Higher education is in trouble. Some conservative figures have called for an end to the Department of Education. While that may be a great ultimate goal, many of the problems in Higher Education stem from the accreditation process, accreditors, and requirements. President Donald Trump has said he would hire accreditors “who will impose real standards on colleges.” A group of students at Mount Liberty College, in our Political Philosophy class, have asked; what is a solution that many can rally around? Instead of getting rid of woke ideology in higher education through executive action that can easily be undone by the next president, we think small, incremental change is a realistic and longer lasting solution. These small changes begin with the accreditation process itself.
Our plan is to locate the power to certify accreditation institutions in individual state authorities. This would be established through legislation that implements the following:
Each state would have the authority to choose and certify which accreditation institutions could operate within that state.
Existing federal financial arrangements with higher education would not be affected except to the extent that colleges and universities would now be subject to accreditation by state-certified institutions.
The next logical step to fix higher education would be to separate accreditation and funding. This will lead to further steps that will eventually remove federal regulations. Every step gets us closer to restoring liberty in higher education.
I am all for states having more power and the Federal government having less, but a quick question. If you have state A, and their accreditation requirement are really high and strict, and state B has really lax requirements, do you see a problem with that in the long run?
Hey Bob, thanks for the comment! Here are my thoughts: To begin with, States are choosing which accreditation companies are invited to work with the colleges in their states. This means the accreditors will need to work with the states to make them happy if they want to work there. The states don’t necessarily get to pick their own requirements, though that might be a good idea down the road. It is true that states having different accreditation agencies/requirements might cause a few complications, specifically when students may want to transfer from a school in one state to a school in another state. But these complications are true for a lot of state-specific policies outside of education, like Trump’s desire to bring abortion decisions back to the states. People ultimately choose where they want to live and work. In this case, they would choose where they want to go to school. If, let’s say, states with lax requirements are losing students, it wouldn’t take long for them to tighten up their regulations. In the case of accreditation agencies, it would introduce a needed element of competition and provide variety instead of sticking with our current intellectual monopoly on education. Any complication that comes with state-certified accreditors seems better than anything we have currently.
Higher education reform is desperately needed. Currently the liberal worldview is so dominant in education (from K-12 through higher education) that we have lost our ability to discuss or discover real objective truth. Our education system has become much more of a machine of propaganda for one perspective rather than a training ground for good thinking.
Since work opportunities typically require a degree, the spreading of the liberal perspective has reached deeply into our culture, our entertainment, and our business and civic leaders. Ultimately it seems that we need to make inroads into the whole system that has propagated liberal thought in our culture. That could mean building a parallel entertainment industry, economy, or education system where the pendulum swings back at least to worldview neutrality, and many advocate for parallel conservative systems.
So, my question for you, Ella, is - Do you think this policy in the long term could be enough of a catalyst to gradually insert ideas from conservative perspectives (from states whose accreditation allows for more conservative thought) into research, teaching, and student minds that it could influence culture and entertainment enough to shift it back in the right direction? Would allowing colleges with conservative thinkers accreditation and funding be enough to move the needle? Or do we need a more-drastic approach like building a parallel economy, education system, accreditation system, or something similar to “compete” with the current system?
I’m a student here at Mount Liberty College and helped brainstorm this idea; I think it would be so helpful to make these changes and would love to hear other’s thoughts!
Hi Ben, I’m another student at Mount Liberty who worked on this submission, I’d love to share some thoughts and perhaps provide some more clarity on the proposed solution. The extreme liberal ideologies that are endorsed in modern colleges are certainly a concern, especially since these ideologies discourage freedom of thought and stunt the ability to identify and apply truths.
The first two steps of our proposed solution to accreditation are not enough to completely fix the entire education system, however, changes must be done gradually, and with the consent of the citizens of the United States. It’s much better to do it one step at a time and through the proper channels of a representative government.
Historically, trying to change a national system overnight that has been in place for decades has not worked well in the long term.
Yes, states that are more conservative should be able to have access to accreditors who are more agreeable to their beliefs, which will push accreditors to begin to be more accepting and acceptable to conservative schools so that they are allowed to work in more states. This will begin to shift the needle, and the next step of disconnecting funding from accreditation will move it more. This idea does not negate the need for new start-up colleges that refuse to follow the conventional rules of a currently ineffective mainstream system. After all, Mount Liberty College is one of those! Empowering states through a shift to more localized control of the education system can be a first step in helping simplify the uphill battle for new colleges as well.
It’s not about conservative or liberal ideologies; it’s about freedom and liberty in education to provide a merit-based education system.
Why does the government thru taxpayer dollars send money to universities with very, very large endowments? makes no sense. Why would my money be sent to Columbia, Harvard… and other ivy league colleges? Let’s end this now and forever.
Agreed, taxes should not be used to fund universities or colleges. These institutions have been turned into subsidized corporations where there is little to no accountability to the taxpayers on how the money is being spent, the tuition cost is unaffordable without loans or grants (also from the government), and despite horrible financial management the college is able to survive through recessions and other market fluctuations that should be culling out these inefficient institutions.
The problems that are found in higher education is what Mount Liberty College is trying to avoid by not letting accreditation requirements destroy the unique value of their liberal arts education. It’s difficult to see small and independent colleges with alternative education options struggling, when often they offer lower tuition, in depth relationships and leadership growth, and a higher level of educational experience. This rejection of quality education for larger social scenes or status is a cultural problem as well as a political one.
Instead of alumni and other individuals donating generously to these incompetent businesses that are relying on the taxpayers to pay for the education of students who are still going into debt for their classes and often not gaining a high quality education, donors are better off supporting independent and private colleges that are not tied to government strings and have missions that the donors believe in and want to contribute to.
It’s a nice thought but the school system was started by the Rockefellers and is a institution made to control the public and teach kids how to be good little slaves. It need to be in the hands of parents. Kids should choose what subject interest them. Focus should be put on entrepreneurship. All non governmental organizations are unconstitutional.