THREE U.S.-BASED organizations that advocate for the effective use
of technology in higher education recently issued four policy briefs
related to U.S. federal regulations. The briefs were produced by the
UPCEA, based in Washington, D.C.; the Online Learning Consortium
(OLC), based in Newburyport, Massachusetts; and the Western
Interstate Commission for Higher Education’s Cooperative for
Educational Technologies (WCET), based in Boulder, Colorado.
The UPCEA, OLC, and WCET issued the briefs out of concern
that current government policy regulating higher education serves
a student population “that has not existed for more than 50 years,” according to a statement. The briefs are
an effort “to change the conversation
around these out-of-date regulations,”
which leaders from all three organizations
believe could stifle the progress of
students enrolled in online programs.
The reports highlight ways that
academic institutions can run afoul of
policies that do not reflect 21st-century
educational practices. For example, the
authors of “Regular and Substantive
Interaction: Backgrounds, Concerns,
and Guiding Principles” point to the
example of Saint Mary-of-the-Woods
College in Indiana. In 2012, the U.S.
Department of Education (DOE) audited
the institution and determined that
students enrolled in its online program
did not engage in sufficient “regular
and substantive interaction.” The DOE
based its determination on the fact
that students in the competency-based
program did not uniformly engage with
faculty or each other, but instead completed
assignments at their own pace
and used online resources and tutoring
at their own discretion.
Confusion surrounding this case
spurred the DOE to audit other competency-
based programs such as those
delivered by Western Governors University.
It also called for other higher education
institutions and accrediting bodies,
such as the Higher Education Commission,
to more clearly define what
constitutes regular and substantive
interaction where competency-based
programs are concerned.
The brief on “State Authorization
Across State Borders” highlights
difficulties that arise when students
enroll in online programs delivered by
institutions outside their home states.
It points to the hypothetical example of
a student from Maryland who enrolls in
an Arizona university’s online doctoral
program in physical therapy. The
university in Arizona “would have to
evaluate the regulations of the state
licensing board in Maryland in order to make sure the student would be eligible
to sit for a licensing exam in Maryland”
and practice in her home state after
she graduates.
Institutions then would have to
multiply that effort across all of their
degree programs to evaluate the varying
regulations of all states where their
online students reside, a task requiring
intensive time and resources. And if they
fail to ensure their programs comply
with a state’s regulations? Students from
that state could be barred from attaining
state licensure at all.
Examples such as these underscore
the need for academic leaders to
push policymakers to update higher
education regulations, says Kathleen
Ives, the OLC’s executive director and
CEO. “Addressing the needs of the
21st-century learner includes creating
an environment that supports effective
use of digital and online learning,” she
emphasizes. “Our hope is that our
input and our insights are thoughtfully
considered as policymakers contemplate
the necessary changes for realigning
policy with the needs of modern
higher education.”
The three organizations have released
two additional briefs, including “Competency-
Based Education, Direct Assessment,
and Financial Aid” and “Financial
Aid and the 21st-Century Learner:
Background, Concerns, and Guiding
Principles.” Access all four papers here.