Category: Small Colleges

  • Why Small Private Colleges Matter More Than Ever – Edu Alliance Journal

    Why Small Private Colleges Matter More Than Ever – Edu Alliance Journal

    Opinion Piece by Dean Hoke — Small College America and Senior Fellow, The Sagamore Institute

    A Personal Concern About the Future of Public Education

    It’s impossible to ignore the rising level of criticism directed at our nation’s public schools. On cable news, social media channels, political stages, and in school board meetings, teachers and administrators have become easy targets. Public schools are accused of being ineffective, mismanaged, outdated, or, in some corners, ideologically dangerous. Some commentators openly champion the idea of a fully privatized K–12 system, sidelining the public institutions that have educated the vast majority of Americans for generations.

    For those of us who have spent our lives in and around education, this rhetoric feels deeply personal. Public schools aren’t an abstraction. They are the places where many of us began our education, where our children discovered their strengths, where immigrants found belonging, where students with disabilities received support, and where caring adults changed the trajectory of young lives.

    Behind every one of those moments stood a teacher.

    Amid this turbulence, there is one group of institutions still quietly doing the hard work of preparing teachers: small private nonprofit colleges.

    Small Private Colleges: An Overlooked Cornerstone of Teacher Preparation

    Despite the noise surrounding public education, small private colleges remain committed to the one resource every school depends on: well-prepared, community-rooted teachers.

    They rarely make national headlines. They don’t enroll tens of thousands of students. But they are woven into the civic and human infrastructure of their regions—especially in the Midwest, South, and rural America.

    This reality became even clearer during a recent episode of Small College America, in which I interviewed Dr. Michael Scarlett, Professor of Education at Augustana College. His insights provide an insider’s view into the challenges—and the opportunities—facing teacher preparation today. Note to hear the entire interview click here https://smallcollegeamerica.transistor.fm/28

    I. The Teacher Shortage: A Structural Crisis

    Much has been written about the teacher shortage, but too often the conversation focuses on symptoms rather than causes. Here are the forces shaping the crisis.

    1. Young people are turning away from teaching

    Data from the ACT show that only 4% of students express interest in becoming teachers—down from 11% in the late 1990s. Bachelor’s degrees in education have fallen nearly 50% since the 1970s. Surveys show that fewer than 1 in 5 adults would recommend teaching as a career.

    The message is clear: Teaching is meaningful, but many no longer see it as sustainable.

    As Dr. Scarlett told us: “The pipeline simply is not as wide as it needs to be.”

    Recent data offers a glimmer of hope: teacher preparation enrollment grew 12% nationally between 2018 and 2022. However, this modest rebound is almost entirely driven by alternative certification programs, which increased enrollment by 20%, while traditional college-based programs grew by only 4%. This disparity underscores a critical concern: the very programs that provide comprehensive, relationship-based preparation—including those at small colleges—are not recovering at the same rate as faster, less intensive alternatives.

    2. Burnout and attrition have overtaken new entrants

    The pandemic accelerated an already-existing national trend: teachers are leaving faster than new ones are entering.

    Reasons include:

    • Student behavior challenges
    • Standardized testing pressure
    • Emotional fatigue
    • Inequities across districts
    • Lack of respect
    • Political and social media hostility

    As Scarlett notes, these realities weigh heavily on early-career teachers: “What new teachers face today goes far beyond content knowledge. They face inequities, discipline issues, emotional exhaustion… and they’re expected to do it all.”

    3. Alternative certification can’t fill the gap

    Alternative routes help—but they cannot replace the traditional college-based pipeline. Many alt-cert teachers receive less pedagogical training and leave sooner.

    Scarlett captures the trend: “Teaching has always attracted people later in life… we’ve definitely seen an uptick.”

    And while alternative routes have seen growth in recent years—increasing 20% between 2018 and 2021—this expansion has not translated into solving the shortage. As of 2025, approximately 1 in 8 teaching positions nationwide remains either unfilled or filled by teachers not fully certified for their assignments. The shortcut approach cannot substitute for comprehensive preparation.

    “The national teacher shortage is real… and retention is just as big a challenge as recruitment.” — Dr. Michael Scarlett

    II. The Quiet Backbone: How Small Private Colleges Sustain the Teacher Workforce

    Small private colleges graduate fewer teachers than large public institutions, but their impact is disproportionately large—especially in rural and suburban America.

    1. They prepare the teachers who stay

    About 786 private nonprofit colleges offer undergraduate education degrees—representing roughly 20% of all teacher preparation institutions in the United States. Together, they produce approximately 25,119 graduates per year, an average of 32 per institution.

    These numbers may seem modest, but these graduates disproportionately:

    • Student-teach locally
    • Earn licensure in their home state
    • Take jobs within 30 miles of campus
    • Stay in the profession longer

    Public schools desperately need these ‘homegrown’ teachers who understand the communities they serve.

    2. Small colleges excel at the one thing teaching requires most: mentoring

    Teacher preparation is not transactional. It is relational. And this is where private colleges excel. Scarlett put it plainly: “Close relationships with our students, small classes, a lot of direct supervision… we nurture them throughout the program.” In a profession that relies heavily on modeling and mentorship, this matters enormously.

    3. Faculty—not adjuncts—supervise student teachers

    One of the most striking differences: “Full professors… working with the students in the classrooms and out in field experiences. Other institutions outsource that.”

    This is not a trivial distinction. Faculty supervision affects:

    • Preparedness
    • Confidence
    • Classroom management
    • Retention

    Where larger institutions rely on external supervisors, small colleges invest the time and human capital to do it right.

    4. They serve the regions hit hardest by shortages

    Rural districts have the highest percentage of unfilled teaching positions. Many rural counties rely almost exclusively on a nearby private college to produce elementary teachers, special education teachers, and early childhood educators.

    When a small college stops offering education degrees, it often leaves entire counties without a sustainable teacher pipeline.

    5. They diversify the educator workforce

    Small colleges—especially faith-based, minority-serving, or mission-driven institutions—often enroll first-generation students, students of color, adult career-changers, and bilingual students. These educators disproportionately fill shortage fields.

    “What we have here is special… students understand the value of a small college experience.” — Dr. Michael Scarlett

    III. Should Small Colleges Keep Offering Education Degrees? The Economic Question

    Let’s be direct: Teacher preparation is not a high-margin program.

    Costs include:

    • Intensive field supervision
    • CAEP or state accreditation
    • High-touch advising
    • Small cohort sizes

    Education majors also often have lower net tuition revenue compared to business or STEM.

    So why should a small college continue offering a program that is expensive and not highly profitable?

    Because the alternative is far worse—for the institution and for the region it serves.

    1. Cutting teacher-prep weakens a college’s identity and mission

    Many private colleges were founded to prepare teachers. Teacher education is often central to institutional mission, community trust, donor expectations, and alumni identity.

    Removing education programs sends the message that the college is stepping away from public service.

    2. Teacher-prep strengthens community partnerships

    Education programs open doors to:

    • District partnerships
    • Dual-credit pipelines
    • Grow Your Own initiatives
    • Nonprofit and state grants
    • Alumni involvement

    These relationships benefit the entire institution, not just the education department.

    3. Education majors support other academic areas

    Teacher-prep indirectly strengthens:

    • Psychology
    • English
    • Sciences
    • Social sciences
    • Music and arts

    When teacher education disappears, these majors often shrink too.

    4. The societal mission outweighs the limited revenue

    There are moments when institutional decisions must be driven by mission, not margins. Producing teachers is one of them.

    5. Addressing concerns about program quality and scale

    Some critics question whether small programs can match the resources and diversity of perspectives available at large universities. This is a fair concern—and the answer is that small colleges offer something different, not lesser.

    Graduation and licensure pass rates at small private colleges consistently match or exceed those of larger institutions. What smaller programs may lack in scale, they compensate for through personalized mentorship, faculty continuity, and deep community integration. These are not peripheral benefits—they are the very qualities that predict long-term teacher retention.

    IV. Why Students Still Choose Teaching—and Why Small Colleges Are Ideal for Them

    Despite all the challenges, students who pursue teaching are deeply motivated by purpose.

    Scarlett described his own journey: “I wanted to do something important… something that gives back to society.”

    Many education majors choose the field because:

    • A teacher changed their life
    • They want meaningful work
    • They value community and service
    • They thrive in supportive, intimate learning environments

    This makes small colleges the natural home for future teachers.

    V. What Small Colleges Can Do to Strengthen Their Programs

    Below are the strategies that are working across the country.

    1. Build Grow Your Own (GYO) teacher pipelines

    Districts increasingly partner to:

    • Co-fund tuition
    • Support paraeducator-to-teacher pathways
    • Provide paid residencies
    • Guarantee interviews for graduates

    2. Develop dual-credit and “teacher cadet” high school programs

    Scarlett sees this as a major reason for hope: “We’re seeing renewed interest in teaching through high school programs… This gives me hope.”

    3. Offer specialized certifications (ESL, special ed, early childhood, STEM)

    These areas attract students and meet district needs.

    4. Create 4+1 BA/M.Ed pathways

    Parents and students love the value.

    5. Provide flexible programs for career-changers

    The rise of adult learners presents a major opportunity for private colleges. “We prepare our students for the world that exists.” — Dr. Michael Scarlett

    VI. Why Small Colleges Must Stay in the Teacher-Prep Business

    If small private colleges withdraw from teacher preparation, the consequences will be immediate and dramatic:

    • Rural and suburban schools will lose their primary source of new teachers.
    • Teacher diversity will shrink.
    • More underprepared teachers will enter classrooms.
    • Districts will become more dependent on high-turnover alternative routes.
    • Student learning will suffer.

    And the profession will lose something even more important: the human-centered preparation that small colleges provide so well.

    • The teacher shortage will not be solved by legislation alone.
    • It will not be solved by fast-track certification mills.
    • It will not be solved by online mega-universities.
    • It will not be solved by market forces.
    • It will be solved in the classrooms, hallways, and mentoring relationships of the small colleges that still believe in the promise of teaching.

    If we want public schools to remain strong, we must support the institutions that prepare the teachers who keep them alive. Small private colleges aren’t just participants in the teacher pipeline—they are its foundation.

    When these colleges thrive, they produce educators who stay, who care, and who transform communities. That’s not just good for education—it’s essential for American democracy.

