Heather Shea
Welcome back to Current Campus Context, a limited series from student affairs now the online learning community for Higher Education and Student Affairs. I’m your host, Heather, Shea. We’re recording this episode at 5:06pm, Eastern Time on Thursday, April 24 as always, things may have changed by the time you listen each week, we are breaking down the shifting landscape of higher education, what’s happening, why it matters, and how we can respond. This week, we’re tracking three consequential stories, federal research dollars at risk, attempts to reshape accreditation and university tax exempt status. These aren’t just hypotheticals. These are direct attempts to redefine governance and the values of higher education. So what does this mean for those of us on campus, and what can we do? That’s what we’ll unpack today with our expert guests. So let’s welcome this week’s correspondents back again this week, Dr Demetri. L Morgan, welcome Demetri.

Demetri L. Morgan
Hello. Proud to be back.

Heather Shea
Demetri is an expert in institutional governance, campus climate, student activism and STEM education in higher ed. He is an associate professor of education at the University of Michigan, and welcome back. Dr Brendan Cantwell,

Brendan Cantwell
hello. Good to be here.

Heather Shea
We haven’t seen you since, like, I think, week two or three, so we’re excited that you’re back. Dr Cantwell, Brendan is an expert in higher education policy, governance and the political economy of higher education. He is a professor of higher adult and lifelong education here at Michigan State University. So appreciate you both being here with me today. So I’m going to dive into the three stories, and then I’m going to end on a positive note with two other things that have just recently happened. So first, the National Institutes of Health, or NIH, has issued a direct threat that requires universities to certify that they are not running, quote, illegal dei programs to keep their research grants. So for campuses who depend on NIH funding, especially in STEM I see this as a pretty direct attack on faculty autonomy and years of equity driven work. So we’ve asked this question in multiple other weeks episodes. But what happens when advancing research with federal funds means abandoning our equity initiatives? The second topic in a story foretold by Dr Felicia Commodore, yesterday, President Trump signed an executive order targeting accreditors higher education accrediting agencies. It gives the Secretary of Education power to deny or suspend recognition of these agencies that broadly require institutions to address dei as part of the accreditation process. So the Council for Higher Education Accreditation warns that this move threatens the independence of these agencies, and the AAUP American Association of University Professors calls this an attempt to reshape higher education to fit an authoritarian political agenda. Pretty strong words there from the AAUP. Finally, the third story, the administration has also threatened to revoke tax exempt status from schools like Harvard. Just want to clarify legally, this is not within presidential power. Only the IRS can revoke 501, c3, status, and that’s only after a formal process, right? So further, there is section I had, you know, had to look this up, section 7217, of the tax code prohibits the White House from influencing IRS investigations. So take that for what you will. Regardless, this is increasing talk about the nonprofit status of higher education institutions. So those are the three top stories. I also want to note that we’re fine finally seeing a stronger higher higher ed coalition and legal resistance. So just earlier this week, over 220 higher ed leaders signed a joint AAC and you statement condemning these actions. This is one of the strongest, most unified pushbacks I’ve seen yet. And then earlier today, a federal judge in New Hampshire blocked the administration from withholding Title One funds from K 12 schools over dei she called the policy vague, unconstitutional and a threat to free speech. And I think this matters for higher ed too, because some of these same funding funding ultimatums are also being aimed at colleges. And so maybe this ruling will. Offer a legal road map for pushback. As always, Sources and Citations are in our episode notes. So let’s get into it. Dimitri, I’m going to start with you given what I’ve just shared. Where should we begin? What do you want to talk about related to these stories and how they’re affecting colleges and universities?

