Blog

How to level the PhD playing field

To most undergraduate and postgraduate students, deciding to undertake a doctoral degree is not common.

What is involved can be rather opaque – if not completely mysterious – with many potential applicants unaware of how to navigate the PhD journey.

Unfortunately, there is evidence of underrepresentation for some groups at doctoral level. For example, 59 per cent of the undergraduate population identify as White, rising to 68 per cent of taught postgraduates and 74 per cent for research degrees as of 2022-23.

This broken pipeline is demonstrated by just 1.2 per cent of the 19,868 studentships awarded by all UKRI research councils from 2016-17 – 2018-19 went to Black or Black Mixed students, with just 30 of those being from a Black Caribbean background.

In addition, those from underrepresented groups have fewer role models in PhD study and in academia. For academic staff, HESA data for 2023-24 shows that just 3.4 per cent of all academic staff are Black, with data from 2022-23 showing that 1 per cent of all professors are Black (and just 31 per cent of professors are female).

The value of personal contact

One of the most effective ways to help potential applicants understand what is involved in a doctorate is a face-to-face event, where current doctoral researchers and supervisors can deliver presentations, answer questions and talk one-to-one with attendees. However, such in-person events can be challenging for many students including those with physical disabilities and may not be suitable for those who are neurodivergent. In addition, they can be costly in terms of travel, time not available for paid employment and/or requiring the expense of childcare. Last, but not least, the idea of attending such an event can simply be intimidating, especially to those who do not come from a middle-class background.

Working with the Bloomsbury Learning Exchange, we surveyed over 200 PhD students about their application journey. Most gained understanding through personal contacts rather than formal events, with significant numbers regretting their lack of preparation for the intensity of doctoral study.

Guided by these survey results and input from academics, support staff and students, we developed “Is a PhD Right for Me?”, a Massive Open Online Course (MOOC) on FutureLearn as a readily available resource for potential PhD applicants coming from a wide range of backgrounds and circumstances. The MOOC format allows the students to engage with it at times that suit them best. We focused on information regarding preparation, funding, and commitment, but also factors which may cause a potential PhD student to pre-emptively talk themselves out of applying, such as personal circumstances like ethnicity, disability, gender, age, psychological wellbeing, and insecurities about intellectual fitness to engage in high level academic study. Through frank interviews and diverse representation, we show authentic experiences of doctoral study. The feedback we have received suggests that our approach is proving effective.

Participants who have completed the whole course have told us that it has empowered them to make a better-informed decision about whether or not to proceed with a PhD application:

I haven’t been in paid employment for many years due to ill health. I am very tenacious and adaptable, I am disabled so have to be. Yes, I feel ready for a PhD. This course has been really helpful thank you. I feel more confident on the application process and the time management aspects in particular.

It has also changed how some potential applicants see more personal aspects of PhD study:

This course overturned the stereotype I had. I learned that there could be PhD students who are easy-going and enjoy life and work and who are not serious all the time.

Supervision

The gatekeepers to PhD study are usually the staff who work in a supervisory capacity. In many institutions, the initial contact is made with a potential supervisor before a formal application is made. At such a stage there is no monitoring of the characteristics of the inquirer (not yet formally an applicant) so biases – conscious or otherwise – will not be apparent.

Some barriers can be inadvertent: such as requiring a master’s for PhD study or requiring a publication. The former is expensive, especially for students carrying substantial financial burdens from undergraduate study and the latter can be harder for those with caring responsibilities or for those who are not already familiar with the focus on publication in academia.

It is important that universities do not focus only on the application process but also ensure appropriate support during doctoral study for those from traditionally under-represented groups. In particular, universities can facilitate peer-support groups similar to existing examples such as the Blackett Lab Family, developed at Imperial from Mark Richards’ decision to take on two Black students as their academic and social mentor and now a national collective who share a passion for physics and positive representations of the Black community.

While supervisor training exists, uptake is often low. Universities might instead integrate inclusion discussions into regular departmental activities, making these conversations harder to avoid.

