Public trust in higher education rebounded slightly in the last year but remains at historic lows. And presidents know it: According to Inside Higher Ed’s 2026 Survey of College and University Presidents with Hanover Research, just 16 percent of leaders think higher ed has been at least moderately effective in responding to declining public trust—a modest increase from last year’s 8 percent. Just 2 percent of presidents say higher ed has been highly effective at addressing this issue.
In a parallel finding, 2 percent of presidents believe that higher ed has been highly effective in addressing the widening education divide in the U.S. electorate, or the increasingly sharp difference in how people vote by degree attainment. That’s virtually unchanged from last year.
Amid this ongoing crisis of confidence and polarization, 51 percent of presidents (N=430) report that their institution has launched one or more initiatives aimed at improving public trust in the last year. An additional 9 percent are planning to do so. Public institution presidents report launching initiatives at a higher rate than their private nonprofit counterparts (56 percent versus 45 percent).
More on the Survey
On Tuesday, April 14, at 2 p.m. Eastern, Inside Higher Ed will present a free webcast to discuss the results of the survey. Please register here—and plan on bringing your own questions about academic leadership in 2026.
Inside Higher Ed’s 2026 Survey of College and University Presidents was conducted with Hanover Research. Some 430 presidents from public and mostly private nonprofit institutions, two-year and four-year, responded. The margin of error is four percentage points. Download a copy here.
This is good news for higher ed. Yet when asked exactly what their institution is doing to rebuild public trust, more than half of the 189 presidents who answered a write-in question about their efforts describe stand-alone public relations and marketing—primarily increased messaging about the value of the institution to the broader community and about individual student return on investment.
One president wrote, for instance, of “Proactively getting good news stories out about the impact of our university on the region’s economy and communities.” Another wrote, “High profile PR on the value of a 4-year degree.” Yet another said, “Make our impact as an institution more visible (research impact, student success, robust enrollments, value of a college degree).”
While storytelling is an important part of brand building, many experts agree that it’s insufficient—and that daylight between institutions’ narratives and observers’ experiences can actively widen trust gaps. (Read on for their insights on how to close these gaps.)
Gallup and Lumina Foundation have found that the top drivers of public doubts about higher ed relate to perceived political agendas, teaching the wrong things and costs. Conversely, the top drivers of trust are perceptions of value, strong training and educational quality. Inside Higher Ed’s Student Voice surveys have found that current undergraduates rate the quality of education they’re receiving highly. But they also strongly link affordability to trust and indicate that their networks do, too.
In last year’s survey of presidents, leaders themselves were likely to say that doubts about the value of a degree were damaging public trust—but likelier still to personally deem public doubts about affordability, distinct from value, as highly valid. Yet in 2026, fewer than one in 10 trust-building presidents describe targeted efforts around affordability. One president of a private nonprofit college wrote, for instance, of reducing tuition by 25 percent several years ago and holding that rate steady, plus working with regional employers “to understand their needs and add required programming to satisfy those needs in graduating seniors,” resulting in improved placement rates.
Workforce development and increasing employer partnerships also surface as themes: About one in five comments describe such efforts. Same for increased transparency around student outcomes and, separately, holding events and speaker series.
The responses also mention relationship building. One example: “We have strengthened engagement with elected officials at the local, state and federal levels and been more intentional in outreach to communities and school districts.”
So PR isn’t the only theme that emerges among survey respondents—just the dominant one. And some leaders are publicly thinking about comprehensive trust building. University of Illinois system president Tim Killeen recently shared a five-pronged approach based on accessibility and affordability, delivering tangible economic and career impacts, listening to communities, forging partnerships to create real-world solutions, and reimagining how higher ed serves society.
This kind of strategy may be particularly relevant for four-year institutions. As one community college president wrote in the survey, “As a two-year college, I do not feel we have lost trust. We align our programs with regional industry needs.” And Gallup has found that public trust in community colleges is higher than it is for higher education over all: In 2025, 56 percent of Americans polled expressed high confidence in two-year colleges, versus 44 percent for four-year colleges and universities. The consultancy EAB has associated this kind of “strategic edge” with community colleges’ affordability, career and technical growth, short-term credential potential in this era of federal Workforce Pell Grants, and strong presence in dual-enrollment programs.
Yet some presidents of four-year institutions also reject reports of declining public trust. One private nonprofit leader wrote in the survey, “We build public trust every single day in the success of our students. The ‘public trust’ issue is a red herring cultivated by the media and politicians like a cudgel to batter higher ed into submission to their orders. Our students and millions of others still thrive, earn degrees and licenses, and find good employment. I would like to see higher ed advocacy groups do more advocacy for our success!!!!”
