A Federal Grab for College Oversight Could Put Students At Risk

One of the most profound impacts would be on federal student aid programs, because students can only access these programs, such as Federal Pell Grants and student loans, if they attend accredited institutions.

The Trump administration wants to:  

• Give the federal government more authority over what faculty teach, research, and publish.  
• Make it easier for organizations to gain official recognition as accreditors without any proof of expertise, quality, or past success.
• Roll back diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts that support students and impact faculty hiring.
• Force colleges and universities to accept all transfer credits, regardless of where they were earned.

“Together, these changes push college accreditation away from its original purpose of quality assurance and make it a weaker system that can be easily evaded and used to push federal political agendas—leaving students to pay the price,” says a July 2026 report by the Center for American Progress (CAP). 
No one claims accreditation is perfect, but it provides a measure of transparency and accountability. Samuel Dunietz, an NEA senior policy specialist, compares accreditation to a home inspection. You’ve fallen in love with the charming Cape Cod across from the park, but is it structurally sound? To find out, you need an impartial inspector.  

“Just like a home inspector, accreditors are independent, not beholden to institutions or to the government,” Dunietz says.  

Liz Wright, an at-large higher education member of the NEA Board of Directors, says accreditation “shows that the college or university actually does what it says it will do in offering classes with academic value; that the people who are teaching know what they are doing; and that the institution is economically viable.”

The CAP report notes that the administration’s changes “could ultimately leave students with fewer protections against low-quality programs, reduce the value of their degrees in the labor market, and even limit their exposure to diverse perspectives and areas of study that are critical for civic and economic participation.”

NEA members’ voices will be heard, Dunietz says. The union’s continuing engagement is crucial, says Wright, because the Trump administration’s goal is as straightforward as it is dangerous: to amass control over higher education.

“We have had one of the greatest higher education systems in the world, and I am afraid we are losing that,” she says.

“But as union members, we are so powerful,” Wright adds. “When people in a collective come together and realize the importance of something, when we bring our voices and our varied talents, there is so much we can do. That’s the whole history of unions in this country.”  

(NEA members participated in public comment on the rule in September. At press time, the final rule was expected  by November 1.)