Major Updates
- Department of Ed Issues Final Rule on Distance Learning, “Regular and Substantive” and Competency-Based Education
On August 24th, following the comprehensive 2018-2019 Negotiated Rulemaking session and the additional public comments from organizations such as UPCEA and its partners in the National Council for Online Education on the proposed regulations this past spring, the Department of Education has released final rules. These regulation changes include distance education, “regular and substantive” interaction, Competency-Based Education (CBE), direct assessment, and other topics. The proposed changes and response to comments are extensive, but we wish to highlight a few that we believe our UPCEA community would be interested in: -
- Clarity on “regular” and “substantive” definitional aspects of “regular and substantive interaction” for distance education:
- For “substantive” the action must engage students in teaching, learning, and assessment, as well as two of these five actions: providing direct instruction; assessing or providing feedback on a student’s course work; providing information or responding to questions about the content of a course or competency; facilitating a group discussion regarding the content of a course or competency; or other instructional activities approved by the institution’s or program’s accrediting agency.
- For “regular” interaction, the original draft proposed language (“regular and predictable basis”) which UPCEA and others found problematic was changed to the final regulatory wording of “scheduled and predictable basis” to remove any confusion associated with the term “regular.”
- Clarifies that requirements for regular and substantive interaction between instructors and students occur at the course or competency level
- Clarity on “regular” and “substantive” definitional aspects of “regular and substantive interaction” for distance education:
- Changing of “clock hour” definition to express that a clock hour includes a synchronous or asynchronous class, lecture, or recitation where there is an opportunity for direct interaction between instructors and students
- Clarification of Virtual/Augmented reality fulfilling expectations of “Academic Engagement”
- Providing more flexibility for a focus on learning, rather than seat time, in evaluating CBE and distance education
- Clarifying Distance Education and Correspondence Education
-
- Defining more clearly the differences between what is correspondence education from distance education based on:
“The institution’s online instruction is delivered through an appropriate form of media; The instructors with whom students regularly and substantively interact meet the requirements of the institution’s accrediting agency for instruction in the subject matter; Instructors engage in at least two forms of substantive interaction meeting the regulatory requirements for the course or competency; The institution has established scheduled and predictable opportunities for substantive interaction between students and instructors and create expectations for instructors to monitor each student’s engagement and substantively engage with students on the basis of that monitoring; and Instructors are responsive to students’ requests for instructional support.”
- Defining more clearly the differences between what is correspondence education from distance education based on:
-
- Providing flexibility for Direct Assessment programs
- An institution will only need to put its first direct assessment program in any degree level through Departmental approval
- Providing flexibility for Direct Assessment programs
- Providing a structure for subscription-based models to interact with financial aid disbursement
These changes take effect July 1, 2021; however, the early implementation of any or all of the changes is allowed.
Click here to view the Department’s Fact Sheet on the changes.
Click here to view the full draft regulations.
- Trump Issues Memorandum on Student Aid Relief Extension To End of Year
As part of a response to the ongoing stalled talks on COVID-19 relief legislation from Congress, President Trump declared multiple executive actions. While many of these actions were seen by critics being on shaky ground from a legal perspective, the one memorandum which is not expected to see pushback is the one surrounding student aid relief. The Department of Education has already implemented the memorandum, and Federal Student Aid (FSA) has extended the student loan relief to borrowers initiated by the President and Secretary in March 2020 through December 31, 2020. All student loans that are federally held will have their payments automatically suspended until 2021 without penalty. In addition, there will be a 0% interest rate on these loans through the end of the calendar year. Some critics have called it “insufficient” while others are worried how the actions might quell congressional funding for colleges.
Other News
- New Grant Opportunity from US Dept of Ed for Colleges Affected by COVID-19
The U.S. Department of Education has recently announced a grant program to help colleges and universities “emerge from the Coronavirus pandemic more resilient and expand educational opportunities for students.” The deadline for notice of intent to apply is September 10, 2020, and the application date deadline is October 20, 2020. More information on the program is included below:
“Priority for grant awards will be given to colleges and universities with the greatest unmet needs related to COVID-19. In addition, proposals will receive additional consideration if they:
- Provide Dual Enrollment Opportunities to Students Who Live or Attend School in a Rural Community or Opportunity Zone:
- Are led by, or include as partners, Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCUs), Tribal Colleges, minority serving institutions (MSIs), and/or developing institutions that are eligible to participate in Title III or Title V programs; and/or
- Are committed to developing more resilient instructional delivery models, such as distance learning, that make learning possible even when students cannot be physically present on campus for any reason.”