The public trust conversation is certainly nuanced. Even amid doubts about value, a narrowing hiring edge for college graduates and fears of artificial intelligence displacing workers, study after study shows that college remains worth it for most learners, even when postgraduate earnings are debt-adjusted, for example. Regarding concerns about political bias, studies also suggest that even conservative students feel free to share their views on campus.
What can higher ed do to reaffirm public trust in a way that registers? Inside Higher Ed reached out to nearly a dozen leaders thinking about trust in different ways to get their recommendations. Many of their suggestions overlap, but at least four core themes emerge: walk the talk on value, lean into public concerns and act on them, be transparent and think local, and build authentic buzz by focusing on the user experience. Their comments, which have been lightly edited for length and clarity, appear below.
I. Demonstrate Value, Don’t Just Talk About It
Laurie Shanderson, founder and CEO of Accreditation Insights and former college president
Laurie Shanderson
When public trust starts to erode, too many institutions default to messaging that they think tells the story better, highlights ROI and emphasizes impact rather than confronting the elephant in the room, a.k.a. harder structural issues. The challenge is that public skepticism isn’t a communications problem, it’s a performance and value problem. If cost, time to degree and career outcomes are not consistently delivered, more sophisticated messaging can deepen mistrust.
If I were advising presidents, I would push on two areas more directly. First, we need to be far more rigorous and transparent about outcomes and willing to be held accountable for them. That means publishing program-level data on completion, time to degree, job placement and earnings—not just when the numbers are strong, but across the board. It also means being honest about programs that are not producing adequate returns and making difficult decisions to redesign or sunset them. Too often, institutions protect legacy offerings at the expense of student outcomes. Additionally, we should be more candid about viable alternatives to a four-year degree. Avoiding that conversation undermines credibility, especially when many skilled pathways offer strong wages and immediate employment.
Second, presidents need to move beyond symbolic employer engagement to true co-ownership of workforce outcomes. Advisory boards are not enough. Institutions should align curriculum with labor-market demand in real time, embed work-based learning into the academic experience and, in some cases, tie program expansion or continuation to demonstrated employer demand and placement success. If we are not willing to meaningfully link enrollment to employment, the public will continue to question the value proposition.
Sian Beilock, president of Dartmouth College
Sian Beilock
To build back trust, I believe universities and their leaders should own the return on investment, not just assert it. Families are making one of the largest financial investments of their lives. Institutions need to stand behind that investment with concrete commitments. At Dartmouth, that looks like guaranteed internships, transparent outcome data and career planning that starts day one. Accountability can’t stop at the tuition bill.
Universities must also recenter on learning, not posturing. A significant driver of eroding trust is the perception that campuses have become ideologically narrow. When institutions rush to take positions on every national controversy, we signal there’s a right answer and that skeptics aren’t welcome. Institutional restraint, protecting free inquiry and genuinely preparing students how to think, not what to think—that’s the work.
On affordability, the gap between acknowledging the problem and acting on it is where trust is actually lost. My advice? Make specific, measurable commitments and then show the results. It’s important to note there is no single model here. Different approaches will work for different institutions. Some are experimenting with three-year degrees, others with dual-enrollment and early-college programs. At Dartmouth, we’ve grown our financial aid budget more than 100 percent over the last decade. Tuition is free for students from families making $175,000 or less, and we meet 100 percent of students’ demonstrated financial need, loan-free, for all four years of their undergraduate experience. The result: It is cheaper today for a student from a middle-income family to attend Dartmouth than it was 10 years ago. That’s the kind of concrete accountability that moves the needle.
Ravi Pendse, vice president for information technology and chief information officer at the University of Michigan
Ravi Pendse
There is no question that higher education must continue to earn public trust, and that begins with clarity, transparency and a commitment to outcomes that truly matter. If I were to offer advice, it would be to always focus on action and tangible results that directly address the concerns of students, families and our community.
At the University of Michigan, efforts like our Look to Michigan campaign reflect that approach, from expanding our Go Blue Guarantee so more students can attend tuition-free to investing in a robust, no-cost AI ecosystem that prepares our students to both lead tomorrow and transform our world today. In our view, building trust means advancing affordability and career readiness in ways that have real impact. That is what it means to walk the talk, and for U-M, this work is guided by our responsibility as one of the world’s greatest universities to serve the public good. That work is only made possible by the generosity of our alumni and donors, who share our commitment to making a lasting difference in the lives of our students and the world around us.
II. Listen to—and Act on—Public Concerns About Affordability, Jobs and More
Richard Roman, founder and CEO of Trusted Arc Labs
Richard Roman
Most presidents are responding to declining public confidence by emphasizing their institution’s value, student ROI and economic impact through PR. That’s essentially saying, “Look at what we produce.” But the public’s doubts aren’t really about whether colleges can deliver outcomes. They’re about whether these institutions actually have ordinary people’s interests at heart. There’s a difference between “Can they do the job?” and “Are they on my side?” Most of what presidents describe doing addresses the first question, while the public is asking the second.
