A movement to reshape the landscape of American higher education is gaining momentum, spearheaded by new accrediting agencies with conservative backing. These organizations aim to challenge the established system that oversees quality control for universities and colleges, a role that directly impacts access to billions of dollars in federal student aid.
In March, a meeting near the Hartsfield-Jackson Atlanta International Airport brought together state officials and proponents of this new approach. Discussions centered on creating alternatives to existing accreditors, with a focus on promoting intellectual diversity and pushing back against what some participants described as ideological impositions on campuses.
Key Takeaways
- New college accreditation agencies are being formed by a coalition of Southern states, including Georgia.
- These groups aim to offer an alternative to established accreditors, citing concerns over ideology and bureaucracy.
- Proponents are focused on concepts like "intellectual diversity" and reducing administrative requirements.
- Critics express concern that these new bodies could be politically driven and may not uphold rigorous academic standards.
- The U.S. Department of Education must approve any new accreditor before its member institutions can access federal financial aid.
The Push for an Alternative System
For decades, a handful of regional bodies have held significant power over higher education. Accreditation is a critical, non-negotiable requirement for nearly every college and university in the United States. Without it, institutions are cut off from federal funding, including Pell Grants and student loans, which are the financial lifeblood for many schools and their students.
Now, a coalition of states including Georgia is working to establish a new accrediting agency. The effort is driven by a belief that the current system has become what they term "antiquated," "bureaucratic," and ideologically biased. Proponents want to create a process that is less burdensome and more aligned with their educational priorities.
This initiative gained public attention following a meeting in Atlanta where the agenda included sessions on "the imposition of ideologies" related to diversity, equity, and inclusion. An opening presentation was reportedly titled, “What do you know, Trump won. Now what?” This has fueled speculation about the political motivations behind the movement.
Why Accreditation Matters
Accreditation serves as a seal of approval, signifying that an institution meets certain standards of academic quality and financial stability. It is a peer-review process intended to be independent of government, yet it functions as a gatekeeper for federal funds.
The Gatekeeper Role
The U.S. Department of Education does not accredit institutions itself. Instead, it recognizes accrediting agencies that it deems reliable authorities on academic quality. If an accreditor loses federal recognition, all the schools under its purview risk losing access to federal student aid, a potentially catastrophic outcome.
Some institutions have faced severe consequences under the current system. For example, Morris Brown College and Paine College, two Georgia-based institutions, have previously struggled with accreditation issues, highlighting the high stakes involved in the oversight process.
Concerns Over Political Influence
The emergence of these new agencies has raised questions among education experts about their independence and rigor. A key concern is whether these bodies will be driven by political ideology rather than objective academic standards. The involvement of individuals connected to the Trump administration has amplified these worries.
Documents obtained through public records requests show communication between organizers and officials within the Biden administration's Department of Education. However, some experts find the timing and nature of these discussions concerning, suggesting a potential for political coordination.
“It would be worrisome if they think that these rules should be applied differently to them,” said Antoinette Flores, a higher education expert with the Center for American Progress, commenting on the process new accreditors must follow.
The U.S. Department of Education has stated it is open to engaging with all stakeholders on accreditation reform. In a statement, the department affirmed its commitment to a thorough review process for any new applicants seeking recognition.
A Controversial Precedent
One consultant involved with the new Georgia-led agency, Anthony Bieda, previously led the Accrediting Council for Independent Colleges and Schools (ACICS). ACICS had its federal recognition terminated in 2016 following what was described as a "profound" failure of compliance, particularly in its oversight of large for-profit colleges that later collapsed amid fraud allegations. The agency was later temporarily resurrected by the Trump administration before being shut down again under the Biden administration.
The Path to Federal Recognition
For any new accrediting agency to become a legitimate player, it must first gain recognition from the U.S. Department of Education. This is a rigorous and lengthy process designed to ensure that any new body is capable of upholding quality standards.
The National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity (NACIQI), an independent board, advises the Secretary of Education on these matters. Any new applicant, such as the group being formed by the Southern states, will have to present its case to this committee and prove it meets all federal requirements.
Eric Johnson, an adviser to the new agency, has stated that the organization expects to undergo a "thorough" process and is confident it can earn the trust of the department. He emphasized that the goal is to create a respected and effective alternative in the accreditation field.
What Changes Are Being Proposed?
The organizers of these new agencies argue they want to streamline the process and focus on core academic principles. They have criticized existing accreditors for what they call "ideology-driven" initiatives and administrative "bloat."
Their stated goals include:
- Reducing Bureaucracy: Simplifying the extensive documentation and reporting required for accreditation.
- Promoting Intellectual Diversity: Ensuring that a range of viewpoints are represented and respected on college campuses.
- Focusing on Student Outcomes: Shifting emphasis from institutional processes to tangible results for students.
Critics, however, fear that a focus on "viewpoint diversity" could be used to push a partisan agenda or to weaken standards related to diversity and inclusion. The Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA), a non-governmental oversight body, has welcomed the idea of competition but stresses that all accreditors must be held to the same high standards.
“So what we don't want to do is create a system where some accreditors are treated differently than others,” said Nasser Paydar, president of CHEA. “We want everybody to go through the same process.”
The debate over these new agencies represents a fundamental disagreement about the purpose and practice of higher education oversight in the United States. As these organizations move forward in their quest for federal recognition, their progress will be closely watched by educators, policymakers, and students across the country.