Learn more about these grant opportunities and apply.
- Ed Dept appeals decision to block student relief funding rule in California (Education Dive)
- Justice Department Threatens Yale with Admissions Lawsuit (Inside Higher Ed)
Deadline Time for New Federal Sexual Assault Policies (Inside Higher Ed)
UPCEA is pleased to announce the inaugural and 2020 cohort of Bethaida “Bea” González Diversity in Leadership Scholars. These 13 individuals are leading this new initiative on behalf of our profession.
Representative and diverse leadership is a cornerstone of UPCEA’s Commitment to Diversity and Inclusive Excellence. The goal of the Diversity Scholars program is to equip diverse professionals at any stage of their career with the skills and knowledge needed to move into leadership positions on campus, in the field of professional, continuing, and online (PCO) education, and in UPCEA.
“We are heartened by the overwhelming response to this program, and our members’ dual commitment to their individual professional development and enhancing diversity and inclusive excellence at their institutions and within the PCO profession,” said Dr. Christina Sax, Provost and Vice President for Academic and Student Affairs at Maryland University of Integrative Health and chair of UPCEA’s Diversity and Inclusive Excellence Committee.
The Diversity in Leadership Scholars program is named for Bethaida “Bea” González, 2014-15 UPCEA President and longtime leader at Syracuse University’s University College.
UPCEA Online Professional Development Faculty Director and Professor of the Practice Emeritus at Boston University Dr. Jay Halfond added, “All of us teaching and learning in these programs will benefit by how the Diversity in Leadership Scholars program enhances our courses and enriches the student experience.”
The 2020 Diversity in Leadership Scholars are:
- Rebecca Chung, Program Manager, Online Campus, Columbia University School of Social Work
- Saira Cooper, Director of Digital Learning, IT, & Operations, Rice University
- Billie Gastic Rosado, Associate Dean, New York University
- Nichole Henry, Director of Admissions and Recruitment, Syracuse University
- Kristen Hodge-Clark, Senior Assistant Dean, Program Planning, Georgetown University, School of Continuing Studies
- Mark Jimerson, Coordinator, Mississippi State University
- Christine Jones, Associate Director of Finance Planning & Assessment, Temple University, University College
- Fiyyaz Karim, Lecturer, University of Minnesota-Twin Cities
- Heather McCullough, Associate Director, Center for Teaching and Learning, University of North Carolina at Charlotte
- Emad Rahim, Kotouc Endowed Chair, Program Director/ Associate Professor, Bellevue University
- Rondha Remy, Program Director, Georgetown University, School of Continuing Studies
- Karen Nelson Villanueva, Program Lead, San Francisco State University – College of Extended Learning
- Janelle Williams, Associate Dean, Widener University
Each Diversity in Leadership Scholar is receiving a full scholarship for one UPCEA Online Professional Development certificate program consisting of five courses.
Learn more about UPCEA’s Commitment to Diversity and Inclusive Excellence.
Learn more about UPCEA’s online professional development program.
As we prepare for the fall term, most colleges and universities are reacting to the evolving pandemic, responding to changing conditions. But who is creating a vision for the future?
These COVID-19 times are disrupting our lives, our work and our learning. They lead us into a transactional role in shifting circumstances. The pandemic takes a turn while researchers discover new insights into causes for contagion and an ever-expanding list of symptoms and afflictions. In a reactive way, we change our plans to minimize these rapidly proliferating effects. In each instance, we are tending to the short term — to what we need to do in September, October and November. There are piles of developing pages and pages of policies and plans that are built on the foundation principle that the virus will go away. Our focus is almost exclusively on the next 120 days.
I am not suggesting that we don’t need to respond to the realities of contagion and the grim outcomes of getting our responses wrong. But, in the crush of this crisis, who is charting a course for higher education at the other end of this 2020 dark Coronavirus tunnel? Is there an end to the tunnel in the next year? What lies ahead?
