Running head: Title 5 - Regular Effective Contact California Code of Regulations, Title 5: Analysis of Regular Effective Contact Requirements for Online Learning at California Community Colleges by Jory Hadsell August 16, 2011 Drexel University
Title 5 - Regular Effective Contact 1 Executive Summary Title 5 of the California Code of Regulations (also known as the Education Code) requires that California Community Colleges ensure that faculty teaching online and hybrid courses engage in regular effective contact with students as part of the distance education learning experience. Additional professional standards and accreditation guidelines have been developed in parallel with these regulations. There are effective models for implementation of policies and procedures that assist administrators and faculty in maintaining compliance with the regulations. Three California Community Colleges are discussed with regard to efforts at meeting the regular effective contact requirements: Butte College, Mt. San Antonio College, and Sacramento City College. The impact of professional organizations is evident in advocating for professional standards, rather than additional legislation targeted at increasing accountability and student success in distance education environments.
Title 5 - Regular Effective Contact 2 California Code of Regulations, Title 5: Analysis of Regular Effective Contact Requirements for Online Learning at California Community Colleges Selection I Summary of Regulations Overview of Title 5 Requirements In order to ensure that student and faculty interaction in online classes is sustained at desired levels, the Board of Governors of the California Community Colleges have codified regulations and written them into the state Education Code requiring regular effective contact between online instructors and students. These guidelines provide a foundation for institutional evaluation of online learning, evaluation by accreditors, and faculty best practices in online student engagement (State of California, 2008). At the core of the regulation is the central idea that students should have regular, ongoing opportunities to ask questions and get assistance from the course instructor. Typically, the instructor in an online course is responsible for verifying the active participation of students and providing regular feedback about their performance in the course. The California Code of Regulations, Title 5 (commonly referred to as the Education Code ) contains the actual language, and the Chancellor s Office of the California Community Colleges provides guidelines for colleges that explain how to maintain compliance with the Title 5 regulations. The statutory requirement for regular effective contact between instructor and students is codified in section 55204 of the California Education Code. In addition to the requirements of section 55002 and any locally established requirements applicable to all courses, district governing boards shall ensure that: (a) Any portion of a course conducted through distance education includes regular effective contact between instructor and students, through group or individual meetings, orientation and review sessions, supplemental seminar or study sessions, field trips, library workshops, telephone contact, correspondence, voice
Title 5 - Regular Effective Contact 3 mail, e-mail, or other activities. Regular effective contact is an academic and professional matter pursuant to sections 53200 et seq. (b) Any portion of a course provided through distance education is conducted consistent with guidelines issued by the Chancellor pursuant to section 409 of the Procedures and Standing Orders of the Board of Governors (State of California, 2008). Guidelines for interpreting and maintaining compliance with the statutory requirement, issued by the Chancellor s Office of California Community Colleges, state: This section defines what contact must be maintained between instructor and student. It is virtually identical to section 55211 which it replaces, except that language has been added to clarify that rules related to conduct of distance education and effective instructor contact apply to any portion of a course conducted through distance education. Subdivision (a) stresses the responsibility of the instructor in a DE course to initiate regular contact with enrolled students to verify their participation and performance status. The use of the term regular effective contact in this context suggests that students should have frequent opportunities to ask questions and receive answers from the instructor of record. The last published Distance Education Guidelines, March 2004, issued by the Chancellor pursuant to section 409 of the Procedures and Standing Orders of the Board of Governors, as referenced in subdivision (b), establishes the principle that for DE courses there are a number of acceptable interactions between instructor and student, not all of which may require in-person contact. Thus, districts and/or colleges will need to define effective contact including how often, and in what manner instructor-student interaction is achieved. It is important to document regular effective contact and how it is achieved. Since regular effective contact was declared an academic and professional matter, this documentation must include demonstration of collegial consultation with the academic senate, for example through its delegation to the local curriculum committee. A natural place for this to occur is during the separate course approval process (see section 55206) as well as during faculty evaluations, student surveys, and program review. Documentation should consist of the inclusion of information in applicable outlines of record on the type and frequency of interaction appropriate to each DE course/section or session. Local policies should establish and monitor minimum standards of regular effective contact (California Community Colleges Chancellor's Office, 2008). Clearly, the idea of mandating ongoing, meaningful instructor-student interaction is central to the spirit of Title 5 and the intent of the Board of Governors. As such, community
