Since February 2007, International Higher Education Consulting Blog has provided timely news and informational pieces, predominately from a U.S. perspective, that are of interest to both the international education and public diplomacy communities. From time to time, International Higher Education Consulting Blog will post thought provoking pieces to challenge readers and to encourage comment and professional dialogue.
Title: Fewer Freshmen Enrolled in College This Year Following Troubling FAFSA Cycle
Author: Katharine Meyer
Source: Brookings Institution, National Student Clearinghouse Research Center
The rollout of the new FAFSA form last year triggered cascading consequences across the higher education community. The launch was delayed, customer calls remained unanswered, and the number of filings decreased by about three percent. As the form’s issues compounded, experts predicted that the fumbled rollout would likely negatively impact the higher education sector across several metrics, particularly new student enrollment.
The National Student Clearinghouse Research Center collected data at the beginning of the academic year to begin painting the updated enrollment picture and will follow up with final enrollment numbers for the 2024-25 academic year. The Brookings Institution analyzed the preliminary data and observed large declines in FAFSA filings, followed by a decrease in first-year enrollment.
Across all institutions, first-year enrollment is down 5.8 percent among 18-year-olds and 8.6 percent among 19-20-year-olds. At public four-year institutions, first-year enrollment declined 8.5 percent, and it declined 6.5 percent at private four-year institutions. White freshman enrollment declined the most (11.4 percent), followed by multiracial (6.6 percent) and Black (6.1 percent) first-year student enrollment. Enrollment at HBCUs, however, increased 5.9 percent from last year and has cumulatively increased 12.6 percent since fall 2022.
First-year enrollment at four-year schools declined across all levels of Pell Grant recipience. Institutions that experienced the largest declines in first-year enrollment, though, were public and private four-year institutions with the highest shares of students receiving Pell Grants (-10.4 and -10.7 percent, respectively). First-year enrollment at four-year colleges is also down across all levels of selectivity, with the largest decline occurring at very competitive public four-year institutions (-10.8 percent), followed by competitive public four-year institutions (-10.3 percent).
Despite declines in first-year enrollment, total college enrollment increased three percent, due in part to a 4.7 percent increase in community college enrollment. Interestingly, this increase occurred at certain types of two-year institutions but not all of them. At colleges that predominantly award associate degrees and some bachelor’s degrees, freshman enrollment increased 2.2 percent, and at two-year institutions that enroll a higher proportion of low-income students, first-year enrollment increased 1.2 percent. At community colleges only awarding associate degrees, however, enrollment decreased by 1.1 percent.
The author notes these insights come with caveats; many factors have contributed to enrollment decline over the last decade, notably falling public confidence in higher education and the ever-growing cost of attending college. The sharp decline in first-year enrollment, however, correlates with the troubled FAFSA launch. Continuing to collect data over time will provide more insight into the implications of recent disruptions to enrollment trends, particularly following the COVID-19 pandemic and the FAFSA rollout. The 2025-26 FAFSA form will be available this December, and its functionality will determine the gravity of the past year’s enrollment decline.
To view the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center data dashboard, click here. To read the Brookings Institution analysis, click here.
—Erica Swirsky
If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.
Title: Supporting Minds, Supporting Learners: Addressing Student Mental Health to Advance Academic Success
Source: Center for Community College Student Engagement
The 2023 Community College Survey of Student Engagement (CCSSE) and Survey of Entering Student Engagement (SENSE) gathered essential data to guide community colleges in supporting student mental health and well-being. The surveys collected responses from 61,085 students at 149 community colleges in spring 2023 and 13,950 students at 61 community colleges in fall 2023, respectively.
Key findings include:
Check out the full report on the CCSSE website.
—Nguyen DH Nguyen
If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.
As an educator, where do you go for advice on teaching? Perhaps it’s a book. Maybe it’s a social media channel of your choosing. But more often than not, faculty have turned to higher education podcasts as a way of gleaning fresh insights in a captivating, bite-sized format. It’s no secret that educators are stretched between teaching, grading and research commitments. So listening to a reputable guest share their best practices for improving equity, engagement and interaction in the classroom is a valuable faculty development and training exercise in of itself.
If you’re looking for the best higher education podcasts to explore, this post is for you. We’ve rounded up our favorite shows that speak to the good, the bad and the ugly within higher ed in our present moment. We also capture podcasts hosted by leaders who bring deep, discipline-specific expertise to their field. Most importantly, we’ve summarized shows that not only cover the latest trends but offer practical advice in an educational and entertaining way. So grab your earbuds and let’s dive into the top higher education podcasts of the year.
