Author: Russ Poulin

Ignoring state authorization? How long can you tread water?

By Russ Poulin

November 21, 2011

4 Comments

As part of our coverage of the state authorization issue, we at WCET have met several regulators charged with enforcing those rules. We asked Alan Contreras, who recently retired from Oregon’s Office of Degree Authorization and is now a higher education consultant, to serve as guest blogger and to answer a question we get asked often: “Without the federal regulation, why should my institution follow the state laws?” Of course, we all believe that the federal regulation will return. The Education Department is appealing the decision. If they lose, they only need to follow their rule-making processes to overcome the court’s objections. Even so, the state laws preceded the federal regulation and remain in place regardless of what happens at the federal level. Thank you to Alan for giving a state perspective.

As the federal regulatory scheme embodied in “rule 609” requiring state approval for all college operations drifts slowly downstream, caught in a variety of legal and political eddies, many colleges have decided that it is perfectly fine, even wise, to quietly do things the way they have always done, without worrying about those pesky state laws. This course of action is not wise. It is profoundly stupid.

Although it is true that some states do not yet have appropriate processes in place to handle high-volume distance-education and so-called “hybrid” programs that have small on-ground components, they all will eventually and many do already. Recall Bill Cosby’s defining phrase from an early comedy skit about the great biblical flood: to the stubborn and dilatory Noah, God used the simple admonition “How Long Can You Tread Water?”

Photo of Alan Contreras — Alan Contreras – Recently retired from Oregon’s Office of Degree Authorization. Now a higher education consultant.

How long, and with what end in mind, do colleges in denial about state laws plan to tread water? The fact is that the law in states where you offer your programs has always applied to your activities. The fact that you hadn’t mentioned what you were doing to the states in which you were operating is evidence of managerial inattention, at best, not of proper operation and certainly not of latent wickedness by those Other States.

Some states regulate nondomestic offering of courses and programs through distance means, others do not. That is a decision that states get to make under U.S. law, and pretending that it doesn’t really matter has consequences.

Consider the poor student who recently tried to get licensed to practice a profession in a WICHE member state. This student had taken courses online from a regionally-accredited institution based in another state. When he applied for professional licensure in his field, the state licensing board did what it is supposed to do—it checked to be sure that the program was operating legally under the laws of the state in which the student lived. It wasn’t. For that reason, the student could not be licensed. This led to a fair amount of hootin’ and hollerin’ among a pack of unhappy lawyers whose howling at the moon has been largely ineffectual.

In this situation, where does the aggrieved student turn for recompense? The state licensing board has done nothing wrong – it followed state law. The state college licensing agency did nothing wrong – it, too, followed state law. The only player that did not follow state law was the college, which makes it the logical target for litigation and public criticism by students whose money has been spent on a credential the utility of which is unexpectedly circumscribed. How exactly does this differ from the actions of those “bad-actor” for-profits who enroll students in programs without telling them that the degree they are getting is not useful?

I don’t know what the eventual outcome of this case will be, as it is still in progress, but I hope that the example offers a cautionary note as to the consequences of ignoring state law on a theory that no one really cares.

You may ask why we don’t have better interstate reciprocity for licensed professions. Great question, but the answer needs to be addressed in another venue suited to that subject. As for interstate reciprocity for college authorizations, that is in progress via a Lumina Foundation-funded project managed by the Council of State Governments and the Presidents Forum. WCET staff is involved in that process and WICHE is discussing ways to ensure that even small states with limited oversight capacity are eligible to join the new compact, thus making their domestic colleges eligible for the benefits of simplified interstate operation.

But what happens in the interim? It will be two to three years before most states can join a new compact covering the interstate offer of online education. A few states may choose not to join. Do you try to work within the laws of states that expect you to do so or do you quietly resubmerge and hope no one notices your periscope until your state joins the new compact?

How long can you tread water? Are you prepared to defend any legal actions related to your illegal, yes, illegal activities in other states? Offering college degrees without a license is even a criminal offense in some states – whether anyone prosecutes is not especially important when a state says that your college is violating the civil and criminal law – it’s true and it’s in the newspaper.

You can hardly sue another state for pointing out the truth about its own laws and politely asking that they be obeyed. But students in that state can sue you for failing to obtain necessary licenses before suckering them into paying you for a course or degree that is now in limbo or, in worst cases such as the one discussed above, has been declared invalid for use.

In at least one state, offering degree programs without a state license is a felony. Do you really want to spend your time explaining to your local daily or Inside Higher Education why your college has been accused of a crime? And again, you can’t screech that you are not a perp and sue the other state for defamation. The fact is, you are a perp.

