[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 26 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 26

 Strongly supporting the quality and value of diversity and innovation 
in the Nation's higher education institutions, and strongly disagreeing 
with the President's proposal to create and administer a Postsecondary 
                      Institution Ratings System.


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 12, 2015

  Mr. Goodlatte (for himself and Mr. Capuano) submitted the following 
 resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the 
                               Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION


 
 Strongly supporting the quality and value of diversity and innovation 
in the Nation's higher education institutions, and strongly disagreeing 
with the President's proposal to create and administer a Postsecondary 
                      Institution Ratings System.

Whereas the Nation's diverse higher education system, which includes community 
        colleges, public and private four-year colleges, faith-based colleges, 
        research universities, career training schools, work colleges, land 
        grant universities, historically Black colleges, women's colleges, 
        Hispanic serving institutions, institutes for the arts, and many other 
        specialized institutions, offers opportunity and innovation in 
        postsecondary education and for life-long learning that is unmatched 
        anywhere in the world;
Whereas this diversity of institutions reflects the plurality and history of our 
        people, and the diversity of the Nation's ideas and ideals;
Whereas many of these institutions are the intellectual homes to our great 
        traditions of faith, social service, research, arts and humanities, all 
        flourishing in the Nation's free marketplace of ideas;
Whereas public, private non-profit, and for-profit institutions all compete in 
        the marketplace for students causing postsecondary institutions to 
        constantly innovate and adapt in order to meet the evolving needs of the 
        Nation's students;
Whereas the Department of Education already collects large amounts of data and 
        metrics each year from postsecondary institutions with much of this 
        information made publicly available to prospective students, but not in 
        a useful way;
Whereas most States are better equipped to distribute meaningful information 
        regarding the postsecondary institutions within their borders;
Whereas the Federal Government has focused its investment in higher education in 
        providing grants, loans and work-study funds to help low- and middle-
        income students, who are academically qualified for college and who are 
        willing to work hard, attend college, but has left the choice of 
        institution, and the responsibility of effort for success, up to 
        students and their families;
Whereas institutions that educate students who receive these funds are and shall 
        continue to be accountable for the appropriate use of those funds, and 
        must already go through private accreditation, State authorization, as 
        well as Federal eligibility certification processes to be able to 
        participate in the Federal student aid programs;
Whereas the amount of Federal aid a student receives is determined by Congress 
        through need analysis formulas in the Higher Education Act and through 
        the annual appropriations process, and may only be adjusted on a case-
        by-case basis by a campus Financial Aid Officer, and may not be adjusted 
        by the Administration;
Whereas the development of a Postsecondary Institution Ratings System has been 
        proposed by the current Administration to rate and compare the value of 
        colleges, and to base the amount of need a low-income student receives 
        not exclusively on need, but, also, on the Administration's rating of 
        the college that student chooses to attend;
Whereas the Administration has suggested this rating system will put a 
        particular emphasis on graduates' earnings, suggesting that institutions 
        that produce graduates who go into public service, the military, 
        ministry, non-profit work, or who stay at home to care for family are 
        somehow less worthy of support than institutions that produce graduates 
        who go into more lucrative fields;
Whereas the Administration has said the rating system will also give 
        consideration to graduation rates of traditional students, thereby 
        disadvantaging institutions that have a mission to serve students who 
        are first generation to college, persons with learning disabilities, 
        veterans and other adults who are resuming education while also working 
        and caring for families;
Whereas a rating system built around a handful of factors chosen by the 
        Department of Education is likely to lead to greater standardization, 
        less choice, and less innovation;
Whereas a rating system built around a handful of factors chosen by the 
        Department of Education is reductionist in nature and will overlook many 
        of the qualitative benefits that accrue to individuals and communities 
        from a college degree, including, but not limited to, greater civic 
        participation, better health, greater appreciation of the arts and 
        culture, and critical reasoning skills; and
Whereas a Federal rating system will likely carry an image of validity that will 
        mislead the people of the United States on college choice, decrease the 
        ability of colleges to openly compete with each other in the 
        marketplace, and replace the free choices of students and their 
        families, informed by their values, with monetary measures determined by 
        the Federal Government: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives 
that--
            (1) students and families should maintain the right and 
        responsibility of determining where to enroll for postsecondary 
        education;
            (2) the Federal Government, in conjunction with States and 
        accreditors, has a responsibility to ensure that the 
        significant taxpayer funds that are invested in student aid 
        each year are appropriately spent, and has tools such as 
        program reviews and eligibility and certification procedures 
        that should be better targeted to those purposes;
            (3) the Federal Government also has a positive role it 
        could play in making information available to enable informed 
        choices about postsecondary education available to prospective 
        students and the Administration should work collaboratively 
        with the higher education community to make that information 
        more consumer friendly and accessible to those students and 
        their families; and
            (4) the Administration's proposal to rate postsecondary 
        institutions through an oversimplified Federal rating system 
        that is not supported by postsecondary institutions, statute, 
        or by the House of Representatives, will lead to less choice, 
        diversity, and innovation, and should be rejected.
                                 <all>