Board of Trustees Push Back Against Trump’s Attack on DEI Requirements
The Board passed a resolution to protect the college from the Department of Education's accreditation reforms
By Tom Whitehead
The Board of Trustees unanimously voted against the Department of Education’s proposed revisions to the Accreditation Handbook that remove Diversity, Equity and Inclusion requirements for colleges.
The decision came despite some Board members’ qualms about going it alone against the Department of Education, as well as recently receiving a clean bill of health from the Accrediting Commission for Community and Junior Colleges.
The Department of Education had published a Request for Information (RFI) in the Federal Register on Dec. 11, “to solicit feedback from the public on how best to reenvision and update” the Accreditation Handbook.
The “Resolution Affirming the Role of Accreditation in Protecting Academic Freedom, Institutional Autonomy, and Equity, and Expecting the Chancellor to Submit Public Comment,” approved on Jan. 8, doubles down on DEI, declaring it to be “essential to educational quality, student success, workforce preparation, and democratic participation, particularly at open-access institutions such as community colleges that served diverse student populations.”
Drafted by Vice President Luis Zamora, the resolution calls on the chancellor to submit comments in response to the Department of Education’s RFI. The Board felt that it needed to act quickly because the comment period closes on Jan. 26.
The current Accreditation Handbook, dated February 2022, does not mention DEI, but the Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary Education, Dr. David Barker, said in the Dec. 10 press release that “changes to the accreditation handbook will complement a forthcoming negotiated rulemaking on Accreditation, which the Department plans to convene next year.”
According to Barker, the new rulemaking is a continuation of the department’s implementation of Trump’s Executive Order 14278, “Reforming Accreditation to Strengthen Higher Education,” which Trump signed in April of last year.
During a lengthy discussion among Board members, during which the wording of the resolution was amended before a final vote to approve it, former Board President Anita Martinez made it clear that she felt there are significant risks to the college.
“I’m very concerned about retaliatory action from the Administration,” Martinez said. “Very concerned about financial aid.”
Zamora pointed to 20,000 plus individuals tied to Harvard’s Crimson Courage who are also behind the sentiment of the resolution, and cited the San Francisco Board of Supervisors' decision to pass a similar resolution, “Protecting Academic Freedom and Condemning Attacks on Higher Education.”
The Resolution also names a large number of officials and institutions that the Chancellor is requested to contact for support. Chancellor Kimberlee Messina did not respond to a request for comment by press time.
