Why Americans stopped believing in the promise of higher education

Over the past 20 years, confidence in higher education  has fallen dramatically in the United States. Seven in 10 Americans believe that the U.S. higher education system is heading in the wrong direction, according to an October 2025 poll from the Pew Research Center. This figure is up from 56% of respondents who said the same back in 2020.

A Gallup poll first administered in 2015 has shown waning confidence in higher education. The initial poll showed that 57% of respondents reported being confident in higher education. By 2024, confidence had plummeted to just 36%. And while results from July 2025 show a glimmer of hope—with 42% reporting they are confident in higher education—gaps along party lines remain, with 66% of Democrats, 40% of independents and 26% of Republicans reporting they are confident in four-year colleges.

“These polls have shown a steady decline in public favorability of higher education over the last 10 years, with steeper declines in trust aligned with political affiliation,” says Tracy Poon Tambascia, the Veronica and David Hagen Chair in Women’s Leadership at USC Rossier School of Education. In the recent Pew poll, 77% of Republicans were more likely to say that the higher education system is headed in the wrong direction, compared with 65% of Democrats.

Despite these trends, the majority of Americans still believe that colleges and universities have an important role to play in society. A February 2024 poll from Pew found that around 53% of respondents believe that higher education has a positive impact on the country. Understanding today’s crisis in confidence requires looking back at how American higher education began, what it was built to do and who it was meant to serve. This history reveals longstanding tensions between higher education’s noble ideals and its lived realities.

A Brief History of Higher Education in the U.S.

With its founding in 1636, Harvard University lays claim to the title of the oldest institution of higher education in the U.S. Several other private institutions were founded in the decades following, including the College of William and Mary in 1693, St. John’s College in 1696, Yale University in 1701 and the University of Pennsylvania in 1740. The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the oldest public university in the U.S., began welcoming students in 1786. However, it wasn’t until states began to utilize federal funding provided by the Morrill Land-Grant Colleges Acts of 1862 and 1890 that a plethora of public, land-grant institutions, initially focused on agriculture and engineering, began to emerge across the nation.

The rise of these public institutions stemmed from broader debates about the purpose of higher education. Eric Canny, assistant teaching professor of education, points to this period of the late 1700s to early 1800s as a time “when what it meant to be professional was shifting,” he says. On the heels of the Age of Enlightenment, which ushered in a deep interest in science and reason, the public was questioning the purpose of higher education and actively debating whom it was meant to serve.

Historically, institutions of higher education were seen as places for the white, male and elite members of society, and the professions that required advanced education were limited to priests, doctors, lawyers and scribes. But as the middle class grew and new professions emerged in the late 1700s, people began to question whether the doors of universities should also be open to those beyond the upper echelons of society. New secondary educational paths emerged, including normal schools, which were established to train teachers.

In recent years, we’re seeing a similar pattern of questioning, Canny says. Higher education institutions have been accused of elitism, including by the Trump administration in an August 2025 memo that stated, “President Trump is holding elite universities accountable, ensuring they prioritize fairness, merit and American values.”

Elite is a word Trump has used throughout his political career. “By framing higher education as ‘elite,’ Trump and others are tapping into a powerful cultural tension,” Canny explains. “It plays on longstanding tensions about who higher education is for with a goal of dividing rather than reforming. Important data about access and affordability gets interpreted not to inform policy, but to serve a certain narrative.” Political rhetoric aside, soaring tuition costs have rendered higher education out of reach for many Americans.

In our current times, Canny believes that higher education hasn’t done the best job of communicating its purpose. Universities, especially public ones, were founded with a goal of creating a learned society that could actively participate in democracy. In many ways, higher education institutions were seen as a way to fulfill the promises that America was founded on.

