by Carol D.
Who gets educated—and who gets to decide what education looks like? Those questions reach far beyond college campuses. They shape what students are taught, what professors are free to teach and research, whether topics like women’s health are studied, how doctors, lawyers, and teachers are trained, and whose voices are heard in the classroom. It underlies how voters vote. Decisions about higher education, including law school and medical school, help shape not just universities, but the future of American society. All of this is influenced and shaped by the Accreditation process.
Historically, accreditation is an independent review process that determines whether a college or university meets standards for educational quality and institutional integrity. The Federal Department of Education certifies accreditors. Then those accreditors certify universities, colleges and professional schools like law, medicine, education and engineering.
Even President Nixon stated, “Institutional autonomy and academic freedom should be strengthened by Federal support, never threatened with Federal domination.” But this is no longer your grandpa’s Republican party. Trump declared: “Our secret weapon will be the college accreditation system.” Translated, this means that the radical conservative right hopes to use accreditation as a tool to reshape the fabric of American society.
Why is accreditation so powerful? Accreditation is a potent tool because it significantly influences educational institutional reputations and the federal money these institutions receive. While its actions are typically indirect and operate through arcane federal rules, they enable an accreditor to effect systemic long-term changes that can and do have broad impact, all while flying largely under the radar. In other words…it’s a potential “secret weapon,” ripe for Trump to exploit.
Accreditation is tied directly to federal money. Colleges must be accredited by a federally recognized accreditor for their students to receive Pell Grants, federal loans, and other federal aid. If a school loses that accreditation, it could lose access to a major source of funding. This would make it hard to keep operating and could eventually force them to close.
Federal student aid reaches more than half of all U.S. undergraduates. About 6 in 10 recipients are women, and nearly 4 in 10 are Black or LatinX. First-generation students—who make up more than half of U.S. undergraduates under the most common definition—also rely heavily on federal aid.
Changes that the federal Department of Education makes in the rules for accreditation are an indirect but powerful way to pressure universities to do Trump’s bidding. The government would not need to tell professors exactly what to teach. Instead, its accreditors can implement requirements favored by Trump, thereby “forcing” schools to change their policies and programs accordingly in order to protect their accreditation and federal funding.
That is why accreditation matters. It connects government rules, federal money, and university policy—and gives Washington a powerful way to influence higher education without directly running it.
Accreditation can reshape American society because universities train many of the people who become teachers, doctors, lawyers, scientists, and public leaders. If accreditation rules change what schools are expected to teach, research, or prioritize, those changes can spread far beyond campus. Over time, they could affect which ideas are studied, which fields receive support, how professionals are trained, and what values institutions encourage—giving accreditation the power to influence not just higher education, but the society those institutions help shape.
Join us for a deeper conversation with Professor of Law Jonathan D. Glater on Sept 10. Submit a comment to the Department of Education.
