Trump鈥檚 carrot for college reform
The president tries incentives over bullying as a way to change universities, even offering a dialogue about his proposed reforms, perhaps in an academic spirit of civility and reason.
Passers-by walk and ride on the campus of Brown University, in Providence, R.I.
AP/file
In the last 15 years, the public perception of higher education has plummeted. Only one-third of Americans rate such education as 鈥渧ery important,鈥� down from three-quarters in 2010. Even a majority of college grads agree. Reform is now on the lips of many a university leader. And campus debates over types of reform have largely lived up to the core principles of advanced learning: civility, evidence, reason, and innovation.
But then, earlier this year, the new Trump administration began to demand its brand of reforms and wielded a big stick: It cut, or threatened to cut, billions in federal funds to many universities. Some schools went along with the demands despite an erosion in academic freedom. Others resisted and won in the courts. The president's action disrupted the work of many universities and set a harsh partisan tone in the national discussion about university reform.
Last week, however, the White House appeared to shift tactics. It offered an experiment in incentives and listening. It proposed a 鈥渃ompact鈥� with nine universities that would reward them with 鈥渕ultiple positive benefits,鈥� such as new federal research grants, if they volunteered to make specific changes in 10 areas, from grade inflation to gender definition to a cap on international students.
This carrot approach is similar to one started in 2009 by President Barack Obama with a program dubbed Race to the Top. It rewarded states that adopted K-12 education reforms preferred by the White House.
The Trump administration has welcomed feedback on its proposal. Some of the nine universities have opened a campus dialogue about the offer. A civil debate, the kind essential to learning, could now lead to compromises of all sides.
The nine schools were chosen because they have a president or a board that 鈥渞eally indicated they are committed to a higher-quality education,鈥� a top White House official told The Wall Street Journal. 鈥淲e hope all universities ultimately are able to have a conversation with us.鈥�
Some of the proposed reforms might be difficult for the school leaders to accept. How can they prevent students from belittling conservative ideas, for example, without imposing on free speech? Yet the door is now open for a two-way debate on the reforms without bullying or lawsuits. 鈥淚nstitutions of higher education are free to develop models and values other than those [listed in the compact],鈥� states the proposal.
Reason, respect, and facts just might prevail. And universities might again be seen as important for individual advancement.