Title 5 - Regular Effective Contact 4 college administrators bear oversight responsibilities with regard to ensuring that faculty and students are engaged in maintaining contact with students in distance education classes which meets the standards of: (a) regularity, and (b) effectiveness. While faculty themselves ultimately bear the responsibility for engaging in course activities that meet these standards, institutions should ensure that operating procedures, evaluation tools, and institutional culture support compliance with this regulation. Selection II Examples of Institutional Responses Achieving effective oversight over distance education courses can be difficult, as it can require difficult conversations about the college educational mission, commitment of financial resources, and the future face and footprint of the institution. Because online learning is relatively new and demand for distance education has been growing at such a rapid pace, many colleges have not yet stumbled upon the most effective forms of local governance, particularly when it comes to implementing guidelines surrounding the quality of instruction, mandatory faculty training, peer evaluation, and measures for maintaining regular effective contact between faculty and students in distance education courses. There are, though, some institutions that have flourished with a strong commitment to distance education. Butte College Butte College is located near Chico, California, approximately two hours north of the capital city of Sacramento. The college has been an innovator in technology, instructional design, and environmental practices for several years. Butte is often referred to as a model for how to build a strong connection between shared governance, teaching faculty, administration, and instructional designers. The college governance structure contains a standing committee,
Title 5 - Regular Effective Contact 5 consisting of faculty, two instructional designers, and the distance learning administrator (dean) who meet regularly, and have published expectations regarding regular effective contact (Danielson, 2009). In fact, the Distance Learning Committee at Butte College has developed a set of minimum standards for online courses, including a process for review by the instructional design specialists and the full Distance Learning Committee (Butte Community College District, 2011). A review of the committee s published document, titled Course Diagnostic Standards, reveals the college s commitment to quality, student-instructor engagement, and sound instructional practices in all online or distance education courses. No course is offered via distance learning at Butte College if it does not meet or exceed the standards contained in this document, and the faculty member requesting to teach the course must present it to the full committee for approval before the course can be added to the class schedule. This is a rare and substantive approach to distance education course approval. Mt. San Antonio College Another statewide model in this regard is Mt. San Antonio College, located in the San Gabriel Valley of eastern Los Angeles County. The college has also formed a Distance Learning Committee, which is part of its standing governance structure. The committee requires all faculty teaching courses online to complete a mandatory certification prior to teaching a course online. According to the Mt. San Antonio College website, The purpose of the Distance Learning Committee is to discuss, review, and evaluate distance learning modes of instruction, and recommend and promote best practices and new opportunities for distance learning and teaching (Mt. San Antonio College Distance Learning Committee, 2005). A thorough review of the materials and committee minutes listed on the website reveals a thoughtful, comprehensive approach to distance learning across the institution. In fact, Mt. San Antonio College has
Title 5 - Regular Effective Contact 6 emerged as a leader in developing and receiving collective bargaining approval for a separate evaluation process for online faculty, which is a major topic of conversation at colleges across California. By implementing a strong governance presence early on in the development of the online learning program, the college has built a solid foundation upon which future growth in distance education can be sustained. Sacramento City College Sacramento City College is located in an urban area near downtown Sacramento. As the capital city campus, the college was not heavily invested in online education early on. In the early 2000s, Sacramento City College became the hub within the Los Rios Community College District for video-based courses, including pre-produced telecourses and later, interactive television courses (ITV) via cable television and internet broadcast. As cable television broadcasts became an increasingly smaller share of the distance education market, the college has transitioned to offer primarily online distance education courses. Having lagged behind in the development of infrastructure and program support for online classes, Sacramento City College has an online program that, while robust, has grown more slowly than some of its sister colleges (Hadsell, 2008). While not an early leader in online education, the college has been able to build from models provided by other colleges, and now has a robust planning, governance, and oversight process in place for distance education (Sacramento City College, 2009). In some ways, by not existing on the bleeding edge of technology during the infancy of most online programs, the institution has been able to allocate energy and resources into building a program based on best practices many of which were initially created by other colleges.
