On October 1st, documents addressed to Interim President Paul Mahoney detailed the Department of Education’s plan to rope nine major universities into a “Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education.” Among them was UVA — one of the latest battlegrounds in the war on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion.
The compact lists a 10 point model by which schools can “advance the national interest.” These points, framed as regulating civil rights enforcement, are a response crafted in the wake of the Pro-Palestinian movement of the past year and the ensuing pushback led by Trump against student protestors. The Trump Administration investigated and sued numerous institutions for their handling of the uprisings, as well as the practices commonly used by modern universities to promote diversity.
This isn’t the first time the administration has come for what it calls “wokeness” in education; since ascending to the presidency, Trump has ordered the removal of DEI-based programs from public universities. In September, The Department of Justice dropped two of their seven investigations into UVA for its role in “antisemitism” and “racial discrimination.” This “discrimination” is in reference to affirmative action to diversify acceptances in the admissions process, a practice effectively outlawed by the Supreme Court in 2023.
Education Secretary Linda McMahon set hard deadlines to meet: by October 20th, all schools must submit limited feedback, and by November 21st, a deal must be put in place. As a way to strong-arm acceptance, the Department of Education has stipulated that a failure to meet the requirements of the final agreement would result in the withdrawal of federal funding.
Though it stops short of stating that non-compliance would mean immediate revocation of funds, the language of these documents points to direct penal action. “Institutions of higher education are free to develop models and values other than those below,” the letter states, “If the institution elects to forgo federal benefits.” These benefits include “access to student loans, grant programs, and federal contracts; funding for research directly or indirectly; approval of student and other visas in connection with university matriculation and instruction; and preferential treatment under the tax code.”
Should the University reject this pact, it is expected that cuts to some or even all of the aforementioned federal programs would occur, putting the community in financial distress. Tuition increases or decreases for struggling students could present the greatest threat to the status quo under this scenario.
After already losing over $60 million in federal research grants due to cuts from the Department of Government Efficiency (“DOGE”), the University is in a position to favor the over $300 million in annual revenue granted by the U.S. government. It is the first logical option for an institution which runs itself as a business. However, for a school which runs as a community — one that works to be “great and good” in all it does — the compact presents direct issues for minority populations on grounds.
Translating the Rhetoric
Initially, students may gloss over the more unsavory parts, seeing the words “freeze tuition for five years” and hop on board before considering the meat of the action plan. However, with a closer reading, it becomes clear that the true intentions of the agreement are to roll back the assurance of a diverse education and the resources of Queer and international students.
The majority of the compact is aimed at Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (“DEI”) initiatives, claiming to create equality under a “marketplace of ideas.” By utilizing the language of free-speech ideology, the consequences of federal regulations are hidden behind its vague orders.
The four most concerning points of the compact are as follows:
First, “Discriminatory admissions” — Referring here to affirmative action and the evaluation of a student by character, the plan aims to require universities to assess students based on “objective” qualities, such as SAT and ACT scores. Since 2020, UVA has not required the submission of standardized test scores. Such exams are proven to not accurately evaluate the performance of students and may install additional hurdles for neurodivergent people in achieving college admission.
Second, “Marketplace of ideas” — This term is used to promote policies which include bans on demonstrations which “heckle,” “disrupt class,” or “allow obstruction” of campus property from certain groups. This language, while in a direct sense a positive protection for personal freedoms, can allow for the wrongful and aggressive crackdown of free protest through the proliferation of misinformation.
Third, “Privacy, safety, and fairness” — The section this guise comes from is targeted at the classic debate of transgender people in sports and restrooms. Under the current framework, accepting colleges must set their definitions of “man” and “woman” based on what the letter calls “biological processes.” Furthermore, the section calls for a requirement of single-sex spaces and single-sex sports. Not only does the current language of the compact erase trans and otherwise genderqueer individuals from being properly identified by the school, but it threatens the equality and personal safety of queer and gender-nonconforming people when forced into assigned single-sex spaces. The order would ultimately lead to the discrimination of any suspected transgender person for living and utilizing facilities which some may consider unfit for them to be in.
Using the restroom is already a fear-inducing situation for most transgender people; therefore, UVA’s current stance is that they may choose whichever facilities make them most comfortable. In this state, there is very little issue or controversy. However, definitively forcing them into one category without proper accommodation may easily become a gateway to harassment and discrimination.
Fourth, “Anti-American values” — This term is used to excuse limitations on international students who come to the United States in search of world-class education and experience. Under the proposed plan, no more than 15 percent of admitted students may participate in the Student Visa Exchange Program. Those admitted must not be chosen as a “financial” benefit and must not “demonstrate hostility” towards the United States or its allies. Such a rule is both antithetical to the free-speech claims of the plan and an excuse to invade the privacy of foreign students to ensure compliance with the positions of the federal government.
Though admission limits would not necessarily impact the international students at UVA who make up less than 10 percent of the student body, the proposed vetting of ideals is bound to restrict highly qualified students from receiving access to their desired educational path. Additionally, it requires that “all known information about foreign students” be shared with the Department of Homeland Security and State Department upon request. Collaboration to this degree opens the doors for deportation raids and invasion of individual privacy to avoid the perpetuation of “noxious values.”
The Students’ Sentiment
The compact marks the end of quality education for all. To reject it would be to secure UVA as a school for the wealthy; to accept it would mean a meltdown of the core values and protections presented by the institution as it has stood for over a decade. How we move forward is far from certain, but we as a University must work to reject the proposals put forward and keep sacred the security of our community as a whole.
The opinions expressed within this piece represent the views of the author alone and do not necessarily reflect the views of The Jefferson Independent.
Nice!