Featured Post from ExpertFile

Higher Education Enters the Ring

What Linda McMahon’s Appointment Means for Colleges & Universities

Nov 21, 2024

6 min

Peter Evans
CaptionResizeWrap TextRemove


Why it matters

CaptionResizeWrap TextRemove


Yesterday’s announcement that Linda McMahon is President-elect Donald Trump’s pick to lead the Department of Education ushers in a new era for universities and colleges.  This signals a sharp pivot toward decentralization and pro-business policies, and it's expected that McMahon’s leadership will focus on dismantling traditional federal education structures, expanding school choice, and aligning education priorities with a business-first agenda.  Higher education faces funding uncertainties, new accountability pressures, and the need to demonstrate its relevance in supporting economic growth.

The Big Picture


McMahon’s appointment reflects Trump’s broader strategy to reframe education policy in a way that prioritizes state control, entrepreneurship, and conservative cultural values. This will likely have significant consequences for higher education, including:


Decentralization: Shifting control of education policy and funding to the states.


School Choice Expansion: Redirecting public funds to private, religious, and homeschooling options.


Economic Alignment: Pressuring institutions to support industry, small business, and workforce development through research, partnerships, and entrepreneurship/startup programs.


Cultural Shifts: Rolling back policies on diversity, equity, and inclusion while emphasizing “patriotic” education.


What’s at Stake


Federal Funding Cuts:

Threat: Research funding, Pell Grants, and other federal supports may face cuts.

Reality Check: Congressional approval is required to eliminate funding streams like Title I, making complete federal withdrawal unlikely but changes and funding disruptions possible.


Policy Shifts:

Threat: Federal oversight will likely weaken, and policies favoring vocational and workforce-aligned education will likely put increased pressure on programs such as liberal arts. Universities will also likely face increasing pressure to align with ideological goals, such as restricting DEI (diversity, equity, and inclusion) initiatives.  The new administration could wield considerable control over the school accreditation process, which has been seen by some to force ideological changes on campuses.  There has been a movement to decentralize accreditation authority, reduce federal oversight, and align educational standards with conservative values. According to the Council for Higher Education, many of the ideas put forward focus on empowering states to authorize accrediting agencies and even serve as accreditors themselves, shifting control from federal to state governments. 

Action: Institutions must better identify their options amidst a rapidly evolving agenda at both the state and federal levels, develop strategies and secure the resources necessary.  For instance, there are calls to prohibit accreditors from requiring institutions to implement Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) policies.  Institutions also need to understand what the implications of a more diverse accreditation landscape could be, with standards varying significantly across states, potentially affecting the uniformity and transferability of academic credentials nationwide. 


Reputational Risks:

Concern: Growing public skepticism toward higher education undermines enrolment and support.

Impact: Conservative narratives favoring alternatives like apprenticeships and other programs that support the economy and job growth will likely gain traction.


Preserving Institutional Independence:

Pressure: Universities face increased scrutiny of their course curriculum and research priorities that may be deemed ideologically contentious.

Opportunity: Institutions must tangibly demonstrate their value to society. The more they can do to break down barriers between “town and gown” and counter the narrative that paints them as too expensive, elitist, and out of touch.


Demonstrating Economic Impact:

Need: Universities must showcase their role in driving economic growth through research, commercialization, and support for small businesses and entrepreneurs.

Opportunity: Institutions should communicate their relevance in relatable ways that engage with businesses, emphasizing tangible contributions to research innovation and job creation as a positive return on investment that can be messaged to taxpayers.


Key Questions for Higher Ed Leaders


Funding: How can we diversify revenue streams and reduce reliance on federal support?

Advocacy: How should universities engage state and federal leaders to protect their interests?

Reputation: How can higher education rebuild public trust and counter skepticism? 

Relevance: How do we better communicate the value of university research and its role in supporting a pro-business agenda?

Adaptation: Can institutions innovate by expanding industry partnerships, online education, and workforce-aligned programs?


Implications of Project 2025


Project 2025 is a comprehensive initiative spearheaded by the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank, aiming to reshape the U.S. federal government through a conservative lens. Launched in April 2023, it serves as a strategic blueprint for a potential conservative administration, detailing policy proposals, personnel strategies, training programs, and a 180-day action plan.


Analysis from the Brookings Institution states that "many proposals in Project 2025 would require an unlikely degree of cooperation from Congress, though others could be enacted unilaterally by a second Trump administration.”  While we don’t know the full extent to which Project 2025 will be implemented, its agenda seeks to reshape federal agencies, including the Department of Education, with a significant impact on the sector.  Key areas of focus include:


Title I and Student Aid

Proposals to give parents more control over federal funds could deprioritize public education.


Tax Credits for School Choice

Incentives to support private school tuition may shift K-12 pipelines, impacting university enrolment.


Economic Realignment

Universities will need to align with business priorities, emphasizing innovation, commercialization, and job creation.


Diversity Equity & Inclusion

Project 2025 explicitly calls for reducing federal spending on what it deems unnecessary or politicized initiatives, and DEI programs are likely to fall under this categorization.  This could have wide-ranging impacts, including changes to school ranking systems that have a DEI component.  Ranking bodies such as US News & World Report may need to adjust their methodologies to account for changes in diversity initiatives and data availability. With potential reductions in diversity-related data, rankings might place greater emphasis on other factors such as academic performance, faculty qualifications, and post-graduate outcomes.

This also could extend to endowments, which direct funding toward diversity programs through scholarships and fellowships. For institutions that rely heavily on DEI as a cornerstone of their fundraising and donor relations strategies, they may experience reduced donor enthusiasm, particularly from philanthropic organizations or alumni committed to these causes.


Regulatory Rollbacks

There is the potential for significant changes to Title IX protections and federal loan forgiveness programs, creating legal and financial uncertainty.


What Universities Can Do Now:


Secure Funding

  • Build relationships with private donors, businesses, and industry partners.
  • Strengthen advocacy efforts at the state level to safeguard funding & other resources.  
  • Adopt proactive strategies to mitigate potential policy impacts, such as diversifying revenue sources, engaging donors with aligned government priorities, and ensuring compliance with evolving regulations.


Reinforce Public Trust

  • Explain complex topics in accessible ways to help the public and policymakers make informed decisions.
  • Help promote and support faculty who can serve as credible sources for the media, countering misinformation and fostering informed dialogue.
  • Strengthen community connections with your experts through public speaking engagements, workshops, and local events. Position the university as a hub for knowledge and innovation that benefits the community.
  • Capitalize on the reach and influence of alumni. Highlight their successes to show how they benefitted from educational programs and research. Position them as important role models and advocates in the community who are contributing to economic growth.


Demonstrate Relevance

  • Showcase faculty and their research breakthroughs. Demonstrate how their work benefits industries, supports entrepreneurship and addresses societal challenges.
  • Speak to real-world outcomes in health, technology, the environment, and more. Use accessible language to connect with policymakers, business leaders and taxpayers.


Strengthen Advocacy:

  • Partner with peer institutions to shape policy discussions. Position universities and colleges as vital contributors to a pro-business agenda.


Innovate:

  • Expand stackable credentials and micro-credential programs that are aligned with private and public sector requirements and emerging skills-based models.
  • Look at new online education options.
  • Embrace partnerships that connect academic research to real-world economic impact.
Universities must deliver a more compelling, data-driven, yet humanized story about their institution’s contributions, fostering stronger relationships with government, the private sector, and taxpayers.


What's Next


This new era will most certainly challenge higher education to rethink its approach to funding, policy, and public engagement. For all institutions, both public and private, there is no place to hide.  As they step into the ring, Higher Education leaders will need lots of support as they look to forge new paths for research, teaching, and community service while engaging their stakeholders in ways that more powerfully communicate their vital contributions to society.

The bell has rung—are you ready?



Connect with:
Peter Evans

Peter Evans

Co-Founder & CEO

Recognized speaker on expertise marketing, technology and innovation

Media TrendsThought LeadershipMarketingTechnologyInnovation
Powered by

You might also like...

Check out some other posts from ExpertFile

New Gallup–Lumina Study Data Suggests Parents Can't See What a University Degree Is Really Worth featured image

3 min

New Gallup–Lumina Study Data Suggests Parents Can't See What a University Degree Is Really Worth