The obligation to obey the law applies to colleges just as it does to everyone else. As far back as 1936 the nature of collegiate licensure and the obligation to obtain proper approvals was discussed in The Colleges and the Courts, a well-known book on legal issues affecting colleges. The modern restatement that I wrote for SHEEO in 2009 (The Legal Basis for Degree-Granting Authority in the United States) offers updated information but does not offer any changes to the fundamental interpretation of U.S. law. There is simply no excuse for a college to not know that it needs to be licensed.

In the west, the role of public systems and colleges is especially important, and such schools have developed the habit of thinking that because they are public, they have an open license to do whatever they want to in the way of distance learning programs. They forget that they are only “public” in one state, unless they have a unique legal status such as Treasure Valley Community College’s cross-border campuses in Oregon and Idaho. Outside their home state, they are just another nondomestic provider and the nature of their ownership is usually irrelevant.

It is true that some states are not prepared to handle the flood of applications or requests for exemption that they are getting. That’s fine. If you contact a state and they say “buzz off, talk to us next year” then you have done all you can do, and you have their statement at hand in case the feds ask. The feds understand this and they are not going to divot your Title IV aid because you could not get licensed in a state that is still figuring out what to do.

But many states are perfectly willing and able to handle your application. Yes, you’d rather not apply and your budget didn’t include these inconvenient fees for licensure. But you have to do it anyway. It’s the law.

Alan Contreras
acontrer56@gmail.com
Alan’s Blog: http://oregonreview.blogspot.com/

Note: Alan Contreras and Russ Poulin are two members of the drafting team developing the model state compact reciprocity language. Many details are currently being worked out and we plan to have a version for public comment available this spring.

Russ Poulin
Deputy Director, Research & Analysis, WCET
rpoulin@wiche.edu

State Approval page: http://wcet.wiche.edu/advance/state-approval
Twitter: @wcet_info State Authorization Hashtag: #stateauthorization

Join WCET! Support our work.

Professional Licensure, Regulation, State Authorization, U.S. Department of Education

Uncategorized

Questions about Online Learning? Respond to the Managing Online Ed Survey.

By Russ Poulin

November 16, 2011

You get questions. We get questions.

What are other campuses doing about the issues that vex you? How do you know? There is only one way to find out, ask them. And there is only one way for us share the answers — if you respond when asked.

For the third year, WCET is partnering with the Campus Computing Project to conduct the Managing Online Education survey. The survey focuses on the instructional, operational, and technology infrastructure of online education programs of institutions throughout the U.S. and Canada.

Highlights of the results of the 2010 survey included:

Just over half of the institutions require faculty to take mandatory training before teaching an online class.
Almost three-quarters cited “faculty resistance” as a barrier to expanding their online programs.
Online education organizations within a campus are in flux as 44 percent restructured their how they managed online education in the past two years and 59 percent plan to do so in the next two years.
Only one-third of institutions offered their students 24*7 technical support.

In response to feedback from last years’ survey participants and those who used the results, we have made some changes to this year’s survey. You will be glad to know that we cut some of the questions that were not producing interesting results and shortened the survey. Additionally, after two years, we were seeing clear trends on some responses. To delve deeper into those issues we added these new questions:

How centralized or decentralized is your online learning organization?
How engaged is your president and provost in the development or expansion of online education at your institution?
Faculty resistance has been cited as a barrier in past surveys, what are the sources of that resistance?
What percentage of the online tuition and fee revenue from online courses and programs revert back to the academic unit offering that course or program?
Does your institution have a mandatory process to review and approve all new online courses and programs?

I bet you would like to know how your colleagues answer those and other questions. Here’s where you come in…

YOUR INSTITUTION NEEDS TO RESPOND TO THE SURVEY.

<Sorry for yelling at you> To avoid confusion, we would like one response from each institution. Given that some institutions are centralized, some are decentralized, and some laugh at the notion of organization, it is often difficult to know who is the correct person to invite to take the survey. There is no common position of “chief elearning officer” like there is with a CIO.

How Do You Participate?

Review the 2011 Managing Online Education survey to see what questions are being asked. If you are not what passes for a “chief Elearning officer,” ask around at your institution to see if someone has received an invitation and is completing the survey. If you need an invitation or have other questions about the survey, contact Casey Green at cgreen@campuscomputing.net. He will help you out and get you access to the survey. Survey responses must be submitted through the online survey software and not by completing the .pdf linked earlier in this paragraph.

The survey deadline is Friday, ~~December 2~~ December 16 28. I’m looking forward to your participation, seeing the results, and sharing them with you! NOTE: THE SURVEY DEADLINE HAS BEEN EXTENDED TO DECEMBER 16 28.

Thank you,

Russ

Russ Poulin
Deputy Director, WCET
rpoulin@wiche.edu
Twitter: @wcet_info

Join WCET! Support our work.

