Colorado State University - Global Campus

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 5, 2015/06/10) */ CSU-Global Campus' Satisfactory Academic Progress (SAP) policy is based on Federal Title IV regulations and is designed to inform, as early as possible, students who do not successfully complete courseworkSuch unsuccessful course completion may jeopardize the student's' ability to complete their academic programPer Federal regulations, the SAP policy has steps of severity (Warning, Probation, & Suspension) to prevent a student from continuing to pay for tuition or to take federal financial aid when they are not making progress toward graduationPer Federal regulations, once a student has reached SAP Probation they are no longer eligible for Title IV funds The CSU-Global SAP policy has two components that must be met, both required by the Federal Government: 1) Grade Point Average (GPA) and 2) completion rateStudents need to maintain a GPA that meets graduation requirements (for undergraduate programs and for graduate programs) and a completion rate of 67%The completion rate protects students from retaking a course multiple times, which could prevent them from completing program requirements within 150% of the total credits In this specific case, the student began studies in Fall and was placed on SAP Warning on November 10, 2011, after failing to successfully complete required courseworkAt this time, an Academic Success Plan was initiated via email correspondenceAfter continued performance issues and after not meeting the conditions of this collaboratively developed Success Plan, the student was placed on SAP probation on January 13, In each case the student was provided a success plan via email that included the necessary conditions to return to good academic standing, including the expected grades and clearly articulated time frame required to complete the courses Due to a substandard completion rate, the student moved to SAP suspension on 7/9/Her multiple attempts to successfully complete the same course moved her below the 67% threshold needed to graduateIn Spring and Fall the student appealed the decision based on CSU-Global policy and was denied by a committeeThe student appealed to the Provost in February and a final review was conductedAt that time it was determined that CSU-Global policy was followed, communication to the student was accurate, and that in the best interest of the student, readmission would be denied With respect to the withdraw from the course, records indicate that the student withdrew herself from the course in question, which occurred in her first semester in fall after having moved to SAP warningEven after the withdraw, the student had additional opportunities to return to good academic standing prior to suspension in July Though the student did indicate in the appeals from Spring and Fall that there had been an illness, by that point the student was at a place where graduating within the 150% completion rate would be unlikely based on her previous academic experienceThe student never sought an accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act and had the student done so, an accommodation would not exempt the student from the SAP policy Finally, a member of our student success team will reach out to the student to explain in more detail the reason for the suspension and any options the student may have, though readmission may not be in the best interest of the student Initial Consumer Rebuttal / [redacted] (2000, 7, 2015/06/23) */ (The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.) The university has granted me readmission along with the opportunity to set up services with the disability departmentI am looking forward to completing my degreeThey were very helpful and accommodating

Complaint: I am rejecting this response because: I have requested that CSU allow me to finish the last remaining classes at CSU Global for a discounted rateCSU Global did not inform me that they would be willing to wave their exam fees that cost $ Sincerely, [redacted]

Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID 11089323, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to meThe school offered to amend the disbursement amount.The person I spoke with over the phone was very pleasant to work withI really do believe that the school did everything to fix this problemI was told that there was a misunderstanding and admitted that the issue was handled improperly and they did what they needed to make things rightI hate to be the person to go as far as making a complaint but the school has made things right with me as a student and a consumer Sincerely, [redacted]

We are a state, public, nonprofit institution whose only mission is to serve in the best interests of students towards workplace success and that unfortunately we cannot afford to pay for students’ tuitionStudents have the ability to choose the financing method that they wish to use to pay for their tuition In this case, the financing option the student chose did not come through even though she did successfully complete the courses and now owes the balance She is not eligible for Title IV funding until she provides the clearance letter and completes the verification process We have been in contact with the student over the phone and are working through her financial aid issues and trying to come up with a resolution for her situation

