|
|
 |
|
The views expressed on this page are soley
those of the author and do not
necessarily represent the views of County
News Online
|
 |
Inside Higher Education
Net Neutrality
Rollback Concerns Colleges
The creation of internet fast lanes could come at a high cost to higher
education, experts on technology and learning warn.
By Lindsay McKenzie
November 29, 2017
Last week the chairman of the Federal Communications Commission
published his plan to dismantle Obama-era regulations protecting "net
neutrality" -- the idea that all web content should be treated equally
by internet service providers.
Under the FCC proposal, due to be voted on Dec. 14 by the
majority-Republican commission, ISPs would have the freedom to slow
down or even block websites or online services that do not serve their
commercial interests. They could also charge their customers a fee to
prioritize the delivery of their content through the creation of
internet “fast lanes.”
Higher education groups have been united in their condemnation of the
net neutrality rollback, which they say could make it more difficult
for students and the public to access educational resources, and
potentially impose huge costs on institutions.
Jarret Cummings, director of policy and government relations at
Educause, said the FCC proposal was concerning for higher education on
“multiple levels” and would likely have a significant negative impact
on higher education “and the internet as a whole.”
A High Price for Higher Ed
The proposal, put forward by Republican FCC Chairman Ajit Pai, would
reverse strong rules protecting net neutrality that were established by
the (then majority-Democratic) FCC in 2015. Pai, formerly a lawyer for
Verizon, was nominated to lead the agency by President Trump in
January. Having served as an FCC commissioner since 2012, Pai has made
no secret of the fact he thinks the 2015 regulations were a mistake and
an example of government overreach. His appointment was celebrated by
telecom companies.
If Pai's plan is approved and ISPs are allowed to create a “tiered”
system of access, which could prioritize sites willing to pay for
faster speeds, higher education institutions may be forced to pay fees
to ensure that their online content, particularly bandwidth-guzzling
video, continues to be accessible to students and the public at
workable speeds, said Cummings.
Third-party services like email, particularly those that are
cloud-based and require a fast and secure internet connection, may also
be forced to pay ISPs to use the “fast lane” with increased costs
passed on to customers. Jon Fansmith, director of government relations
at the American Council on Education, said the cost increase to higher
education institutions would likely be “massive,” as “there is no part
of modern higher education that doesn’t depend on the internet,” he
said. He added that much of this cost would likely be passed on to
students “for no appreciable benefit.”
While the impact of the changes may sound trivial -- some webpages
taking longer than others to load, for instance -- Fansmith said the
net effect would be substantial and detrimental. “Imagine you’re a
student taking an online exam, or trying to submit work by a deadline,”
he said. The ability to participate in collaborative research in real
time could also be impeded, said Fansmith.
Another potential impact of the FCC proposal, though not one Fansmith
says he thinks is likely, is a limitation of free speech. Internet
providers could, if they wished, block access to content their users
find objectionable, said Fansmith. This could have a chilling impact on
research on controversial issues such as gun control or abortion, said
Fansmith.
A Widening Digital Divide
Though some universities have private networks or are part of National
Research and Education Networks that will not be affected by the FCC
rule change, many institutions still rely on commercial internet
providers to send and receive information, said Cummings. Regardless of
which networks are used on campus, students accessing content off
campus or on their mobile phones could still encounter issues.
Janna Anderson, professor of communications and director of the
Imagining the Internet Center at Elon University, said she was
particularly concerned about the impact of dismantling net neutrality
on distance education. She said the introduction of paid prioritization
from ISPs could “crush the potential for amazing breakthroughs in
education for all.”
Many online educators were experimenting with technologies such as
augmented and virtual reality, which could “much more effectively carry
the opportunity for a first-rate higher education to anyone, anywhere,”
Anderson said. But as these technologies would require substantial
bandwidth, they may no longer be accessible at usable speeds to
students accessing content from home.
“Added costs and complexities that may accompany a rejection of net
neutrality principles will make it difficult to develop and implement
these education innovations and deliver them to the public far and
wide,” said Anderson. Such a change, she warned, “will further widen
the digital divide.”
Another divide could emerge between those with the resources to pay for
prioritization and those without, said Jessica Sebeok, associate vice
president and counsel for policy at the Association of American
Universities. This consequence of the rule change would particularly
affect community colleges and smaller state institutions, she said.
Kris Shaffer, an instructional technology specialist at the University
of Mary Washington, said many students working from home already have
slow internet, making it difficult for them to access course materials.
If ISPs start charging customers more for content such as video, this
issue may get worse, he said.
At Mary Washington, many students take part in an institutionwide
initiative called Domain of One’s Own, in which they are encouraged to
create their own websites and share the content with friends. Shaffer
says the university works with small companies to provide this service
to students -- companies that, he worries, wouldn’t have the cash to
buy prioritization from ISPs, potentially making the websites less
accessible to the public.
“The internet was invented for universities. If educational content is
now going to take a back seat … it’s disheartening, to say the least,”
said Shaffer.
Potential Legal Challenges
Going forward, both Cummings and Fansmith agree that it is likely the
FCC will vote to roll back net neutrality regulations next month. Legal
challenges from open-internet advocates are likely to follow, however.
If the changes hold, it is unlikely that colleges will notice
differences overnight, said Cummings, but the internet will slowly
change. Tracking whether access to institutional content is being
restricted or slowed will be tricky, but even if it is observed,
Cummings said he thought it was unlikely that individual institutions
would have the resources to take legal action to rectify it.
The FCC says that ISPs should be transparent about how they implement
the rule change, and suggests that many won’t make large changes for
fear of losing out to competitors. But in many areas, there is no real
competition between internet providers, said Cummings. While ISPs such
as Comcast have said they do not plan to introduce paid prioritization,
the providers are said to be supportive of the FCC proposal.
|
|
|
|