Sixty-three percent of Americans say four-year colleges are doing a poor job of making education affordable. Twelve percent say they're doing well. That figure is getting a lot of attention along with other results in the latest Gallup and Lumina Foundation survey of 2,043 adults. Ironically, this data will surprise very few people working in the sector who are paying attention. When you look at the data, one number stands out and provides hope for institutions. Among parents who hold a college degree, 48 percent want a four-year university for their child. And among parents with some college or a high school diploma, fewer than 20 percent do. Both groups want education after high school. What separates them is whether the parent has personally experienced what a degree does to employment, earnings and job satisfaction. So the case for the four-year degree is currently being carried by "lived experience", which, by definition, does not reach families who haven't had it. These are the families four-year institutions most need to reach. Community colleges, by contrast, show what the alternative looks like when it's explained well. They're rated good or excellent by 68 percent on access, 61 percent on quality, 54 percent on affordability and 52 percent on workforce preparation. Four-year institutions lead in one category: advancing knowledge and new discoveries, 53 percent to 46. Price is where institutions have hurt themselves most directly. Net prices have fallen across income brackets and institution types over six years, yet colleges continue publishing sticker figures that most enrolled students never pay. Courtney Brown calls transparency “the missing link in rebuilding trust.” A family that can't determine the price before applying will assume the advertised number is the price. The 3 Themes Run Through this Data Evidence has to Connect with Audiences Who Have No Reference Point: Institutions often position for families who already understand how higher education works. And the survey suggests the persuadable audience is the one that doesn't. Unexplained Value Doesn't Count: A college credential that costs less, takes two years, and ends in a job explains itself. A benefit that compounds over thirty years does not, and most institutions have responded by falling back on median starting salary. Universities need to show other evidence of value.  Scattered Evidence Isn't Discoverable: Aid data, outcomes, faculty expertise, and research impact each live in a different department, in different faculties, and in different systems. It’s challenging for CMO’s to unify all this information. But the market isn’t waiting for that to happen. Students and families now hand that assembly job to an AI search tool, and whatever it retrieves and attributes is functionally what the institution has said. None of this starts with a campaign. Write down the ten questions families ask most often, then check what your website, your faculty pages and an AI assistant currently return for each one. Most institutions find the evidence exists and nobody can locate it. At ExpertFile we understand we can’t fix all of these problems. Nonetheless, we’re working hard to make faculty expertise and research more findable and relatable to a variety of audiences - this includes the students and families that have important questions about the value of university. Americans have not given up on higher education. They just want clearer evidence of what it costs and what it returns, and they want it from credible voices willing to put their names to it.

Expert Insights on the Manhattan High-Rise Structural Concerns featured image

2 min

Expert Insights on the Manhattan High-Rise Structural Concerns

The unfolding structural emergency at the former Pfizer headquarters on East 42nd Street in Midtown Manhattan raises urgent questions issues such as load limits, weight redistribution, structural steel, emergency shoring and in general the challenges of converting older office towers into residential buildings. As officials and engineers continue to investigate what happened, the incident points to a larger issue facing many major cities: how safely can older commercial buildings be adapted for new uses, especially when vertical additions, new floor loads and major structural modifications are involved? ExpertFile has a range of structural engineering experts available to help journalists and audiences understand the engineering issues behind this story. Featured Experts Edward Sippel, P.E., Ph.D. Assistant Professor, Milwaukee School of Engineering Edward Sippel is an expert in structural engineering at the Milwaukee School of Engineering with a focus on steel structures, stability and structural analysis. His expertise in structural steel, finite element analysis and nonlinear analysis makes him especially relevant to questions about column buckling, steel-frame behavior, temporary reinforcement and how engineers assess whether a damaged steel structure can be stabilized or repaired. David O. Prevatt Professor, University of Florida David O. Prevatt is a structural engineer at the University of Florida whose areas of expertise include structural load paths, structural engineering and resilient building performance. His expertise is especially relevant to explaining how loads move through a building, what happens when weight is added or redistributed, and why engineers must understand the full path that gravity loads take from upper floors down to the foundation. Key Questions Experts Can Address How do added floors or major renovations change the way weight moves through an existing building? What causes a steel column to buckle, and how is that different from other types of structural failure? Why do transition points between older and newer parts of a structure require special attention? How do engineers use temporary shoring, jacks and steel reinforcement to stop movement during an emergency? What should cities, developers and regulators consider as office-to-residential conversions become more common? Additional Structural Engineering Experts Available Beyond load paths and steel mechanics, this story also raises broader questions about structural health monitoring, building inspections, retrofits, aging infrastructure, concrete systems, structural dynamics and resilient design. ExpertFile includes additional experts who can speak to these related issues, including: For journalists covering the Manhattan high-rise situation, office-to-residential conversions, emergency building stabilization or the future of urban infrastructure, these experts offer relevant structural engineering expertise that may help add context, clarity and perspective to your reporting. Looking for more experts?  Visit: www.expertfile.com About ExpertFile ExpertFile is the worlds largest open-access, curated search engine for experts. ExpertFile is the best way to search and connect with credible experts on over 50,000+ topics. Our award-winning software platform is trusted by leading knowledge-based organizations to help them manage and connect their research and perspectives to a broader audience. Download the ExpertFile Mobile App.

