Transcript Slide 1

Truncated version for distribution July 23, 2014.
Legislation
Accreditation
and Higher Education
July 16, 2014
Ann T. Bentz, PhD
Office of Academic Affairs
Office of the Provost
Summary
History of the relationship between the federal
government and higher education (most material
removed in this truncated version)
Significance of the Higher Education
Opportunity Act of 2008
Consequences of noncompliance
Federal Funds for Higher Education
71 percent of students earning a bachelor’s
degree graduate with debt, averaging $29,400.
US Department of Education
• In October 1979, Congress passed Public Law
96-88 which created the present Department
of Education
• By law, control was still left in the hands of the
states
WHAT CHANGED?
National Center for Education Statistics
(July, 2014)
Postsecondary Institutions and Cost of
Attendance in 2013–14; Degrees and Other
Awards Conferred, 2012–13; and 12-Month
Enrollment, 2012–13
Public 2- and 4-year institutions increased tuition, room and board, every year
State support has decreased
Federal support has increased ($166.7 billion in AY12 to
$200 billion in AY13; values include military assistance)
OVER $1.2 trillion dollars in student loan debt
2008
2008 financial crisis resulted in private lenders
unable to support student loans
Congress gave the DoE the power to buy student
loans
With student loans moving to the federal
government, substantial modifications were
made to the HEA
By 2010, the entire federal student loan program
moved to the federal government; private lenders
could no longer provide student loans with
government backing
Higher Education
Opportunity Act (HEOA)
of 2008 (Public Law 110-315)
amended and reauthorized the Higher Education
Act (HEA) of 1965
Passed by the House and the Senate on July 31, 2008
Signed by the President on August 14, 2008
Higher Education Opportunity Act
of 2008
• Changed the responsibilities of the HE accrediting
bodies (HLC)
• From 1965 to 2008, HE just needed to be
accredited in order to be eligible for Title IV funds
• HEOA of 2008, by law, assigned direct monitoring
of federal compliance to the accreditors
– Now the accreditors must demonstrate to the DoE
that institutions are following every federal legislation
or the accreditors lose their authority
Electronic Code of Federal Regulations
http://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retrieveECFR?gp=&SID=bdb908035bd6091e8059682444998375&r=SECTION&n=34y3.1.3.1.3.2.33.7
Title 34: Education
PART 602—THE SECRETARY'S RECOGNITION OF ACCREDITING AGENCIES
Subpart B—The Criteria for Recognition
§ 602.16 Accreditation and preaccreditation standards.
(a) The agency must demonstrate that it has standards for accreditation, and preaccreditation, if offered, that are sufficiently
rigorous to ensure that the agency is a reliable authority regarding the quality of the education or training provided by the
institutions or programs it accredits. The agency meets this requirement if—
(1) The agency's accreditation standards effectively address the quality of the institution or program in the following areas:
(i) Success with respect to student achievement in relation to the institution's mission, which may include different
standards for different institutions or programs, as established by the institution, including, as appropriate, consideration of
State licensing examinations, course completion, and job placement rates.
(ii) Curricula.
(iii) Faculty.
(iv) Facilities, equipment, and supplies.
(v) Fiscal and administrative capacity as appropriate to the specified scale of operations.
(vi) Student support services.
(vii) Recruiting and admissions practices, academic calendars, catalogs, publications, grading, and advertising.
(viii) Measures of program length and the objectives of the degrees or credentials offered.
(ix) Record of student complaints received by, or available to, the agency.
