You have /5 articles left.
Sign up for a free account or log in.
Through their architecture and traditions, American colleges and universities project a sense of timelessness and continuity. Ivy-covered buildings, neoclassical or Gothic facades, and centuries-old rituals like convocations and commencements give the impression that these institutions have remained unchanged for generations.
Yet beneath this seemingly unchanging exterior, today’s campuses are vastly different from those of just half a century ago, having undergone profound transformations in size, complexity and mission. To understand the financial pressures today’s institutions face, one must first grasp how dramatically their scope has expanded. Universities now incorporate applied research, community outreach, expanded student services, interdisciplinary study and much more as integral parts of their enterprise.
A Seismic Shift in the University’s Mission
Over the past 50 years, universities—especially research-intensive campuses—have experienced a far more profound shift in their mission than even many faculty members realize. While undergraduate education remains the public face of higher education, the real transformation has occurred behind the scenes, in areas like research expansion, innovation, technology transfer, health care, graduate and professional education, and student services.
These changes go far beyond mere mission creep or administrative bloat. The very purpose of universities has shifted from being primarily teaching-centered institutions to becoming multifunctional organizations involved in research commercialization, policy formulation, economic development and even public health.
Research, Technology Transfer and Innovation Hubs
One of the most visible transformations is the growth of the research enterprise. The number of Research-1 institutions, those with the highest levels of research activity, has surged. Many universities now prioritize knowledge production and research commercialization over undergraduate and even graduate teaching.
Contract research, where universities partner with government agencies, corporations and private entities to conduct research, has become central to many institutions’ missions. These partnerships focus on cutting-edge technologies, public policy and health care, blurring the lines between academia and the marketplace.
Technology transfer—turning academic research into patents, start-ups and commercial applications—has also added a new dimension to universities’ roles. Many campuses now include innovation hubs and research parks, designed to foster collaboration between academia and industry. These hubs develop market-ready technologies in fields like biotechnology, renewable energy and data science, positioning universities as engines of economic development.
For members of the Association of American Universities, having a sophisticated medical center has become the norm. These centers do far more than provide medical education; they engage in biomedical research, clinical trials and public health initiatives, expanding universities’ influence in medical innovation and patient care. Many are now integral parts of giant regional health-care delivery systems.
Interdisciplinary and Identity-Based Programs
Another significant shift is the rise of interdisciplinary programs that challenge traditional academic boundaries. New fields like artificial intelligence, brain science, sustainability studies and data science draw on multiple disciplines, emphasizing problem-solving and applied knowledge.
At the same time, universities have established an expanding number of interdisciplinary studies units in the humanities and social sciences that are aligned with specific identities, political interests and regions of the world. These units arose partly in response to pressures from students, faculty, donors and legislators, who push for academic entities that align with their personal, intellectual and political commitments.
While certainly enriching campus life by introducing new perspectives and areas of study, while helping to diversify the professoriate and adding a new dimension to universities’ intellectual and ethical mission, they also differ in significant ways from more traditional discipline-based departments. Many of these initiatives have an explicit theoretical bent and an emphasis on community outreach and social justice and activism or an alignment with a particular intellectual and political or policy agenda.
Today’s universities face the challenge of serving as big tents, accommodating a wide range of constituencies who expect their diverse interests, values and identities to be reflected in the academic curriculum. Thus, alongside units that focus on colonialism, indigeneity, environmental justice and race or gender and sexuality studies, interdisciplinary centers focusing on policy, business and international relations, often driven by donor interests, have become more prominent.
Some centers promote conservative ideologies, such as those dedicated to free enterprise, constitutional studies, Western civilization and market-oriented economic policies, reflecting the demands of politically aligned donors or state legislatures. These programs have emerged on campuses to counterbalance the perception that most university curricula lean left.
The growth of these interdisciplinary centers has allowed universities to broaden their academic offerings and better reflect the diverse perspectives of students and faculty and provide focused attention on issues such as race, gender, globalization or political philosophy. For many students, these programs provide safe spaces where they can explore their identities, values and worldviews in an academic setting.
