|Action||Regulatory Language for Enrollment Agreement Legislation|
|Comment Period||Ends 10/31/2018|
Objections to Enrollment Agreement
I have read over the proposed changes to the Enrollment Agreement requirement and moved it up the chain to our institutional office located in Jackson, MS. The CFO and COO of our institution has the following concerns...
Our concerns are twofold: (1) the requirements that SCHEV would put in the enrollment agreement are already communicated to our students via the catalog and our website and (2) this is an administrative burden and a notable challenge in our graduate level context.
We hope that the agency will take this into consideration, especially regarding the context of our institution.
Thank you for your time.
Objection to change in enrollment agreement
We do have some comments on the proposed changes to SCHEV regulations about enrollment agreements:
1. The document containing the changed language was not readily provided to us (and presumably to other institutions). Instead, we were simply referred to a general web site.
2. Once we located the document, the changed language was not identified. We had to do a detailed comparison between existing and proposed language.
3. Most critically, the new provisions for the legal agreements our students must sign hark back to a pre-internet past of pen and paper - printouts and signatures on actual printed documents. Is this really how Virginia wants to present itself to the digital world thinking about doing business in the state? How will it look if Amazon employees seeking to learn about predictive analytics and optimization (see the story of Karolis Urbonas, chief data scientist at Amazon and graduate of THe Institute for Statistics Education) encounter these pen and paper obstacles to studying with us?
4. Bottom line - this new requirement is an undue burden for us, and also for our prospective students.
Comment in response to Notice of Intended Regulatory Action 8175
American Public University System (“APUS”) appreciates the opportunity to submit comments to the State Council of Higher Education for Virginia (“SCHEV”) in response to the October 1, 2018 Notice of Intended Regulatory Action (“NOIRA”) announcing SCHEV’s intent to consider amending 8 VAC 40-31, Regulations Governing Certification of Certain Institutions to Confer Degrees, Diplomas and Certificates. (35 Va. Reg. Regs. 399 (Oct. 1, 2018)). APUS understands that the purpose of the proposed action is to amend the regulation governing postsecondary schools to include enrollment agreements between students and regulated institutions as mandated by Chapter 298 of the 2017 Acts of Assembly (“Chapter 298”). Chapter 298 left to SCHEV discretion to prescribe “disclosures” to be contained in such enrollment agreements.
APUS supports SCHEV’s stated goal of developing regulations that “will benefit both regulated institutions and students”. With that goal in mind, APUS offers the following comments on certain aspects of the proposed regulatory language, including several of the specific proposed disclosures.
Background on APUS
Founded in Virginia in 1991 as American Military University to serve the needs of a highly mobile military, APUS provides online postsecondary education directed primarily at the needs of the military, military-affiliated, and public service communities. APUS enrolls approximately 82,200 students worldwide and offers more than 200 degree and certificate programs in diverse fields of study including business administration, health science, technology, criminal justice, education, and liberal arts, as well as national security, military studies, intelligence, and homeland security. APUS is regionally accredited by the Higher Learning Commission and permitted to operate as an out-of-state institution in the Commonwealth of Virginia by SCHEV.
APUS is guided by a strong sense of social responsibility and a commitment to serving our students and the broader community. Our mission is to provide high-quality higher education with emphasis on educating the nation’s military and public service communities by offering respected, relevant, accessible, affordable, and student-focused online programs that prepare students for service and leadership in a diverse, global society. APUS is proud to serve as one of the leaders of the proprietary education sector in this country.
Definition of “enrollment agreement” (8 VAC 40-31-10)
APUS acknowledges that the proposed definition of “enrollment agreement” is to some extent derived directly from Chapter 298. However, we respectfully encourage SCHEV in its interpretation of the definition to note that an enrollment agreement may take several forms—for example, some institutions may utilize traditional paper documents, and other institutions may present the required information online as part of the enrollment process. Where information is presented online, disclosure might take the form of descriptive links to institutional web pages where additional relevant information is available. These varied forms should all be considered an acceptable “enrollment agreement” so long as both the student and the institution sign the agreement, and electronic signatures should be acceptable.
This flexibility is necessary because each institution is different in terms of its current enrollment process and procedures. When it adopts final regulations, SCHEV should permit institutions adequate time to consider and implement processes to comply with the requirements. Furthermore, it would be helpful to institutions if SCHEV would identify a SCHEV point of contact who would provide technical assistance to institutions about their operational plans for compliance with the regulations.
