When the Trump Administration unveiled its Compact for Academic Excellence in Higher Education, it didn’t just propose policy—it launched a brand.

‍Words like “compact” and “excellence” are not neutral. They’re aspirational and common sense. Who wouldn’t want higher ed to reward merit? Who wouldn’t want a compact for excellence?

But as in any branding exercise, the story you tell is as important as the reality underneath it. And here, the story of “excellence” hides a deeper, more troubling narrative: a meritocracy branded as fairness, designed to reinforce the success of those already advantaged.

This is a brand narrative audit: what story the Compact tells, why it works, where it falls apart, and what narrative higher education actually needs.

The Story the Compact is Selling  

The Compact positions itself as a reset for higher education—one that strips away “politics” and asks institutions to prioritize “neutral” principles of merit through these provisions:

• Ban on considering race or gender in admissions and hiring. Branded as neutrality, this enforces a “merit-only” frame, as if scores and GPAs exist in a vacuum.
• Mandatory standardized testing (SAT/ACT) for admissions. A direct signal that test performance is the ultimate arbiter of “excellence.”
• Freeze on tuition for five years, with exceptions for students from families of “substantial means.” Overlooks the core issue of affordability, reinforcing the idea that access depends on financial status rather than educational needs.
• Preference for “hard science” programs when allocating tuition waivers, narrowing the definition of valuable knowledge.
• Caps on international student enrollment. Sold as protecting access for U.S. students, but built on scarcity and exclusion.

Institutions that sign the Compact are promised preferred access to federal funding.Together, these provisions and that promise tell a clear story: Higher education should reward individual effort, measured by supposedly neutral metrics, and present that reward as both fair and inevitable. Or else.

The Narrative is False. But It Works.

The Compact’s brand narrative resonates not because it’s accurate, but because it leverages rhetorical devices and cultural stories Americans already believe:

• Clarity. “Work hard, get rewarded” is simple and repeatable.
• Resonance. The American Dream myth of meritocracy appeals because it flatters those who succeed and seems to justify their rewards.
• Masking. Banning demographic considerations and mandating standardized tests hides structural inequities under the guise of neutrality.
• Appeal to ego. The Compact defines fairness through competition; prestige comes from being among the few who make the cut.
• Framing. Excluding perspectives that meritocracy has failed allows systems that look neutral to consolidate advantage for those already positioned to succeed.
• The pull of zero-sum thinking. The Compact frames progress for some as a loss to others, branding itself as loss-preventative rather than opportunity-restrictive.

In branding terms, this is the equivalent of a product that markets only the benefit (“excellence”) and buries the fine print (systemic barriers, unequal access).

The Cracks in the Compact’s Story

Strong brands only hold if the narrative matches reality. Here, the cracks are easy to see:

• Unequal starting points. Standardized tests don’t measure merit in isolation—they reflect access to tutoring, school resources, and family wealth.
• Contradictions of neutrality. The Compact bans demographic criteria while simultaneously requiring ideological representation of conservative viewpoints. That isn’t neutrality; it’s selective narrative control.
• Narrow definitions of value. Elevating “hard sciences” while sidelining other fields is a brand choice about what knowledge counts, not an objective truth.
• Community costs. Capping international students and ignoring affordability gaps may play to a political audience, but they undercut higher education’s role in fostering global connection and economic growth.

This is a brand of exclusion disguised as fairness—and once you read the fine print, the story loses its credibility.

The Narrative Higher Ed Actually Needs

A counter-narrative can’t just say “meritocracy is wrong.” It has to be just as clear, resonant, and repeatable—rooted in truth rather than spin.Here’s what a better brand story of excellence could look like:

• Shared Investment. Excellence doesn’t emerge from individual grit alone. It’s built by communities, institutions, and public policies that expand opportunity.
• Inclusive Excellence. Broadening who succeeds strengthens higher education’s claim to be a true public good. Excellence isn’t meaningful if it rests on exclusion; it becomes legitimate only when students from every community see themselves reflected in success. This is about higher education living up to its promise as a pathway for all.
• Equity as Growth. When more students thrive—first-gen, adult learners, rural students, international students—institutions gain stability, the workforce expands, and communities prosper. Equity isn’t just a moral imperative; it is a growth strategy that fuels economic vitality and institutional sustainability.

Most importantly, this story rejects the zero-sum frame. Opportunity is not finite. When more people succeed, we all benefit. Or, as Heather McGhee puts it, progress is a “solidarity dividend”—the gains we unlock when we invest in each other instead of competing over scarcity.

Conclusion: Branding is Never Neutral

The Compact demonstrates the power of brand narrative in policy. By framing inequity as fairness and scarcity as inevitable, it makes exclusion feel like common sense. That’s why it works—and why it’s dangerous.

But branding is never neutral. Higher education doesn’t have to accept this story. Leaders and advocates can tell a different one—aspirational, expansive, and true.

At Friday, we know a brand isn’t just words on a page. It’s the story you choose to tell. Higher education doesn’t need a compact that narrows the field. It needs a narrative that makes excellence accessible, opportunity abundant, and growth a shared responsibility.