I Am Captcha: ‘Ghost’ Students and the AI Machine
justin.morriso…
Fri, 02/21/2025 – 03:00 AM
Adam Bessie and Jason Novak capture the higher educator’s dilemma in the age of generative AI.
Category: Featured
-
NIH faces pivotal hearing amid layoffs, grant freeze
As mass layoffs and suspended grant reviews at National Institutes of Health sow more chaos for the nation’s once-cherished scientific enterprise, a federal judge is set to hear arguments Friday morning on whether to extend a temporary block on the NIH’s attempt to unilaterally cut more than $4 billion for the indirect costs of conducting federally funded research at universities, such as hazardous waste disposal, laboratory space and patient safety.
If the cuts move forward, they will “destroy budgets nationwide,” higher education associations and Democratic attorneys general, along with medical colleges and universities, argued in court filings this week. “But the consequences—imminent, certain, and irreparable—extend far beyond money, including lost human capital, shuttering of research projects and entire facilities, stalling or ending clinical trials, and forgoing advances in medical research, all while ending the Nation’s science leadership.”
The NIH refuted that claim in court filings, arguing that the plaintiffs “do not establish that any irreparable impacts would occur before this case can proceed to the merits.”
Friday’s hearing comes two weeks after the NIH’s Feb. 7 announcement that it will cap indirect research cost rates at 15 percent, which is down from an average rate of 28 percent, though some colleges have negotiated reimbursement rates as high as 69 percent.
The National Institutes of Health is one of the largest sources of funding for research at the universities and colleges and has supported breakthroughs in medical technology and treatments for diseases like cancer and Alzheimer’s. In fiscal year 2024, the agency sent about $26 billion to more than 500 grant recipients connected to colleges. About $7 billion of that went to the indirect expenses—a source of funding that universities argue is crucial but still doesn’t cover the full cost of conducting research.
Federal data shows that in fiscal year 2022, universities contributed approximately $25 billion of their own institutional funds to support research, including more than $6.2 billion for the federal government’s share of indirect costs that it did not reimburse.
Nonetheless, Elon Musk, the unelected billionaire bureaucrat President Donald Trump has charged with heading the nascent Department of Government Efficiency, characterized NIH reimbursements for universities for indirect research costs as “a rip-off.” Meanwhile, the academic research community warned that such drastic cuts—which Trump failed to get congressional approval for during his first term—would hamper university budgets, local economies and medical breakthroughs.
Within days of NIH’s directive, a federal judge put the rate cut on hold after 22 state attorneys general sued the agency, joined by numerous higher education research advocacy organizations, including the Association of American Medical Colleges, the Association of American Universities, the Association of Public and Land-grant Universities, and the American Council on Education. Across three separate lawsuits, they argued NIH doesn’t have the authority to unilaterally change the cap and that its guidance was “arbitrary and capricious,” among other points.
Although the nationwide injunction gave colleges a brief reprieve from the cuts, which briefly took effect Feb. 10, university administrators have spent the last two weeks sounding the alarm about the estimated losses and other impacts. Some Republicans in Congress have also opposed the plan, saying it violates language in federal legislation that bars NIH from modifying indirect costs.
‘Irreparable Injury’?
In its motion for the dismissal of the injunction filed on Feb. 14—a day before the NIH fired some 1,000 workers—lawyers for the agency argued that the federal district court “lacks jurisdiction” over the case and only federal claims court should hear the case, because the plaintiffs “are effectively seeking damages for breach of contract—the regulations incorporated into their grant agreements.” They also claimed that the NIH “ran afoul of no statute” and that the plaintiffs “have failed to show that they would suffer an irreparable injury” without a temporary restraining order.
“Where declarants assert that reducing funds is likely to harm research or clinical trials,” the motion said, “they generally do not assert that those harms are imminent as opposed to eventual reductions in their capacity that would occur from sustained diminished funding after a ruling on the merits.”
The motion went on to claim that the NIH’s capping of indirect cost rates seeks to “further its mission of advancing public health in a manner reflecting wise stewardship of the public money entrusted to it,” claiming that indirect costs are “difficult” for NIH to oversee. “To be clear, the Supplemental Guidance will not change NIH’s total grant spending; rather, it simply reallocates that grant spending away from indirect costs and toward the direct funding of research.”
But that’s not how the NIH publicly framed the indirect cost cap in a post on the social media site Musk owns that said the policy change will “save more than $4B a year effective immediately.”
And in a response filed earlier this week, the plaintiffs argued that the NIH’s policy change “bears no rational connection to NIH’s stated goal” in its court filings, because nothing in the NIH’s notice to cap indirect costs “directs more money to direct expenses.” The response also argues that the NIH has not provided adequate evidence to support its assertions that indirect costs are “difficult to oversee” and implored the court to reject the NIH’s attempt to “deprive Congress of its power of the purse.”
Mass Layoffs, Grant Reviews Still Suspended
While the temporary injunction has halted the rate cap for about two weeks, it hasn’t stopped Trump and Musk from destabilizing federal science agencies in other ways. Over the past week, thousands of mostly probationary employees—ranging from top-ranking agency officials to grant administrators who help grantees ensure their projects are compliant with federal regulations—across numerous science agencies, including the NIH, the National Science Foundation and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, lost their jobs.
“The majority of what people who work for those agencies do is get the grant money out the door,” said Carrie Wolinetz, a science and health policy consultant who worked for the NIH between 2015 and 2023. “Because the layoffs took place across job categories, any of those critical positions could be affected. It’s hard to imagine that’s not going to have some impact on the ability of those agencies to fulfill its mission of getting those grants out the door.”
And even before the layoffs and indirect cost cap directive, the NIH had already derailed its operations by temporarily pausing communication and grant reviews last month. Although the courts put those orders on hold, Nature reported Thursday that nearly all NIH grant-review meetings remain suspended.
When the reviews finally do resume, the process will likely face even more challenges with fewer agency employees.
“The fewer people, the greater the bottleneck,” Wolinetz said. “Uncertainty itself causes delays. When people are confused, afraid and worried after watching their colleagues being dismissed, all of that just causes a slowing down of the entire system.”
On Wednesday, hundreds of scientists, federal workers and their supporters rallied outside of Department of Health and Human Services headquarters in Washington, D.C., wielding signs with phrases such as “Leash That DOGE,” “Fight for Science” and “America Needs NIH Scientists” and speaking out against cuts to science funding. (The rally was part of a national day of action to oppose the research funding cuts and layoffs.)
