WASHINGTON - MAY 03: College graduates, wearing caps and gowns, walk into House Majority Leader John Boehner's office on Capitol Hill May 3, 2006 in Washington, DC. The graduates delivered mock diplomas with more than 10,000 signatures of students and parents demanding an affordable college education. (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images) A new rating plan for U.S. colleges from the U.S. Department of Education will divide schools into broad categories of good, bad and average based upon affordability, graduation rates and student loan repayment rates. (Photo by Mark Wilson/Getty Images)

WASHINGTON (CBS DC) — A new rating plan for American colleges from the Department of Education will divide schools into broad categories of good, bad and average based upon affordability, graduation rates and student loan repayment rates.

The Obama administration has directed the department to develop the college ratings system by the 2015-2016 school year to improve “transparency” and “accountability” among degree-granting schools. The plan intends to recognize and rate schools that “excel at enrolling students from all backgrounds, focus on maintaining affordability, and succeed at helping all students graduate,” according to the department “framework” released Friday.

“Relatively simple metrics like the percentage of students repaying their loans on time might be important as consumers weigh whether or not they will be able to handle their financial obligations after attending a specific school,” the department said in the document released Friday.

Education Secretary Arne Duncan said rating colleges is a “financial and moral obligation” to U.S. students and families being crushed by $1.2 trillion in student loan debt – the second largest source of personal debt in the U.S. behind only mortgages – in addition to making wiser choices with taxpayers’ $150 billion annual investment in student aid.

“As a nation, we have to make college more accessible and affordable and ensure that all students graduate with any education of real value,” Duncan said in a statement. “Our students deserve to know, before they enroll, that the schools they’ve chosen will deliver this value. With the guidance of thousands of wise voices, we can develop a useful ratings system that will help more Americans realize the dream of a degree that unleashes their potential and opens doors to a better life.”

The plan notes that it is difficult to judge many postsecondary institutions’ “intangible” elements through quantitative measures or simple ratings systems, but says it will focus judgment on “core elements” of education and affordability.

Most schools will fall into a “middle” category, with one aim of the plan to keep a relatively small number of institutions in the high and low-performing categories.

Four-year and two-year private and public colleges will be judged across the country, but graduate degree and non-degree institutions will not be included in the initial version of the ratings report.

It will also be a rating system and not a numerical rankings system.

Congressional Republicans have already blasted the program as government “overreach” into higher education.

“They’re getting involved in something they have no business getting involved with,” Rep. Virginia Foxx, R-N.C., a former college administrator, told Politico. “Absolutely, it’s overreach.”

Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., plans to lead an effort to cut off funding for the ratings initiative. Sen. Lamar Alexander, R-Tenn., will push a similar measure in the Senate, and Sen. Marco Rubio, R-Fla., is among many GOP lawmakers denouncing the concept as flawed, Politico reports.

But Education Under Secretary Ted Mitchell said in a statement that “accountability” will be improved through the plan.

“Designing a new college ratings system is an important step in improving transparency, accountability, and equity in higher education,” he said in a statement. “The public should know how students fare at institutions receiving federal student aid, and this performance should be considered when we assess our investments and set priorities. We also need to create incentives for schools to accelerate progress toward the most important goals, like graduating low-income students and holding down costs.”

— Benjamin Fearnow