Photo/Graphic credit: Sean MacEntee Some rights reserved: http://www.flickr.com/photos/smemon/6289600762/

Managing Digital Learning, Survey

Uncategorized

More than One Path to Meeting the Adult Degree Completion BIG GOAL

By Russ Poulin

October 20, 2011

Lumina Foundation has a BIG GOAL: To increase the proportion of Americans with high-quality degrees and credentials to 60 percent by the year 2025. Over the past several years, they have supported many projects that are of sufficient scale to reach this goal.

This week I have been attending a meeting of WICHE’s Adult College Completion Network. Funded by Lumina Foundation, the Network unites organizations and agencies working to increase college completion by adults. Included in the meetings are both Lumina-funded projects and other promising efforts that are re-engaging adults in completing their degrees.

You can find information about many such projects on the Network website. During the meeting we had “speed dating” sessions where participants could share information about the efforts to increase college completion for adults. Here are highlights of some of my “dates:”

West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission – Student Affairs Training
The universities, community, and technical colleges are partnering with NASPA – the national student affairs organization. They have created a multi-tier “train-the-trainers” initiative with the ultimate aim of enhancing adult-focused student services at the state’s institutions. So far they held a 3-day workshop with 38 student and academic affairs staff from the state. This fall those participants will become trainers in eight regional workshops held throughout the state. It will be interesting to watch this project develop, as it could become a model for how rolling out adult-friendly student and academic services throughout a state.

Goodwill Industries – Community College/Career Collaboration (C4)
I have long heard of Goodwill, but was blown away by their commitment to finding jobs for people and getting people the education needed to fill those jobs. They noticed that three local Goodwill communities had done an exceptional job of creating collaborations with community colleges. Through these C4 partnerships they had increased college and career success for low-income adults. In the short term they are expanding out to twenty more communities with the goal of reaching a total of 60 within three years.

Council for Adult and Experiential Learning – Learning Counts
Rather than each institution running its own prior learning assessment, CAEL is creating a service (Learning Counts) to help students navigate this confusing process. Students are paired with counselors who help the students determine what is best for them. Some are counseled that an assessment is not for them, while others are steered to take exams, such as ACE or CLEP. If a student should pursue a prior learning assessment, they are counseled to take a course that teaches them how to create a portfolio of their past experiences. The portfolio is examined to determine the number of ACE-transcripted credits that should be awarded.

Minnesota State Colleges and Universities – Veterans Programs and Services
The Minnesota National Guard has partnered with the state’s colleges and universities to better serve current Guard members and veterans after they return. Services include granting academic credit for military training, concurrent enrollment for courses that will count both for military purposes and academic credit, and assisting veterans in career and education planning upon their return.

I hope this gives you a flavor of the great diversity of adult-centered projects that are out there. To learn about other projects, go to the Adult College Completion Network’s website. See Lumina Foundation’s website to see other ways that they plan to meet their BIG GOAL.

Russ

Russell Poulin
Deputy Director, Research and Analysis
WCET – WICHE Cooperative for Educational Technologies
rpoulin@wiche.edu
wcet.wiche.edu

Assessment, Completion, Faculty, Military and Veterans, Prior Learning Assessment, Student Success, Workforce/Employment

Uncategorized

No ‘Deus Ex Machina’ on State Authorization

By Russ Poulin

September 22, 2011

3 Comments

Ancient Greek playwrights would sometimes write themselves into a corner. The intricate plot, which was so carefully developed through the initial acts, did not lend itself to an easy resolution in the finale.

One answer was to let the gods and goddesses resolve the outcome. Actors playing deities would be lowered by cranes onto the stage to intervene in the action and untangle the unseemly mess created by us humans. The term ‘deus ex machina’ (gods out of the machine) describes the plot device of using contrived or unexpected events to resolve the conflict in a play.

In more recent times, the television courtroom drama Perry Mason television series was famous for members of the gallery suddenly confessing to a crime much to the relief of Mason’s unjustly accused defendant. The Martians invading the Earth in H.G. Wells’ War of the Worlds suddenly fall victim to a common bacteria to which they have no immunity. The aliens die, the Earth is saved, and all rejoice.

There is no ‘deus ex machina’ for the state authorization regulations.

Regarding state authorization regulations, I have heard people say that they are ‘waiting for clarity,’ ‘this will all blow over,’ ‘students came to us so we don’t have to worry about it,’ ‘certainly we must be exempt,’ and ‘the federal regulation was vacated so we don’t have to do anything.’ These sentiments were reflected in the UPCEA/WCET survey on what colleges are doing on state authorization. Many colleges are still waiting to act.