Hundreds of protesters gathered in front of HHS headquarters Wednesday.
“It is important that we understand exactly what is at stake right now,” Kailyn Price, a neuroscience doctoral student at George Washington University, told the crowd. “Cutting indirect costs is like telling a football team to do their work with only the players and the coach—no lights for the field, no physical therapist for the players, no water for the showers.”
She said casting indirect costs as an unchecked and unnecessary burden on taxpayers is all part of the government’s plan to turn the American public against scientists and their work.
“They want you to be angry and misinformed, incensed and ignorant,“ Price said. “Trump and his unelected billionaire backers want you to look at the people like us—making $20, $30, $40,000 a year, working late nights through the weekends because we believe that much in the work that we do—as the enemy.”
And the federal workers who remain at the agencies that support university research may not be there for long, either.
“Messaging from the agency is changing on a daily basis. Everyone is internally freaking out,” one still-employed NIH scientist told Inside Higher Ed on the condition of anonymity. “I’m applying for other jobs, and most people are hedging their bets and sending out other applications, assuming they could get let go.”
The chaos at the NIH, including the firings and the potential for billions in funding cuts, means “there just won’t be the same number of scientists coming out of American universities,” the NIH researcher said. “On the bright side, though, there is the rest of the world.”
The cuts “are also adversely affecting important agency functions, such as support for research security at universities,” Toby Smith, senior vice president for government relations and public policy at the AAU, said in an email.
“Cutting key research security offices at the NSF and NIH will make it more difficult for universities and our science agencies to implement new congressionally mandated research security requirements aimed at protecting sensitive information and data from competitors at a crucial time when we are trying to stay at the forefront of global scientific leadership.”
-
12% of college students won’t participate in an internship
The value of internships for students’ career navigation and future employment opportunities is clear for colleges and many employers. But what do students think of internship experiences, and how do they benefit them in their future planning?
A new report from Handshake, published Feb. 20, highlights trends across students who have and have not participated in internships, the impact on their goals beyond college, and the barriers that hinder engagement.
Among the trends present: More interns are participating in paid internships and earning above minimum wage while doing so, and company culture can influence students’ willingness to return for a full-time position.
Methodology
Handshake’s Internship Index was assembled with data from a November 2024 survey of more than 5,605 students and 834 recent graduates, as well as job posting and application data from the platform. Recent graduates are those who completed their degree in 2022, 2023 or 2024.
Why intern? A majority of students said they pursue internships to build valuable skills (87 percent), to identify possible career opportunities (72 percent), to make professional connections (70 percent) or to get a leg up in their future job hunt (70 percent). About 59 percent say participating in an internship is an essential step toward clarifying their career goals.
Only one-third of students identified fulfilling a degree requirement as a primary factor for pursuing an internship, and just over half indicated financial motivation for interning.
Among students who have completed an internship, more than 80 percent say the experience shaped their preferences for industries and job roles. Around 54 percent of students said their internship made them more confident in their career goals, and 56 percent said it was essential for making progress toward career goals. One-quarter said it inspired them to set new career goals, which can be similarly valuable.
A winter 2023 Student Voice survey by Inside Higher Ed and College Pulse found 10 percent of students identified an internship as a top influence on their career decisions for after college.
What hinders internships: Around 12 percent of students in the Handshake study have not participated in an internship and do not expect to do so prior to finishing their degree. The greatest share of these students say they’re limited by time (33 percent)—overwhelmed by coursework and other commitments—or they’ve applied for roles and haven’t been selected (33 percent).
“Students may feel shut out of internships for a variety of reasons, ranging from packed schedules to financial and geographic constraints,” the report says. “Even for students who have ample time and resources, landing an opportunity has become more difficult as hiring contracts and competition increases, and the application process may feel overwhelming given the variation in hiring timelines across employers and industries.”
Internal data shows demand for opportunities among students that is outpacing the supply. The number of internship postings on Handshake declined 15 percent from January 2023 to January 2025, but applications surged, with 41 percent of the Class of 2025 having applied to at least one internship through Handshake, compared to 34 percent of the Class of 2023.
Only half of recent college graduates participated in an internship while enrolled in an undergraduate program. Even among students who do land an internship, time continues to be limited, with 56 percent of interns simultaneously taking classes and 36 percent working a part-time job. Around one in eight students said that their internship required them to work 40 hours a week or more.
First-generation students were more likely to say they completed an internship while taking classes or working (80 percent) compared to their continuing-generation peers (70 percent).
Pay day: As colleges and employers consider the importance of experiential learning for student career outcomes, more attention has been placed on the value of fair compensation to reduce equity gaps in who is able to participate in internships. Some colleges will provide stipends or scholarships for learners who take on an unpaid or underpaid internship, allowing them to still receive financial support for their work.
Almost all internships (95 percent) posted on Handshake in the past year were paid, which students say is important to them in selecting an internship role.
A majority of students who participated in an internship had an hourly wage (57 percent) or a fixed salary or stipend (24 percent). The highest average rate was for student interns working in professional services ($35 an hour) or financial services ($31 per hour). Students working in hospitality or education received the lowest average rate of $17.50 an hour.
A talent pipeline: Internships can be a great way for a student to get a foot in the door of a company and for the employer to offer training and a career pathway for early talent. Handshake’s data shows that the interpersonal experiences students have while in their internships can influence their desire to hold a full-time role in that company.
Three in five interns said the mentorship they received or didn’t receive had a major impact on their level of interest in working full-time for their internship employer. About 89 percent of students said team culture at least somewhat impacted on their interest in working full-time for their internship employer, and 90 percent said the same of their interactions with colleagues.
Similarly, pay was a factor that impacted students’ consideration of a full-time role at their employer. Eighty-two percent of interns who had a fairly compensated role would likely accept a full-time offer from their internship employer, compared to 63 percent of those who didn’t feel their pay was fair.
After finishing their internship, 59 percent of students said their experience impacted their interest in working for their employer at least moderately, but only 30 percent said they would definitely accept a full-time offer from their employer.
Get more content like this directly to your inbox every weekday morning. Subscribe here.
-
Voodoo doll study explores why scientists get harassed
What can voodoo dolls tell us about the public’s distrust of, and aggression toward, scientists? A new paper has attempted to find out.