New deal

If we are to truly level the playing field for PhD study, the sector needs coordinated action across multiple fronts. While UKRI’s New Deal for Postgraduate Research represents important progress, its reach extends to only 20% of UK doctoral researchers, leaving the majority of provision unmonitored and unregulated. The current system’s reliance on individual supervisors as informal gatekeepers perpetuates existing inequalities, often unconsciously.

What is needed is a more systematic approach: a national framework that standardises PhD admission processes, monitors equity outcomes across all institutions, and mandates inclusive practices rather than leaving them to institutional discretion. This could include establishing minimum standards for supervisor training on unconscious bias, requiring transparent reporting of demographic data at inquiry and application stages, and creating pathways that do not penalise those without traditional academic capital.

Universities must also recognise that widening participation cannot end at enrolment; it requires sustained support structures that acknowledge the different challenges faced by doctoral students from underrepresented backgrounds. The prize is significant: a more diverse doctoral cohort will not only address issues of fairness and representation but will ultimately strengthen the quality and relevance of research itself. The question is whether the sector has the collective will to move beyond well-intentioned initiatives toward the structural changes that genuine equity demands.

Contributing authors from the Bloomsbury Learning Exchange: Tom Graham, Nancy Weitz, Sarah Sherman

Source link

December 10, 2025
95% vote no-confidence in UTS VC – Campus Review

Almost all staff who participated in a ballot have voted no confidence in the vice-chancellor of the University of Technology Sydney, Andrew Parfitt.

Please login below to view content or subscribe now.

Membership Login

Source link

December 9, 2025
Highlights and low points for higher ed in 2025 – Campus Review

The last 12 months has marked a period of profound change and ongoing scrutiny for Australia’s higher education sector.

Please login below to view content or subscribe now.

Membership Login

Source link

December 9, 2025
Martin University to “Pause” Operations

Martin University is the only predominantly Black institution in Indiana.

Martin University plans to wind down operations at the end of the current semester.

College officials are calling the move a “pause,” stopping short of calling it a closure. They attribute the pause to financial challenges, declining enrollment and the lack of an endowment.

“The Board has announced a pause in operations at the end of the semester. No final decision has been made regarding permanent closure. Discussions continue about how to carry forward Martin’s mission,” Martin spokesperson Keona Williams wrote to Inside Higher Ed by email.

While the official language indicates a pause, it appears unlikely Martin will resume operations given its financial challenges and historical precedent, which shows that institutions are rarely resurrected after ceasing operations. Some, such as Knoxville College, have bucked that trend; the historically Black Tennessee college suspended operations in 2015, reopened in 2018 and is working to regain accreditation.

Given Martin’s financial woes, Board of Trustees chairman Joseph Perkins noted in a news release that the private university needed “more community support,” especially for “first-generation college students who are fighting courageously to make a better life for their families.” Martin is seeking donations to continue operations through December. The college’s president Sean L. Huddleston stepped down late last month.

Should Martin close, Indiana will lose its only predominantly Black institution.

The decision to pause operations comes as Martin has teetered on the brink of closure for years and received warnings in its last three publicly available audits warning that it could go out of business due to significant financial challenges in the aftermath of the coronavirus pandemic.

“The University has seen enrollment declines during the COVID-19 pandemic. While the enrollment has stabilized, it has not returned to the pre-pandemic levels the University once saw. The University has incurred additional liabilities during the year due to the results of additional borrowings deemed necessary by management and the Board of Trustees for operations, including the use of restricted funding for operational needs,” auditors wrote.

Its latest available audit also noted that Martin “experienced a significant cyber-attack that resulted in extensive corruption of the University’s records that required significant resources for operations and recreation of the University’s records,” which “has taken a significant amount of time and effort due to significant turnover and instability in the finance and operation teams.”

As noted by auditors, enrollment has also plunged in recent years.

Martin had nearly 1,000 students in fall 2010, but by fall 2023, its head count was at just 223 students, according to federal enrollment data.