Another essential function of American institutions of higher education has been their role as engines of innovation, University Professor Emeritus William Tierney says. He estimates that around “60% of all innovations that happened in the 20th century had their genesis at universities.” As America rose in prominence, especially after World War II, universities were seen as “a national partner to becoming great,” Canny says. Yet even as universities helped shape American democracy and drive progress, they have also been sites of tension—where new ideas often meet resistance and distrust.

The politics of distrust

Scorn, skepticism and fear of the new ideas that education ushers in are not new. On the contrary, distrust in education is something we’ve seen in human history for thousands of years. Famed Greek philosopher Socrates was sentenced to death in 399 B.C.E. for corrupting the youth and introducing false gods. Aristotle, a student of Plato (who was, in fact, a student of Socrates), fled Athens a few decades later in 323 B.C.E. to avoid a similar fate after he, too, was charged with impiety.

In modern history, waves of anti-intellectualism have often accompanied the rise of totalitarian governments. Spanish dictator Francisco Franco persecuted and killed many of those in Spain’s intellectual circles—including teachers, academics and artists—in the 1930s and ’40s. In Argentina, on the “Night of the Long Batons” in 1966, academics who opposed the right-wing regime of Juan Carlos Onganía were exiled.

Tierney sees disturbing links between recent efforts from the Trump administration to stifle academic freedom and the era of McCarthyism in the 1940s and ’50s, when U.S. Sen. Joseph McCarthy and others made baseless allegations against government officials, accusing them of being communists and of attempting to overthrow the U.S. government. This “Red Scare” quickly made its way to public school systems and college campuses as well, with administrators and faculty members being investigated and forced to resign over their supposed views.

“It takes so much to build things and so little to break them.” —Julie Posselt, Professor of Higher Education

After that time, Tierney says, “we never did an autopsy on what the problems were and how to make sure it doesn’t happen again.” So now, as federal funding for universities has either been pulled or threatened to be revoked if universities don’t abide by certain rules—from shuttering diversity, equity and inclusion offices to limiting transgender athletes’ participation in sports—those in higher education have no past precedent to look to as they search for a way to challenge these threats.

How Did We Get Here?

Return on investment

The cost of attending a college or university has risen significantly over the past two decades in the United States. Jihye Kwon, associate director for survey research at the USC Race and Equity Center, explains that tuition at U.S. institutions is among the highest in the world.

The numbers back this up. According to a U.S. News and World Report analysis, in the past 20 years, when adjusted for inflation, tuition has risen by about 32% at private universities and about 29% at public universities. The average cost per full-time, postsecondary student in the U.S. jumped from $31,800 in 2010 to $37,400 in 2019, representing an increase of 18%. “For low- and middle-income families, [higher education] is very expensive,” Kwon says.

Myriad factors—including faculty salaries, an increase in administrative staff to assist students, rising health care costs, and investments in new technology and campus infrastructure—have contributed to the steep rise in tuition, according to a report by the American Council on Education. However, the authors of the report argue, it’s not simply that costs have risen, but also that income growth in the U.S. has remained flat and state subsidies have been cut.

During the Great Recession of the early 2000s, Americans began to doubt college as a sound investment. “Graduates struggled to find jobs,” Kwon says, “and people questioned whether higher education was keeping pace with social and economic realities.” Kwon sees parallels between the sentiment of 2008–10 and now. College and its return on investment is being put under the microscope as recent grads, saddled with college debt—some with loans from predatory lenders—struggle to find jobs in a challenging economy.

But what does the research show? Canny stresses that the latest data on college and its ROI still shows that, in large part, “the investment is still there.” Attending and graduating from college still has a huge impact on the earning power of individuals and can help lift individuals into the middle class.

Tambascia points to Georgetown University’s Center on Education and the Workforce, which “has been studying this for years, and the evidence still points to yes, though with wide ranges in median earnings based on various fields,” she says.

Public perception, however, “is that a college education does not lead to gainful employment,” Tambascia says. “This is another example of how the data shows longer-term gains in the workforce for those with a college degree, but data on the 6–18 months following graduation may show that it takes time for graduates to increase earning power.”

