国产视频

In Short

Why Does One Online Education Supporter Oppose Better Data on Online Education?

online data privacy surveillance
Shutterstock.com / Lightspring

Last month, the U.S. Department of Education that would require colleges to provide more detailed data on students in online education programs. Given the rise of online education, including hybrid learning, it鈥檚 critical to understand how students' modes of attending college impact their success.

Do certain students, like those from low-income backgrounds, learn better through certain modalities? Do similar programs serving comparable student populations at different schools yield different outcomes? If so, how can colleges replicate those successful strategies across programs?

We don鈥檛 know the answers to these questions because we don鈥檛 have the data. The good news is the Education Department is looking to change that. But a prominent proponent for distance education, the WICHE Cooperative for Educational Technologies, or WCET, is opposing making these data public, depriving students, parents, college leaders, and policymakers of critical information.

The Proposals

Currently, the only available distance education data are aggregate enrollment information in the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System, or IPEDS. That essentially tells us totals of students learning fully in-person, fully online, or in a hybrid modality at particular schools. But this aggregate information doesn鈥檛 reveal a necessary level of detail: how particular students are faring at particular schools in particular programs through particular modalities.

The department鈥檚 proposed rule would require institutions to report student-level data on the modality of instruction for students receiving federal financial aid. The idea actually stemmed from negotiations on distance education rules this spring, when representatives from across the higher education sector, including for-profit, public, and private nonprofit colleges and consumer advocates, presented that to the department.

At the end of that negotiation, all representatives, the vast majority of whom are from colleges, supported the proposal. It鈥檚 not surprising 鈥 colleges already have these data to report to IPEDS and could easily provide them to the Education Department through existing reporting mechanisms, including to the National Student Loan Data System (NSLDS).

The second proposal would create a 鈥渧irtual location鈥 for a college for federal reporting purposes, differentiating program-level data for students in fully online programs from those in in-person or hybrid programs. Current available data do not distinguish between online programs and in-person or hybrid programs.

A student might be deciding between online and in-person programs in the same field at the same institution, but can鈥檛 compare outcomes because all the data are reported as one program.

Take a student who is considering whether to enroll in either a college鈥檚 online or in-person Master鈥檚 of Business Administration.

The two programs may have vastly different success rates in terms of student debt and post-graduation earnings, but an applicant won鈥檛 know that because they鈥檙e reported as one program to the federal government. The department鈥檚 proposal would allow that student to see how the online program compares to the in-person program.

This change would also better enable the Education Department to provide debt relief called closed school discharge to students whose colleges end a learning modality, either in-person or online.

For example, one institution, Trinity International University, recently it was ending only in-person enrollment. The college鈥檚 students might not be able to complete their degree program online, or they may not prefer to learn online. In situations like these, students who cannot finish their education would be better protected because the department could discharge their loans because it could tell whether the college ended a physical or virtual option.

The Opposition

It鈥檚 hard to imagine someone arguing against better data for students, taxpayers, and policymakers, but one prominent advocate for online learning has just done that. WCET opposes both of these proposals.

Some of WCET鈥檚 complaints, including about the burden to colleges, are to be expected. What was not expected 鈥 and is frankly shocking 鈥 is that it doesn鈥檛 seem to want the data out there at all.

WCET鈥檚 most mind-boggling complaint is that the Education Department would use the data elsewhere, such as for program oversight audits or to include in College Scorecard program-level data. WCET it 鈥渃an see where collecting some of this information might make sense, but others make us worry about the possibility of seeking reasons to defund distance education programs.鈥 It went on to say:

鈥淚mportantly, we have sincere concerns about how the Department might use such data. We hope clear research questions are elucidated when they propose the data elements. Meanwhile, we are all aware of 鈥榬esearch鈥 that pins differences in student success on modality while overlooking differences in the population served. And in the long list of items the Department suggests, the necessary demographics are missing. We are worried that the Department might erroneously make a correlation equals causation argument regarding student success in distance education.鈥

Why Is WCET Really Against This?

Other complaints WCET raised beg the question of why it opposes collecting better distance learning data. WCET says on its that it 鈥渟eeks to improve educational equity by increasing access to high-quality digital learning educational options.鈥 If that鈥檚 true, shouldn鈥檛 we get better data to understand program quality? Shouldn鈥檛 we be able to identify and uplift high-quality online programs?

WCET鈥檚 concern about the lack of research is not an argument against getting better student outcome data鈥攊t鈥檚 the perfect argument for it. WCET says it鈥檚 worried about existing research pinning any differences on modality, rather than demographics. The existing research is limited precisely because we do not have data to understand the nuances of student success by modality.

Keeping this information from students and the public is wrong. Students deserve better data to make one of the most important and, often expensive, decisions of their lives. The student mulling over whether to enroll online or in-person should be able to compare them accurately. Students can't learn about debt and earnings for online programs if an institution offers both on-campus and online options in the same field. There could be many online programs with outcomes that exceed their on-campus counterpart, but that is lost in existing data.

WCET鈥檚 complaints also go against institutions鈥 interests. Shouldn鈥檛 institutions also want these data to better understand how their students fare? Colleges already analyze retention, graduation and compare learning modalities to inform decisions on curriculum and program changes.

Wouldn鈥檛 institutions want to know the different earnings outcomes for online and in-person programs so they could highlight when online program graduates earn more? Why wouldn鈥檛 they want to know when online students earn less (and try to figure out a way to improve those earnings)? Of course they want that information, which is why all of the institutional negotiators supported the proposal.

WCET has also criticized the department鈥檚 student-level data as falling short of the agency鈥檚 policy goals because it only applies to those receiving federal financial aid.

But WCET knows the Education Department cannot change the law that prohibits it from collecting information on all students. That鈥檚 Congress鈥檚 job.

The public absolutely should have better data on all students, but current law only allows the Education Department to have this information on Title IV recipients (although more than , including 国产视频, and a large bipartisan group in Congress, are trying to change that).

So until the law is rewritten, the department鈥檚 proposal is consistent with current data practices that inform the College Scorecard and more鈥攁nd would provide much-needed information about students in all types of programs. The federal government invests billions of dollars in higher education and better information can provide a better understanding of the payoff of that investment.

WCET claims to want better data, but its protests sound like it opposes seeing the differences between student outcomes based on the mode of instruction. It should make anyone wonder why. Anyone who cares about students should support better data to understand their outcomes, address equity gaps, and improve student success. The Education Department is right to support better data in higher education. It鈥檚 time for some outliers in the industry to get on board.

More 国产视频 the Authors

Amy Laitinen
Amy Laitinen white bg.png
Amy Laitinen

Senior Director, Higher Education

Programs/Projects/Initiatives

Why Does One Online Education Supporter Oppose Better Data on Online Education?