TEACH Act Interpretation

["John Farquhar" <John.Farquhar@xxxxxxx>]

Georgia -

I'm very happy to receive your response. The concern here is not just
the burden of implementing the conditions and limitations, but that the
institution becomes principally responsible for "enforcing" such
compliance. It is perceived that in relation to Fair Use this statute
shifts liability from the decisions made by individual faculty to the
controls implemented by the institution. If the institution now has
greater liability for compliance, there might be an expectation that
"full compliance" would be "policing".

By the way, I'm told that contributing to this interpretation is a
presentation that you made at NWACC last June. Several individuals from
my institution left your session with the impression that many (if not
most) schools were finding that compliance with TEACH was too burdensome
to implement. While it has been difficult for me to determine how many
schools have been proceeding with TEACH Act policies, it appears to me
that many are moving ahead. And, while I've encountered a few schools
concerned (or mostly confused) about how they might comply, I've found
no other school who has completely rejected using the exceptions made
available through the Act.

Ultimately, I think I can get our administration to reconsider if I can
show that the compliance bar is not out of reach. Other schools seem to
rely upon a faculty education campaign coupled with technology such as
Blackboard and video streaming. We already make use of these
technologies. To shift present thought, I believe I must demonstrate
that the general trend by institutions such as ours is one of complying
with TEACH (through existing technology and reasonable policy).

Thanks again for your thoughts.

jf

________________________________
John D. Farquhar, Ph.D.
Manager, Instructional Development
Academic Technology & User Services
Western Washington University
Bellingham, WA 98225

(O) 360.650.6538
(F) 360.650.2816
_______________________________