News Topic

Action Alerts, Advocacy & Public Policy, Departments & Institutions, Federal Government, Funding for History, History Education

Tell the Department of Education to Protect Title VI and Fulbright-Hays Programs

The US Department of Education (ED) has proposed eliminating the regulations (34 CFR Parts 655, 656, 657, 658, 660, 661, 662, 663, 664, and 669) governing the Title VI International Education Programs and Fulbright-Hays Programs—federal programs that have long supported foreign language instruction, area studies, international research, and educational exchange.

These programs are essential to historical research, teaching, and public scholarship. Title VI and Fulbright-Hays programs provide critical support for the historical discipline through foreign language instruction and educational exchanges that enable historians to conduct research, interpret sources, and contribute new knowledge about the past. The proposed change would eliminate legally binding procedural safeguards that, in many instances, provide the sole guarantee that proposals and applications will be assessed on their merits and with input from academic specialists. The rule would reduce our ability to produce the evidence-based scholarship that informs education, public policy, cultural institutions, and public understanding of the past.

The ED argues that rescinding the regulations would provide greater flexibility in administering these programs. It has not explained how these important programs would operate in the future. The proposal would remove longstanding safeguards that provide transparency, accountability, and predictability for higher education institutions and researchers.

The American Historical Association submitted a public comment opposing these changes on July 28. Now, we need historians across the country to make their voices heard. 

Take Action by July 31, 2026

Please submit your own public comment to the Department of Education by July 31, 2026. We suggest you take the following steps:

  1. Read the AHA’s public comment and/or our key concerns (posted below under Why This Matters).
  2. Draft a comment (it doesn’t have to be long–even a brief comment can make a difference!)
  3. Follow the guidelines shared in the AHA’s Responding to Federal Regulations.
  4. Submit your comment through the regulations.gov webpage.
Why This Matters 

The proposed rule would reduce transparency, create uncertainty for applicants, and weaken the consistent administration of programs that Congress established to advance the nation’s long-term international education, language instruction, and research capacity.

Our key concerns include the following:

  1. Title VI and Fulbright-Hays Programs have long served the national interest by supporting foreign language instruction, international research, and area studies that would otherwise receive little institutional support. These programs prepare students for careers in government, business, education, and public service while strengthening the nation’s capacity to understand regions of strategic importance.
  2. The department has not demonstrated that existing regulations impose unnecessary burdens. The proposal repeatedly states that existing regulations are unnecessarily burdensome but does not identify which provisions are problematic, quantify the burdens they impose, or explain why targeted amendments would not adequately address those concerns.
  3. Existing regulations promote transparency, fair competition, and predictability. The proposed changes would eliminate regulations that provide the sole legal guarantees that federal funding be administered through a fair and intellectually rigorous review process. 34 CFR Part 662, governing Fulbright-Hays, requires the Department of Education to evaluate the quality of application materials, assess the qualifications of applicants, and seek input from external panels of academic specialists, providing foundational guarantees that applicants will be evaluated based on the merits of their proposals. Institutions make substantial long-term investments in faculty, language instruction, international partnerships, and graduate training in reliance on the stable administration of these programs. Abrupt elimination of the governing regulations without a replacement framework introduces uncertainty that may discourage those investments, particularly for programs in less commonly taught languages that depend on sustained federal support.
  4. Existing regulations already provide considerable flexibility. The Department argues that rescission is necessary to permit greater flexibility and responsiveness to changing geopolitical circumstances. However, Title VI and Fulbright-Hays programs already provide substantial flexibility through annual Notices Inviting Applications, competition priorities, and discretionary grant administration.
  5. The proposal creates uncertainty regarding program administration. The proposed rule does not explain how application review, selection criteria, peer review, or program oversight would function after rescission. Institutions and prospective applicants deserve greater clarity regarding how the Department intends to administer these congressionally authorized programs if the existing regulations are eliminated.

The AHA’s comment urges the Department of Education to retain the existing regulations and not finalize the proposed rule.

Deadline: July 31, 2026

Make Your Voice Heard!