The growth of distance education has added a new dimension to  evaluating the quality of postsecondary education programs. Distance Education Use Varies between Minority Serving Institutions and Other Schools, with Some Minority Serving Institutions Choosing Not to Offer Any Distance Education

There are some variations in the use of distance education at Minority  Serving Institutions and other schools. While it is difficult to generalize  across the Minority Serving Institutions, the available data indicate that  Minority Serving Institutions tend to offer at least one distance education  course at the same rate as other schools, but they differ in how many  courses are offered and which students take the courses. We found that Minority Serving Institutions offered distance education  courses for two main reasons: (1) they improve access to courses for  some students who live away from campus and (2) they provide  convenience to older, working, or married students. It offers  distance education by videoconference equipment or correspondence. School officials believe that classroom education best  meets the needs of its students because of the personal interaction that  occurs in a classroom setting. Minority Serving Institutions Face Sizable Challenges in Using Technology, Including Distance Education, and Education’s Efforts to Monitor Technology Could Be Improved

Minority Serving Institutions, like other schools, face stiff challenges in  keeping pace with the rapid changes and opportunities presented by  information technology and Education could improve how technological  progress is monitored. Minority Serving Institutions view the use of  technology as a critical tool in educating their students. With respect to  their overall technology goals, Minority Serving Institutions viewed using  technology in the classroom as a higher priority than offering distance  education. 1.) Accrediting Agencies Have Made Progress in Ensuring the Quality of Distance Education Programs; However, Two Areas May Merit Attention

Accrediting agencies have made progress in ensuring the quality of  distance education programs. While accrediting agencies have made progress in reviewing the quality of  distance education programs, there is no agreed upon set of standards for  holding schools accountable for student outcomes. Certain Statutory Requirements Limiting Federal Aid to Students Involved in Distance Education May Cause Some Students to Lose Eligibility for Such Aid

Finally, we found that if some statutory requirements—requirements that  were designed to prevent fraud and abuse in distance education—remain  as they are, increasing numbers of students will lose eligibility for the  federal student aid programs. While the number of schools currently affected is small in comparison to  the over 6,000 postsecondary schools in the country, this is an important  issue for more than 200,000 students who attend these schools. In deciding  whether to eliminate or modify these rules, the Congress and the  Administration will need to ensure that changes to federal student aid  statutes and regulations do not increase the chances of fraud, waste, and  abuse to federal student financial aid programs.
Why GAO Did This Study

The Higher Education Act of 1965 gives special recognition to some postsecondary schools--called Minority Serving Institutions--that serve a high percentage of minority students. These and other schools face stiff challenges in keeping pace with technology. One rapidly growing area, distance education, has commanded particular attention and an estimated 1.5 million students have enrolled in at least one distance education course. In light of this, GAO was asked to provide information on: (1) the use of distance education by Minority Serving Institutions; (2) the challenges Minority Serving Institutions face in obtaining and using technology; (3) GAO's preliminary finding on the role that accrediting agencies play in ensuring the quality of distance education; and (4) GAO's preliminary findings on whether statutory requirements limit federal aid to students involved in distance education. GAO is currently finalizing the results of its work on (1) the role of accrediting agencies in reviewing distance education programs and (2) federal student financial aid issues related to distance education.

What GAO Found

There are some variations in the use of distance education at Minority Serving Institutions when compared to other schools. While it is difficult to generalize, Minority Serving Institutions offered at least one distance education course at the same rate as other schools. When Minority Serving Institutions offered distance education, they did so to improve access for students who live away from campus and provide convenience to older, working, or married students. Some Minority Serving Institutions do not offer distance education because classroom education best meets the needs of their students. Additionally, schools view the overall use of technology as a critical tool in educating their students and they generally indicated that offering more distance education was a lower priority than using technology to educate their classroom students. The two primary challenges in meeting technology goals cited by these institutions were limitations in funding and inadequate staffing to maintain and operate information technology. Accrediting agencies have taken steps to ensure the quality of distance education programs, such as developing supplemental guidelines for reviewing these programs. However, GAO found (1) no agreed upon set of standards for holding institutions accountable for student outcomes and (2) differences in how agencies review distance education programs. Finally, several statutory rules limit the amount of federal aid for distance education students. GAO estimates that at least 14 schools are not eligible or could lose their eligibility for federal student financial aid if their distance education programs continue to expand. While the number of schools potentially affected is relatively small in comparison to the more than 6,000 postsecondary institutions in the country, this is an important issue for the nearly 210,000 students who attend these schools. Several factors must be considered before deciding whether to eliminate or modify these rules. They include the cost of implementation, the extent to which the changes improve access, and the impact that changes would have on Education's ability to prevent schools from fraudulent or abusive practices.