Each month, CUPA-HR General Counsel Ira Shepard provides an overview of several labor and employment law cases and regulatory actions with implications for the higher ed workplace. Here’s the latest from Ira.
Dartmouth Men’s Basketball Team, SEIU Withdraw Union Petition
In March 2024, the Dartmouth College men’s basketball team voted 13-2 in favor of joining the Service Employees International Union Local 560 after the National Labor Relations Board regional director ruled that the players were employees eligible to vote in an NLRB-supervised representation election. On December 31, 2024, Local 560 pulled back its representation petition, and the NLRB will dismiss the case (Trustees of Dartmouth College (N.L.R.B. No. 01-RC-325633, Petition Withdrawn 12/31/24)).
An SEIU spokesperson stated that they withdrew the petition to preserve the legal precedent of the NLRB regional director’s decision holding that the basketball players were employees of Dartmouth. While SEIU will no longer participate as the collective bargaining representative, the union claims it will pursue its goals via a change in tactics. Dartmouth maintains that the regional director’s decision ruling that the basketball players are employees is legally erroneous.
The employee status of student-athletes is still subject to NLRB litigation in the University of Southern California and Pac-12 case. The NLRB is pursuing unfair labor practice charges against USC and the Pac-12 as joint employers following their refusal to bargain with a union on the grounds that basketball and football players are students and not employees. We will continue to follow developments in this area as they unfold.
Federal Court Allows Muslim Professor to Proceed With Religious Discrimination Claim — Dismisses Age Discrimination Claim
The plaintiff professor, an immigrant from Bosnia and a Muslim, has had a non-tenure-track position for more than a decade with Teachers College, Columbia University. She alleged in federal court that she was discriminated against because of her religion and age when the university did not offer her a tenured position. While the court allowed the religious discrimination and retaliation portions of the complaint to proceed, it dismissed her allegations that she was also denied the tenure-track position because of age and age-related comments (Sabic-El-Rayess v. Teachers College (S.D.N.Y. No.-24-cv-2891, 12/5/24)).
The plaintiff alleged that no Muslim professor has ever received a tenure-track position in Teachers College, despite many being qualified, and that university leaders made remarks that could be construed as anti-Muslim. The plaintiff claims that the university’s rationale for its decision — that she lacked peer-reviewed publications — is false. The court also allowed the plaintiff’s allegations that she was retaliated against by a salary reduction after she made her religious discrimination complaints to proceed, notwithstanding the university’s denial of such allegations.
Employer Sued in Class Action for Allegedly Mismanaging Pension Fund
An employee group has filed a class action lawsuit against a national sports retailer alleging that the employer violated pension plan rules. The employee group alleges REI used non-vested pension fund employee forfeitures to reduce contributions otherwise owed to other employees, rather than adhere to plan provisions requiring the employer to use the funds to pay amounts owed for rehired participants or to pay administrative expenses (Smith v. Recreational Equipment Inc. (W.D. Wash, No. 3:24-cv-03062, complaint, 12/17/24)). Plaintiffs propose to represent a class of 24,000 participant employees.
Plaintiffs claim that the employer used more than $5.8 million in forfeitures incorrectly from 2018 to 2023. Similar claims along these lines have been litigated in other courts, with some courts dismissing the claims in favor of the employer and others allowing the litigation to continue. It appears to be an unsettled issue at this time.
Judge Rules Terminated Athletic Director Entitled to Jury Trial Over Allegations of Sex and Age Discrimination — Case Dismissed Subject to a Confidential Settlement
A university’s first woman athletic director, who was terminated for alleged poor athletic team performance, is entitled to have her claims of age and sex discrimination heard by a federal court jury. The plaintiff alleged that she was discriminated against on the basis of age and sex when she was replaced by a man who was 27 years younger. The judge pointed to this in ruling that a jury could find in the plaintiff’s favor (Ford-Kee v. Miss. Valley State University (2024 BL 460757 N.D. Mis. No. 4:23-cv-00107, 12/17/24)).
The university president testified that hundreds of people recommended that the athletic director be fired, but he refused to identify people calling for the termination. The court concluded that this did not evidence any discriminatory intent by the president, but it did raise the question of whether the president was influenced by discriminatory views of others. The plaintiff alleged that the poor team performance was an after-the-fact rationalization and that the university president was swayed by the “sexist” views of the athletic foundation and key alumni. The plaintiff claimed the president did not raise poor team performance as a reason for the termination during her final meeting, but rather stated it was time for a change.
Bloomberg later reported that the parties reached a confidential settlement dismissing the case, which will no longer go to trial.
Federal Appeals Court Rules No Private Right to Sue Under Law Prohibiting Employment Discrimination Against Marijuana Users
Under the New Jersey Cannabis Regulatory, Enforcement Assistance, and Market Place Modernization Act (CREAMMA), employers are specifically prohibited from discriminating against workers over the age of 21 for their use or non-use of cannabis. The 3rd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals recently affirmed the decision of the federal trial court, dismissing the case in which the plaintiff alleged cannabis use employment discrimination (Zanetich v. Walmart Stores East Inc. (0:23-cv-01996, 3rd Cir. 12/9/24).
The plaintiff alleged that his job offer was rescinded after he tested positive for cannabis use. Nonetheless the appeals court dismissed the case, holding that the CREAMMA statute contains no language creating or suggesting a private remedy. The appeals court also denied the plaintiff’s request to remand the case to the New Jersey Supreme Court so that the New Jersey court could interpret the statute. The appeals court concluded that the absence of an express remedy providing a private right to sue under CREAMMA was a deliberate choice of the legislature rather than an oversight.
University Prevails in Gender Bias Claim Raised by Former Athletic Director
The 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in a split 2-1 decision, held that a university was entitled to a dismissal of a gender-based pay discrimination claim brought by the university’s former athletic director. The former athletic director claimed that her male successor was discriminatorily paid $170,000 annually compared to her last salary of $135,000. The court concluded that the university raised legitimate factors other than gender which led to its decision to pay the male athletic director more (Williams v. Alabama State University (11th Cir., No. 23-121692, unpublished, 12/23/24)). The majority of the three-judge appellate panel concluded that the university was justified in paying the male athletic director more because of his 10 years of experience in athletic administration leadership and because of his Ph.D. This compared to the plaintiff’s two years of relevant experience and a master’s degree.
The appeals court pointed out that this is not a case of two employees being employed contemporaneously at different salaries to perform the same job. Rather, the court concluded that the employer met the salary demands of a more experienced leader for the job in order to secure him. One judge dissented from the decision to dismiss the case. The dissenting judge concluded that university leaders made a number of comments concerning this selection that a jury should be able to hear and consider.