Demetri L. Morgan
Yeah, I really want to talk about the, well, all of them, but I think starting at the NIH ultimatum is really important. And forgive me, we’re going to nerd out a little bit. And I’m really curious for Professor cantwells perspective and yours as well. But one of the when we talk about organizational theory in higher ed, one of the hallmark kind of descriptions of higher ed, and one of the things that makes it different from other organizations is that it’s a loosely coupled organization. Easiest way to explain this, when I’m teaching it to students, is like, what’s happening in athletics doesn’t necessarily what impact what’s happening in the classroom. Sometimes they do, but sometimes they don’t. What’s happening in student affairs might not impact academic affairs. And so we’re very loosely coupled, and it provides strengths sometimes, right? If there’s a crisis in one place, it doesn’t necessarily mean we have to stop everything going on somewhere else. But also we know that if there’s weaknesses, it creates silos. And so all that to say, one of the things that is worries me about the NIH is that it’s trying to more tightly couple different segments of the of the institution. So for example, you have NIH, which you know largely funds, almost exclusively, funds medical research. And now you’re saying, Hey, if you have any quote, unquote, dei which is not defined in the in the order anywhere else in the institution, anywhere anywhere you you have to certify that you don’t have dei going on anywhere else in the institution in order to receive NIH funds. And so that historically, that type of coupling is historically, not something that has characterized large, complex higher education institutions and even smaller ones, where people do wear more hats, we still are pretty loosely coupled in how we move through and so I think one of the reasons why this is an important story to watch and understand is that historically, when there’s been crises or challenges in other places, it doesn’t always make it to your doorstep. But this is one that is very directly trying to kind of more tightly couple the different organizational cultures that exist within higher ed and it too, and kind of having it pit different sides against each other. Do you want to keep access to your research funds, or do you want to keep supporting Dei? And so it’s it’s a strategy at two levels. Obviously, there’s the financial and there’s the potential loss of programs, but it’s also hitting organ people within higher ed against each other, to say, and it happened in a recent faculty call where there was a research scientist who was like, hey, like, can we not pursue this? Like, dei stuff, I don’t want to lose my job because I’m soft money funded, and so that’s really tough to hear one of your colleagues be like, hey. Like, no, I my job is on the line. And so there that two levels of attack makes it really difficult to sort of think about and talk about, but also all the more important to kind of track what’s happening, because it’s really far reaching.

Heather Shea
That’s fascinating. Yeah, that’s super fascinating. I mean, I think the Yeah, I mean, it’s, it’s pitting it, parts of the institution against one another. Brendan, what? What would you share about that? And then we can go to the next story. Yeah,

Brendan Cantwell
I think that Demetri is absolutely right, that this approach to linking uh biomedical grant funding to to other activities is a strategy that exploits the loop, loose coupling of universities. A few weeks ago on blue sky, I called it mission splitting. So the What the The strategy is that the the administration is going to pit one, one mission against another at the university, and kind of create internal conflict and force, try to force the university to to to choose which of its missions, it prefers. And that creates all kinds of internal tensions on campus as, uh, as Dr Morgan was pointing out you have, you know, people saying, Hey, you’re doing this thing may jeopardize my job. Whereas. Yeah, you know, we think that supporting students, creating diverse learning environments is important for education, and being inclusive is a sort of ethical and educational imperative that we have, and so you’ve put these things in intention with each other, and I think it’s kind of predictable that that is what they hope to do. They were broadcasting that in advance of the election, and, you know, after the president was elected. But it is both fascinating and horrifying to see it play out yes and see where things are going. So that’s my reaction to that story, yeah, and to Professor Morgan’s really insightful comments on it, yeah,

Heather Shea
I’m really curious about the accreditation story as well. But partially because we’ve been kind of waiting, I feel like this was the same as the executive order to dismantle the Department of Ed, right? Like we were like, Okay, is it happening? Is it happening? But I also want to note that for the audience for Student Affairs now, they may not understand exactly what accreditation means and why oversight of accredited accrediting agencies is so complicated and concerning, and why Dr Commodore was like, this is keeping me up at night. I’m worried about it. So Brendan, do you want to tackle that first, and then we’ll, we’ll go back to Demetri.