The federal state authorization regulation will probably return soon.
It is true that federal regulation was vacated, but it was only on procedural grounds. The U.S. Department of Education (USDOE) recently filed an appeal seeking to reinstate the distance education regulation. In presentations by and conversations with USDOE personnel, they feel that they have a good chance to win an appeal. This will take several months to resolve as it works its way through the appeal process. The appeal might fail. Even so, since the regulation was vacated on the grounds that the USDOE did not follow its procedures, they could reissue the regulation as part of a future proposed rulemaking process and overcome the court’s objections.

States still expect your institution to comply with their state laws.
State regulations predate the federal regulation and are still in force. You are expected to check whether you need to apply for authorization or not. If your institution needs authorization, you were supposed to have received it prior to enrolling the first student and, often, prior to any marketing in that state. In many states, if an institution is offering courses at a distance and is doing nothing else in that state, then you do not need to seek approval or may be exempt. But some states will require you to apply.

Federal legislation will provide little relief
There is also hope being pinned on federal regulations repealing this regulation. In a previous post, we gave the opinion that the legislation will probably not pass, if it passes it will probably be vetoed, and if it is signed by the President that it will have little impact. The state regulations are still in place and this legislation does not change that fact.

No reason to wait
In re-examining the quotes that I gave above, in reverse order:

Vacating the federal rule does not absolve you from following state law.
You are exempt only if the state says you are exempt.
Even if the student came to you, the state laws and regulations where that student is taking the bulk of the instruction still apply.
I don’t see how it will blow over.
Stop waiting for clarity. Sometimes it feels like I’m talking to the math student who is waiting to learn Algebra by osmosis. Math ability comes from studying math, state authorization clarity comes only from studying the state regulations.

What should we be doing?
We completely understand that this is a pain and expensive and confusing and a big time suck. If you have not started, our advice is to do what you can, including:

Run the numbers so that you know where you are enrolling students.
Determine which states are at the top of your institution’s list strategically.
Convene a meeting with your institution’s leadership (president, provost, attorney) and marketing director so that they can be informed and prepared to make tough decisions. Involving the marketing director is crucial so that marketing efforts do not trigger a need for authorization in states where you are not approved to operate. This becomes more problematic at larger institutions with multiple marketing or distance education efforts. A coordinated response is key.
Begin learning the regulations in that state.
Contact the regulator in that state with specific information about what you are doing in the state and specific questions about their regulations. Build a relationship. Please do not send a blanket letter to them saying “tell me what to do.”
Determine next steps based upon what you learn.

Also, you will be hearing more about reciprocity agreements in the coming months, but relief from reciprocity is still probably a couple years away. The exception to this is the Southern states, which are building on an existing agreement. When the time comes, be sure that your state supports reciprocity agreements. The more states that sign-on the easier authorization will be on all of us, which is good for us and good for students.

Good luck.

Russ Poulin
Deputy Director, WCET
rpoulin@wiche.edu

State Approval page: http://wcet.wiche.edu/advance/state-approval
Twitter: @wcet_info State Authorization Hashtags: #stateauthorization #stateapp

Join WCET! Support our work on this issue.

Photo Credit: Morgue File

Reciprocity, Regulation, State Authorization, U.S. Department of Education

Uncategorized

State Authorization Updates on Reciprocity & Surveys

By Russ Poulin

August 4, 2011

It’s suddenly the dog days of August. Many people are on vacation and the beginning of a new school year is only weeks away for many institutions. Below are updates on several activities regarding the State Authorization regulations.

Lumina/Gates State Authorization Meeting

Last week I attended a meeting sponsored by the Lumina Foundation for Education and the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation. The event focused on efforts to maintain the integrity of the state regulatory process while easing the burden on institutions in complying. Representatives from a wide variety of institutions, national higher education organization, regional compacts, and the U.S. Department of Education participated.

Photo of picket fence on a sandy beach — We’re working all summer on those state regulatory borders.

Even with the recent court finding, there was consensus that this was still an important issue. Absent the federal regulations, the state regulations are still in place.

The quote of the day regarding the authorization process in one state was: “I have gone to a proctologist and felt less exposed.” Beyond that bon mot, I am able to report on a few of the discussion items at that meeting.

The Department of Education (USDOE) and the APSCU Law Suit

As you will recall, the District Court of the District of Columbia recently vacated the ‘state authorization’ regulation on procedural grounds. The USDOE believes that they have a good case for appeal and are working with the Department of Justice to weigh options. They will decide on their course of action in the next month or two.

Model State Compact from the Presidents’ Forum and Council of State Governments

The Lumina Foundation funded the Presidents’ Forum of Excelsior College and the Council of State Governments to create model language for a proposed interstate compact. It is hoped that such an agreement would meet the needs of regulators while easing the burden on institutions. The first round of work has been completed and the next stage is to convene a ‘drafting team’ to turn the research outcomes into language for the compact. The Council of State Governments received much input on the process from the participants. The final compact language is probably about a year away. States would then have to decide whether or not to join the compact.