Despite a growing fear that global attitudes have hardened toward scientific research, including instances of violence, “virtually nothing is known” about those likely to attack scientists, according to the study, published in Scientific Reports.
The paper, which examined about 750 responses across two different studies, claims to be the first to identify factors associated with an increased likelihood of harassing scientists.
Researchers tested their theories by offering participants a bonus payment of 1 pound ($1.27), which they could gift to themselves or donate to the Union of Concerned Scientists, and by asking them to sign a petition against the harassment of scientists.
Out of the total of £359 ($455) offered, participants opted to donate £69.79 ($88). The study found that political ideology was the best predictor for who would donate, with right-wing individuals contributing less.
The paper also asked those taking part to express their aggression by sticking pins in a digital voodoo doll of a stereotypical scientist—an “old-age male with a lab coat and equipment.”
Participants were asked to “release negative energy” by clicking their mouse, with a higher number of “pins” indicative of more aggressive behavior. It found significant positive correlations with five variables—conspiracy mentality, science cynicism, relative deprivation, threat and attitudes toward harassment.
Lead author Vukašin Gligorić, a Ph.D. researcher in the Department of Psychology at the University of Amsterdam, said across the two studies, distrusting worldviews, political ideology and perception of threat were associated with more approving attitudes toward harassment of scientists.
Notably, the paper found that science cynicism—the belief that scientists are incompetent and corrupt—also drives approval of scientists’ harassment.
In addition, perceiving scientists as threatening, as well as dark personality traits, such as psychopathy and narcissism, contributed to approving harm.
The paper concluded that highlighting reasons why people should trust scientists and not be threatened by them is the most promising way to counter such behavior.
The antiscience movement is a growing trend in some countries, Gligorić told Times Higher Education.
And he said that changing these attitudes will be challenging, because scientists are viewed as part of the “establishment,” which many people around the world are dissatisfied with.
“To address this, I believe scientists should engage more directly with the public … rather than for private or corporate interests, which erode trust.
“Ultimately, people are cynical about the political and economic systems we live in, and they sometimes blame scientists as part of that system. Therefore, scientists should also be critical of and work to improve the system itself.”
-
College English classrooms should be slow (opinion)
In a minorly famous letter to the duchess of Sutherland, Henry James advises that The Ambassadors should be read “very easily and gently,” specifying that his correspondent should ideally “read five pages a day.” At this pace, the duchess would have taken almost exactly 13 weeks to finish the book if she read every day of the week. One imagines that the novel would be tucked into otherwise inaccessibly glamorous, luxurious days for the duchess, days filled with, among other comforts, corresponding with James about how to read his latest novel.
Five pages a day is very slow reading, but most of us would love to approach our reading at a more leisurely pace, if not a pace determined so prescriptively. On the other side of the spectrum of reading experiences, one finds the average student in college English classes—both undergraduate and graduate. To use my experience as an example, I was at the nadir of my reading life as an undergraduate English major; as someone who naturally reads quite slowly, I spent many nights of my undergraduate career standing at my dresser so I wouldn’t fall asleep while reading. (I couldn’t afford, and doubt I had ever heard of, a standing desk at that point in my life, and my dresser was the tallest piece of furniture in my room.)
While doing this, I often took notes blindly in a notebook with my right hand while I held whatever book I was reading in my left. I would reread my notes the next morning to help me remember what I had read the night before. I loved the books I was reading, and I wanted to succeed in the classes I took, but I was also, by trying to read upward of 500 pages a week, making myself miserable.
I don’t blame the professors who assigned the reading—all of them were gifted pedagogues, and not all of them assigned too much reading. They, too, inhabited a culture in which they were expected to work quickly and fulfill numerous demanding institutional roles (years later, I still remember one of my undergraduate professors saying she worked around 70 hours a week).
Now that I’m on the other side of the academic experience, however, I’ve come to realize that each of us is responsible for resisting a culture that is, by all accounts, making students anxious, depressed and—dare I say it—unproductive at unprecedented rates. Students in undergraduate classes are primed to work quickly. Almost every part of their life—their experience on social media, their online shopping, their use of ChatGPT to complete assignments and their selection of a route on Apple Maps—is designed to help them reach tangible and intangible destinations as quickly as possible. Most students, meanwhile, are terrible at working slowly.
As academicians, we’re constricted, of course, by all the reasonable and unreasonable demands placed on us by work, family and the other important parts of life, and when we read—especially when we read for professional, critical purposes—we read and work as quickly as possible, that “possible” being an ever-nebulous boundary toward which we strain and suffer while still trying to produce quality work. As professors, if we read books like The Ambassadors, we’re likely to read them in bursts and chunks—butcherly words that sound as unappealing as the process of reading a dense, beautiful novel in such a manner actually is.
While we cannot, in the immediate future, totally alter the institutional structures of postsecondary liberal arts education, there are still things that English professors can do to resist the pressure for speed. Chief among them is to design a classroom that encourages our students to go slow.
In their 2016 book, The Slow Professor, Maggie Berg and Barbara K. Seeber challenged the culture of speed in academia by advising faculty to work more slowly, a laudable goal, but one that critics pointed out was a luxury that untenured faculty simply couldn’t enjoy. The problem, of course, is that the people who design a job decide how much work ought to be accomplished in a given time frame, and untenured faculty have little control over the amount of work they are expected to produce to attain job security. However, what almost all professors, regardless of contract status, do have control over is how much work we require within a given time frame from the students we teach. In other words, we should design classes that treat our students in a way that we’d like our institutions to treat us.
As English professors, our job is not to encourage quick thinking but to foster thorough, imaginative and critical thinking. To do this, we must design our courses to foster and prompt slow work that breaks students out of the habits of expediency they have developed throughout their time in school. Designing classes that foster intentional slowness takes effort, but it also means that we can craft the kinds of spaces that make literature enjoyable and show students the value and beauty of literary texts when they are encountered in an environment suitable for literary consumption.
A slow classroom can take several forms. In the slow classes I’ve taught, it means requiring students to purchase paper copies of the texts we read and to keep a real, physical journal in which they respond to prompts weekly outside of class. I also do something in these classes that I wish someone had done for me when I was a student: I make it clear that they should spend a certain amount of time on work for my class outside the classroom but that they should also give themselves a cutoff time, especially when it comes to reading for class. I tell them that I take around two or three minutes to read a page of a novel well, sometimes more if the prose is dense, and that they should plan for each page of reading to take three to four minutes. I also tell them that if they make time to read and don’t finish, they shouldn’t panic; they should move on with their day and enjoy the nonacademic parts of their life.