Initial Business Response / [redacted] (1000, 11, 2015/05/22) */ CSU-Global Campus carefully reviewed this student's claim and determined (personal information omitted): [redacted] Student's enrollment status was reported correctly throughout her time at CSU-Global o Status change of "less than half time" was due to withdraw from the university [redacted] Requesting In-School Deferment is the responsibility of the studentStudent requested it on 4/26/via email [redacted] On 4/27/15, the Advisor assisted with the In-School Deferment form and responded to the email We are unsure if the student was aware that her loans were being placed in temporary forbearance, why didn't she notify us that an In-School Deferment form was needed? it is our understanding that in order to accept the forbearance terms and conditions, she would have been notified it was needed Additionally, Great Lakes should have been able to view her enrollment details in NSLDS We are happy to assist the student in resolving this matterOur suggestion is we can send a enrollment validation letter to Great Lakes to assist with mending her Enrollment Status to re-instate her grace period

Revdex.com: I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID [redacted] , and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me When the institution's actions prohibit a student from continuing even though the institution knows that funds will be availableI consolidated my loan, there are not barriers to the acceptance of that loan, once the loan is consolidated, which now it is, the financial aid will be availableIn point of fact, the loan is now consolidated and I am waiting for clearance letter Sincerely, [redacted]

Tell us why here...The student was taken out of her MTH 109 Winter A course twice for non-attendance and was also denied a tuition appeal for the course. The first time the student was withdrawn, she stated that she was in communication with her instructor so she was allowed to re-enter the course.... The student then posted her attendance in the course but did not participate again so she was withdrawn 21 days later for the second time. The student states in her complaint that she was mistakenly pulled from her courses but our research reflects that 1) the Withdrawals were intentional based on her lack of course participation and 2) the only work she submitted in six weeks were mastery exercises (interactive, online, repeatable exercises) so she would have failed the course had we not withdrawn her – her financial responsibility is the same with a Failure or a Withdrawal. As part of the tuition appeal process, the Committee pulled a report from our system that showed that the student did not complete any discussion board or critical thinking assignments (homework assignments that comprise the majority of points towards the final grade) during the first 6 weeks she was in the course (and our courses are only 8 weeks in length); and given our Late Policies she would have not been able to submit them for any points. In review of her case, the Committee found that she was properly withdrawn both times based on sufficient work completion, and her Appeal was denied.The timeline below is from our electronic tracking systems:11/9/15 – course started11/10/15 – student posted attendance11/19/15 – student contacts advisor about possible withdraw from the course – she indicates with her husband has left and that she is starting a new job she doesn’t think she can complete the course. Advisor provides info on withdrawing.11/24/15 – student calls advisor, concerned about how W/D would impact FA. Decides to stay in course. 12/2/15 – Student withdrawn for 3 weeks of non-attendance12/3/15 – Student says she has been doing mastery exercises in Connect and has been working with instructor. Is reinstated in course. Advisor makes it clear she needs to do critical thinking and discussion board assignments and that she needs to work with instructor on plan to get caught up.12/3/15 – Posts attendance in course12/21/15 – Advisor leaves message after student hasn’t participated in over 14 days. No response back from student.12/28/15 – Student withdrawn from course due to non-attendance. 12/29/15 – Student contacts advisor, says she completed mastery exercises on 12/27. Advisor lets her know she is over 21 days non-attendance and the withdraw will stand.2/3 – 2/9/16 – Communicates with advisor and Jerid about her situation and submits a tuition appeal2/29/16 – Tuition appeal denied, student notified

Complaint:
I am rejecting this response because: my advisor had insisted I didn't withdraw from this courseIn my email exchanges between me and my professor he clearly stated it was still possible for me to get credit for this course as long as I submitted the final exam - which I was unable to do since you pulled me from the class days before itI had completed assignments and tests up until the day I was withdrawn the second time in an effort to catch up and get creditIf you're saying I'm responsible for the full tuition then I want my credits for this course and my transcripts updated reflecting those credits
Sincerely,
*** ***

