The U.S. Department of Education finalized a rule intended to increase competition between accrediting agencies by “lowering unnecessary (federal) barriers” and make it easier for students to transfer credits, according to an Oct. 29 news release.
Accreditation is the process of independent agencies evaluating higher education institutions for quality assurance, said Antoinette Flores, the vice president of federal policy and government relations at the Council for Higher Education Accreditation, an organization that advocates for accreditation policy.
The accreditation process is done via peer review and evaluates a university based on the agency’s criteria, including curriculum, faculty qualifications and student learning, Flores said. Flores said the Department of Education may not have the authority to regulate transfer credit rules, but that making it easier to transfer credits would be beneficial for students.
For a student to receive federal financial aid, their university must be accredited by an agency recognized by the Department of Education, according to the Department.
The new rule reduces the barrier for agencies to receive federal recognition by decreasing the time required for approval. The rule also requires universities to fully disclose transfer credit policies when a request to transfer credit is denied.
Accrediting agencies are non-governmental associations part of the “Triad,” or the three areas of higher education oversight: federal government, state governments and accrediting agencies. Prior to the new rule, the standards and policies around college credit transfers and accreditation were left to each institution. The provisions of the final rule go into effect July 1, 2027.
Robbie Ha, a senior policy analyst at EdTrust, an advocacy group for expanding access to education, said the Department of Education has framed the rule as an increased emphasis on student outcomes, but it will actually reduce standards for accreditors.
Ha also said the new rules will make it easier for government officials to interfere with accreditor decisions.
“The rule would create new avenues for federal and state politicians to put their hands in the cookie jar of accreditor decisions and academic decisions that should be independent,” Ha said. “This rule would transform accreditors into enforcers of this administration’s interpretation of what academic freedom, what viewpoint neutrality and the First Amendment mean.”
Wesley Whistle, former senior advisor in the Office of the Under Secretary at the U.S. Department of Education, said the “race to the bottom” in accreditation runs the risk of more “fraudulent schools,” which could worsen student experiences.
“They have said that having more accreditors and competition among accreditors is a good thing, and it’ll improve student outcomes,” Whistle said. “That’s just not how it works when you’re talking about a regulatory environment where, if you’re a college, you’re going to go to the lowest common denominator to make it easier on you.”
The University’s accreditor, the Commission on Colleges and Universities could not be reached for comment. University officials did not respond to request for comment.
