White House Asks Colleges to Sign Sweeping Agreement

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Curious if McGill and University of Toronto will see record numbers of US applications this year.

Our DS is typing up his as we speak! Also, Waterloo (engineering), Western (business), Queen's U, UBC, Dalhousie - all excellent institutions.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In theory, if they sign, they need to eliminate tuition for anyone studying the “hard” sciences such as Math, Biology et al.

I think this means anything they deem as a difficult science though last I checked, Math isn’t a science at all.

Guess everyone will double major in Math even if you are just getting Cs.

No they should eliminate tuition for teachers as those are desperately needed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Letters on Wednesday were going out to solicit agreement and feedback from Vanderbilt University, Dartmouth College, the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Southern California, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Texas at Austin, the University of Arizona, Brown University and the University of Virginia, according to an administration official."

Who's going to sign this first? My bet: Vanderbilt.

These are all the schools that rejected Barron, right?

Are they literally trying to mandate safe spaces for right wingers? The irony.

Guess the SC ruling the year he applied still couldn’t help his scores

[Anonymous]

You should see what they are rolling out as some fed agencies this week… unbelievable emails and treats

[Anonymous]

Didn't read the whole thread, so sorry if this is a repeat... but this "no politics" BS is VERY VERY hard for those of us who teach science-based content when the right is anti-science. For example, the conclusion that tylenol causes autism is DEMONSTRABLY wrong in the scientific literature, and it's a great illustration of "correlation is not causation" and that when we do well controlled studies THAT CONTROL FOR CONFOUNDS the link disappears. Can I not teach that? It's "political" but it's also just objectively correct (I've read the original empirical research). So will I now get in trouble for teaching the basics of what science ACTUALLY shows?

[Anonymous]

With two students at one of those pricey universities: yes!! Freeze tuition for 5 years. That I’m in favor of !

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Letters on Wednesday were going out to solicit agreement and feedback from Vanderbilt University, Dartmouth College, the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Southern California, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Texas at Austin, the University of Arizona, Brown University and the University of Virginia, according to an administration official."

Who's going to sign this first? My bet: Vanderbilt.

exactly Vanderbilt and Arizona first

I assume he's telegraphed this to them behind closed doors before name-checking them so most of them must be open to this nonsense.

Can't believe UVA is on this crazy list.

I don't think there's any school that can agree to no tuition raises for 5 years....unless maybe if they cut out all the merit aid. That would be wildly unpopular with middle class families, many of whom are shopping for merit aid.

It's just not at all practical. Can you image a business saying that they agree not to raise any prices for 5 years for ALL their customers, even if inflation hits 5-10% annually over that time period? And those are for profit businesses that could at least take it on the chin with their profit statements. These schools just don't have the margins to be able to do that. Most of them are underwater already.

[Anonymous]

The smartest move colleges could make is to refuse to sign the pledge, repudiate the idea that it's appropriate for the administration to request it, but then tout plans to do things to address the actual good points raised in the pledge (like addressing tuition hikes and grade inflation).

Also, smart schools will point out the inherent conflicts in the pledge. If you cap international students at 15%, this makes it harder to keep tuition low for US students because international students often pay more than US students and help fund the school.

I also think it would be interesting to see schools more frankly discuss both the benefits and drawbacks of using sex and race in hiring decisions. There are obviously situations where it makes sense, for instance in helping to diversify disciplines with long histories of being non-inclusive and where a tiny percentage of academics are anything other than white men. In those situations, where candidates are equally qualified, there is a real benefit to the university to hiring the more diverse candidate because it could help attract more people to the major, and might help push the scholarship in that field to new and interesting places (lack of diversity tends to lead to group think).

But there are also instances where an insistence on diverse candidates can get in the way of hiring people who are most qualified or have the most to offer the school. I would love to hear school talk about creative ways to combat this issue -- how do you get the most out of diversity initiatives while avoiding the pitfalls? We've been at it long enough that I think people have ideas.

But yeah, just ignore the demands from Trump. Some of these issues are worth discussing and colleges are already working on them. Talk about that. This should be about colleges and universities and not about Trump. Take him out of the conversation.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There are some very good ideas in this agreement.

This is how they work. They put one or two things in each agreement that are good ideas and the rest is fascism or authoritarianism or christian nationalism or jsut straight up bullshit.

ASK THE ADMIN WHY THEY WONT JUST HAVE THEM SIGN TO FREEZE TUITION.

Exactly. Fox News and the rest of Trump's propaganda machine will only highlight the few slightly more reasonable items. So when one confronts a MAGA acquaintance who only gets their information from these sources, they will look at you like you are crazy for being opposed to it because they only know of the more innocuous part of it. Then when you try to explain the details to them, they will ignore you and shut down because how could anyone ever question the good intentions of St. Trump.

We are living in very scary times. Anyone who believed Trump when he said he knew nothing about Project 2025 is a moron who should not be allowed to vote or operate heavy machinery.

I'd like to know the details. Please explain them to me. I will read / listen with an open mind, but from what I have read this far in this thread everything seems fine.

Blame the far left liberals for policing our language, actions, work place environments, etc. They can be viewed as being authoritarian and for limiting free speech & the free exchange of ideas. Just try putting forth conservative ideas in a college or university class--see what happens and see how your grades suffer. Time to give conservative thoughts freedom equal to that of far left liberals.

Thank you President Trump for having the courage and skills and stamina for making American colleges open to the free expression of ideas even if the thoughts represent a conservative point of view.

America first !

lol, this post started out reasonable enough.

Haha

[Anonymous]

It would be malpractice for any university's legal team to suggest they sign the agreement Trump wants universities to sign.

They have to refund tuition for dropouts? Make "hard science" education free but not any other kind? Insert and promote conservative thought?

I'd start privately raising money if I was an institution with any kind of global rep. I'd also probably increase tuition and become need aware.

Getting an education at the institutions that sign this ridiculous government overreach letter will be a joke and that diploma won't be worth anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think most people will focus on the tuition freeze for 5 years.

Which is the only reason that was included. Trump doesn't care about making stuff more affordable for people, especially higher ed, which he detests.

But the people who wrote this are psychologically aware enough to use people's baser instincts against them.

Separately, I agree with the list except the part about protecting conservatives. I thought we shouldn't have ANY protected classes???

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Does the WH realize if they don’t take into account gender, these schools will be heavily female???

+1

No more DEI for boys.

They’ll find a way to screw girls

Worst pun of the year.

Ugh. And it was completely unintentional. What a world we live in.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:"Letters on Wednesday were going out to solicit agreement and feedback from Vanderbilt University, Dartmouth College, the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Southern California, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Texas at Austin, the University of Arizona, Brown University and the University of Virginia, according to an administration official."

Who's going to sign this first? My bet: Vanderbilt.

Guess that’s where the MAGA elite will be sending all their kiddos

[Anonymous]

I don’t know if UVA has any meaningful leadership right now. Don’t they just have an interim president at the moment?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Letters on Wednesday were going out to solicit agreement and feedback from Vanderbilt University, Dartmouth College, the University of Pennsylvania, the University of Southern California, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, the University of Texas at Austin, the University of Arizona, Brown University and the University of Virginia, according to an administration official."

Who's going to sign this first? My bet: Vanderbilt.

These are all the schools that rejected Barron, right?

Are they literally trying to mandate safe spaces for right wingers? The irony.

Between this and the calling attention to his autism, I honestly feel sorry for Baron. How humiliating to have your father broadcasting your private challenges across the world.