We have pulled and reviewed all of the correspondence between the Instructor and the Ms***, and we have also spoken directly with the Instructor All of the documentation and information we have indicate that the Instructor encouraged Ms*** to do her best to pass the course but there were no arrangements made to provide extensions or other accommodations beyond a waiver of Late Penalty Points Finally, the university policy regarding Student Attendance is in the Student Portal and it clearly reflects the information belowAccordingly, we have also verified that Ms*** received the At Risk email after failing to attend her course after consecutive days before she was finally removed from class after consecutive days of non-attendance (which is a significant amount of time relative the the compressed 8-week length of our courses) Student Attendance Students are expected to actively engage in coursework every week in order to effectively master the course materialActive engagement is defined at CSU-Global as a submission of an assignment to the grade book, completing a mastery exercise, posting a response to a discussion board, responding to a student's post on a discussion board, or asking a question regarding the material to the instructor within a course forumAcademic engagement will be monitored on a weekly basisStudents who have not actively engaged for consecutive days will receive an At-Risk Email requesting that the student academically engage in their course within seven days or they will be administratively withdrawn from coursesIf the student has not participated after days, the student will be administratively withdrawn from the courseStudents are still responsible for all tuition charges related to courses if a student is withdrawn for non-attendance after the drop deadline each termWithdrawal for non-attendance may have an impact on financial aid eligibility

The student's work at Saylor is akin to CSU-Global's CBE offering and the Student Advisor will resend the email from the Registrar regarding the CBE offer to the student CSU-Global's standard 8-week course is an entirely different student experience from both the Saylor and CBE option and at a cost of $per course, as a state nonprofit university, it is not something that CSU-Global can or will provide free-of-charge Please note that the university has also provided the student the option to have CSU-Global pay for him to take the Saylor proctored exams for the courses that he is trying to transfer

Complaint:
I am rejecting this response because: I have never seen the email saying that CSU Global said they would cover the costs of the CBE examsI'm not saying they didn't send it, I'm saying I have not seen itAdditionally, I have never said I wanted a free classI have said multiple times now, that I would like to take these classes at CSU Global but at a discounted rateWhen I make these requests, CSU Global has ignored and continues to say I want something for freeI have stated that I would like a discount off these classes and I would take them at CSU GlobalInstead of accepting a rather small agreement, CSU Global has decided to avoid agreeing to a solutionI would take them after my capstone and would be willing to pay for them, at a discountThis was and is CSU Global's faultI asked for clarification and they provided me with wrong informationRegardless if it was stated elsewhereThey provided me contradicting informationThey're willing to eat the costs on a CBE but not eat some of the cost on classes I would take thereDoes it not sound fishy? Any other atmosphere, providing wrong information would result in a lawsuit and potentially losing quite a bit of moneyI'm asking for a discount on the two remaining classes, not for them to be free, due to what happenedIt's reasonable.
Sincerely,
*** ***

Revdex.com:
I have reviewed the response made by the business in reference to complaint ID 11089323, and find that this resolution is satisfactory to me. The school offered to amend the disbursement amount.The person I spoke with over the phone was very pleasant to work with. I really do believe that the school did everything to fix this problem. I was told that there was a misunderstanding and admitted that  the issue was handled improperly and they did what they needed to make things right. I hate to be the person to go as far as making a complaint but the school has made things right with me as a student and a consumer. 
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Complaint: 11424176
I am rejecting this response because: I have requested that CSU allow me to finish the last remaining classes at CSU Global for a discounted rate. CSU Global did not inform me that they would be willing to wave their exam fees that cost $250.
Sincerely,
[redacted]

Tell us why here...The student was taken out of her MTH 109 Winter A course twice for non-attendance and was also denied a tuition appeal for the course. The first time the student was withdrawn, she stated that she was in communication with her instructor so she was allowed to re-enter the course....