Now more than ever, knowing how to recruit students online is essential for success. In 2025, brochures and campus visits alone are no longer enough. A successful student recruitment plan requires a blend of innovative digital tools, personalized engagement, and a deep understanding of student behavior.
At Higher Education Marketing, we’ve spent years refining our approach to online student recruitment, and we’re excited to share ten proven strategies that can take your recruitment efforts from awareness to enrollment this year. Keep reading for a deeper understanding of the enrollment process, actionable tips on recruiting students online, and access to our student recruitment resources.
Struggling with enrollment?
Our expert digital marketing services can help you attract and enroll more students!
Understanding the Enrollment and Decision-Making Process
The journey from awareness to enrollment as illustrated by the enrollment funnel is complex, often involving multiple stages of research, evaluation, and emotional investment. For prospective students and their families, choosing a school is a decision that balances academic aspirations, career goals, financial considerations, and personal preferences.
Understanding this process is essential for creating a recruitment strategy that aligns with their needs and motivations.
Stage 1: Awareness
At the beginning of the journey, students and their families are typically exploring broad options. They may be influenced by online advertisements, social media content, or recommendations. During this phase, your goal as a school is to make a positive first impression and provide easily accessible, engaging content. Students are looking for reasons to consider your institution, such as program variety, campus culture, or career outcomes. For families, financial feasibility and safety often rank high as priorities.
A strong online presence is crucial here, including a well-optimized website with clear messaging, visually appealing social media accounts, and engaging videos that spark curiosity. For instance, showcasing testimonials from students with similar backgrounds or aspirations can help prospective students visualize themselves as part of your community.
Stage 2: Consideration
Once students identify potential schools, they begin in-depth research. At this stage, they often turn to your website, virtual campus tours, and program details, comparing your institution to others. Families may analyze cost, scholarship opportunities, and academic flexibility, while students might focus on extracurricular activities, study-abroad opportunities, and campus life.
To meet these needs, your content should highlight differentiators, such as unique programs, industry partnerships, or alumni success stories. Transparent communication is key—clearly outlining tuition fees, application requirements, and scholarship opportunities builds trust. Including testimonials from alumni and current students in similar fields can help students and families see the real-world value of your programs.
Stage 3: Decision
When students are ready to make their final decision, the process becomes personal. Students and families are likely reaching out for additional information, attending virtual or in-person events, and engaging with admissions counselors. They want answers to specific questions, such as “What internships are available in this program?” or “What percentage of graduates find jobs in their field within six months?”
Personalized follow-ups play a crucial role in this stage. Schools that demonstrate a genuine interest in the student’s goals and address family concerns are more likely to earn their trust. Hosting webinars with faculty and student panels can also provide authentic insights that make prospective students feel more connected to your institution.
Stage 4: Enrollment
After narrowing down their options, students proceed with the application process. For many, this stage can feel overwhelming, particularly if they’re applying to multiple schools or navigating complicated requirements. Families, on the other hand, may focus on evaluating financial aid packages and understanding the return on investment.
Streamlining the application process is critical here. Ensure that your application portal is user-friendly, deadlines are clearly communicated, and the required documents are easy to upload. Offering guidance through a dedicated admissions counselor or chatbot can alleviate stress and improve the overall experience. Schools that simplify this process often see higher application completion rates.
After submitting applications, the waiting period begins. At this stage, communication should remain active. Personalized acceptance letters, invitations to exclusive admitted-student events, or detailed guides on the next steps can keep students and their families engaged while reinforcing their decision to enroll.
Source: HEM
Need support in your school’s online student recruitment efforts? Reach out to learn more about our services!
How to Recruit Students Online
Want to explore how to recruit students online in more detail? The answer lies in combining data-driven insights, engaging content, and personalized communication to guide students through their enrollment journey as discussed above. From leveraging SEO and social media ads to creating interactive virtual tours and using chatbots for instant support, online student recruitment requires a multi-faceted approach that captures attention, builds trust, and inspires action. In the sections that follow, we’ll discuss ten proven strategies that can help you move prospective students seamlessly from awareness to enrollment. Let’s get started!
1. Start With Data-Driven Audience Insights
The foundation of any successful recruitment strategy is understanding your target audience. Relying on broad demographics is no longer enough. Why is that? Today’s students expect hyper-personalized messaging at each level of the enrollment funnel.
Tools like Google Analytics, CRM systems, and social media insights provide invaluable data on prospective students’ preferences, online behavior, and decision-making patterns. The information you glean from your detailed demographic research will help you make informed campaign decisions.
Behavioral information such as the length of each session, the devices used, bounce rates, and session attribution provides insight into how people are engaging with your site, when and why they may lose interest, and whether your site is optimized for desired actions such as filling out contact forms or subscribing to newsletters. If you’re looking to revamp your school’s online recruitment efforts, the use of data analytics tools is an excellent way to start planning.
2. Invest in Search Engine Optimization (SEO)
Visibility is key in the awareness phase, and SEO ensures your school appears where prospective students are searching. Optimizing your website and blog content for high-ranking keywords can drive organic traffic from search engines. Long-tail keywords tend to be the most effective.
Long-tail keywords are highly specific search terms that prospective students use when looking for educational opportunities. These phrases, such as “best online MBA programs for working professionals” or “affordable graphic design diploma in Vancouver,” often reflect a searcher’s intent more clearly than generic keywords.
For schools, targeting long-tail keywords can drive qualified traffic to your website by connecting with students who are already in the decision-making phase. Unlike broader keywords, long-tail terms face less competition, making ranking higher in search engine results easier.
To effectively use long-tail keywords, start with thorough keyword research. Tools like Google Keyword Planner, SEMrush, or AnswerThePublic can uncover phrases students frequently search for. Analyze internal data, such as search terms used on your site, or interview current students to understand how they found your programs.
Pay close attention to questions students ask during open houses or information sessions—these often provide insight into potential long-tail keywords. Incorporating these terms naturally into blog posts, program pages, and FAQs can help your school align with the needs of prospective students, driving meaningful engagement and boosting enrollment. Additionally, focusing on local SEO—like “business schools in New York”—can capture the attention of students looking for programs within a specific region.
Source: Google | Matthew’s Hall
Example: If you want to maximize the effects of local SEO, you need a Google My Business account like the one pictured above. Prospects looking for schools in a particular geographic location are more likely to come across your school’s profile which reveals all the information they need to get in contact with you and even visit you in person. A Google My Business account also provides an official first impression of your school
3. Leverage Social Media Ads with Predictive Targeting
How does predictive targeting work on social media? By leveraging advanced algorithms, platforms like Facebook, Instagram, and TikTok analyze user behavior and identify prospective students who are most likely to engage with your content or apply to your programs.