Two of the country’s top infectious disease experts present a sobering look ahead. Thomas Frieden, former director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and Michael Osterholm, director of the Center for Infectious Disease Research & Policy at the University of Minnesota, weighed in on the future in a recent CNBC report. “We will be dealing with this forever,” Osterholm said. “COVID is here to stay,” added Frieden.
Osterholm, in another interview, goes further in his explanation:
We will be dealing with this virus forever. Effective and safe vaccines and hopefully ones with some durability will be very important, even critical tools, in fighting it. But the whole world is going to be experiencing COVID-19 ’til the end of time. We’re not going to be vaccinating our way out of this to eight-plus billion people in the world right now. And if we don’t get durable immunity, we’re potentially looking at revaccination on a routine basis, if we can do that. We’ve really got to come to grips with actually living with this virus, for at least my lifetime, and at the same time, it doesn’t mean we can’t do a lot about it.
Lest we forget, COVID-19 is not the only new deadly disease just beyond the horizon that will threaten our society, there will be many more to come, perhaps some will be even more virulent than the one we currently are confronting. We hope that in higher education, we have learned lessons from this COVID-19 experience. There will be differences with new threats — some mere nuances, others, perhaps radical differences in the way in which new threats impact our field.
If we can take a moment to pause from our immediate plans for saliva tests, dormitory isolations, HVAC modifications, protecting the vulnerable and the myriad of other considerations; can we focus a bit further ahead? What awaits us in 2021, 2022 and beyond? How will the survivors in higher education be different from those colleges and universities that will close their doors or be forced into mergers in the coming two years?
At its core, the practices and expectations most threatened in higher education are the in-class and out-of-class, up-close, face-to-face interaction. The social experience is at risk. The centuries-old classroom experience is now a threat. To address these threats, our view of sustainable models must certainly include distance and virtual engagements.
CNN recently examined perspectives on the future of colleges and universities:
Face-to-face learning and residential education can provide a rich experience that helps students and faculty form supportive networks and learn valuable social and behavioral skills. Online delivery can provide valuable access to higher education if it is delivered well. But much depends on whether each college designs and implements high-quality online courses. The long-term shifts sparked by Covid-19 have threatened the traditional business models of public and private colleges and universities. As a result, the remaining institutions capable of face-to-face education and a true campus living experience will become the province of students with high family incomes or outstanding academic ability.
How do we replace campus face-to-face interaction with dispersed or virtual face-to-face, up-close, personal interaction? Beyond our already-proven online learning pedagogies and practices, can we leverage advancing VR, AR, AI, and associated technologies to create a more meaningful and satisfying personal experience? Who is leading the visioning on your campus? Do you have a role, a responsibility, to step up and help lead in articulating the changes that will enable your institution to survive — even thrive — in serving the students of the future?
This article originally appeared in Inside Higher Ed’s Transforming Teaching & Learning.
Generation Z, those ages 8 to 23, are 67 million strong and represent one in five U.S. residents.[i] Those approximately 14 to 23, the iGeneration, are a powerful and influential group and constitute more than half of Gen Z. iGen recently disrupted President Trump’s Tulsa rally through the use of TikTok. They, along with young Millennials, are also fueling much of the cancel culture phenomena that is spreading across the world. Generation Z and Millennials are less concerned about cancel culture because the result beyond protesting a brand, product or company is the destruction or dismantling of a known entity or tradition. What makes these young people so powerful? iGen and young Millennials are more organized on social media, have different values and are also more informed than other generations. Carrying this further, they have significant potential to disrupt not only the political process, but also higher education.
As a result of being a digital native and receiving their first mobile device by age 10, Generation Z understands money better than other generations. Boomers (those 56 to 72 years of age) and Generation X’ers (those 41 to 55) were borrowers when they needed more money. Those generations were more likely to take out loans and grew up without direct access to their banking accounts. Generation Z checks their balances daily. They check prices. They compare products and read reviews. With less wealth and resources, they truly understand return-on-investment much better than other generations. A 2018 study by XYZ University of 1,800 Generation Z’ers showed that almost two-thirds prefer financial stability over spending money on something they enjoy. Colleges and universities have to better understand the value equation as they price their products and services. More progressive or innovative institutions have started to design products, programs and services with Generation Z in mind, as opposed to delivering the same legacy services to them.
