Overview
Good morning! We realize that it has been a while since you received a CSPEN email in your inbox, but we are hoping that this email will catch you up on the major event that occurred this week – the U.S. Department of Education’s announcement and publication of the Accreditation Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM). Here is a brief update, which will be followed by an in-depth summary on Monday.
Accreditation, Innovation, and Modernization Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM)
As noted in the Overview above, midweek the Department shared a press release (us.list-manage.com/Zv829bIwePY?e=05bce952ad&c2id=828e2f13ae2569477ba2b7da4ef30812) announcing the publication of the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) entitled, “Accreditation, Innovation, and Modernization: The Secretary’s Recognition of Accrediting Agencies: Institutional Eligibility Under the Higher Education Act of 1965, as Amended, Student Assistance General Provisions.” (us.list-manage.com/qamOg960Hvz?e=05bce952ad&c2id=828e2f13ae2569477ba2b7da4ef30812)
The NPRM is the result of the Federal Negotiated Rulemaking of the Accreditation, Innovation, and Modernization Committee which was convened by the Department to develop sweeping changes to Title IV, Subpart 2 – Accrediting Agency Recognition of Part H of the Higher Education Act of 1965, as amended based upon President Trump’s Executive Order 14279, Reforming Accreditation to Strengthen Higher Education (us.list-manage.com/1Cui32H6gy7?e=05bce952ad&c2id=828e2f13ae2569477ba2b7da4ef30812) .
As stated in the NPRM, “the goal of these regulatory changes is to realign the Secretary’s criteria for recognition of accrediting agencies to promote high-quality, high value, and affordable education for students that—
* Promotes such academic programs and activities at higher education institutions that are focused on student outcomes and are free from unlawful discrimination and other violations of Federal law;
* Reduces barriers that limit competition, innovation, and new education models that advance credential and degree completion;
* Holds institutions accountable for discrimination and other unlawful acts; and
* Advances academic freedom, intellectual inquiry, and student learning by ensuring that accreditation requires that institutions support and prioritize intellectual diversity among faculty.
Based upon our initial review it appears that the Department made only very limited modifications to the consensus proposals agreed upon by the AIM Committee. On key topics such as transfer of credit, the definition used to determine if an accrediting agency is separate and independent from a related, associated or affiliated trade association or membership organization, and issues related to outcomes have not been changed.
