Eisgruber Discusses Statements, Buildings, Aid, and Endowment in Annual Letter
‘I will continue to speak up vigorously and often for the values of this University,’ Eisgruber wrote
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/eacd0/eacd06f53b2b1a8044701cc07b132134ab0efa0b" alt="20230829_FreeExpression_SK_0042.jpg President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 sits on a stage wearing an orange tie and looks to his left."
In his 2025 State of the University letter, President Christopher Eisgruber ’83 highlighted Princeton’s ongoing expansion and renovation, its investment in student financial aid, and the role that the University endowment plays in funding teaching and scholarship. He also explained his views on institutional speech and shared data on how undergraduates view Princeton’s campus climate. Here are four takeaways from the Jan. 29 letter:
1. Don’t expect Eisgruber to issue statements that will rile politicians and pundits — but op-eds are still on the table. In the letter, he noted that he’s made statements “only rarely in the past” and expects to do it even less in the future, a reflection of a more restrained approach to institutional speech in a fraught political environment. “At the same time, I will continue to speak up vigorously and often for the values of this University, including scholarly excellence, truth-seeking research, academic freedom, free speech, diversity and inclusion, and the importance of a liberal arts education that prepares students not only for their careers but for lives of service and citizenship,” he wrote, noting that speeches, essays, op-eds, and “scholarly channels” are his preferred paths for communicating those views.
2. Princeton undergrads are pretty happy, based on data from senior surveys collected in the past four years, with 91% of the Class of ’24 rating their educational experience as excellent or good. But there are disparities across demographic groups that “show where we have opportunities to improve what we do,” Eisgruber wrote in a section of the letter explaining the work of diversity, equity, and inclusion programs. Among the points he highlighted from the data were groups of students who reported concern about being judged unfairly for expressing their opinions, including Jewish and Muslim students and those who identify their political views as “extremely conservative.” “These data matter because we want all students to thrive at Princeton and feel that they belong here,” Eisgruber wrote. “We also believe that ours must be a community where all members can speak their mind and where they engage in civil and respectful dialogue, even on — indeed, especially on — difficult topics.”
3. The president defended endowment spending in the wake of “worrisome taxation proposals that result partly from misunderstandings of what endowments do.” Those who think of the endowment as a savings account are missing the mark, Eisgruber wrote: “It is more like a retirement annuity that must provide income every year for the remainder of the owner’s life,” or in the case of a university, the rest of its existence, stretching across centuries. At Princeton, the endowment pay-out rate is more than 5% per year; it funded 57% of the University’s annual budget in 2023-24, with direct benefit to students. In this year’s freshman class, Eisgruber wrote, 71% of students receive Princeton’s no-loan financial aid, with the average grant totaling $73,000.
4. Get ready for ribbon cutting. As construction fences come down, Princeton will be opening a string of major projects that were funded through the Venture Forward campaign, including the new Princeton University Art Museum and the Environmental Studies and School of Engineering and Applied Science complex on Ivy Lane. The Class of 1986 Fitness and Wellness Center and Frist Health Center opened in the current academic year. Eisgruber also announced that the University will be updating its campus plan.
8 Responses
Bill Rosser ’56
1 Week AgoFocus on Merit, Countering Bias
How about just focusing on a merit-based approach — but with eliminating the frequent bias against the underrepresented groups, whether race, sexual orientation, nationality, religion, or whatever? We know they exist. That would be truly fair and sound.
Kim J. Masters ’68
2 Weeks AgoResentment Fueling Tax Aims
A lot of the “tax the endowment” is a cover for resentment that 96% of applicants have no chance of admission and so received no benefit from the Princeton endowment. So for them Princeton is only a source of personal resentment.
Ken Phillips ’62
2 Weeks AgoA Shift Toward Representation
Given today’s climate and realities, I think it’s time everyone moved away from the DEI terminology and concepts. I propose a new concept called representation.
For Princeton and other educational institutions, representation would mean exactly what it says: Children of alumni would be included, children of big donors would be included, highest performing academic achievers and top athletes and leaders of extracurricular activities would be included, applicants with the greatest potential would be included, international applicants would be included, and other people of all backgrounds throughout the country would be included. It would be, well, representative. For other entities, it would also work well.
Bill Hewitt ’74
1 Month AgoHigh Stakes of Decisions About DEI
Princeton’s “double down on DEI” faces a direct challenge from President Trump’s Jan. 21 Executive Order 14171. It mandates an end to race- and sex-based preferences in institutions that receive federal funding, prioritizing merit-based opportunity. As a recipient of substantial federal support, Princeton is now at a crossroads: Will it comply with the law faithfully, or will it risk vital funding and the University’s hard-won standing — all to continue its DEI policies and programs?
What decisions will President Eisgruber and his administration make to bring Princeton within this new federal mandate? Section 3(b)(i) of the Executive Order indicates that Princeton may have only until April 21 to fully comply, so the University must act promptly. In his Jan. 29 State of the University Letter, President Eisgruber reported briefly that the University is exploring measures to achieve “compliance with applicable laws.” He promised updates “when we have more information to share.” Key decisions and actions lie ahead over the next 11 weeks.
President Eisgruber’s rhetoric, as seen in last year’s State of the University Letter, asserts that “inclusivity” enhances excellence. Yet University of Chicago professor Jerry Coyne showed persuasively that Eisgruber made “bogus arguments” and that instead, “[T]here is a tradeoff between excellence and [racial] diversity, and we know that for several reasons …” The pursuit of diversity through measures that diminish meritocratic standards undermines academic rigor. Eisgruber owes the Princeton community specific responses to Coyne’s challenges.
Moreover, race-based measures work against Martin Luther King Jr.’s goal that individuals be judged by the content of their character rather than the color of their skin. Last, this approach directly contradicts the principles enshrined in federal civil rights law, which the Executive Order seeks to uphold.
Princeton’s reliance on federal funding for student loans, educational programs, and pathbreaking research, such as that at the Princeton Plasma Physics Laboratory, dramatically heightens the stakes. The question looms: Is Eisgruber prepared to place these vital resources and the University’s mission in jeopardy to sustain policies under increasing legal and ethical scrutiny?
Princeton’s trustees also have a crucial role to play. They, too, must weigh the implications of the University’s current trajectory. Will they endorse Princeton’s double down on DEI or instead demand that the University’s leadership change course?
President Eisgruber needs to explain to the Princeton community his course for the University on these crucial issues. He should set forth how Princeton will comply with federal law, abandon identity-based preferences, and pursue merit-based excellence. Rhetorical legerdemain is no longer an option.
President Eisgruber and the trustees now inescapably confront a time for choosing. This demands fidelity to fiduciary duties of the first order. Princeton can either reaffirm its dedication to academic rigor, fairness, and compliance with the law, or it can cling to an ideological agenda that imperils its future. The stakes are monumental, the choice is clear, and the time to act is now.
Dallas Brodie ’84
3 Weeks AgoIn Response to Eisgruber’s Letter
The sooner this hopeless experiment is over the better.
David Gilroy ’88
3 Weeks AgoOutlook for University Governance
Exquisitely articulated, profoundly true. Thank you for the principled, intellectual clarity, in the midst of the University’s obfuscation. Can we finally and simply follow MLK’s dream? There is no place for unlawful political and ideological agendas in university governance.
Stephen Garner ’72
2 Weeks AgoComment Kudos
Cogent, articulate — “a time for choosing”!
Francis Allen ’76
2 Weeks AgoComment Kudos
Clearly and intelligently stated, Bill.