Distance Education Legislation, Accreditation
and Regulation
America faces many problems and challenges
in education. From coast to coast, from local school districts
to large universities, educators are being asked to do more with
less and budgets are being significantly reduced. There is overcrowding
in urban areas, and a lack of access to educational opportunities
in both urban and rural areas. Many states have undertaken efforts
to plan and coordinate for distance learning and have formed
distance learning consortia, but until all the users are aggregated
on a national level, they will not have enough market power to
attract commercial interest for a telecommunications infrastructure
to facilitate distance learning growth. The education sector
is also limited by short-term planning because education budgets
are formulated primarily at the state and local levels which
are done on an annual or biannual basis. Since funding levels
are uncertain from year to year, educators and administrators
find it difficult to enter long-term agreements which would gain
the discounts that they need.
There is an expanding interest in the use
of distance learning for courses and enrichment for students,
for teacher training and professional development, networks for
teaching and learning and for courses for adult learners and
continuing education. Dr. Linda Roberts of the U.S. Department
of Education believes that we are just at the beginning stages
of understanding what we can do with telecommunications. In continuing
to contribute to the growth and utilization of the field of distance
education, she feels that the vision has to be maintained and
nurtured. "You can't assume that the public is on your side,"
she said. You have to convince them of the difference that it
can create.
There are many opportunities for distance
education to provide service to the more than two million teachers.
"They are the most isolated professionals I know,"
Dr. Roberts said. The systems should serve teachers and students.
As examples, she suggested that teachers should be involved in
teaching specialized courses and reaching more students. Other
opportunities include developing new ways of teaching, expanding
classroom resources, connecting with others, pre-service mentoring
and in-service to advance the profession. Roberts observed that
one of the obstacles to adopting distance learning technologies
is the common but nevertheless erroneous perception that teachers
are delighted when distance education is adopted. "I never
found that teachers were delighted because of distance education.
Usually, the numbers increased." Technology has transformed
every sector of our lives, It can transform education as well.
It will not replace teachers, it will empower them with better
teaching tools.
Boundaries are changing between schools,
states, private institutions, higher education and districts.
There are now many groups which are creating new relationships
and coalitions. The new relationships emphasize the importance
of sharing resources and brings up the question of state teacher
certification. Rural and urban populations are different but
the needs are the same and it emphasizes the importance of providing
equal access for all students. Networks should be used 24 hours
a day.
Competing interests and fragmented regulatory
authority are detriments to distance learning. Regulations usually
lag behind the use of technology and because of this educators
should take the initiative and inform those who need to know
about telecommunications policy that will enable distance education
technologies and their use. Telecommunication policy decisions
should address the costs, capacity and services available for
distance education. Issues include the development of the nation's
telecommunications structure for a mix of technologies, telecommunications
policies, providing technology that teachers want that is easy
to use and educational satellites among other topics. More and
better courseware needs to be developed and copyright issues
must be addressed.
In at least six states (Kansas, Missouri,
Oklahoma, Texas, Washington and West Virginia), legislation has
been developed to specify the kind of telecourse evaluation to
be done and the criteria to meet for telecourses and their delivery
systems (Kressel, 1986). The fact that states are mandating evaluation
procedures underscores the fact that the available media selection
model and evaluation instrument are not being used across the
board (Lane 1989). Holt (1989) warns against seeking government
entitlement programs to fund the production of distance education
telecourses and believes that it should remain entrepreneurial
to force bankruptcy on the producer of deficient programming.
He strongly feels that the administration, faculty and student
consumers must judge quality. Holt's message is that both the
buyer and seller should beware. Holt demands a partnership between
producers and consumers that amounts to unreserved commitment
to distance education as most failures occur because student
support systems are not in place (Holt, 1989).
Holt predicts that state controlled accreditation
will be established for political reasons rather than for the
quality control, which he endorses. He predicts that state accreditation
is here to stay since more credit programming is being brought
in by satellite from other states. Holt warns that for accountability,
state education personnel should be used in a guidance role,
but distance educators should perform the evaluation.
An example of an accreditation policy that
has been acknowledged as being ahead of its time is the 1985
Project ALLTEL,an acronym for Assessing Long Distance Learning
Via Telecommunications. It was created to "get ahead of
that giant wave" when accreditors and regulators alike found
themselves unable to adequately respond to changes in the environment
they were charged with regulating (Goldstein, 1991). Over a period
of two years, a policy board, three task forces and a committee
struggled to deal with the inextricably intertwined issues of
the licensure and accreditation of telecommunications-based distance
learning. One task force looked at the accreditation issues,
a second look at the state authorization concerns, and a third
considered the legal issues arising out of attempts to control
and regulate this arena. The Project was an effort to bridge
development in the use of technology in delivering higher education
services with the traditional roles and responsibilities of state
agencies, accrediting bodies and institutions. The object was
to set in place reasonable policies to ensure the growth, development
and quality of the technology.
