Connecticut Senate Bill SB00026

Connecticut 2019 Regular Session

• Introduced: 1/15/19
• Refer: 1/15/19
• Refer: 3/7/19
• Report Pass: 3/14/19
• Refer: 3/27/19
• Report Pass: 4/2/19
• Engrossed: 4/17/19
• Report Pass: 4/18/19
• Chaptered: 6/12/19
• Enrolled: 6/17/19
• Passed: 6/21/19

Caption

An Act Making Permanent The Moratorium On The Approval Of Programs At Independent Institutions Of Higher Education.

Impact

The enactment of SB00026 would significantly affect the regulatory framework governing independent higher education institutions in Connecticut. Under this law, institutions with a history of strong accreditation and financial performance can introduce new programs without needing a lengthy approval process from state authorities. This could lead to increased educational opportunities for students and allow institutions to remain competitive in a rapidly changing educational landscape, enhancing their ability to respond to market demands and student interests.

Summary

Senate Bill No. 26, known as an Act Making Permanent the Moratorium on the Approval of Programs at Independent Institutions of Higher Education, establishes a permanent halt on the approval of new programs at independent higher education institutions unless they meet specific eligibility criteria. This bill allows for up to twelve new programs per academic year to be exempt from approval by the Office of Higher Education, provided the institutions meet guidelines regarding financial aid eligibility and accreditation status. The intent is to streamline the process for established institutions while ensuring that only financially stable and accredited programs are introduced.

Sentiment

The sentiment around SB00026 appears to be generally supportive among those advocating for educational innovation and flexibility. Proponents argue that it represents a progressive step towards reducing bureaucratic obstacles, thus enabling institutions to adapt quickly to the needs of students and industries. Conversely, there are concerns raised by some groups about potential risks associated with unregulated program proliferation, including fears that quality could be compromised and that institutions may prioritize profit over educational integrity.

Contention

A notable point of contention is the balance between fostering educational innovation and maintaining oversight to ensure quality and accountability in higher education. Critics of the bill express worries that making the moratorium permanent could lead to an influx of programs that are inadequately vetted, potentially harming students and the reputation of independent institutions. Additionally, the requirement for transparency through annual reporting fosters some debate about the extent to which institutions will adhere to quality standards in their program offerings.