Office of Postsecondary Education - U.S. Department of Education

66850 Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 209 / Friday, October 29, 2010 / Rules and RegulationsWReier-Aviles on DSKGBLS3C1PROD with RULES2similar program. Thus, we do not agreewith the recommendation that aninstitution should be required todemonstrate the portability of suchcredits to other institutions of highereducation offering similar programs aswe believe such a requirement would,in fact, interfere with the academicdecision-making processes atinstitutions.These regulations should not beinconsistent with current Federal laws,State regulations, and accreditingagencies’ policies because of theirintended narrow application to thedetermination of eligibility for, anddistribution of, Federal program funds.Therefore, to the extent an institutiondetermines that it may be necessary touse a current credit assignment system,for example, to comply with otherrequirements such as State mandates, aninstitution may continue using itscurrent system for purposes unrelated toFederal programs.We do not agree with the commenterthat the credit-hour definition in § 600.2conflicts with the Americans withDisabilities Act of 1990, as amended.The credit-hour definition in § 600.2does not prohibit institutions fromdeveloping policies for academicallyaccommodating students withdisabilities in accordance with theAmericans with Disabilities Act of 1990,as amended. The credit-hour definitionprovides institutions with the flexibilityto determine the appropriate credithours or equivalencies to award forstudent work.Changes: None.Comment: Several commentersbelieved that a Federal definition of acredit hour is unnecessary. Many ofthese commenters noted that there hasbeen no history of fraudulent practicesin credit assignment by institutions inthe nonprofit sector and that any fraudor abuses identified have been in thefor-profit sector. Some of thesecommenters believed that it is unfair toapply a Federal definition of a credithour to all institutions. One commentersuggested that the credit-hour definitionapply only to institutions that are notaccredited by regional or specializedaccreditors.A few commenters believed that theSecretary’s only motive to define acredit hour stemmed from a report fromthe Department’s Inspector Generalregarding one regional accreditingagency’s accreditation of a for-profitinstitution it found to haveinappropriate credit-hour policies. Onecommenter believed that although therehave been problems reported with someinstitutions’ assignment of credit hours,these problems were primarily related totwo regional accrediting agencies’evaluation of degree programs and notwith vocational career educationprograms.One commenter expressed concernthat enforcement of institutions’compliance with the credit-hourdefinition would be directed primarilyat for-profit institutions even thoughthere have been inappropriate creditawarding practices at nonprofitinstitutions as well.A few commenters believed thatinstitutional credit assignment problemsidentified in the nonprofit sector areeffectively resolved through the existingprocesses of accreditation andinstitutional self-review.One commenter suggested thatinstead of establishing a Federal credithourdefinition, the Department shouldrequire institutions to describe theircredit assignment policies in theircatalogs and promotional materials.Discussion: The Secretary did notintend to define a credit hour forFederal program purposes as a punitivemeasure against institutions in aparticular sector or institutions thathave engaged in inappropriate creditawarding practices in the past. Instead,the revised credit-hour definition isintended to provide a minimum,consistent standard for all institutionsregardless of State, sector, or accreditorin determining the amount of studentwork necessary to award credit hoursequitably for Federal program purposes.Changes: None.Comment: A few commentersbelieved that a Federal credit-hourdefinition is unnecessary because Stateagencies already review institutions’credit-hour policies within their generaloversight of an institution’s integrity.Discussion: We do not agree. ManyState agencies do not perform suchoversight activities nor do they use auniform standard that would assure theequitable administration of Federalprograms.Changes: None.Administrative BurdenComment: Several commentersbelieved that the proposed credit-hourprovisions would cause an undueadministrative and financial burden oninstitutions. A few commenters believedthat institutions would be forced tofocus their administrative resources onensuring that their programs andcourses conform to the Federal credithourdefinition and remain eligible fortitle IV, HEA program funds instead ofother important academic matters suchas ensuring program integrity. Othercommenters believed that in order tocomply with the proposed credit-hourVerDate Mar2010 14:10 Oct 28, 2010 Jkt 223001 PO 00000 Frm 00020 Fmt 4701 Sfmt 4700 E:\FR\FM\29OCR2.SGM 29OCR2definition, institutions would beburdened with administrative taskssuch as reevaluating and significantlyrestructuring their credit-assignmentsystems, ensuring compliance with theiraccrediting agency’s standards,reconfiguring the use of classroomspace, and recalculating students’financial aid packages.One commenter believed that Stateagencies and accrediting agencies willbe burdened by the requirement to focuson institutions at a more detailed leveland will need to increase their staffs andcosts to account for the increasedworkload. This commenter believed thatincreased costs would be passed toinstitutions, and subsequently, tostudents.Discussion: We do not believe thatassigning credit to courses inaccordance with the definition of credithour in § 600.2 for Federal programpurposes will cause any significantincrease in administrative or financialburden on institutions. Institutionsparticipating in Federal programs suchas title IV, HEA programs are alreadyresponsible for ensuring the appropriatetreatment of Federal funds, includingaccurate distribution of Federal funds tostudents. Institutions will not berequired to change their current systemsof awarding credit for academicpurposes which in many instances willalready be compliant with these finalregulations, but some institutions willbe required to make the necessarychanges to ensure accurate andequitable credit assignments for Federalprogram purposes.We do not believe that the credit-hourdefinition will cause any significantincrease in the administrative burden onaccrediting agencies or State agenciesrecognized under 34 CFR part 603.Section 496(a)(5) of the HEA requiresaccrediting agencies recognized by theSecretary to evaluate an institution’s orprogram’s ‘‘measures of program lengthand the objectives of the degrees orcredentials offered’’ which inherentlyrequires accrediting agencies to evaluatethe courses that constitute institutions’programs.Changes: None.Accrediting Agency Procedures(§ 602.24(f))Comment: Several commenterssupported the addition of § 602.24(f).These commenters believed thataccrediting agencies are the appropriateentities to ensure institutions’compliance with the credit-hourprovisions in § 600.2.Many other commenters believed thatthe proposed provisions in § 602.24(f)are unnecessary. These commenters