This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.
Dive Brief:
Florida’s public universities could be barred from hiring any new employees through the H-1B visa program this year under a policy the system’s leaders are considering this month.
The university system’s Board of Governors plans to vote on introducing the proposed policy change for public comment during its meeting on Jan. 29. The proposal says trustee boards “shall not utilize the H-1B program” for new hires through Jan. 5, 2027.
The policy would carry out the wishes of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis, who directed the system’s governing board in October to end what he described as “H-1B abuse” at Florida universities. DeSantis argued that Florida’s universities were hiring foreign workers through the program over qualified Americans.
Dive Insight:
The H-1B visa program is intended to allow U.S. employers to hire highly educated foreign workers for specialized positions, such as software development or research. Many high-profile universities, including those in Florida, rely on the program to hire researchers.
The University of Florida, the state’s flagship, employed 253 workers through the H-1B visa program in fiscal 2025, according to federal data. Statewide, it was followed by Florida State University, with 110 H-1B workers, and the University of South Florida, with 107.
Officials from those universities did not immediately respond to Higher Ed Dive’s request for comment on the policy proposal.
In October, DeSantis directed the state’s university system during a press conference to “pull the plug on the use of these H-1B visas in our universities.” With the new proposed policy, the governing board would carry that out through a roughly one-year pause on H-1B hiring.
DeSantis’ views on the H-1B program are in line with the Trump administration’s. In September, President Donald Trump issued a proclamation creating a $100,000 fee on new applications for H-1B visas, setting off alarms in the higher education world and other sectors that rely on these workers.
Nearly three dozen higher education groups have asked U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem for a sectorwide exemption to the fee.
In an October letter to Noem, American Council on Education President Ted Mitchell argued that carving out an exemption for higher ed would be similar to the sector’s current exemption from the nationwide annual cap on new H-1B awards,set at 85,000 per year.
The $100,000 policy has also drawn several lawsuits. However, a federal judge sided with the federal government last month on one of those legal challenges, ruling that Trump did not exceed his authority by issuing the proclamation.
The groups who sued, the U.S. Chamber of Commerce and the Association of American Universities, appealed the ruling on Dec. 29.
DeSantis told universities in October to end the use of the visa program.
All Florida public universities would be banned from hiring foreign workers on H-1B visas under a policy change that the Florida Board of Governors will consider next week.
Next Thursday, the board’s Nomination and Governance Committee will consider adding to a policy a line saying the universities can’t “utilize the H-1B program in its personnel program to hire any new employees through January 5, 2027.” If the committee and full Board of Governors approve the addition, there will be a 14-day public comment period.
The proposal, reported earlier by Politico, comes after Florida governor Ron DeSantis ordered the state’s public universities in October to “pull the plug on the use of these H-1B visas.” Fourteen of the Board of Governors’ 17 members are appointed by the governor and confirmed by the state Senate.
DeSantis complained about professors coming from China, “supposed Palestine” and elsewhere. He said, “We need to make sure our citizens here in Florida are first in line for job opportunities.”
Last fiscal year, according to a U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services database, the federal government approved 253 H-1B visa holders to work at the University of Florida, 146 at the University of Miami, about 110 each at Florida State University and the University of South Florida, 47 at the University of Central Florida, and smaller numbers at other public institutions. Universities use the program to hire faculty, doctors and researchers and argue it’s required to meet needs in health care, engineering and other areas.
Spokespeople for the State University System of Florida and DeSantis didn’t respond to requests for comment Thursday.
The policy revisions would also say that each university board’s “personnel program must not discriminate on the basis of race, color, religion, national origin, or sex.”
With public school enrollment declining nationwide, districts are facing the budget constraints that come with losses in per-pupil funding.
Enrollment has dropped at state and district levels in recent years — due primarily to declining birthrates, but also to increased competition for students brought on by an expansion of school choice laws. Some districts, including the Los Angeles Unified School District, have also cited heightened federal immigration enforcement under the Trump administration as a factor draining enrollment.
