New Distance Education Rules from the U.S. Dept. of Education: What Changes for Digital Learning?

By Cheryl Dowd and Kathryn Kerensky

The wait is over. Two new federal regulatory provisions addressing distance education are now in effect. The U.S. Department of Education finalized a package of distance education regulations in January 2025 and became effective July 1, 2026.

Why the 18-month gap? It comes down to the Higher Education Act’s “master calendar.” Under section 482(c)(1) of the HEA, regulations affecting Title IV programs generally must be published by Nov. 1 of the preceding year to take effect the following July. Because these regulations were published on Jan. 3, 2025, after the Nov. 1, 2024, deadline, the effective date is July 1, 2026. The Department also extended the implementation of the distance education reporting requirement to July 1, 2027, giving institutions an additional year to make necessary adjustments.

The final rule includes several changes, but two are particularly important for the digital learning community:

• 34 CFR § 600.2 establishes a new federal definition of a distance education course.
• 34 CFR § 668.41(h) creates a new requirement for institutions to report each Title IV recipient’s enrollment in distance education or correspondence courses.

Timing is important here: The regulations are effective now, but the new reporting requirement does not begin until July 1, 2027.

While the regulation establishes the reporting requirement, the Department has not yet established the procedures that institutions will use to report the information. The Department says those details will be clarified through future guidance and instructions.

What Does This Mean for Digital Learning?

The new definition provides some important clarity about when a course is considered distance education, particularly when students may be required to participate in activities that are not instructional. The reporting requirement raises additional questions about how institutions identify students by instructional modality and whether their systems can capture the information the Department will eventually require.
Let’s take a closer look at these two provisions and what digital learning professionals should know, and be thinking about, as institutions prepare for the new reporting requirement.

New Rules

34 CFR § 600.2 — Definition of a Distance Education Course

The new definition of a “distance education course” is important because it makes clear that a course can still be considered distance education even when students are required to participate in certain in-person, non-instructional activities. The regulation specifically identifies orientation, testing, and academic support services as examples. The key is that the instruction itself takes place through distance education.
For the digital learning community, the distinction between “instructional” vs “non-instructional” activities is important. The question is not simply whether a student must be physically present. The question is whether the student must be physically present for instruction.

34 CFR § 668.41(h) — Reporting Distance Education Enrollment

The new regulation requires institutions to report, for each Title IV recipient, the student’s enrollment in distance education or correspondence courses. The regulation states that this reporting will occur “in accordance with procedures established by the Secretary.”

The Department has not yet established the procedures. The preamble says the Department expects to incorporate the information into an existing data stream rather than create a new reporting portal or interface. The Department decided to collect the information through the National Student Loan Data System (NSLDS) and said that a process similar to the existing NSLDS enrollment reporting process appears likely. However, the Department also stated that the specific details of the reporting process have not yet been determined.

The Department does expect the reporting to occur at the student level, not the course level, and anticipates distinguishing among students enrolled in distance education, in-person, and hybrid education. The Department also expects the reporting frequency to align with existing reporting requirements, such as the current 60-day NSLDS enrollment reporting cycle, although that frequency has not yet been finalized. For institutions, the message is straightforward: the reporting requirement is established, but the reporting mechanics are still being developed.

Connecting the Federal and Institutional Modality Definitions

The new definition of a distance education course may lead institutions to take a closer look at how their existing modality terms fit with the federal definition. But institutions do not necessarily need to throw out terms such as online, hybrid, blended, HyFlex, or low-residency. These terms can serve important purposes for describing the student experience, even if the institution needs to ensure it knows which of their modalities align with the federal classification for federal reporting purposes. In fact, this is not a new challenge; many terms used to describe digital learning can vary across federal and state policy, accreditors, and institutions.

For institutions, the practical question may not be whether to abandon or modify existing modality labels, but understanding how those labels relate to the federal definition. A course that an institution calls “online” or “distance education” could still require an in-person orientation and meet the federal definition. On the other hand, a course that an institution calls “online” but requires students to attend an in-person instructional session would not meet the federal definition.

Institutions may want to ensure that the people responsible for course scheduling, modality definitions, reporting, and compliance understand. WCET’s modality definitions can be a useful starting point for institutions thinking through these scenarios, particularly because it emphasizes that the most useful definitions are ultimately those that provide clear information about the actual student experience. At the same time, for Title IV purposes, institutions will need to look beyond the modality label and consider whether required in-person activities are instructional or instead are non-instructional activities such as orientation, testing, or academic support services.

Reporting Requirement: Why the Department Wants the Data and How to Prepare

The Department says the new reporting will improve its ability to oversee distance education and better understand student outcomes. The preamble explains that the Department has been limited in its ability to fully understand students’ participation in distance education, compare outcomes by modality, and conduct oversight. The Department believes student-level reporting will provide a more detailed picture of students enrolled in distance education or correspondence courses.

The Department also says the information can benefit institutions, students, researchers, Congress, and the public by providing outcome information by modality. Institutional representatives involved in the rulemaking indicated that this type of information could also help institutions make decisions about distance education programs, resources, and partnerships.

So, how should institutions prepare for July 1, 2027? This is where there is still some uncertainty. We know the reporting requirement is coming, and we know the Department intends to use NSLDS and collect the information at the student level. But we do not yet have all of the reporting procedures, data specifications, or final reporting frequency.

The Department says the system details will be clarified through future guidance and instructions. The Department also said it will provide more specific information through a separate information collection for public comment closer to implementation. In the meantime, institutions can use this time to understand their own data and systems. Where is course modality identified? How consistently is it identified across institutional systems? Can course information be connected to student enrollment and Title IV status? These are good questions to explore now.

The Department believes the additional year provides sufficient time for institutions to make the necessary adjustments. For the digital learning community, the message is simple: we know reporting is coming, but we are still waiting to learn exactly how it will work.

New Distance Education Regulations Takeaways

• Institutions may need to clarify how modality definitions are applied. Institutions can continue to use terms such as online, hybrid, blended, and HyFlex for their own purposes. The new federal definition may not require institutions to change their existing terminology, but it does create a need to understand when a course’s institutional modality aligns, or not, with the federal definition.
• Clear institutional definitions still matter. Clear institutional definitions still matter. The federal classification does not replace the need for clear institutional modalities that help students know what to expect. Institutional labels can describe the student experience, while the federal definition determines Title IV classification and subsequent obligations. Required in-person non-instructional activities—such as orientation, testing, or academic support—do not prevent a course from meeting that definition.
• The new reporting requirement begins July 1, 2027. Institutions will need to report each Title IV recipient’s enrollment in distance education or correspondence courses.
• The reporting details are still being developed. The Department expects to use NSLDS and student-level reporting, but specific procedures, data requirements, and reporting frequency have not yet been finalized.
• Now is a good time to assess institutional data. Institutions can begin examining how course modality is identified across systems and how course, student enrollment, and Title IV data connect, while watching for future Department guidance and reporting instructions.

The new rules are now in effect, but the work is not finished. Institutions have time to prepare for the July 2027 reporting requirement, and there are still important details to come from the Department.

For the digital learning community, this is an area to watch closely. WCET and SAN will continue to monitor the Department’s guidance, reporting developments, and related federal and state policy changes, and we will share updates and practical information as details become available.

The WCET and SAN Policy Tracker is an excellent resource for staying current as policy related to digital learning continues to evolve. As always, our goal is to help the digital learning community understand what is changing, what remains uncertain, and what institutions may need to consider next.