Newly proposed college accreditation standards could affect federal borrowing and oversight on higher education.<\/p>\n
The Department of Education<\/a> proposed new changes to accreditation on Aug. 20 in a document titled \u201cAccreditation, Innovation and Modernization.\u201d<\/a> Proposed modifications include prioritizing \u201cintellectual diversity\u201d among faculty, lowering the requirements for initial recognition as an accreditor and allowing universities to work with multiple accreditation agencies. Critics are worried that these new policies will politicize the accreditation system.<\/p>\n Accreditation<\/a> is a review process that holds higher education institutions to quality standards, measured through data points like economic return and program retention rates. Accreditors are non-government, non-profit organizations that regularly check to ensure that accredited universities are maintaining sufficient educational quality.\u00a0<\/p>\n This shift aligns with President Donald Trump\u2019s 2025 executive order<\/a> to overhaul higher education standards, eliminate<\/a> DEI initiatives and assess tax spending.<\/p>\n The proposed changes are in the public comment stage<\/a> until Sept. 21. If a final ruling is issued by Nov. 1, changes are expected to go into effect<\/a> by July 1, 2027.<\/p>\n Heather McCambly, an assistant professor in educational foundations, organizations and policy<\/a>, believes these new changes could have a significant impact on federal student loans and federal grants by lowering the standard for universities to become accredited.<\/p>\n \u201cWe care about accreditation for many reasons,\u201d McCambly said. \u201cIt\u2019s what tells us that a school is not a scam, and it tells us what quality education should look like. Policy wise, it\u2019s extra important because it determines what schools students can use federal aid at.\u201d<\/p>\n Mostly, McCambly said she is concerned about how institutions can maintain independence while \u201cfolding\u201d to suggestions by the federal government such as \u201cintellectual diversity\u201d standards. Scholars debate the varied definitions<\/a> and implications of the phrase \u201cintellectual diversity,\u201d though it is commonly associated<\/a> with political affiliation by critics.\u00a0<\/p>\n \u201cThe things that are most threatening to the independence of higher education, and therefore the independence of learning in the U.S., is new regulations around academic freedom, and the idea of intellectual diversity,\u201d McCambly said.<\/p>\n McCambly said while some aspects of the document are considered less controversial, such as its emphasis on measured standards<\/a> like program retention, employment outcomes and economic returns, she believes that changes like the prioritization of intellectual diversity are intended as more direct political intervention.<\/p>\n \u201cOne of the most nefarious aspects of this proposed shift in accreditation policy is the federal government making direct inroads to control expression on campus in very direct ways,\u201d McCambly said.\u00a0<\/p>\n McCambly believes that this initiative would increase the presence of viewpoints that are \u201cnot based in scientific fact,\u201d such as anti-vaccine rhetoric<\/a>, on university and college campuses.<\/p>\n \u201cIt is a direct attempt to punish ideological differences between faculty, students and the [college] administration,\u201d McCambly said. \u201cWe are seeing these \u2018viewpoint diversity\u2019 initiatives<\/a> that are coming up across the country that are driven by the far right, emphasizing far right viewpoints, even when they are not based in fact.\u201d<\/p>\n McCambly is also concerned that new rules allow institutions to \u201cshop around\u201d for accreditors that fit lowered standards, a practice that was previously restricted.<\/p>\n \u201cUnder current and historic policy, you have to show a good reason why you would change accreditors because you don\u2019t want them saying \u2018I\u2019m going to find an easier accreditor who\u2019s just going to say \u2018I\u2019m good\u2019\u2019 even when something is fundamentally wrong,\u201d McCambly said.<\/p>\n McCambly said this change could create a \u201crace to the bottom\u201d in which institutions start to adhere to lower standards, and accrediting agencies are financially incentivised to drop standards in order to keep clients.<\/p>\n