When I entered the University of Minnesota for my freshman year in 2022, I didn’t expect to be running toward the finish line three years later as the future of our education system crumbles behind me with one year still left to go. For students across the country and around the world, the future of the U.S. education system does not seem promising.
The fate of what is often regarded as a stable stepping stone to a successful career is now changing by the day. Academia is under attack.
President Donald Trump’s administration is investigating more than 50 universities as a part of Trump’s efforts to eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion programs. The administration also launched an investigation into 60 colleges over allegations of antisemitism and issued numerous cuts to funding and grants for health science research.
Federal immigration authorities detained Mahmoud Khalil, a permanent resident of the U.S. who helped lead pro-Palestinian protests at Columbia University in 2024. Book bans and attempts to reframe history continue to undermine the quality and integrity of education across the country.
Trump is particularly hostile toward universities because they tend to support much of what he is against — critical thinking, scientific innovation, acknowledgment of history and questioning leadership with a critical eye.
But these attacks run deeper.
Education is the key to change, whether that change moves a society forward or backward. Investment in education builds a future with an educated populace that can think for itself and make advancements. Restricting education leaves people vulnerable to deception and lies.
If Trump and his supporters want to stay in power, attacking education is an important piece of the puzzle.
These attacks also make education and career opportunities unstable for students looking to build a promising future, especially for students looking to go into fields currently under pressure from the administration.
Larry Jacobs, founder and director of the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance at the University, said these attacks jeopardize the stable education students count on.
“It is a deliberate attack on the higher education system,” Jacobs said. “It’s meant to discourage, deflate, dismantle, higher education and the reliance that so many students have on it for advancement, pursuing their dreams and their futures. A lot of that has been put on hold.”
This paired with the current hostility of our politics could deter some students from getting involved, but it can also be a motivator for students to be the change they want to see. Activists and changemakers came out of pivotal points in history like the civil rights movement, Jacobs said.
“There are certainly groups of students who are taking the challenge, feel mobilized and energized by this,” Jacobs said. “Fighting back is really the only recourse at this point.”
As students, we face an important decision about what we’re willing to do to fight for the future we want to build. This is not an easy place to be, but educational institutions aren’t facing anything less challenging.
Daniel Myers, an associate professor of political science at the University, said the Trump administration’s use of funding to leverage universities puts them in a difficult position to deal with current challenges but also to anticipate future ones.
“We’ve certainly seen controversy about how the U has regulated protests on campus,” Myers said. “But having that directive come down to the federal government and having the federal government say, ‘If you don’t shut down certain kinds of protests, we’re gonna cut off the funding for your cancer research,’ puts universities in an incredibly difficult position.”
Even if universities comply with Trump’s orders now, there’s no guarantee the administration won’t go after the same institutions later on.
“The real concern is not just that a particular kind of protest will be disallowed,” Myers said. “It’s that, then, universities are going to have to anticipate if other protests happen on campus that the Trump administration doesn’t like, are they going to come along and take away the funding for all of the vast array of things that happen on the university campus.”
What makes attacks on education so significant is that they don’t just destabilize education today. Cutting funding for cancer research, restricting dialogue about history and social issues, banning books and reducing opportunities for underrepresented groups will have consequences that play out for decades to come.
“This is a perilous moment and how students respond to it is going to be important for today, but also for moving forward,” Jacobs said. “Perilous moments are both disappointing, but they’re also opportunities.”
Trump and his administration have shown they don’t respect precedent or boundaries set by previous administrations. He will go after any and all institutions who challenge him if he has the power to do so, and it remains to be seen how effective any checks on his power will be.
Defending academic freedom isn’t just about addressing today’s chaos. What we do or don’t do now will determine the trajectory of our country and our ability to be educated participants in society.
So, what can we do?
First and foremost, we must educate ourselves through reliable sources of information, support credible journalism and talk with others in our communities about what we know. From there, communities can organize and fight back to protect education and academic freedom.
In a society where leaders want you to be uneducated, educating yourself is an act of protest.
For the sake of today and tomorrow, let’s do everything we can to make sure education is used to move us forward, not backward in time.
Michael Paige
Apr 4, 2025 at 10:46 am
There is a bit of misunderstanding by the author on what motivates Trump’s reactions to university leadership and how universities have been acting over the past 20 or more years. It is a well know fact that universities have leaned left of center for a very long time. It is also a well understood notion that very little of any views from people or organizations on the right or center portions of the political spectrum have been voiced at universities due to fear of protests, backlash or removal.