Most importantly, I assign less reading. Of course, I’d love to live in a world where my students have thoroughly read the English literary canon (whatever that means), but more than anything, I want them to have read something and to have read it well. To this end, I try to assign between 20 and 30 pages of reading per class meeting, which amounts to around 10 to 15 pages per day, not too far from James’s edict. Rather than just assigning this reading and hoping for the best, I explain to my students about why I assign this number of pages, talk to them about creating and choosing a time and space to read in their daily lives, and describe the process of reading in my class as one they should understand as a reprieve from the time-pressured demands of other courses.
In class, I designate much of our time together as technology-free in order to make space for the rich and meaningful conversations that occur most fruitfully when we aren’t distracted by notifications from our phones and laptops. Students engage in small group and classwide discussions, and I challenge them with daily questions that push them out of their comfort zones. I task them with coming up with steel man arguments in support of cultural and fictional villains, I ask them to articulate what makes a good life by finding evidence for and theories of good lives in their reading, and I frequently make them dwell with a given scene until we’ve extracted every last bit of sense (and often a bit of senselessness) from it.
We tackle around one question a day, if we’re lucky. But the answers and questions we walk away with are finer and fuller than the formulaic answers that students give when they’re in a hurry. In return for designing my class in a way that allows students to work slowly, I expect around the same amount of essayistic output in terms of page numbers, but I design essays to be completed slowly, too, by scaffolding the work and requiring creative responses to prompts to encourage the slow, critical thinking and writing that English professors long to read and rarely encounter. I’ve received work that was thoughtful and occasionally even beautiful, work that couldn’t have been written by AI.
In many ways, my experience of earnestly trying to read around 500 pages of fiction a week as an undergraduate might seem anachronistic. Professors across disciplines have noted the apparent inability of students to engage with any extended reading, whether this means they’re not reading at all or that they just ask ChatGPT to do the “reading” for them. The irony of worrying—as many academics seem to be doing these days—that students will use artificial intelligence to read or write for them is that many undergraduate classes require students to work like machines, to read and write at a breakneck pace, a demand that prompts the ridiculous phenomenon of classes on speed reading, which many universities advertise and which are also available online (the one I’ve linked here is accompanied by the terrifying motto “Reading at the Speed of Thought™”).
In a discipline for which the core method is close reading, the idea of students reading a novel as quickly as possible ought to make English professors shudder, and while it’s not necessary to dedicate an entire semester to a single novel, we ought to see course design as part of the solution to students rushing through their work. In an age that privileges fast work, near-constant availability and answers on demand, the slow English classroom is a reprieve, a space where deep, creative and inspired thought is given the time it needs to blossom.
While our students will likely never occupy the rarefied spaces that the duchess of Sutherland enjoyed when James wrote to her in 1903, with our guidance and course design, they can experience the joy, power and, yes, the luxury of reading and writing slowly. We just have to give them the time.
-
Solving the continuation challenge with engagement analytics
- By Rachel Maxwell, Principal Advisor at Kortext.
Since the adjustments to the Office for Students’ (OfS) Condition B3: Student outcomes, published continuation rates have dropped from 91.1% in 2022 to 89.5% in 2024 for full-time students on their first degree.
This drop is most evident for students in four key areas: (1) foundation year courses; (2) sub-contracted and franchised courses; (3) those with lower or unknown qualifications on entry; and (4) those studying particular subjects including Business and Management, and Computing.
Universities utilising student engagement analytics are bucking this downward trend. Yet, surprisingly, engagement analytics are not mentioned in either the evaluation report or the accompanying Theory of Change document.
Ignoring the impact of analytics is a mistake: universities with real-time actionable information on student engagement can effectively target those areas where risks to continuation are evident – whether at the programme or cohort level, or defined by protected characteristics or risks to equality of opportunity.
The [engagement analytics] data you see today is next year’s continuation data.
Dr Caroline Reid, former Associate Dean at the University of Bedfordshire
A more complete view of student learning
The digital footprints generated by students offer deep insights into their learning behaviours, enabling early interventions that maximise the opportunity for students to access the right support before any issues escalate. While data can never explain why a student is disengaging from their learning, it provides the starting point for a supportive outreach conversation. What happens thereafter would depend on what the conversation revealed – what kind of intervention would be most appropriate for the student? Examples include academic skills development, health and wellbeing support or financial help. The precise nature of the intervention would depend on the ecosystem of (typically) the professional services success and support expertise available within each institution.
Analysing engagement activity at the cohort level, alongside the consequent demand on student services teams, further enables universities to design cohort or institution-wide interventions to target increasingly stretched resources where and when they are needed most.
[With engagement analytics we have] a holistic view of student engagement … We have moved away from attendance at teaching as the sole measure of engagement and now take a broader view to enable us to target support and interventions.
Richard Stock, Academic Registrar, University of Essex
In 2018–19, 88% of students at the University of Essex identified as having low engagement at week six went on to withdraw by the end of the academic year. By 2021–22, this had reduced to approximately 20%. Staff reported more streamlined referral processes and effective targeted support thanks to engagement data.
Bucking the trend at Keele
The OfS continuation dashboard shows that the Integrated Foundation Year at Keele University sits 8% above the 80% threshold. Director of the Keele Foundation Year, Simon Rimmington, puts this down to how they are using student engagement data to support student success through early identification of risk.
The enhanced data analysis undertaken by Simon and colleagues demonstrates the importance of working with students to build the right kind of academically purposeful behaviours in those first few weeks at university.
- Withdrawal rates decreased from 21% to 9% for new students in 2023–24.
- The success rate of students repeating a year has improved by nearly 10%.
- Empowering staff and students with better engagement insights has fostered a more supportive and proactive learning environment.
Moreover, by identifying students at risk of non-continuation, Keele has protected over £100K in fee income in their foundation year alone, which has been reinvested in student support services.
Teesside University, Nottingham Trent University (NTU) and the University of the West of England (UWE) all referred explicitly to engagement analytics in their successful provider statements for TEF 2023.
The Panel Statements for all three institutions identified the ‘very high rates of continuation’ as a ‘very high quality’ feature of their submissions.
- Teesside’s learning environment was rated ‘outstanding’, based on their use of ‘a learner analytics system to make informed improvements’.