    Dean Hoke is Managing Partner of Edu Alliance Group, a higher education consultancy firm. He formerly served as President/CEO of the American Association of University Administrators (AAUA). Dean has worked with higher education institutions worldwide. With decades of experience in higher education leadership, consulting, and institutional strategy, he brings a wealth of knowledge on colleges’ challenges and opportunities. Dean is the Executive Producer and co-host for the podcast series Small College America and a Senior Fellow at the Sagamore Institute based in Indianapolis, Indiana.

    Source link

  • Why Are So Many Smaller Independent Colleges and Universities So Similar and What Does This Mean for Their Futures? – Edu Alliance Journal

    Why Are So Many Smaller Independent Colleges and Universities So Similar and What Does This Mean for Their Futures? – Edu Alliance Journal

    September 8, 2025, by Dr. Chet Haskell: It is well known that many small American private non-profit academic institutions face serious financial pressures. Typically defined as having 3000 or fewer students, more than 170 of these have been forced to close in the past two decades. Numerous others have entered into various mergers or acquisitions, often with well-documented negative impacts on students, faculty, staff, alumni and local communities. Of the more than 1100 such institutions, at least 900 continue to be a risk.

    The basic problems responsible for this trend are also well-known. Most institutions lack significant endowments and are thus almost totally dependent on tuition and fee revenues from enrolled students. Only 60 such small institutions have per student endowments in excess of $200,000. The remainder have far less.

    The only additional potential source of revenue – gifts and donations –is generally neither large nor consistent enough to offset enrollment-related declines. While the occasional donation or bequest in the millions of dollars garners attention, most institutions raise much smaller amounts regularly.

    Enrollment declines are the existential threat to many of these smaller colleges and universities. These declines are also well-documented. There simply will be fewer high school graduates in the US in the coming decade or more. This reality creates a highly competitive environment, especially in regions with many of these institutions.

    Demographic worries are augmented by broad concerns about the cost of higher education and the imputed return on such an investment by students and families. Governmental policies such as limitations on international students or restrictions on immigration further add to the problem. Also, these institutions not only compete with each other for students, but they also compete with colleges and universities of the public sector and a growing number of for-profit entities.

    Most of these 900 or so institutions have high quality programs, often described under the term “liberal arts”. Many are differentiated by a specialization or an emphasis. However, at their core they are very similar. The basic concept of a personal scale four-year undergraduate educational experience provided in a residential campus setting has a long history and is highly valued by many students and faculty alike. These institutions have lengthy, strong histories, loyal alumni and important roles in their local communities.

    The fact is that it is difficult to differentiate among many of these institutions. Not only their scale or their general model of personalized undergraduate education are similar, but many of their basic messages sound the same. A review of the websites of these schools results in striking consistencies of stated “unique” missions, programs, facilities, faculty and even marketing materials.

    Their approaches to financial challenges are also similar. There is considerable competition on price. Most of these institutions discount their formal tuition rates by 50% or more. Initiatives to grow enrollments support an industry of educational consultants whose recommended initiatives are themselves similar and, even if successful, are quickly copied, thus reducing advantages.

    Some have tried to compete by raising money for new, attractive facilities through dipping into limited endowments, borrowing or securing external major gifts. These shiny new buildings – athletic facilities, science centers, student centers – are assumed to provide an edge in student recruitment. In some cases, this works. However, in many others the new facilities do not come with long term maintenance and eventually add to increased on-going institutional expense. The end result is often another demonstration of similarity.

    Some institutions have tried to branch out into selected graduate programs, perhaps based on a strong group of undergraduate faculty. Success is often limited for multiple reasons. Graduate students in commonly introduced professional fields such as business or nursing do not naturally align with an undergraduate in-person academic calendar. Older students, especially those in careers, are reluctant to come to a campus for class twice a week. Even if there is sufficient interest in such a program, it is difficult to increase in scale because of the limits of distance and geography. And most of these institutions lack significant expertise and technology do conduct effective on-line operations.

    Their institutional similarities extend to their governance. Typically, there is a Board of Trustees, all of whom are volunteers, often with heavy alumni representation. These boards generally lack expertise or perspective on the challenges of higher education and thus are dependent on the appointed executive leadership. They often take a short-term perspective and lack strategic foresight that may be most valuable in times of uncertainty and external changes.

    Even when trustees have financial experience from other fields, their common approach to small institutions is to bemoan any lack of enrollments. Most do not make significant personal financial contributions, particularly if they think the institution is struggling to survive. The assumed budget goal is basically a balanced budget and when one does not control revenues, one focuses on the more controllable expense side, trying to balance budgets solely on cuts.  Board members serve because they want to support the institution, but many are risk adverse. For example, a fear of being associated with an institution that might generate possible legal liability for the board member means a first concern usually involves whether there is sufficient insurance.

    While every institution is indeed different in its own way, they also are very similar. What explains this?

    One possible way of explanation is provided by the organizational theorists Walter Powell and Paul DiMaggio who in 1983 (updated in 1991) published a seminal piece on what they called ”institutional isomorphism and collective rationality.” [1]They argued that ”institutions in the same field become more homogenous over time without become more efficient or more successful” and identified three basic reasons for such a tendency.

    Coercive isomorphism – similarities imposed externally on the institutions. In higher education, good examples would be Federal government policies around student financial aid or the requirements of both regional and specialized accreditors. Every institution operates within a web of regulation and financial incentives that impose requirements on all and work to limit innovation.

    Mimetic processes – similarities that arise because of standard responses to uncertainty. Prime examples in higher education are the increasingly common responses to the quest for enrollment growth. As noted, numerous consultants purport to improve enrollments, but the gains typically are limited, as other institutions mimic the same approach. In another example, recent surveys show that almost all institutions expect to be users of artificial intelligence models to promote marketing in the service of admissions, as if this is a “magic wand”. If one institution makes strides in this area, others will follow. The result will be more similarity, not less. It is a bit like the Ukrainian-Russian war, where Ukraine originally had clear advantages using drone technology until that technology was matched by the Russians, leading to a form of stalemate. As DiMaggio and Powell note, ”organizations tend to model themselves after similar organizations in their field that they perceive as more legitimate or successful.”[2]

    Normative pressures – similarities that arise from common “professional” expectations. The authors identify two important aspects of professionalization: the common basis of higher education credentials and the legitimation produced by these credentials and “the growth and elaboration of professional networks.” Examples include common faculty and senior administrator qualification requirements. Another would be so-called “best practices” in support areas like student affairs. “Such mechanisms create a pool of almost interchangeable individuals who occupy similar positions.”[3] Recently, Hollis Robbins pointed out the commonalities in paths to academic leadership positions, likening these to the Soviet nomenklatura process through which a leader progresses in one’s career.[4] Evidence of this is obvious through a cursory review of the qualifications and desired qualities posted in searches for college and university presidents or other senior administrators. Most searches end up looking for and hiring individuals with very similar qualifications and experience.

    The implications of such pressures and processes are several. With common values and similar personnel, “best practices” do not lead to essential changes. Innovation is quickly copied. Indeed, it becomes increasing difficult to differentiate an institution from competitors. Common regulatory structures, declining student pools, increased competition and a lack of resources for investment all combine to enhance similarity over difference. In some sense, it is almost a form of commodification where price does in fact matter, but the “product” basically the same, especially in the minds of the larger population of potential students and families.

    What is to be done?

    Leadership Must Confront Their Institution’s Reality

    Confronting reality has many aspects, but the leaders of every institution must be clear-eyed and unsentimental about where it stands and where it is headed. This is an essential role for boards and executive leadership.

    First and foremost, the mission of the institution must be understood in realistic and practical ways. What is the institution’s purpose and what is required to fulfill that purpose? Institutional mission is central as it should drive an appreciation for the current situation of the institution, provide clarity regarding longer term goals and bringing into focus the necessary means to move forward.

    With clarity of mission must come a full understanding the of institution’s financial situation, its opportunities and the longer term needs required to achieve mission goals.  Building multi-year mission-oriented budgets based on surpluses (positive margins) is key. Sometimes restructuring and cuts are necessary and thus leadership must make sure all faculty and staff have a clear understanding of reality and the strategy for addressing it.

    A clear understanding by all of the marginal results (positive and negative) of major components is also critical. Some elements or units return significant positive margins. Others less so. And some return negative margins, often year after year. Yet, some of these less financially productive elements may be essential to mission and must be balanced or subsidized by other elements. At the end of the day, it is the margin of the entire institution that matters. And, as the saying goes, “no margin, no mission.” However, the opposite is also true. Institutions that are unclear about their mission will be challenged to attract and motivate students, faculty, staff or major donations.

    Every institution must worry about enrollments as the largest source of revenue. Declining enrollments force expense restraints. Every institution must also be concerned about growing enrollments as a key prerequisite of financial stability. Institutions operating on thin or negative margins cannot hope to achieve their mission goals without some form of growth, including having the resources to invest in growth. Without some forms of growth, an institution will either be at risk or will have to make sometimes radical changes in order to continue to pursue mission goals. The only real alternative is to amend the mission and the definition of its success.

    The other important point is that all institutions are subject to unexpected external pressures that they cannot control. Examples would be 9/11, the 2008-09 Great Recession, the COVID pandemic or the advent new government policies, such as those confronting all institutions today. Coping with such events requires having some financial resiliency, strong leadership and creativity.

    Yet, the combination of external pressures and the realities of small-scale institutions operating on thin margins in the face of extensive competition may mean that even the best managed and led organizations will confront existential risk.

    For many institutions, merging or partnering with another institution may be the only realistic path. While there often is reluctance to cede independence to another institution, mergers are hardly new, as consolidation in US higher education is hardly a new phenomenon. There are several hundred examples of mergers, many going back a century or more. Washington and Jefferson College in Pennsylvania in 1865 is the result of such an arrangement, as is Case Western Reserve University in Ohio a century later. In addition to these mergers, hundreds of other institutions have simply closed, including at least 170 in the past twenty years.

    Additionally, may institutions may be placed to take advantage of consortium relationships with other institutions. Again, there are numerous examples of institutions seeking to improve their situations through this form of collaboration. Participating institutions collaborate on such things as sharing costs or providing a wider range of student options, while remaining independent. However, this model, while valuable in many ways, rarely provides major financial advantages except at the margins. And successful consortia require a certain degree of independent sustainability for each member.