If I could advise presidents on two concrete moves, they’d be these: First, stop leading with polished messaging and start leading with honesty. That means publicly acknowledging where your institution has fallen short on affordability or access, not as damage control, but as a genuine signal that you’re paying attention. Trust, at its core, requires vulnerability. When institutions project strength and success without putting any skin in the game, they’re asking the public to trust them. People can feel that one-sidedness, and it breeds skepticism rather than confidence. Second, invest in relationships, not just communications. The presidents in this survey who describe building deeper ties with communities, school districts and local leaders are on the right track.
Trust doesn’t come back through campaigns where the institution controls the story. It comes back through consistently appearing in spaces where people have a real voice. The fastest way to erode trust is to broadcast confidence you haven’t earned through a relationship.
Greg Pillar, associate provost at Gardner-Webb University and higher education strategist and consultant
Greg Pillar
Many institutions are responding to declining public trust with messaging, when the concern from students and families is rooted in lived outcomes, cost, career mobility and long-term value. This isn’t something that can be solved through marketing or better storytelling alone. It requires institutions to listen more carefully, acknowledge where the gaps are and then demonstrate change through results.
If I were advising presidents, I would focus on two things. First, make career outcomes and affordability central to the academic model, not adjacent to it: clear pathways from program to employment, stronger employer alignment and more honest commitment to ensuring students are not leaving with debt they cannot manage. This also includes being far more transfer-friendly and recognizing prior learning through credit for prior learning and competency-based education, which signals respect for the experience adult learners bring and reduces both time and cost to completion.
Second, shift from a one-time, transactional view of students to a long-term relationship, supporting learners beyond graduation through continued access to education, upskilling, professional development and career transitions. Rebuilding trust will not come from what we say, but from what students experience over time.
Rob Anderson, president of the State Higher Education Executive Officers Association
Rob Anderson
Our members are rightfully concerned with public perception and with making sure degrees are aligned with their state’s workforce needs. We need to be better at telling our stories, so public campaigns are a start, but they must be grounded in data. We also must demonstrate a willingness to develop transparent policies and procedures that address shortcomings, depict a commitment to continuous improvement and highlight and strengthen what we do well.
I think it is important to note that perceptions of higher ed’s value vary among student experience versus public opinion, with a recent Gallup study revealing that students overwhelmingly believe that their programs of study are preparing them for a career and that their overall investment is worth it. These beliefs are bolstered by three-quarters of graduates who state that their degree has been critical or important to their success. All objective data indicate that a college degree is worth it. On average, it not only pays for itself but is financially lucrative to the individual and yields dividends to the community, state and nation. However, that through line is not always evident, and cost remains a barrier for many who cannot afford the opportunity to attend. Policy shifts are increasingly making workforce alignment a reality. Changing public perception where higher ed has had shortcomings but is repairing is something that will take time.
III. Focus on Relationships, Including by Practicing Transparency and ‘Radical Localism’
Mike Gavin, president and CEO of the Alliance for Higher Education and former college president
Mike Gavin
Rebuilding public trust in higher education and reclaiming its role as the fifth pillar of democracy requires going beyond saying more positive things more frequently to more audiences. We need to work toward practicing radical localism and operational transparency.
First, trust is about relationships. It’s the product of grassroots efforts that ripple across disparate audiences, bridged by people, not news stories. My advice to college leaders is to intentionally convene and invite your community in. Invest in consistent programming that demonstrates your breadth, depth and impact, as well as their interests—whether that be a speaker series, hosting a school district’s science fair, creating space for industry to work alongside students and faculty, or ensuring your doors are open for Saturday morning youth soccer and basketball games. Create an environment where, for example, your student a cappella groups are empowered to perform at your region’s elementary schools. The subliminal message to the audience is: There’s a place for you here, and at institutions like ours, and we are in service of our communities.
Second, while institutions are not intentionally opaque, managing a myriad of funding streams, operational and regulatory requirements, and stakeholder needs naturally leads to a lack of simplicity for an end user like a student. Polling data shows that the public’s top issue with regard to higher education is affordability. Meanwhile, the majority of college students in this country go to a community college or local public four-year institution—far more affordable pathways than the viral six-figure price tag headlines. This breakdown is a symptom of a lack of trust, not its cause.
Community college leaders will say they do a fantastic job nurturing student success, which is true but is paired with the fact that the overwhelming majority of their students do not graduate within three years. Wealthier and selective institutions say that their cost of attendance is far lower than sticker price, which is also true but doesn’t take away the anxiety of sticker shock.