Distance Education Commission

The Association of Public Land-grant Universities (APLU) and a few other organizations proposed a new group to study this issue. From the draft document distributed at the meeting, the outcome is as follows:

The commission should recommend proposals for the state and federal level to deal broadly and in a more or less permanent manner with this regulatory matter. This will almost certainly involve at least recommending a model regulatory law, but no doubt include much more than that.

If possible, these recommendations should be broadly agreed upon within the academic community, the states and the federal government. It is important that the process begin promptly so as to capitalize on a singular focus of attention on these issues created by the Department’s new regulation.

Peter McPherson, president of APLU, told me yesterday that Sloan-C is providing funding to this Commission.

Southern Regional Education Board’s Electronic Campus

Although not on the agenda, Bruce Chaloux provided an update on his attempt to renew the Electronic Campus agreement among the SREB states. The updated agreement would allow for reciprocity as long as the institution offering the distance course is: a) a public institution in an SREB state, b) is authorized by that state, and c) adheres to SREB’s Principles of Good Practice. The agreement needed to be renewed and updated to meet changing federal and state expectations, but is nearly completed.

Surveys

Apart from the work on interstate agreements, there are a couple survey that are now out in the field.

UPCEA / WCET State Authorization Survey

We were often asked by collegiate personnel, the press, and policy makers, “what are colleges doing about state authorization?” The University Professional Continuing Education Association and WCET decided to send out a survey to obtain more information on that question. Preliminary results are in and we will be delivering a report and hosting a webcast on the results later this month.

SHEEO Survey of State Regulators

The State Higher Education Executive Officers organization is committed to creating an authoritative list of state regulators and their regulations. The survey is out and results will be published this fall. If some results are ready earlier, they may release the results in batches.

While it is August, there is still much work being done on state authorization. I hope that you are having fun on your vacation!!

Russ Poulin
Deputy Director, WCET
rpoulin@wiche.edu

State Approval page: http://wcet.wiche.edu/advance/state-approval
Twitter: @wcet_info State Approval Hashtag: #stateapp

Join WCET! Support our work on this issue.

Photo credit: Morgue File, http://morguefile.com/archive/display/129520

Reciprocity, Regulation, State Authorization, U.S. Department of Education

Uncategorized

Court “Vacates” Distance Ed Portion of State Authorization Regulation

By Russ Poulin

July 12, 2011

2 Comments

Today (July 12, 2011), the United States District Court for the District of Columbia struck down the distance education portion of the U.S. Department of Education’s (USDOE) ‘state authorization regulations. The decision is as a result of a lawsuit brought by the Association of Private Sector Colleges and Universities. You can read the complete ruling on the Court’s website. The ‘state authorization’ section begins on page 35.

On page 39 of the ruling is the statement…

“The Court will vacate 34 C.F.R. § 600.9(c).”

As you might recall, § 600.9(c) is the new, short paragraph in the regulations released last October regarding distance education’s need to seek authorization in each state.

The reason for the ruling is that the USDOE did not provide adequate opportunity in the Negotiated Rulemaking Process for institutions to comment, as stated on page 37:

“APSCU challenges § 600.9(c) on various grounds, but the Court need only address the argument that the Department failed to provide notice and opportunity for comment on subsection (c) of the State authorization regulations, as this subsection, or any variation thereof, was not included in the notice of proposed rulemaking.”

As we’ve noted before, the distance education language was not included in the original language proposed by the USDOE in June 2010 as part of its rulemaking process. The rule appeared in the final ‘Program Integrity’ regulations released in October 2010. As a result, the court seems to have agreed that the USDOE did not follow proper procedures in implementing the rule. If the language had been included in the June 2010 proposed rules, WCET and the distance education community could have provided comments to improve the final regulation.

So what does this mean?

First, as we keep saying, we’re not lawyers and we’re not sure that we understand all of the nuances of this ruling.

Second, the USDOE could still appeal the ruling.

Third, as we said in a recent posting, even if the ‘state authorization’ regulation is repealed or struck down, institutions still have the obligation to comply with state laws. State regulators are newly aware that there are many institutions operating in their states without approval.

More to come!

Russell Poulin
Deputy Director, Research & Analysis
rpoulin@wiche.edu

Megan Raymond
Manager, Events and Programs
mraymond@wiche.edu

State Approval page: http://wcet.wiche.edu/advance/state-approval
Twitter: @wcet_info State Approval Hashtag: #stateapp

Join WCET! Support our work on this issue.

Photo credit: Morgue File

Regulation, State Authorization, U.S. Department of Education

Uncategorized

WCET & UPCEA Partner on State Authorization Survey-We Need Your Help

By Russ Poulin

June 29, 2011

1 Comment

What are institutions doing about complying with state authorization regulations?

