"Reforming Accreditation": E.O. threatens higher education accreditors with diversity requirements (except one)

On April 23, Trump signed an executive order titled “Reforming Accreditation To Strengthen Higher Education.” The order seeks to eliminate “diversity, equity, and inclusion’’ programs but require “intellectual diversity” in higher education by changing accreditation requirements and bureaucratic processes.

What is Accreditation?

Accreditation is the process by which colleges and universities are recognized as meeting standards of educational quality which will prepare students for work in their desired fields and carry weight with future employers. Many federal and state financial aid programs require a school to be accredited for their students to receive aid. Accreditors are the organizations recognized by the government and awarded authority to define standards of a high-quality institution or program, and to assess schools based on those standards.

What does this order do?

This executive order accuses accreditors of failing to ensure that colleges and universities maintain a high quality of education, but most of the executive order addresses what it calls “unlawful discrimination in accreditation-related activity under the guise of ‘diversity, equity, and inclusion’ initiatives.” “Diversity, equity, and inclusion” (DEI) refers to a wide range of initiatives that are designed to eliminate discriminatory practices against racial minorities, women, LGBTQ+ people, and veterans, not to create discrimination against other groups. Still, this executive order notes that affirmative action in college admissions was recently barred by the Supreme Court and orders an investigation of other unspecified forms of “unlawful discrimination.”

While attempting to strike diversity initiatives for groups that face discrimination, the order requires that these institutions instead “support and appropriately prioritize intellectual diversity amongst faculty.” That’s code for hiring more MAGA-aligned teachers.

With this executive order, this administration threatens to “deny, monitor, suspend, or terminate” the authority of any accreditor which is found to have violated federal law, which puts the status of schools they accredit in jeopardy. It calls out the American Bar Association (ABA) and the Liaison Committee on Medical Education (LCME), which accredit law schools and medical schools, respectively. However, the ABA already suspended its DEI standards in February, following previous executive orders condemning DEI practices.. In fact, in the wake of Trump’s crackdown on DEI policies since taking office, many accreditors have already rolled back or softened their DEI standards.

Other reforms in the executive order seek to cut down on the bureaucracy of the accreditation industry by streamlining the processes for new accreditors to be recognized, and for schools to switch accreditors if they choose. Further, they encourage experimentation with new models of education by embracing technological advances, as well as updates to the accreditation handbook for better transparency. Accreditors have called for many of these reforms in the past, and are issuing mixed responses to this executive order.

What do people think?

Proponents say that this order will refocus higher education on student results and away from what they call discriminatory practices and bureaucratic bloat. They point to graduation rates and graduates who are unable to achieve desired employment and financial success after college as victims of a failed accreditation system. In her statement, Secretary of Education Linda McMahon said, “President Trump’s Executive Order will bring long-overdue change by accelerating the recognition of new accreditors and refocusing existing accreditors on helping member institutions improve the student outcomes families care most about.”

Critics describe the order as a power-grab and a threat to academic freedom. The American Association of University Professors said it would strip “educational decision making from educators and reshape higher education to fit an authoritarian political agenda.” The Council of Regional Accrediting Commissions (C-RAC) released a fact-checking analysis of this order in which it denies and rebukes the criticism of accreditors as abusive, discriminatory, and failing to enforce high standards of education. In defending their integrity and mission, C-RAC points to a record of unending improvement and a regular pattern of taking actions against schools which are underperforming. They stand their ground to defend what they see as an attack on their institution, while also showing a willingness to work with the administration for reforms which they acknowledge are necessary.

What happens next?

The Department of Education is already beginning to implement part of this order by issuing new guidance to simplify the process of a school switching to a different accreditor. The process to switch accreditors will now take place within 30 days, with an assumption of approval if the Education Department doesn’t respond within that time frame. This means the applications to switch accreditors will undergo very little review, which has been applauded by proponents as cutting down on government meddling and admonished by critics as an allowance of schools to evade oversight.

Further implementation can be expected, although it is possible for legal challenges to impact those efforts.