Disclosure of “name of the educational program, start date, and the total number of credit hours or clock hours to complete the program of study and type of credential awarded upon completion” (8VAC40-31-160.E.2.a.(3))
First, we note that as a practical matter, a student’s “start date” is often best described as an anticipated start date that indicates the earliest start date for which an individual student is prepared to enroll. As a result of personal or family considerations, students often take advantage of flexible start dates, where made available by an institution, and choose a subsequent start date. For example, institutions such as APUS offer monthly start dates or other innovative academic calendars, and it is not uncommon for students to indicate their intent to enroll in one month and in fact to begin study in the subsequent month. We encourage SCHEV to accept as a “start date” the student’s and the institution’s good-faith attempt to identify the student’s anticipated start date.
Second, we encourage SCHEV to clarify that disclosure of “the total number of credit hours or clock hours to complete the program of study” should reflect the total number of credit hours or clock hours to complete the program without regard for any transfer credits the institution may award the student. In other words, APUS understands that the enrollment agreement does not need to be modified to reflect an individual student’s academic circumstances and any transfer credits awarded. As a practical matter, transfer credits typically are not granted until after a student has provided an official transcript that is evaluated by the accepting institution, so it may be impossible for an institution at the time of execution of the enrollment agreement to account reliably for potential transfer credits awarded to an individual student.
Disclosure of “estimated cost of all institutional charges and fees including, but not limited to: tuition, fees, equipment charges, supplies, textbooks, and uniforms” (8VAC40-31-160.E.2.a.(4))
APUS notes that institutional charges and fees may be calculated and assessed by institutions in a number of different ways—for example, by the clock hour or credit hour; per course; per academic term; or for the full academic program. We believe that transparency is important and that the disclosures will only be useful to students if the basis of the charges is conveyed clearly. However, because institutions and their academic programs vary in program structure, we recommend that SCHEV permit institutions to disclose institutional charges and fees in accordance with and with reference to the nature and structure of their academic programs.
Inclusion of language related to “student’s right to cancel” (8VAC40-31-160.E.2.a.(6))
Some institutions, such as APUS, do not assess any institutional charges or fees at any time before the first class day of an academic session. Therefore, we respectfully request that SCHEV revise the proposed language to indicate that “terms for cancellation” language is required to be included in the enrollment agreement only if the institution requires the student to make a payment before the beginning of class.
Enrollment agreement must include “places for signatures of the student and authorized representative of the school and the date the document was signed” ((8VAC40-31-160.E.2.a.(13))
As noted above, APUS respectfully requests that SCHEV permit electronic signatures from the student and the authorized school representative.
Requirement that “[a] new enrollment agreement must be completed in the event that the student (i) delays his start date, (ii) changes the program of enrollment; or (iii) drops from the program and re-enrolls at a later date” (8VAC40-31-160.E.2.b)
APUS respectfully requests that SCHEV omit this portion of the proposed regulation. As discussed above, it is not uncommon for students to delay their start dates by a month or two as a result of personal scheduling or other individual circumstances. The simple fact that a student delays his anticipated start date, or drops from a program and re-enrolls at a later date, does not warrant completion of a new enrollment agreement. Similarly, if a student changes her major halfway through her course of study toward a bachelor’s degree, but nothing else—including the number of credits required to complete the degree program and the estimated institutional charges and fees—has changed, there is no reason to require a new enrollment agreement. Requiring that a new enrollment agreement be completed in such cases would present unnecessary administrative burden to both the student and the institution. If SCHEV is concerned that the disclosures may become outdated, the regulation could require that the enrollment agreement include language stating that the information in the enrollment agreement could change if the student delays his start date, changes the program of enrollment, or drops from the program and re-enrolls at a later date, and that the student may request updated disclosure information in those situations.
Thank you for your consideration of these comments. APUS would be pleased to discuss with you any of the points raised in this letter so that the final regulation can meet the goals established by SCHEV.
 Notice of Intended Regulatory Action (NOIRA) Agency Background Document (NOIRA No. 8175), http://townhall.virginia.gov/L/GetFile.cfm?File=100\4821\8175\AgencyStatement_SCHEV_8175_v1.pdf.
Comment in response to Notice of Intended Regulatory Action 8175
University of Maryland University College (“UMUC”) appreciates the opportunity to comment on the proposed regulations. Based on the requirement in the regulations that the enrollment agreement provide a statement regarding a student’s cancellation rights, it appears that the intent of the regulation is for enrollment agreements to be issued at the time of admission. In this regard, 8VAC40-31-160(N)(3)-(4) provides that a student applicant be given 3 business days to cancel his/her enrollment without financial obligation. This cancellation right only applies to student applicants. If a student registers for his/her first class at a Virginia location more than 3 business days after applying to the institution, it would be misleading to notify such students of a cancellation right that no longer applies to the student. Therefore, we seek clarification in the regulations that the requirement to provide students with an enrollment agreement occurs at the time of admission and does not apply to a student who registers for a class at a Virginia location after admission. Thank you for the opportunity to provide feedback.