Everything you need to know about ranked-choice voting in one spot. Click to learn more!

Distance Education and Innovation rule (2021)

From Ballotpedia
Jump to: navigation, search
New Administrative State Banner.png
What is a significant rule?

Significant regulatory action is a term used to describe an agency rule that has had or might have a large impact on the economy, environment, public health, or state or local governments. These actions may also conflict with other rules or presidential priorities. As part of its role in the regulatory review process, the Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs (OIRA) determines which rules meet this definition.


Administrative State
Administrative State Icon Gold.png
Five Pillars of the Administrative State
•Agency control
• Executive control
• Judicial control
•Legislative control
• Public Control
Click here for more coverage of the administrative state on Ballotpedia.
Click here to access Ballotpedia's administrative state legislation tracker.


The Distance Education and Innovation rule is a significant rule issued by the U.S. Department of Education effective July 1, 2021, that amended department regulations regarding institutional eligibility under the Higher Education Act, relating to distance education and innovation.[1]

HIGHLIGHTS
  • Name: Distance Education and Innovation
  • Code of Federal Regulations: 34 CFR Parts 600, 602, and 668
  • Agency: Office of Postsecondary Education, Department of Education
  • Type of significant rule: Economically significant rule

    • Timeline

    The following timeline details key rulemaking activity:

    Background

    Education Policy
    Education Icon 200x200.png
    Education policy topics
    • Overview of trends in K-12 curricula development
    • Impact of school choice on rural school districts
    • Local school board authority across the 50 states
    • State policies on cellphone use in K-12 public schools
    • School choice in the United States
    • School choice glossary

    Other policy areas
    Click here for coverage of other policy areas on Ballotpedia

    President Lyndon Johnson (D) signed the Higher Education Act (HEA) into law on November 8, 1965, in an effort to strengthen educational resources and financial assistance for college students by increasing federal grants to universities, creating low-interest student loans, and issuing scholarships. Title IV of the HEA established standards for offering financial assistance to college students, which governed Student Assistance General Provisions regulations.[4]

    The institutional eligibility regulations under the HEA include provisions related to distance education and innovation "to reduce barriers to innovation in the way institutions deliver educational materials and opportunities to students, and assess their knowledge and understanding, while providing reasonable safeguards to limit the risks to students and taxpayers," according to the proposed rule.[3]

    The department proposed amendments to the regulations in an effort to "remove barriers that institutions face when trying to create and implement new and innovative ways of providing education to students, and also provide sufficient flexibility to ensure that future innovations we cannot yet anticipate have an opportunity to move forward without undue risk of a negative program finding or other sanction on an institution.," according to the proposed rule.[3]

    Summary of the rule

    The following is a summary of the rule from the rule's entry in the Federal Register:

    “ The Secretary amends the general, establishing eligibility, maintaining eligibility, and losing eligibility sections of the Institutional Eligibility regulations issued under the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended (HEA), related to distance education and innovation. In addition, the Secretary amends the Student Assistance General Provisions regulations issued under the HEA.[1][5] ”

    Summary of provisions

    The following is a summary of the provisions from the rule's entry in the Federal Register:[3]

    “ These regulations—
    • Clarify that when calculating the number of correspondence students, a student is considered “enrolled in correspondence courses” if correspondence courses constitute 50 percent or more of the courses in which the student enrolled during an award year;
    • Limit the requirement for the Secretary's approval to an institution's first direct assessment program at each credential level;
    • Require institutions to report to the Secretary when they add a second or subsequent direct assessment program or establish a written arrangement for an ineligible institution or organization to provide more than 25 percent, but no more than 50 percent, of a program;
    • Require prompt Department action on any application an institution submits to the Secretary seeking a determination that it qualifies as an eligible institution and on any reapplications for a determination that the institution continues to meet the requirements to be an eligible institution for HEA programs;
    • Allow students enrolled in eligible foreign institutions to complete up to 25 percent of an eligible program at an eligible institution in the United States; and clarify that, notwithstanding this provision, an eligible foreign institution may permit a Direct Loan borrower to perform research in the United States for not more than one academic year if the research is conducted during the dissertation phase of a doctoral program;
    • Clarify the conditions under which a participating foreign institution may enter into a written arrangement with an entity that does not participate in the title IV, HEA programs;
    • Provide flexibility to institutions to modify their curricula at the recommendations of industry advisory boards and without relying on a traditional faculty-led decision-making process;
    • Provide flexibility to institutions when conducting clock-to-credit hour conversions to eliminate confusion about the inclusion of homework time in the clock-hour determination.
    • Clarify the eligibility requirements for a direct assessment program;
    • Clarify, in consideration of the challenges to institutions posed by minimum program length standards associated with occupational licensing requirements, which vary from State to State, that an institution may demonstrate a reasonable relationship between the length of a program, as defined in 20 U.S.C. 1001(b)(1), and the entry-level requirements of the occupation for which that program prepares students;
    • Clarify that a student is not considered to have withdrawn for purposes of determining the amount of title IV grant or loan assistance that the student earned if the student completes all the requirements for graduation for a non-term program or a subscription-based program, if the student completes one or more modules that comprise 49 percent or more of the number of days in the payment period, or if the institution obtains written confirmation that the student will resume attendance in a subscription-based or non-term program;
    • Remove provisions pertaining to the use and calculation of the Net Present Value of institutional loans for the calculation of the 90/10 ratio for proprietary institutions, because the provisions are no longer applicable;
    • Clarify the satisfactory academic progress requirements for non-term credit or clock programs, term-based programs that are not a subscription-based program, and subscription-based programs;
    • Clarify that the Secretary will rely on the requirements established by an institution's accrediting agency or State authorizing agency to evaluate an institution's appeal of a final audit or program review determination that includes a finding about the institution's classification of a course or program as distance education, or the institution's assignment of credit hours;
    • Clarify that the Secretary may deny an institution's certification or recertification application to participate in the title IV, HEA programs if an institution is not financially responsible or does not submit its audits in a timely manner; and
    • Clarify that an institution is not financially responsible if a person who exercises substantial ownership or control over an institution also exercised substantial ownership or control over another institution that closed without executing a viable teach-out plan or agreement.[5]
    		 ”