Title 5 - Regular Effective Contact 7 To ensure Title 5 compliance in this area, Sacramento City College utilizes a rigorous curriculum approval structure and standards that require faculty to explain, up front, procedures used to ensure that regular effective contact is attempted. Faculty, working with an instructional development specialist if they choose, can propose courses for a distance education modality. These courses are reviewed by a separate Distance Education Subcommittee of the college Curriculum Committee. Once dialogue has occurred with the faculty member, approved courses are forwarded to the college Curriculum Committee for a full technical review and hearing. The next layer in course approval occurs at the Los Rios District Curriculum Committee, which approves new courses, programs, disciplines, and coordinates curriculum across the four colleges (May, 2009). Administrators at Sacramento City College conduct regular evaluations of online classes, with online surveys and access to the course being evaluated (with faculty permission). Students are surveyed near the mid-point of their course, and are asked specific questions with regard to their satisfaction with interactions with their online professor. These surveys are used in the evaluation process, and are not provided to the faculty member until after grades for the course have been submitted. In 2010, Sacramento City College adopted its own official set of guidelines for regular effective contact, modeled after the policy developed at Mt. San Jacinto College (Mt. San Jacinto College Curriculum Committee, 2008). This policy clearly spells out expectations and provides faculty with the actual regulations governing regular effective contact. The college also provides faculty with access to robust, market-vetted technology conferencing and interactivity tools, most of which are available on campus or remotely including via personal mobile devices at any time of the day or night. Through this multi-pronged approach
Title 5 - Regular Effective Contact 8 at achieving excellent interactivity between faculty and students, the institution is attempting to remain in compliance with all of the applicable standards for regular effective contact. In the first two examples, it is evident that early and intensive planning for the expansion of online course offerings, and an institutional commitment to devoting the human and financial capital necessary to working through sometimes contentious issues, has paid large dividends. In both cases, creating high quality, high contact classes has meant slowing the initial rate of online course growth. However, as other institutions may now be dealing with pulling back courses that do not meet quality standards, both Butte College and Mount San Antonio College are well positioned to continue growing, without the distraction of trying to figure out how to implement new standards after courses have already been built and offered. They are modeling excellence in governance and oversight of online education that other institutions across California would do well to emulate. Colleges which got a later start in online and learning, such as Sacramento City College, have been able to capitalize on the experiences of other early adopters. Such institutions can now position themselves for success and compliance with Title 5 and related regulations and guidelines by avoiding failures of those on the leading edge, and building upon the successes and best practices of those institutions that have forged a path forward. Selection III Political Considerations Implementation of the requirements of Title 5, in this regard, can be precarious. While the Education Code itself creates a specific requirement, the locus of control for ensuring compliance is somewhat decentralized. While administrators bear the burden of ensuring compliance, these efforts may be hampered by faculty arguments for academic freedom, inadequate evaluation rules for evaluation of online courses written into collective bargaining
Title 5 - Regular Effective Contact 9 agreement, and an intersecting nexus of professional standards and accrediting rules that also impact distance learning practices at the institution. Because regular effective contact is deemed an academic and professional matter, control over the implementation of this requirement is effectively placed in the hands of faculty, as provided for in California s AB 1725 legislation signed by Governor George Deukmejian in 1988 that created delineated areas of academic freedom in instructional practices for faculty. As such, college academic senates are typically charged with developing and monitoring guidelines to which faculty who teach online must adhere, based on professional standards (The Academic Senate for the California Community Colleges, 1999). Professional organizations, such as the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges (ASCCC) have weighed in attempting to bring clarity to distance education issues, such as the regular effective contact requirement. Because of the rapid pace of technology development, distance education practices have changed immensely over the past 20-30 years. What was once truly independent study has now become much more interactive, for example, through online connectivity and real-time communication separated by distance. In 2005, Pat James Hanz, director of distance learning for Mt. San Jacinto College, presented a resolution to the ASCCC specifying how community colleges should address issues of regular effective contact and course approval for distance education modalities. The ASCCC passed the resolution, as follows: Whereas, The existing distance education guidelines refer generally to "regular effective contact between instructor and students," and no clear definition of "regular effective contact" is provided; Whereas, Title 5 55211b recognizes that how "regular effective contact" is achieved is an academic and professional matter;
