Why Arthur Levine believes 25 percent of US colleges are headed for closure

American higher education has been warned about change for decades. This time, the warning feels final. Arthur Levine, the newly appointed president of Brandeis University, is not predicting a gentle reshaping of colleges and universities. He is forecasting a shakeout, one that will permanently thin the ranks of institutions that have long assumed their own survival. Speaking at a recent American Enterprise Institute event, Levine said bluntly that as many as 20 to 25 percent of colleges may close in the coming years, with community colleges and regional universities increasingly pushed toward online-only models, as reported by College Fix.

The remarks were delivered during “Tackling Higher Education’s Challenges: A Conversation with Frederick M. Hess and Brandeis University President Arthur Levine,” but they carried the weight of something larger than an academic discussion. Levine was describing a system that, in his view, has run out of excuses.

A transformation universities can no longer ignore

“Higher education is undergoing a transformation. Our whole society is undergoing a transformation,” Levine said in the event, placing the crisis within a broader economic and cultural shift, from a national, industrial economy to a global, digital, knowledge-based one.


That shift, he argued, is no longer theoretical. It is reshaping demographics, labour markets, politics, and technology at a pace universities have failed to match. While other sectors have adapted, higher education has remained stubbornly attached to inherited models, often mistaking tradition for stability.


The result is a widening divide. Wealthier, elite institutions can afford to wait. According to Levine, schools like Harvard, have the resources to sit through disruption. Smaller colleges do not. For them, adaptation is not strategic, it is existential.

Familiar criticisms, now with consequences

Levine was clear that today’s crisis did not arrive overnight. The criticisms facing colleges, he said, are as old as American higher education itself. Since the early 19th century, institutions have been accused of changing slowly, resisting reform, and charging too much.


What has changed is the public’s patience.


“Outcomes better be worth the price paid,” Levine said, capturing the growing skepticism around tuition, debt, and uncertain returns. When society changes rapidly, he added, universities tend to lag, and then rush to catch up once trust has already eroded.


At the heart of the problem, Levine argued, is a structure built for the Industrial Revolution. The traditional model still resembles an assembly line, moving students forward based on time spent in classrooms rather than what they actually know or can do.


“It doesn’t matter what was taught to you … We should care about what you learn,” he said.

Reinventing the liberal arts, not abandoning them

At Brandeis, Levine is trying to respond with what he calls the Brandeis Plan to Reinvent the Liberal Arts. The initiative aims to overhaul general education, expand access to internships and apprenticeships, and introduce micro-credentials tied directly to skills employers recognize.


“The liberal arts have always been practical,” Levine said, pushing back against the idea that career preparation and liberal education are opposing forces. Early American colleges, he noted, were explicitly designed to prepare students for professional life and civic leadership.


Under the new plan, Brandeis is redesigning general education to align with the realities of a global digital economy. The university describes the initiative as one that integrates “the values of a rigorous liberal arts education with career readiness, ethical grounding and lifelong learning.”


A redesigned curriculum sits at the center of the effort, along with a career-competency transcript that captures “the skills, experiences and competencies that students gain inside and beyond the classroom.”

When grades stop meaning anything

A major shift embedded in Levine’s vision is a move toward competency-based education, measuring skills and knowledge rather than relying solely on grades. It is not, he admitted, a clean or easy transition.


“We’re going to make mistakes. We’re going to get some things wrong,” Levine said, acknowledging that universities will struggle to define competency and agree on how to measure it.


Still, he argued that the alternative is worse. Grade inflation, in his view, has hollowed out academic standards. “Grades don’t mean much anymore, if everyone gets an A.”


Without clearer expectations and stronger assessment tools, Levine warned, colleges risk undermining their own credibility at a moment when trust is already fragile.

Antisemitism, DEI, and institutional blind spots

Levine also spoke about the rise of antisemitism on college campuses, saying Brandeis has been working with local school districts to better understand how discrimination affects students. He has seen an increase in applications from students who say they no longer feel safe at other institutions.


On diversity, equity, and inclusion, Levine took a nuanced but critical stance. He said DEI efforts are necessary, but argued that the term has become so broad and poorly defined that it often fails to protect Jewish students and faculty.


Universities, he said, tend to address these issues in fragments rather than through a clear, comprehensive strategy, one focused on access, support, and equal opportunity.

Research funding and the cost of political retaliation

When the discussion turned to research funding and transparency, Levine issued a warning about politicizing federal support.


“Cutting research funding is not a fit penalty. It’s a penalty to the country,” he said.


Universities, he argued, are increasingly targeted over political grievances rather than the quality of their research. Such actions, he said, represent the “wrong remedy,” punishing the nation’s innovation ecosystem instead of holding institutions meaningfully accountable.

Academic freedom, with limits

Levine ended on academic freedom, defining it as the right to pursue and speak the truth. But he was careful to draw a boundary. Academic freedom, he said, does not grant faculty license to say anything without responsibility.

What emerges from Levine’s remarks is not nostalgia for a lost system, but impatience with one that has delayed reform for too long.

The future he outlined is not guaranteed to be fair, or forgiving. Some institutions will adapt. Many will not. And for the first time in generations, the collapse of colleges is no longer a distant possibility. It is an expectation.

Higher education, Levine made clear, is no longer debating change. It is negotiating survival.
Ready to navigate global policies? Secure your overseas future. Get expert guidance now!