I think it’s probably safe to say that, given this being a piece from a college news division, the author is left wing, and so is probably the vast majority of editorial. This wouldn’t surprise me, as the opinion piece misses the obvious when saying “Trump is particularly hostile toward universities because they tend to support much of what he is against — critical thinking, scientific innovation, acknowledgment of history and questioning leadership with a critical eye. ”
This is a very typical attitude of the Left, as they do assume every time that theirs is the way of enlightenment. It is never possible that an attack on Left wing views is simply an attack on extremes, such as abortion until birth, which has been passed in 6 or 7 Democrat lead states, including Minnesota. It is seen in the type of rhetoric that says “if you like Trump, you’re literally a Nazi” or “If you think it’s okay to curb illegal immigration, you must be a complete racist.” This misses many points, such as that Trump was voted in with huge support from Latinos and the Asian communities, or that he was a Republican with the highest share of the black vote ever. Is it really true that almost half of Latinos, 1/3 of Asians and 20% of black voters are nothing but absolute racists? I’d say probably not. But, this hasn’t stopped prominent Democrats, and I would be sure some in the editorial department of this organization, of making these same claims.
The simple point to note here is, is it safe to go on campus and say “I don’t like abortion?” or “I don not support Palestine, it is run by a terrorist organization”? Maybe on paper, but given the tendency for violent protest from the Left, I don’t know if I would have felt safe. And that is the heart of the issue. Are colleges a place where anyone with a reasonable argument can be heard and respected, or is it a place where anyone with a view right of Che Guevara would feel unwelcome, unsafe and be potentially punished for daring to disagree with the majority?
KG
Mar 26, 2025 at 12:17 pm
Wren raises important concerns about academia but fails to address rising antisemitism at the U. While the piece briefly references antisemitism, it provides no meaningful exploration of this pervasive and urgent problem.
At UMN, antisemitism has manifested in troubling ways. Hillel has been targeted by violent acts, including its building being shot at. Jewish students have faced intimidation and threats of bodily harm, and one event at Hillel required attendees to shelter in place due to anti-Israel protests outside the building. UMN Faculty for Justice in Palestine (FJP) have fostered a hostile academic environment for Jewish students and faculty by promoting the false settler-colonialist narrative about Israel (as well as pro-active anti-Israel activity). Hiring and tenure practices within some UMN departments are influenced by candidates’ anti-Israel positions perpetuating an atmosphere of bias. FJP radicalizes students and utilizes them to roil the campus: protests, disturbances, encampments, and seizing buildings. It is no wonder that the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) gave the U the grade of “F” in its antisemitism test and that the Amichai Initiative classified UMN as one of the 10 worst universities for antisemitism out of hundreds. A new report by Capital Research dated March 26, 2025, of thousands of social media posts by 496 of the most active “pro-Palestinian” groups and activists found a 3,000% surge in calls for violence and a 186% increase in the use of anti-American and anti-police keywords and phrases since the Hamas-led terrorist attacks on October 7, 2023.
Despite these alarming developments, the author focuses almost exclusively on Trump’s actions, framing academia’s challenges as stemming entirely from external political interference. This approach ignores the role of UMN’s own faculty, administration, and student organizations in fostering an environment where Jewish students have come to feel unsafe and marginalized.
The article’s failure to address antisemitism undermines its credibility. How can we claim to fight for academic freedom while ignoring the targeted harassment of a specific group? The principle of academic freedom must extend to all students and faculty, including those who are Jewish. Yet at UMN, this freedom is eroded when anti-Semitic rhetoric is tolerated and even amplified by certain faculty and student groups.
The challenge facing academia must include addressing antisemitism at the U with the same urgency as other forms of bigotry. Anything less fails the very principles of diversity, equity and inclusion that the author seeks to defend.
nailheadtom
Mar 20, 2025 at 9:33 am
The US educational system was designed in Germany during the 17th century and has changed little since. A student no longer needs to travel across the country to personally listen to a professor repeat the words printed in the over-priced text the professor forced him to buy. His tuition isn’t needed to pay the salaries of thousands of administrators.
Education and research are two different fields. Academia needs to decide which one it will concentrate upon in the future and how it will operate.
Mary Vavrus
Mar 19, 2025 at 10:50 am
This is a terrific column! Thanks for explaining to students what the long- and short-term stakes are in these attacks on higher education. As a professor, I look forward to joining forces with UMN students and standing up for higher ed.