(x) Record of compliance with the institution's program responsibilities under Title IV of the Act, based on the most recent
student loan default rate data provided by the Secretary, the results of financial or compliance audits, program reviews, and
any other information that the Secretary may provide to the agency; and
(amended in 2009)
Higher Education Opportunity Act
of 2008
•
Module 1: Program Integrity
(http://www2.ed.gov/offices/OSFAP/training/materials/regupdatemod1.pdf) (Link is currently
broken – pdf version available)
•
Module 2: Pell Grant
(http://www2.ed.gov/offices/OSFAP/training/materials/regupdatemod2.pdf) (Link is currently
broken )
•
Module 3: Consumer Information
(http://www2.ed.gov/offices/OSFAP/training/materials/regupdatemod3.pdf) (Link is currently
broken – pdf version available)
•
(http://ifap.ed.gov/qadocs/ConsumerModule/ConsumerInfoataGlance.doc)
Helpful Links:
http://www2.ed.gov/policy/highered/reg/hearulemaking/2009/integrity-qa.html
http://www.higheredcompliance.org/resources/program-integrity-rules.html
Federal Student Aid Handbook:
http://ifap.ed.gov/ifap/byAwardYear.jsp?type=fsahandbook&awardyear=2013-2014
Added slide due to broken links
July 23, 2014
http://www.higheredcompliance.org/resources/
program-integrity-rules.html
“Program Integrity Rules
In 2010, the Department of Education adopted a new set of rules
with major implications for colleges and universities. The new
program integrity rules primarily focus on Title IV of the Higher
Education Act and establish new compliance requirements for
administrators to follow. Of the 14 topic areas in which changes
were instituted, five topics of significant concern are changes to
guidelines regarding credit hours, gainful employment, incentive
compensation, misrepresentation and state authorization.”
14 Areas in “Program Integrity” Rules
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
High School Diploma
Ability to Benefit
Misrepresentation
Incentive Compensation
State Authorization
Credit Hour
Written Arrangements to
Provide Education Programs
8. Verification
9. Satisfactory Academic
Progress
10. Repeated Course Work
11. Return of Title IV Funds
(Modules)
12. Return of Title IV Funds
(Attendance)
13. Disbursement for
Books/Supplies
14. Gainful Employment
Misrepresentation
• Misrepresentation “is any false, erroneous or misleading
statement made directly or indirectly to a student,
prospective student, member of the public, accrediting
agency, state agency, or DoE” 34 C.F.R. 668.71
• “A misrepresentation may be made in writing, visually,
orally, or through other means.”
• “…a misrepresentation does not require a specific intent
to deceive”
• Categories of Misrepresentation
• Nature of our educational programs
• Nature of our financial charges
• Employability of our graduates
• Relationship with the US Dept of Ed
(http://counsel.cua.edu/res/docs/Program-Integrity-memo.pdf)
34 C.F.R. 668.72
• Nature of Educational Programs (list is not
comprehensive)
– Process and conditions for transferring/accepting
credit
– Requirements for program completion
– Nature and extent of prerequisites
– Course recommendations
– Grounds for termination from a program
– Program objectives
– Characteristics of faculty/personnel
34 C.F.R. 668.74
• Misrepresentation about employability of
graduates (list is not comprehensive)
– Knowledge about current or likely future
conditions, compensations, or employment
opportunities in program’s industry/occupation
– Other requirements generally needed to be
employed in the field
– Failure to disclose factors that would prevent an
applicant from qualifying for job requirements
14 Areas in “Program Integrity” Rules
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
High School Diploma
Ability to Benefit
Misrepresentation
Incentive Compensation
State Authorization
Credit Hour
Written Arrangements to
Provide Education Programs
8. Verification
9. Satisfactory Academic
Progress
10. Repeated Course Work
11. Return of Title IV Funds
(Modules)
12. Return of Title IV Funds
(Attendance)
13. Disbursement for
Books/Supplies
14. Gainful Employment
Credit Hour
• 34 CFR 600.2, 602.24
• Definition:
• Not less than “one hour of classroom or direct faculty
instruction and a minimum of two hours out of class
student work per week” for 15 weeks (common practice)
• Equivalent work as established by the institution for lab
work, internships, practica, studio work (NOTE: CDHE has
established minimum contact time)
• “Regulations create procedures that accrediting agencies
must use to determine if an institution’s assignment of a
credit hour is acceptable”
Credit Hour
• One hour = 50 minutes
50 x 3 work hours x 15 weeks = 37.5 hours of time
that must be allowed for one credit
37.5 hours of time for 1 credit x 3 = 112.5 hours of
time that must be allowed for three credits
• Think about condensed courses
• 112.5 divided by 5 = 22.5 hrs/day
• 112.5 divided by 7 = 16 hrs/day
**Course Type
Description (Course type is a course level code that applies to every section of every course for a single course
prefix and number. Ex: FND 250 is always a “lecture” but the IM may be TR or DS.)