Martin was founded in Indianapolis in 1977 to “serve low-income, minority, and adult learners,” and the majority of its students are Black, female and over 25, according to its website. The university was named in honor of civil rights activist Martin Luther King Jr. and St. Martin de Porres, a Peruvian saint who worked to achieve racial harmony in the 16th and 17th centuries.

Source link

December 9, 2025
University lands: mapping risks and opportunities for the UK higher education sector (Part 1)
This blog, kindly authored by Thomas Owen-Smith, Principal Consultant at SUMS Consulting, and William Phillips, Data Analyst at SUMS Consulting, is part of a three-part mini series on UK universities’ approaches to land use.

Today’s blog introduces the work.

Where we are

With the economic and policy developments of the last 18 months, the UK’s higher education institutions now face a heady mix of acute challenges and an emergent agenda around the contributions they are expected to make towards the country, its economy and society.

The sector is already seeing mergers, amongst a range of potential measures to reduce costs. That a prominent recently merged institution is keeping its constituent campuses is not really surprising: for most universities, their mission and even shifting identities are still broadly bound up with their location.

Over recent years, this has spoken to agendas such as the Johnson government’s “levelling up” or institutions’ own civic commitments. And place remains prominent in the current government’s Modern Industrial Strategy, in which Mayoral Combined Authorities will be central actors in integrated regional planning for many areas, and of course in the Post-16 Education and Skills White Paper.

We know that universities are critical economic players nationally and regionally, due to their scale and the value created by their education, research and convening power.

We also know that universities cover a lot of space. A sense of this is reported in quant data terms each year in the (now voluntary) HESA Estates Management Record which, although it does not cover all providers, can be deployed for powerful analysis at the aggregate level.

How we use our land is a national question that cuts across a range of issues including economic development, food security and a healthy environment for people and nature, amongst many others.

These questions are about “where” as well as “how much”.

For university estates we have the numbers, but until now we have not had much of a sense of where certain things are, happen or could potentially happen.

We have sought to change that.

In our new report published today, we have used public and open-source datasets and methods to map the UK higher education sector for the first time.

Overlaying the boundaries for 174 institutions (those with data on Open Street Map) onto geospatial datasets (that is, datasets which contain a geographic or spatial component which brings the “where”) has allowed us to explore perspectives about universities’ estates and how they use them – which would not be possible without geospatial data.

The list of institutions, representing a mix of more traditional institutions reporting to HESA as well as some alternative providers, does not constitute the whole sector (or all of its known lands). But we believe the coverage is sufficient to allow for grounded discussion of sector patterns.

We explore the data over four strategic themes for institutions and at aggregate (sector) level:
1. State of the sector’s land
2. Risks
3. Opportunities
4. Value.
The report is accompanied by a mapping tool which allows user to explore these questions for themselves.

Purely in the direct financial terms we have modelled, “risks” and “opportunities” are to the tune of tens or hundreds of millions of pounds annually for the sector. And the wider dimensions of opportunities speak not only to universities’ contributions to environmental sustainability, but also to their role as critical players in regional economies and systems.

As such, this work has implications for a range of points in institutions’ thinking. These, of course, include approaches to risk, estates management, capital and strategic planning; but also core mission questions such as regional development, skills, innovation and industry partnership.

Over this series of blogs we will explore the strategic themes mentioned, starting today with the state of the sector’s land.

Due to the complexity of the topics involved, we have not been able to treat every risk and opportunity area in all the detail they deserve. But we do hope to inspire new ways of thinking about universities’ lands and locations and how these fit into their wider strategic context, including trade-offs and opportunity costs.

We also point to examples of institutions which are already engaging with these questions, to resources from sector organisations such as AUDE, EAUC and Nature Positive Universities, and to our own work supporting institutions across a range of topics relevant to this work.

State of the sector’s land

Our mapping of UK universities’ core estates covers a total area of 6,390.1 hectares (ha).

This does not cover the full extent of the HE estate due to limitations of the data available. (The 2023 HESA Estates Management Record reports a total of 7,293 ha “total grounds area” for 135 reporting institutions and a larger “total site area” – roughly the same size again – outside the core estate). But it does achieve more than 80% coverage of core estates.