    Still others may be able find opportunity in growth through symbiosis. The recent Coalition for the Common Good begun by Antioch and Otterbein universities is an example. Other variants are possible. However, again such middle ground models also assume a basic stability of the members. As stated by Coalition president, John Comerford, “we are looking for a sweet spot of resources. This is not a way to save a school on death’s door. It’s also probably not useful to a school with billions in their endowment. Institutions in the big middle ground both need to look at new business models and likely have some flexibility to invest in them.” This type of model will not work in many cases.

    The point is that many of these small college will continue to be at risk as long as they are tuition dependent within a shrinking pool of potential students and insufficient external support. Fewer and fewer small institutions will be able to survive independently simply because of the financial challenges inherent in their small-scale model.

    Small undergraduate institutions represent the highest ideals of higher education. They are a key source for graduate students and future professors. They are central to their communities. Their strengthening and preservation as a class is an essential element of the American higher education ecosystem with its wide range of institutional models and opportunities. But this does not mean all can survive.

    The leaders of every institution need to have a clear and practical plan for the maintenance of their independence, while also being open to careful consideration of alternatives, exploring potential alternatives well before they face a crisis.

    Notes:

    1. DiMaggio, Paul and Powell, Walter, The Iron Cage Revisited: Institutional Isomorphism and Collective Rationality in Organizational Fields in DiMaggio and Powell, The New Institutionalism in Organizational Analysis, University of Chicago Press, 1991. (pp.63-82)
    2. Ibid. p. 70
    3. Ibid. p. 71
    4. Hollis Robbins, The Higher Ed Nomenklatura? Inside Higher Education, May 12, 2025

    The next essay in this series will examine in some detail the steps in a process that begins with acknowledging the possible need for a partner and hopefully results in an agreement that is implemented.

     Dr. Chet Haskell is Senior Consultant and Higher Education Strategist at Edu Alliance Group. He brings over four decades of leadership and consulting experience in higher education, with a career spanning the U.S., Europe, Latin America, and Asia. He has held senior roles, including President of the Monterey Institute of International Studies and Cogswell Polytechnical College, Dean and de facto Provost at Simmons College, and 13 years of leadership positions at Harvard University and five years in senior administrative roles at the University of Southern California.

    As Provost and Chief Academic Officer of Antioch University, he helped lead the creation of the Coalition for the Common Good, a groundbreaking alliance with Otterbein University. Internationally, Dr. Haskell has advised universities in Mexico, Spain, Holland, and Brazil and served as a consultant to the Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA), the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) and the Council on International Quality Group.
    ‍
    A respected accreditation expert, he has served as a WSCUC peer reviewer and as an international advisor to ANECA (Spain) and ACAP (Madrid). He is a frequent speaker at global conferences and meetings.

     

     

    Source link

  • Higher Education Leadership in Times of Crisis – Edu Alliance Journal

    Higher Education Leadership in Times of Crisis – Edu Alliance Journal

    First in Leadership Series by Barry Ryan, PhD, JD August 11, 2025

    It is hard to think of a time when higher education was swimming in a pool filled with a greater number of shark-like threats than at present.

    Some of these were predictable (in hindsight), some not so much. Let’s set aside blame, however, on either an institutional level or on a more global basis. The vital thing now is for genuine leaders to help chart courses that will lead higher education, not just to mere survival, but to new and meaningful purposes that will benefit this generation and the next.

    When situations are “normal,” we may be tempted to imagine that we need leadership that can keep the legacy intact, turn the crank, not rock the boat. But normal no longer exists, does it?

    I remember a senior university leader, who admonished me, as I began a new presidency: “everything’s going great—just don’t mess it up” (using slightly more colorful language). One year later, seismic changes in higher ed created an unexpected crisis and necessitated major changes in the institution. Almost everything that had contributed to its prior success turned, overnight, into a liability.

    There is, of course, more than one crisis in which higher ed is being buffeted. The sheer number of colleges and universities that have ceased to exist at all, or have been merged to various extents with others, or are currently teetering on the brink, appears in news stories almost every day. The root causes are legion and often woven together: financial shortfalls, a shrinking number of students, reductions in state and federal support, the disappearance of many international students, families, and prospective students increasingly unable to justify the cost of a degree, the “value” of which is seriously questioned. The list goes on.

    Of the three large “types” of higher education in the United States—public (state) colleges and universities, private not-for-profit colleges and universities, and for-profit entities—the vast majority are struggling in meaningful ways.

    If you find yourself in a leadership role in this age of crisis, what are some key things you can do to keep becoming a better leader and more effectively serve your institution and your colleagues? Here are three suggestions that you may find helpful.

    First, don’t panic.

    And even if you do feel panic welling up inside you, do your best to keep it from becoming obvious. Phil Slott, who was involved in the Dry Idea marketing campaign in the 1980s, seems to have coined a relevant phrase: “Never let them see you sweat.” It just stresses you out more and does little to inspire confidence in those who are looking to you for leadership.

    Once you’ve steadied yourself, the next critical realization is that leadership in crisis cannot be solitary work.

    Second, remember every day, you can’t do this alone.

    A 19th-century lawyer by the name of Abe Lincoln is credited with the adage: “A person who represents himself in court has a fool for a client.” That rings true for any leader who tries to do everything and assumes they have sufficient knowledge (or wisdom or experience or insight) to solve every problem on their own. No one does—no matter how experienced.

    So where do you turn for help? The answer is two-fold: internally and externally. You need to draw on both circles and find confidential, experienced, and reliable counsel.

    Choose very carefully with whom you share the issues internally. Depending on the nature of the problem you’re trying to address, success might well be thwarted if there is a lapse of absolute confidentiality. At the starting point of the process, you need to be able to rely on one other person, or perhaps a very small circle, with which you will be able to expand bit by bit as the timeline moves along.

    There are difficult audiences and stakeholders in the life of an academic institution, and ultimately, all must be included in the process of working through a crisis. The sequencing of sharing information and inviting input, though, must be very carefully structured. If you’re a president, oftentimes the first person you seek is a senior member of the administration—a provost, vice president, or someone in a similar position. At times, it could be the chair of the board or a wise and thoughtful alum. But whoever the person(s) may be, the timing of sharing the situation and seeking input for solutions is everything.

    It’s very important not to neglect external assistance as well. It is all but impossible to generate a sufficient perspective on a crisis from only one (your) vantage point, or even from that of your small, trustworthy group. You’re very likely not the first institution to face these problems, and consulting with trusted external leaders can provide not only perspective but also ideas you may not have thought of on your own.

    Some of these leaders may be in academic institutions, but not necessarily. It is always helpful to have relationships with leaders in other professional fields as well, who may be particularly helpful in providing fresh perspectives and ideas. For example, in my own experience, I’ve found such people in leadership of non-profit organizations or boards, key corporate positions, government at various levels, and experienced friends with whom I served long ago, and could provide input on both my institution’s situation and also my own strengths and weaknesses. In addition, external folks don’t have the same emotional investment as someone internal, so the chances of a more neutral observation point are increased significantly.

    There is a temptation—and often a prudent one—to seek external input from lawyers. There are, of course, a fair number of attorneys and firms with expertise in higher education, which can be a plus. Higher education is a very specialized field, and, frankly, most lawyers have a huge knowledge deficit in terms of the operational realities of a college or university. Their tendency is to think, “Well, I know higher ed—after all, I went to college and law school” (or maybe even taught a course or two). Beware the well-intentioned lawyer who does not have directly relevant practice experience.

    This, of course, does not at all preclude seeking competent legal advice for certain aspects of the problems you may be facing. For example, most institutions have or will need counsel in employment matters. Even if not the center of your challenge, these issues will likely arise as part of the need for a solution to your challenges. If it appears you will have to make difficult financial decisions that might impact faculty or staff, you should seek excellent employment counsel much sooner rather than later. With students, Title IX requirements, for example, may dictate the need for specialized counsel, as might certain types of accreditation issues.

    Third, leadership is not “one size fits all.”

    Every leader has different abilities and personalities. Even though many institutions experience similar types of crises, the circumstances of each call for a bespoke solution.

    However, some very important leadership characteristics can increase the probability of success in these situations. In part two, we’ll examine these and how to cultivate them.

    Dr. Barry Ryan invested the first half of his career in higher education in teaching and the second half in administration. During that same timeframe, he pursued a parallel career in law and legal education. He​ served as the Supreme Court Fellow in the chambers of Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist and is a​ member of numerous federal and state bars. He has been appointed as the president of five universities and provost and chief of staff at three others. Among the institutions he served have been state, private non-profit, and private for-profit universities. Included in his academic experience were two terms as a Commissioner of the regional accreditor WASC​ (WSCUC).

    He has been appointed as the president of five universities and provost and chief of staff at three others. Among the institutions he served have been state, private non-profit, and private for-profit universities. Included in his academic experience were two terms as a Commissioner of the regional accreditor WASC​ (WSCUC). Dr. Ryan has led institutions through mergers, acquisitions, and affiliations that have preserved academic​ quality, expanded access, and strengthened long-term viability. His leadership has been marked by​ transparency, shared governance, and a commitment to stakeholder engagement at every stage of these processes.

    He earned his Ph.D. from the University of California, Santa Barbara, his J.D. from the University of​ California, Berkeley, and his Dipl.GB in international business from the University of Oxford.

    Edu Alliance Journal provides expert commentary and practical insights on U.S. and international higher education, focusing on innovation, policy, and institutional growth. Published by Edu Alliance, a consulting firm with offices in the United States and the United Arab Emirates, the Journal reflects the organization’s mission to help colleges, universities, and educational organizations achieve sustainable success through strategic partnerships, market intelligence, and program development.

    Source link

  • Is There a Collaborative Middle Ground Between Mergers and Consortia for the Sustainability of Small Independent Institutions?

    Is There a Collaborative Middle Ground Between Mergers and Consortia for the Sustainability of Small Independent Institutions?

    July 28, 2025, by Dr. Chet Haskell: The headlines are full of uncertainty for American higher education. “Crisis” is a common descriptor. Federal investigations of major institutions are underway. Severe cuts to university research funding have been announced. The elimination of the Department of Education is moving ahead. Revisions to accreditation processes are being floated. Reductions in student support for educational grants and loans are now law. International students are being restricted.

    These uncertainties and pressures affect all higher education, not just targeted elite institutions. In particular, they are likely to exacerbate the fragility of smaller, independent non-profit institutions already under enormous stress. Such institutions, some well-known, others known only locally, will be hard hit particularly hard by the combination of Trump Administration pressures and the developing national demographic decline for traditional-age students.(https://www.highereddive.com/news/decline-high-school-graduates-demographic-cliff-wiche-charts/738281/) These small colleges have been a key element of the American higher education scene, as well as for numerous local communities, for many decades.