These enrollment declines and the resulting budget pressures are forcing more districts to consider — and approve — school closure and consolidation plans. And with researchers projecting continued enrollment woes in the near future, additional closures and consolidations are likely to follow.
As school districts grapple with this financial challenge, K-12 Dive is tracking key district-approved school closures and consolidations. If you know of other such developments we should include, contact us here.
This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.
Dive Brief:
Nevada higher education officials are considering raising tuition and fees by 12% for public four-year institutions and 9% for two-year colleges amid cost increases and the pending loss of millions in state funding.
The hikes would save the equivalent of 317 full-time jobs, according to a proposal from Nevada System of Higher Education Chancellor Matt McNair and presidents of the system’s colleges.
More modest tuition and fee hikes could lessen student impact but lead institutions to cut 100 to 200 jobs systemwide. NSHE’s board of regents plans to consider the proposals at a Jan. 23 meeting.
Dive Insight:
NSHE is looking to fill a funding gap amounting to tens of millions of dollars across its seven institutions in the coming years.
The proposal before the regents cited, in part, general cost increases in higher ed. That includes a 20.4% cumulative increase in the Higher Education Price Index — a sector-specific measure of inflation calculated every year by the Commonfund Institute — from fiscal 2021 through 2025.
The Nevada higher ed system has specific costs it is trying to fund as well. A briefing from McNair and NSHE presidents pointed to a “significant deferred maintenance backlog,” as well other expenses such as student support services, technology infrastructure, cybersecurity, and a 1% merit increase for faculty salaries.
In 2025, the Legislature passed a more than $57 million bridge funding package to help the system absorb cost increases, but that money will run out in July 2027. The expiration will leave NSHE with a $27.1 million hole in fiscal 2028, including an $11.8 million shortfall at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas and an $11.2 million gap at University of Nevada, Reno.
That loss, plus salary increases in coming years, adds up to a roughly $41.4 million shortfall for the system in fiscal 2029. Officials tied that funding gap to the 317 positions that they may eliminate without more revenue. Most of those losses — 238 jobs — would come from various faculty and academic advisor positions, the rest from classified staff.
The heaviest proposed tuition and fee increases would cover the gap, and then some, by raising an estimated $49.3 million in revenue.
A lower hike of 8% for four-year college tuition and fees and 6% for community colleges would still leave a $9.3 million hole, potentially leading to 102 job cuts. An even lower price increase of 4% at four-year colleges and 3% at two-years would leave a $25.5 million shortfall and might mean 206 job reductions.
Those numbers are representations of the funding gap in terms of jobs. NSHE’s institution leaders described a wider range of measures they may have to take absent tuition increases. Those include program eliminations and consolidation, hiring freezes, larger class sizes, reduced student services and other budget actions.
The briefing said that even the largest tuition spikes would still leave Nevada’s public universities cheaper by thousands of dollars annually compared to the average among their peers in the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education. Meanwhile, staffing at NSHE colleges remains generally below peer levels, according to a board presentation.
“Affordability compared to peers does not negate the reality of individual hardship that may result as cost of attendance rises,” the briefing from McNair and the colleges’ leaders stated. “The Institutions recognize that even comparatively small increases can have meaningful impacts for some students and families.”
This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.
Public school student enrollment across the U.S. dipped slightly by 0.3% to 49.3 million in the 2024-25 school year compared to the year before, according to data released in December by the U.S. Department of Education for the 50 states and the District of Columbia.
Meanwhile, the number of operating elementary and secondary public schools decreased by 0.2% — from 99,297 in 2023-24 to 99,073 in 2024-25.
The data release, part of the Education Department’s annual Common Core of Data collection, does not offer explanations for the trends, but it does mirror reported enrollment dips that are leading some school systems to consider school closures or consolidations.
Although many factors may contribute to each community’s school enrollment figures, nationally, some experts have said lower birthrates and increased school choice competition are having an adverse impact on public school enrollment.