This approach not only increases the precision of your campaigns but also optimizes your marketing budget by focusing on high-intent audiences. Schools can use predictive targeting to showcase program-specific ads to users who have expressed interest in similar fields, ensuring a personalized and relevant experience.
For instance, promoting STEM programs to students who frequently engage with tech or science content creates a stronger connection and improves conversion rates. Predictive targeting helps schools reach the right students at the right time, making it a highly effective strategy for boosting enrollment outcomes.
4. Develop Interactive Virtual Campus Tours
While in-person visits are valuable, virtual campus tours have become indispensable for reaching international and out-of-state students. These tours should be interactive, incorporating 360-degree views of classrooms, dorms, and recreational facilities.
You can go a step further by integrating live Q&A sessions with student ambassadors or faculty during the tours. This provides a personalized touch and provides the opportunity to share valuable information and address concerns or barriers to enrollment.
Source: University of Toronto | Virtual Campus Tours
Example: The University of Toronto provides detailed, user-friendly virtual tours complete with a menu, high-quality 360-degree imagery, clear audio guidance, and valuable information about student life and available on-campus learning resources.
5. Create Engaging Video Content Across Platforms
Video content continues to dominate online engagement. For this reason, schools that prioritize video marketing see higher application rates, as videos create emotional connections with prospective students. From testimonials and alumni success stories to faculty introductions and campus events, video content humanizes your institution.
Platforms like YouTube, Instagram, TikTok, and LinkedIn offer dynamic opportunities for schools to showcase their programs, campus life, and success stories in ways that resonate deeply with their audience. Videos can humanize your institution, create a sense of community, and provide visual storytelling that goes beyond text and images.
To start, consider the wide variety of video formats available and how each can serve a specific purpose. Short, attention-grabbing reels or TikTok videos are perfect for introducing prospective students to your campus culture or highlighting unique aspects of a program. For example, a day-in-the-life video of a current student studying abroad, participating in research, or preparing for a career in their field can inspire viewers to imagine themselves in similar roles.
Longer-form content, such as YouTube campus tours, faculty interviews, or alumni success stories, allows you to dive deeper into the value of your school and its offerings. Interactive live video events are a powerful tool for real-time engagement. Hosting live Q&A sessions with admissions counselors, students, or alumni provides an authentic look at your institution and builds trust with prospective students.
Leverage platform-specific trends like TikTok’s creative, relatable content to showcase your programs and connect with current student interests. Participating in viral challenges or trending audio can make your school approachable and relevant.
Optimize video formats for each platform—vertical for Instagram Reels and TikTok, horizontal for YouTube and Facebook—and include captions for accessibility. Focus on storytelling by highlighting the journeys of students, faculty expertise, and alumni success to create compelling, relatable content.
Source: TikTok | University of Manchester
Example: Here, the University of Manchester shares authentic, student-generated content that viewers will be able to relate to. This tends to be the most effective video format for fostering community among your student body and deepening your relationships with new leads.
6. Use Chatbots for Instant Engagement
Students today expect instant answers, and chatbots provide a seamless way to meet that demand. AI-powered chatbots can handle common inquiries about admissions deadlines, program details, and financial aid, freeing up your staff for more personalized interactions.
Source: Excel Career College
Example: Here, Excel Career College provides an instant chatbot option for site visitors. The tool asks questions to categorize each interaction, determining what information and resources to share with the user. Chatbots help streamline the enrollment process, particularly at the awareness stage, by providing a convenient way for important questions to be answered.
7. Build a Strong Presence on Review Platforms
Prospective students and their families often rely on online reviews to make decisions. Platforms like Google Reviews and specialized education sites are vital in this regard. Proactively managing your online reputation by encouraging current students and alumni to leave positive reviews can enhance trust and credibility. How can you build a strong public reputation?
To start, addressing negative reviews or complaints with empathy and transparency can significantly improve public perception. Schools should respond promptly to concerns, offering solutions where possible and demonstrating a genuine commitment to student and family satisfaction. A well-handled negative review can turn into an opportunity to show your institution’s dedication to improvement and care.
In addition, fostering community connections can garner a positive reputation and good reviews across various platforms. Parents and local communities play a crucial role in shaping your reputation. Hosting events such as open houses, community service projects, or alumni panels fosters goodwill and positions your school as an integral part of the community. Engaging with parents through newsletters, personalized communication, and parent-specific resources further strengthens relationships and encourages positive word-of-mouth.
Positive reviews can also be amplified by showcasing testimonials and case studies from current students and alumni. Create detailed profiles of students who have achieved their goals through your programs and share their stories on your website, social media, and promotional materials.
8. Offer Personalized Email Campaigns
Email remains one of the most effective tools for nurturing leads and guiding them through the enrollment funnel. Unlike many other channels, email provides a direct line of communication that allows your school to build meaningful connections with your audience over time.
By crafting personalized email campaigns tailored to the unique needs and interests of prospective students, schools can significantly enhance engagement and conversion rates. For instance, including program-specific content that highlights key features, career outcomes, and testimonials from current students or alumni can help prospects visualize themselves succeeding in that program.
Additionally, timely reminders about critical application deadlines, scholarship opportunities, or upcoming events like open houses or webinars create a sense of urgency and keep prospective students actively engaged with the admissions process. When done effectively, personalized email campaigns foster trust and rapport while providing valuable, actionable information that empowers prospective students to make informed decisions about their educational journey.
9. Host Webinars on Trending Topics
Webinars are a fantastic way to showcase your expertise and connect directly with prospective students. Hosting sessions on trending topics like “Careers in Artificial Intelligence” or “How to Finance Your College Education” can position your school as a thought leader in the field. During these sessions, including live interactions with faculty, alumni, or current students makes the experience even more compelling.
Source: The Academy of Applied Pharmaceutical Sciences
Example: The Academy of Applied Pharmaceutical Sciences puts itself at the forefront of pharmaceutical education on a variety of topics that appeal to career-seekers in the field by hosting several educational events each month. Their upcoming workshops and webinars are easy to find on their website. Users can also access recorded webinars.
10. Emphasize Alumni and Career Outcomes
Finally, showcasing the success of your alumni is one of the most compelling ways to attract prospective students. Highlighting career outcomes, such as high employment rates or notable employers, demonstrates the tangible value of your programs.