Clinical
Participation in client and client-related services that are an integral part of an academic program. Clinical instruction CLI
occurs in or outside an institutional setting and involves work with clients who receive professional services from
students serving under direct supervision of a faculty member and/or approved member of the agency staff.
Directed Study
Faculty and student negotiate an individualized plan of study.
DST
.75:1 = 1 credit
Dissertation
Credit enrolled for formal period of work on doctoral dissertation.
DIS
.75:1 = 1 credit
Field Instruction
Instructional activities conducted by the faculty and designed to supplement and/or extend an individual course or
classroom experience.
FLD
2.5:1 = 1 credit
Internship
INT
3:1 = 1 credit
LAB
2:1 = 1 credit
Lecture
Applied and supervised field-based learning experience where students gain practical experience following a
negotiated and/or directed plan of study.
Instructional activities conducted by the faculty which require student participation, experimentation, observation, or
practice.
Faculty member responsible for delivery and discussion of learning material and related instructional activities.
LEC
1:1 = 1 credit
Physical Educ./
Recreation
Participation in or the performance of some form of physical activity. Knowledge associated with the proper
performance of the activity is presented.
PER
2:1 = 1 credit
Practicum
Practical student work under the supervision of a faculty member or under supervision of a professional in the
student’s field and regular consultation with faculty member.
Formal presentation in a one-to-one relationship between student and instructor.
PRA
2:1 = 1 credit
PMI
.50:1 = 1 credit
Recitation/
Discussion
A course, or a section of a larger course, designed for group discussion or student recitation/discussion.
REC
1:1 = 1 credit
Research
Credit formally enrolled for during period of research instruction in pursuit of a graduate degree (e.g., doctoral
proposal research).
A highly focused course that may include student presentations and discussions of reports based on literature,
practice, problems, or research (e.g., a capstone course)
Teacher candidates observe, participate in, analyze, and reflect on issues in education.
RES
.75:1 = 1 credit
SEM
1:1 = 1 credit
SCO
2:1 = 1 credit
Student Teaching
Faculty supervised learning experience in which student applies knowledge gained in the teacher education program
to a classroom setting.
SST
2.5:1 = 1 credit
Studio
Lab-type activities conducted by faculty (e.g., music ensembles, art studio, etc.)
STO
2:1 = 1 credit
Thesis
Credit enrolled for formal period of work on thesis.
THS
.75:1 = 1 credit
Lab
Private Music
Instruction
Seminar
Student Classroom
Observation
Code
Minimum Contact Hour
Ratio
2:1 = 1 credit
**Course Type
Clinical
Minimum Contact Hour Ratio
2:1 = 1 credit
Directed Study
.75:1 = 1 credit
Dissertation
.75:1 = 1 credit
Field Instruction
2.5:1 = 1 credit
Internship
3:1 = 1 credit
Lab
2:1 = 1 credit
Lecture
1:1 = 1 credit
Physical Educ./
Recreation
2:1 = 1 credit
Practicum
2:1 = 1 credit
Private Music
Instruction
Recitation/
Discussion
Research
.50:1 = 1 credit
1:1 = 1 credit
Directed Study
1:1 = 1 credit
Student Classroom
Observation
2:1 = 1 credit
Distance/online
2.5:1 = 1 credit
Studio
2:1 = 1 credit
Thesis
.75:1 = 1 credit
NOTE: Different IMs may be scheduled for two different sections of the same course. Instructional
method is a section level code. EX: FND 250, a lecture course, may be offered as TR or DS.