On the other hand, some states are seeing year-over-year enrollment increases, including the District of Columbia (2%) and Arkansas (1.2%), according to an analysis of the federal data by Burbio, a business intelligence service that works with suppliers to K-12 education. The three states that lost the most students between the 2023-24 and 2024-25 school years were Louisiana (5.9%), Maine (3.5%), and West Virginia (1.9%).
Here are some other figures from the Education Department and from the Burbio’s analysis:
By the numbers
19,183
The number of operating public school districts nationwide in 2024-25.
-2.8%
The percent decrease in the number of public school students between 2019-2020 and 2024-25.
+2.6%
The percent increase in the number of public charter school students between 2023-24 and 2024-25. Charter school students make up 8% of all public school students.
1,859
The number of special education-specific public schools in 2024-25. That’s down 3.8% from 2019-2020.
+1.8%
The percent increase in number of students in the Philadelphia City school district between 2023-24 and 2024-25.
-0.9%
The percent decrease in the number of students in New York City Public Schools between 2023-24 and 2024-25.
-2.8%
The percent decrease in the number of students attending Los Angeles Unified School District between 2023-24 and 2024-25.
10.3-to-1
The student-teacher ratio in Vermont classrooms in 2024-25 — the lowest of all states and the District of Columbia.
21.7-to-1
The student-teacher ratio in California classrooms in 2024-25 — the highest nationwide.
Last year, the Satanic Temple of New Hampshire put up a Baphomet statue (a part-human, part-goat satanic deity) in front of the State House in Concord. People vandalized it and knocked off its head. Concord vowed to review its policies after its mayor described the statue as “deliberately provocative and disturbing.” That raised major constitutional concerns.
FIRE wrote to Concord, arguing that the government could not discriminate against disfavored displays. In a victory for free speech, Concord kept the statue and arrested the perpetrators. This year, despite questions from public officials, Baphomet is back up in front of the State House.
New Hampshire’s backing of the Satanic Temple’s right to display its religious symbol illustrates a core First Amendment principle: When the government invites private holiday displays, the First Amendment bars viewpoint discrimination.
What the Free Speech Clause requires
The threshold question: who is speaking?
When the government — such as a town council or a public school — puts up holiday displays, it’s subject to the First Amendment’s Establishment Clause. When the government opens up a public place to private groups or individuals to display their own religious symbols, it is subject to the Free Speech Clause.
Understanding public forum doctrine
If the government allows private groups or individuals to display their own symbols, the question is then one of forum. Public forum doctrine is a First Amendment framework that determines the level of constitutional protection afforded to speech on government property. Some forum types allow for more restrictions, but viewpoint discrimination is always constitutionally forbidden.
The Supreme Court identifies three types of public forums: traditional, limited, and designated. Traditional public forums are those historically used for public assembly, such as streets and parks, where regulatory ability is most limited. In these spaces, restrictions based on the content (not just viewpoint) of speech are almost always unconstitutional.
Designated public forums arise when the government intentionally opens public properties for expression. Once the government opens up a designated public forum, the same rules that apply to traditional public forums apply as long as the government keeps the forum open.
Finally, limited public forums are places the government opens for expression by limited groups or specific topics. The government can be slightly more restrictive here, with the ability to impose restrictions that are viewpoint neutral and reasonable in light of the purpose served by the forum. For example, a city council might establish a public comment period at its meetings but require that comments be related to city business.
No matter which type of forum exists, viewpoint discrimination is prohibited
Courts have reached different conclusions on whether government properties (other than parks, sidewalks, or other traditional forums) opened up for holiday displays constitute limited or designated public forums depending on the circumstances. Regardless, even when the government canset subject matter limits, it can’t discriminate by viewpoint within those categories. The Supreme Court has long barred censorship merely “because public officials oppose the speaker’s view.” Perry Education Association v. Perry Local Educators’ Association (1983).
