Consumer protection groups are seeking changes to policies that govern how distance education is offered across state lines in most of the U.S.
They have made several recommendations to NC-SARA, the organization that controls the nation's only multistate reciprocity agreement for online learning, including proposed rule changes on professional licensing and resolving student complaints.
While reciprocity agreements such as NC-SARA's are meant to ease barriers for institutions to offer online education to out-of-state students, the organization has come under fire for having weak standards.
Federal rules on state authorization for distance learning programs have been under discussion since the U.S. Department of Education began renegotiating them last year. The final version of the rules, which federal officials said will scale back regulatory burdens on colleges, take effect on July 1.
Federal requirements allow colleges to participate in distance learning pacts such as NC-SARA's instead of pursuing separate authorization in each state that they seek to enroll students. Members of the agreements hold to a set of common standards intended to ensure students receive quality education across state lines.
Every state except California participates in NC-SARA's agreement, so shifts in its policies would be felt widely across the country.
NC-SARA is meeting in May to vet potential changes to its operations manual. Five organizations have concerns with the proposals, which they spelled out in a letter to NC-SARA officials this week. Among those groups are the National Consumer Law Center and The Institute for College Access and Success (TICAS).
One of the groups' suggestions is to retain a policy that allows participating schools to provide students with contact information for professional licensing boards. This is so they can research whether online programs meet requirements for a license or certification in their home states if schools are unable to determine whether it does so.
The new federal authorization rules, however, require colleges only to disclose whether they know if the program meets state licensure requirements. NC-SARA is proposing to match that "weakened" federal standard, the groups wrote.
"Lowering the NC-SARA standard ... will only place students at heightened risk of spending time and money on education that will not pay off," they wrote.
NC-SARA also wants to change the process for handling student complaints against programs operated by branch campuses. It wants to change the policies so students could file complaints in either the state in which the institution is based or the one in which the branch is located. But only the institution's home state could resolve complaints.
However, the groups argue this would reduce the likelihood that cases would be resolved. Complaints should be able to be resolved by any state where a college is operating, even if it's not the home state, they added.
While almost all states have joined NC-SARA, California so far has resisted doing so out of concern that the pact would fail to hold certain institutions, namely for-profits, accountable. Maryland's membership also came under question recently after the state's legislature passed a bill that would restrict for-profit and online colleges and that NC-SARA said interfered with its rules.
The groups also called for NC-SARA to add two state attorneys general, a consumer protection advocate, and a student to its governing board, saying its current composition gives "the regulated entities themselves a larger role than the states in approving more regulations."
Lori Williams, president and CEO of NC-SARA, said in a statement emailed to Education Dive that the organization "always welcomes higher education stakeholders to offer feedback."
"We appreciate the recommendations provided in this letter, and we look forward to exploring these and other ideas at our upcoming board meeting and in the months ahead," Williams said.