Instructors interact with students through a flexible format.
Internships/ Practica Internship: Applied and supervised field-based learning experience where
students gain practical experience following a negotiated and/or directed
plan of study
Practicum: Practical student work under the supervision of a faculty
member or under supervision of a professional in the student’s field and
regular consultation with faculty member
Face to Face
Instructors interact with students in the same physical space for 75% or
more of the instructional time
Mixed Face to Face
Instructors interact with students in the same physical space for less than
75% of the instructional time with the remainder of the instructional time
provided through distance or correspondence education (as defined
below)
Correspondence
Instructors interact with students through mail or electronic interface
according to a typically student self-paced schedule

Instructional materials are provided by mail or electronic
transmission including exams

Students are separated from the instructor

Interaction between instructor and student is not regular and
substantive and is primarily initiated by the student

Typically self-paced

Is NOT distance education
.75:1 = 1 credit
Seminar
Student Teaching
Instructional
Method
Non-Academic NonCredit
Instructors interact with students exclusively through one or more forms
of distance delivery

Students are separated from the instructor

Interaction between the student and instructor is regular and
substantive
TECHNOLOGIES:
1.
Internet
2.
One way and two way transmissions through open broadcast,
closed circuit, cable, microwave, broadband lines, fiber optics,
satellite, or wireless communication devices
3.
Audioconferencing
4.
Videocassettes, DVDs, and CD-Roms, if the videocassettes, DVDs or
CD-Roms are used in conjunction with any of the technologies listed
in #1 through #3
Place holder courses; checkpoint courses
http://www.grantland.net/compliance.htm
Past: we could show that our policies/procedures existed
NO LONGER ACCEPTABLE
Present: we must demonstrate that practice matches policy
HLC
• In preparation for HLC
accountability worksheets based on
federal “program integrity rules”
HLC
• Worksheets
–
–
–
–
Credit hours
Delivery formats
Contact hours
Separate identification of all courses in compressed
format, self-paced, or other alternate structure (“…a
single five-week course awarding 10 credits would be
subject to inquiry and justification.”)
– Comparison of credits awarded across terms
– Per term, number of UG students taking >18 credit
hours; number of grad students taking >15 credit hours
HLC
• Reviewers are to
– “Scan course schedules to determine how frequently
courses meet each week and what other scheduled
activities are required for each course.”
• “Pay particular attention to alternatively-structured or
other courses with particularly high credit hours for a
course completed in a short period of time or with less
frequently scheduled interaction between student and
instructor.”
– “Where the institution offers the same course in
more than one format, the team is advised to sample
across the various formats to test for consistency.”
HLC
• Worksheets and instructions to
reviewers are designed to ensure that
students from a Title IV institution are
getting federal funding to support
programs that are in compliance with
federal law (consistency, clarity, rigor,
transparency)
How do we know?
• Bringing 400 current and former students back to
class to repair academic integrity of their degrees
– university is covering cost of tuition, fees, books
• Fraudulently kept students enrolled even though
they should have been dropped because of poor
grades or attendance; misrepresented a student’s
future employability; quoting higher salaries than
the students earned; inflating job placement stats
– penalty is $5500-$11,000 per student
Penalties
• HLC withdrew accreditation because the
university lacked administrative structure for
sufficient oversight of, and resources to
support, its teaching and learning process
• Falsely certified compliance with federal aid
programs - $3.7 million
• Falsely certifying compliance with federal aid
eligibility - $2.5 million
Penalties
• Improperly awarded aid; financial need
overestimated, exceeded loan limits - $868,000
• Institution placed on Probation by HLC for
concerns related to
– academic integrity; the quality and rigor of alternative
or compressed format courses and programs (ten-day
and four-week format);
– the effectiveness of teaching and assessment within
the alternative or compressed format courses and
programs (ten-day and four-week format)
– Institution had to immediately (April, 2013) cease
offering courses shorter than 8 or 16 weeks
Penalties
• Fabricated tutoring attendance records - $10
million
• Failed to provide students with the educational
program it promised - $1.6 million
• No evidence of student attendance; other Title IV
violations - $232,918
• No documentation that students “participated in
an academically related activity”; did not ensure
that student began attendance on or after the
start of a course - $173,164
• $42,362,391 repayment to DoE
DoE Two Years of Negotiated Rulemaking
for HEOA Program Integrity
• “Comment: Many commenters believed that a Federal credit-hour
definition will stifle institutions' ability to develop new and innovative
education models, especially with regard to delivery methods. Several
commenters believed that institutions' ability to respond creatively to
changing pedagogies, circumstances, and student needs would be
limited under the proposed credit-hour definition.
