The Trump administration sent the Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education to nine universities across the nation on Wednesday, Oct. 1. The compact offers preferential access to federal funds in exchange for an agreement to the conditions it lists, most of which attempt to implement policies that adhere to the Trump administration’s political priorities. The document details 10 conditions that include, among other requirements, removing sex, gender and race as factors in the admissions process, reinforcing safety on campus and restricting faculty and university affiliated officials from expressing their political views.
The nine universities that initially received the compact include the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), Dartmouth College, University of Southern California (USC), Vanderbilt University, Brown University, University of Virginia, University of Arizona, University of Texas (UT) at Austin and University of Pennsylvania — seven of which have rejected the compact, while UT Austin and Vanderbilt still evaluating the compact.
After the Trump administration sent the compact to the initial nine universities, MIT was the first to publicly reject it, and MIT president Sally Kornbluth stated in a letter to the MIT community that the compact includes “principles with which MIT disagrees, including those that would restrict the freedom of expression and our independence as an institution.” Many universities followed suit, several of them citing similar reasons that the restrictions were too limiting.
Following MIT’s decision, Dartmouth College took a similar approach. President Sian Leah Beilock initially informed the Dartmouth community via email that the college would consider the compact. However, she issued a follow-up email on Oct. 18 formally rejecting the compact, citing reasons similar to MIT’s. Dartmouth freshman and MVHS alum ‘25 Saanvi Goyal recalls that when the compact first circulated, both students and faculty were concerned about its impact on their peers.
“The first notice that students got from the administration about the compact was quite vague in terms of what the school was actually going to do,” Goyal said. “I was initially dissatisfied because the administration was not giving us a concrete answer. There were a lot of student protests in front of the president’s office, and also one of the largest faculty petitions against signing the compact. It was really cool to see that a lot of people stood up for their own beliefs, and ultimately it resulted in Dartmouth not signing the compact.”
Goyal’s experience with the Dartmouth administration’s unclear management of the compact reinforced her belief that universities should be places where students and faculty feel comfortable questioning decisions and advocating for what they believe. Especially as the compact attempts to censor faculty’s political views on campus, she maintains that institutional excellence depends on fostering critical thinking and exposing students to different perspectives.
“I think part of the job of these institutions is to educate people on modern day politics, because they’re going to become citizens that vote or maybe even run for office,” Goyal said. “Part of that is preparing students to understand different perspectives on the world and modern and current issues.”
While East Coast institutions like Dartmouth and MIT faced student protests and faculty petitions, USC faced additional threats beyond reactions from those on campus. As the only Californian university to originally receive the compact, USC formally rejected the compact on Oct. 16. However, while the administration deliberated the compact, USC also received an additional response from California Governor Gavin Newsom. Specifically, Newsom threatened to cut state funding if it complied with the compact’s demands. This includes cutting funding from CalGrant, a state-wide financial aid program that, among other initiatives, provides students with the financial support to pay for college without requiring reimbursement, equipping USC with $28.4 million in the 2024-2025 academic year, supporting 3,198 students.
Guidance Counselor Clay Stiver explains that although he typically aligns with Newsom’s policies, he disagrees with these recent threats. He says that this strategy will only intimidate USC, possibly resulting in more consequences for both the school and future students.
“Newsom is on this kick lately where he’s fighting fire with fire,” Stiver said. “I’m not sure that I like that strategy, because it’s just putting more pressure on USC. I think it’s not a bad thing to take a look at higher education and its practices, and I always think there should be accountability in that regard. But I don’t want to see students suffer, especially since most of them can’t vote.”
Senior Kavya Kumar agrees with Stiver, saying he feels a sense of uncertainty as a student applying to USC with the threat of funding cuts. Specifically, Kumar’s concerns about the compact are centered around one of the demands in the compact, “equality in admissions,” explaining that it could significantly impact the admissions process for students all over the country.
“Education should stay separate from politics,” Kumar said. “Political issues shouldn’t be in line with educational issues, because everyone deserves an equal opportunity to education. With all these new policies coming into play, it might be really hard to separate education from policy. I’m scared that private schools will succumb to these demands and that important factors like race or gender will not be considered in the admission process. In that sense, these things that are happening in the government with Trump right now, might affect my education in the next four years.”
When applying to college, Stiver urges students to look beyond name recognition. He explains that many college applicants are drawn to schools such as USC, Dartmouth and other elite universities simply because of their prestige. Instead, he encourages students to do more research on the values and priorities of each school and the opportunities it offers, emphasizing that understanding a college’s culture is just as important as its rankings. Stiver believes that the responses from the initial nine universities that received the compact are a step in the right direction, explaining that rejecting the compact is necessary to their status as private institutions.
“It’s a good thing that they’re not just going to bow down to whoever’s in charge,” Stiver said. “They’re an independent institution. They deserve and have the right to do what they want. That’s what America is all about.”