- NTU cited learning analytics as the enabler for providing targeted support to students, with reduced withdrawals due to the resulting interventions.
- UWE included ‘taking actions … to improve continuation and completion rates by proactively using learning analytics’ to evidence their approach.
The OfS continuation dashboard backs up these claims. Table 1 highlights data for areas of concern identified by the OfS. Other areas flagged as key drivers for HEIs are also included. There is no data on entry qualifications. All figures where data is available, apart from one[1], are significantly above the 80% threshold.
Table 1: Selected continuation figures (%) for OfS-identified areas of concern (taught, full-time first degree 2018–19 to 2021–22 entrants)
The Tees Valley is the second most deprived of 38 English Local Enterprise Partnership areas, with a high proportion of localities among the 10% most deprived nationally. The need to support student success within this context has strongly informed Teesside University’s Access and Participation Plan.
Engagement analytics, central to their data-led approach, ‘increases the visibility of students who need additional support with key staff members and facilitates seamless referrals and monitoring of individual student cases.’ Engagement data insights are integral to supporting students ‘on the cusp of academic failure or those with additional barriers to learning’.
The NTU student caller team reaches out to students identified by its engagement dashboard as being at risk. They acknowledge that the intervention isn’t a panacea, but the check-in calls are appreciated by most students.
Despite everything happening in the world, I wasn’t forgotten about or abandoned by the University.
NTU studentBy starting with the highest risk categories, NTU has been able to focus on those most likely to benefit from additional support. And even false positives are no bad thing – better to have contact and not need it, than need it and not have it.
What can we learn from these examples?
Continuation rates are under threat across the sector resulting from a combination of missed or disrupted learning through Covid, followed by a cost-of-living crisis necessitating the prioritisation of work over study.
In this messy world, data helps universities – equally challenged by rising costs and a fall in fee income – build good practice around student success activity that supports retention and continuation. These universities can take targeted action, whether individually, at cohort level or in terms of resource allocation, because they know what their real-time engagement data is showing.
All universities cited in this blog are users of the StREAM student engagement analytics platform available from Kortext. Find out more about how your university can use StREAM to support improvements in continuation.
[1] The Teesside University Integrated Foundation Year performs above the OfS-defined institutional benchmark value of 78.9%.
-
How to Be Proactive in an Evolving Higher Education Landscape
How can you make the future of your campus more clear and sustainable? As colleges and universities continue to rise above the challenges brought on by the pandemic five years ago, it has become clear that the new normal for higher education demands more than resilience—it requires strategic foresight and proactive leadership. Institutions today must navigate shifting policies, demographic changes, public sentiment, natural disasters, economic pressures, compliance mandates, safety concerns, talent turnover, operational efficiency demands, and increasing pressure for measurable results.
Is your institution prepared to proactively face these challenges, knowing that disruption is not just possible but highly probable?
- Will your strategic plan ensure financial sustainability if events on the scale of the pandemic disrupt your revenue streams?
- Does your current enrollment strategy include innovative approaches to capture new market share despite declining numbers of prospective students?
- Is your institution leveraging artificial intelligence to drive innovation and efficiency?
- Does your academic master plan align with program demand, employer talent needs, and student success outcomes?
- Can your organization prioritize limited resources effectively and use data to inform critical budget decisions?
- Do your stakeholders understand that your institution’s reputation and competitive standing depend on academic innovation, excellence, community engagement, and student success—achieved through accountability, continuous improvement, campus engagement, agility, and clear prioritization?
If your answer isn’t a confident “YES!”, it’s time to act. Consider investing two days at RNL’s Strategic Planning Executive Forum (April 1–2, Chicago).
Building a foundation for strategic planning in two days
RNL quite literally wrote the book—three of them, in fact—on Strategic Enrollment Planning. For decades, RNL has guided institutions in transforming their approach and achieving their missions through a proven, data-informed strategic planning framework.
Today, institutions discover that this framework goes beyond enrollment—it is adaptable to address every facet of university and college operations, including institutional culture, financial health, academic excellence, technology integration, student success, community engagement, branding, and institutional value. This approach aligns your institution’s goals with the realities of the evolving higher education landscape, ensuring long-term enrollment success and financial sustainability.
While many institutions simply set goals and outline steps, true strategic planning thrives at the intersection of creativity, critical thinking, data analysis, and action. The RNL Strategic Planning Forum is designed to elevate your institution’s capacity by focusing on essential, foundational steps:
- Analyzing your institution’s strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats (SWOT)
- Identifying key performance indicators (KPIs)
- Fostering a data-informed decision-making culture
- Developing actionable strategy plans with clear accountability and measurable ROI
- Establishing prioritization protocols by assessing risk, resistance, and required effort
- Implementing, managing, and refreshing dynamic strategic plans through effective dashboards and processes
What to expect at the forum
The forum offers practical case studies and shared experiences from transformation leaders. Sessions will highlight best practices in areas such as:
- Strategic enrollment planning
- Institutional strategic planning
- Academic program revitalization
Breakout sessions will cater to specific institutional needs—whether from two-year colleges, four-year public universities, or private institutions—offering space to share best practices and tackle unique challenges.
Institutional assessment with expert guidance
Your leadership team will have the opportunity to complete a strategy assessment and receive live feedback from RNL experts with decades of higher education experience in:
- Marketing and market research
- Recruitment and financial aid strategy
- Student success initiatives
- Academic program planning
- Online learning and delivery models
- Advancement and venture philanthropy
- Artificial intelligence applications in higher education
Discussion and collaboration are at the heart of this event. You’ll dive into critical areas of strategic planning while engaging with industry experts, higher education leaders, and peers from other campuses. This will spark meaningful conversations within your own team, setting the stage for momentum and change.
RNL Strategic Planning ExecutiveForum: A history of driving enrollment and revenue success
Many institutions that have participated in this event have seen transformative results, including:
- Record-breaking enrollment growth
- Enhanced student outcomes
- Millions in additional revenue generation
- Stronger community engagement
- Streamlined operations and improved efficiency
Equip your institution for future-focused success
Empower your institution with actionable insights, dynamic strategies, and the tools necessary for growth, resilience, and meaningful impact in today’s higher education environment.
See the agenda and register for the Forum today. Bring your leadership team and ignite the discussions that will drive action and measurable results for your institution’s future. You’ll be hard-pressed to find a more impactful event to propel your institution forward.