Last year in Gallatin, Tennessee, a library allowed 20 different organizations to decorate Christmas trees to display on its premises. The mayor directed the library to remove one of the trees with a gay pride message, citing a policy against “political” decorations. That type of policy is constitutionally suspect in a limited public forum like the library tree exhibition and the tree should not have been removed.
Just as constitutionally suspect are government attempts to limit religious displays in public forums for fear of endorsing religion. In Shurtleff v. Boston(2022), Boston allowed different groups to fly flags of their choice over Boston’s city hall. Some included foreign countries’ flags or the pride flag. When the city denied a request to fly a “Christian flag,” the Supreme Court treated that as unconstitutional viewpoint discrimination. Put simply, religion is a viewpoint too. Boston could not approve a pride flag and deny a Christian one.
VICTORY! Charges dropped against Tenn. woman cited for using skeletons in Christmas decorations
Less than a month after FIRE filed a First Amendment lawsuit against Germantown, Tennessee, the city has dismissed charges against a resident for keeping skeletons in her yard after Halloween.
Attempts to classify certain messages as offensive, disturbing, or otherwise not in the holiday spirit count as viewpoint discrimination. In other words, under the First Amendment, if the government allows people to publicly celebrate Christmas, it cannot dictate how they do so just because officials dislike a particular perspective.
Common neutral rules
That begs the question: what can the government do once it opens up a forum for holiday displays?
Usually OK — time, place, and manner rules
The government can usually impose what are known as “time, place, and manner” restrictions on speech in public forums. In the holiday display context, this could mean limiting the size, height, and distance between displays — all without regard to the display’s content. In other words, cities can reasonably regulate logistics as long as they don’t police viewpoints.
Red flags — often viewpoint discrimination in disguise
Some rules masquerade as viewpoint neutral time, place, and manner restrictions, but are actually viewpoint discriminatory. Look no further than the New Hampshire Baphomet statue, where the mayor argued that the display was too provocative. On the surface, it might seem that the mayor advocated for a neutral “provocation” principle where any display that causes a reaction could be taken down. But that’s not a neutral principle at all — it means enabling a heckler’s veto over unpopular speech. Restricting speech because members of the public, rather than government officials, dislike its viewpoint is still viewpoint discrimination.
Perhaps the most common problem with holiday display policies are rules that feign neutrality by requiring “good taste” or “respect.” But what’s respectful to one religious group might be offensive to another. These rules invite subjective message policing by the government, which does not and should not have a dog in the fight when it comes to the tone of expression.
The bottom line
In the end, the government can choose whether to open up non-traditional public forums for public holiday displays or not. If it doesn’t, there is no free-floating constitutional right to put up a Satanic display or a Christmas tree as one pleases. For example, the government has not opened up court rooms for holiday displays, so one could not just walk up to the bench and place a giant menorah on it. But when the government solicits holiday decorations, it can’t discriminate between a menorah, a Christmas tree, or even a Satanic statue.
We are grateful to Inside Higher Ed editor in chief Sara Custer in her recent column “Higher Ed Faces Competing Visions for Its Future” (Dec. 18, 2025) for mentioning Advancing Public Trust in Higher Education, the initiative we co-direct at the American Association of Colleges and Universities. We write to expand upon Custer’s review of the emerging responses to the trust problem and to clarify what our initiative is advocating and doing to invigorate public trust.
Higher ed cannot restore public trust in colleges and universities unless the sector reckons in a clear-eyed fashion with the causes of the current crisis. Simply put, the fundamental problem is that when the sector or its individual institutions draw public criticism, we are unable either to make quick changes in response, to explain compellingly why we should not do so, or to redirect public attention effectively toward the overall value and purpose of our work. Under increased scrutiny from the public and government alike, that paralysis is a recipe for a disastrous decline in public trust.