Showcasing alumni success is one of the most impactful ways to attract prospective students and their families. When students see tangible evidence of career achievements—whether it’s high-profile employers, entrepreneurial ventures, or significant industry contributions—they are more likely to perceive your programs as a pathway to their own aspirations.
Alumni stories provide real-world validation of your school’s value and help prospective students envision their future success. Leverage alumni by creating a dynamic “Alumni Success Wall” on your website or use social media campaigns that highlight diverse career paths. Include those in traditional corporate roles as well as entrepreneurs, creatives, and community leaders to represent a broad spectrum of success. Video testimonials can be particularly powerful, capturing the emotions, challenges, and triumphs of alumni journeys.
Schools can also build relationships between alumni and prospective students through mentorship programs, webinars, or networking events. For instance, hosting a virtual panel featuring alumni working in fields related to your school’s programs provides insights and inspiration for prospective students.
Source: John Cabot University
Example: John Cabot University has an Alumni Ambassadors Program designed to provide mentorship to current students and provide alumni with an interconnected network of fellow graduates and faculty members. Prospects like to know that access to your school’s support and resources doesn’t end at graduation. Like JCU, consider hosting regular events, encourage alumni to share their positive experiences with your institution, and foster mentorship within your culture.
Final Thoughts: Aligning Strategy With Student Expectations
In summary, let’s explore how to write a college recruitment planthat works. Online student recruitment is about building meaningful connections with prospective students. By integrating data-driven insights, focussing on connection and personalization, providing value, and streaming the enrollment process, you can create a cohesive, impactful approach that resonates with students at every stage of their journey, from initial awareness to final enrollment.
At Higher Education Marketing, we specialize in helping schools like yours navigate the complexities of digital recruitment. Let’s work together to create campaigns that inspire, engage, and deliver results!
Struggling with enrollment?
Our expert digital marketing services can help you attract and enroll more students!
Frequently Asked Questions
Question: How to recruit students online in more detail?
Answer: The answer lies in combining data-driven insights, engaging content, and personalized communication to guide students through their enrollment journey.
Question: How to write a college recruitment plan that works?
Answer: Online student recruitment is about building meaningful connections with prospective students. By integrating data-driven insights, focussing on connection and personalization, providing value, and streaming the enrollment process, you can create a cohesive, impactful approach that resonates with students at every stage of their journey, from initial awareness to final enrollment.
Most of the time when I talk about the history of university financing, I show a chart that looks like this, showing that since 1980 government funding to the sector is up by a factor of about 2.3 after inflation over the last 40-odd years, while total funding is up by a factor of 3.6.
Figure 1: Canadian University Income by source, 1979-80 to 2022-23, in billions of constant $2022
That’s just a straight up expression of how universities get their money. But what it doesn’t take account of are changes in enrolment, which as Figure 2 shows, were a pretty big deal. Universities have admitted a *lot* more students over time. The university system has nearly doubled since the end of the 1990s and nearly tripled since the start of the 1990s.
Figure 2: Full-time Equivalent Enrolment, Canada, Universities, 1978-79 to 2022-23
So, the question is, really, how have funding pattern changes interacted with changes in enrolment? Well, folks, wonder no more, because I have toiled through some unbelievably badly-organized excel data to bring you funding data on this that goes back to the 1980s (I did a version of this back here, but I only captured national-level data—the toil here involved getting data granular enough to look at individual provinces). Buckle up for a better understanding of how we got to our present state!
Figure 3 is what I would call the headline graph: University income per student by source, from 1980-81 to the present, in constant $2022. Naturally, it looks a bit like Figure 1, but more muted because it takes enrolment growth into account.
Figure 3: University income per student by source, from 1980-81 to the present, in constant $2022
There’s nothing revolutionary here, but it shows a couple of things quite clearly. First, government funding per-student has been falling for most of the past 40 years.; the brief period from about 1999 to 2009 stands out as the exception rather than the norm. Second, despite that, total funding per student is still quite high compared with the 1990s. Institutions have found ways to replace government income with income from other sources. That doesn’t mean the quality of the money is the same. As I have said before, hustling for money incurs costs that don’t occur if governments are just writing cheques.
As usual, though, looking at the national picture often disguises variation at the provincial level. Let’s drill one level down and see what happened to government spending at the sub-national level. A quick note here: “government spending” means *all* government spending, not just provincial government spending. So, Ontario and Quebec probably look better than they otherwise would because they receive an outsized chunk of federal government research spending, while the Atlantic provinces probably look worse. I doubt the numbers are affected much because overall revenues from federal sources are pretty small compared to provincial ones, but it’s worth keeping in mind as you read the following.
Figure 4 looks at government spending per student in the “big three” provinces which make up over 75% of the Canadian post-secondary system. Nationally, per-student spending fell from $22,800 per year to $17,600 per year. But there are differences here: Ontario spent the entire 42-year period below that average, while BC and Quebec spent nearly all that period above it. Quebec has notably seen very little in terms of per-student fluctuations, while BC has been more volatile. Ontario saw a recovery in spending during the McGuinty years, but then has experienced a drop of about 35%. Of note, perhaps is that most of this decline happened before the arrival of the current Ford government.
Figure 4: Per-Student Income from Government Sources, in thousands of constant $2022, Canada and the “Big Three” provinces, 1980-81 to 2022-23
Figure 5 shows that spending volatility was much higher in the three oil provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Newfoundland & Labrador. All three provinces spent virtually the entirety of our period with above-average spending levels but the gap between these provinces and the national average was quite large both in the early 1980s and from about 2005 onwards: i.e. when oil prices were at their highest. Alberta of course has seen per-student funding drop by about 50% in the last fifteen years, but at the same time, it is close to where it was 25 years ago. So, was it the dramatic fall or the precipitous rise that was the outlier?
Figure 5: Per-Student Income from Government Sources, in thousands of constant $2022, Canada and the “Oil provinces”, 1980-81 to 2022-23
Figure 6 shows the other four provinces for the sake of completeness. New Brunswick and Nova Scotia were the lowest spenders in the country for most of the period we’re looking at, only catching up to the national average in the mid-aughts. Interestingly, the two provinces took two different paths to raise per-student spending: Nova Scotia did it almost entirely by raising spending, while in New Brunswick this feat was to a considerable extent “achieved” by a significant fall in student numbers (this is a ratio, folks, both the numerator and the denominator matter!).
