Higher education in the United States arose from an autonomous tradition of practice (Rippner, 2016), manifested in many ways, including in intellectual freedom in our campus libraries where the state has little control over which books are purchased, and in academic freedom in classrooms around what positions and truths faculty claim, or at least once they have achieved permanent ‘tenured’ status. That level of freedom, unfettered from federal oversight, can also follow into the syllabus and even the online classroom. Until we follow the money. And money talks.
Requirements for the online and hybrid course policy incorporate many layers of alignment. The courses offered at public institutions are likely funded by federal dollars or have students supported through federal financial aid. In that case, those courses are thus subject to Title III, Part B, and Title IX rules and regulations (St. John, et al., 2018), as well as the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) Section 504 and Section 508 (HHS, 2010). Section 504 ensures that persons with disabilities have access to information technology tools and resources, and Section 508 ensures equal access to participate for all students. And for eight of the campuses in the Cal State University system, Title V of the Higher Education Act (HEA) Reauthorization of 1972 created support for Hispanic Serving Institutions (HSI) designation with campuses serving at least 25% undergraduate Hispanic students (U.S. Department of Education, n.d.). If your campus gets federal money, then chances are high that your campus must follow federal law and regulation.
Last week I wrote about our moral compass of doing right by our students being slowly matched by internally developed requirements that now come from the state to promote the public good and ensure “meritocratic access to professions” (Etzkowitz, 2017, cited in St. John, et. al, 2018, p. 32). In the case of online and hybrid course offerings, those simple syllabus parameters get reinforced to meet institutional standards of Quality Assurance. On this campus that’s done by following the Quality Matters (n.d.) standards and recommended practices. Quality Matters has taken a process of best practices and moved into rubrics and metrics by which courses and instructional practices can be evaluated. And these evaluations align with the accreditation process used with non-profit and selective institutions (Lubinescu, Ratcliff, & Gaffney, 2001), where these institutions of higher education are evaluated on broader levels including the quality of academic programs, confirming a culture of continuous improvement of quality and stimulate a general raising of standards and ensure that faculty and staff are comprehensively involved in institutional evaluation and planning (U.S. Department of Education, 2019).
At its heart, the Quality Matters process aligns with an institution's internal commitment--the institutional moral compass of sorts--to its students and support of success and equity. In this campus that can be seen through the existing commitments at many layers, including procurement, web publications, and staff. For example, the head of business services is part of the accessible procurement team ensuring that all electronic information technology (EIT) hardware and software purchases must demonstrate accessibility, web publications and learning management systems, such as Canvas and Moodle, follow WC3 standards (n.d.), and there are employees dedicated to supporting students with disabilities in both direct support roles in the Student Disability Resources office, as well as through the Center for Academic Technology with an accessibility specialist who works with faculty to deliver accessible content.
In short, in the 25 years since distance education courses have moved from paper packets and cassette tapes to complex, online and hybrid electronic course materials and learning systems, federal requirements have followed those changes with policy and requirements to promote further education for all. And our campuses have responded by strengthening our resources, committing staffing and systems to support change, and worked to develop institutional resilience that can carry our students, equitably and accountably (Rippner, 2016), deep into the 21st Century.
References
Crowe, C., Cruise, T., Gooding, C., Zellweger, R., Wilson, N., Tri-Star Pictures., Gracie Films., ... Columbia TriStar Home Video (Firm). (1999). Jerry Maguire. Culver City, Calif: Columbia TriStar Home Video.
HHS. (2010, June 15). What is section 504 and how does it relate to Section 508? [Text]. Retrieved July 13, 2019, from HHS.gov website: https://www.hhs.gov/web/section-508/what-is-section-504/index.html
Lubinescu, E. S., Ratcliff, J. L., & Gaffney, M. A. (2001). Two Continuums Collide: Accreditation and Assessment. New Directions for Higher Education, 2001(113), 5–21. https://doi.org/10.1002/he.1
Quality Matters. (n.d.). Home. Retrieved July 13, 2019, from https://www.qualitymatters.org/
Rippner, J. A. (2016). The American education policy landscape. Routledge.
St. John, E. P., Daun-Barnett, N., & Moronski-Chapman, K. M. (2018). Public policy and higher education: Reframing strategies for preparation, access, and college success. Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315622453
U.S. Department of Education. (2019, March 18). College Accreditation in the United States-- Pg 1 [Educational Guides]. Retrieved July 13, 2019, from Overview of Accreditation in the United States website: https://www2.ed.gov/admins/finaid/accred/accreditation.html#Overview
U.S. Department of Education. (n.d.). Hispanic-Serving Institutions (HSIs) | White House Initiative on Educational Excellence for Hispanics. Retrieved July 13, 2019, from https://sites.ed.gov/hispanic-initiative/hispanic-serving-institutions-hsis/
W3C. (n.d.). Level AA Conformance to Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 2.0. Retrieved July 13, 2019, from https://www.w3.org/WAI/WCAG2AA-Conformance
RSS Feed