In a significant legal development, the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts has granted an extension for the ACTS survey deadline. On March 13, 2026, Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV issued a temporary restraining order that pushes the deadline from March 18 to March 25, 2026. This decision comes in the wake of a lawsuit initiated by 17 plaintiff states, which are contesting the legality of the ACTS survey under the Administrative Procedure Act.

Background on the ACTS Survey

The ACTS (Assessment of College Teaching Survey) has been a topic of contention among states and educational institutions. The lawsuit filed by the plaintiff states argues that the survey exceeds the statutory authority granted to the implementing agency. The plaintiffs contend that the ACTS is not conducted in an objective and neutral manner, raising serious concerns about its credibility and validity.

Legal Allegations Against ACTS

The complaint against the ACTS survey outlines several key allegations:

• Violation of the Administrative Procedure Act: The plaintiff states argue that ACTS does not adhere to the legal standards set forth in the Administrative Procedure Act, which governs how federal agencies propose and establish regulations.
• Lack of Objectivity: The states assert that the survey is biased and lacks the neutrality required for such assessments, which could significantly impact educational institutions’ reputations and funding.
• Procedural Failures: The complaint cites violations of the Paperwork Reduction Act and the E-Government Act, specifically noting the absence of a privacy impact assessment, which is a critical component of data collection practices.
• Bypassing Established Protocols: The states highlight that ACTS has circumvented the Technical Review Panel process established by the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) since 2002, which is essential for ensuring the quality and reliability of educational data.

Implications of the Extension

As a result of the court’s decision to extend the ACTS deadline, institutions now have a reprieve until March 25, 2026, to comply with the survey requirements. However, this extension introduces a layer of uncertainty regarding its applicability. It remains unclear whether the extension is limited to the institutions represented by the plaintiff states or if it will extend nationwide.

Concerns from Educational Institutions

Educational institutions across the country are closely monitoring the developments surrounding the ACTS survey. Many are concerned about the implications of the lawsuit and the potential changes in the survey’s administration. Some of the key concerns include:

• Impact on Funding: Many institutions rely on survey data for funding and grant applications. Any changes to the survey’s validity could jeopardize these financial resources.
• Reputation Risk: The results of the ACTS survey could influence public perception and institutional rankings, making the stakes particularly high for colleges and universities.
• Compliance Challenges: Institutions may face challenges in adapting to new requirements or changes in the survey process, especially if the legal proceedings lead to significant modifications in how the survey is conducted.

Next Steps in the Legal Proceedings

As the court awaits further developments in the case, the plaintiff states and the educational agencies involved will be preparing their arguments. The outcome of this legal battle could have far-reaching effects on how educational data is collected and reported in the future. Stakeholders are keenly observing the situation, knowing that the implications of this lawsuit may redefine practices within the educational sector.

Conclusion

The decision by Judge F. Dennis Saylor IV to extend the ACTS survey deadline has provided a temporary relief to institutions embroiled in the ongoing legal dispute. However, the underlying issues raised by the plaintiff states regarding the survey’s legality and adherence to procedural norms remain unresolved. As the case unfolds, educational institutions, policymakers, and legal experts will be closely monitoring the developments in this significant legal matter, which has the potential to reshape the landscape of educational assessment in the United States.