Brendan Cantwell
Sure. So, you know, quick crash course in the way higher education works in the United States, the Federal Government and the State governments, in a sense, outsource quality assurance to these independent, nonprofit accrediting agencies, which is a form of peer review, so that members of the academic field Evaluate each other and determine whether campuses are meeting expected or best practices in terms of, you know, governance, curriculum, campus environment and so on. And when the Higher Education Act established a framework for administering federal financial aid, accreditors were given the responsibility of certifying whether a campus would be eligible for federal aid. So the federal government doesn’t determine that itself. It actually relies on the judgment of accreditors, which is in a way, relying on academic judgment to determine which which colleges and universities qualify for federal financial aid. And so over time, accreditors have asked colleges and universities to do a lot of things, including meeting standards for governance and managing their money, and, you know, maintaining a relevant curriculum and updating programs and so on. One of the things that some accreditors have asked universities to do is to develop plans for making sure that their students are are welcomed and supported, and for putting plans in place to ensure that all students on campus have a chance to succeed and to graduate. And you know, these days, all that falls under the DEI rubric in in many ways. And so what the administration is potentially saying is that if accreditors ask campuses, ask colleges and universities to pay attention to things like campus climate, to pay attention to things like equity gaps in attainment and opportunity, then, then they’re in violation of the law, and the accreditor is decertified and and it can’t provide, or potentially decertified, and it can’t then provide that sort of golden ticket to get federal financial aid, so it takes away a big lever to ensure that campuses are being accountable to their students, and it’s another sign that the administration is very serious to use these pretty powerful coercive measures to achieve its cultural goals, whether or not that’s going to work, I think, in a kind of hopeful note, remains an open question. It’s going to work. It’s working to some extent, how, how far it works, and how far this goes, and whether this holds up in court and proves to be something the administration can do still remains an open question. But this is a an anticipated Development. Dr Commodore predicted it. Others have predicted it was in Project 2025, but nonetheless a serious development, and one that we ought to be paying a lot of attention to, directly impacts the way that student affairs professionals and. Them could work with their with their students,

Heather Shea
yeah, Demetri, you want to add something about accreditation or move on to the third topic,

Demetri L. Morgan
I think rightfully so. A lot of the focus and fear is on accreditations role in the financial aid process. And so when we’re saying financial aid, we mean Pell Grants, but also loans and other idled funds that are, that are part of the higher education that so massive. But there’s lots of other like nitty gritty things. And one example I always point to is, you know, if you’re a student, we know, you know, a good number of students transfer institutions, and you need to be from an accredited institution to transfer to another accredited institution. And so imagine Michigan State losing its accreditation. Oh, we’ll put it up. What would say Michigan loses its accreditation that wants to transfer to Michigan State. Michigan State might not be inclined to accept my transfer credits, because all of a sudden, Michigan isn’t an accredited institution that’s recognized by by a body. So I think that it obviously the financial aid piece. But also think about student mobility, and all the reasons students move for whatever reason, and how much more difficult that will come. But I think the other layer of the story too that I’m really interested to follow on and very nervous about is the you know, as Professor Cantwell mentioned, that this sort of outsourcing of quality assurance came about because we assume that our congress people and even our executive branch are busy and only have so much expertise to do all of the things that are on their that are on their plate, the proverbial plate. And so we have what are called intermediaries that play a variety of roles to help principles, in this case, the federal government, carry out all of the things. And so when you remove or start to play with some of these intermediaries that have really specific expertise. And in this sort of technical academic expertise, of what makes a quality program, what makes a good education, what makes good governance, you start to replace it with other forms of expertise. And so there’s also been a play here for the last, you know, sort of 20 years from not only the for profit realm, the for profit colleges, university realm, but also from newer, newer, we’ll call them, educational providers, who have not been able to meet all of the sort of accrediting standards that are more established and have have been pecking away at this in hopes that they’ll have access to federal funds, which is really the corner of the realm, but also that students can transfer to and from and have their credentials be be valid. And so the other thing that I’m watching and trying to sort of not be naive, but as hopeful as possible, is that I do think personally, and I’m curious how you all feel about this. I am curious what other forms of educational credentials, whether it’s micro credentials or or competency based education, what that would look like, actually, sort of more formally a part of there are a few Western Governors. There’s a few here and there. But would more educational providers place downward pressure on on institutions, or would it just open it up and be big? And I think that’s part of the like, the spin that is put out there, like, oh, we need more educational providers. And part of me wants to say, like, yes, if done well, and if, you know, not late, you know, loading people with debt in, you know, sort of diploma mill, degrees maybe. But then I’m like, You’re being naive, like, that’s not what’s gonna happen. That’s not what this is about. But I do think that’s part of the rhetoric people will hear. So it’s important to kind of be able to read through that, that people are gonna say, oh, we need alternate models of education and competency based and all of these things. But it’s really been, you know, a decades long project of providers to try to get into the kind of financial aid funnel, and now they have their moments. So we’re going to see this thrust that’s that’s really important to sort of watch. Yeah,