    It is widely understood that the vibrancy of American higher education comes, in part, from the diversity of its institutions and educational goals. The rich mixture of American colleges and universities is a strength that many other nations lack. Students have opportunities to start and stop their educations, to change directions and academic goals, to move among different types of institutions.

    Smaller undergraduate colleges play important roles in this non-systemic system. They provide focused educational opportunities for younger adults, where they can build their lives on broad principles. Impressively large percentages of small college graduates go on to graduate education for various professions. Small colleges provide large numbers of graduates who enter PhD programs and eventually enter the professorate.

    There are approximately 1179 accredited private institutions with enrollments of fewer than 3000 students. Of these, 185 have between 3000 and 2000 students. Another 329 have enrollments below 2000 but above 1000. A final 650 institutions have enrollments below 1000. These 1179 institutions students include few wealthy colleges such as Williams, Amherst, Carleton or Pomona, as well as numerous struggling, relatively unknowns.

    A basic problem is one of scale. In the absence of significant endowments or other external support, it is very difficult to manage small institutions in a cost effective manner. Institutions with enrollments below 1000 are particularly challenged in this regard. The fundamental economics of small institutions are always challenging, as most are almost completely dependent on student enrollments, a situation getting worse with the coming decline of traditional college age students. There are limited options available to offset this decline. Renewed attention to student retention is one. Another is adding limited graduate programs. However, both take investment, appropriate faculty and staff capacity and time, all of which are often scarce.

    These institutions have small endowments measured either in total or per student value. Of the 1179. There are only 80 with total endowments in excess of $200 million. While a handful have per student endowments that rival the largest private universities, (Williams, Amherst and Pomona all have per student endowments in excess of $1.8 million), the vast majority have per student endowments in the $40,000 range and many far less.

    Most of these schools have high tuition discount rates, often over 50%, so their net tuition revenue is a fraction of posted expense.  They are all limited by size – economies of scale are difficult to achieve. And most operate in highly competitive markets, where the competition is not only other small schools, but also a range of public institutions.

    So, what is the underendowed, under resourced small college to do?

    The most common initiatives designed to address these sorts of challenges are consortia, collaborative arrangements among institutions designed to increase student options and to share expenses. There are numerous such arrangements, examples being the Colleges of the Fenway in Boston, the Five Colleges of Western Massachusetts, the Washington DC Metropolitan Area Consortium, and the Claremont Colleges in California, among others.

    The particulars of each of these groups differ, but there are commonalities. Most are geographically oriented, seeking to take advantage from being near each other. Typically, these groups want to provide more opportunities for students through allowing cross-registrations, sharing certain academic programs or joint student activities. They usually have arrangements for cost-sharing or cost reductions through shared services  for costs like security services, IT, HR, risk management options, pooled purchasing and the like. In other cases (like the Claremont Consortium) they may share libraries or student athletic facilities. Done well, these arrangements can indeed reduce costs while also attracting potential students through wider access to academic options.

    However, it is unlikely that such initiatives, no matter how successful, can fundamentally change the basic financial situation of an independent small college. Such shared services savings are necessary and useful, but usually not sufficient to offset the basic enrollment challenge. The financial impact of most consortia is at the margins.

    Furthermore, participating institutions have to be on a solid enough financial basis to take part in the first place. Indeed, a consortium like Claremont is based on financial strength. Two of the members have endowments in excess of $1.2 billion (Pomona’s is $2.8 billion.) The endowments of the others range from a low of $67 million (Keck Graduate with 617 students) to Scripps with $460 million for 1100 students.) The Consortium is of clear value to its members, but none of these institutions is on the brink of failure. Rather, all have strong reputations, a fact that provides another important enrollment advantage.

    One important factor in these consortia arrangements is that the participating institutions do not have to give up their independence or modify their missions. Their finances, alumni and accreditation are separate.  And while the nature of the arrangement indicates certain levels of compromise and collaboration, their governance remains basically unchanged with independent fiduciary boards.

    At the other end of the spectrum are two radically different situations. One is merging with or being acquired by another institution. Prep Scholar counts 33 such events since 2015. (https://blog.prepscholar.com/permanently-closed-colleges-list). Lacking the resources for financial sustainability, many colleges have had no choice but to take such steps.

    Merging or being acquired by a financially stronger institution has many advantages. Faculty and staff jobs may be protected. Students can continue with their studies. The institution being acquired may be able to provide continuity in some fashion within the care of the new owner. Endowed funds may continue. The institution’s name may continue as part of an “institute” or “center” within the new owner’s structure. Alumni records can be maintained. Real estate can be transferred. Debts may be paid off and so forth. There are multiple examples of the acquiring institution doing everything possible along these lines.

    But some things end. Independent governance and accreditation cease as those functions are subsumed by the acquiring institution. Administrative and admissions staffs are integrated and some programs, people and activities are shed. Operational leadership changes. And over time, what was once a beloved independent institution may well fade away.

    The second situation is, bluntly, oblivion. While there are cases of loyal alumni trying to keep an institution alive with new funding, the landscape is replete with institutions that have failed to be financially sustainable.https://www.insidehighered.com/news/governance/executive-leadership/2025/03/27/how-sweet-briar-college-defied-odds-closure. At least 170 smaller institutions have closed in the past two decades. Significantly, it looks like the rate of closure is increasing, in part because of pressures experienced during the pandemic and in part because of continuing enrollment declines.(https://www.highereddive.com/news/how-many-colleges-and-universities-have-closed-since-2016/539379/)

    The end of a college is a very sad thing for all involved and, indeed, for society in general. Often a college is an anchor institution in a small community and the loss is felt widely. The closure of a college is akin to the closure of a local factory. As Dean Hoke and others have noted, this is a particular problem for rural communities.

    Are there other possible avenues, something between a consortium and a merger or outright closure?

    One relatively new model has been organized by two quite different independent institutions, Otterbein University and Antioch University, that came together in 2022 to create the Coalition for the Common Good. Designed to be more than a simple bilateral partnership, the vision of the Coalition is eventually to include several institutions in different locations linked by a common mission and the capacity to grow collective enrollments.

    At its core, the Coalition is based on academic symbiosis. Otterbein is a good example of the high-quality traditional undergraduate residential liberal arts institution. It has been well-run and has modest financial resources. Facing the demographic challenges noted earlier (in a state like Ohio that boasts dozens of such institutions), it developed a set of well-regarded graduate programs, notably in nursing and health-related fields, along with locally based teacher education programs and an MBA. However, despite modest success, they faced the limitations of adult programs largely offered in an on-campus model. Regardless of quality, they lacked the capacity to expand such programs beyond Central Ohio.

    Antioch University, originally based in Ohio, had evolved over the past 40 years into a more national institution with locations in California, Washington State and New Hampshire offering a set of graduate professional programs to older adults mostly through distance modalities in hybrid or low-residency forms. Antioch, however, was hampered by limited resources including a very small endowment. It had demonstrated the capacity to offer new programs in different areas and fields but lacked the funds necessary for investment to do so.

    Within the Coalition, the fundamental arrangement is for Antioch to take over Otterbein’s graduate programs and, with Otterbein financial support, to expand them in other parts of the country. The goal is significant aggregate enrollment growth and sharing of new revenues. While they plan a shared services operation to improve efficiencies and organizational effectiveness, their primary objective is growth. Antioch seeks to build on Otterbein’s successes, particularly with nursing programs. It already has considerable experience in managing academic programs at a distance, a fact that will be central as it develops the Otterbein nursing and health care programs in a new Antioch Graduate School of Nursing and Health Professions.

    It is assumed that additional new members of the Coalition will resemble Otterbein in form, thus further increasing opportunities for growth through enhanced reach and greater scale. New members in other geographic locations will provide additional opportunities for expansion. One early success of the Coalition has been the capacity to offer existing Antioch programs in Central Ohio, including joint partnerships with local organizations, health care and educational systems. Crucially, both institutions remain separately accredited with separate governance and leadership under a Coalition joint  “umbrella” structure.

    This is not to assert that this model would work for many other institutions. First, many schools with limited graduate programs will be reluctant to “give up” some or all these programs to another partner in the same fashion as Otterbein has with Antioch. Others may not fit geographically, being too remote for expansion of existing programs. Still others may not wish to join a group with an avowed social justice mission.  Finally, as with some consortia, the Coalition arrangement assumes a certain degree of institutional financial stability – it cannot work for institutions on the brink of financial disaster, lest the weakest institution drag down the others.

    Are there other organizational variants that are more integrated than consortia, but allow the retention of their independence in ways impossible in a merger or acquisition model? What can be learned from the Coalition initiative that might help others? How might such middle-ground collaboration models be encouraged and supported?

    How can philanthropy help?

    This is an opportunity for the segments of the philanthropic world to consider possible new initiatives to support the small college elements of the education sector. While there will always be efforts to gain foundation support for individual colleges, there will never be enough money to buttress even a small portion of deserving institutions that face the financial troubles discussed above

    Philanthropy should take a sectoral perspective. One key goal should be to find ways to support  smaller institutions in general. Instead of focusing on gifts to particular institutions, those interested in supporting higher education should look at the multiple opportunities for forms of collaborative or collective action. Central to this effort should be exploration of ways of supporting diverse collaborative initiatives. One example would be to provide sufficient backing to a struggling HBCU or women’s college to enable it to be sufficiently stable to participate in a multi-institutional partnership.

    As noted, institutional consortia are well established as one avenue for such collaboration. Consortia have existed for many years. There are consortia-based associations that encourage and support consortia efforts. However, every consortium is unique in its own ways, as participating institutions have crafted a specific initiative of a general model to meet their particular situations and need. Consortia can be important structures for many institutions and should be encouraged.

    But there is a large middle ground between consortia arrangements and mergers and acquisitions. The Coalition for the Common Good is but one such arrangement and it is still in its early stages. What has been learned from the experience thus far that might be of use to other institutions and groups? How might this middle ground be explored further for the benefit of other institutions?

    One thing learned from the Coalition is the complexity of developing a new model for collective action.  Antioch and Otterbein separately pursued individual explorations of options for two or more years before determining that their partnership together should move forward. It then took a full year to get to the point of announcing their plans and another year to complete negotiations and sign completed legal documents and to obtain the necessary accreditor, regulator and Department of Education approvals. The actual implementation of their plans is still in a relatively early stage. In short, it takes time.