•
A few commenters believed that the proposed credit-hour definition
would limit innovation in education at a critical time. One of these
commenters believed that because of the economic recession,
institutions need to be more innovative in developing alternative
delivery methods. One commenter believed that institutions must be
able to respond to the rapidly changing education sector. Another
commenter believed that other nations are currently developing new
educational models and the United States will fall behind these nations
in education.”
• “A few commenters believed that credit hours are not compatible with
technological advancements in education.”
Negotiated Rulemaking
•
“Discussion: We do not agree with the commenters that the credit-hour
definition in Sec. 600.2 will limit institutions' flexibility to creatively respond
to innovations in educational delivery methods and changing student needs.
A fundamental component of the credit-hour definition in Sec. 600.2 provides
that institutions must determine the academic activity that approximates the
amount of work defined in paragraph (1) based on institutionally established
learning outcomes and verifiable student achievement. The definition allows
institutions that have alternative delivery methods, measurements of
student work, or academic calendars to determine intended learning
outcomes and verify evidence of student achievement.
•
All institutions participating in title IV, HEA programs have a responsibility
to ensure appropriate treatment of Federal funds, regardless of course
format or educational delivery method. The definition in Sec. 600.2
provides institutions with a baseline for determining the amount of student
work necessary for title IV, HEA program eligibility, but does not specify the
particular program formats or delivery methods that institutions must use.”
“Changes: None.”
HLC Annual Meeting
April, 2014
NOTE: the information on the next three slides is UNC’s
interpretation of the material presented
• Federal Compliance Session
– New guidelines were put into effect in 2012
– 50 self-studies
• 56% had at least one criterion met “with concern”
– Automatically results in follow-up action ranging from written
report to follow-up visit
• Large area of concern – CREDIT HOUR
– Reviewers are asked to evaluate for…
– Do dates/times on syllabus match published schedule of classes
– Do compressed format courses have same learning outcomes,
courses requirements for in and out-of class work
– Does practice match policies for determining how credit is
awarded
HLC Annual Meeting
April, 2014
•
•
•
•
(UNC interpretation)
Do processes insure that faculty, adjuncts, internship
supervisors, etc. know and apply policies regarding
awarding of credit
Are student learning outcomes (SLOs) consistent across
varying delivery formats – Faculty and deans need to know
about all internal, state, and federal policies regarding
credit hour award
Teams review all syllabi from randomly selected programs –
looking at SLOs, assignments, courses requirements, etc. to
determine whether these are appropriate to the number of
credits assigned. Particularly interested in courses
delivered through alternate formats
They may ask to sit in on face-to-face courses or in an
online course, may want to talk with faculty, including
adjuncts, about their awareness of credit hour policies.
HLC Annual Meeting
April, 2014
Red flags
(UNC interpretation)
• Class meeting hours don’t match published schedule
• SLOs and assignments are different for different delivery
modes
• Team goes to visit a class and finds it is not meeting at
published time
• Student complaints about workload for compressed
courses (either workload is too high for amount of time
available or syllabus substantially changed by eliminating
readings, assignments, etc. due to time constraints)
• Off campus programs doing their own thing (not abiding by
policies)
• Adjuncts don’t know about federal compliance
requirements related to credit hour policies