Solving this crisis will require a multipronged approach that balances internal reform—although not along the lines of the administration’s ill-fated Compact—with better communication and collective defense strategies. Higher education must become better and nimbler at making changes that already have wide support but are held back by parochial interests; better at relentlessly prioritizing engagement with local communities; and better at offering a meaningful welcome to all students, including those with conservative views and others who feel alienated from our institutions. We also need to be better at mounting a vigorous and coordinated sectorwide defense when we are in the right, and at communicating our value and purpose clearly and effectively so that the public can put things into context when we inevitably make mistakes.
Our view is that internal reform, improved communication, and better defense are inseparable parts of a whole; higher education will not regain public trust, or reestablish productive partnerships with the government and our communities, unless we pursue all three goals simultaneously. Our vision is of a sector that is agile, responsive, invitational, humble and trusted to generate new knowledge and transform students’ lives. If colleges and universities act smartly and collectively, we believe that vision is within reach.
We look forward to sharing more specifics about our approach with Inside Higher Ed’s readers over the coming months.
Jeremy C. Young is Senior Advisor for Strategic Initiatives, and Kathryn Enke is Vice President for Leadership and Strategy, at the American Association of Colleges and Universities
In a world where classrooms are racing to keep up with rapidly evolving technology, El Salvador has taken a bold leap that is capturing global attention. In partnership with Elon Musk’s xAI, the country has launched what is being celebrated as the world’s first nationwide AI-powered education program—a move that could redefine how children learn, teachers teach, and nations prepare their next generation.
The initiative aims to introduce personalized AI tutoring to more than one million students across public schools, creating a blueprint for what the future of AI in public education could look like.
🎥 Elon Musk’s xAI Enters Classrooms: AI Education in Action
🌎 A Historic Education Partnership
On December 11, 2025, the Government of El Salvador announced a landmark two-year collaboration with xAI to integrate advanced artificial intelligence across more than 5,000 public schools, from bustling cities to remote rural regions.
At the heart of this transformation is Grok, xAI’s powerful language model—now entering classrooms as an intelligent tutor designed to adapt to each student’s unique learning journey.
For the first time, an entire national education system is embracing AI tutoring at full scale. This isn’t a pilot. This isn’t an experiment in a few select schools. This is a nationwide rollout, positioning El Salvador as a global pioneer in educational innovation.
🤖 What Grok Will Bring to Classrooms
According to the joint announcement from the government and xAI, Grok’s role goes far beyond simply answering questions. It has been designed as a full-spectrum learning companion.
Here’s what Grok will do:
Deliver personalized, curriculum-aligned tutoring, adjusting explanations based on each child’s pace and learning style.
Break down complex concepts in simpler, more relatable ways—reducing classroom confusion.
Generate custom practice exercises for students who need extra support or want additional challenge.
Support teachers, not replace them, by taking over repetitive tasks so educators can focus on creativity, critical thinking, and emotional development.
This initiative is expected to uplift over one million students and thousands of teachers, offering differentiated learning opportunities on a scale never seen before in the developing world.
🗣️ Vision, Leadership & Global Ambition
President Nayib Bukele has positioned this initiative as a cornerstone of the nation’s educational transformation. His vision is clear and bold.
“El Salvador doesn’t just wait for the future of education — we build it with xAI.”
This statement captures the spirit behind the project: a desire not just to follow global trends but to lead them.
On the other side of the partnership, Elon Musk emphasized the historic nature of the program:
“By partnering with President Bukele to bring Grok to every student in El Salvador, we’re putting the most advanced AI directly in the hands of an entire generation.”
Together, these viewpoints underscore a shared conviction: AI can facilitate more equitable access to high-quality education, providing every child—regardless of their background—a genuine opportunity to succeed.
📊 Why This Matters for the Future of Education
1️⃣ Personalized Learning at Scale
Traditional classrooms frequently face challenges in addressing the diverse needs of dozens of students simultaneously. While some students grasp concepts quickly, others require more time and support, leading to disparities in learning progress and the risk of some quietly falling behind.