Yet while interdisciplinary centers add value by diversifying the academic landscape and giving voice to underrepresented perspectives, they also raise several challenges that universities must navigate carefully. As interdisciplinary centers grow in number and influence, they introduce new dynamics to the campus academic landscape. They can fragment the academic landscape, foster division among faculty and students, and create pressure to establish additional programs to ensure that no interest group goes unrepresented.
Standards for tenure and promotion and decisions about granting these units departmental or college status have become flashpoints on many campuses, including my own. Whereas traditional departments like history, biology or economics have well-established curricula, methods of inquiry and expectations for intellectual diversity, interdisciplinary centers, particularly those with activist components, sometimes hold different objectives, resulting in differences in priorities, goals, methods and standards of evaluation. This has led to tensions on many campuses over issues involving academic rigor, hiring and political agendas.
Another challenge is the growing influence of donors in the establishment and direction of certain interdisciplinary centers, particularly those with political or ideological leanings. While donor involvement can provide critical funding, it also raises concerns about academic independence. Universities must carefully navigate these relationships to ensure that donor interests do not unduly shape academic content or stifle intellectual diversity.
Establishing and maintaining interdisciplinary centers requires significant financial and administrative resources. As universities create more specialized centers, they often strain their budgets and staff, leading to bitter fights over resource allocation.
Also, in this politically polarized moment, interdisciplinary centers—especially those focused on race, gender, sexuality and political ideologies—are often caught in the crossfire of broader societal debates. Conservative critics frequently accuse identity-aligned centers of promoting identity politics or indoctrination, while progressive critics may argue that free enterprise or Western civilization centers are vehicles for reinforcing privilege and conservative values. Universities must navigate these external pressures while maintaining their commitment to academic freedom and the free exchange of ideas.
The establishment of interdisciplinary and identity-aligned centers reflects the evolving nature of higher education, where universities are increasingly expected to cater to a wide array of student, faculty and donor interests. A key issue is how big the tent should be in accommodating diverse perspectives and interests given institutions’ resource constraints.
Expansion of Student Services
In parallel, universities have vastly expanded their student services, reflecting the growing expectation that higher education should provide wraparound student supports. Mental health services, disability centers, diversity offices and career centers have become central to student life, making universities responsible not only for academic growth but also for students’ emotional, psychological and professional development.
The Rise of Online Professional Master’s Programs
A related development is the rapid expansion of online professional master’s programs, reflecting broader changes in both higher education and the workforce, with profound implications for universities’ roles and missions.
Over the past two decades, there has been a sharp increase in demand for graduate degrees in fields like business, data science, cybersecurity and public health. Universities have responded by expanding professional and applied programs that emphasize workforce readiness and career advancement.
The rise of online education has allowed universities to reach new, nontraditional student populations, including working adults and international students. Online professional master’s programs offer flexibility, allowing working students to upskill without leaving their jobs. This has made graduate education a major revenue stream for universities, especially as undergraduate enrollment declines.
However, this shift raises concerns about how universities balance career-oriented programs with their traditional commitment to intellectual and academic development. Are universities at risk of becoming credentialing factories, focusing on job training rather than fostering broad intellectual inquiry? Are schools using these programs as cash cows, without sufficient concern for quality, cost or learning and employment and promotion outcomes?
Balancing These Roles
The challenge for contemporary universities is how to balance these new functions with their traditional roles of educating undergraduates and advancing scholarly research. This dual identity, between traditional education and research and a complex, multifunctional institution, creates tensions, as resources, attention and focus are often divided between competing priorities. For example, the rise of contract research and technology transfer has led some to argue that universities are shifting away from their core mission of disinterested intellectual inquiry in favor of commercially driven projects.
The expansion into student care and workforce development also raises questions about whether the focus on nurturing critical thinking and intellectual exploration is being diluted by the more immediate demands of preparing students for the job market and addressing their well-being. In some cases, universities are seen as quasi-public utilities, expected to provide services that extend far beyond education, including mental health support and housing assistance.
The Shifting Mission of Universities: Critical Questions and Tensions
The transformation of universities from primarily teaching-focused institutions to multifaceted, multifunctional organizations raises fundamental questions about their evolving role. This shift challenges traditional perceptions of what universities should be, revealing contradictions and concerns about their ability to fulfill their varied missions effectively.