While our mapped area constitutes just 0.026% of the UK’s land surface, it equates to a town the size of Guildford, Chesterfield or Stirling.

Of this area, 3,796.8 ha (nearly 60%) is built environment (buildings or artificial other surfaces), 1,893.6 ha (around 30%) is grass, 646.4 ha (around 10%) is covered by trees and 52.8 ha (a little less than 1%) is water and waterlogged land.

We also used machine learning to develop a typology of institutions based on their land use profiles. This identified three clusters of institutions, each of which stands out for possessing a higher proportion of one of the three core land use types (built, grass, trees) than the other two clusters.
- Cluster 1 (95 institutions, covering 1,205 ha) is highly urban, containing universities that are at least 80% and typically around 90% built land cover.
- Cluster 2 (60 institutions, covering 3,679 ha) is made up of universities with a relatively high grass cover (typically around 35%), still with a high built cover (around 58%).
- Cluster 3 (19 institutions, covering 1,506 ha) is comprised of universities that have a high proportion of non-built land (around 61%) and notably high tree cover (around 25%).
The various profiles of land use and institutions present different types of risks and opportunities, which we will explore over the coming days.

SUMS Consulting will host a webinar from 11:00 to 12:00 on Thursday 22 January 2026. The webinar will include a walkthrough of the report and online tool, and panel discussion featuring Nick Hillman OBE (Director of HEPI). Register here.
Source link
December 9, 2025
Okla. Instructor Put On Leave for “Viewpoint Discrimination”

The University of Oklahoma put a lecturer on administrative leave last week for allegedly exercising “viewpoint discrimination” five days after a different instructor was placed on leave for alleged religious discrimination.

Kelli Alvarez, an assistant teaching professor focused on race and ethnicity in literature and film, allegedly encouraged students to miss her English composition class to attend a protest in support of Mel Curth, a graduate teaching assistant in the psychology department who was removed from teaching after a student filed a religious discrimination complaint against her. Alvarez said she would excuse the absences of students who attended the protest. But according to university officials, she did not extend the same offer to students who intended to miss class that day to “express a counter-viewpoint.”

“Immediately upon learning of the situation, the Director of First-Year Composition told students in class today and by email that the lecturer’s actions were inappropriate and wrong, and that the university classroom exists to teach students how to think, not what to think. The Director further stated that any student, regardless of viewpoint, would be excused if absent from class today to attend the protest without penalty, and that the lecturer had been replaced, effective immediately, for the remainder of the semester,” officials wrote in a statement Friday. “Classroom instructors have a special obligation to ensure that the classroom is never used to grant preferential treatment based on personal political beliefs, nor to pressure students to adopt particular political or ideological views.”

Spokespeople for the University of Oklahoma did not respond to Inside Higher Ed’s request for comment. An X post by the University of Oklahoma chapter of Turning Point USA, a conservative student group founded by the late Charlie Kirk, said that the chapter president, a student in Alvarez’s class, had asked to miss class in order to counterprotest.

“Kalib Magana, student in professor Alavarez’s [sic] class and TPUSA OU president, asking to counter-protest was denied the same option unless a large, documented group could be organized,” the chapter wrote. “Kalib filed a report with The University of Oklahoma’s Equity Office for ‘discrimination of a viewpoint’ and freedom of speech violations Friday morning.”

Hundreds of students, faculty, staff and community members rallied Friday in support of Curth, who is on leave after giving a junior psychology student, Samantha Fulnecky, a zero on a reaction essay assignment. In her explanation about the grade, Curth said that Fulnecky did not answer the assignment’s questions, that her essay contradicted itself and that it “heavily uses personal ideology over empirical evidence in a scientific class, and is at times offensive.” A second teaching assistant for the course concurred with Curth’s grade.