-
A Year of AI-Powered Progress: RNL’s Product Evolution
The last year has been one of significant strides for RNL. We embarked on a journey to enhance our existing tools, aiming to provide our partners with even more powerful and effective solutions. This commitment has driven us to develop a suite of AI-powered tools designed to strengthen your connections with students and donors.
A focus on data-driven decisions and user-friendly solutions
Our primary goal was to create AI tools that are not only secure but also user-friendly and insightful. We aimed to provide you with a comprehensive view of your data, empowering you to make informed decisions and develop winning strategies. We understand the importance of ease of use, ensuring that our tools are accessible to everyone, regardless of their technical expertise.
Key achievements: RNL Insights, Compass, and RNL Answers
- RNL Insights: This AI-powered data management platform revolutionizes how you work with your data. By integrating data from various sources, including your enrollment CRM, financial aid modeling tool, and marketing analytics, Insights provides a unified view for informed decision-making. Its intuitive conversational interface allows you to ask questions and receive immediate answers, uncovering valuable insights you might have otherwise missed.
- RNL Compass: Our AI-powered digital assistant, Compass, streamlines communication and enhances efficiency. By automating responses to common student and parent inquiries, Compass frees up your admissions team to focus on more strategic tasks. Integrated with your CRM, Compass provides personalized answers, ensuring each interaction is tailored to the individual’s needs.
- RNL Answers: This AI copilot leverages your institution’s private data to provide valuable insights and support. Whether it’s crafting compelling marketing messages, assisting traveling admissions officers, or building robust knowledge bases for new team members, RNL Answers offers a secure and reliable AI-powered solution.
Beyond technology: Empowering partners with AI expertise
We recognize the importance of responsible AI adoption. To this end, we have introduced AI Governance and Education Consulting Services. These services provide guidance on integrating AI into your institution, including:
- AI Education: Training leadership teams, faculty, and staff on the fundamentals of AI.
- AI Governance Frameworks: Assisting in the development of frameworks that ensure ethical and responsible AI usage.
Collaboration and continuous improvement
To ensure our solutions remain aligned with your evolving needs, we have established the Leadership AI Council and the Product Advisory Council. These groups, comprised of our valued partners, provide valuable feedback and insights, shaping the future of our AI-powered solutions.
Looking ahead: A future of innovation
We have also began migrating some of the outbound communication tools our agents use to deliver your omnichannel outreach services to our new all-in-one platform—RNL Reach. While as a partner, your involvement in transitioning to RNL Reach is very minimal, but you will feel the benefit of the solution because your agents will be able to be more efficient in how they execute your campaigns and provide stronger analytics and reporting. This is the first step to making the new solutions and services we have planned in 2025 possible!
In 2025, we are committed to building upon the strong foundation we’ve established this year. We will leverage our expertise in consulting, data analysis, and AI to develop innovative solutions that address your unique challenges and help you achieve your goals.
A note of gratitude
We extend our sincere gratitude to all our partners for their trust and collaboration. We are honored to work alongside you and contribute to your success. We look forward to a continued partnership in the years to come.
Discover RNL Edge, the AI solution for higher education
RNL Edge is a comprehensive suite of higher education AI solutions that will help you engage constituents, optimize operations, and analyze data instantly—all in a highly secure environment that keeps your institutional data safe. With limitless uses for enrollment and fundraising, RNL Edge is truly the AI solution built for the entire campus.
-
Understanding College Safety Concerns | RNL
“I’m scared to walk alone at night.”
“What if someone targets me because I’m Muslim?”
“Will I be safe being openly gay on campus?”
These aren’t just random comments—they’re real voices from our latest research, and they stopped me cold.
For the past three years, RNL and ZeeMee have been diving deep into the emotional landscape of college planning. Our latest pulse survey (our third round!) reached over 2,600 high school seniors through the ZeeMee app, and their responses about safety concerns left me genuinely shaken.
Last year, we added a crucial question: we asked students who expressed worry about their safety in college to tell us, in their own words, what specifically scared them. Their candid responses paint a vivid— and sometimes heartbreaking—picture of what’s keeping our future college students up at night.
Here’s what they told us, unfiltered and unvarnished.
Understanding college safety concerns
Every night, a high school senior lies awake somewhere in America, staring at their college acceptance letter. But instead of dreaming about new friends and future possibilities, they’re wrestling with darker questions: “Will I be safe there? Will I belong? Will someone hurt me because of who I am?”
These aren’t just passing worries. They’re the heavy weight on students’ hearts as they contemplate their next big step. Through hundreds of candid conversations with students, we’ve uncovered the raw, unfiltered truth about what keeps them up at night. Their voices—brave, vulnerable, and achingly honest—paint a picture of what safety means to Generation Z and why traditional campus security measures are just the beginning of what they need to feel truly secure.
After analyzing hundreds of student comments about their safety concerns, 10 clear themes emerged, revealing how identity, background, and lived experience shape their fears. Understanding these concerns is crucial for colleges aiming to create safer, more supportive environments.
1. Personal safety and physical harm
Across all groups, students expressed anxiety about their physical safety on campus and in surrounding areas. Random attacks, mugging, and the general unpredictability of urban environments were frequent concerns.
- “I’m worried about approximate safety, like the area’s crime rate or state. There’s always going to be dangers.” – First-Generation Male
- “Being alone at night or generally in an open area with few people.” – First-Generation Female
Takeaway for institutions:
- Provide real-time crime alerts and transparent reporting about campus safety statistics.
- Partner with local authorities to increase security presence around campus.
- Encourage students to use campus safety apps for safe travel between locations.
2. Sexual assault and gender-based violence
Female and non-binary students, regardless of generation status, are consistently worried about sexual assault, harassment, and gender-based violence. Parties, walking alone at night, and navigating unfamiliar environments amplified these fears.
- “Rape culture is real. Parties can be dangerous, and not knowing who to trust makes it worse.” – Continuing-Generation Female
- “I’m suicidal and afraid of being raped.” – First-Generation Non-Binary
Takeaway for institutions:
- Expand bystander intervention training for all students.
- Ensure that Title IX resources and reporting processes are well-publicized and easily accessible.
- Provide self-defense classes and safe-ride programs for students traveling after dark.
3. Safety in new and urban environments
Moving to a new city or a high-crime area was a significant concern, particularly among first-generation students unfamiliar with city living.