→ NEW HIGHER EDUCATION PODCAST: Stream S1 of Higher Listenings by Top Hat
Ok, call us biased, but we think Higher Listenings from Top Hat is well worth a listen. Higher Listenings aims to engage and entertain educators with a look at the latest trends shaping the future of teaching and learning. In our first season, we offer practical advice to leave you feeling equipped and confident to tackle your next teaching challenge—whether boosting reading completion rates or embracing AI-powered learning. The first season offers an all star line up featuring some of the leading change makers in higher ed including Jesse Stommel (author of Ungrading: Why We Grade and How to Stop), José Antonio Bowen (author of Teaching with AI) and Terrell Strayhorn (leading expert on student belonging). Stay tuned for season two releasing in January 2025! In the meantime, catch up on our inaugural season by listening on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.
As the most effective educators know, good teaching is both an art and a science. Dr. Bonni Stachowiak is a professor and Dean of Teaching and Learning at Vanguard University. As the host of the Teaching in Higher Ed podcast, Stachowiak serves up best practices across four key categories including: digital pedagogy, student life, work-life balance and teaching. Notable guests include Joshua Eyler (Director of the Center for Excellence in Teaching and Learning at the University of Mississippi) and Jenae Cohen (Executive Director at the Center for Teaching and Learning at the University of California, Berkeley). Whether you’re looking for strategies to grade more productively or need guidance on ed tech integration in higher education, Stachowiak’s impressive lineup will leave you feeling inspired. Listen to the latest episodes on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.
Do you want to take your knowledge of foundational teaching practices to the next level? Dr. Derek Bruff will help you do just that. Bruff, Associate Director of the Center for Teaching Excellence at the University of Virginia and author of Intentional Tech, hosts the Intentional Teaching podcast geared towards college and university faculty. His goal is to leave listeners with actionable techniques to make their classrooms more inclusive, responsive to an AI-saturated world and ultimately, more engaging for every learner. Esteemed guests on his podcast include Thomas J. Tobin (Senior Teaching and Learning Developer at the University of Wisconsin-Madison) and Viji Sathy (Associate Dean for Evaluation and Assessment at the University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill). Check out Bruff’s star-studded episodes on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.
If you’re looking for faculty development and training paired with emerging research in pedagogy, this higher education podcast will surely be your cup of tea. The Tea for Teaching show is produced by John Kane and Rebecca Mushtare, who run the Center for Excellence in Learning and Teaching at the State University of New York (SUNY) at Oswego. The producers wrestle with hot-button topics from upskilling in the age of AI to reducing bias in course evaluations. High-impact guests, who include Michelle Miller (Professor in the Department of Psychological Sciences at Northern Arizona University) and Anthony Abraham Jack (Faculty Director of the Boston University Newbury Center), are featured in weekly episodes. Grab your favorite warm beverage and a notebook and tune into this podcast on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.
Unsure about the direction that education is heading in? Then you’ll want to take note of D2L’s Teach & Learn podcast. Geared towards K-12 and higher ed faculty, the show is hosted by Dr. Christi Ford (Vice President of Academic Affairs at D2L) and Dr. Emma Zone (Senior Director of Academic Affairs at D2L). In candid discussions with educational experts, the hosts dive into issues affecting higher education institutions today. This timely higher education podcast offers practical advice such as how to put diversity, equity and inclusion at the forefront of your course and how to harness AI to improve student learning. Recent guests include Thomas Cavanagh (Vice Provost for Digital Learning at the University of Central Florida) and Karen Costa (Faculty Development Facilitator for the Online Learning Consortium). Leave with practical tips for your own course by listening on Apple Podcasts or Spotify.
College recruitment strategies have undergone a seismic shift in recent years with the rise of an always-on digital audience and the growing accessibility of online programs. Fewer geographical constraints and heightened competition have fueled this realignment, prompting institutions to craft student recruitment strategies that are as dynamic as the students they aim to enroll.
In the modern, digital-first landscape of higher education, recruitment season is no longer confined to the traditional August to December window. Students are applying and enrolling year-round, and your institution must constantly assess which strategies are driving results and which are falling flat.
By embracing smarter, data-driven marketing tactics, you can stand out in the crowded landscape of online education, uniting students under the shared mission of your institution.
You’ve been working in higher education for over a decade, but recently, student recruitment seems harder. You’re not alone. Prospective students are going in less traditional directions and finding cheaper, faster ways to become qualified for the workforce through modalities such as online certificates and boot camp programs. Inflation isn’t helping either.