Fulnecky fought back, appealing to the president of the university and the governor of Oklahoma, arguing that she was unfairly given a failing grade because her essay cited the Bible and discussed her religious beliefs. Though university officials said the grading dispute was settled last week, Curth was put on leave pending investigation after Fulnecky filed a formal religious discrimination complaint.

The university’s TPUSA chapter helped whip the story into a social media storm. The news caught fire, offering something for everyone to comment on. Supplied with the full essay, assignment instructions and rubric, academics online debated how they would have scored Fulnecky’s essay. Others blasted her writing skills. Conservatives, including Fulnecky’s mother, used the story to fuel a narrative of persecution against Christian students by “woke” academics. “Individuals who identify as trans should be automatically disqualified from holding any position as teacher or professor,” one X user commented, which Samantha Fulnecky’s mother, lawyer and conservative radio commentator Kristi Fulnecky, reposted.

Liberal commenters pointed to the incident as another example of genderqueer faculty being unfairly maligned and doxed. “Mel Curth should be reinstated,” a user wrote on Bluesky. “I’m sorry, but religious freedom does not mean you as a student get to write out a genocidal screed wishing for your teachers death & eternal torture.”

During a meeting Thursday, the University of Oklahoma Graduate Student Senate passed a resolution calling for greater transparency and protection for graduate teaching assistants on leave and under investigation. The resolution also said that Curth was justified in giving Fulnecky a zero on the assignment and called on the university to publicly apologize to the professor for failing to protect her from the bullying and harassment the case has incited.

The Oklahoma University chapter of the American Association of University Professors made a similar call to administrators, KOKH reported. “Disturbingly, OU has not made a public statement stating that it vigorously defends instructors, including transgender instructors, from harassment, discrimination, and even reported death threats,” the chapter told KOKH in a statement.

Source link

December 9, 2025
AI Tool From Maryland Grads Teaches Case Study Responses

Students can complete faculty-made case study prompts with a generative AI model called STRATPATH.

Nicole Coomber has taught consulting and experiential learning courses at the University of Maryland’s Smith School of Business for years, assigning graduate students take-home case studies that mimic consulting interviews.

But, like many professors in the ChatGPT era, Coomber has found that the assignments no longer challenge her classes, because students simply enter questions into large language models and submit whatever the generative AI model spits out.

“I was discovering that students could pretty much take my assignment, plug it into AI and get a perfect answer without having to go through some of the struggle that we know is part of learning,” she said.

Case studies are a critical part of the interview process for many business students, so ensuring they engage with the exercises and don’t circumvent critical thinking is important to Coomber. But rather than create a new low-tech assignment, Coomber partnered with a group of master’s-level students to make an AI tool to act as a case interviewer.

The result is STRATPATH, a generative AI tool that delivers faculty-created case studies to assess and provide real-time feedback to business students. The tool both connects students’ learning to real-world scenarios and provides career-readiness skills, prepping students for interviews after graduation.

How it works: STRATPATH was developed by six recent UMD business school graduates: Deep Dalsaniya, Anna Huertazuela, Aditya Kamath, Aromal Nair, Krishang Parakh and Venkatesh Shirbhate. The team first assembled to participate in a case competition for M.B.A. students in 2024 and then returned to the university after graduation to launch STRATPATH, using funds allocated by the dean.

“It was a bit of, ‘Hey, these are really talented students, the job market is really hard, they could use a soft landing to keep up with their job search,’” Coomber said. “It’s turned into something much more; we’ve built something that’s really incredible.”

Students can chat with STRATPATH or respond with audio to the faculty-developed case study.

To set up the tool, professors provide the case-study story they want the student to answer, a rubric or feedback form, and some examples of ideal answers, Dalsaniya said. Based on the input, STRATPATH facilitates prompts via audio or text, engaging the student in a conversation.

“Students are getting prepared for thinking spontaneously and building their critical thinking abilities over all,” Dalsaniya said.

STRATPATH relies on a large language model with additional boundaries set by developers to reduce the odds that the AI hallucinates, accepts incorrect information or provides overly complimentary feedback. It also investigates student responses to ensure that they aren’t cheating using outside sources.