The student then posted her attendance in the course but did not participate again so she was withdrawn 21 days later for the second time. The student states in her complaint that she was mistakenly pulled from her courses but our research reflects that 1) the Withdrawals were intentional based on her lack of course participation and 2) the only work she submitted in six weeks were mastery exercises (interactive, online, repeatable exercises) so she would have failed the course had we not withdrawn her – her financial responsibility is the same with a Failure or a Withdrawal. As part of the tuition appeal process, the Committee pulled a report from our system that showed that the student did not complete any discussion board or critical thinking assignments (homework assignments that comprise the majority of points towards the final grade) during the first 6 weeks she was in the course (and our courses are only 8 weeks in length); and given our Late Policies she would have not been able to submit them for any points. In review of her case, the Committee found that she was properly withdrawn both times based on sufficient work completion, and her Appeal was denied.The timeline below is from our electronic tracking systems:11/9/15 – course started11/10/15 – student posted attendance11/19/15 – student contacts advisor about possible withdraw from the course – she indicates with her husband has left and that she is starting a new job she doesn’t think she can complete the course. Advisor provides info on withdrawing.11/24/15 – student calls advisor, concerned about how W/D would impact FA. Decides to stay in course. 12/2/15 – Student withdrawn for 3 weeks of non-attendance12/3/15 – Student says she has been doing mastery exercises in Connect and has been working with instructor. Is reinstated in course. Advisor makes it clear she needs to do critical thinking and discussion board assignments and that she needs to work with instructor on plan to get caught up.12/3/15 – Posts attendance in course12/21/15 – Advisor leaves message after student hasn’t participated in over 14 days. No response back from student.12/28/15 – Student withdrawn from course due to non-attendance. 12/29/15 – Student contacts advisor, says she completed mastery exercises on 12/27. Advisor lets her know she is over 21 days non-attendance and the withdraw will stand.2/3 – 2/9/16 – Communicates with advisor and Jerid about her situation and submits a tuition appeal2/29/16 – Tuition appeal denied, student notified

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 5, 2015/06/10) */
CSU-Global Campus' Satisfactory Academic Progress (SAP) policy is based on Federal Title IV regulations and is designed to inform, as early as possible, students who do not successfully complete coursework. Such unsuccessful course completion...

may jeopardize the student's' ability to complete their academic program. Per Federal regulations, the SAP policy has steps of severity (Warning, Probation, & Suspension) to prevent a student from continuing to pay for tuition or to take federal financial aid when they are not making progress toward graduation. Per Federal regulations, once a student has reached SAP Probation they are no longer eligible for Title IV funds.
The CSU-Global SAP policy has two components that must be met, both required by the Federal Government: 1) Grade Point Average (GPA) and 2) completion rate. Students need to maintain a GPA that meets graduation requirements (2.0 for undergraduate programs and 3.0 for graduate programs) and a completion rate of 67%. The completion rate protects students from retaking a course multiple times, which could prevent them from completing program requirements within 150% of the total credits.
In this specific case, the student began studies in Fall 2011 and was placed on SAP Warning on November 10, 2011, after failing to successfully complete required coursework. At this time, an Academic Success Plan was initiated via email correspondence. After continued performance issues and after not meeting the conditions of this collaboratively developed Success Plan, the student was placed on SAP probation on January 13, 2012. In each case the student was provided a success plan via email that included the necessary conditions to return to good academic standing, including the expected grades and clearly articulated time frame required to complete the courses.
Due to a substandard completion rate, the student moved to SAP suspension on 7/9/2014. Her multiple attempts to successfully complete the same course moved her below the 67% threshold needed to graduate. In Spring and Fall 2014 the student appealed the decision based on CSU-Global policy and was denied by a committee. The student appealed to the Provost in February 2015 and a final review was conducted. At that time it was determined that CSU-Global policy was followed, communication to the student was accurate, and that in the best interest of the student, readmission would be denied.
With respect to the withdraw from the course, records indicate that the student withdrew herself from the course in question, which occurred in her first semester in fall 2011 after having moved to SAP warning. Even after the withdraw, the student had additional opportunities to return to good academic standing prior to suspension in July 2014.
Though the student did indicate in the appeals from Spring and Fall 2014 that there had been an illness, by that point the student was at a place where graduating within the 150% completion rate would be unlikely based on her previous academic experience. The student never sought an accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act and had the student done so, an accommodation would not exempt the student from the SAP policy.
Finally, a member of our student success team will reach out to the student to explain in more detail the reason for the suspension and any options the student may have, though readmission may not be in the best interest of the student.
Initial Consumer Rebuttal /* (2000, 7, 2015/06/23) */
(The consumer indicated he/she ACCEPTED the response from the business.)
The university has granted me readmission along with the opportunity to set up services with the disability department. I am looking forward to completing my degree. They were very helpful and accommodating.