Built to Last: What It Takes to Compete Across Generations of World Cups featured image

4 min

Built to Last: What It Takes to Compete Across Generations of World Cups

The 2026 FIFA World Cup is giving fans an unusual view of football history: several of the game’s biggest names are still competing long after most elite careers have ended. Cristiano Ronaldo and Lionel Messi are appearing in their sixth World Cups. Ronaldo has scored twice in this tournament and 10 times overall, while Messi has added six goals in 2026 to reach 19 for his World Cup career. Luka Modrić is playing in his fifth tournament. Neymar and Kevin De Bruyne are each appearing in their fourth. Those numbers say something important about talent. They say even more about durability. Reaching one World Cup is difficult. Returning four, five or six times means surviving nearly two decades of club schedules, injuries, travel, tactical changes and competition from younger players. It also means finding new ways to contribute when the body no longer responds exactly as it once did. That opens up several timely questions for journalists covering this final stage of their careers. Below, experts in sports science, biomechanics, psychology and sports business offer perspective on what it takes to compete across multiple World Cups—and what allows some players to remain influential long after their physical peak. What does it take physically to last this long? The World Cup lasts only a few weeks, but the careers behind it are built over thousands of training sessions and matches. For older players, the challenge is not simply staying fit. It is managing fatigue, recovering faster and avoiding the injury that could end the run. Hofstra exercise physiologist Katie Sell can speak to the less visible work behind these careers: sleep, hydration, nutrition, endurance and the tighter recovery window athletes face as they age. At the University of Delaware, Tom Kaminski brings expertise in soccer injuries, concussions and player safety. He can help explain how accumulated wear, repeated head impacts and return-to-play decisions influence whether a player can continue at the highest level. Texas Christian University’s Peter Weyand, an expert in sprint mechanics and running performance, can discuss what happens to speed and acceleration over time—and which physical qualities can still be protected through training. How do great players change their game? Longevity rarely comes from playing the same way forever. Ronaldo moved from the wing into a more central scoring role. Messi became more selective with his movement. Modrić continued to control matches through timing, positioning and awareness rather than physical dominance. These are not signs that aging players have stopped influencing games. They are signs that influence has changed. Carnegie Mellon biomechanics researcher Eni Halilaj can speak to how athletes adjust their movement patterns, conserve energy and reduce physical strain as they get older, while her colleague Eric Yttri, who studies motor control and decision-making, can explain how anticipation and experience allow veteran players to act earlier and more efficiently. Texas Christian University’s Peter Weyand can also add context on why older players often change positions, reduce repeated sprinting or become more selective about when they make high-intensity runs. Why keep coming back? By the time a player reaches a fourth or fifth World Cup, money and recognition are unlikely to be the main reasons for continuing. The harder question is what keeps an athlete committed after years of success, injuries and public scrutiny—especially when their role may be smaller than it once was. TCU sport psychology expert Robyn Trocchio can speak to motivation, focus and how accomplished athletes continue setting meaningful goals late in their careers. Hofstra’s Genevieve Weber can address performance anxiety, media pressure and the emotional weight of entering what may be a final international tournament. Georgia Southern sport psychologist Brandonn Harris can discuss resilience, confidence and the mental discipline required to recover from injury, disappointment and changing expectations. How should an aging superstar be judged? Goals are easy to count. Leadership, timing and influence are not. A veteran player may no longer dominate every match, but may still shape how teammates prepare, how opponents defend and how supporters respond. For coaches, that creates a difficult balance between reputation, current performance and what an experienced player brings in moments of pressure. At Emory University’s Goizueta Business School, Michael Lewis can discuss the value of global stars beyond the score sheet, including fan interest, brand strength and the attention they bring to a national team. Carnegie Mellon University’s Eric Yttri can speak to the on-field contributions that statistics often miss, including positioning, anticipation and decision-making. Texas Christian University’s Robyn Trocchio can address the leadership side of the story, including the difficult transition from automatic starter to mentor, substitute or situational player. A generation nearing the end The 2026 World Cup may be remembered not only for the players who emerged, but for the ones who were leaving. Ronaldo, Messi, Modrić, Neymar and De Bruyne have played through different tactical eras and alongside multiple generations of teammates. Their longevity was not built on talent alone. It required adaptation, recovery, discipline and a willingness to accept that staying great sometimes means becoming a different kind of player. For reporters, their careers offer a timely way to examine how elite athletes age—and why some remain relevant long after the normal limits of the game suggest they should.

View all posts
Powered by