“It doesn’t say, ‘Deep, you’re so smart, that’s right!’” Coomber explained. “It’s like, ‘How did you get there?’ So even if the students are typing into ChatGPT, then putting that answer into our platform, our platform will go, ‘How did you get there?’”

The platform also doesn’t allow for copying and pasting responses, so if a student is sidebarring with ChatGPT while responding to STRATPATH, they have to at least transcribe responses (and at a reasonably human words-per-minute rate), which will hopefully produce learning in some capacity, Dalsaniya said.

“Our main focus is whether their critical thinking abilities are increasing or not, and it does even if they are cheating,” he said.

The impact: STRATPATH provides instant grading and real-time personalized feedback, saving faculty time and helping students adjust faster.

It used to take Coomber hours to go over student assignments, which could hinder learning due to the long lag time between assignment and feedback. Now she can spend more time conducting face-to-face learning or holding office hours.

Anecdotal feedback from students so far indicates they feel better prepared to tackle interviews, and they’ve appreciated the assessments from the tool, which identifies both where they’re excelling and areas where they could improve.

What’s next: Coomber and her team are looking to identify other campus stakeholders who might have a use case for STRATPATH. One option is to work alongside the career center to deliver behavioral interview prompts. Many interviewers require applicants to use the STAR method—situation, task, action and result—to respond to questions and use it to assess talent, and STRATPATH could be one forum for students to practice these questions.

Dalsaniya and the development team are also investigating ways to feed STRATPATH additional resources from faculty to provide a richer evaluation of student responses to case studies.

“Case-based learning has no right answer—all answers can be right,” Dalsaniya said. “What we are trying to focus on is how we can integrate all the class materials of the professor, including their slides, their video lectures, within the feedback so that the student can see the feedback and reference those slide numbers or chapters or video transcripts.”

The team is also looking for additional funding sources to scale and possibly license the tool for outside groups.

Source link

December 9, 2025
Pomona In Talks to Acquire Claremont Graduate University

Pomona College is in talks to acquire Claremont Graduate University as the latter seeks a strategic partner amid financial challenges, according to reports in local and student media.

The two institutions, both part of California’s seven-institution Claremont Colleges consortium, are reportedly set to strike a preliminary agreement by the end of this week. But so far, neither institution has said much publicly about the potential deal.

“CGU has entered a process to ensure its long-term viability. We’re aware of that process, and to maintain its fairness, we cannot offer comment at this time,” a Pomona spokesperson wrote in an email to Inside Higher Ed, sharing the same statement sent to other news organizations.

CGU officials were similarly tight-lipped.

“Claremont Graduate University continues to explore a range of potential partnerships as part of our long-term strategic planning. These conversations are ongoing and confidential, and we want to ensure that any information we share is accurate and complete,” CGU vice president of strategy Patricia Easton wrote in an emailed statement provided by the university. “Once there are updates appropriate for release, we will share them through our official channels.”

Claremont Graduate University has been seeking a partner since at least April 2024, when it sought out consulting firms to help with that process, according to an April 2025 announcement.

“After much debate, we came to a consensus that we do not have the financial resources to continue going it alone as a graduate-only, comprehensive university. It was time to seek out a strategic partner or partners with a strong financial and academic foundation that by joining together would expand our opportunities for the future,” Easton wrote in the April 2025 communiqué about where partnership efforts stood at the time.

Officials said in that announcement that a consulting firm had contacted more than 100 prospective partners on behalf of the university in January. Arizona State University, Loyola Marymount University and Northeastern University all reportedly considered acquiring CGU. But now it appears that nearby Pomona College has emerged as the top pick.

The acquisition is reportedly moving ahead despite financial strain for both institutions.

CGU has operated with a persistent deficit for more than a decade, which is expected to continue in fiscal year 2026; the college anticipates an operating loss of nearly $8.7 million, according to a public filing.

