mailing list