But through a realignment of strategy to meet digital native consumers, you can meet students where they are and capitalize on projected enrollment growth.
Don’t get scared into sticking with outdated ways of reaching prospective students. Instead, rise to the challenge, get a better understanding of the landscape you’re working with, and refresh your enrollment marketing strategy.
We won’t tell you that all traditional marketing strategies are outdated, but we do want to make it crystal clear that students are online. They’re surfing the web on their smartphones and discovering new universities and programs through (mostly mobile) online journeys. If your enrollment strategy isn’t rooted in this reality, you’re at risk of losing more than half of your potential students.
With 91% of the U.S. residents owning a smartphone, it’s no surprise prospective students are surfing the web from their mobile devices. In fact, a recent report by Oberlo tells us that over 60% of all internet traffic comes from mobile devices.
Most of the time, however, our web developers, brand managers, and marketing professionals are viewing and building websites on their desktop computers. While working from a computer is convenient, it’s imperative that every single UX/UI change made to your university/program website is tested on both desktop and mobile.
Don’t lose out on prospects just because you didn’t consider both desktop and mobile website views in your design process. It may seem obvious, but plenty of colleges and universities aren’t considering this important strategic detail.
Now that you’ve cleaned up your mobile site, you’re ready to start pushing students from other platforms to your program pages through a key college recruitment strategy: paid media. While paid media isn’t the cheapest option, it’s often one of the most effective. Google Ads, LinkedIn, and Facebook provide fairly straightforward ways to spend for clicks.
We recommend starting with PPC (pay per click) campaigns to attract prospective students to your site. These campaigns help the most with bringing in entirely new audience members whom you may not have been able to reach through organic efforts. The internet is vast, and it’s not always easy to track down potential candidates without some extra help.
After bringing in new prospects from platforms like Google and LinkedIn, your job is to create a journey where they’ll sign up for your newsletter or respond to a survey so you can effectively follow up and make their click worthwhile. It may seem pricey at first, but once the leads start coming in and you’re able to connect with them well after that first click, you’ll see the return on investment.
PPC campaigns can also help speed up the process if you’re finding yourself behind on your goals this quarter.
If paid media feels a bit too far out of reach, some high-growth organic options can help your student recruitment strategy.
Most institutions now have a presence on LinkedIn and Facebook, but university marketers may be missing a huge opportunity with Instagram. A recent article from RivalIQ cited higher ed’s impressive average engagement rate of 2.43% on Instagram, compared with the median across all industries of 0.43%.
Instagram should be used in a completely different way than Facebook and LinkedIn, which can be deterring for content teams, but clearly prospective students are interested in engaging there. Be sure to connect with them and provide tailored content.
When you hear the words “influencer marketing,” you may think of famous teenagers with millions of followers dancing their hearts out to a 15-second song. While plenty of those influencers are out there, so are users who share their educational journeys, financial tips and tricks, and personal stories about their lives and experiences.
With the number of graduates, administrators, and staff members your school has on social media, you’re sure to find some influential users who are willing to share their satisfaction with your program on their channels. It doesn’t require millions of followers either.
Nano influencers (influencers with a following between 1K and 10K) are “everyday people” who come across as more authentic and with much more enthusiasm than the players in the big leagues (micro/macro influencers). According to a recent study from Matter Communications, 69% of consumers depend on recommendations from influencers, family members, and friends over information provided by brands. That means two of every three consumers want to read reviews from online personalities they see as trustworthy sources — an amplified version of word-of-mouth marketing.
Short-form video is an important college recruitment strategy for engaging with students. Though the style of content may seem daunting and the editing may seem like a lot of work, recent studies have indicated that Gen Z users prefer TikTok for search over Google — making it an indispensable part of your strategy.
Although prospective student demographics look different across universities, your target students are likely on TikTok. And more importantly, they’re using it as a source of information. The hashtag #LearnOnTikTok had over 360 billion views as of 2024, according to The Leap.
Think of the reasons users visit your website — and the questions they have — and use that insight to inform the kinds of content you can provide to educate prospective students.
The higher-ed landscape is still undergoing unexpected shifts at a faster rate than most of us are ready for. Some days, you might feel like you’ll be playing catch-up for ages, and evolving marketing tactics might make that race feel even harder. It’s a lot to manage a robust omnichannel college recruitment strategy, but you don’t have to do it all internally.