Pomona, meanwhile, has enacted cost-saving measures in recent years despite its deep pockets: It had an endowment valued at nearly $3 billion in fiscal year 2024. Officials wrote in November that “Pomona has faced financial uncertainty amid changes in federal funding and policy since early 2025,” and it is being squeezed by inflation, tariffs and rising operational costs. Recent challenges follow financial modeling in 2023 that projected expenses were on pace to grow faster than revenues, prompting a five-year “college-wide savings and reallocation program.”

Any potential merger would still need regulatory approval before it becomes official.

Source link

December 9, 2025
Making OBBBA Implementation Work for Students

The One Big Beautiful Bill Act is the biggest shake-up to federal higher education policy in more than a decade. And while the bill passed on partisan lines, implementing it to maximize student success and postsecondary value requires real bipartisan cooperation. With negotiated rule making under way, and 2026 implementation deadlines looming, a new deep-dive report from Inside Higher Ed, “After Reconciliation: Higher Ed Reform and Where Left–Right Collaboration Matters Most,” looks at conservative, progressive and institutional priorities and perspectives on three key areas of OBBBA: institutional accountability for student outcomes; new loan limits and payment reforms; and changes to the Pell Grant program, including the introduction of Workforce Pell.

Join the Discussion

On Wednesday, Jan. 21 at 2 p.m. Eastern, Inside Higher Ed will host a live webcast discussion on the report and OBBBA’s impact on higher education. Register for that here. Download the free report here.

Despite clear differences of opinion on various areas of the bill, many experts agree on the need for accountability, limits on excessive graduate debt and support for high-value training programs.

“The underlying principles here of stronger accountability for financial outcomes, of reining in excessive borrowing, especially in the graduate education space—those are bipartisan priorities that have been expressed for a long time,” says Michelle Dimino, director of education programs at the think tank Third Way. “These are conversations that we have been having in the higher education reform space for the last decade and beyond.”

Common concerns also emerge around the tight timeline for adoption, the data infrastructure to support changes, aligning earnings regulations, handling repayment plan transfers with care, protecting the Pell Grant budget and more. Another challenge: execution by an Education Department in transition.

“After Reconciliation: Higher Ed Reform and Where Left–Right Collaboration Matters Most” was written by Ben Upton. The independent editorial project is supported by Arnold Ventures.

Source link

December 9, 2025
Why Universities Need a Strategic Marketing Shift
This past week, presenting at the UPCEA MEMS conference in Boston, we explored a question that is becoming central to the future of higher education: What does it actually take to engage learners in lifelong learning with an institution?

In a moment of rising enrollment volatility, shifting global dynamics and accelerating technological change, this question cuts to the heart of what universities must become. For decades, higher education has centered its marketing and enrollment strategy around discrete, program-level recruitment pipelines: find prospective students, convert them into a program and repeat the cycle for the next cohort.

But today’s learners don’t behave in discrete cycles. Their lives aren’t structured around one big decision. They move fluidly across roles, industries and learning needs. They progress in fits and starts. They upskill to chase opportunity or reskill to navigate disruption. They return to learning not once, but many times over.

And that means universities have a unique opportunity—if they choose to seize it.

Rethinking Acquisition

Rather than thinking transactionally—acquiring each enrollment anew—we can build relationships that honor a simple premise: If we provide value consistently, learners will keep choosing us.

This is about rewriting the social contract. Not only with current students, but with alumni, midcareer professionals, online learners and the millions of individuals who may engage with us long before (or long after) a degree is on the table.

Gone are the days when it is sufficient for a university to promise that earning a college degree is all that is needed for a long, successful career. Today’s learners and our broader society demand more.

Instead, imagine a world where a learner begins with a short online experience or a noncredit course from an institution and immediately encounters a clear, welcoming pathway:

Try something, learn something, earn a credential, return to learn more; stack the credentials and pursue a degree; return again for what’s next in their career and life.

This is not an acquisition and retention strategy rooted in constraints. It is a relationship strategy rooted in community, trust and relevance.

Lifetime learning becomes a shared journey and not simply a recruitment goal.