We get asked that question repeatedly. Institutions want to know what others are doing to make sure they are not left behind. State regulators are interested in knowing if they will receive even more inquiries and applications. The press wants information that is less anecdotal and more fact-based.

While we have some guesses, the information is based upon conversations and hearsay. With the original July 1 deadline for federal compliance upon us, let’s get better information.

State Authorization Survey

The University Professional & Continuing Education Association (UPCEA) and the WICHE Coooperative for Educational Technologies (WCET) have partnered to conduct research on what steps colleges have taken (or have not taken) to address this issue, including the following questions:

Describe your institution’s progress in addressing the state authorization regulation.
In how many states will you apply?
If you have not applied, why haven’t you or someone in your organization applied for approval in any state?
What are your estimated costs for your institution to comply?
From which states do you believe you will no longer accept students?
What concerns, comments or questions might you have about the process or what issues related to the new regulation do you think are most important to address?

We hope that by gathering this information, we can gauge progress and identify areas of confusion that still remain.

We Need Your Help – How Can You Participate?

If possible, we are interested in getting one response per institution. The two organizations cross-checked their institutional membership lists and are sending out the surveys ~~today (June 29)~~ next week (July 5 or 6). (We had an unexpected glitch and decided to wait until after the holiday weekend).

If your institution is not a member of WCET or UPCEA or if you would like to assure that your institution is included in the survey, please contact Jim Fong at jfong@upcea.edu or Megan Raymond at mraymond@wiche.edu.

We hope to have a quick turnaround on this survey and to announce the results in July. Those completing the survey will get a full report on survey results. A summary of results will be reported to members of both organizations and on this blog.

Thank you for helping.

Russ and Jim

Jim Fong
Director, Center for Research and Consulting
University Professional & Continuing Education Association
jfong@upcea.edu

Russell Poulin
Deputy Director, Research & Analysis
WCET – WICHE Cooperative for Educational Technologies
rpoulin@wiche.edu

State Approval page: http://wcet.wiche.edu/advance/state-approval
Twitter: @wcet_info State Approval Hashtag: #stateapp

Join WCET! Support our work on this issue.

Regulation, State Authorization, Survey

Uncategorized

What Would Repealing the Federal ‘State Authorization’ Regulation Accomplish?

By Russ Poulin

June 20, 2011

3 Comments

Last week, Cyd Grua, from the Utah System of Higher Education asked me:

OK, Russ, I am going to ask what is probably a really dumb question: with or without Department of Education involvement, we all now know the states and territories have 50+ sets of criteria for doing business in a state. And the state regulators, often an agency other than education, knows we know. Even if DOE backs off further, do we not have an obligation to contact states and territories if we serve students within their borders? Cyd

Cyd was responding to an announcement that I had sent to WCET members about federal legislation to repeal the ‘state authorization’ and ‘credit hour’ regulations. Before I answer her question, here’s some quick background on the legislation and what might happen to the legislation as it moves forward.

The Legislation

The U.S. Department of Education released regulations on state authorization last October and a new definition on credit hour earlier. State authorization arose from concerns in protecting the federal financial aid process. Rep. Virginia Foxx (NC) and 24 co-sponsors introduced H.R. 2117 (the ‘Protecting Academic Freedom in Higher Education’ Act) with the intent of repealing the two regulations. Rep. Foxx called the measures a “classic case of federal government overreach.” In support of the legislation, the American Council on Education sent a letter of support on behalf of 78 higher education organizations to Rep. Foxx, praising the repeal effort.

The House Education Committee approved the measure last week on a 27-11 vote. Some were elated by this outcome.

What’s Next?

Well…I’m just some guy from Colorado, but here’s how I see it…

House passage of the bill – very likely.
Senate passage of the bill– not very likely at this time.

Signed into law by President Obama– not very likely at this time. This would undermine the President’s Department of Education, but could become law if it becomes part of an agreement on larger issues. Stranger things have happened.

Six Reasons Why We Should Not Support the “State Authorization” Section of H.R. 2117

Below are reasons why we should not support the “state authorization” portion of this legislation. As for the “credit hour” debate, that is a separable issue that I will leave for another time.

In developing these reasons, I received help from Diane Goldsmith (WCET’s Steering Committee Chair) about some core principles underlying our thinking. We kept coming back to the underlying principle that:

States have always had the right to regulate higher education offerings to those in their states.

1) If H.R. 2117 becomes law, the state regulations still remain

This takes us back to Cyd’s original question. She is correct. Repealing the federal regulation will have no impact on the regulations already existing in the states. Are Rep. Foxx, ACE, and the 78 agencies that signed the letter suggesting that institutions should ignore state laws and regulations? That is the only way that they will achieve the relief they describe.

Accrediting agencies will still expect institutions to follow state laws. States will expect them to do so, as well.

