Changing Higher Ed Inside Neg Reg and the 2026 Higher Ed Changes
Higher education has spent years hearing that affordability, student debt, and public skepticism are putting pressure on colleges and universities. What is different now is that those pressures are shaping federal action in ways that will directly affect Title IV funding, graduate program financing, accreditation reform, and institutional decision-making before July 1, 2026.
In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Andy Vaughn, President and CEO of Alliant University and one of three higher education representatives on the 2025 Negotiated Rulemaking RISE Committee, about what the latest Neg Reg signals for colleges and universities and why institutions that have not started preparing are already behind.
Drawing on Vaughn's firsthand experience in federal rulemaking and Dr. McNaughton's strategic perspective on higher education leadership, this conversation examines why this round of Neg Reg is different from prior cycles, why the One Big Beautiful Bill changed the operating landscape, and why the next major pressure point is likely to be accreditation reform tied to cost and value. The discussion also explores what these changes mean for graduate programs, why institutions need to involve faculty early in redesign decisions, and how leaders should be thinking now about financing, delivery costs, and institutional relevance in a rapidly changing environment.
This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, provosts, CFOs, trustees, graduate enrollment leaders, and others responsible for institutional planning, financial sustainability, and academic strategy in a time of federal change.
Topics Covered:- Why this Neg Reg is different from prior negotiated rulemaking cycles
- How the One Big Beautiful Bill changed the Title IV and regulatory landscape
- Why student debt is the political driver, but cost of delivery is the deeper issue
- Why the accreditation Neg Reg is likely to focus on cost, value, and specialty accreditors
- How graduate and professional programs may be affected by financing gaps
- Why institutions should be modeling risk and redesigning programs before July 2026
- Why faculty and program leaders need to be involved early in institutional response
- How AI is shifting from a compliance concern to a program quality and workforce issue
- How Alliant began tracking Title IV changes before the bill passed and started preparing early
- Why some graduate programs may face private lending gaps with no strong historical baseline
- Examples of specialty accreditor requirements that can lock in delivery costs, including supervision expectations, program length, and student-to-faculty ratios
- The institutional challenge of lowering tuition when accreditation structures still drive high-cost delivery
- Why some institutions are still treating AI primarily as a containment issue instead of a graduate-readiness issue
- Institutions should treat these federal changes as structural, not temporary, and plan accordingly.
- The real issue is not just tuition pricing. It is the cost of delivering programs under current academic and accreditation structures.
- Colleges and universities that start redesigning early, especially with faculty involved, will have more options than those that wait for the pressure to become financial damage.
Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/2026-neg-reg-and-title-iv-changes-in-higher-education/
#HigherEducation #HigherEducationPodcast #NegReg