    It also takes tremendous effort by leadership on both sides, as they must work closely together while continuing to address the daily challenges of their separate institutions. Everyone ends up with at least two major jobs. Communication is vital. Boards must continue to be supportive. The engagement of faculty and staff takes time and can be costly.

    What is often referred to as “fit” – the melding of cultures and attitudes at both the institutional and individual levels – is essential. People must be able to work together for shared goals. The burdens of accreditation, while necessary, are time-consuming and multifaceted. There are many things that can go wrong. Indeed, there are examples of planned and announced mergers or collaborations that fall apart before completion.

    Philanthropic institutions could support this work in numerous ways, first for specific initiatives and then for the sector, by providing funding and expertise to facilitate new forms of coalitions. These could include:

    • Providing financial support for the collaborative entity. While participating institutions eventually share the costs of creating the new arrangement, modest dedicated support funding could be immensely useful for mitigating the impact of legal expenses, due diligence requirements, initial management of shared efforts and expanded websites.
    • Providing support for expert advice. The leaders of two institutions seeking partnership need objective counsel on matters financial, legal, organizational, accreditation and more. Provision of expertise for distance education models is often a high priority, since many small colleges have limited experience with these.
    • Funding research. There are multiple opportunities for research and its dissemination. What works? What does not? How can lessons learned by disseminated?
    • Supporting communication through publications, workshops, conferences and other venues.
    • Developing training workshops for boards, leadership, staff and faculty in institutions considering collaborations.
    • Crafting a series of institutional incentives through seed grant awards to provide support for institutions just beginning to consider these options.
    • These types of initiatives might be separate, or they might be clustered into a national center to support and promote collaboration.

    These and other ideas could be most helpful to many institutions exploring collaboration. Above all, it is important to undertake such explorations before it is too late, before the financial situation becomes so dire that there are few, if any, choices.

    Conclusions

    This middle ground is not a panacea. The harsh reality is that not all institutions can be saved. It takes a certain degree of stability and a sufficient financial base to even consider consortia or middle ground arrangements like the Coalition for the Common Good. Merging with or being acquired by stronger institutions is not a worst-case scenario – there are often plenty of reasons, not just financial, that this form of change makes great sense for a smaller, weaker institution.

    It is also important for almost all institutions, even those with significant endowment resources, to be thinking about possible options. The stronger the institution, the stronger the resistance to such perspectives is likely to be. There are examples of wealthy undergraduate institutions with $1 billion endowments that are losing significant sums annually in their operating budgets. Such endowments often act like a giant pillow, absorbing the institutional challenges and preventing boards and leaders from facing difficult decisions until it may be too late. Every board should be considering possible future options.

    In the face of likely government rollbacks of support, the ongoing demographic challenges for smaller institutions and the general uncertainties in some circle about the importance of higher education itself, independent private higher education must be more creative and assertive about its future. Also, it is essential to remember that the existential financial challenges facing these institutions predate the current Presidential Administration and certainly will remain once it has passed into history.

    Just trying to compete more effectively for enrollments will not be sufficient. Neither will simply reducing expense budgets. New collaborative models are needed. Consortia have roles to play. The example of the Coalition for the Common Good may show new directions forward. Anyone who supports the diversity of American higher education institutions should work to find new ways of assuring financial stability while adhering to academic principles and core missions.

    Chet Haskell is an independent higher education consultant. Most recently, he was Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and University Provost at Antioch University and Vice President for Graduate Programs of the Coalition for the Common Good.

    Source link

  • Conversations on the Future and Impact of Small Colleges – Edu Alliance Journal

    Conversations on the Future and Impact of Small Colleges – Edu Alliance Journal

    Small colleges have long played a significant role in shaping American higher education. They may not make national headlines every day, but their impact on students, communities, and the broader landscape of learning is undeniable. That’s why Kent Barnds and I, Dean Hoke, created Small College America. Its mission is to present critical discussions at the forefront by interviewing small college higher education leaders, policy experts, and innovators. The podcast delves into the evolving role of small colleges, their economic impact, innovative strategies for sustainability, and how they can continue to provide a highly personalized educational experience.

    Each episode explores the distinctiveness of small colleges—through conversations with presidents, provosts, foundation leaders, and changemakers who are deeply engaged in the work of shaping the future. We focus on the real issues small colleges face—from enrollment shifts and financial pressures to mission clarity, leadership, and collaborative innovation.

    Why is now the perfect time for this podcast? Higher education faces unprecedented challenges, and small colleges, with their adaptability and personalized approaches, offer valuable lessons and innovative solutions critical to the broader education landscape.

    Our most recent episodes include:

    • Wendy Sherman Heckler and Chet Haskell – From Otterbein University and Antioch University, respectively these two leaders discuss their groundbreaking collaboration known as the Coalition for the Common Good. It’s a bold new model for partnership between mission-driven institutions focused on shared values and long-term sustainability.
    • Eric Lindberg—Executive Director of the Austin E. Knowlton Foundation in Cincinnati, Ohio, shares insights into the Foundation’s commitment to supporting small colleges, reflects on his own liberal arts experience, and outlines how strategic philanthropy can strengthen institutional resilience.
    • Dr. Paaige Turner, Provost and Executive Vice President at Aurora University discusses her transition into the role after serving as Dean at Ball State University. She brings a fresh perspective on leadership, regional relevance, and the evolving communication needs of today’s students.

    Upcoming Guests:

    We’re excited to welcome several new voices to the podcast in upcoming episodes:

    • Charles Kim, retired Managing Director at Kaufman Hall and former head of its Higher Education division, now serves on the boards of Augustana College and Westminster College.
    • Scott Wiegandt, Director of Athletics at Bellarmine University, who helped lead the university’s move from NCAA Division II to Division I.
    • Karin Fischer, senior writer for The Chronicle of Higher Education and author of the Latitudes newsletter, brings deep insight into the global and domestic challenges facing small colleges.
    • Steve Bahls, President Emeritus of Augustana College and national expert on shared governance, discusses how collaboration can lead to institutional agility and long-term success.
    • Matthew Ward, Vice President of Enrollment Management at California Lutheran University.
    • Liz Nino, Executive Director of International Enrollment at Augustana College.
    • Dr. Marco Clark, President of Holy Cross College at Notre Dame, Indiana.

    Whether you’re a small college president, a prospective student, an alum, or simply someone passionate about the future of higher education, we invite you to join us. Each episode of Small College America is a chance to learn, reflect, and engage with the people who are shaping this vital sector.

    Subscribe on your favorite podcast platform or listen directly at https://www.podpage.com/small-college-america/. We hope you’ll tune in. If there’s a story or college you think we should feature, let us know.

    Small colleges are changing higher education—be part of the conversation.

    Dean Hoke is Managing Partner of Edu Alliance Group, a higher education consultancy, and a Senior Fellow with the Sagamore Institute. He formerly served as President/CEO of the American Association of University Administrators (AAUA). With decades of experience in higher education leadership, consulting, and institutional strategy, he brings a wealth of knowledge on small colleges’ challenges and opportunities. Dean, along with Kent Barnds, is a co-host for the podcast series Small College America. 

    Source link

  • Alice Lloyd College – Edu Alliance Journal

    Alice Lloyd College – Edu Alliance Journal

    March 24, 2025, by Dean Hoke: Each small college has something special about it. Alice Lloyd College in Pippa Passes, Kentucky, was founded by Alice Spencer Geddes Lloyd and June Buchanan. They established the school in 1923 with minimal funds to provide affordable, quality education for Appalachian students facing economic hardship and limited educational opportunities. Their pioneering vision continues today, empowering students to become leaders dedicated to serving their Appalachian communities. This profile of Alice Lloyd College ​is the seventh in a series presenting small colleges throughout the United States.

    Background

    Established in 1923, Alice Lloyd College (ALC) is a private liberal arts college located in Pippa Passes, Kentucky, in the heart of Appalachia. The campus occupies approximately 175 acres in a picturesque mountain valley, offering an idyllic rural setting. Alice Spencer Geddes Lloyd (1876 – 1962) and her co-founder June Buchanan (1887 – 1988)  were the co-founders and worked without pay on both education and fundraising for the college.

    The school was created to provide post-secondary educational opportunities to serve students from Appalachia; the college remains steadfastly committed to its original mission of providing affordable, quality education, especially to students from Kentucky’s Appalachian region. It became a bachelor’s degree-granting institution in the early 1980s. Alice Lloyd College serves almost exclusively a 108-county Central Appalachian service area. Tuition is guaranteed to full-time students residing in the service area.

    Alice Lloyd College remains dependent on the private support of the American free-enterprise system for over half of its revenue sources.

    Curricula

    Alice Lloyd College offers bachelor’s degrees across numerous academic fields, including Biological Sciences, Education, English, History, Sociology, Business Administration, and Criminal Justice. Education remains a cornerstone of ALC, reflecting its historic mission, with notable concentrations in Elementary Education, Secondary Education, and Special Education.

    ALC’s distinctive curriculum model is designed around leadership education and character development, which are integral to the college’s foundational philosophy. Alice Lloyd’s Gatton Winston Scholars Program (formerly The Caney Scholars Program) financially supports ALC graduates seeking advanced degrees. It is the only program of its kind in the nation. Applicants must have high academic standards, be of strong character, and show potential for leadership. The College’s “Caney Scholars” program emphasizes leadership, community service, and personal responsibility, complementing traditional liberal arts education.

    Strengths

    • Tuition Guarantee and Financial Aid: Alice Lloyd College offers free tuition for full-time students residing within its designated service area, making higher education accessible to economically disadvantaged students in Appalachia. This tuition-guarantee policy, funded through endowment revenues and private donations, covers full tuition for eligible students.
    • Work-Study Program: Uniquely, all full-time students participate in a mandatory work-study program. This program requires them to contribute labor weekly to campus operations, fostering a strong work ethic, practical experience, and reduced operating costs for the institution. Only seven colleges in the US have such a program.
    • High Graduate Success Rates: Nearly 95% of Alice Lloyd graduates secure employment or acceptance to graduate programs within six months of graduation, demonstrating the effectiveness of the College’s rigorous academic and character development programs.
    • Leadership and Character Development: A cornerstone of Alice Lloyd College’s educational experience is the emphasis on developing leaders through service learning and character education, which external evaluators consistently recognize as a defining institutional strength.

