The U.S. Department of Education sent a letter to university presidents and governing boards on Monday asking them to publicly commit, by the end of the year, to a series of changes long championed by the Trump administration — a notably softer approach than the compact nine universities rejected last fall.
In the letter, dated August 3, Education Secretary Linda McMahon asks institutions to post statements on their websites addressing seven areas: admissions transparency, free speech and campus protest policy, ideological diversity in hiring and scholarship, cost and loan repayment outcomes, grade inflation, foreign influence on research, and how campuses can serve what she calls American national interests. McMahon writes that she hopes to see “a variety of institutional types, each with distinct missions and priorities, issue landmark declarations of purpose that will revitalize higher education in the years ahead.”
The letter arrives roughly ten months after the White House’s “Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education” was sent to nine prominent universities, offering preferential access to federal research funding in exchange for adopting administration-aligned policies on admissions, hiring and governance. Seven of those nine schools — including MIT, Brown, Penn, USC, UVA, Dartmouth and the University of Arizona — publicly rejected it, citing threats to academic freedom and institutional independence. MIT’s Sally Kornbluth was first to decline, writing that the compact’s premise conflicted with the university’s belief that funding should rest on scientific merit alone.
This time, the more contentious provisions are absent. There is no 15% cap on international undergraduate enrollment, no five-year tuition freeze, and no explicit promise of a leg up on federal contracts and grants for schools that comply. The department also has not said what happens to schools that decline to participate, or comply only partially.
Ted Mitchell, president of the American Council on Education, drew a sharp contrast with last year’s approach: “Unlike the compact, which was a gun-to-the-head ultimatum, this is an invitation to a conversation,” he said, adding he hopes the letter prompts productive discussion regardless of whether schools ultimately sign on. He also noted the letter’s focus on admissions practices makes it most relevant to elite, research-intensive universities rather than the broader landscape of American higher education.
Unlike with the compact, the administration consulted with higher education groups beforehand. Leadership at the Association of American Universities provided feedback on a related questionnaire in the weeks before the letter went out, according to a joint statement from AAU officials. Jenna Storey of the American Enterprise Institute, who helped arrange those conversations, called the letter “radically different from the Compact” in a statement, noting it does not condition federal funding priority on adopting specific policies.
Not everyone is reassured. Ross Mugler, president of the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges, welcomed the shared goals but cautioned that reforms should be “shaped by fiduciary responsibility and the long-term interest of our institutions and their students, not by political coercion,” in his own statement.
Universities that rejected last year’s compact, including the University of Arizona, say they are now reviewing the new proposal. Arizona President Suresh Garimella said the school will again consult its shared governance groups before responding.
Whether this friendlier framing produces different results than the compact — which found no takers among its original invitees — remains to be seen.