With Grok:
Lessons can be personalized in real time
Students can learn at their own speed
Remedial support becomes instant and accessible
Advanced learners can progress further without being held back
For the first time, every child can receive individual attention.
2️⃣ A Powerful Tool for Teachers
Instead of competing with educators, Grok is designed to empower them.
AI can:
Generate worksheets, quizzes, and differentiated materials
Help explain tough topics when students need extra support
Allow teachers to focus on emotional, social, and creative growth
With AI as an assistant, teachers gain more time for meaningful teaching.
3️⃣ Global Implications
If the program succeeds, El Salvador could become a case study for the world—a proof of concept showing that AI in public education isn’t just possible, but game-changing.
This model could influence:
National education reforms
Digital transformation policies
How countries approach AI equity in schools
Long-term strategies for bridging learning gaps
Many education systems are watching closely—and some are already considering similar programs.
📍 Challenges & Concerns
Despite the excitement, experts agree that the approach must remain thoughtful and responsible.
Key concerns include:
Curriculum alignment: Ensuring AI does not stray from national learning goals.
Data privacy: Preventing the exploitation of private student information.
Algorithmic bias: Making sure AI treats all students fairly.
Human connection: Preserving the teacher-student bond that shapes emotional intelligence and values.
These conversations are not unique to El Salvador—they mirror global debates about AI’s role in the classroom. The country’s experience will provide critical insights for the world.
El Salvador’s partnership with xAI represents a pivotal milestone in the advancement of AI in public education. By implementing AI tutoring nationwide, the country is not only enhancing academic achievement but also fundamentally transforming the educational experience for the 21st century.
Whether this model becomes a global standard will depend on careful implementation, measurable improvements, and thoughtful oversight. But one thing is undeniable:
El Salvador has taken a bold step toward the future—and the world is watching.
Creating consistency between classrooms and ensuring curriculum alignment school-wide can be challenging, even in the smallest of districts. Every educator teaches–and grades–differently based on their experience and preferences, and too often, they’re forced into a solution that no longer respects their autonomy or acknowledges their strengths.
When Superior Public Schools (SPS), a district of 450 students in rural Nebraska, defined standards-referenced curriculum as a priority of our continuous improvement plan, bringing teachers in as partners on the transition was essential to our success. Through their support, strategic relationships with outside partners, and meaningful data and reporting, the pathway from curriculum design to classroom action was a smooth one for teachers, school leaders, and students alike.
Facing the challenge of a new curriculum
For years, teachers in SPS were working autonomously in the classroom. Without a district-wide curriculum in place, they used textbooks to guide their instruction and designed lesson plans around what they valued as important. In addition, grading was performed on a normative curve that compared a student’s performance against the performance of their peers rather than in relation to a mastery of content.
As other educators have discovered, the traditional approach to teaching may be effective for some students, but is inequitable overall when preparing all students for their next step, whether moving on to more complex material or preparing for the grade ahead. Kids were falling through the cracks, and existing opportunity gaps only began to grow.
SPS set out to help our students by instituting standards-referenced instruction at both the elementary and secondary levels, allowing us to better identify each child’s progress toward set learning standards and deliver immediate feedback and intervention services to keep them on the path toward success.
Take it slow and start with collaboration
From day one, school leaders understood the transition to the new curriculum needed to be intentional and collaborative.
Rather than demand immediate buy-in from teachers, administrators and the curriculum team dedicated the time to help them understand the value of a new learning process. Together, we took a deep dive into traditional education practices, identifying which set students up for success and which actually detoured their progress. Recognizing that everyone–teachers included–learns in different ways, administrators also provided educators with a wide range of resources, such as book studies, podcasts, and articles, to help them grow professionally.
In addition, SPS partnered with the Curriculum Leadership Institute (CLI) to align curriculum, instruction, and assessment practices across all content areas, schools, and grade levels. On-site CLI coaches worked directly with teachers to interpret standards and incorporate their unique teaching styles into new instructional strategies, helping to ensure the new curriculum translated seamlessly into daily classroom practice.
