Penn State University will not sign a controversial federal proposal that offers increased funding in exchange for adopting a specific ideological agenda, according to university President Neeli Bendapudi. The decision aligns Penn State with a growing number of major universities opposing the plan, citing concerns over academic freedom and institutional independence.
Speaking at a university forum, Bendapudi confirmed that while Penn State has not been formally invited to join the "Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education," it would decline if asked. The proposal has drawn sharp criticism from higher education organizations for its extensive list of requirements affecting admissions, campus life, and curriculum.
Key Takeaways
- Penn State President Neeli Bendapudi stated the university would not sign the proposed federal compact.
- The compact offers federal grants in return for adherence to specific policies on admissions, free speech, and tuition.
- Bendapudi cited threats to academic freedom and merit-based principles as reasons for the rejection.
- Major academic organizations have condemned the proposal as federal overreach and a partisan ideological agenda.
A Firm Stance on Academic Principles
During a "State of State" event on Thursday, President Bendapudi was directly asked how the university would respond to the compact. Her answer was unequivocal.
"We have not been approached, as you know, and if we were we would not sign it," Bendapudi stated. "That’s because of a number of reasons we could go into but we would not sign it."
While she did not elaborate extensively during the public forum, Bendapudi later clarified her position to student media. She emphasized the importance of academic freedom and expressed concern that the compact's conditions could undermine the principle of awarding grants based on merit.
What is the Compact?
The "Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education" was a proposal sent by the Trump administration to an initial group of nine universities. It promised "substantial and meaningful federal grants" to institutions that agreed to implement a range of policies aligned with the administration's priorities.
The Controversial Conditions
The proposal's requirements would significantly alter how signatory universities operate. Institutions would be mandated to make sweeping changes across several key areas of campus governance and student life.
Admissions and Hiring
One of the most significant requirements is the elimination of race, gender, and other demographic factors in all admissions and hiring decisions. Furthermore, universities would be required to reinstate the use of standardized tests like the SAT or ACT for all prospective students, reversing a trend at many institutions that have made such tests optional.
Campus Culture and Free Speech
The compact demands that universities adopt a stance of "institutional neutrality" on political and societal issues. It also contains specific language requiring the abolition of campus units that are perceived to target conservative viewpoints. Rules governing student demonstrations would also be tightened, with prohibitions on protests that disrupt classes or involve heckling.
Specific Mandates of the Compact
- Tuition Freeze: A five-year freeze on tuition for all U.S. students.
- International Enrollment Cap: A 15% cap on the total undergraduate international student body, with no more than 5% from any single country.
- Gender Policies: Adherence to the government's definition of gender for access to bathrooms, locker rooms, and participation in women's sports.
A Growing Chorus of Opposition
Penn State's position reflects a widespread sentiment across American higher education. The compact was initially sent for feedback to nine prominent universities, including the University of Pennsylvania, MIT, Dartmouth, and the University of Virginia. Most have indicated they would reject the terms.
The proposal has been met with forceful condemnation from leading academic associations. In a joint letter, leaders of the American Association of University Professors (AAUP) and the American Federation of Teachers (AFT) described the plan in stark terms.
"[The proposal] to give preferential treatment to colleges and universities in exchange for allegiance to a partisan ideological agenda stinks of favoritism, patronage, and bribery. It is entirely corrupt."
Similarly, the American Council on Education (ACE), along with dozens of other higher education groups, issued a statement criticizing the compact as "excessive federal overreach." They argued it contradicts the administration's stated opposition to federal regulation by imposing top-down control on institutions.
Penn State's own AAUP chapter had previously urged the university administration to publicly reject the compact, warning that it posed a direct threat to the core mission of the university. "Supporting the compact... would render Penn State’s mission impossible and destroy academic freedom and free expression of ideas," the chapter wrote in a statement.
National Implications and University Responses
While the majority of major research universities have distanced themselves from the proposal, a few smaller institutions have expressed support. The New College of Florida and Valley Forge Military College in Pennsylvania have both volunteered to sign the compact.
The situation has also created tension between federal and state governments. In California, Governor Gavin Newsom warned universities in his state that agreeing to the compact could jeopardize their state funding, setting up a potential conflict over institutional autonomy.
For now, Penn State joins the ranks of institutions prioritizing academic freedom over the promise of additional federal dollars. President Bendapudi's clear rejection signals a commitment to principles that faculty and higher education advocates argue are fundamental to the purpose of a university.