Goldstein points out that most programs
which have been developed to cross borders have been developed
with an overabundance of caution and wonders if we have been
spared the charlatans because the regulatory environment filtered
them out because of the oppressive regulatory regime which was
developed and few dared to challenge. If it is the latter, he
states, then "what we are accomplishing is the denial of
educational opportunity at precisely the time when this nation
can least afford such impediments." One of the legal problems
to consider is whether a provider of distance learning services
via telecommunications can be barred by a state from bringing
those services across its borders. Another legal question is
whether the delivery of educational services via a particular
modality be constrained to protect local, traditional institutions
from perceived competition? Another question is at what point
a technology-based distance learning service is sufficiently
present in a state to give that state the right to control its
conduct?
Goldstein also points out that one cannot
ignore the issue of competitiveness among institutions reflecting
a sense that the market is unlikely to support every school involved
in distance education. Competition for students will increase
as the children of the baby-boomers graduate. While the number
of traditional college age students has been declining, college
enrollments have not reflected the magnitude of the decline because
of the increase in the number of adult students returning to
college.
Reilly and Gulliver (1992) argue that the
distance learning experience cannot necessarily be evaluated
by the standard measures applied to traditional education such
as seat time, amount of face-to-face contact with the instructor
and the immediate availability of massive library collection
and extensive laboratory facilities. "In fact, since measurement
of these inputs has produced little empirical evidence of the
effectiveness of conventional classroom learning, using them
as the baseline to evaluate distance learning is problematic
at best." When coupled with the different pedagogical assumptions
implicit in distance education (Granger, 1990) and "it becomes
clear that new evaluative criteria are needed for distance education"
(Reilly and Gulliver,1992).
A symposium "Emerging Critical Issues
in Distance Higher Education" resulted in a number of recommendations
ranging from ensuring that quality in all education be measured
on outcomes rather than inputs, to developing a set of principles
of good practice for distance higher education, to establishing
a research agenda that would inform policy development in distance
learning (Granger 1991). The recommendation to develop principles
of good practice is being implemented by a task group of educators,
regulators and accreditors. Another of the symposium's central
recommendations reaffirms the basic message of Project ALLTEL:
Regulating and accrediting agencies should develop ways of cooperating
among states and regions to facilitate approval while ensuring
quality in distance education programs that cross state and regional
accrediting lines, with a goal of advancing distance education
while protecting the "consumer" (Regents College Institute
for Distance Learning,1990).
Another result of the meeting was that
participating states (Arizona, Colorado, Connecticut, Georgia,
Illinois, Minnesota, New York, Pennsylvania, Puerto Rico, Tennessee,
Texas, Vermont and Virginia) agreed to use the review of distance
learning institution in the institution's home state as part
of the approval process in other states where the institution
seeks to operate (Reilly & Gulliver, 1992). Other states
are being encouraged to sign the agreement in which states would
rely not only upon the home state review, but also upon additional
reviews that may have been carried out by other states. This
agreement does not entail automatic reciprocity of recognition
and each state retains the right to make its own decision but
does commit states to build upon the work of other states to
minimize duplication of review processes. This avoids the chief
impediment to the implementation of Project ALLTEL which called
for receiving states to accept the decision of the state of origin.
If states agree to use a common information
collection instrument for distance education institutions which
is being circulated to all states and accrediting associations,
this would reduce some of the duplication. Accrediting agencies
are also being asked to use more fully states' approval of distance
education programs for accreditation purposes. Reilly and Gulliver
(1992) assert that for these steps to be effective "states
must first accelerate their movement toward acting more like
units of a nation and less like sovereign entities in their regulation
of interstate distance higher education via telecommunications."
State education agencies are both gatekeepers
and catalysts for distance education. Stringent teacher certification
requirements may prevent skilled instructors from teaching electronically
in areas experiencing teacher shortages. Varying state curriculum
and textbook requirements make it difficult to share teaching
between schools that could be linked. State leadership is critical
to foster the efficient use of resources to meet educational
needs. In the process of developing plans for distance learning,
states have the opportunity to forge cooperation between agencies,
encourage sharing of costs among users, and build new linkages
between schools, higher education and the private sector. Federal
and state regulations guiding the development of telecommunications
infrastructure and services significantly affect distance education
according to an OTA (Office of Technology Assessment) Report
Brief (Nov. 1989). The nation's schools represent major markets
for applications of technology and should be in a powerful position
to influence telecommunications policy. Because of conflicting
interests and fragmented telecommunications authority, educational
needs may not be fully served. As distance learning expands,
education has a growing stake in shaping future telecommunications
policies.