Heather Shea
I So Brendan knows this, because we’re both on the same campus. Michigan State just got its 10 year renewal from the Higher Learning Commission for accreditation. I got to participate in the process a little bit this year, and it’s a year over a year long, data gathering and then inquiry process. I mean, it is a massive undertaking, and so I can’t imagine a that the expertise lies within, you know, other bodies, right? I mean, I think accrediting agencies, they, they sent out a group of people to do a site visit, spend days talking with folks, yeah, it’s just, it’s a huge, it’s a huge undertaking. Yeah, but you mentioned something that made me think a little bit about this idea of tax exempt status, and that’s for profits, right? So for profit, higher education institutions are not tax exempt, as their name would imply. And now there’s this threat, and I think it’s based on, I mean, it’s, it’s targeted, of course, to Harvard. But I think it’s being also broadly talked about, like, why are colleges and universities tax exempt? And so Brendan, do you want to kick us off with this? Or Dimitri,

Brendan Cantwell
why are they tax exempt? Is is an interesting question, and I guess, you know, the base, the simplest answer, is that they’re seeing, at least to some extent, as organizations that are contributing to the public good. They’re charitable in that sense that they’re contributing things that are good for society, and you wouldn’t want the imposition of a tax to produce to cause the sector to produce less education, right or less research. And so tax exempt status is a way to to promote the sort of common good mission of higher education, I think the administration’s a sort of attack on public on tax exempt status is, you know, another way to attempt to control higher education and to to have this lever of influence. And I think it also points, along with accreditation and the sort of attempted to adjustment to indirect rates and this sort of broad side on dei it’s taking things that have been addressed in education policy circles in sometimes sophisticated and sometimes less sophisticated ways, but have been points of critique and conversation and debate and like should har you know, there’s lots of sort of left wing conversation about Harvard being a hedge fund with a university attached and so on. And it takes these conversations that have been going on kind of in the background, and it weaponizes them for partisan for partisan gain. And I think that that’s a big like underlying theme is that most of this, these moves, haven’t come out of nowhere. Yes, they’ve come out of places like Project 2025, but even beyond that, they reflect sort of really wonky and scholarly and advocacy group kind of conversations that have been simmering for a long time, including discontent with higher education, that people in the kind of technocratic centrist space and even the left advocacy space have had and Just really transforms them and leverage them, leverages them for like, their particular political aims.

Heather Shea
Yeah, super interesting.