Why Strategic Marketing Must Shift

Much of higher ed’s traditional marketing infrastructure was built for a different era—one where programs were stable, pipelines were predictable and learners followed linear paths. Budgets are owned by program leaders, who allocate a portion to marketing “their” program. Central marketing functions may provide brand guidelines and a few templates. Marketing happens in silos across the institution.

Challenges to this model today abound: from surging paid media costs and the rise of nontraditional learners to how AI is reshaping both labor markets and learner preferences. In this landscape, marketing single programs in isolation is not only inefficient—it’s misaligned with how learners actually behave.

The more effective and learner-centered approach is clear.

Market On-Ramps and Pathways, Not Just Destinations

Instead of funding dozens of disconnected campaigns across schools and units, universities can invest centrally in marketing strategic portfolios of programs, composed of not just degrees but noncredit courses, certificates and more. This aligns messaging, reduces duplication, supports brand coherence, expands reach and—most importantly—mirrors the way different learner segments make decisions.

People don’t all jump straight into an undergraduate degree or master’s program. They explore. They try something small and low-risk. They re-engage when life or work creates new urgency. They seek clarity, not complexity.

Portfolio-based marketing meets them where they are.

Building for Lifelong Value

At the University of Michigan, we have been reorganizing our approach to online learning and marketing through this lens. Michigan Online, stewarded by the Center for Academic Innovation, serves as our unified destination for online, noncredit and for-credit learning opportunities.

When a learner enters Michigan Online, our goal is not simply to direct them to a single offering; we welcome them into a coherent ecosystem.
1. Pathways That Make Progression Clear
We’ve aligned noncredit courses and certificates with for-credit opportunities, creating intentional pathways that help learners move from exploration to deeper engagement. When learners earn value early, the transition to degrees becomes more natural and more meaningful.
1. CRM and Automation as Relationship Infrastructure
We invested in CRM and marketing automation, bringing together noncredit and for-credit learner records into a single enterprise system. Just as importantly, we invested in the people and processes to use the tools well. This allows us to nurture learners over time, personalize recommendations, track cross-program engagement and create communications that feel relevant rather than transactional.
1. A Shared Experience, Not a Siloed One
By unifying messaging, branding and learner pathways, Michigan Online makes it easier for individuals to see themselves across programs, schools and stages of life. Instead of navigating institutional boundaries, they navigate opportunities.
1. Reduced Reliance on Expensive Paid Media
When the value is built into the learning itself—and when pathways clearly connect noncredit to for-credit—universities can rely less on costly late-funnel advertising. The relationship, not the ad spend, becomes the engine of enrollment.

The Future Belongs to Institutions That Build Relationships, Not Funnels

A lifetime-value approach to learners is not simply a marketing strategy. It is an institutional strategy. It asks universities to:
- Design portfolios—not just degree programs
- Welcome learners early—with value, not pressure
- Create seamless transitions between credential types
- Embrace personalization at scale
- Invest in shared infrastructure instead of parallel campaigns
- Build trust by offering meaningful learning at every stage
Learners are telling us, through their behavior and their choices, that the old model no longer fits. They want ecosystems, guidance and clarity. They still want courses and content but they also want coaching and community. They want to return again and again, not because they’re targeted—but because they’re well served.

The question for universities is not whether this shift is coming. It’s whether they will lead it. Leading means protecting a direct relationship with learners—so access, quality, privacy and long-term benefit remain anchored in educational values, not solely in market logic

We believe that if institutions embrace this more holistic, value-centered approach—one rooted in lifelong relationship-building—they will not only strengthen enrollment resilience. They will also deepen their impact, broaden their reach and fulfill the promise at the heart of higher education: to support learners not just once, but throughout their lives.

James DeVaney is associate vice provost for academic innovation and the founding executive director of the Center for Academic Innovation at the University of Michigan.

James Cleaver is chief marketing officer for the Center for Academic Innovation at the University of Michigan.

Carol Podschwadt is associate director of marketing for the Center for Academic Innovation at the University of Michigan.
Source link
December 9, 2025