Personally, I cannot advocate that institutions continue to ignore state laws as they have in the past.

Believe me, I understand the objections to the rigorous requirements and outrageous costs for compliance in several states. I, too, object to those. But, removing the federal requirement does not remove our responsibility to comply with state laws nor does it change the requirements in those states.

The states should not get off easy on this point. I have come to the conclusion that:

It is not unreasonable to expect institutions to follow state laws.

State laws should not expect institutions to do the unreasonable.

It’s 2011 and an alarming number of state laws are antiquated. Is the goal really consumer protection or protectionism? How can we start a dialogue about reasonable requirements at a reasonable cost?

2) If H.R. 2117 becomes law, federal oversight becomes weaker

All H.R. 2117 does is repeal the law. Admittedly, state authorization is a highly uneven mechanism for use in financial aid eligibility determination. But, at least it is something. Accreditation can’t fill the void. What will?

3) If H.R. 2117 becomes law, the current wording might not have the desired effect.

The resolution states: “To the extent that regulations repealed by paragraph (1) amended regulations that were in effect on June 30, 2011, the provisions of the regulations that were in effect on June 30, 2011, and were so amended are restored and revived as if the regulations repealed by paragraph (1) had not taken effect.” Ummm…from the U.S. Department of Education’s point-of-view, they have always expected that institutions follow state laws. While this point is debatable, will the Department retain that expectation only we won’t have any regulations to guide us?

4) The Timeline for Complying was Our Big Objection

After the first ‘Dear Colleague’ letter was released, I critiqued the U.S. Department of Education’s responses in-depth. I also said: “Reciprocal agreements could help, but they will take more than a year to develop. Let’s follow state and federal laws, but give us the time to do it right.” The second ‘Dear Colleague’ letter extended the federal timeline to July 2014. The exact meaning and enforcement implications of the ‘good faith effort’ expectations are unclear, but I believe more guidance is coming.

5) If H.R. 2117 becomes law, the momentum to improving state regulations could be lost

The regulation has opened their eyes to what can be done in terms of saner state regulations, reciprocity, and single applications. Should the federal regulation impetus be removed, the state regulations, but the momentum simplification and reciprocity could be lost.

In the April 20 ‘Dear Colleague’ letter, the Department of Education said: “we are interested in working with the community to support States’ efforts to develop model reciprocal agreements, common applications, or other methods that States could adopt to foster compliance.” They need to get going on this or be ready for more attacks like H.R. 2117.

6) This is a distraction…

Since the legislation will have few, no, or unintended effects, let’s find other things to do with our time.

Thanks Cyd. You ask good questions.

Russell Poulin
Deputy Director, Research & Analysis
rpoulin@wiche.edu

State Approval page: http://wcet.wiche.edu/advance/state-approval
Twitter: @wcet_info State Approval Hashtag: #stateapp

Join WCET! Support our work on this issue.

Photo credit: Morgue File http://morguefile.com/archive/display/606770

Legislation, Regulation, State Authorization, U.S. Department of Education

Practice

Online Ed Needs to Be More Aggressive in the Quality Debate

By Russ Poulin

June 15, 2011

11 Comments

Diane Goldsmith is the Executive Director of the Connecticut Distance Learning Consortium. A long-time contributor to WCET activities, Diane is the current WCET Steering Committee Chair and serves on the WCET Executive Council.

Maybe I’m just getting cranky, but I’m increasingly irritated by attacks on online learning, especially those based on badly designed research, small sample sizes, or those using data from un-cited studies. “Why Are So Many Students Still Failing Online?” was the provocative headline of a recent Chronicle of Higher Education article.

Now to be fair, the article itself, aside from postulating that the only reason that institutions offer online course is that they are the “proverbial cash cow,” was not completely unreasonable. Although the author is clearly not a fan of online learning, most of us would at least agree with his point that learning online requires certain skills. But why the Chronicle devoted an entire article to something we have known for years while highlighting his solution of some sort of pre-test for students before enrolling, is beyond me.

Photo of Diane Goldsmith — Diane Goldsmith

This isn’t news.

What rankles me most is that those of us who work in the world of online learning, have been examining and implementing new ideas promoting student success for years, including assessments and orientations to ensure that students are aware of and helped to attain the skills they need to be successful. I’m baffled as to why our efforts still seem to be a secret to both the public and the majorhigher education media.

In 2000, when I first started at the Connecticut Distance Learning Consortium (CTDLC), we were working with our member institutions to help them improve the quality of their online courses and programs through course development funding, instructional design consultation, quantitative and qualitative research on course completion and faculty roles, studies of student readiness, the development of our collaborative eTutoring program, and the list goes on. And in Connecticut, where “distance” is a strange concept in what, despite what its residents think, is actually a small state, we were behind many of you at tackling these issues.