Figure 6: Per-Student Income from Government Sources, in thousands of constant $2022, Canada and selected provinces, 1980-81 to 2022-23
An interesting question, of course, is what it would have cost to have kept public spending at 1980 per-student levels. And it’s an interesting question, because remember, total spending did in fact rise quite substantially (see Figure 1): it just didn’t rise as fast as student numbers. So, in Figure 7, I show what it would have cost to keep per-student expenditures stable at 1980-81 levels both if student numbers had stayed constant, and what it would have meant in practice given actual student numbers.
Figure 7: Funds required to return to 1980-81 levels of per-student government investment in universities, Canada, in millions of constant $2022
Weird-looking graph, right? But here’s how to interpret it. Per-student public funding did fall in the 80s and early 90s. But it rose again in the early aughts, to the point where per-student funding went back to where it was in 1980, even though the number of students in the system had doubled in the meanwhile. From about 2008 onwards, though, public investment started falling off again in per-student terms, going back to mid/late-90s levels even as overall student numbers continued to rise. We are now at the point where getting back to the levels of 1980-81, or even just 2007-08, would require a rise of between $6 and $6.5 billion dollars.
Anyways, that’s enough sunshine for one morning. Have a great day.
Rabbi Ari Berman, president of Yeshiva University in New York, will deliver the benediction at the inauguration of Donald Trump next week, officials announced Tuesday.
Berman “will call for the nation to rise to this historic moment and unite around America’s foundational values as a source for realizing our shared dreams of a prosperous, compassionate country led by faith and trust in God,” according to a university news release.
Berman has led Yeshiva University, a modern Orthodox Jewish institution, since 2017. As president, he has overseen both successes and controversies. The institution recently reported its highest number of undergraduate applications in its history and has increased the number of transfer students, which it attributed in part to contentious pro-Palestinian protests elsewhere.
But Yeshiva administrators also clashed with an LGBTQ student group, which it refused to recognize, prompting a lawsuit. In fall 2022, the university suspended all student groups in an effort to avoid recognizing the LGBTQ club after Yeshiva was dealt a legal setback.
In the university news release, Berman said he was deeply honored to deliver the benediction.
“As I prepare my remarks, I am inspired by the words of the prophet Jeremiah, who thousands of years ago walked through the roads of Jerusalem, the eternal capital of Israel, and proclaimed ‘Blessed is the one who trusts in God.’ I pray that we are all united around the core values of life and liberty, of service and sacrifice, and especially of faith and morality, which George Washington called the ‘indispensable supports’ of American prosperity,” Berman said.
Representative Greg Steube, a Florida Republican, speaks at a press conference following the passage of his Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act in the House of Representatives.
Allison Robbert/AFP via Getty Images
The House of Representatives voted 218 to 206 to pass a bill that would unilaterally ban trans women from competing in women’s sports Tuesday. The votes were nearly split along party lines, but two Democrats, Henry Cuellar and Vicente Gonzalez, both from Texas, voted for the bill.
Sponsored by Representative Greg Steube, a Florida Republican, the legislation dubbed the Protection of Women and Girls in Sports Act, is the latest attempt in Congress to keep trans women off women’s sports teams and builds on efforts in the states to restrict the participation of transgender students in sports that align with their gender identity. Last Congress, identical legislation from Steube passed the House but didn’t move forward in the Democratic-controlled Senate.
Now, Republicans hold the majority in both the House and the Senate, making it far more likely that this iteration will be more successful. In nearly half of the country, trans women are banned from playing women’s sports at the K-12 or higher education level, but the legislation would take those bans nationwide.
Passing the bill was a top priority for House Republican leadership, who included it on a list of 12 pieces of legislation to be considered first when the new session of Congress kicked off earlier this month. Its place of prominence seems to indicate that Republican leadership will prioritize rolling back or restricting the rights of transgender people, whom Republicans have often put at the center of a culture war.
Republicans and President-elect Donald Trump have criticized the Biden administration’s effort to amend Title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972 to prevent blanket bans that prohibit transgender students from participating in sports consistent with their gender identity. Last month, the Biden administration scrapped that proposal.
Under the bill, institutions that receive federal funding would be prohibited from allowing “a person whose sex is male to participate in an athletic program or activity that is designated for women or girls.” It defines sex as being based on “a person’s reproductive biology and genetics at birth,” though it doesn’t expound upon how an institution would tell. The bill does not prevent trans men from playing on men’s teams.
Anti-trans activists argue that allowing individuals assigned male at birth to play on women’s sports teams opens cis women athletes up to being injured by athletes who are more naturally powerful due to their physiques. There is sparse research on if this is true; however, the few studies that do exist haven’t backed up the idea that trans women retain significant advantage over athletes assigned female at birth.
Supporters of the legislation—including some cis female athletes, like Riley Gaines, who have competed alongside and against trans athletes at the collegiate level—also argue that trans women take spots on women’s teams, going against Title IX’s promise of equal opportunity, and that it is uncomfortable for cisgender female athletes to share close quarters, like locker rooms, with individuals assigned male at birth.
Representative Tim Walberg, the Michigan Republican who chairs the House Education and the Workforce Committee, echoed these sentiments in his argument on the House floor Tuesday.
“Mr. Speaker, kicking girls off sports teams to make way for a biological male takes opportunities away from these girls,” he said. “This means fewer college scholarships and fewer opportunities for girls. It also makes them second-class citizens in their own sports and puts their safety at risk.”
Some people who agree that trans women should not play on women’s teams say they broadly support transgender individuals but see it as unfair for them to take spots on women’s teams. But Steube took a different approach. When he announced the bill earlier this month, he quoted President-elect Donald Trump’s promise that “under the Trump administration, it will be the official policy of the United States government that there are only two genders—male and female.”
Meanwhile, Democrats and LGBTQ+ advocates argue that trans women should have the opportunity to play sports—which have been shown to improve outcomes and mental health for youths across the board—on the team that matches their gender.
“Transgender students—like all students—they deserve the same opportunity as their peers to learn teamwork, to find belonging and to grow into well-rounded adults through sports,” said Representative Suzanne Bonamici, an Oregon Democrat, on the House floor. “Childhood and adolescence are important times for growth and development, and sports help students form healthy habits and develop strong social and emotional skills. Sports provide meaningful opportunities for kids to feel confident in themselves and learn valuable life lessons about teamwork, leadership and communication. Teams provide a place for kids to make friends and build relationships.”
Bonamici and other democrats dubbed the bill the “Child Predator Empowerment Act” and argued it wouldn’t make schools safer for students. In fact, she said that the vague language in the bill about what defines the male sex could lead to invasive examinations.