Generation Z in the U.S. is more diverse than other generations. Almost half (48%) of Generation Z are non-white, with one-in-four being Hispanic, 14% black, 6% Asian and 5% some other race or two or more races.[ii] They are also well informed and well connected, and they spend about three hours a day on a mobile device.[iii] As a result of their diversity, connectedness and also their upbringing (often raised by Gen X’ers and older Millennials), Generation Z is more environmentally, culturally and even politically connected. A 2019 survey by Morning Consult of 1,000 Gen Z’ers showed that mass shootings, the #MeToo movement and Black Lives Matter were more important to them than to other generations. In fact, it was not uncommon to find Gen Z’ers participating in BLM protests[iv] and voicing their concerns on Twitter or other social media. Greta Thunberg, the 17-year-old environmental activist, has over 4.1 million Twitter followers. Fifteen-year-old Claudia Conway, daughter of George and Kellyanne Conway, has become a major force for her generation and has over 180,000 Twitter followers in her short life on social media.
The voice of Generation Z needs to be heard in terms of redesigning higher education post-pandemic. This generation is experiencing higher education at a time when colleges and universities are creating short-term fixes in the hope of preserving enrollments for the Fall of 2020. They are hoping for a positive or at least acceptable outcome for students, knowing that the product they are delivering may not be optimal. However, if Generation Z rejects the offering and solutions made by these institutions to deliver education during a pandemic, they are likely to rebel and demand change. In addition to the yet unleashed power of Generation Z on higher education, administrators will also face the wrath of their parents. While Millennials were raised by “helicopter parents,” Generation Z is being raised by “bulldozer parents.” The relationship between a Gen Z’er and their parents is much stronger than any other generation. As a result, higher education really has two dominant audiences to serve.
With Gen Z parents being more involved and protective of their children than other generations, don’t be surprised if they opt out of sending their children to campus in the fall. As many wade through a majority of courses being online, colleges and university leaders need to consider redesigning the format for Gen Z’ers’ and employers’ long-term needs. A stackable credential model might be a stronger solution than an overpriced 120-credit win or lose bachelor’s degree. A stackable model, if done correctly, should be like a series of Legos building off each other to get to the 120-credit model. The perfect stackable model would be rewarding Gen Z students for milestones and competencies earned along the way. Even if the student doesn’t complete the entire degree, they are at least recognized for the skills they acquired to that point. If one does not complete the bachelor’s degree, the current model assumes that they have not acquired any knowledge. In fact, they are often branded as a “college dropout,” regardless of whether they completed 10 credits or a 100.
“Well before COVID we were already starting to see a shift in higher education with an increasing interest in alternative credentials, but many institutions believed this might just be a passing trend and were hesitant to disrupt their traditional offerings. But based on what we know about Gen Z and a post-pandemic recovery, this trend isn’t going anywhere.”
–Katharine H. Merritt, Director of Research & Strategy, Blackboard Inc. Marketing & Enrollment Solutions
One Possible Model for Higher Education Credentialing … A Stackable Approach[v]
A new stackable model would recognize competencies gained, courses taken, badges and certificates earned, and possibly earning the grand prize of the degree. If Generation Z comes into power post-presidential election, they may disrupt higher education. While they lack the full economic power of Boomers and the growing influence of Millennials, they do have the power of cancel culture. This should not be underestimated, as Generation Z values the presence of influencers, their peers and their networks. While they have access to larger audiences on social media, they hold very tight influential power on their parents and closed but organized networks of friends. If higher education doesn’t start to rebuild around Generation Z post-pandemic, the word will get out. Some institutions may even get cancelled and cease to exist.
[i] https://www.statista.com/statistics/797321/us-population-by-generation/
[ii] Pew Research Center, “On the Cusp of Adulthood and Facing an Uncertain Future: What We Know About Gen Z So Far,” K. Parker, R. Igielnik, May 14, 2020.
[iii] https://www.kasasa.com/articles/generations/gen-x-gen-y-gen-z#:~:text=Gen%20Z%3A%20Gen%20Z%20is,nearly%2074%20million%20in%20U.S.)
[iv] Forbes, “Gen Z Leads the Black Lives Matter Movement, On and Off Social Media,” R. Bellan, June 12, 2020.
[v] UPCEA, “Faster Forward to a New Economy and Implications for Higher Education,” Presentation. J. Fong, August 6, 2020.