Research and development A blog for short updates that provide context for breaking news about law and policy changes that affect science and scientists today.
The “Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education,” drafted by the Trump administration and sent to nine universities on Oct. 1, proposes that institutions agree to different standards in exchange for preferential treatment in funding decisions.
Provisions of the compact ask universities to:
- Consider any demographic factors, including sex, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, and religion in any admissions decisions, financial aid decisions, or hiring decisions.
- Pledge to “institutional neutrality,” create an “intellectually open campus environment,” and “eliminate institutional units that purposefully punish, dispute, and even raid violently conservative ideologies.”
- All employees are required to refrain from actions or speech related to social and political events unless such events directly affect their university or they are acting in their individual capacity rather than as representatives of the university.
- Interpret the words “woman,” and “man” according to “Reproductive Functions and Biological Processes.”
- Stop charging tuition for any admitted student to pursue “hard science” programs. .
- Disclose foreign funds and gifts.
The proposed contract was sent to the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Virginia, the University of Arizona, the University of Texas at Austin, the University of Southern California, Vanderbilt University, Dartmouth University, Brown University, and the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
White House spokeswoman Liz Huston said, “Any university that denies this once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to transform higher education is not serving its students or their parents. They are bowing to radical, left-wing bureaucrats.” Bloomberg.
Simon Margenson, professor of higher education at Oxford University, said: time If successful, the compact would “establish a level of federal control over the national mind never seen before.”
On October 12, President Trump opened the offer to all institutions of higher education in a post on the social media website Truth Social Social Social.
As of October 17, the following schools have responded to Trump’s offer:
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology: MIT was the first to reject Trump’s offer. In an Oct. 10 letter to the administration, MIT President Sally Kornbluth wrote that MIT’s practices “meet or exceed many of the standards outlined in the document,” but that the compact “includes principles with which we disagree, including those that would limit freedom of expression and freedom as an institution.”
- Brown University: In an Oct. 15 letter to the administration, Brown University President Christina H. Paxson rejected the deal. She wrote that Brown “would work with the government to find a solution if there were concerns about the university fulfilling its academic mission,” but that, like Kornbluth, she was concerned that the compact, by its nature and various provisions, would limit academic freedom and undermine Brown’s governing autonomy. “
- University of Southern California: In an Oct. 16 statement, USC Interim President Byung-soo Kim informed the university community that she rejected the agreement, writing that the university takes legal obligations seriously and is working to streamline administrative functions, control tuition rates, maintain academic rigor and ensure students develop critical thinking skills. “Although the compact will be voluntary, tying research benefits to it will, over time, undermine the very values of free inquiry and academic excellence that the compact seeks to promote,” he wrote.
- University of Pennsylvania: In an October 16 statement, Open President Jay Larry Jameson informed the university community that he had declined to sign the compact. “At Penn, we are committed to merit-based success and accountability. The long-standing partnership between American higher education and the federal government has greatly benefited the community and our nation. Shared goals and investments in talent and ideas will likely translate into progress,” he wrote.
— Grace van Dillon (@gvd.bsky.social), staff writer
This update is made possible by input from the scientific community. Do you have a story about how a change in law or policy is affecting scientists or research? Send us a tip [email protected].
