Local opinion: The compact threatens University of Arizona’s land-grant promise

As Arizona’s land-grant institution, the University of Arizona is responsible for advancing education, research, and outreach that directly benefit the state’s diverse communities, including rural, tribal, and underserved populations. This mission, rooted in accessibility and public service, has allowed it to build a globally regarded, innovative research enterprise and educate generations of students from every walk of life.

Last week, the Department of Education circulated the “Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education” to nine universities, including the U of A. As a private citizen long committed to the mission of public higher education, I am gravely concerned. Behind the vague rhetoric of “excellence” and “neutrality,” the Compact signals a dangerous shift away from the values that have made American universities global leaders in social mobility, innovation, and impact. It asks the U of A to trade those values for federal control rather than compete and succeed on its own merit.

The document demands compliance with a list of constrictive political priorities in exchange for continued access to funding for student loans and research, student visas, and tax-exempt status. It demands “institutional neutrality,” elimination of units deemed disagreeable, disruptive, or uncivil, and most troubling, “commitment to using lawful force” to control and silence speech the government does not like. Its enforcement mechanisms are unhinged: an anonymous poll will evaluate adherence, and the Department of Justice will determine violations, resulting in loss of compact benefits, all federal funding, and all private contributions revoked by grantors. Academic freedom is not a privilege; it’s a collective responsibility and a cornerstone of both higher education and a democratic society.

This offer threatens to undermine the U of A’s independence and public-serving mission. Founded in 1885 to educate and elevate the people of Arizona, the university operates as an economic and cultural engine across the state, with faculty and staff embedded in five tribal communities and all 15 counties. These statewide partnerships are not peripheral; they are central to the U of A’s land-grant role. The Compact’s restrictions on admissions, enrollment, hiring, and speech threaten to shrink the university’s workforce and destabilize its contributions to local economies and communities. These impacts would be felt most acutely in rural and tribal communities, where the university’s presence often represents a significant source of higher education, research, and public engagement.

Some provisions may appear reasonable at first glance, like maintaining “grade integrity,” requiring standardized tests for admission, complying with “anti-money laundering obligations,” and reducing tuition burdens. Yet these demands overlook the fact that the U of A already upholds rigorous academic standards, complies with federal regulations, and works to ensure accessibility for students throughout the state.

The push to reinstate standardized testing requirements, in particular, threatens to reverse decades of progress toward fairer, more holistic admissions. These tests have long been shown to disadvantage students from low-income backgrounds, under-resourced schools, and rural areas, where access to test preparation and college counseling is limited. Most universities have moved away from them, recognizing that they exclude students rather than predict college success. For many Arizona communities, such requirements reintroduce barriers that land-grant institutions were created to dismantle.

While affordability remains a critical challenge, the U of A has made meaningful strides in expanding access to higher education, enrolling veterans and service members, and maintaining academic excellence. Rather than supporting these efforts and helping to address the complex challenges all universities face, the Compact would compromise institutional integrity and obstruct the university’s efforts to serve the public good.

Journalists, editorial boards, numerous faculty, and higher education leaders (e.g., ACE, AAUP, Ed Trust), including presidents at targeted universities Dartmouth, MIT, and the University of Pennsylvania, have swiftly denounced the Compact’s assertion of capricious federal government power over universities. The public must urge other university leaders to join their peers to reject this Compact and reaffirm their commitment to the values that make American institutions great. Arizona deserves a university that serves its people, not one beholden to Washington. We must defend the integrity of higher education and the futures it makes possible.