Demetri L. Morgan
So in full disclosure, I have to admit, I last year for a fellowship I was in that kind of connected education scholars with policymakers, one of my policy engagements was with Representative Nancy mace office. I didn’t actually meet with Nancy mace, but I met with a staffer, and the bill that I was talking with the staffer on was about nonprofits. And what was interesting is that if you follow Congress, Nancy mace represents a district in South Carolina that’s on the coastline, and so essentially, the bill was about helping the federal government coordinate with nonprofits. And the sort of subtext was like, hey, in the aftermath of a natural disaster, sometimes nonprofits, broadly defined, are able to be more responsive than the federal government. So what does coordination look like to say the bill was not written with any specificity, so one of the things that I was talking about was like, Hey, do you realize? Like, you just say, any nonprofit which is everywhere from Harvard to your local non mama, you know, mom and pop, nonprofit that you know is, you know, running soup kitchens. And I think all that to say, one of the things to really watch here, if you’re following along, this particular story, is that it’s really, really difficult to kind of go in with a scalpel and say, and just want to attack Harvard’s nonprofit status, but not the United Way, or Big Brothers, Big Sisters, or the YMCA, or like some of the beloved nonprofits that exist in in people’s locals, local communities, that people, you know, when they think about Big Brothers, Big Sisters and Harvard, they’re like, Oh, those are two different organizations, but they have the same taxes and status. And how do you as a federal government make a case that I’m going to say, yes, it’s okay for Big Brothers, Big Sisters to keep being a nonprofit, but no to Harvard. What is the sort of material difference? And they’re trying, right? They’re focusing on anti semitism, foreign foreign influence and gifts, but it gets really sort of technical and nitty gritty, in a way that’s hard to defend across the the wide scope of of nonprofits that are out there. So of all of the news, um, I don’t want to say I’m not worried, because I’m always worried about everything the federal government, but there, there are a lot of um Pentacles to the sort of nonprofit case that will activate other segments of that that once people start to see, like, Oh, you’re talking about the United Way, or, Oh, you’re talking about the Salvation Army, and somebody can just come in and remove their nonprofit like, I don’t know if I like that, that’s going to be a really hard political theater game to play and walk that fine line. And some of the things that I’m hearing as well from some of the conversations I’m in is that the sort of nonprofit sector is sort of ready to stand together in ways. And so, like the nonprofit Council, has already put out some some really good explainers and primers, kind of pairing and readying, because earlier this week, and interestingly, it didn’t happen on Earth Day, which was Tuesday, that there were some rumors that there were going to be some executive orders targeting environmental related nonprofits and going after there and making environmental advocacy not a thing that is in the public’s best interest, which is some somehow wild, it didn’t come through. And so that doesn’t mean it won’t, but the but some of even the advocacy that was going on earlier this week, you know, some are pointing to that, how complicated it gets when you when you start to kind of come up after this, this whole sector. So I think it’s really important to follow, because the implications are massive, but it’s one of those things that does very quickly create coalitions that are beyond higher ed in the way that ni in the way that like indirects, is kind of a very higher ed thing. Nonprofit status is much greater, much broader, and will activate in people’s consciousness Much, much sooner than some of the other kind of accreditation, or, or, or indirects. Yeah,

Heather Shea
wow. So I have, I’ve been thinking about this mostly through the lens of, there’s nothing that that Trump can really do in this space. But now, after hearing you both talk about it, I’m like, oh my goodness, there’s, there’s maybe a much bigger repercussion that I hadn’t considered, and also this coalition idea. So let’s, let’s move to what we can do within our spheres of influence. So Brendan, we talked about these three stories. You know, when you think about student affairs, folks, higher ed administrators, what are some possible actions that we might be able to take to navigate this environment that we’re in at this moment?

Brendan Cantwell
Yeah, I think one of the things that is encouraging is compared to when I appeared on the first couple of episodes of this limited series, universities were pretty much sitting on the sidelines and not doing much. I think we’re starting to see some mobilization and activism, act, activation of the sector. Because one I think people are realizing that there’s not really you’re not negotiating with a good faith actor. So trying to approach this as you would other governments, is not useful. And two, because the administration, like, the scariest part of what the administration is doing is that it’s doing all of this right. It’s trying to do all of this, and it’s so extensive and far reaching. But there’s like, silver lining is not the right word, but there’s like, another aspect of that is that they are overreaching, and that overreach is starting to in, you know, create some pushback. So if you you’re not probably on your campus, like the lead pushbacker In terms of speaking for the campus, or like representing it in government relations or in lawsuits, I’m certainly not. But what you can do is quietly, you know, circulate that the examples of campuses that are pushing back on your campus to kind of build that norm that this is something that is happening, and it’s not just a few, it’s actually a broad set of campuses that are starting to and leaders that are starting to speak up and also quietly document the impacts of this stuff, your students, on your colleagues, on your ability to fulfill the educational mission, because there are going to be lawsuits that are going to proceed and they’re going to need Exam. Examples of harm and and so if you’re working with students, and you see the consequences of what’s happening in the students lives, and the ability of students to pursue their education and to succeed, and you know, document that, because that could potentially be useful in in a strategy to push back on this. And it is certainly useful information for campuses as they try to think about ways to mitigate what’s happening, paying attention and documenting

Heather Shea
that’s great. Dr Morgan, what would you add as things we can do? No,

Demetri L. Morgan
that’s excellent. So you know, one of the things that I have been talking a lot about with students and colleagues and today’s topics are a good example, is that we need additional help, and people who are conversant and able to explain some of the idiosyncrasies. So what am I getting that you should practice talking about accreditation, you know, with your with your colleagues, and I’m glad you shared Heather that you know you were able to participate a little bit in your RE accreditation process, because it doesn’t become real for people unless they get access to some of that. And so you know, at your next, you know, department meeting, or your next senior meet us, like, how does our the roles that we’re doing or the work that we do feed into the accreditation process? When’s the last time we were up for our 10 year? You know, accreditation just become more conversant in it. Because one of the things that some of these strategies that we’ve talked about today, bank on is that only a few people on campus who, like, sort of really know the ins and outs and nitty gritties, and they’re they in things that go on are missed, because not everybody’s like, Oh, this is, this is where accreditation comes in, or this is where you know why losing accreditation could be really harmful. And so, you know, I was, I was talking with social work colleagues a couple of weeks ago, and I sort of, you know, listening to Dr Commodore mentioned accreditation. And if you’re in a field that’s heavily accredited, like social work, they were like, what? Like, they could do that. And I was like, yes, they could. And so we need more people, you know, being conversant, to be able to help other people say, like, hey, this, this, these things are relevant for you. And and again, you don’t have to have the sort of level of depth that you know Professor kentwell has, but just just being able to talk about it in words, in ways that make sense to you, I think it’s really good practice, and we need more people who are conversant in it. And so it’s a really good thing, and because every campus you know has it connects with the accreditation apparatus in some way. You can look up your campuses accreditation, you can read the latest report. You can, you know, familiarize yourself with the standards. Just good professional development, even just to be like, yeah, what did we say in our last one? Where do we have any areas where we were sort of doctor or reapproved on, you know, outside of all of this, I think it’s just good practice to know that at the university level. But now even more so, because when you start to get messages from your institution about what they may or may not be doing in response to some of the accreditation threats, you’ll be able to also read and kind of understand that with a different level of depth, if you’ve done, kind of your own reading and preparation with what that looks like. And so I think that that’s really something that any, any and everybody at all levels of the kind of student affairs kind of landscape can do and should do.

Heather Shea
Yeah, yeah. It was really, it was really enlightening. And I mean, I think looking up the different accrediting agencies and seeing what they are requiring for institutions to show as evidence is basically, you know, are you doing what you say you’re doing? And how do you demonstrate that by disaggregating data, student success data, and then showing the results of that. So I thought it was a really interesting experience. And in all honesty, this wasn’t one of our top three topics today until Dr Commodore sent an email to us. Was like, Don’t forget. And I’m like, Oh my gosh. Like, we’ve got to we This has got to be a standalone topic. And Keith and I had a back conversation where he’s like people. I don’t know that everybody knows what accreditation is, because it is like something that doesn’t come around all that often, and it’s really it has massive repercussions, but it usually is, you know, a smaller group of people who are directly involved, so

Demetri L. Morgan
especially for student affairs folks, because we are a sort of field that, unless you have sort of a counseling connection, not an accredited field, we are also less conversant. So we absolutely have cast standards right the council. For investment of standards and in the NASPA and ACPA competencies, but those are sort of a different level or threshold than sort of full on accreditation or other programs that are accredited. So even as a field, the way we enter into the conversation is going to look different. So we kind of have to do our own transposing into like, oh yeah, like, I know cast standards, or I know the ACPA NASPA competencies, or, you know, insert the alphabet soup competencies that exist for the different professional associations. But that’s different than kind of like the big CIS, big six accreditors, and then, you know, program specific accreditors that exist for different programs. And so just kind of understanding the landscape is a really good place to start and seeing, you know, how student affairs fits in and doesn’t relative to, you know, like the formal standards that exist in other places.

