In recent months, new ad hoc structures have emerged, however, specifically to address the issues surrounding the development of telecommunications networks. Some states have designated a statewide or multicampus system board as the primary decision entity, while others use the state department of education or an executive office of state government to facilitate telecommunications planning. Most states, however, use some combination of several entities to conduct planning for different uses of the information infrastructure. In some instances, states have little or no comprehensive planning for telecommunications, which often results in grassroots efforts by higher education institutions to build their own networks. The traditional approaches to program approval and review at the state and system levels fit well with the way in which traditional, non-technology based programs have developed.
New programs emerge from individual faculty or discrete departments within a single institution.
Requests for authorization and funding travel up the hierarchical structure and are eventually evaluated by a state or system board on the basis of their fit with institutional missions, resources and costs, and external demands and political support for the program. Developments in information technology and distance learning, however, challenge many of the assumptions upon which program development policies have been based. New consortia delivering programs at a distance and involving multiple partners which cross traditional role and mission boundaries, as well as state and national boundaries, will certainly challenge the criteria upon which program authorizations have been made in the past. State and system boards also will need to rethink their program development strategies. A third piece of the puzzle is state financing strategies.