Leaders must make every effort to be up front about an institution’s operations. This means making financial aid predictable and easy to understand and being candid about student success timelines and support structures. Word of mouth is the most powerful tool we have. Every faculty member who feels supported and free to use their expertise to teach and research, and every student who graduates, feels they were treated with respect and successfully enters the labor market is worth far more in rebuilding trust than ads touting ROI or the number of students who receive financial aid. We need to be introspective, name our shortcomings, identify our strengths and constantly work to address the former and amplify the latter.
Jeremy Young, senior adviser for strategic initiatives at the American Association of Colleges and Universities
Jeremy Young
Public relations campaigns emphasizing the value of a college or university degree are necessary but not sufficient for advancing public trust in higher education. Campus leaders need to emphasize not just the value they bring to their own graduates, who will never make up a majority of the public, but their deep and reciprocal connection to their communities as a whole. To inspire trust, campuses must be trustworthy.
This is not just a PR campaign. It requires real engagement and responsiveness, investment of time and treasure in rural and underserved places and the people who live there, the ability to innovate nimbly to meet the needs of the public rather than getting bogged down in bureaucratic inertia, and a commitment to building connections across stakeholders and institutions. It requires framing campuses as places of intellectual freedom and fair opportunity, places that, like the local fire department, benefit the whole community rather than just individuals. Finally, it requires resisting government overreach that restricts curriculum, course content, programming or governance. People don’t trust an institution unless they can trust it to defend itself.
DeRionne Pollard, president and CEO of the American Association of Community Colleges
DeRionne Pollard
Public trust in higher education has not eroded at community colleges. For eight decades we have been the most reliable source of affordable, accredited, career-connected higher education in most communities. If anything, people are turning to community colleges more frequently because they know that we are affordable, connected to career pathways and deeply engaged with the business needs of local communities. When I visit with lawmakers on Capitol Hill, there is support for our colleges on both sides of the aisle because they understand that we drive economic mobility. That said, many community college graduates go on to earn a four-year degree, so I am encouraged by initiatives that amplify the economic and social value of higher education across the board.
IV. Grow Authentic Promoters by Focusing on the User Experience
Liz Gross, founder and CEO of Campus Sonar
Liz Gross
I agree there is some misalignment, and I believe it stems from a fundamental misunderstanding of how trust should be rebuilt in low-trust environments—which, according to the 2026 Edelman Trust Barometer, we are in as a society, not just an industry. In low-trust environments, people don’t turn to institutions directly. They seek validation from intermediaries: influencers, peers, online communities like Reddit and the algorithms that shape them.
The Edelman research found that more than half of people who trust influencers say they would trust or consider trusting a company they currently distrust if it was vouched for by someone they already trust—including online influencers. This is already happening with college choice. Students are asking Reddit if their intended degree is worth it and watching Instagram reels from current students about campus life. They’re trusting peer experiences over polished marketing materials. And young people are much less likely to follow news, which is where higher ed tends to put most of its PR efforts. They get their news from social media.
The strategies presidents report using may be effective with lawmakers or older alumni/donor stakeholders, but they aren’t the best choices to build trust with today’s students or their parents. [In that light,] invest in listening to digital spaces and communities as it relates to your institution, priority academic programs and the higher ed industry so you can assess reputation in real time; understand the peer-to-peer public narrative about your institution and the unique differentiators students identify; and inform student-centric trust-building initiatives that impact recruitment and retention outcomes.
Once you have listening in place, invest in authentic partnerships, peer-to-peer content and timely, resonant brand marketing in digital spaces. In 2024, social media became the world’s largest marketing channel, as measured by marketing spend, according to the 2026 AMA Future Trends in Marketing Report. Compared to other industries, higher education is significantly underinvested in social media for awareness and trust building. The survey found relationship building was one theme of public trust initiatives, but more in a government or community relations sense, rather than via the third-party intermediaries that transfer trust with the general public.
Martin Kurzweil, managing director of Ithaka S+R
Martin Kurzweil
Many institutions seem to be leaning heavily on messaging about value, but the erosion of public trust is rooted as much in lived experience as in perception. People generally still believe postsecondary education matters, yet they increasingly question whether institutions are responsive to their needs, particularly around affordability, timely completion and clear pathways to good jobs in a rapidly changing, AI-influenced labor market. In that context, more effective trust-building would focus less on telling a better story and more on changing the underlying experience in visible ways.
Concretely, I would advise presidents to prioritize three things. First, make the costs and benefits of college far more transparent and concrete by clearly communicating price, debt, completion and postgraduation outcomes, and actively measure and improve performance on those indicators. Second, strengthen alignment with evolving workforce demands through closer employer partnerships, applied learning and more flexible, shorter-term credentials. Third, more proactively deliver value to the broader community beyond degree-seeking students, such as through workforce upskilling, community-based learning and regional problem-solving. Higher education is not monolithic, and institutions vary widely in mission and context, but each should identify how it can address these underlying concerns in ways that are meaningful for the students and communities it serves.