- “The area of the college I chose is notoriously dangerous.” – Continuing-Generation Female
- “Since I’m out of state, I won’t know who to trust, especially in a big city.” – First-Generation Female
Takeaway for institutions:
- Offer city orientation programs to help students identify safe routes, neighborhoods, and resources.
- Highlight partnerships with local authorities and emergency services.
- Make campus safety maps available, showing emergency call boxes and security patrol zones.
4. Racial and ethnic discrimination
Concerns about racism, hate crimes, and bias were prominent among students of color, especially first-generation and male students. Black, Muslim, and international students frequently mentioned fears of being targeted because of their identity.
- “Since I’m African, racism and all that.” – First-Generation Male
- “I’m a Black Muslim woman. Being assaulted, being hate-crimed, Islamophobia.” – First-Generation Female
Takeaway for institutions:
- Create visible reporting channels for bias-related incidents.
- Provide diversity and inclusion training for campus staff and students.
- Ensure campus police and security are trained in cultural sensitivity.
5. Isolation and being alone
Being away from family and trusted support systems was a significant source of anxiety, especially for first-generation students. Women were more likely to express concerns about being alone while navigating new environments.
- “I would be alone away from home. Just knowing that anything could happen and I wouldn’t have that support system to call on.” – First-Generation Female
- “I’ve never lived away from home and don’t know if I’m ready to make safe decisions all the time.” – Continuing-Generation Male
Takeaway for institutions:
- Establish peer mentorship programs to help new students build connections.
- Promote campus counseling services, emphasizing their accessibility.
- Encourage students to join student organizations for community-building.
6. Campus safety and security measures
Many students, regardless of gender or generation status, questioned whether campus safety protocols were robust enough to protect them.
- “What if someone sneaks onto campus or tries to harm me?” – First-Generation Female
- “Sometimes the safety measures that are there aren’t enough.” – Continuing-Generation Male
Takeaway for institutions:
- Regularly assess and update campus security protocols.
- Provide students with clear information about emergency procedures.
- Ensure dormitories and common areas have secure access systems.
7. Substance use and peer pressure
Students were wary of the prevalence of drugs and alcohol on campus, especially in social settings where peer pressure could lead to unsafe situations.
- “Narcotics float around campus daily, causing self-harm to other students.” – Continuing-Generation Male
- “I’ve heard some college guys spike drinks, and it isn’t safe to go places alone.” – First-Generation Female
Takeaway for institutions:
- Promote alcohol and drug education programs during orientation and throughout the year.
- Partner with student organizations to create substance-free social events.
- Ensure campus safety staff are trained to handle substance-related emergencies.
8. Mental health and well-being
Many students expressed worries about managing their mental health while adjusting to college life, especially those from first-generation backgrounds.
- “I struggle with anxiety, and being in unpredictable places worries me.” – First-Generation Female
- “Just any fighting or being depressed.” – Continuing-Generation Male
Takeaway for institutions:
- Expand mental health resources, including counseling and peer support groups.
- Train faculty and staff to recognize signs of mental health struggles.
- Promote mindfulness and stress-relief programs on campus.
9. LGBTQ+ safety and acceptance
LGBTQ+ students are worried about harassment, discrimination, and feeling unsafe in gendered spaces.
- “I’m trans and nowhere really feels safe to be trans.” – First-Generation Non-Binary
- “I look like a cis male even though I am AFAB. I’m worried about my safety using the women’s bathroom.” – Continuing-Generation Non-Binary
Takeaway for institutions:
- Ensure that gender-neutral restrooms are available across campus.
- Promote LGBTQ+ resource centers and support groups.
- Train campus staff on LGBTQ+ inclusivity and safety.
10. Gun violence and mass shootings
With the rise in school shootings, concerns about gun violence were prevalent across all demographics.
- “The reality of increasing school shootings really scares me.” – First-Generation Female
- “How easily accessible and concealable guns are.” – Continuing-Generation Male
Takeaway for institutions:
- Conduct regular active shooter drills and safety trainings.
- Ensure campus police are equipped to handle potential threats.
- Promote anonymous reporting systems for suspicious activity.
Building safer campuses: Where do we go from here?
While each student’s experience is unique, the themes that emerge highlight common anxieties that colleges and universities must address. Institutions can make campuses feel safer by:
- Improving transparency: Regularly update students on campus safety protocols and crime statistics.
- Strengthening support systems: Expand counseling, mentorship, and peer support programs.
- Enhancing security: Invest in access-controlled dorms, safe-ride programs, and emergency call boxes.
- Promoting inclusivity: Ensure students from marginalized communities feel protected and respected.
- Empowering students: Provide self-defense classes, bystander training, and safety resources.
Behind every statistic in this report is a student’s story – a first-generation student wondering if they’ll make it home safely from their late-night library sessions, a transgender student searching for a bathroom where they won’t be harassed, a young woman calculating the safest route back to her dorm. Their fears are real, their concerns valid, and their hopes for a safe campus environment are deeply personal.
The path forward isn’t just about adding more security cameras or emergency phones, though those matter. It’s about creating spaces where every student can exhale fully, knowing they’re physically safe and emotionally secure. Where belonging isn’t just a buzzword in a campus brochure but a lived experience. Safety means being free to focus on learning, growing, and becoming—without constantly looking over your shoulder.
This isn’t just a challenge for institutions—it’s a sacred responsibility. Because when we promise students a college education, we promise them a chance to transform their lives. And that transformation can only happen when they feel truly safe being themselves. The students have spoken. They’ve shared their fears, hopes, and dreams for safer campuses. Now it’s our turn to listen—and, more importantly, to act.
Read Enrollment and the Emotional Well-Being of Prospective Students
RNL and ZeeMee surveyed 8,600 12th-grade students to understand their anxieties and worries of students during the college search process. Download your free copy to learn:
- The greatest challenges for 12th graders about the college planning process
- The barriers keeping students from applying to college
- The social fears of college that keep prospective students up at night
- The top safety concerns of students
- What excites and encourages students about the college journey
- How students describe these anxieties, stresses, and fears in their own words
-
The Hidden Crisis in College Planning
Millions of students and families are caught in a middle-class crunch for affording college. Approximately 7-8 million families with school-age children are in the middle-income bracket ($60,000-$200,000). That’s not just a statistic—it’s a massive segment of your potential student population caught in a precarious position.