There are long standing national efforts such as Quality Matters with its focus on best practices in online course design and pedagogy. An entire business community has also developed commercial as well as open source solutions to many of the issues we, as a community of online practitioners, have identified as impacting student learning and success online.

And we don’t do this in a vacuum.

We have sought out organizations like WCET. Even those of us from the east found that despite the “Western” (which was, wasn’t, and now sort of is) in its name, WCET’s active CIG’s, listservs, and annual conference belie the notion that institutions and administrators have nothing but revenue on their minds. The responses to the recent WCET listserv discussion on improving online course retention provided evidence of institutional commitment to understanding and improving online programs and how they serve students. Some reported 85% In the responses, an Athabasca University study reported having “85% of courses started by undergraduate students were successfully completed,” the North Dakota University System Online reported an 85% completion rate, and research on institutions with high completion rates was cited. Others reported progress in closing the retention gap between online and face-to-face courses.

Most institutions with significant online programs have clearly identified strategies to monitor and improve quality. And we keep pushing ourselves and others to get better at this. WCET’s recent grant from the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation to use highly sophisticated statistical methods aggregating large institutional data sets is a significant step in our continual efforts to improve the persistence of students online.

So why is it that the media continue to highlight these stories? Is it just that the negative is more provocative? Why is it that even within the academy, we are often all painted with the same brush used for fly-by-night online diploma mills? Why am I still being asked to visit institutions to convince faculty that online education can and does help students achieve real learning objectives? Does anyone seriously believe that the 5.9 million students taking an online course in 2009 (an annual increase of 21%) (2010 Sloan Survey of Online Learning) is because all these students are choosing or fooled into enrolling in substandard courses? How do we get better at ensuring that our commitment to quality and innovation are the norm? Do we need better large scale research studies to help us demonstrate the efficacy of online programs? (Although the cranky me wants to respond with where’s the large scale research demonstrating the efficacy of lecture courses?)

I don’t mean these as rhetorical questions. At the last WCET Steering Committee meeting, we began this discussion. Now I’d like to ask all of WCET’s members and all of you reading this blog for your thoughts. Through comments to this blog, let us know about your institution’s commitment to student success.

It’s time we began to assert and better publicize the efficacy of our work.

Diane Goldsmith
Executive Director, Connecticut Distance Learning Consortium
Chair, WCET Steering Committee

Completion, Online Learning, Quality, Student Success

Uncategorized

Increasing Adult Graduates through Sharing: The Adult College Completion Network

By Russ Poulin

May 31, 2011

Late last year, Lumina Foundation announced its financial support for 19 projects seeking to dramatically increase the number of adults who complete their postsecondary degrees. WICHE’s grant differed from the others as it is tasked with bringing together representatives of the funded projects and others from around the country working in this area to share successful strategies and practices. We asked Pat Lane, who coordinates the Adult College Completion Network project, to give you more details.

It’s no secret that governments at all levels—federal, state, and even cities—have set ambitious goals for dramatically increasing degree and certificate attainment levels. These goals have different justifications—regional or international competitiveness, meeting future workforce needs, or individual economic benefits just to name a few. The postsecondary community is awakening to a truth already known by many in the field: meeting these goals won’t be possible without boosting the number of adults completing postsecondary credentials.

With this in mind, the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education, with funding from Lumina Foundation, has launched the Adult College Completion (ACC) Network. This collaborative learning network focuses on a segment of the adult population that offers a potentially large bang for the buck: those adults who previously earned college credits, but never graduated.

The goal is to bring together the many diverse practitioners, institutions, organizations, and agencies already targeting this population and help them share new ideas, discuss common challenges, and highlight promising practices. The ACC Network is open to all free of charge, and we certainly welcome participation by WCET members. With your vast range of expertise in distance education, we welcome your input in how to use this key tool in helping this population succeed.

Although WICHE launched the ACC Network only a few months ago, members are already engaging in the types of sharing and idea exchanges that will greatly benefit the adults they serve. On the ACC Network listserv, members have recently been discussing a “concierge” model of student service, in which a single point-of-contact can guide a potential student through the bureaucratic maze of application, admission, and enrollment. Members have also discussed linkages between industry certificates and two- or four-year degrees, marketing and communications strategies, and cost efficient data mining techniques to identify and reach out to former students to try to reengage them.

We hope that you will join this growing network! You can learn more about the other members by visiting the project warehouse where we are collecting profiles of projects that serve adults with prior college credits. You’re also welcome to join and participate in the email discussion list. We’ll also be offering a series of webinars, policy briefs, and blog posts in the coming months that will hopefully prove useful to all those working in the field.

If you have any questions, please contact Demarée Michelau, WICHE’s director of policy analysis, or Patrick Lane, ACC Network project coordinator at WICHE.

Completion, Student Success