“There is no way this so-called protection bill could be enforced without opening the door to harassment and privacy violations. It opens the door to inspection, not protection, of women and girls in sports,” she said. “Will students have to undergo exams to prove they’re a girl? We are already seeing examples of harassment and questioning of girls who may not conform to stereotypical feminine roles; will they be subject to demands for medical tests and private information? That’s intrusive, offensive and unacceptable, especially from a party of limited government.”
Social media is a top source of news for nearly three in four students, and half at least somewhat trust platforms such as Instagram and TikTok to deliver that news and other critical information accurately. As for legacy media sources, namely newspapers, just two in 10 students indicate they regularly rely on them for news. That’s even as most students indicate they trust newspapers to convey accurate information.
These are some of the findings from Inside Higher Ed’s new Student Voice flash survey with Generation Lab on media literacy, conducted last month. Some of the data seems grim in light of declining public trust in institutions and expertise, and the spread of misinformation—concerns that many of the survey’s 1,026 two-year and four-year respondents share: Some 62 percent express some or a lot of concern about the spread of misinformation among their college peers. (See also this month’s news that Meta is eliminating third-party fact-checkers.) And not quite half of respondents (46 percent) approve of the job colleges and universities as a whole are doing to promote students’ media literacy.
At the same time, the data suggests that colleges and universities are at least somewhat effective in this area. One example: Just one in 10 students rates their level of media literacy prior to attending college as very high, compared to the quarter of students who rate their current level of media literacy as very high. Nearly all respondents, 98 percent, also indicate they regularly practice at least some basic media literacy skills to check the accuracy of the information they’re consuming. To some degree, this challenges ongoing skepticism about students’ critical thinking abilities and how helpful colleges are in developing them.
When asked to highlight ways colleges and universities can help them build their awareness and skills, students ranked creating digital resources to learn about media literacy highest on a list of possible actions.
Inside Higher Ed and Generation Lab defined media literacy in the survey as the ability or skills to critically analyze for accuracy, credibility or evidence of bias in the content created and consumed in sources including radio, television, the internet and social media. Read on for an overview of the findings in six charts, plus some additional analysis—and how colleges can help close some of these gaps.
Students’ top sources for news are social media and friends and family/word of mouth. Relatively few students indicate they regularly get their news from sources such as newspapers, broadcast/network TV news, radio or magazines. This is relatively consistent across institution type (two-year/four-year and public/private nonprofit), though students at private nonprofits (n=259) are much more likely than their public counterparts (n=767) to indicate they read newspapers, at 38 percent versus 15 percent, respectively. By student type, those 25 and older (n=167) are much less likely than their peers 18 to 24 (n=842) to say they rely on friends and family/word of mouth for news, at 33 percent versus 52 percent, respectively.
Most students aren’t turning to legacy media as a top source of news, though they generally express trust in sources such as newspapers and broadcast network/TV news to deliver news and other critical information accurately. But more than half also express some or a great deal of trust in social media to deliver accurate information. Same for friends and family/word of mouth.
When engaging with media of different kinds, about two in three students say they regularly check the accuracy of the information by analyzing the source’s perspective and/or possible biases, thinking critically about the message delivered (such as distinguishing fact from opinion), and verifying the information using other sources.
Approximately half of students also say they consider the algorithm that is pushing them certain content on websites and/or social media, pause to check the information before sharing with others or on social media, and identify who or what additional sources are being included in the content. While nearly all students indicate they practice some of these skills, some differences emerge by political affiliation, with self-identified Democrats more likely than self-identified Republicans to report analyzing the source’s perspective and/or possible biases, for example, at 68 percent versus 53 percent.
Many students indicate that their level of media literacy has increased in college. Students also express more confidence in their own level of media literacy than that of their peers, on average: While 72 percent of students rate their own level of media literacy as somewhat or very high, just 32 percent rate their peers’ level of media literacy this way, on average. And students across a range of demographics express at least some concern about the spread of misinformation among their college peers. This includes 63 percent of both Democrats and Republicans. By age, respondents 25 and older are likelier to express a very high level of concern (37 percent of this group versus 24 percent of the 18-to-24 set).
How are institutions doing when it comes to helping students build their media literacy? As with their own level of media literacy relative to their peers’, respondents have a rosier view of their own institution than they do of higher education as a whole. This is relatively consistent across institution types, though students at private nonprofits are less likely than their public counterparts to approve of the job colleges and universities in general are doing.
As for how institutions can best help students improve their media literacy, the top pick from a list of options (up to two choices) is creating digital resources for students to learn about media literacy (35 percent). Another relatively popular option is embedding training on media literacy in a first-year seminar or program (31 percent). This option is more popular among four-year college students than it is among two-year students. But creating peer-to-peer education programs on media literacy is more popular among two-year students than it is among four-year students.
Building Habits and Competencies
Renee Hobbs, professor of communication studies and director of the Media Education Lab at the University of Rhode Island, says it’s “no surprise that college students rely on their family and friends and social networks for news, as do most Americans.” In one comparison, an Intelligent survey of four-year college students following the 2024 election, respondents cited TikTok and Instagram as their top two news sources. The same survey found that students for voted for President-elect Donald Trump were twice as likely to get their news from podcasts as those who voted for Vice President Kamala Harris. In Inside Higher Ed’s survey, Democrats are somewhat more likely than Republicans to cite news podcasts as a top news source (12 percent versus 4 percent, respectively), but Republicans are somewhat more likely than Democrats to rely on opinion podcasts (12 percent versus 5 percent).
Hobbs says it’s a “comfort” that even one in five Student Voice respondents relies heavily on newspapers. That the same, relatively small share expresses a very high level of trust in newspapers and broadcast news confirms national trends, she adds; a fall poll from Gallup, for example, found that confidence in mass media remained at a low. Noting the existence of active “news avoiders,” whose ranks are growing, according to data from the Reuters Institute, Hobbs says that her own media literacy students are required to read the newspaper. Turns out, many “appreciate the opportunity to take up the habit.”
Regarding the ever-expanding space where media literacy overlaps with digital literacy, Hobbs’s own ongoing research suggests that teaching about algorithmic personalization is very low, at least in K-12 education. At the same time, many college students are digitally savvy, and Hobbs says some of her own students have significant followings on platforms such as Instagram, TikTok and Twitch.
As for how colleges and universities can help, Hobbs says general education requirements—such as those suggested in the survey—“might be the best place for media literacy to thrive in a higher education context.” Learning outcomes from Hobbs’s own digital media literacy course satisfy gen ed requirements regarding effective communication and developing and engaging in civic knowledge and responsibilities.