Title 5 - Regular Effective Contact 10 Whereas, The existing Distance Education Guidelines state that "it is important that districts document how regular effective contact is achieved" and "a natural place for this to occur is during the separate course approval process" and distance education courses are no longer automatically categorized as independent study in Title 5 Regulations, yet a course that is offered at a distance may in fact be independent study; and Whereas, A course that requires instructor-student contact only at the middle and/or end of the course is not compliant with the required "regular effective contact" component of distance education but is more correctly described as independent study; Resolved, That the Academic Senate for California Community Colleges encourage and provide guidance to local curriculum committees to establish clear local guidelines that are consistent with existing regulations and designed to ensure that different course modalities are separately reviewed and independentstudy courses are designated as such (James Hanz, 2005). Most faculty members are not particularly enthusiastic about administrators peeking around unannounced inside their online courses. In fact, arguments are often raised that a professor would certainly know if an administrator walked into the room while an on-ground class was in session, and therefore administrators should not be allowed to lurk unannounced in online courses. The passage of the 2005 resolution by the ASCCC was an attempt to get faculty to increase self-policing activities, by providing additional clarity about the nature of facultystudent interaction. Accrediting guidelines present their own political challenges, as well. Maintaining accreditation for distance education programs requires that an institution meet a multitude of standards, with peer evaluation and regular approval cycles for re-affirmation of accreditation. The spirit of the Title 5 regular effective contact guidelines have been largely incorporated into the accrediting guidelines for distance education programs. However, the accrediting guidelines are often much more prescriptive in nature and reflect the mood of the educational community at the moment with regard to distance education policies, practices, and procedures. Legal
Title 5 - Regular Effective Contact 11 regulations tend sometimes to fail to meet emerging concerns about distance education, mainly due to the fact that the legislative process can be lengthy, while at the same time, the field of online education is changing quite rapidly. While there are myriad accreditation related requirements for distance education programs, the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges the body specifically charged with accrediting two year colleges through the Western Association of Schools and Colleges, a regional accrediting body published a distance learning manual that offers specific criteria under which distance learning or correspondence programs may be evaluated. On page 1 of the Distance Education and Correspondence Manual the definition of distance education is discussed. It is worth noting that in this important document, the ACCJC highlights the need for regular interaction between faculty and students on its very first page: Distance education is defined, for the purpose of accreditation review as a formal interaction which uses one or more technologies to deliver instruction to students who are separated from the instructor and which supports regular and substantive interaction between the students and instructor, either synchronously or asynchronously (Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges, 2009). In fact, the ACCJC even uses the frequency and substance of instructor-student interaction to distinguish distance education from correspondence courses. While the anytime, anyplace nature of online learning has brought tremendous flexibility to learning outside the walls of a traditional classroom, the accrediting commission clearly places a premium on the student-instructor dynamic and regular, ongoing assessment and communication between the teacher and learner, as a distinguishing feature and mark of excellence for online learning programs (Western Association of Schools and Colleges, 2010).
Title 5 - Regular Effective Contact 12 SELECTION IV Analysis While distance education continues to grow and thrive at many institutions, there is still concern within the higher education community about certain issues tied to online learning. First, while technology is playing a monumental role in shifting the learning experience outside of the classroom, this same phenomenon is driving concerns about faculty preparedness and the amount of ongoing technology training necessary for faculty to be truly successful teaching in an online environment. While community colleges continue to do their best to address these concerns, college budgets continue to shrink at a time when online course enrollments are skyrocketing. While California s community colleges are making valiant strides in this area, the reality is that institutional funding models have not shifting significantly enough during the boom years of online learning to provide adequate staffing and professional development opportunities for faculty teaching online classes. Instead, departments supporting online instruction are typically run by a lone faculty member with an equally small number of support staff, many of whom are temporary employees. Until distance education is fully institutionalized, and both the funding and administrative models for supporting these programs at the individual college level shifts, it is likely that the trend of self-supporting online faculty will continue (Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges, 2009). As such, without adequate professional development and technology resources, individual faculty may have a difficult time meeting the legislative intent of this section of Title 5, not to mention ASCCC and accrediting commission concerns. As online education gains popularity and acceptance within the Academy, concern over the nature, frequency, and quality of online student-faculty communication continues to be evident. According to the ACCJC, Students should expect that distance education programs