Heather Shea
So we There’s one story we haven’t talked about too much, which is the 220 leaders. I keep looking at it to see if our institution leader has signed on not yet, but your institutions did. Demetri, so,

Demetri L. Morgan
yep, not so, so,

Heather Shea
so message to President of Michigan State University. We’d love to see your name on there, but I I think it’s a really interesting show of connection and coalition building. So just, I mean to me, elevating that as a as a show of unity, because these are institutions that are vastly different, right? And for them to sign on to a joint statement or 220, institutions. I mean, we, we know there are many, many more institutions in the US, but I don’t know any thoughts on that. As far as, like, what we can do to keep our institutions relevant,

Brendan Cantwell
I think the statement is, is good, it’s fine. It is a, you know. It’s not especially strident. It’s not like, you know, it’s not like, hey, federal government, take this but, but it’s strong enough. Yeah, I think the important thing about it is that the number keeps growing, and it suggests that the kind of normative pressure on campuses is shifting that like now being seen as being opposed to what’s happening is something that is acceptable and not seen and not understood as being out there or being too political, or violating neutrality, not being a neutral platform, or something like that. So the normative, you know, the message, the signal that it’s sending, that, that it’s okay to to offer a little bit of pushback is, is the, the important thing to make,

Heather Shea
yeah, that’s great.

Demetri L. Morgan
it’s not lost on me. The sort of timing, right? Like, you know, graduation is next week for us, like we’re moving into a different season in time. And so, you know, again, trying to think the best of things. It’s like, okay, this makes sense to kind of do this now, like students are transitioning to, you know, off campus. And so can, you know, presidents and other university leaders turn their attention to these things. And then, you know, I think courage is contagious, right? Like, you just, like, you just need some people to say, like, yeah, and other people like, okay, like, I can, I can, you know, maybe sign my name and do the next step. And these sort of incremental steps, I do think are very important. And so, you know, I think we have to be like, quick and loud with our critiques, but we also know, which is why I’m really glad you’re raising story, we should also sort of applaud and sort of hat tip when you know leaders and other decision makers are doing things that we think will help institutions and help students and help communities. And both things can be can be true, right? And so I am big into like, yeah, when people do something that sort of even, even slightly courageous, like, let’s, let’s say like, good on you, and hope that it leads to the to the next thing that’s

Heather Shea
great. All right. Final thoughts, what’s on the horizon and what’s keeping you up at night and what’s bringing you joy right now? So, Brendan, I’m going to start with

Brendan Cantwell
you. I think on the horizon are lawsuits, and we’re going to see more of them and universities as as party to them. What keeps me up at night is I am remain concerned that there’s going to be some kind of provoking event on a campus test, an encounter that is going to that’s going to create much more internal conflict on on a particular campus, on campuses nationwide and. And that if the inter level of internal conflict increases at the same time as this federal external pressure, that things are just going to be very difficult. So that’s the sort of that’s the sort of thing that keeps me up at night. Come on, students, I want you to protest, but also be smart. And what’s bringing me joy. A little embarrassed to say this, maybe, but trees, so I really like to be around trees. They really bring me a sense of calm and in in the part of the country where where all of us live, the trees are starting to leaf out. And it’s, it’s a it’s, to me, like, when the trees leave out, it’s a hopeful time, yeah, also it means that graduation and summer vacations coming, summer breaks coming up. But so it’s the trees that’s bringing that are bringing me joy.

Heather Shea
I love that. Yes, the the all the different flowering trees, I’m also like, there’s like, a patch of pink over there, yeah, all right, how about you, Demetri, what’s on the horizon keeping you up at night and bringing you joy?