Hobbs adds that academic librarians are leaders in media and digital literacy initiatives on many campuses, and that “one of the best ways for college and university students to develop media literacy competencies” is by creating media themselves. Possibilities include creating websites, podcasts, videos for YouTube or other social media, or developing a community public service media campaign or outreach program. Other opportunities? Working at the college newspaper or radio station or managing social media for a college unit or organization.
“Creating media is a great way to develop media literacy skills, and college faculty may be pleasantly surprised to see what their students can create without any special prompting.”
What are you and/or your institution doing to promote students’ media literacy? Let us know by submitting one of the forms found here.
A running joke with my department chairs, when I was a dean, involved the awarding of merit badges for the accomplishment of a particularly thorny task that the outside world (outside of academia, that is) would not otherwise have known about. Generals rising in the ranks of the military accumulate ribbons. Why shouldn’t there be a similar accumulation of ceremonial badges for accomplishments on the way up the academic leadership ladder?
The granting of ribbons or merit badges will be ever more important in the AI era, in which leaders cannot simply speak about something but rather demonstrate and present the knowledge physically. As the Boy Scouts Merit Badge Hub states, “If it says ‘show or demonstrate,’ that is what you must do. Just telling about it isn’t enough. The same thing holds true for such words as ‘make,’ ‘list,’ ’in the field,’ and ‘collect,’ ‘identify,’ and ‘label.’”
For example: Consider details of just two of the 12 areas Scouts must master to earn the Boy Scout Bird Study Merit Badge:
Demonstrate that you know how to use a bird field guide. Show your counselor that you are able to understand a range map by locating in the book and pointing out the wintering range, the breeding range, and/or the year-round range of one species of each of the following types of birds:
Seabird
Plover
Falcon or hawk
Warbler or vireo
Sparrow
Observe and be able to identify at least 20 species of wild birds. Prepare a field notebook, making a separate entry for each species, and record the following information from your field observations and other references.
Note the date and time.
Note the location and habitat.
Describe the bird’s main feeding habitat and list two types of food that the bird is likely to eat.
Note whether the bird is a migrant or a summer, winter, or year-round resident of your area.
When scouts earn a Bird Study merit badge, you will know they know what they’re talking about and feel comfortable with those scouts running a birding outing. You will feel confident putting matters in their hands.
Wouldn’t this approach be helpful for showing department chair expertise as well?
The Basic Badges: Survival Skills for New Chairs
I propose the list below as standard merit badges any department chair should be working toward. Following the Bird Study merit badge model, the specific tasks involved in earning the first badge are listed in detail. Follow this model and logic if you decide to document and award any or all of these badges at your institution.
Meeting Management Merit Badge (for mastering the art of running efficient faculty meetings while maintaining collegiality and reaching actual decisions)
Show that you are familiar with the terms used to describe meetings by doing the following:
Sketch or trace a meeting room and then label 15 different aspects of a meeting.
Draw up a meeting agenda and label six types of agenda items.
Demonstrate that you know how to properly follow an agenda, use the AV equipment in the room and use the hybrid camera, plus monitor for virtual attendees:
Explain what the Roman numerals mean on an agenda.
Show how to present a PowerPoint to both present and virtual members.
Show how to see, in a timely manner, when a virtual hand is up.
Describe how to bring a latecomer up to speed on an agenda item already discussed.
Demonstrate that you know how to use Robert’s Rules of Order. Show your dean that you are able to understand each chapter in the book, pointing out the debate rules, the tabling-a-motion rules and the majority requirements for each of the following types of votes:
Motion to accept minutes.
Motion to object.
Motion to suspend consideration of an item.
Motion to call the question.
Motion to take up matter previously tabled.
Procedure to select a second when everyone’s hand is up.
Observe and be able to identify at least 20 types of meetings. Prepare a field notebook, making a separate entry for each species of meeting, and record the following information from your field observations and other references:
Note the date and time.
Note the location and room capacity.
Describe each attendee’s main feeding habitat and list two types of food that the attendees are likely to eat.
Note whether the attendee is a tenure-line professor, career-line or part-time/adjunct resident of your department.
Successfully defuse at least three of these common meeting scenarios:
The Filibuster Professor who “just has a quick comment” that turns into a 20-minute monologue.
The Side Conversation Insurgents who start their own parallel meeting.
The “Actually …” Interrupter who must correct every minor detail.
The Passive-Aggressive Email Sender who “just wants to follow up on some concerns.”
Do you not feel comfortable with any department chair who has earned a Meeting Management merit badge running a meeting? Following are some additional basic badges that one can earn for adept engagement in the everyday and more occasional department chair work.
Budget Detective Merit Badge (for successfully tracking down and reallocating mysterious fund transfers and finding hidden resources)
Schedule Tetris Merit Badge (for fitting 47 course sections into 32 available time slots while satisfying everyone’s preferences)
Diplomatic Relations Merit Badge (for mediating between feuding faculty members without taking sides or losing sanity)
Paperwork Expedition Merit Badge (for successfully navigating a minor curriculum change through six committees and three levels of administration)
Assessment Survival Merit Badge (for completing a program review cycle without uttering the phrase “this is meaningless”)
Email Endurance Merit Badge (for maintaining inbox zero while receiving 200-plus daily messages during registration week)
Faculty Development Sherpa Merit Badge (for successfully guiding junior faculty through the tenure process wilderness)
Student Crisis Navigation Merit Badge (for handling everything from grade appeals to mental health emergencies with grace—and documentation)
Accreditation Archive Merit Badge (for creating and maintaining the sacred assessment documents for the next site visit)
Interdepartmental Peace Treaty Merit Badge (for negotiating shared resources and cross-listed courses without starting a turf war)
Conference Room Warrior Merit Badge (for surviving 50 consecutive hours of committee meetings in a single semester while maintaining consciousness)
The Advanced Badges
As department chairs move toward the “seasoned category,” akin to Eagle Scouts’ level of capability, these are the advanced merit badges department chairs should be moving toward:
Everyone Remained Seated Merit Badge (for successfully hosting a controversial speaker event where the Q&A didn’t require campus police, no one stormed out, everyone actually asked questions instead of making speeches, and the dean didn’t have to issue a statement the next day)
Viewpoint Diversity Navigator Merit Badge (for successfully resolving ideological tensions between the “universities are too woke” faculty member and the “universities aren’t woke enough” faculty member, while keeping both the university counsel office and the campus newspaper uninterested in your department)
Social Media Firefighter Merit Badge (for managing department communications after a faculty member’s tweet goes viral, while upholding both academic freedom and institutional reputation)
Soft Landing Merit Badge (for compassionately guiding a struggling graduate student toward alternative career paths while avoiding lawsuits, maintaining departmental reputation for mentoring, preventing faculty infighting about “standards” and ensuring the student leaves with dignity and future options intact)
Side Hustle Tackler Merit Badge (for successfully filling out outside employment forms for a professor simultaneously consulting for Google, running a resale textbook start-up and offering expert testimony, while ensuring university compliance, managing jealous colleagues and preventing the local newspaper from running a “professors don’t work” exposé)
Advanced Curriculum Shepherding Merit Badge (for successfully shepherding an interdisciplinary, multimodal, study abroad–required curriculum through 17 different committees without having it transformed into “just add one elective to the existing major”)
Bonus points for maintaining revolutionary elements like “required internships,” “community-engaged capstone” and “two semesters abroad” through final approval, while fielding questions like “but how will student athletes do this?” and “what exactly do you mean by ‘transdisciplinary’?” and “have you checked with Risk Management?” and “will this impact our parking situation?”