    Weaknesses

    • Alice Lloyd College’s student retention and six-year graduation rate is below both national and regional averages for private colleges.  
    • Financial Dependency on Donations: Alice Lloyd College operates tuition-free for eligible students from its service region, placing considerable reliance on donations, grants, and endowment income. This dependence can pose financial stability risks if philanthropic trends shift negatively.
    • Rural Isolation: The College’s isolated location, while picturesque, can deter students seeking urban experiences or greater proximity to metropolitan opportunities, limiting the pool of prospective students to those primarily interested in a rural collegiate experience.

    Economic Impact

    Alice Lloyd College significantly impacts the economy and social infrastructure of eastern Kentucky. Alice Lloyd College significantly contributes to the local and regional economy, generating $33 million in total economic impact for the Fiscal Year 2021-2022, according to a recent study commissioned by the Association of Independent Kentucky Colleges and Universities. According to Alice Lloyd College President Jim Stepp,  “Today, 83% of our alumni live, work, and serve in these mountains and are fulfilling our founders’ vision. Additionally, the college frequently engages in community initiatives, supporting local economic and educational development.

    Enrollment

    Enrollment at Alice Lloyd College remains stable between 550 and 600, primarily from Appalachia. However, recent years have seen an uptick in applications from outside the immediate region due to increased awareness of its distinctive tuition-free and work-study models.  Key points:

    • The acceptance rate in Fall 2023 is 86%—source: National Center for Education Statistics.
    • 48% of graduates are first-generation, 4-year college graduates.
    • 98% of their students come from the 108-county Appalachia Region.

    Graduation and Retention Rates

    Source: Alice Lloyd College Student Achievement Report

    The graduation and retention rates for private colleges are below both national and regional averages. The National Student Clearinghouse Research Center reports that private nonprofit institutions have an average six-year graduation rate of 68%. In Kentucky, the average six-year graduation rate for private colleges is approximately 52.5%. For freshman-to-sophomore retention, the national average is 75%, and Kentucky is about 79%.

    Alice Lloyd College’s graduation and retention rates reflect its explicit mission to serve Appalachian students facing significant socioeconomic, geographic, educational, and cultural barriers. Many students are first-generation, with limited financial resources and weaker academic preparation. The institution’s rural location limits access to employment, internships, and support services common in urban areas. Additionally, strong family obligations in Appalachian culture can disrupt students’ academic progress. The college’s pronounced commitment to educating high-risk students partially accounts for lower retention and graduation rates relative to national and regional averages for private nonprofit colleges.

    Degrees Awarded by Major

    In 2022- 2023, Alice Lloyd College conferred degrees as follows: 92 seniors graduated. In the Class of 2022, 50% are working (all in Appalachia), 45% are in graduate or professional school, 2% are in the military, and 3% are unemployed 6 months after graduation.

    Alumni

    Alice Lloyd College boasts an alumni network committed to community service, leadership, and regional development, with graduates frequently occupying influential positions in education, healthcare, business, and public service within Appalachia.  According to LinkedIn, which has 1,169 alums registered, of which 704 live in Kentucky.

    Notable alumni include:

    • Carl Perkins ( attended in the early 1930s) House of Representatives 1949 – 1984 Known for his advocacy of higher education, including the Carl D. Perkins Career and Technical Education Act, which focuses on improving career and technical education programs
    • Dr. Clyde Thornsberry (39) Centers for Disease Control, where he gained a national and international reputation as a scientist and expert in several fields, including microbiology and infectious diseases.
    • Dr. Warren Grady Stumbo (65) is a Distinguished physician and public servant from Eastern Kentucky.
    • Preston Spradlin (09) Head Basketball Coach James Madison University

    Endowment and Financial Standing

    Alice Lloyd College maintains a modest yet healthy endowment, valued around $60 – $70 million. Financial stability remains reliant mainly on consistent fundraising efforts and prudent asset management. Forbes 2023 Financial Health Evaluation gives a GPA of 3.463 out of 4.5 and a grade of A-. This reflects Alice Lloyd College’s fiscal responsibility, with continued positive ratings from financial health assessments.

    Why is Alice Lloyd Important?

    • Strong Regional Commitment: The college addresses Appalachian educational disparities and actively contributes to the region’s long-term economic and social well-being.
    • Providing Tuition-Free Education: ALC significantly reduces financial barriers for Appalachian students, enabling higher education access for underserved populations.
    • Community Development: The college nurtures local economic and social growth by educating regional students who return as impactful leaders.
    • Innovative Work-Study Model: ALC’s mandatory Student Work Program teaches graduates practical workplace skills and instills a strong work ethic.

    Alice Lloyd College is a unique school that fulfills its mission to educate mountain people for positions of leadership and service to the Appalachian region. 98% of its students come from the region, and 83% of its alumni return to live, work, and serve in the Appalachian region.

    Dean Hoke is Managing Partner of Edu Alliance Group, a higher education consultancy, and a Senior Fellow with the Sagamore Institute. He formerly served as President/CEO of the American Association of University Administrators (AAUA). With decades of experience in higher education leadership, consulting, and institutional strategy, he brings a wealth of knowledge on small colleges’ challenges and opportunities. Dean, along with Kent Barnds, are co-hosts for the podcast series Small College America. 

    Source link

  • Small College America – Profile College of Wooster – Edu Alliance Journal

    Small College America – Profile College of Wooster – Edu Alliance Journal

    March 3, 2025, by Dean Hoke: This profile of the College of Wooster is the fourth in a series presenting small colleges throughout the United States.

    Background

    The College of Wooster, founded in 1866, is a private liberal arts institution located in Wooster, Ohio. Known for its commitment to mentored undergraduate research, Wooster offers a comprehensive liberal arts education in a residential setting. The college enrolls approximately 1,800 students representing diverse backgrounds from 47 U.S. states and 76 countries. The student-to-faculty ratio is 11:1, ensuring personalized attention and mentorship. For the 2022-2023 academic year, the total cost of attendance, including tuition, fees, room, and board, is $71,000. Notably, more than 85% of students receive financial aid, with an average award of $50,000.

    Curricula

    Wooster offers over 50 academic programs in the sciences, humanities, social sciences, and arts. A distinctive feature of the Wooster experience is the Independent Study program. In this program, students engage in a year-long research project under faculty mentorship, culminating in a thesis or creative work. This program fosters critical thinking, problem-solving, and effective communication skills.

    Strengths

    • Mentored Research: The Independent Study program exemplifies Wooster’s dedication to undergraduate research. It provides students with hands-on experience in their chosen fields.
    • Diverse Community: With 27% U.S. students of color and 14% international students, Wooster boasts a vibrant and inclusive campus environment.
    • High Graduate Success Rate: Within six months of graduation, 96% of alums are employed or enrolled in graduate programs, with 94% accepted into their top-choice graduate schools.

    Weaknesses

    • Cost of Attendance: Despite substantial financial aid offerings, the total cost may be a barrier for some prospective students.
    • Limited Graduate Programs: As an institution focused primarily on undergraduate education, Wooster offers limited opportunities for postgraduate studies.

    Economic Impact

    The College of Wooster significantly contributes to the local economy of Wooster, Ohio, which has a population of 27,012 and is the county seat of Wayne County, which has a population of 116,500. The college is a major employer in the region and attracts students, faculty, and visitors, bolstering local businesses and services. Additionally, cultural and academic events hosted by the college enrich the community’s cultural landscape. According to LeadIQ, approximately 1,200 people are employed by the college, and its annual operating expenses are over $88 million.

    LinkedIn data shows that the college has nearly 17,000 alums, 4,700 of whom reside in Ohio and 1,120 in the Wooster, Ohio, area.

    Enrollment Trends

    Over the past decade, Wooster’s enrollment has slightly declined, from 2,100 to 1875 over a 10-year period. The student base is 35% in-state and 65% out-of-state and international. The college consistently attracts a diverse student body from across the United States and around the world. 98% of the student population lives in campus housing, and the age range is 18-24. Wooster does not have any graduate degree programs.

    Degrees Awarded by Major

    In the most recent report, 18 majors had graduates Wooster Degrees Conferred.

    Alumni

    Employment and or attending graduate school is very high. In the class of 2023, 97% of Wooster graduates secured employment or enrolled in graduate programs within six months post-graduation. 78% entered the workforce, 15% are attending graduate or professional school, 4% were applying for graduate school, and only 3% are seeking employment. Also, an average over the past three years shows that 91% of the Wooster graduates were accepted into their top choice graduate school. (Source: College of Wooster Destination Report, Class of 2023)

    LinkedIn data shows the college has nearly 17,000 alumni. 28% live in Ohio, 18% in the greater Cleveland area, and 7% in the city of Wooster.

    Notable Alumni:

    • J.C. Chandor ‘96 Acclaimed filmmaker known for works such as “Margin Call” and “All Is Lost.” Nominated for the Academy Awards in 2011
    • Laurie Kosanovich ’94, general counsel for the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame
    • John Dean ’61 Former White House Counsel for President Richard Nixon, notable for his role in the Watergate scandal.
    • Duncan Jones, ‘95, award-winning filmmaker director of Source Code and Moon. He is the son of David Bowie.
    • Jennifer Haverkamp ’79, Professor of Practice Gerald R Ford School of Public Policy, the University of Michigan
    • Donald Kohn ’64, former vice chairman of the Federal Reserve
    • Dr. Sangram Sisodia ’77, The Department of Neurobiology, specializing in Alzheimer’s disease. University of Chicago.

    Endowment and Financial Standing

    As of June 30, 2023, The College of Wooster’s endowment stands at $395.5 million, reflecting prudent financial management and generous alum support. This endowment supports scholarships, faculty positions, and various institutional initiatives, ensuring the college’s long-term financial health.  According to the 2023 Forbes financial report, The College of Wooster is rated 2.421 and a B- grade. Wooster has maintained a stable financial position. 

    Why is The College of Wooster Important?

