His letter, which USC provided to The Times, was addressed to Education Secretary Linda McMahon and said that the compact “raises a number of issues worthy of further discussion within both higher education and our nation.” But, Kim wrote, the university had concerns about the Trump administration’s offer.
“I appreciate the various points of view shared with me by many members of our community,” Kim said in a statement.
Provided to USC on Oct. 1, the compact requires universities to make a range of commitments in line with Trump’s political agenda.
The compact had been strongly rejected by faculty attending an Oct. 6 meeting held by the USC Academic Senate, when 20-plus professors, department heads and others spoke out against the document.
The compact has not been given to California State University or University of California campuses.
Saying it would compromise “values of free inquiry and academic excellence,” the University of Southern California rejected the contentious education compact offered to it and eight other institutions by the Trump administration on Thursday. “”.
In a statement, USC interim president Beong-Soo Kim said he had written to the U.S. S. . The Trump offer, which would grant priority research funding to colleges that accept the president’s largely conservative views on higher education, was rejected by the Department of Education.
The Times obtained a copy of his letter, which was sent to Education Secretary Linda McMahon, stating that the compact “raises a number of issues worthy of further discussion within both higher education and our nation?”. “.”.
Kim wrote, however, that the university was wary of the offer from the Trump administration.
Kim wrote, “We are worried that, despite the Compact’s voluntary nature, linking research benefits to it would eventually erode the same values of academic excellence and free inquiry that the Compact aims to promote.”. Academic excellence can be negatively impacted when changing external priorities shift the research playing field away from free, meritocratic competition, as demonstrated by other nations whose governments do not share America’s dedication to freedom and democracy. “”.
According to a statement from White House spokesperson Liz Huston, “universities funded by American taxpayers should absolutely serve the national interest.”. “.”.
“Universities can adopt any legal policy they want as long as they are not pleading for federal funding,” she stated. But it is completely misguided to think that colleges should receive public funding with no obligations in return. “.”.
Kim’s letter stated that the university “fully agrees” with a section of the compact that states that a “vibrant marketplace of ideas where all different views can be explored, debated, and challenged” is necessary for academic excellence. “”.
“We have committed ourselves to institutional neutrality and launched a number of initiatives designed to promote civil discourse across the ideological spectrum at USC in order to foster such an environment,” Kim wrote in the letter dated Thursday to McMahon. “We could not produce excellent research, teach our students to think critically, or instill the civic values necessary for our democracy to flourish if professors and students were not free to debate a wide range of ideas and viewpoints. “.”.
Kim responded to the frequently contentious campus discussion surrounding the compact in a letter to the USC community on Thursday.
Kim said in a statement, “I value the diverse perspectives that many people in our community have shared with me.”. Even though USC has chosen not to participate in the proposed Compact, we are excited to add our viewpoints, knowledge, and Trojan values to a crucial national discussion regarding the direction of higher education. “.”.
Despite their opposition to the compact, some faculty members expressed their satisfaction with Kim’s choice.
According to Sanjay Madhav, an associate professor of practice at the USC Viterbi School of Engineering, “this demonstrates that we can effect institutional change when a broad coalition of faculty, students, staff, and workers comes together at USC and across the country.”. “The rejection of this unconstitutional compact by USC is encouraging, but more needs to be done to preserve academic freedom and higher education in general. “”.
The compact, which was already turned down by Brown, MIT, and the University of Pennsylvania on Thursday, has caused a stir in higher education and angry Gov. Gavin Newsom’s calls for changes to campus policies toward the right in return for priority federal funding and other advantages.
In a forceful stance, Newsom urged USC “to do the right thing” and turn down the offer. If any California university complies, he threatens to stop providing state funding.
Earlier this month, the University of Texas hinted that it might accept Trump’s demands. Kevin Eltife, chair of the board of regents, said in a statement that the Austin campus’s inclusion in the compact and its “possible funding advantages” were “honored” by the Texas system’s leaders.
supplied to USC in October. 1. According to Trump’s political agenda, the compact mandates a number of commitments from universities.
The compact prohibits colleges from acknowledging the gender identities of transgender individuals and urges them to embrace the government’s definition of gender, which is two sexes: male and female. Enrollment of foreign students would be restricted. The compact also calls for U to freeze tuition for five years. S. pupils.
It calls on colleges to remove sex, race, and other factors from admissions decisions and to require the SAT or ACT for all undergraduate applicants.
Faculty at an October meeting had firmly rejected the compact. At the sixth USC Academic Senate meeting, more than twenty professors, department heads, and others voiced their opposition to the document. During the virtual meeting, participants made strong statements condemning the compact as “a Trojan horse,” “egregiously invalid,” “probably unconstitutional,” and “antithetical to principles of academic freedom.”. “”.
Aro Velmet, an associate professor of history at USC, had been at the Oct. praised Kim’s decision to turn down the compact at the sixth meeting, but claimed that the action demonstrated “the amount of pressure the president received from pretty much everyone on campus.”. “.”.
“We commend President Kim for his actions and are relieved that he made the correct choice. “This battle is a victory,” Velmet declared. However, the war is still going on. In one way or another, the federal government will probably be attempting to exert pressure on universities. “.”.
Dissident opinions existed.
By rejecting the compact without “providing feedback to improve it,” universities are sending a message that “they have no intention of acknowledging their failures — or of taking meaningful steps toward reform,” according to Anna Krylov, a chemistry professor at USC. “”.
However, Kim’s letter to McMahon, which “expresses agreement with the aspirations of the Compact and at least signals a willingness to reform,” was seen favorably by Krylov. “”.
While the compact was made directly available to the select few universities, a White House official stated on Tuesday that it also serves as a model for other campuses.
“Not every university has been contacted proactively by us. There is still time for the first nine colleges to offer their opinions on the suggested compact. Naturally, though, we wouldn’t reject universities that wish to lead the way and have a positive impact,” the official stated.
Trump also said other colleges could sign the deal in a Sunday social media post.
“In order to contribute to the establishment of the Golden Age of Academic Excellence in Higher Education, institutions that wish to swiftly return to the pursuit of Truth and Achievement are encouraged to sign a forward-looking agreement with the Federal Government. The president stated, “They will pledge to abide by Federal law and defend the civil rights of ALL students, faculty, and staff on campuses.”.
The campuses of California State University and the University of California have not received the compact. Last week, during a meeting with the UC Academic Senate, UC President James B. According to Milliken, UC would not consent to being asked to sign on.
