Search News


Browse Archives

News

Quick Takes: Appeals Court Backs Accreditor, Diversity Gains at U. of California, Outbreak of Newspaper Thefts, Hunger Strike in Florida, Debt Relief for Med Students, Rhode Island Eliminates 4 Teams

April 15, 2008

Share This Story

FREE Daily News Alerts

Advertisement
  • The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit on Monday rejected a suit by Hiwassee College challenging the accrediting procedures of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools. The college, whose accreditation was revoked by the association, argued that Southern should be treated as a "state actor," which would give the college far more due process rights. But the appeals court said Hiwassee's rights had not been violated, in part because Southern is not a government entity. The court noted that SACS is self-governing, receives no federal funds and "determines its own membership in accordance with its own standards." Even though loss of accreditation leads to denial of federal funds, the court noted that the Education Department -- not SACS -- cuts off federal funds.
  • The University of California, a system with some of the most competitive admissions in the United States, and one that under state requirements cannot use affirmative action, is reporting significant gains in the diversity of those admitted for the fall's freshman class. The admission of Latino students was up 16 percent and the admission of black students was up 11 percent, while white and Asian student figures were flat -- consistent with trends in student applications. Since the state did away with affirmative action, the most elite UC campuses have had particular problems admitting black and Latino students. This year, Berkeley reported relative stability among minority applicants, but UCLA reported that the percentage of black applicants admitted rose to 3.7 percent of the class (from 3.5 percent) and the percentage of Latino applicants admitted rose to 14.1 percent (from 12.7 percent).
  • The Student Press Law Center is reporting that four student newspapers have recently experienced the theft of issues. The thefts involved the papers at Ball State University (where coverage in the stolen issue included news about the arrest of an athlete), Loyola Marymount University (with controversial columns about a pregnant transgendered man and a critical look at fraternities), the University of New Orleans (following a dispute with the student government), and Kent State University (where no particular controversy is associated with the stolen issue).
  • Five students have consumed only water for five days, and several others are on forms of hunger strikes at the University of Florida, as part of the Students for a Democratic Society push for changes in the institution's investment policies. The students say that the university has failed to consider the ethical implications of its ownership of shares of companies. "Call Bernie Machen [the university's president] himself and let him know what you think about his refusal to put UF's money where its mouth is. Ask him if the possibility that our university is profiting off of war, environmental destruction, and human rights abuses is OK with him," says the students' Facebook group. Machen wrote the students last month, expressing admiration for their ideals and noting that there are circumstances in which the university would not invest in certain companies. But Machen said he didn't favor the students' demands for a campuswide committee to discuss investment choices because of the responsibilities of trustees for financial management and the difficulty of achieving consensus among the entire campus on such issues.
  • A few weeks after Harvard University announced a plan to reduce the debt or family contributions needed to attend its medical school, Yale University followed suit. Yale's plan will eliminated the required family contribution for those with family incomes of up to $100,000.
  • The University of Rhode Island, which has already announced plans to eliminate its gymnastics team, on Monday announced it was also ending its men's swimming, men's tennis and field hockey teams. The university cited state budget cuts.
See all postings »
Advertisement
Advertisement

Comments on Quick Takes: Appeals Court Backs Accreditor, Diversity Gains at U. of California, Outbreak of Newspaper Thefts, Hunger Strike in Florida, Debt Relief for Med Students, Rhode Island Eliminates 4 Teams

  • Consider Referrals
  • Posted by Dr. Beverley Pickering-Reyna , Director of Diversity/Gender Initiatives at University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee on April 15, 2008 at 10:35am EDT
  • Significant gains at UC seem to reflect the quantity of admits rather than full consideration of campus quality (i.e., educational excellence) as a vital admission factor to all applicants. That is, when 8,450 UC-eligible applicants are “referred” to a campus (e.g., UC Merced) other than their choice (e.g., UCLA), does this differ much from a unit on any university campus “referring” particular admits to an Academic Opportunity Center? It is notable that Latino and African-American admissions rose by 16% and 11%, respectively. However, too which campuses (i.e., what quality of higher education) will underrepresented admits have access? Since every UC campus has support systems, why steer underrepresented admits toward specific campuses that do not offer what the celebrated locations provide?

  • us appeals court accreditation decision
  • Posted by Glen S. McGhee , Dir., at Florida Higher Education Accountability Project on April 15, 2008 at 9:20pm EDT
  • The recent US Appeals court decision that repeated the lower court opinion that SACS is not a "state actor" demonstrates how the gatekeeping triad for Title IV funds sometimes works in the government's favor.

    If the regional accrediting agencies were "absorbed," or federalized (as part of an effort to reform them), then institutions unhappy with accrediting decisions would have constitutional grounds to sue -- to sue the government itself.

    Thus, the delegation of accrediting matters to supposedly independent regional agencies conveniently *shields* the federal government from the wrath of unhappy institutions.

    As this Appeals Court decision shows, the US Dept of Education can withhold access to Title IV funds on the basis of, in this case, regional accrediting decisions.

    But the opinion also pointed out that the Higher Education Act (HEA), which authorizes US Dept of Education oversight of Title IV, does *not* provide standing to private citizens wishing to sue the Secretary regarding Title IV matters.

    Unhappy institutions are therefore caught in a Catch-22.

    Even though the Secretary can remove access to Title IV funds, he/she cannot be sued on the basis of HEA. And since the regional accreditor is not a state actor or government agency, their accrediting decisions are valid -- unless they can be shown to be arbitrary and capricious, or lacking in due process, which was not done in this case.

    Literally, there is nowhere for an institution, whose accreditation has been terminated, to turn.