Title 5 - Regular Effective Contact 13 will permit completion of learning outcomes and objectives in the same manner as those delivered in traditional programs. Student access to faculty should also be a major program ingredient (Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges, 2009, p. 3). In this statement, the ACCJC is directly addressing issues of course quality and regular effective contact, particularly in highlighting the idea of student access to faculty being a major program ingredient. The ACCJC makes a clear distinction between a correspondence versus distance education course, in this case, in very clear terms. Because there is a unified direction offered by the Title 5 regulations, the Chancellor s Office guidelines, and the ACCJC guidelines, it is clear to see that regular effective contact with distance education students having direct, frequent opportunities for contact with their instructor remains on the forefront of critical issues and ingredients for all distance learning courses and programs. The trend toward measurement of these critical program elements is likely to continue for some time to come, as online learning moves into its adolescence at California s community colleges and across the nation. Faculty and administrators at California Community Colleges and around the nation, since this phenomenon is not unique to the Golden State may need to get used to a higher level of scrutiny for online courses, as compared to traditional on-ground courses. Although many supporters of distance education attempt to cling to the mantle of equity with regards to the scrutiny of online courses, the reality is that the somewhat invisible nature of these courses necessitates a somewhat more vigilant set of oversight activities by college administrators. The collection and analysis of data related to student success in online courses will likely play a key role in driving both academic and legislative agendas with regard to distance education in the future. Faculty who teach robust online courses recognize that teaching in this modality is no lark. In fact, the amount of preparatory time, course development, and
Title 5 - Regular Effective Contact 14 time spent communicating with today s plugged in generation of students can be overwhelming to those teaching online for the first time. Such activities, however, are an investment in the future of distance learning, in that ongoing, regular, meaningful contact with students in these courses raises retention and success rates. As this data continues to be gathered and shared with others in higher education, the perceived need for increased regulation in this area can be diminished. Selection V Conclusion There are a variety of approaches toward ensuring that the spirit of the Title 5 regulations on regular effective contact are met. The Chancellor s Office of the California Community Colleges has provided documentation that provides institutions with a framework for meeting the minimum standards. By looking at institutions that have pioneered online learning methods, institutions that began online learning programs later in the development cycle obtain best practices and avoid costly infrastructure mistakes. Taking the whole of the Title 5 regulations, Chancellor s Office guidelines, accreditation guidelines, and professional standards, a more vivid picture is created in which institutions are provided with guidance toward shaping their policy and political goals, with regard to online and distance learning. While overcoming political and resource challenges may be difficult at times, it may be in the best long-term interest of online learning programs to take extra steps to document successes and go an extra mile toward engaging students. Without such efforts, critics of distance learning may emerge victorious, and additional regulations may be implemented by federal, state, local, or accrediting authorities.
Title 5 - Regular Effective Contact 15 References Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges. (2009). Distance education and correspondence manual. Western Association of Schools and Colleges Retrieved from http://grapevine.laspositascollege.edu/distanceeducation/documents/de_manual_august _2009.pdf. Butte Community College District. (2011). Distance Learning Committee, from http://www.butte.edu/departments/governance/committees/dlc/index.html Distance education guidelines, 2008 Omnibus version (2008). Danielson, D. (2009, April 17). [Dean of Instruction, Butte College]. Hadsell, J. (2008). Growth in Online Courses (SCC). Sacramento City College. Sacramento, CA. James Hanz, P. (2005). Distance education review of new distance education modalities: Academic Senate of California Community Colleges. May, V. (2009). Sacramento City College Curriculum Handbook, from http://www.scc.losrios.edu/documents/instruction/scc_curriculum_handbook.pdf Mt. San Antonio College Distance Learning Committee. (2005). Distance Learning Committee purpose and function, from http://elearn.mtsac.edu/olsc/dstlearn/purpose.htm Mt. San Jacinto College Curriculum Committee. (2008). Mt. San Jacinto College regular effective contact policy: Mt. San Jacinto College. Sacramento City College. (2009). Distance Education Program Plan 2009-10. Sacramento, CA: Retrieved from https://file.scc.losrios.edu/insidescc/familyofplans/program%20plans/distanceedprog Pln2009-10.pdf. California Code of Regulations, Title 5 55204 (2008).
Title 5 - Regular Effective Contact 16 The Academic Senate for the California Community Colleges. (1999). Guidelines for good practice: Effective instructor-student contact in distance learning. Western Association of Schools and Colleges. (2010). Guide to evaluating distance education and correspondence education: A publication of the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges.