Choose wisely. And quickly.
The University of Texas at Austin hasn’t said whether it will sign an agreement with the Trump administration that would tie preferential access to federal funding to a series of campus policy changes, even as other universities have rejected the administration’s offer.
The proposal, known as the “Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education,” would require UT-Austin to define sex as male or female based on reproductive function, cap international enrollment at 15%, freeze tuition for five years and ensure that academic departments include a mix of ideological perspectives among their faculty and programs.
Provost William Inboden said in an interview last month with The Chronicle of Higher Education that “we align with the principles of conduct that they want,” though he added that “some of the procedural enforcement of the compact would clash with state law and some of our other institutional prerogatives.”
UT System Board of Regents Chair Kevin Eltife, who initially expressed enthusiasm about the proposal, told The Texas Tribune last week that “nothing has changed. It’s a work in progress.”
UT-Austin is trying to navigate competing pressures from a White House seeking to reshape higher education in its image; from Texas elected officials who have already imposed limits on diversity, equity and inclusion and faculty governance; and from faculty and students who say the compact threatens their freedom to teach and learn.
The university is also staring down a deadline: The Trump administration has said it wants initial signatories by Nov. 21. UT-Austin and the White House did not respond to requests for comment.
The Trump administration sent the compact offer to nine universities last month, describing them as “good actors” that could help model reforms for the rest of higher education. The compact doesn’t promise more federal dollars, but it would give priority to participating schools for federal grants, contracts and other benefits.
On Oct. 10, the Massachusetts Institute of Technology became the first to reject the offer, calling it “inconsistent with our core belief that scientific funding should be based on scientific merit alone.”
The University of Pennsylvania and the University of Virginia later issued nearly identical statements, saying federal funding should be based on merit. Dartmouth College, Brown University and the University of Southern California have also rejected it.
Vanderbilt University says it is open to discussion and the University of Arizona says it has not signed but has not ruled it out. Only UT-Austin has not said anything at all.
See here for the background. That “deal” was embarrassing then, and given how the politics have shifted in the interim it would be even more embarrassing now. You have an opportunity to not jump aboard a sinking ship that is also on fire, UT. Please avail yourself of that opportunity.