According to recent Census data, these families make up about 40% of all U.S. households, with 39% of family households including children under 18. They’re too “wealthy” for significant financial aid but not wealthy enough to write a check without breaking a sweat. Understanding this demographic isn’t just important—it’s crucial for the future of higher education.
Data from the 2024 Prospective Family Engagement Report from RNL and CampusESP reveals critical insights about this demographic that could reshape how we approach recruitment, financial aid packaging, and communication strategies.
The data that should change your strategy
Let’s start with the numbers that matter. Among middle-income families:
- 71% report loan concerns actively impacting college selection.
- 69% eliminate institutions based on sticker price before engaging.
- 60% find financing “difficult” or “very difficult.”
- 87% rank financial aid among their top five decision factors.
For enrollment managers, these statistics represent more than just data points—they signal significant leakage in our recruitment funnels before we even have a chance to present our value proposition.
Decision drivers: Reframing our approach
The research reveals three primary decision factors for middle-income families:
- Final cost after aid (71%)
- Academic program availability (66%)
- Academic scholarships (51%)
For those of us in enrollment management, this hierarchy suggests we must lead with net price messaging earlier in the funnel rather than waiting for admitted student communications.
Communication channels: What’s actually working
Here’s where we need to check our assumptions. While many institutions are investing heavily in custom apps and elaborate communication plans, the data shows:
- 88% prefer email communication.
- 31% would use a parent/family portal.
- 30% are open to text messages.
- Only 7% would use institution-specific apps.
Translation? We might be overcomplicating our outreach strategies and underutilizing our most effective channel.
Campus visit insights for admissions teams
Despite our digital transformation efforts, traditional visit experiences still dominate:
- 68% participate in guided group tours.
- 40% opt for guided individual tours.
- 46% conduct self-guided tours.
- 37% engage with virtual tours.
This suggests we must reimagine our visit programs to integrate financial conversations earlier in the campus experience, not just at admitted student events.
2024 Prospective Family Engagement Report
The 2024 Prospective Family Engagement Report dives into the experiences, expectations, and challenges of families during the college planning process. RNL, CampusESP, and Ardeo surveyed more than 11,000 families of prospective college students about:- College planning: How many families consider out-of-state institutions? What are their college planning experiences? Do they value and participate in campus visits?
- Communicating with institutions: Which channels to families prefer? How often do they want to hear from you? Which college planning topics do they value the most?
- College financing plans: How many families expect paying for college to be difficult? How many plan to borrow? Do they think college is a worthwhile investment?
Five strategic imperatives for enrollment leaders
1. Revolutionize financial transparency
- Move EFC conversations earlier in the recruitment cycle.
- Implement targeted financial planning workshops.
2. Optimize communication flow
- Leverage the strong preference for email with segmented campaigns.
- Develop parent portals that prioritize financial planning tools.
- Create clear timelines for aid and scholarship processes.
- Integrate financial counseling throughout the admission funnel.
3. Transform campus visits
- Embed financial aid counselors in regular tour programs.
- Design value proposition messaging for tour guides.
- Create flexible scheduling for working parents.
- Include aid discussions in standard visit protocols.
4. Strengthen value messaging
- Focus on ROI metrics that resonate with middle-income families.
- Showcase relevant alumni success stories.
- Highlight internship-to-career pathways.
- Emphasize four-year graduation rates’ impact on total cost.
5. Reimagine merit strategy
- Expand mid-range merit band opportunities.
- Develop clear scholarship retention criteria.
- Create post-enrollment scholarship opportunities.
- Consider guaranteed merit aid programs.
The AI opportunity: Next-generation enrollment tools
1. AI financial planning assistant
Implement systems that:
- Generate dynamic cost projections.
- Automate scholarship matching.
- Model various enrollment scenarios.
- Provide proactive deadline management.
- Adapt to changing family circumstances.
2. Smart visit management
Deploy tools that:
- Create personalized visit experiences.
- Coordinate key stakeholder meetings.
- Offer virtual preview capabilities.
- Optimize multi-college visit planning.
- Align visits with aid events.
3. Financial aid navigation system
Develop platforms that:
- Provide 24/7 form completion support.
- Flag application enhancement opportunities.
- Compare aid packages systematically.
- Project career-based loan scenarios.
- Identify special circumstances early.
Moving forward: Implementation priorities
The data presents clear imperatives for enrollment management teams:
- Restructure communication flows: Lead with affordability messaging earlier in the funnel.
- Integrate technology thoughtfully: Focus on high-impact tools that address specific pain points.
- Realign resources: Ensure financial aid counseling is embedded throughout the recruitment process.
Success in serving middle-income families isn’t just about having the right aid packages—it’s about creating transparent pathways to enrollment that address financial concerns proactively rather than reactively.
For enrollment managers, this means rethinking how we allocate resources, structure our communication flows, and leverage technology to support our goals. The institutions that will thrive in this environment won’t necessarily be those with the largest aid budgets but those that best understand and address the unique needs of middle-income families throughout the enrollment journey.
Creating clear pathways for middle-income families
Let’s put this in perspective: with 7-8 million families with school-age children in the middle-income bracket and 77% believing college is worth the investment, we’re looking at millions of families who need our help to make higher education work for them. The old system of navigating college planning isn’t cutting it anymore.
The good news? Colleges are starting to get it. The best institutions create clear pathways for these middle-income families, combining high-tech tools with high-touch personal support. Considering that these families represent about 40% of all U.S. households, it becomes clear that serving this demographic isn’t just an option—it’s an imperative for institutional sustainability.
What your institution can do right now
- Develop targeted financial planning tools for this specific demographic.
- Create communication strategies that address middle-income concerns directly.
- Redesign campus visits to include meaningful financial conversations.
- Invest in AI tools that can help these families navigate the complexity.
Remember: These families aren’t just looking for a college—they’re looking for a partner in making college affordable. The right approach isn’t necessarily about having the lowest sticker price or the biggest name. It’s about understanding and actively helping this crucial demographic bridge the gap between sticker price and reality. The college planning maze might be complex, but with these insights and tools, your institution can lead in serving this vital segment of American families. The future of higher education may well depend on how effectively we serve these 7-8 million families caught in the middle.
Engage families throughout the college planning process
Parents and family members can be your biggest enrollment champions. They are the number-one influencers for prospective students. That’s why RNL Student Search to Enrollment makes parent engagement a major part of search campaigns.
Ask for a for a free walkthrough and see how you can engage students and parents at every stage of the enrollment journey.