In reviewing the account, it appears that the student's aid was set up to disburse over the course of the trimester, however, the student only attempted courses in the first term of the trimester and his package was not readjusted to accommodate his change in enrollment. We believe that there may...

have been miscommunication in the conveyance of information regarding the student’s enrollment plan, disbursement amounts, and schedules. We have amended the student’s account issue and have discussed the situation with the student on February 4, 2016 to fully explain the financial aid disbursement process and how the terms of enrollment also impact the overall eligibility within a trimester. We believe that the student is now satisfied and we are making sure that we have made changes on our end to ensure that other students do not have a similar issue in the future.

Student selected employer reimbursement as the financing method from the start of the program, and did not indicate any plans to utilize federal financial aid at the start of the program.  Under our tuition deferment option, students who are receiving employer benefits have until 30 days after...

the end of each term to pay their tuition. The student did sign the tuition deferment agreement stating that they understood that they were responsible for the account balance regardless of whether or not payment was received from the employer. We allowed the student to defer tuition payments based on the employer reimbursement financing method, and when the account went past due the student was not allowed to continue in any further courses so that the balance would not be increased even further.  At this time, the student is not eligible to receive Title IV Federal Financial Aid at our school as we did not receive all required eligibility documentation necessary.  The student has taken and passed all of the courses taken with CSU-Global Campus and does owe the balance on the account. Due to difficulties with the employer the student did not receive the reimbursement as expected and has been unable to pay the balance owed to the school. The student did attempt to set up a payment plan with the school but did not make any of the agreed upon payments, and therefore the account was referred to collections. Based on requirements to receive Title IV Federal Financial Aid the student does not qualify for federal loans and would not be able to use any of the federal direct loans to cover this balance at the university.  We have attempted to reach out to the student to discuss the account and potential payment options.

We are a state, public, nonprofit institution whose only mission is to serve in the best interests of students towards workplace success and that unfortunately we cannot afford to pay for students’ tuition. Students have the ability to choose the financing method that they wish to use to pay for their tuition.  In this case, the financing option the student chose did not come through even though she did successfully complete the courses and now owes the balance.  She is not eligible for Title IV funding until she provides the clearance letter and completes the verification process.  We have been in contact with the student over the phone and are working through her financial aid issues and trying to come up with a resolution for her situation.

Initial Business Response /* (1000, 11, 2015/05/22) */
CSU-Global Campus carefully reviewed this student's claim and determined (personal information omitted):
* Student's enrollment status was reported correctly throughout her time at CSU-Global.
o Status change of "less than half time" was...

due to withdraw from the university.
* Requesting In-School Deferment is the responsibility of the student. Student requested it on 4/26/2015 via email.
* On 4/27/15, the Advisor assisted with the In-School Deferment form and responded to the email.
We are unsure if the student was aware that her loans were being placed in temporary forbearance, why didn't she notify us that an In-School Deferment form was needed? it is our understanding that in order to accept the forbearance terms and conditions, she would have been notified it was needed.
Additionally, Great Lakes should have been able to view her enrollment details in NSLDS.
We are happy to assist the student in resolving this matter. Our suggestion is we can send a enrollment validation letter to Great Lakes to assist with mending her Enrollment Status to re-instate her grace period.

Tell us why here...Our research into the student complaint revealed that he was informed by a CSU-Global Student Advisor that the Saylor courses would be accepted as Transfer Credit. However, what was not explained to the student by the Student Advisor (although the information is found on our...

website and in the Student Catalog) was that CSU-Global requires a Transcript from the transferring institution or through the American Council on Education (“ACE”), and that Saylor (according to its website) will only provide a Transcript through ACE if the student takes a proctored exam.   In taking responsibility for the lack of complete information provided by the Student Advisor, CSU-Global has offered the student two solutions: 1) CSU-Global will pay both the $40 registration fee and the $25 proctored exam fees for the student to take the two exams at Saylor so that CSU-Global can obtain an official transcript for the transfer credits; or 2) CSU-Global will waive its $250 Competency-based Exam fees for 2 of its three-credit courses ($500 total value).  The two options have been communicated to the student via email from our Registrar.