    1. Commitment to Mentored Undergraduate Research – The College of Wooster is distinguished for its dedication to undergraduate research, providing students with personalized mentorship that fosters inquiry, intellectual growth, and academic excellence.
    2. Independent Study Program – A hallmark of Wooster’s education, the year-long Independent Study program requires every student to complete a rigorous research project, developing critical thinking, effective communication, and independent judgment skills.
    3. Diverse and Inclusive Community – Wooster attracts students from all 50 states and over 60 countries, creating a dynamic and inclusive environment where cross-cultural dialogue and global perspectives thrive.
    4. Strong Financial Foundation –Wooster maintains financial stability through prudent management and strategic investments, ensuring long-term institutional sustainability.
    5. Economic Impact – The College plays a vital role in the local economy, contributing to job creation, community development, and regional growth through its sustained presence and financial stewardship.
    6. Distinguished Alumni Network – Wooster graduates excel in various fields, including academia, business, public service, and the arts. The College’s alumni include Nobel laureates, influential public figures, and innovators who make significant contributions to society.

    This structured format highlights The College of Wooster’s key strengths, reinforcing its importance as a leading liberal arts institution.

    Dean Hoke is Managing Partner of Edu Alliance Group, a higher education consultancy, and formerly served as President/CEO of the American Association of University Administrators (AAUA). With decades of experience in higher education leadership, consulting, and institutional strategy, he brings a wealth of knowledge on small colleges’ challenges and opportunities. Dean, along with Kent Barnds, are co-hosts for the podcast series Small College America. Season two begins on March 11, 2025.

    Source link

  • Hendrix College – Edu Alliance Journal

    Hendrix College – Edu Alliance Journal

    February 23, 2025, by Dean Hoke: This profile of Hendrix College is the third in a series presenting small colleges throughout the United States.

    Background

    Hendrix College, founded in 1876, is a private liberal arts institution located in Conway, Arkansas. Its 175-acre campus has been affiliated with the United Methodist Church since 1884 and is nationally recognized for its academic excellence, student engagement, and commitment to innovation. Dr. Karen K. Petersen, the 13th President of Hendrix College, began her tenure in June 2023.

    The student-to-faculty ratio is 11:1, fostering close interactions between students and the 91 full-time faculty members, 89% of whom hold a Ph.D. or equivalent degree. For the 2025-2026 academic year, the total cost of attendance, including tuition, fees, room, and board, is $55,080. The average net price, according to the College Board, is $22,626. More than 90% of students live in college-owned housing.

    Curricula

    Hendrix offers 30 majors and 33 minors, encompassing a wide range of disciplines in the arts, humanities, sciences, and social sciences. Notable programs include Psychology, Health Science, Biology, Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Computer Science, and Economics & Business. A cornerstone of the Hendrix educational experience is the Odyssey Program, which encourages students to engage in hands-on learning through projects, internships, and global experiences, thereby fostering both personal and academic growth.

    Strengths

    • Engaged Learning: The Odyssey Program exemplifies Hendrix’s dedication to experiential learning, providing students with opportunities to apply classroom knowledge in real-world contexts.
    • High Graduation Rate: The four-year graduation rate stands at 67.3%, with 85% of 2022 graduates completing their degrees within four years.
    • Post-Graduation Success: About one-third of graduates pursue advanced studies immediately, with the majority gaining acceptance into graduate or professional programs before graduation.

    Weaknesses

    • Cost of Attendance: The total direct cost for the 2025-2026 academic year is $55,080, which may pose a financial challenge for some students. However, Hendrix offers merit scholarships ranging from $13,000 to $24,000 and meets a significant portion of demonstrated financial need.
    • International Enrollment Challenges: Hendrix has less than a handful of international students compared to the 5-6% national average.
    • Limited Graduate Programs: While Hendrix provides a Master of Arts in Accounting, its primary focus is on undergraduate education.

    Economic Impact

    Situated in Conway, Arkansas, a city with a population of approximately 66,000 and part of the Little Rock metropolitan area, Hendrix College contributes significantly to the local economy. In a report by the Conway city government, they state: “Over 100 years ago, Conway made the strategic decision to pursue institutions of higher learning as a means of growing the Conway economy. That choice has paid countless dividends ever since. As the colleges have grown, so has their economic impact. Perhaps more importantly, over time, they have laid the foundation for Conway’s modern workforce.”

    The presence of Hendrix College, the University of Central Arkansas, and Central Baptist College is, without a doubt, the reason Conway has such a remarkably young (median age 27.3) and educated (almost 40 percent with at least a bachelor’s degree) population. Those two qualities stand out nationally as the city competes for jobs in today’s economy. The result is a regional economy that has been recognized as one of the most diverse in the nation. Conway is among the nation’s top 20 percent of fastest growing cities with populations over 50,000.

    Enrollment Trends

    As of Fall 2023, Hendrix College has enrolled 1,120 students from 39 states and 17 countries. The student population is evenly split between male and female students, and more than 90% reside in college-owned housing, including residence halls, houses, and apartments. Approximately 44% of students are from Arkansas, while 56% come from out of state.

    Like many private colleges, Hendrix has experienced a slow, steady enrollment decline of 23% over the past decade

    Degrees Awarded by Major

    In the 2023-2024 academic year, Hendrix College awarded 227 Bachelor of Arts degrees in 28 different majors and eight Master of Arts degrees in Accounting.

    Alumni

    LinkedIn data shows that the college has nearly 9,000 alums. 60% live outside of Arkansas, 3,575 reside in Arkansas, 2,600 in the Little Rock Region, and 851 in the Conway area.

    Graduation Rates are 67.3% in four years and 68.5% in six years. Approximately 75% of graduates who apply to medical or dental school are accepted, and the law school acceptance rate is 78%.

    Notable Alumni:

    Dr. Margaret Pittman (Class of 1923): A pioneering bacteriologist, Dr. Pittman was the first woman to lead a National Institutes of Health (NIH) laboratory. Her groundbreaking research on vaccines for diseases such as typhoid, cholera, and whooping cough has had a lasting impact on public health.

    Craig Leipold (Class of 1974): A prominent businessman best known as the owner of the National Hockey League’s (NHL) Minnesota Wild.

    Douglas A. Blackmon (Class of 1986): A journalist and author, Blackmon won the Pulitzer Prize for his book “Slavery by Another Name,” which explores the re-enslavement of Black Americans from the Civil War to World War II.

    Trenton Lee Stewart (Class of 1992): An author best known for the “Mysterious Benedict Society” series, Stewart’s work has captivated readers worldwide.

    Dr. Arthur Thomason (Class of 1997): Working at NASA’s Johnson Space Center with Barrios Technology, Dr. Thomason is an Extravehicular Activities (a.k.a. space walk) flight controller and instructor for NASA. 

    Ashlie Atkinson (Class of 2001): An actress recognized for her work in film, television, and theater, Atkinson has appeared in productions like BlacKkKlansman, The Gilded Age, and Mr. Robot.”

    Endowment and Financial Standing

    As of June 30, 2024, Hendrix College’s endowment stands at $206 million, bolstered by a successful $150 million fundraising campaign. The campaign, titled A Time to Lead, added $84 million to its endowment. These funds support scholarships, faculty positions, and institutional initiatives.

    Hendrix holds a 2.705 rating and a B- grade in the 2023 Forbes financial report.

    Why Hendrix Remains Relevant

    Hendrix College stands out in the following areas:

    1. Academic Excellence: Known for its strong liberal arts curriculum, Hendrix is frequently ranked among the top liberal arts colleges in the U.S., reflecting its strong academic programs, student satisfaction, and overall institutional quality.
    2. Odyssey Program: Hendrix stands out for its Odyssey Program, which emphasizes hands-on learning through internships, research, service, and global experiences, making education more experiential and practical.
    3. Economic Impact: Located in Conway, Arkansas, Hendrix contributes significantly to the local economy through employment, student spending, and cultural enrichment.
    4. Graduate Success: Hendrix has a strong track record of graduate success, underscoring its role in shaping well-rounded individuals equipped for personal and professional achievements. They have graduates who have excelled in various fields, including writing, film/arts, sciences, and business, adding to the institution’s prestige and influence.
    5. Endowment Growth: The college’s stable and growing endowment supports scholarships, faculty development, and campus improvements, ensuring long-term sustainability and competitiveness.

    With its commitment to liberal arts education, hands-on learning, and student success, Hendrix College remains a vital institution in higher education.

    Dean Hoke is Managing Partner of Edu Alliance Group, a higher education consultancy, and formerly served as President/CEO of the American Association of University Administrators (AAUA). With decades of experience in higher education leadership, consulting, and institutional strategy, he brings a wealth of knowledge on small colleges’ challenges and opportunities. Dean, along with Kent Barnds, are co-hosts for the podcast series Small College America. Season two begins February. 25, 2025

    Source link

  • Small College America – Profile Earlham College – Edu Alliance Journal

    Small College America – Profile Earlham College – Edu Alliance Journal

    February 17, 2025, by Dean Hoke: This profile of Earlham College is the second in a series presenting small colleges throughout the United States.

    Background

    Founded in 1847 in Richmond, Indiana, Earlham College is a private liberal arts institution with deep Quaker roots. The college maintains its commitment to principles such as integrity, peace, social justice, and community engagement, which shape both its academic and extracurricular life. Despite its modest size, Earlham has built a reputation for academic rigor, experiential learning, and global perspectives. Dr. Paul Sniegowski, a biologist and former dean of the College of Arts and Sciences at the University of Pennsylvania, has served as President since August 2024.

    For the 2023-24 academic year, U.S. News & World Report estimates Earlham’s total annual cost (including tuition, housing, and other expenses) at $53,930, with an average net price after aid of $25,496.

    Curricula

    Earlham College offers a diverse range of undergraduate programs, with popular majors including Biology, Environmental Science, International Studies, Business, and Psychology. The college places a strong emphasis on interdisciplinary learning, allowing students to engage in cross-disciplinary courses and independent research. The Epic Advantage Program provides students with up to $5,000 in funding for hands-on learning experiences, such as internships, field studies, and international travel.

    The college also offers a 3+2 Engineering Program, where students spend three years at Earlham before transferring to an affiliated university, such as Columbia or Case Western Reserve, to complete an engineering degree. This dual-degree approach combines the benefits of a liberal arts education with technical training, preparing students for careers in engineering, business, and technology fields.

    Strengths

    • Commitment to Experiential Learning – Programs like Epic Advantage provide students with real-world experience, enhancing their competitiveness in the job market.
    • Strong International Focus – Nearly 70% of Earlham students study abroad, and the college has partnerships with institutions worldwide.
    • Small Class Sizes – With a 9:1 student-faculty ratio, Earlham offers personalized attention and mentoring opportunities.
    • Values-Driven Education – Quaker principles of peace, social justice, and ethical leadership are embedded in the curriculum and campus culture.
    • Strong Science and Environmental Programs – The Joseph Moore Museum and expansive natural study areas provide unique hands-on research opportunities.

