Three programmatic accreditors—the Midwifery Education Accreditation Council, the Council on Education for Public Health, and the Council on Chiropractic Education—have withdrawn their petitions for continued federal recognition, Education Under Secretary Nicholas Kent announced at a National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity meeting this week.
Kent characterized the withdrawals as an effort by the accreditors to avoid new regulations emphasizing student outcomes and changes to peer-review governance models. He stated that accreditors unwilling to meet higher standards should step aside. However, the Council on Education for Public Health disputed this characterization, with its executive director noting that the recognition process has become increasingly politicized and that the decision reflected careful analysis over two years rather than resistance to accountability. The Midwifery Education Accreditation Council similarly stated that shifting federal priorities and unpredictable timelines prompted the withdrawal, while preserving their ability to reapply later.
Accreditation experts noted that accreditors may withdraw for multiple reasons beyond regulatory resistance, including cost-benefit analyses or decreased reliance on federal recognition. Of approximately 60 specialized programmatic accreditors, only about half maintain federal recognition. The practical impact of these withdrawals appears limited, as only the Midwifery Education Accreditation Council functioned as a Title IV gatekeeper determining federal student aid eligibility, and only for two of its 11 member institutions. Affected students have an 18-month window to seek alternative accreditation.
During the same NACIQI meeting, the board recommended denying recognition to the National Accrediting Commission of Career Arts and Sciences, a major cosmetology and massage therapy accreditor, for failing to comply with 17 standards. The Council on Occupational Education and the Accrediting Commission of Career Schools faced criticism but received recommendations for additional compliance reporting rather than denial.
Article Attribution | Read More at Article Source
Article summary produced by Claude AI