Although “we don’t know about tomorrow,” Tierney says, “today it is still true that [if an individual goes to a school like] USC or UCLA, they will make about a million dollars more than the non-college graduate.” However, while Tierney is confident about the financial outlook for today’s students, he is unsure what the future will bring, as artificial intelligence and other technologies begin to change the professional landscape, especially for those who majored in areas like computer science.

This points to the importance of ensuring that college students are taught not just what to think, but also how to think and problem solve. “Communicative skills in math, verbal and writing can be learned in a history class,” Tierney says. Colleges may find it hard to deliver on their promise of upward mobility if students are too specialized, Tierney stresses, as “we don’t know what the market will want in four to five years.”

Equally important, Kwon believes, is equipping students—especially those from marginalized backgrounds—with financial literacy tools. Many of these students will be taking on large student loans, and managing this financial burden after college presents a huge strain. “If students graduate with high debt and modest income or leave without a degree, the ROI becomes questionable. Many people may then regret that they went to college,” Kwon says.

A narrow focus on financial ROI can also be detrimental, as it reduces the purpose of higher education solely to creating a pathway to individual economic prosperity. This mindset can overshadow the other major benefits of higher education, including the enormous gains from university research and the shaping of students into well-rounded individuals who are prepared to actively participate in democracy.

While some for-profit education companies “are doing an excellent job, particularly those in high-demand fields like health care,” Tamabascia says, some of these companies like ITT Technical Institute, Trump University and Corinthian Colleges, in retrospect, can be seen as cautionary tales of what can happen when higher education institutions focus solely on marketization and operate as businesses concerned only with their bottom line. These institutions were closed because of a combination of fraudulent activities, from operating without a license in the case of Trump University, to losing accreditation in the case of ITT Tech. While marketization has weakened trust in higher education, polarization has deepened the divide.

Political polarization

Rather than being seen as places of inquiry and research, college campuses have become highly visible sites for modern-day culture wars. From free speech controversies and the Black Lives Matter movement, to protests over the Gaza war and allegations of antisemitism, some of the most contentious issues have played out at universities in recent years. Thanks in no small part to politicians who have manipulated these narratives for their own gain, the purpose of higher education has been overshadowed, and the research it generates has also become politicized. Partisan clashes over immunization and wearing masks during the COVID-19 pandemic are a recent, vivid example of what can happen when science becomes politicized.

Since the Trump administration took control of the federal government in January 2025, a storm of legislation and executive orders has aimed itself at crippling universities, perhaps most prominently seen in the cancellation of federal funding. As of June 2025, around $3.2 billion in federal grants have been targeted for terminations. Most of these funds come from grants issued by the National Institutes of Health and the National Science Foundation.

Julie Posselt, professor of higher education and co-director of the Pullias Center for Higher Education, had two grants terminated by the NSF earlier this year. Though one was reinstated, she can’t admit graduate students this year due to the reduction in funds, and she faces challenges in funding her highly rated research studies, she says.

At this point, it’s hard to gauge the full impact of these massive cuts. “It’s slowing down the academic research machine nationally, even stopping it in some places,” Posselt says. “Private philanthropies are doing their best to fill the gap, but it’s impossible for them to fully do so. It takes so much to build things and so little to break them.”

The Path to Restoring Trust

While the factors contributing to this deep erosion of trust are varied and numerous, rising costs and political polarization are two major contributors. So what can universities and policymakers do to address these concerns and begin to regain control of the narrative?

Controlling costs

Tuition costs have risen dramatically in the past 20 years, and in many instances, these increases haven’t been matched with a similar rise in wages. There have been efforts to make public colleges free for lower-income students. The California Promise and MassEducate programs provide free community college tuition for students who meet eligibility requirements in California and Massachusetts. John B. King Jr., chancellor of the State University of New York and former U.S. secretary of education, believes that we should be “moving toward a place where public higher education is debt-free for students.” King raises the important point that the Pell Grant’s purchasing power has greatly diminished since the 1980s, when it covered around 80% of the costs of attending public colleges and universities. Today, the Pell Grant covers only 28% of these costs.