At Archer Education, we partner with colleges and universities to create effective messaging that will illuminate your brand’s strengths and unique values to attract and convert high-quality students. Our experts are always in the know, employing tech-enabled, modern enrollment tactics to attract prospective students’ attention, drive engagement, and facilitate action. Don’t overstretch your team members — let us help. Contact us today for more information.
by CUPA-HR | November 15, 2024
On November 15, a federal judge in the Eastern District Court of Texas ruled to strike down the Biden administration’s Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) overtime final rule. The ruling strikes down all components of the rule, meaning both the July and January salary thresholds are no longer in effect, and the triennial automatic updates will not take place. The decision applies to all covered employers and employees under the FLSA nationwide.
The Eastern District Court of Texas held a hearing on the business groups’ lawsuits challenging the overtime regulations on November 8. During the hearing, the judge suggested that it would be problematic if DOL’s salary basis replaced the duties test established under the FLSA regulations. He also noted that the Biden administration’s regulations were projected to have a larger number of workers impacted by the salary threshold increase than the Trump administration’s 2019 rule. The judge did not rule from the bench, but his remarks showed skepticism about the Biden administration’s rule.
As a reminder, the final rule implemented a two-phase approach to increasing the minimum salary threshold under the FLSA overtime regulations. The first increase took effect on July 1, increasing the minimum salary threshold from the current level of $684 per week ($35,568 per year) to $844 per week ($43,888 per year). The second increase was set to take effect on January 1, 2025, and it would have increased the minimum salary threshold again to $1,128 per week ($58,656 per year). The final rule also adopted automatic updates to the minimum salary threshold that would occur every three years.
Soon after the final rule was published, several lawsuits were filed challenging the final rule. The suit claimed that the salary threshold that was supposed to go into effect on January 1, 2025, was so high it would result in more than 4 million individuals being denied exempt status, even though these individuals could be reasonably classified as exempt based on their duties, and in doing so, the rule violated both the statutory language of the FLSA and prior court decisions. The suits also challenged the automatic updates. The Eastern District Court of Texas granted a preliminary injunction for public employers in Texas prior to the July 1 effective date, stopping the rule from taking effect for those employers only. For private employers in Texas and all other employers in the country, the rule went into effect on July 1, and the January 1 effective date was still in play.
With the decision, the salary threshold set in the 2019 regulations ($35,568 per year or $683 per week) will be the salary threshold employers should adhere to. Whether President-elect Trump decides to increase the minimum salary threshold during his second term remains to be seen, but there will be no effort from his incoming administration to appeal the decision in favor of the Biden administration’s threshold. CUPA-HR will continue to keep members apprised of any updates related to the FLSA overtime regulations.
by Nic Kipar
This blog follows an earlier short review of the literature and is based on the author’s experience in a range of universities. It suggests how working environments might change in practice, with illustrations from the author’s own institution, the University of Glasgow.
In thinking about working environments, the most effective approach is to ask individuals how they work best. This enables them to thrive in the environment most suited to themselves and the particular activity they are undertaking. More importantly, staff should be given the freedom to experiment with different settings, without others imposing judgments based on their own limited perspectives. This openness fosters a supportive and adaptable workplace, enabling everyone to find the spaces that best suit their work and wellbeing.
Traditionally, we have not considered whether staff on our campuses are enjoying their work environments and are able to be their most creative and effective selves. This oversight stands in contrast with the University Value of Curiosity and Discovery: “Embracing new thinking and innovation in a spirit of open minded collaboration that positively impacts on ourselves, our University, our city, society and the world.”
In response, the University of Glasgow has recently begun incorporating a co-design element into its Workspace Futures Programme, starting with a ‘diagnose’ phase. Yet I still wonder: are we thinking boldly enough? Are we exploring possibilities that reach beyond our usual perspectives and assumptions?
Let me pose a provocation from my colleague Dr Nathalie Tasler (personal communication, November 2024):
Remember the Disney movie Aladdin? “Phenomenal cosmic powers… itty-bitty living space!” So how can our immensely talented and creative colleagues thrive when their environment is filled with “stop rules” (Runco, 2007)? In social psychology, stop rules are constraints—often invisible—that limit our thinking, stifle creativity, and shut down possibility thinking (Craft, 2005; Lin, 2020) before they even have a chance to take shape. When workplaces impose these restrictions, whether through rigid protocols, uninspiring spaces, or unspoken norms, how can we expect innovation and fresh ideas to flourish? What would it take to create a work environment where potential isn’t confined, but unleashed?Transforming everyone’s spaces
While we have been focused on transforming student study spaces and creating vibrant, open campuses that attract students and the public alike, we may be neglecting the needs of our own staff. The University of Edinburgh (Bayne, presentation in November 2024) uses the term “buzz” to describe the energy of a thriving campus, drawing inspiration from the University of Warwick’s public events, like World Cup screenings in collaboration with local businesses, that created memorable, widely shared experiences. Edinburgh’s themes of Belonging and buzz; Sanctuary and beauty; Sustainable connections; Mobility, flexibility and flow, and Openness, public co-creation and surfacing resonate with our work on student spaces, but have we fully explored the potential of spaces that could truly empower our staff work best depending on their known, or yet unknown preferences?
