The position of certain Class Councils regarding distance learning is nothing new. Since 2010, the Regional Council of Social Service, for example, has undertaken a real journey against such courses, even barring the professional registration of graduates, under the most diverse justifications; all, it should be noted, illegal.
More recently, in March of this year, there was a massive action by such bodies against distance learning courses, with the issue of resolutions by the Federal Councils of Architecture and Urbanism (CAU-BR), Dentistry (CFO) and Veterinary Medicine (CFMV), in order to refuse the professional registrations of students who completed their studies in distance learning courses.
Justifying the decision, CAU-BR claims that one of the principles that underlie Architecture and Urbanism and Landscaping is the necessary geographical condition, without prejudice to those of historical and cultural character, being impossible to pass this experience of the teacher/student relationship at a distance.
In order to have an idea of the impact of this decision, today there are 32 authorized teaching institutions to offer the Architecture and Urbanism course to 84.000 students, in more than 400 distance education poles, spread all over the country.
Although the Councils point out the existence of serious performance problems in distance learning courses, it is a fact that the extreme decision to refuse registration requests only harms students and educational institutions, without any prejudice to the responsible for regulating these courses, i.e., the Ministry of Education.
Article 209 of the Federal Constitution provides that education is free to private initiative, provided that the general education standards are complied with and the necessary authorization and evaluation procedures are carried out by the government.
Freedom of action - provided the general regulatory and evaluative requirements are met - is even clearer when it comes to universities that, under the terms of art. 207 of the constitutional text, enjoy didactic-scientific, administrative and financial and patrimonial management autonomy.
The constitutional text is express, therefore, when disposing about the prerogatives and conditioning factors for the offer of higher education throughout the Country, whether in the in-class or distance learning modality, and it is certain that there is no legal or normative provision that grants the professional Councils the possibility of performing any kind of value judgment on the quality of higher education courses taught by regularly accredited institutions.
A few days ago, both the Union of Sponsoring Entities of Higher Education Establishments in the State of São Paulo (SEMESP) and the Brazilian Association of Sponsoring Entities of Higher Education (ABMES) filed lawsuits questioning the legality of the bans.
In addition to the professional Councils mentioned above, we are aware of the existence of several isolated cases in which other Councils, making use of less explicit subterfuges, make it difficult to register professionals graduating from distance learning courses.
This proviso is completely abusive and illegal, since there is no difference between the validity of diplomas granted to students completing undergraduate courses, whether in person or at a distance.
In cases of this nature, the consequences arising from the intransigence of the Councils tend to reflect on the educational institutions that, not infrequently, are sued by students in actions for damages.
If your institution has been questioned by any professional Council, or if there is any lawsuit resulting from their actions, it is highly recommended to hire a professional specialized in the regulatory meanderings for a consistent and effective defense.
Barcellos Tucunduva Advogados has an area specialized in Educational Law and is available to answer all questions related to the subject.