With the recent overhaul of the U.S. Department of Education, the offices that handle financial aid and civil rights have been nearly gutted. The effect of these policy changes will likely be felt most by lower-income students who rely on these offices and the programs they run to attend college. “This sends the message that financial aid for marginalized students is not the most important thing, and parents and students assume that attitude as well. It becomes the new norm,” Kwon says.

These policy shifts—from financial aid governance and student visa regulations to support for minority-serving institutions and marginalized student—creates an environment where the public loses trust in both government and higher education. “The core values and policies should stay the same no matter which administration is in power,” Kwon stresses. A volatile environment makes it even more difficult for potential students to decide whether to attend college.

The COVID-19 pandemic also showed that remote learning, especially for higher education institutions, is possible. Looking at how the delivery of education can cut down on high overhead costs for universities should also be a priority, Canny says.

“Do we need the campuses we’ve constructed?” Canny asks. Universities spend “billions in upkeep and maintenance” on these campuses in the U.S., he explains. Higher education has been slow to incorporate new technologies, and Canny sees opportunities for schools to lower costs by thinking more flexibly about how to deliver their services in new and emerging modalities.

“Research is a common  good, and we need to  articulate that better.”  —Eric Canny, Assistant Teaching Professor of Education

Better communication

Trust is hard to earn and easy to lose. One place universities can start is by improving their communication strategies.

“We need transparency,” Canny says. Kwon echoes this sentiment while stressing the importance of universities acting with humility. Universities can’t act “like they’ll be just fine. That can negatively impact trust building. Universities need to stay true to their missions: promoting student success and public services rather than reacting to political pressures,” Kwon says.

Trust-building is a long-term project that occurs not only at the institutional level but also at the individual level. “Professors have the ability to change lives,” Kwon says.  One interaction with a faculty or staff member can change the trajectory of a student’s life, and these positive interactions add up over time. “It’s important for everyone to have ownership of our responsibility [to restore trust],” Kwon says.

Also key is ensuring that colleges are spaces where students, staff and faculty can engage in “open, respectful discussions,” Kwon says. In a politically tense and polarized environment, this can be especially challenging, but Canny suggests universities look to their strengths. The classroom environment is the perfect incubator. In the classroom, “we hold conversations where people disagree with us,” Canny says. These spaces are small and intimate, and skilled faculty create environments where all students feel comfortable engaging with one another, even if they find themselves on opposite sides of an issue. Tierney, similarly, encourages universities to encourage dialogue and debates between those who disagree with one another.

Equally important is ensuring that the public knows that higher education isn’t only educating future generations but also generating innovation and research that can improve all our lives. “Research is a common good,” Canny says, “and we need to articulate that better.” Additionally, universities must think about messaging strategies that can “bridge some of the gaps” between those on different sides of the political spectrum. “In the recent election, the majority of the country voted for [Trump]. ... They believe in what [he] stands for.” To rebuild trust, Canny says, we must improve our messaging to the general public.

Individual faculty members, especially those who are tenured, also have an important role to play, according to Tierney. Tenure, which helps protect academic freedom, “is not simply job security,” he stresses. “Those who have tenure should be [speaking up]. The university will not succeed if tenured faculty are not forthcoming. Academic freedom is an idea ... and those with tenure must protect people.”

A key component that Tierney, Dean Pedro Noguera and Vice Dean Mark Robison feel universities and colleges need is to speak as a united front. Institutions in the Big Ten Conference, for example, “should be working in concert with one another,” Tierney says.

The time we are in “is the most important time in higher education in the last century,” Tierney adds. “It’s an open question: Will we step up?”