To bring standards-referenced curriculum to life with meaningful insights and reporting, SPS integrated the Otus platform into our Student Information System. By collecting and analyzing data in a concise manner, teachers could measure student performance against specific learning targets, determining if content needed to be re-taught to the whole class or if specific students required one-on-one guidance.
With the support of our teachers, SPS was able to launch the new curriculum and assessment writing process district-wide, reaching students in pre-K through 12th grade. However, standards-reference grading was a slower process, starting with one subject area at a time at the elementary level. Teachers who were initially uncomfortable with the new grading system were able to see the benefits firsthand, allowing them to ease into the transition rather than jump in headfirst.
Empowering educators, inspiring students
By uniting curriculum and data, SPS has set a stronger foundation of success for every student. Progress is no longer measured by compliance but by a true mastery of classroom concepts.
Teachers have become intentional with their lesson plans, ensuring that classroom content is directly linked to the curriculum. The framework also gives them actionable insights to better identify the skills students have mastered and the content areas where they need extra support. Teachers can adjust instruction as needed, better communicate with parents on their students’ progress, and connect struggling students to intervention services.
Principals also look at student progress from a building level, identifying commonalities across multiple grades. For instance, if different grade levels struggle with geometry concepts, we can revisit the curriculum to see where improvements should be made. Conversely, we can better determine if SPS needs to increase the rigor in one grade to better prepare students for the next grade level.
While the road toward standards-referenced curriculum had its challenges, the destination was worth the journey for everyone at SPS. By the end of the 2024-2025 school year, 84 percent of K-5 students were at or above the 41st percentile in math, and 79 percent were at or above the 41st percentile in reading based on NWEA MAP results. In addition, teachers now have a complete picture of every student to track individual progress toward academic standards, and students receive the feedback, support, and insights that inspire them to become active participants in their learning.
Tricia Kuhlmann and Jodi Fierstein, Superior Public Schools
Tricia Kuhlmann is the Curriculum Director and Jodi Fierstein is the Elementary Principal and Director of Special Services at Superior Public Schools in Superior, NE.
Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)
President Trump signed an executive order in April to reform accreditation.
Saul Loeb/AFP/Getty Images
Reforming the accreditation process has been a key focus for the Trump administration. Officials from the Education Department reinforced that Wednesday when they announced a request for information to solicit public feedback on updating the accreditation handbook.
The aim, the department said in a news release, is to reduce “unduly burdensome and bureaucratic requirements” and increase “transparency and efficiency.”
“Instead of driving high-quality programs that better serve students, the antiquated accreditation system has led to inflated tuition costs and fees, administrative bloat, and ideology-driven initiatives at colleges across the country,” Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary Education David Barker said. “We are excited to receive feedback on how best to update the Handbook, streamline guidance, and eliminate bureaucratic headaches for accrediting agencies and associations.”
The request falls in line with an April executive order to “reform and strengthen” the accreditation system. It also comes less than a week before the next meeting of the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity, the group that weighs in on accreditation issues and reviews accrediting agencies.
The department is planning to draft new rules and regulations for accreditors sometime next year.
Commenters will have 45 days to provide feedback on the following questions:
What policies or standards are encouraging innovation or reducing college costs within the postsecondary education sector and should be retained in or added to the new version of the handbook?
How can the handbook be designed to be less burdensome?
Is the handbook serving its intended purpose?
How can it better assist accrediting agencies and associations in evaluating the quality of educational institutions and programs or in applying for federal recognition?
How could accreditation standards be updated to incentivize intellectual diversity on campus?
What guidance or standards, if any, can the handbook provide to institutions and programs to help achieve this goal?
What methods should be incorporated into the handbook to determine appropriate assessment benchmarks, and what data sources or validation methods could be used to ensure those benchmarks reflect student competency?
