Higher education saw unprecedented policy changes in the first year of President Donald Trump's second term in office. From the dismantling of the Education Department to the billions of federal dollars withheld from hundreds of institutions, including the nation's most prestigious, 2025 was a whirlwind for the thousands of colleges and universities in the U.S.
"Chaos" and "fear" are the two words Ted Mitchell uses to describe this past year in higher education. Mitchell, president of the American Council on Education, says the Trump administration picked specific institutions and programs to target with its political agenda, leading to chaos. And the institutions not yet singled out fear that they will be.
The year's events have caused the public to question higher education's future. Seven in 10 Americans say that higher education is headed in the wrong direction, according to a widely cited October study from the Pew Research Center. Mitchell admits that there are ways higher education has "disappointed the American public." Graduation rates, student debt and career preparation all have room for improvement, he says.
Viviann Anguiano, managing director for higher education policy at the Center for American Progress, says the Trump administration "radically changed higher education this year" by making college more costly for students and draining institutions of resources in favor of its own political agenda. She sees this as a moment to realize the path to higher education has not always been accessible.
"This moment actually demonstrates the importance of higher education," she says.
Here's a look at some of the major changes in higher education policy this past year.
On Jan. 20, President Donald Trump signed an executive order to eliminate all diversity, equity and inclusion programs and efforts "to the maximum extent allowed by law," including those at universities receiving federal funds. A Feb. 14 letter from the Department of Education urged all colleges and universities to stop the "illegal" practice of considering race in admissions, threatening to remove federal funding from institutions that failed to comply. Later, in August, a federal judge blocked the letter's proposed policies because they did not follow procedural requirements.
The Trump administration "had far less interest in policy than in sustaining its ideological culture wars," says Mitchell. It began investigating dozens of universities in March to ensure they were not using any DEI practices. The crackdown on DEI led to the resignation of the University of Virginia's president in June, one among several to step down because of their frustration with the government's actions.
Cuts to federal funding for colleges and universities took many shapes in 2025, but they were frequent and impactful. The Trump administration attempted to end thousands of federal grants at more than 600 universities across the country as it inserted itself into admissions, curriculum, security and other administrative issues.
Schools thought to be conducting research the administration considers woke, such as Princeton and its climate change investigation, lost millions in federal funding. Several universities, including Harvard and Brown, were forced to cancel some of their doctoral programs - mainly ones in the humanities and social sciences - for the 2026-27 academic year as a result of funding cuts.
These actions, along with the slashing of billions of dollars from the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation, will have consequences for years to come, according to Mitchell, who foresees the potential destruction of American scientific power. The threats to research constitute a "generational problem" to Mitchell and might allow other nations to surpass the U.S. in terms of scientific discoveries.
In its anti-DEI, anti-woke crusade, the Trump administration also targeted specific universities - most notably Columbia and Harvard. The government routinely justified its funding cuts by claiming it was protecting Jewish students from antisemitism that emerged in the course of pro-Palestinian campus protests and other activities supposedly violating federal civil rights law. After a $400 million cut in federal funding in March, Columbia reached a deal with the Trump administration in July, agreeing to pay more than $220 million to restore previously canceled research money. In September, a federal judge blocked the administration from its previous attempt to freeze $2.2 billion in grants to Harvard. Nearing the end of the year, Trump's administration appealed the judge's decision, once again seeking a settlement with Harvard.
Anguiano emphasizes the fact that public universities - which most students attend, especially low-income students - suffered nearly double the blow compared to private schools. She goes on to argue that the draining of resources from institutions of higher education is a danger to democracy.
"These actions diminish the faith that the public has in an educational path that has demonstrated economic return and economic mobility for working people," she says.
On Oct. 1, the Trump administration released the Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education, initially asking nine universities to agree to White House political priorities surrounding tuition, admissions, hiring, free speech and more before inviting all U.S. colleges and universities to accept the compact's terms on Oct. 13. Schools that signed the agreement were to receive preferential access to federal funding. Many major universities, including the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of Southern California, openly rejected the compact while a small number volunteered to sign.
The compact asks schools not to consider race, gender, sexuality, nationality or political views in admissions and hiring decisions, and to limit the enrollment of international students. In hopes of fostering a "vibrant marketplace of ideas" on college campuses, the compact also asks signatories to remove any "institutional units that purposefully punish, belittle, and even spark violence against conservative ideas."
Anguiano says the compact shows just how far the Trump administration was willing to go to push its political agenda: "Trump is changing norms in levers that are used to either force or incentivize institutional behavioral change."
By Trump's Oct. 20 deadline for institutions to respond to the administration's request, seven of the original nine universities had rejected it.
Trump's State Department revoked more than 8,000 student visas in 2025, stripping international students at U.S. colleges and universities of their legal status and sense of safety. The administration specifically targeted students who were said to be active in pro-Palestinian protests and who "celebrated" the murder of conservative activist Charlie Kirk, citing efforts to fight antisemitism and increase national security. A surge in Immigration and Customs Enforcement raids across the country - resulting in hundreds of arrests per day - also left international students, faculty and staff in fear.
The Trump administration's "war on higher education" is "creating cynicism in the country," says Anguiano. The Republicans' "big, beautiful bill" stands out to her as another radical development in higher education policy, as it will impact federal student aid and loan availability - though its ramifications are yet to be seen.
There have been other developments as well: In November, the Trump administration removed "professional status" from several degrees, including nursing, social work and architecture, limiting the amount in loans that students are allowed to borrow. From its earliest days, it escalated its battle against schools that allow participation of transgender athletes in women's sports. And it has looked to reform the higher education accrediting process to eliminate what it believes is a liberal ideology.
Mitchell says that the efforts infringe on his four non-negotiables for higher education: freedom regarding who can teach, what they can teach, who they can teach and what research they can conduct. He observes that, for the first time, the White House is seeking "to make higher education a propaganda tool."
"Higher education does not work if it is an agent of the state," he says.