According to the OTA, federal funding for
distance education has been important but modest. The Star Schools
Program, begun in 1988 to develop multi-state, multi-institutional
K-12 distance education, has focused attention on distance learning,
and spurred planning and development beyond the projects now
under way. Programs at the National Telecommunications Information
Administration and the Rural Electrification Administration support
distance education by funding telecommunications technologies.
Other programs provide limited support for curriculum development,
special programming, technical assistance and research. Growth
of distance learning can be expected to continue for some time
with out increased federal involvement. A major commitment to
expanding the nation's distance learning infrastructure will
require a change in the federal role.
The growing interest in distance learning
comes as calls for improving education increase. States, localities,
the federal government and the private sector can plan, fund
and implement distance education. Four factors (OTA, 1989)that
will most affect the future are:
A national infrastructure, projected to
be fiber optic cable, would provide enhanced broadband services
to every business, home and school. A broadband backbone would
have the ability to provide voice, data and video services. It
holds great promise for education because such a system would
give every student and teacher in the nation access to the same
opportunities. With a fiber optic network, schools could access
any library in the United States or the world. Students could
browse through instructional texts, graphics and video on any
subject, any school could have guest teachers from anywhere in
the world via a two-way interactive audio and visual network.
Other legislation has been introduced for
an educational satellite which is a cost-effective way to deliver
instructional programming to a great number of schools and students.
Satellite transmission provides a way to reach students no matter
how remote. In today's satellite market the education sector
is fragmented and commercial market practices leave educational
institutions without low-cost, dependable and equitable access
to services. For the most part, schools, school districts, state
education agencies, colleges and universities all operate independently.
A dedicated education satellite would ensure instructional programmers
that they will be able to obtain affordable satellite transmission
time without risk of preemption by commercial users. It would
allow educators using the programming to have one dish focused
on one satellite off of which they could receive at least 24
channels of instructional programming. In the legislation, the
federal government's role is to take the risk from the private
sector in order to encourage the development of a dedicated satellite
system.
The National Education Telecommunications
Organization (NETO) was formed after the EDSAT Institute held
seven regional meetings in 1991. Through these meetings they
recognized the need to aggregate the education market for distance
learning and concluded that an education programming users organization
was needed. Its board is committed to the goal of developing
an integrated telecommunications system, dedicated to education
with the first step of acquiring a dedicated satellite. Some
have suggested that the Public Broadcasting System (PBS) could
meet the infrastructure needs of the distance learning community
but PBS and NETO have very different missions. PBS is in the
business of broadcasting programming and acquires satellite time
to deliver its own programming. In contrast, NETO's focus is
on the distribution of distance learning, much of it live and
interactive and will not generate programming. NETO's sole concern
is the creation of an infrastructure which will distribute instructional
programming created by others at an equitable price to all users.
NETO will aggregate the market so that it will be of sufficient
size, but the problem of being a short-term user still faces
the education sector. Educators cannot enter into the five or
ten-year commitments that satellite vendors look for in long-term
users. This legislation solves that problem by offering federal
loan guarantees to NETO so that they can, in turn, offer the
satellite vendors the long-term commitment they need. Our legislation
basically guarantees the vendor an anchor tenant. Without that
guarantee, it is likely that even an aggregated education market
would not be able to secure a long-term lease or purchase arrangement
with a satellite vendor.
A dedicated satellite system will bring
instructional programming which is not scattered across 12 to
15 satellites into one place in the sky. This co-location will
allow educators to receive a variety of instructional programs
without having to constantly reorient their satellite dish. Proponents
of an educational satellite say that by making the investment
in a dedicated system on the front end, distance learning costs
will be reduced for educators at the state and local levels.
Programmers will benefit because they will be able to market
their programming to a wider audience and will be guaranteed
reliable satellite time at an affordable rate that will be equal
no matter how much is bought. Users will benefit because their
investment in equipment to receive instructional programming
may be reduced because of the technological advantages of focusing
on one point in the sky.
Satellite technology can expand educational
opportunity for students in areas with "teacher shortages
in important subjects - such as foreign languages, math and science.
We should capitalize on technology's potential for supplementing
curriculum, without allowing it to, in any way, replace students'
one-to-one interaction with teachers.
In addressing the role of technology, we
must deal with the question of whether there should be a mix
of technology and if so which media should be used? If only a
single technology can be used, what technology would be the most
appropriate? Selection tools and guidelines are available which
can help to clarify the role of technology. Those which are recommended
because of the national experts which participated in their formation
appear in a later chapter (Lane, 1989, 1991).
from "A Technical
Guide to Teleconferencing and Distance Learning," 3rd edition