Understanding individual preferences in workspace design is challenging. Environmental needs are deeply personal, shaped by complex and unique factors. This makes it impossible to assume that one person’s ideal workspace will suit everyone. When we project our own preferences onto others, we risk introducing bias and overlooking or misjudging their needs. These hidden barriers are created by a world design with certain people in mind, leaving others feeling excluded. They make aspects of society accessible to some while shutting out others. These mismatches are the building blocks of exclusion, making people feel unwelcome or unable to fully participate (Holmes, 2018).
It is one thing to offer flexible options for staff to work from home or from a campus office. But we should also look closely at the campus itself, at how we treat these spaces and how they treat us. Typically, we arrive on campus, head into buildings and into offices or meeting rooms, and operate within closed-off spaces that might be limiting our ability to think creatively or envision the future. It makes me wonder: Are we missing something essential?
We expect our staff to innovate and imagine exciting futures, yet how can we foster that kind of thinking when we confine people to uninspiring spaces? A room does not need to have white walls or dull furniture to feel stifling; even a vibrant, biophilic space can feel restrictive if it is still just four walls. What if we reimagined our workplaces so that, rather than feeling like “just another day at the office”, staff actually felt genuinely inspired to be there?
At present, we do not offer staff the full range of spaces that might suit different types of work or support them in ways they find personally meaningful. Why is it, for example, that a staff member working in an on-campus café among students is often seen as “not really working”? Such assumptions are outdated, belonging to a pre-digital era. Why do we still insist that all staff need traditional offices, all the time?
Offices have their purpose, of course, but not all office types are effective for all needs. Open-plan offices with cubicles, for instance, combine the worst aspects of every workspace model. Various issues are associated with open office spaces featuring cubicles, which are often regarded as suboptimal work environments. Common problems include lack of privacy, increased noise levels, and the inability to control one’s environment, which can lead to diminished productivity, lower job satisfaction, and elevated stress levels. The systematic literature review by Colenberg et al (2021) finds a link between cramped cubicle setups in open spaces and decreased physical and mental health due to poor environmental control. I recall working in university offices in the early 1990s, when alternative approaches were simply unimaginable. Back then, an office with your name on the door was a status symbol and a sign of belonging. But why are we still behaving as though we are living in the 20th century?
If someone can concentrate deeply and produce creative, high-quality work in a bustling student study space like the James McCune Smith Learning Hub (JMS,) or in a moderately busy area like the Mazumdar-Shaw Advanced Research Centre (ARC) lobby, who are we to judge? For some, the energy of a café may be the perfect environment to spark ideas and focus, while others need absolute silence and solitude to work through complex problems. Some might prefer a quiet, shared workspace, finding comfort in the presence of others without the noise. Many benefit from working at home, or outside if weather permits, while others feel more motivated and inspired by coming onto campus.
Ultimately, as long as staff are accessible when needed and are delivering excellent work, there is no “right” way to structure a work environment. What works for one person may not work for another, and that is precisely the point: a truly supportive workplace recognises and respects individual preferences and needs. By allowing each person the freedom to choose the space that best supports their productivity and wellbeing, we create a culture that values flexibility and respects diversity in how we all work best.
The psychologist Dr Lorna Champion (personal communication, November 2024) summarised this succinctly: “Evolution is based on variation. If a characteristic supports the survival then it is retained and handed on, because of difference, we evolve. If we don’t have variation then we stagnate.” It is time to embrace new thinking, to break from outdated models, and to create environments that truly support and inspire staff to thrive.
Nic Kipar leads the Academic and Digital Development team at the University of Glasgow. She played an instrumental role in the creation of the James McCune Smith Learning Hub, focusing on inclusive active learning. Nic co-leads the Enhancing Learning & Teaching Practice workstream, contributing to the university’s Learning & Teaching strategy and planning for the upcoming Keystone building, which will feature large interdisciplinary labs. Nic also chairs a working group on Pedagogy in Superlabs, pioneering these innovative spaces for the university.
by CUPA-HR | November 14, 2024
The results of the 2024 election are in: Donald Trump will serve as the 47th president of the United States, while both the Senate and House of Representatives will be controlled by Republicans. With the Republican trifecta in the White House and Congress, Republicans can focus on passing their policy priorities through legislation in Congress and regulatory action at the federal agencies. CUPA-HR’s government relations team provides the following analysis to offer insight into possible leadership, policies and regulations we expect starting in January 2025.