    Weaknesses

    • Financial Stability Challenges – Like many small liberal arts colleges, Earlham faces financial pressures, including declining enrollment and reliance on tuition revenue.
    • Leadership Continuity – Since 2011, Earlham has had four Presidents and one interim.
    • Limited Graduate Programs – Earlham focuses almost exclusively on undergraduate education, which may limit options for students seeking to continue their studies within the same institution.
    • Limited Name Recognition – Despite its strong academic reputation, Earlham struggles with brand recognition outside the Midwest and higher education circles.

    Economic Impact

    Earlham College is a major economic driver in Richmond, Indiana, and the surrounding region. The college employs hundreds of faculty and staff, supports local businesses, and contributes significantly to the local economy.

    According to the Independent Colleges of Indiana, Earlham College has a total economic impact of $76 million on the state and has created nearly 725 jobs in Indiana. LinkedIn data suggests the college has nearly 9,000 alumni, with 1,400 residing in Indiana and 366 in the Richmond area.

    Through programs like the Center for Social Justice and the Bonner Scholars Program, Earlham students engage in community service projects throughout Richmond. The college also frequently hosts cultural and educational events open to the public, further integrating itself into the civic life of the region.

    Enrollment Trends

    Earlham College has experienced a decline in full-time equivalent (FTE) enrollment over the past decade. In the 2013-14 academic year, enrollment stood at 1,159 students, dropping to 677 students in 2022-23. In the 2024 academic year, undergraduate FTE enrollment was 691.33 in the fall and 620.33 in the spring, reflecting ongoing challenges in retention and recruitment.

    Degrees Awarded by Major

    In 2024, Earlham College awarded 123 undergraduate degrees, including 84 single majors, 18 double majors, and one triple major. The distribution by major category is as follows:

    Alumni

    According to Earlham’s First-Destination Survey Report (2019-23):

    • 28% of graduates continue their education within six months of graduation.
    • 57% are employed within six months.
    • The top five employment industries are Education, Healthcare, Internet & Software, and Research.
    • Nearly 50% of alumni pursue graduate or professional school within 10 years.

    Notable Alumni:

    • Michael C. Hall (1993) – Emmy-nominated actor (Dexter, Six Feet Under).
    • Margaret Hamilton (1958) – NASA software engineer, led Apollo Program flight software development.
    • Michael Shellenberger (1993) – Author and journalist on free speech and environmental policy.
    • Venus Williams (2015) – Former World No. 1 tennis player and Olympic gold medalist.
    • Wendell Meredith Stanley (1926) – Nobel Prize-winning chemist in virus research.

    Endowment and Financial Standing

    Earlham College’s current endowment is $419 million, down from $475 million in 2021. Financial challenges stem from declining enrollment and reduced tuition revenue. In FY 2023, the college reported a net loss of $11.1 million.

    Despite these challenges, Forbes (2024) rated Earlham A- with a 3.499 GPA, signaling relative financial resilience. The college is actively implementing strategic budget adjustments and seeking alternative revenue sources to ensure long-term sustainability.

    Why Earlham Remains Relevant

    In an era where liberal arts colleges must justify their value, Earlham College stands out for its values-driven, experiential education. Its commitment to academic excellence, social responsibility, and global engagement makes it an attractive option for students looking for more than just a degree.

    Earlham’s focus on sustainability, diversity, and international collaboration positions it as a model institution that integrates ethical leadership with practical learning. As higher education continues to evolve, Earlham demonstrates that a small college can have a big impact on both students and the world.

    Dean Hoke is Managing Partner of Edu Alliance Group, a higher education consultancy, and formerly served as President/CEO of the American Association of University Administrators (AAUA). With decades of experience in higher education leadership, consulting, and institutional strategy, he brings a wealth of knowledge on small colleges’ challenges and opportunities. Dean, along with Kent Barnds, are co-hosts for the podcast series Small College America. Season two begins February. 25, 2025

    Source link

  • Small College America – Profile Wabash College – Edu Alliance Journal

    Small College America – Profile Wabash College – Edu Alliance Journal

    Background

    Established in 1832, Wabash College is a private liberal arts institution dedicated exclusively to undergraduate education for men. As one of the nation’s few remaining all-male colleges, Wabash upholds a tradition of academic rigor, personal responsibility, and close-knit community engagement. The college’s mission emphasizes the development of critical thinking, effective communication, and responsible leadership. The current President is Dr. Scott Feller. He has been president since 2020, and he has been with Wabash as a professor of chemistry and administrator since 1998. Wabash College is in Crawfordsville, Indiana, a community of 16,100 located 45 miles northwest of Indianapolis and 150 miles southeast of Chicago.

    In 2022- 23, US News & World Report projects the total cost per year is $65,825 (tuition, housing, etc.) Net price after aid is $26,834

    Curricula

    Wabash offers a diverse array of academic programs across three divisions: Natural Sciences, Humanities and Arts, and Social Sciences. Students can choose from 27 majors, allowing for a tailored educational experience. The curriculum is designed to foster interdisciplinary learning, encouraging students to explore various fields and integrate knowledge.

    A distinctive feature of Wabash’s academic program is the comprehensive examination that seniors must pass to graduate. This rigorous assessment includes both written and oral components, ensuring that graduates have a deep and thorough understanding of their chosen fields.

    Strengths

    1. Strong Alumni Network—Wabash boasts a dedicated and active alumni base that provides current students with mentorship, networking opportunities, and career support. The Princeton Review ranks Wabash fourth in the nation for “Best Alumni Network.”
    2. Continuity of Leadership – Wabash has a history of stable and effective leadership, providing consistent direction and long-term strategic planning. This stability has contributed to the college’s strong institutional culture, financial health, and sustained commitment to academic excellence and student success.
    3. Academic Excellence—Wabash’s commitment to a rigorous liberal arts education is evident in its comprehensive curriculum and the requirement that seniors pass comprehensive exams.
    4. Financial Aid and Scholarships – Approximately 99% of Wabash students receive some form of financial assistance, making the college accessible to a diverse student body.
    5. Personalized Attention – With a favorable student-to-faculty ratio, Wabash provides an environment where students receive individualized attention, fostering strong mentorship relationships and personalized academic guidance.

    Weaknesses

    1. Declining Enrollment– Over the past ten years, Wabash has experienced a slow decline in enrollment of 11%.
    2. Geographic Isolation – Located in a small town in Indiana, Wabash may face challenges in providing students with access to urban amenities and opportunities that larger cities offer.
    3. Niche Appeal: The college’s all-male atmosphere deters potential applicants from seeking a coeducational experience, potentially limiting the applicant pool.

    Economic Impact

    Wabash College plays a significant role in the local economy of Crawfordsville and the surrounding Montgomery County. As a major employer, the college provides jobs to faculty, administrative staff, and support personnel. Additionally, the presence of students and visitors contributes to local businesses, including housing, dining, retail, and services. The college’s events and programs also attract visitors, further stimulating economic activity in the region.

    According to the Independent Colleges of Indiana, Wabash College has a total economic impact on the state of Indiana of $134 million and created nearly 1,000 jobs in the state. According to LinkedIn profiles, they have over 9,000 alumni, of which 4,500 live in Indiana, and 869 live in the Crawfordsville, Indiana area.

    Enrollment

    Wabash’s 822 male students come from 32 states and 16 foreign countries; 73% are from Indiana.  73% are White, 5% are international, 12% are Hispanic, and 10% are other minorities. President Feller stated: “Wabash in the future is going to draw more students from more different places,” We already have the highest number of international students in the history of the College. We’re going to draw our student body more nationally and more internationally. And our faculty and staff too. So we’ve got to make sure that when those folks come here, they find a welcoming community where they feel a sense of belonging. “This College is relational, not transactional.”

    Degree Awards by Major

    In 2023, Wabash College awarded a total of 175 degrees across various disciplines. The distribution of the disciplines is as follows:

    • This distribution reflects the college’s strong emphasis on the humanities and social sciences, aligning with its liberal arts mission.

    Alumni

    The majority of Wabash students enter graduate or professional school within five years of graduating. Each year, approximately 25-30 percent of Wabash graduates enroll in graduate and professional schools, including about 8-10 percent in medical and law schools and about 20 percent in other graduate arts and sciences programs. Among those entering the workforce, 31 percent begin careers in business, while nine percent work in government, social service, or teaching.

    When reviewing LinkedIn alumni data, we found that Wabash College alums’ primary areas of study were Economics, Psychology, Political Science, history, and biology.

    Wabash has produced numerous distinguished alumni who have made significant contributions across various fields:

    • Gov. Mike Braun is the current governor of Indiana, a former U.S. senator from Indiana, and a former businessman.
    • Jeremy Bird is the Executive Vice President of Driver Experience for Lyft.
    • Robert E. Allen is the former Chairman and CEO of AT&T.
    • Robert Dirks was a Renowned chemist and researcher in molecular sciences.
    • Dan Simmons is an Award-winning science fiction and horror writer best known for the Hyperion Cantos series.

    Endowment and Financial Grade

    Wabash College’s endowment has maintained its endowment size over the past decade, reflecting successful fundraising efforts and prudent financial management. As of December 31, 2023, the endowment was valued at approximately $379 million, compared to $371 million in 2014. This growth demonstrates the institution’s ability to sustain financial stability while continuing to invest in its academic programs and student success.

    Forbes, in 2023, gave Wabash a top 100 grade of an A+ and a GPA of 4.27. The top grade was Harvard A+ and a GPA of 4.50.

    Why is Wabash College Relevant Today

    In today’s rapidly changing educational landscape, Wabash College remains steadfast in its dedication to a liberal arts education tailored for men. The college’s emphasis on critical thinking, effective communication, and ethical leadership prepares graduates to navigate and contribute meaningfully to a complex world. Wabash’s strong alumni network and commitment to personalized education continue to offer students unique opportunities for personal and professional growth.

    Dean Hoke is Managing Partner of Edu Alliance Group, a higher education consultancy, and formerly served as President/CEO of the American Association of University Administrators (AAUA). With decades of experience in higher education leadership, consulting, and institutional strategy, he brings a wealth of knowledge on small colleges’ challenges and opportunities.

    Source link