IV 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 614 

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 

JUNE 10, 2014 

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 inVerDate Mar 15 2010 01:53 Jun 11, 2014 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\HR614.IH HR614

dlhill on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 614 IH 

novation in postsecondary education and for lifelong 

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 workstudy 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 apVerDate Mar 15 2010 01:53 Jun 11, 2014 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00002 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\HR614.IH HR614

dlhill on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HRES 614 IH 

propriate 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; 


dlhill on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
4 

•HRES 614 IH 

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 

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep2 resentatives that— 

3 (1) students and families should maintain the 

4 right and responsibility of determining where to en5 roll for postsecondary education; 

6 (2) the Federal Government, in conjunction 

7 with States and accreditors, has a responsibility to 

8 ensure that the significant taxpayer funds that are 

9 invested in student aid each year are appropriately 

10 spent, and has tools such as program reviews and 


dlhill on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
5 

•HRES 614 IH 

1 eligibility and certification procedures that should be 

2 better targeted to those purposes; 

3 (3) the Federal Government also has a positive 

4 role it could play in making information available to 

5 enable informed choices about postsecondary edu6 cation available to prospective students and the Ad7 ministration should work collaboratively with the 

8 higher education community to make that informa9 tion more consumer friendly and accessible to those 

10 students and their families; and 

11 (4) the Administration’s proposal to rate post12 secondary institutions through an oversimplified 

13 Federal rating system that is not supported by post14 secondary institutions, statute, or by the House of 

15 Representatives, will lead to less choice, diversity, 

16 and innovation, and should be rejected. 

Æ 


dlhill on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS