Government Relations: The Higher Education Act
By Mark F. Smith
The 108th Congress is scheduled to reauthorize the Higher Education Act (HEA) during the coming year. First passed in 1965, and reauthorized every six years, the HEA coordinates all federal government programs in higher education. The AAUP has supported the core structure of the HEA from its beginning, although we have persistently criticized the unwillingness of Congress to appropriate adequate funds for the programs authorized under the act.
At the heart of the HEA are the student aid programs under Title IV of the act and the assistance to "developing institutions"—colleges and universities that serve populations with special needs—under Titles III and V. Other sections focus on teacher training (Title II), international programs (Title VI), and programs to improve graduate and postsecondary education (Title VII).
The Association has identified four key themes in need of special emphasis during the upcoming reauthorization debate. The core goal of the HEA from the start has been to increase access to a college or university education, and any reauthorization proposal must build on that goal. Equally important is the quality of higher education programs. Increased access to low quality programs will not help institutions, faculty, or students. At the same time, the HEA must recognize and promote the diversity of our higher education system—the diversity among populations within the system as well as among institutions and institutional missions. Finally, the uncertainty and tension in the world today make it especially critical for the HEA to support the openness of the academic community; doing so is the only way to ensure the continued excellence of our nation's colleges and universities.
Specifically, the AAUP calls on Congress to promote access by increasing the maximum award under the Pell Grant Program and ensuring that all eligible students receive the maximum grant to which they are entitled. The Association also recommends strengthening the direct and guaranteed student loan programs currently authorized and continuing support for programs that assist students with special needs.
In addition, the AAUP urges Congress to maintain adequate funding for the institutional-aid programs authorized under Titles III and V that support historically black colleges and universities, tribally controlled colleges, and Hispanic-serving institutions. The Association also recommends that a pilot program be established to extend institutional aid to large universities serving the special needs of urban populations.
The AAUP expects major controversy to arise in the area of quality protection. The Association has expressed concern over the erosion of measures intended to maintain quality standards and prevent a recurrence of the diploma mill scandals of the 1980s. At the moment, the U.S. Department of Education is relying too heavily on market standards and commercially available distance education. The AAUP believes that accrediting agencies and faculty should have more of a role than they now do in protecting the quality of higher education programs.
Procedurally, each house of Congress will handle the reauthorization differently. The House Committee on Education and the Workforce has two subcommittees with jurisdiction over the HEA. The Subcommittee on Twenty-first Century Competitiveness has jurisdiction over Titles II, III, IV, and V. The Subcommittee on Select Education has jurisdiction over Titles VI and VII, with oversight over Titles III and V. (Title I is an introductory section with portions applying to each of the subsequent titles.) The full committee will reconcile the subcommittee actions on the HEA before sending it on to the House floor. In the Senate, the full Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions will handle the reauthorization from the beginning.
The AAUP joined others in the higher education community in a letter to the relevant committees articulating our reauthorization goals. The Association also prepared an individual piece outlining our thematic concerns.
During the summer, House subcommittees began hearings on teacher training and international programs. Both hearings raised concerns about unwarranted legislative intrusion into curricular matters. In the current national climate, it will be critical to articulate the importance of academic freedom. As the international situation deteriorated in the late 1930s, the historian Charles A. Beard wrote in these pages: "If the issues of our time are to be resolved within the limitations of law and reason, universities must lead in the demonstration of self-restraint and open discussion."
Mark Smith is AAUP director of government relations.
|