- Has undergraduate education become secondary? With the rise of research commercialization, contract research and technology transfer, there is growing concern that undergraduate education is no longer the central priority. Critics point to larger class sizes, a greater reliance on adjunct instructors and the increasing emphasis on research rankings as evidence that student-centered teaching is being overshadowed by external partnerships and research activities.
This shift raises important questions about the quality of education. Are universities adequately preparing students for the future or are they more focused on achieving prestige through research output? I myself worry that student learning outcomes are suffering as universities prioritize research over teaching.
- Is the university’s mission becoming too diffuse? As universities take on multiple roles—research hubs, health-care providers, community centers—there is concern that their mission has become too broad to manage effectively. Can universities fulfill all these roles without compromising their core academic functions?
The risk of mission creep is real. Universities may struggle to balance their traditional focus on teaching and knowledge creation with the demands of applied research, entrepreneurship and community engagement. Some critics argue that universities are losing their identity as institutions of higher learning, becoming more like corporate enterprises or public utilities focused on revenue generation and social services.
- How should universities balance intellectual inquiry and activism? As universities increasingly engage in social justice advocacy, a key question arises: How can universities remain neutral spaces for open inquiry and debate?
As we have recently seen, while a host of new interdisciplinary programs align with universities’ missions to promote social betterment, they also create friction. Should universities remain impartial, encouraging intellectual diversity and open dialogue? Or, in the interests of better serving students, is it appropriate and important to have programs to advance a particular agenda? Or will institutions need to create an ever-expanding number of programs in order to reflect a plurality of perspectives?
- What are the limits of the university’s expanding social responsibilities? Universities are now tasked with far more than just education, providing mental health care, diversity and inclusion efforts, housing support, and career services. But how far should these responsibilities extend? Can universities adequately meet these social, emotional and physical needs while maintaining their academic excellence?
The increasing burden to act as quasi-public utilities may well detract from universities’ primary mission of education. Critics argue that the expansion of student services places undue financial and administrative strain on institutions, diverting resources from academic programs. In addition, there is concern that universities are being asked to address societal issues, such as mental health crises and housing insecurity, which may be beyond their scope and expertise.
- How sustainable are these expanding missions? As universities expand into areas such as health care, technology transfer and community impact, questions arise about the sustainability of this growth. Can universities continue to pursue these initiatives without compromising their financial stability or overburdening their faculty and staff?
Revenue generation through research contracts and public-private partnerships is itself a quite costly undertaking. Balancing these activities with academic responsibilities creates potential conflicts of interest and raises questions about academic integrity. Are universities diverting too much funding and attention to revenue-generating activities at the expense of their core educational mission?
- How do universities maintain their role as centers of critical thinking? With increasing pressure to cater to the job market and produce marketable skills, how can universities ensure they continue to prioritize critical thinking, academic rigor and intellectual freedom? There is a growing concern that the commodification of education—emphasizing job skills over intellectual inquiry—is undermining universities’ traditional role as centers of critical thought.
Some argue that this shift risks eroding the intellectual rigor that has long defined higher education. Universities must balance their role as job-training centers with their broader goal of fostering independent thinkers capable of questioning societal norms and engaging in disinterested inquiry.
- What is the role of the faculty in this new model? As universities expand their mission, faculty are increasingly expected to balance teaching, research, public engagement, grant writing and entrepreneurial activities. Are faculty members being stretched too thin?
The growing list of expectations can lead to burnout, particularly as research and administrative duties increase. Faculty are under pressure to publish and secure research grants, which may detract from their teaching responsibilities and reduce student engagement and mentorship.
Navigating the Future of Higher Education
The transformation of universities into multifunctional institutions balancing teaching, research, health care and public engagement offers both significant opportunities and pressing challenges. While these changes reflect the growing importance of universities in societal innovation, health care and public service, they also risk diluting the focus on the university’s core mission: to provide a high-quality education.
If universities are to remain true to their foundational purpose—fostering critical thinking, academic freedom and intellectual diversity—they must redefine their priorities, ensuring they don’t lose sight of their original role as places of education and enlightenment.
The central question is whether these campuses can adapt to the complexities of today’s world without compromising their essence and their long-term relevance.