Department of Labor
The Department of Labor (DOL), overseen by the secretary of labor, directs policy and regulations for employers, workers, and retirees in the U.S. Throughout the election season, news organizations have speculated President-elect Trump’s potential picks for the secretary position, though who will be nominated will be unknown until Trump announces it. According to Politico, two possible candidates are Patrick Pizzella and Bryan Slater. Under the first Trump administration, Pizzella served as deputy secretary of labor and acting secretary of labor between former secretaries Alex Acosta and Eugene Scalia. Slater, who currently serves as Virginia’s secretary of labor, had also previously served as assistant secretary at DOL under the previous Trump administration.
In addition to the secretary of labor, Trump will pick people to head the subagencies at DOL, including the Employee Benefits Security Administration, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, and Wage and Hour Division, among others. These agencies draft and implement regulations governing retirement and health benefits plans, workplace safety and health, and minimum wage and overtime pay requirements. Leaders of the DOL subagencies are typically selected later in the Cabinet-appointment process.
National Labor Relations Board
The party control of the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) depends on actions taken by the Senate during the lame-duck session between the election and President-elect Trump’s inauguration. Current chair of the NLRB Lauren McFerran’s term is set to expire in December 2024, but she has been renominated to serve on the board for another five years by President Biden. Senate Democrats, who are likely to push for her confirmation now that the Senate and White House will be Republican-controlled in 2025, will need to vote to confirm her position, only needing a simple majority. If confirmed, NLRB would be under Democratic control until at least August 2026, more than a year and a half into the Trump administration, leaving President Trump unable to obtain a Republican majority on the board — and thereby control the policy at the NLRB — for nearly half of his second term.
Despite possibly not having control of the NLRB, President Trump may choose to fire the NLRB General Counsel Jennifer Abruzzo (Democrat), whose term is not set to expire until July 2025. In 2021, President Biden terminated then-General Counsel Peter Robb (Republican) within hours of his inauguration, despite Robb’s term not ending until November of that same year. This was the first time any sitting president had fired a sitting general counsel at an independent agency for policy differences. Federal courts upheld Robb’s termination, so President Trump is highly likely to terminate Abruzzo immediately upon taking office. As a reminder, Abruzzo issued several memos stating her position regarding employment status for student-athletes, severance agreements, and disclosure obligations under the National Labor Relations Act and Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, all of which would likely be rescinded by Trump’s NLRB general counsel appointee.
Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
Unless a commissioner leaves their post before their term expires, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) will maintain a Democrat majority (currently 3-1, with one Republican seat vacant) until July 2026. Despite this, President-elect Trump is likely to appoint Commissioner Andrea Lucas to serve as chair of the EEOC. Lucas and the EEOC would be limited in their ability to adopt new policies or reverse actions taken by the Democrat-controlled commission prior to July 2026. At that time, we expect the Republican-controlled EEOC to issue revised guidance that narrows the scope of the agency’s interpretation of Title VII protections in light of Bostock v. Clayton County and the legality of diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) initiatives in employment practices, possibly extending legal principles established under the Students for Fair Admission v. Harvard case.
Similar to the NLRB, we expect that President-elect Trump will replace the current EEOC General Counsel Karla Gilbride (Democrat). In her role, Gilbride has litigated on behalf of the EEOC in federal court, but the position typically does not provide policy recommendations to the full commission like the NLRB general counsel does.
Department of Education
The Department of Education (ED) oversees and implements policy and regulations governing federal assistance to education. With respect to higher education, ED governs issues like federal financial aid, Title IX compliance, and other laws aimed at promoting student success. Under the incoming Trump administration, Politico has speculated that there are a few possible contenders who could ultimately lead the agency.
One possible candidate for ED’s secretary is Betsy DeVos, who served as secretary of education during Trump’s first term. During DeVos’ first term as ED secretary, she led the agency to implement the 2020 Title IX regulations that are still currently in place in 26 states and hundreds of schools around the country, pending legal challenges to the Biden administration’s rule. However, DeVos resigned from her position as secretary of education after the January 6, 2021, riots at the U.S. Capitol, which may lead the incoming Trump administration to search for new candidates. Despite her resignation, DeVos has indicated that she is open to discussions about potentially serving in the role again.