    Significant impact

    See also: Significant regulatory action

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) deemed this rule economically significant pursuant to Executive Order 12866. An agency rule can be deemed a significant rule if it has had or might have a large impact on the economy, environment, public health, or state or local governments. The term was defined by E.O. 12866, which was issued in 1993 by President Bill Clinton.[1]

    Text of the rule

    The full text of the rule is available below:[1]

    See also

    External links

    Footnotes

    1. ↑ 1.0 1.1 1.2 1.3 1.4 1.5 Federal Register, "Distance Education and Innovation," September 2, 2020
    2. ↑ Federal Register, "Distance Education and Innovation; Correction," September 3, 2021
    3. ↑ 3.0 3.1 3.2 3.3 3.4 Federal Register, "Distance Education and Innovation," April 2, 2020
    4. ↑ Federal Student Aid, "Gainful Employment Information," accessed May 2, 2023
    5. ↑ 5.0 5.1 Note: This text is quoted verbatim from the original source. Any inconsistencies are attributable to the original source.
    v • e
    The Administrative State
    MainThe Administrative State Project Badge.png
    Pillars
    Reporting
    Laws
    Administrative Procedure Act • Antiquities Act • Civil Service Reform Act • Clayton Antitrust Act • Communications Act of 1934 • Congressional Review Act • Electronic Freedom of Information Act • Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act of 1938 • Federal Housekeeping Statute • Federal Reserve Act • Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914 • Freedom of Information Act • Government in the Sunshine Act • Independent Offices Appropriations Act of 1952 • Information Quality Act • Interstate Commerce Act • National Labor Relations Act • Paperwork Reduction Act • Pendleton Act • Privacy Act of 1974 • Regulatory Flexibility Act • REINS Act • REINS Act (Wisconsin) • Securities Act of 1933 • Securities Exchange Act of 1934 • Sherman Antitrust Act • Small Business Regulatory Enforcement Fairness Act • Truth in Regulating Act • Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
    Cases
    Abbott Laboratories v. Gardner • A.L.A. Schechter Poultry Corp. v. United States • Association of Data Processing Service Organizations v. Camp • Auer v. Robbins • Chevron v. Natural Resources Defense Council • Citizens to Preserve Overton Park v. Volpe • Federal Trade Commission (FTC) v. Standard Oil Company of California • Field v. Clark • Food and Drug Administration v. Brown and Williamson Tobacco Corporation • Humphrey's Executor v. United States • Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS) v. Chadha • J.W. Hampton Jr. & Company v. United States • Lucia v. SEC • Marshall v. Barlow's • Massachusetts v. Environmental Protection Agency • Mistretta v. United States • National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB) v. Sebelius • National Labor Relations Board v. Noel Canning Company • National Labor Relations Board v. Sears, Roebuck & Co. • Panama Refining Co. v. Ryan • Securities and Exchange Commission v. Chenery Corporation • Skidmore v. Swift & Co. • United States v. Lopez • United States v. Western Pacific Railroad Co. • Universal Camera Corporation v. National Labor Relations Board • Vermont Yankee Nuclear Power Corp. v. Natural Resources Defense Council • Wayman v. Southard • Weyerhaeuser Company v. United States Fish and Wildlife Service • Whitman v. American Trucking Associations • Wickard v. Filburn • Wiener v. United States
    Terms
    Adjudication (administrative state) • Administrative judge • Administrative law • Administrative law judge • Administrative state • Arbitrary-or-capricious test • Auer deference • Barrier to entry • Bootleggers and Baptists • Chevron deference (doctrine) • Civil servant • Civil service • Code of Federal Regulations • Codify (administrative state) • Comment period • Compliance costs • Congressional Record • Coordination (administrative state) • Deference (administrative state) • Direct and indirect costs (administrative state) • Enabling statute • Ex parte communication (administrative state) • Executive agency • Federal law • Federal Register • Federalism • Final rule • Formal rulemaking • Formalism (law) • Functionalism (law) • Guidance (administrative state) • Hybrid rulemaking • Incorporation by reference • Independent federal agency • Informal rulemaking • Joint resolution of disapproval (administrative state) • Major rule • Negotiated rulemaking • Nondelegation doctrine • OIRA prompt letter • Organic statute • Pragmatism (law) • Precautionary principle • Promulgate • Proposed rule • Publication rulemaking • Regulatory budget • Regulatory capture • Regulatory dark matter • Regulatory impact analysis • Regulatory policy officer • Regulatory reform officer • Regulatory review • Rent seeking • Retrospective regulatory review • Risk assessment (administrative state) • Rulemaking • Separation of powers • Significant regulatory action • Skidmore deference • Statutory authority • Substantive law and procedural law • Sue and settle • Sunset provision • Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions • United States Code • United States Statutes at Large
    Bibliography
    Agencies
    Retrieved from "https://ballotpedia.org/wiki/index.php?title=Distance_Education_and_Innovation_rule_(2021)&oldid=9169514"