Delegates to the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges may vote on Tuesday to require the examination of diversity, equity, and inclusion efforts as a condition of accreditation, according to Belle Wheelan, the group’s president.
If that vote is successful, it could set up a clash with state politicians who describe DEI efforts as violating legal bans on racial preferences and a way to enforce liberal groupthink on college campuses. Several states in the South and Texas, where the commission accredits colleges, have passed laws barring institutions from spending money to employ staff in DEI offices, or from requiring diversity training, among other things. Similar laws are likely to be considered in statehouses across the country in the coming months.
The other six major accrediting organizations already have standards to hold colleges accountable for how they serve historically underrepresented students, by examining institutions’ mission statements, the diversity of their faculties, the disparity between outcomes for white students and those of color, and testimonies of community members about discrimination they face at the colleges.
The Southern Association, which accredits colleges across 11 states in the South and Southwest, has taken a more cautious approach than its peer organizations. Instead of including DEI requirements in its accreditation standards, which apply to all members, they are included in a position statement that expresses the association’s stance on the issue, but is optional for institutions.
On Tuesday, a delegate assembly of members from each of the nearly 750 SASCSCOC-accredited colleges may vote to incorporate portions the position statement into the standards.
Accreditors “will require a level of courage that they have sometimes but not always shown enforcing standards that are not nearly as controversial.”
“There are folks who are not happy that it’s a position statement,” Wheelan wrote in an email, “and said that they will vote to make the DEI statement a standard.”
The statement says, in part: “While no single SACSCOC standard speaks to diversity, equity, and inclusion, opportunities are available throughout the standards to showcase efforts and to engage in thoughtful reflection, evaluation, and planning to support the diversity of all students, faculty, and staff.”
The updated statement, approved in June, also offers some new ways that a college can showcase how it supports marginalized and underserved communities, such as through research on the “educational impact and value of diversity,” “rewarding faculty, staff, students, and alumni efforts related to diversity, equity, and inclusion,” and “incorporating diversity, equity, and inclusion into the strategic-planning process; and evaluating relative to ongoing institutional effectiveness.”
“If an institution has decided to focus on DEI, we want to know how,” Wheelan said, “but we don’t force them to focus on it.”
Officials at the commission acknowledge that promoting DEI through an optional position statement reflects the political reality.
“It’s a tough topic, because of the types of institutions” the commission oversees, and the views of elected officials in their states, said Kimberly B. Hall, vice chancellor for institutional advancement and effectiveness at South College, and chair of the committee that finalized changes in the position statement.
The committee was unanimous in not seeking a broader standard to require a focus on diversity, equity, and inclusion, Hall said.
“I was very gratified by the unity in our committee when we discussed this,” Hall said. “It was unanimous that our position statement carried weight and provided institutions what they needed.”
The laws barring DEI staff and policies are not insurmountable challenges to guaranteeing that all students are treated equitably, Hall said. “A lot of our institutions do a nice job, and can nurture diversity to ensure that students receive equitable services and opportunities without dedicated staffing.”
But some advocates don’t think the position statement goes far enough.
Edward Conroy, a senior adviser on education policy at the left-leaning New America think tank, said that despite political headwinds, accreditors need to take a strong stand on diversity and equity to ensure that minority and low-income students get the same opportunities as white and wealthier students to attend and complete college.
Accreditors still carry some weight as gatekeepers of federal student aid, he said. For example, in some states where lawmakers have barred DEI offices, such as Texas, legislators have created an exception to allow those policies and practices if they are required by accreditors.
In Ohio, opponents of a bill meant to prohibit the teaching of divisive concepts — what free-speech advocates have called an “educational gag order” — said the threat of colleges’ losing accreditation gave conservative lawmakers pause.
Those examples show that even many politicians who deeply oppose DEI understand that colleges need some flexibility, Conroy said, and shows accreditors they have some space to be brave.
“In certain states it is going to be challenging but not impossible for accreditors to hold colleges accountable,” he said, “but it will require a level of courage that they have sometimes but not always shown enforcing standards that are not nearly as controversial.”
Legislators in nine of the 11 states where the commission oversees colleges introduced bills to prohibit public institutions from having diversity, equity, and inclusion offices or staff; ban mandatory diversity training; prohibit institutions from using diversity statements in hiring and promotion; or prohibit colleges from using race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in admissions or employment. Such bills became law in four of the states where the commission accredits colleges: Florida, North Carolina, Tennessee, and Texas.
On top of that, Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida, who is running for the Republican presidential nomination, has blasted accreditors on the campaign trail and filed a federal lawsuit arguing that accreditors’ authority as gatekeepers of U.S. financial aid is unconstitutional. Colleges must be accredited by a federally recognized accreditor in order to receive federal student loans, Pell Grants, and other financial aid.
“Some of the problems with the university and the ideological capture — that didn’t happen by accident. You can trace back all the way to the accreditation cartels,” DeSantis said in May, announcing his presidential bid.
Lawmakers in Florida and North Carolina have also passed laws requiring their states’ public colleges to find accreditation from an accreditor other than the Southern Association within a decade.
Higher-education experts note that the Florida law came on the heels of the accreditor’s inquiries about political interference and conflicts of interest at Florida State University and the University of Florida.
“Bodies like SACS,” said Jeffrey M. Weimer, a lawyer who specializes in higher-education accreditation, “may be reluctant to address issues of the day that are hotly contested.”
The Florida and North Carolina laws are part of a growing power struggle that could force accreditors to tread cautiously when enforcing their standards, he said.