As we also discuss below, Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC) will be stepping down from her role as chair of the House Education and the Workforce Committee, where she most recently led an investigation into antisemitism on campus in higher education. This, along with her previous experience serving as an English instructor and president of a community college, may set her up for a bid for the secretary position.
Some additional names that have been discussed by Politico are Virginia Governor Glenn Youngkin, Oklahoma State Superintendent of Public Instruction Ryan Walters, and Moms for Liberty founder Tiffany Justice.
House Education and the Workforce Committee
Republicans held control of the House in the 2024 election, but there will still be some shakeup in leadership for the Education and Workforce Committee. Chair of the committee Virginia Foxx will be stepping down from her role, leaving open the Republican leader position of the Committee. The two front-runners to chair the committee are Reps. Tim Walberg (R-MI) and Burgess Owens (R-UT), both currently serving on the committee. Notably, Walberg has served on the committee for 16 years, and Owens currently serves as the chair of the Higher Education and Workforce Development Subcommittee. For Democrats, current ranking member of the committee Bobby Scott (D-VA) is expected to maintain his position as leader of the Committee Democrats.
Walberg and Owens have both publicized their policy priorities. Walberg has stated that, under his leadership, the committee would focus on legislation to make college more affordable, boost apprenticeships, implement a short-term Pell grant for workforce training programs, and reauthorize the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act. Owens hopes to steer the committee with a more education-centric focus, stating that top priorities for him are school choice and oversight into how ED uses its funding.
Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee
Republicans in the Senate gained control during the 2024 election, flipping the previously Democrat-controlled chamber. As a result, Senator Bill Cassidy (R-LA) will likely rise to the role of chair on the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee. Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT) will shift into the ranking member position after serving as the chair of the full committee in the 118th Congress. Before his political career, Cassidy was a physician, meaning he could pivot the committee to focus more on health policy. Despite this, Cassidy has also advocated for the HELP committee to advance a Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act reauthorization bill, and he has advocated for the committee to focus on other education issues as well.
FLSA Overtime
As you already know, the Biden administration is in the process of implementing their FLSA overtime regulations. The final rule took a two-phased approach to increasing the minimum salary threshold. The first increase raised the salary threshold to $43,888 per year and took effect on July 1, 2024. The second increase would raise the salary threshold to $58,656 per year and is set to take effect on January 1, 2025. The regulations are currently being challenged in a federal district court in Texas, where a preliminary injunction to block the rule from taking effect has been placed only for public employers in the state of Texas. It remains to be seen how the federal judge will rule on the lawsuits, though a hearing for the cases was held on November 8 and a ruling is imminent.
As the Trump administration will not take office until after the January 1 threshold, the regulation will take effect, pending further appeals, if the final rule is upheld in federal court. If the rule is struck down, we expect the Trump administration will let the court’s decision remain and make no further effort to appeal the decision. If the Trump administration decides to increase the minimum salary threshold during this upcoming term, they will likely use the methodology from the 2019 rule to increase the threshold.
Title IX
Similar to the overtime final rule, the Biden administration issued Title IX regulations in 2024 that are also facing legal challenges. The Biden administration’s Title IX rule took effect on August 1, 2024, but several lawsuits challenging the rule have resulted in preliminary injunctions blocking ED from enforcing it in 26 states and hundreds of other schools in states that did not challenge the final rule.
The Biden administration’s regulations replaced the previous Trump administration’s 2020 Title IX regulations. If the regulations are upheld in federal court, we expect that the incoming secretary of education will repeal the Biden administration’s regulations in favor of keeping the 2020 regulations in effect across the country.
Immigration
There are several policies and regulations that CUPA-HR has been tracking on the immigration front that face uncertain futures under the incoming Trump administration. During the first term, the Trump administration placed a proposed rule on the regulatory agenda aiming to restrict the Optional Practical Training program, which allows international students who graduate from U.S. institutions to work in their degree-related field for at least 12 months after graduating. The Trump administration also finalized a couple of final rules that would have increased wage obligations for H-1B visas and narrowed eligibility for H-1B visas to positions that qualified as “specialty occupations.” These rules were struck down in court, so while Trump is unlikely to implement the same rules, we could see similar attempts to increase H-1B wage obligations and narrow the H-1B program.
