A house divided: Chapman faculty split over Trump’s efforts to redirect higher education

Graphic by Easton Clark, Photo Editor

The Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education was sent to nine universities this fall by the Trump Administration, offering favored access to federal grants if they comply. 

The letter requires a nondiscriminatory admissions process, limits international enrollment, requires standardized testing, advocates for sex-based privacy and safety in sports and freezes tuition for five years, among a list of other things.

The universities that received the offer are the University of Southern California (USC), Vanderbilt, the University of Pennsylvania, Dartmouth College, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), the University of Texas, the University of Arizona, Brown University and the University of Virginia. At this point, all but Vanderbilt and the University of Texas have rejected the proposal.

“My reaction was very unsurprised, and I say that because I think that the compact and the things being proposed in it — from the Trump Administration perspective — make complete sense,” communication studies Professor Erik Brooks told The Panther.  

Rhetoric studies Professor Ian Barnard had a very different reaction. 

“It's disgusting,” they said. “(The compact) is a mess of contradictions.” 

Brooks said it all comes down to the role of American higher education.

“From what I understand, this compact is just one small step in trying to install a sense of normalcy of what higher education is supposed to be,” Brooks said. “To revert to what, in (the Trump Administration’s) mind, the university should be doing already. So, from their perspective, nothing proposed in the compact is mindblowing or incredibly controversial; it’s just what schools should be doing already.” 

The compact begins by praising the American higher education system as “the envy of the world,” which stuck out to Barnard.

“(American higher education) is the envy of the world — which I agree with — but then everything after that is about how to destroy it,” they said. “If something was the envy of the world, you would think you (would) want to nurture it and support it, not destroy it… That's the irony, the first sentence has it right.”

Barnard said that although the document states universities cannot discriminate against students based on race, gender or sexual orientation for admissions, it also limits international students to make up 15% of the university's population, with no more than 5% of them coming from the same country of origin. 

Additionally, Barnard found it problematic that the compact claims to promote no singular ideology, yet also asks for the promotion of “American and Western values,” which they see as biased.

“What do they mean by ‘American values and way of life?’” said Barnard. “It certainly doesn’t mean diversity and inclusion, because those are the things being attacked.”

Brooks said the compact is indicative of a larger problem.

“I don’t think it's blatantly a bad thing (or) a good thing,” said Brooks. “I think that (the compact) — at the very least — brings up an important conversation we all should be having, regardless of what side of the (political) aisle: what kind of environment do we want our college campuses to be like.”

A 2025 Gallup poll reveals that 42% of surveyed Americans have “a great deal” or “quite a lot” of confidence in higher education. Although an increase from 36% the past two years, it is still 15% less than the reported 57% confidence in 2015.

“There has been a highlighted conflict of what the (university system’s) role is in society,” said Brooks. “Is the university (system) an institution whose goal is to advance truth-seeking? Or is it an institution to advance social justice? Not that there is anything inherently wrong with either side, but those two identities can’t always coexist well, and there is not going to be a lot of overlap.”

The same study found confidence in Democrats increased by 5% (to 61%) and Republicans increased by 6% (to 26%). 

“If we continue down this track, where higher education is seen as only adhering to or only serving one political side or one ideology, we could theoretically end up in a situation where there is absolutely no trust in higher education from half the country, if not more,” said Brooks. “Universities would be seen as political institutions, not learning institutions. They would be seen as places where only (one) group of people goes — and the other group does not.”

Barnard already sees the political influence on universities increasing.

“Universities in the U.S. are going to become like universities in totalitarian states, which are not the envy of the world but seen as mouthpieces for the government (and) propaganda machines,” said Barnard. 

They also find the monetary reward problematic.

“It's basically bribery,” Barnard said. “To keep people on their toes, (the Department of Justice) can keep saying, ‘You haven’t done this enough. If you want the money, you are going to have to do more of this. Add these courses. Get rid of these courses.’ It’s really about blackmailing universities.”

The Panther reached out to President Matt Parlow for comment, but he did not comment directly on Chapman’s stance as an institution.

“Chapman University has had a long tradition of not making official statements about national or world affairs on behalf of the President's Office or the university because these issues are complex, nuanced and rapidly changing,” Parlow told The Panther. “It would be unfeasible for one person to capture the sentiment of an entire university community.”

It is unknown if the first nine universities were a trial run, the first wave or the full extent of the proposal. Trump wrote on Truth Social, “For those institutions that want to quickly return to the pursuit of Truth and Achievement, they are invited to enter into a forward-looking agreement with the Federal Government.” 

No further formal offers have been extended.