Demetri L. Morgan
Yeah? So two things that are kind of on the horizon keeping me up at night. I So Congress has been on a couple week sort of, I mean, Congress takes a lot of breaks for all of their like waste, fraud and abuse, but, but when they come back, you know, we’re gonna start to get into the weeds of this kind of, you know, one big, beautiful bill, which is a tax bill. And I’m really worried, because one of the things that, you know, sort of a pattern is that when there are economic or financial sort of headwinds or challenges, the Trump administration seems to turn to sort of culture war wins, whether it’s immigration or sort of dunking on higher ed. And so, you know, we had the tariff debacle over the last two weeks. And so it does not surprise me, right, that we get a slew of Eos that kind of stick it to the education apparatus. It’s a way of shifting the narrative, giving the kind of conservative Maga, sort of media sphere, something else to focus on and talk about where they are, you know, sort of demonstrating wins. But I think we are very clearly going to come into heads with how this tax bill is going to be written and and I’m just worried about the collateral damage of who sort of gets thrown who or what gets thrown under the bus as the sort of sausage making gets into it, especially when the sort of conservative budget hawks versus people are trying to Fill the agenda you know, will not be able to iron it out as easily as you know. I think people meet are making it out to be some I’m watching that. And then the the other thing is, you know, I’m worried. Last summer we saw when students left campus in Michigan. I’m not sure about Michigan State. These institutions made a ton of changes to their student codes of conduct, to ways that they, you know, sort of were going to police campuses and encampments, and I am, and sort of people tracked it last year, because we were still coming, kind of coming off it. But I am, I’m worried about what changes institutions are going to make, sort of in the quiet of summer that are going to be equally impactful but less tracked, because it’s not coming on the heels of the encampments sort of wrapping up. So that’s something that I’ll be tracking. And with me joy similar being outdoors. Ann Arbor has a lot of beautiful running paths, and so I’ve been able to get out with them, with my, my two girls, the last couple of Saturdays, and just kind of run and get them outside. So it’s been a lot of fun, and the weather has been beautiful. And yeah, so and I’m excited to run in Denver. The weather was supposed to be really nice, so just kind of being outdoors.

Speaker 1
Well, thank you both, and special. Thanks. Brendan, you are in Denver at A E R A right now, and I know Demetri is on his way there. So thank you for taking the time to join us. This is our second to the last episode of this limited series, and so we’d love to hear from you if you have found these conversations like I have to be really useful and and we hopefully will look to continue them on some cadence, maybe in the fall. So if you haven’t caught up on all of our past episodes, you can find them at Student Affairs now.com/current-campus-context I want to send a special thanks as well to the other folks on the Student Affairs now host team, especially Dr Keith Edwards and Dr Raechele Pope, who today, like talked through the slew of different topics that we could have covered. I really think that you know the. The velocity, right? It’s just it’s out of control, and I think that’s obviously part of the tactic. So for me, these discussions have really mattered. So if you have suggestions or would like to hear a specific question or topic covered in our very last episode next Thursday, please send us an email at host@studentaffairsnow.com Again, thank you. Dr Brennan Cantwell, thank you. Dr Demetri Morgan, this has been current campus context, brought to you by Student Affairs now, and we will see you next week.

Judge Limits Trump’s Ability to Withhold School Funds Over D.E.I. – The New York Times (April 24)
Trump’s Latest Executive Orders Target Accreditation (April 23)

More Than 200 Higher-Ed Leaders Decry Trump Administration’s ‘Unprecedented Government Overreach’ (The Chronicle, April 22)

More Than 220 Academic Leaders Condemn Trump’s ‘Overreach’ – The New York Times (April 22)

A Call for Constructive Engagement | AAC&U (April 22)

The University Is a Hostage. But There’s Hope. (Opinion, The Chronicle, April 22)

Colleges Must Eliminate DEI Programs to Receive Research Funding, NIH Says (Chronicle, April 22)

Harvard Sues Trump Administration Over ‘Improper Government Intrusion,’ With Billions at Stake (Chronicle, April 21)

Harvard Sues Trump Administration Over Threats to Cut Funding – The New York Times (April 21)