Additionally, the incoming Trump administration will likely look to reverse policies implemented by the Department of Homeland Security under the Biden administration, including dropping any appeal of the recent court ruling against the “Keeping Families Together” program for undocumented spouses and children of U.S. citizens, as well as rescinding the guidance to streamline the H-1B visa waiver process for Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) recipients. Similarly, if the Biden administration does not finalize the H-1B modernization rule before the end of his term, a new Trump administration may seek to implement a more restrictive version, reshaping the rule to reflect its own priorities rather than those outlined in the Biden administration’s October 2023 proposal.
Legislative Priorities
With Republicans controlling both the House and the Senate, legislative priorities should be mostly aligned between the two chambers and the White House. However, their ability to pass legislation will still depend on bipartisan support, as Republicans hold a narrow majority in the House and do not have a large enough majority in the Senate to bypass the 60-vote filibuster. Despite these challenges, we expect Republicans to focus on issues like paid leave, workforce development, and affordable college and workforce training.
Though paid leave is a priority for both parties, Republicans and Democrats have previously not agreed on the best approach to establish it through federal legislation. In his first term, Trump and other Republicans backed paid leave legislation that allowed parents to collect a portion of their future child tax credits early to use for leave and receive smaller credits in the following years. This proposal ran counter to the Democrat-supported Family and Medical Insurance Leave (FAMILY) Act, which would establish a payroll tax to fund a paid family and medical leave program that can be used to pay workers who are new parents or who are caring for their own health issues or those of their family. Republicans and Democrats will need to find a compromise if they are to pass any paid leave legislation in the upcoming Congress, as they will need 60 votes in the Senate to bypass a filibuster.
Despite their differences on paid leave, Republicans and Democrats have made bipartisan efforts to pass legislation to improve workforce development and create a short-term Pell grant. During this Congress, both the House and Senate have worked to pass legislation to reauthorize the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, which serves as the nation’s primary federal workforce development legislation designed to help Americans receive training and support to obtain skills necessary for high-quality jobs and careers. Additionally, there has been bipartisan support to pass legislation that would expand the Pell grant program to cover short-term workforce development and training programs that are outside the traditional higher education path. Again, Republicans and Democrats will need to find consensus on these issues in order to bypass the Senate’s 60-vote filibuster, but bipartisan issues like workforce development and short-term Pell grants appear to have a possible path to becoming law.
CUPA-HR is hosting a 2024 election analysis webinar on November 21 at 12 PM ET. Registration is free for CUPA-HR members. Additional updates will be provided through future blogs and Washington Insider alerts.
Given my first job out of university was with Vichy L’Oreal where I served briefly as a junior product manager (because I was worth it) I tend to keep an eye of marketing and communication trends, always a moving target. As soon as one has upskilled, or briefed a sub-contractor, the goalposts have moved once again. Nonetheless, largely driven by the furious pace of technological advancements, and the slower shifts in social behaviours, we have seen several trends in 2024.
Platforms like TikTok, Instagram Reels, and YouTube Shorts have continued to rise to dominance in the social media space, with brands leveraging these formats to create engaging, bite-sized content in the form of short-form video content. Alongside this we have seen commercial organisations allocate significant budgets to creator marketing, where influencers and content creators play a significant role in promoting products and services. The two trends together are just now beginning to be leveraged by universities, and to a lesser extent schools, by encouraging students and staff to generate marketable, authentic, content.
Another trend of 2024 has been the nascent use of AI and marketing science to finetune marketing strategies and generate targeted personalise content. This, alongside with focussing on omnichannel, consolidated, messaging regardless of the device or platform promises to be a cost saving approach once embedded.
Everyone is fighting for brand recognition more than ever, so it is not surprising that we see several educational institutions, at all levels, exploring new branding avenues.
As we look forward to 2025, we can already identify several new trends emerging in marketing and communications. Ubiquitous debate about AI and Machine Learning promises to dominate, particularly as it relates to the regulation of responses to sales queries by AI tools. These should produce a wealth of insights into marketing content creation for those organisations that successfully close the loop.
The increasing use voice search across platforms requires institutions to think about how their ‘audio-brand’ runs in a crowded space. If the organisation is the ‘London School of Economics and Political Science’ but everyone who is already in the know says ‘LSE’, not problem. What about those that don’t?
The web is awash with predictions about the impact of AR and VR for 2025, but having presented at a conference in 2019 on AR/VR and Learning Design, and being assured that universal adoption was within 12-18 months… I am still holding my breath. There are great examples of 3D campus walk-throughs, and I suspect for most that works well enough.
The focus for everyone in marketing and communications, in education as much as elsewhere, will (almost) undoubtedly be on the importance of innovation and authenticity. The trend that keeps giving.
