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 institutions that offer the course in this modality, even barring the professional registration of graduates under the most diverse justifications; all, it should be noted, illegal.
In March this year there was a massive action of 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 records of students who completed their studies in distance learning courses.
After 6 months of that uprising, the scenario remains the same, being earlier this week published Resolution No. 68, of 12.9.2019, of the Regional Council of Physiotherapy and Occupational Therapy of the 3rd Region (Crefito-3), prohibiting the registration of physiotherapists and occupational therapists coming from courses conducted in distance learning modality.
Justifying its decision, CAU-BR claimed 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 the same vein, Crefito-3 justified the issue of that Resolution on thegrounds that EaD training in Health areas, especially in Physical Therapy or Educational Therapy, is an inadequate method for professional training, because it does not ensure safety and quality in training, nor the minimum conditions legally required for professional training.
To have an idea of the impact of these decisions, 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.
As for the Physiotherapy course, there are 44 HEIs authorized to offer it in the distance learning modality, for more than 140,000 students.
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 professional registration requests due to the modality of the course offer only harms the students and the educational institutions, without there being any impact for 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, which, 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 attendance or distance learning modality, being certain that there is no legal 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.
In light of the illegal levies by the professional councils, both the Union of Higher Education Establishment Maintenance Entities in the State of São Paulo (SEMESP) and the Brazilian Association of Higher Education Maintenance Entities (ABMES) filed actions questioning the legality of the prohibitions.
In addition to the above-mentioned Councils, there are several isolated cases in which other Councils, making use of less explicit subterfuges, make it difficult to register professionals who have completed distance learning courses.
In our view, such measures are abusive and illegal, since there is no legal difference between the validity of diplomas granted to students concluding undergraduate courses, whether face-to-face or distance learning.
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 provide advice related to the subject.