Fresh Blood Without Bloodshed Merit Badge (for successfully integrating an outside chair into a department that has been “led” by the same three faculty trading the position since 1987; includes surviving the “but that’s not how we do it” phase, the “well, in my day as chair” phase and the “I’ll just CC the dean on this email to help you understand our culture better” phase)
Special recognition for preventing the emeritus faculty from creating a shadow government in the department’s second-floor conference room.
The King Has Voluntarily Left the Building Merit Badge (For masterfully orchestrating the graceful exit of a chair who has held the position since before email existed, memorized every bylaw and has an office containing 27 years of irreplaceable paper files organized in a system only they understand; successfully convince them that spending more time on research is a promotion, not a demotion, while ensuring they actually hand over the department credit card and graduate student admissions spreadsheet before leaving)
Bonus points if the outgoing chair willingly shares the password to the department’s social media accounts and reveals where they’ve been hiding the good coffee maker.
The “Reply All” Survivor Merit Badge (for maintaining composure during the dreaded accidental reply-all chain that encompasses the entire college)
And, finally (drum roll) the Ultimate Achievement: The Phoenix Chair Merit Badge (for successfully completing a term as chair and willingly agreeing to serve again)
This highest honor requires:
Completing all previous merit badges
Still believing in the mission of higher education
Retaining enough optimism to sign up for another term
Note: This badge has only been awarded twice in recorded higher education history.
Hollis Robbins is professor of English and former dean of humanities at the University of Utah.
Analysis of completion from the class entering in 2016 finds persistence is a significant factor in timely completion among associate and bachelor’s degree seekers.
Phira Phonruewiangphing/iStock/Getty Images Plus
Over 36 million Americans have earned some college credits but have yet to complete a credential, demonstrating gaps in higher education that leave students with only part of a degree and often student loan debt.
Colleges and universities have invested in their retention strategies to improve students’ completion and the cost of education by helping them complete a degree in a timely manner.
A 2023 Student Voice survey from Inside Higher Ed and College Pulse found 69 percent of undergraduate survey respondents (n=3,004) expected to graduate in the standard two- or four-year time frame.
Thirteen percent of respondents said they didn’t expect to graduate in a timely manner because they planned or expected to take longer, and 3 percent said it was due to factors that they believe to be the fault of the institution.
The background: The federal government tracks first-time degree seekers’ graduation rates in terms of six- and eight-year completion, but a typical associate or bachelor’s degree program can be categorized as two-year or four-year, respectively.
The six-year completion rate for all college students entering two-year and four-year institutions in 2017 was 62.2 percent, with a 34-percentage-point gap between private nonprofit four-year institutions (77.5 percent) and public two-year colleges (43.4 percent).
The study evaluates early success indicators, including first-year GPA, credit completion ratios, second-year enrollment and credits earned, and how these indicators predict completion across credential types and demographic profiles.
Methodology
Timely completion, as defined by the report authors, is “the student having earned the credential they initially sought, at any institution, within a specific time frame,” allowing for variance between associate, credential or bachelor’s programs.
Researchers evaluated four factors: first-year credit completion ratio, first-year credits earned, first-year grade point average and second-year enrollment. Study participants (n=307,500) included first-time, full-time starters enrolled in fall 2016 in bachelor’s degree (63 percent) or associate programs (37 percent). Data was sourced from the Postsecondary Data Partnership by the National Student Clearinghouse and therefore is not representative of the national population.
The findings: Researchers found a majority of timely completers demonstrated early success indicators, including having a significant number of credits earned, above a 3.3 GPA and re-enrollment for a second year. Further, “Students who completed in a timely manner had higher early indicators than non-completers, regardless of race, gender, age at entry, or major field of study,” according to the report.
Even students who took 150 percent (three years for an associate degree, six years for a bachelor’s) or 200 percent (four and eight years, respectively) of the expected time to complete had higher success indicators than their noncompleting peers.
In their first year, students who completed a credential had higher GPAs, earned more credits and completed on average 90 percent of the credits they attempted. They were also more often enrolled in their second year—even if at another institution—compared to their peers who did not finish in a timely manner.
First- to second-year persistence was a distinct factor of timely completion for two-year or certificate students; students who did not complete enrolled in their second year at a rate 32 percentage points lower than those who did complete. This was the most important success indicator, followed by first-year credits earned.
For bachelor’s degree seekers, a student’s first-year GPA was the most important early success indicator, followed by second-year retention.
A student’s field of study can also relate to their timely completion, with bachelor’s degree seekers majoring in social sciences or business more likely to complete and associate degree seekers pursuing STEM or a social science degree more likely to complete. However, the researchers utilized program of study as a demographic category, and therefore analysis cannot be made of program requirements or courses that could help or hinder student completion.
“These findings emphasize the need for targeted, evidence-based interventions that prioritize early academic achievement, support retention, and address program-specific challenges to improve completion outcomes,” according to the report.
Get more content like this directly to your inbox every weekday morning. Subscribe here.
A preliminary analysis of UK university websites finds gaps in the practical information on how postgraduate part-time study actually works, combined with inconsistent acknowledgement of the challenges faced by these learners. Ewan Fairweather, Postgraduate Student Recruitment Manager at The University of Edinburgh asks: ‘Should we really be surprised that many universities find it challenging to recruit part-time postgraduate students?’
‘New Year, New You’. It’s January, the month when ambitions and aspirations take shape. Right now, those of us working in university marketing and recruitment are capitalising on this self-improvement trend, targeting potential postgraduate learners and helping them navigate the labyrinth of course choice, affordability and time commitments.
With more than 13,000 part-time Master’s options listed on Findamasters.com, learners are spoiled for choice; there’s a strong chance they’ll find something relevant out there. But can they afford postgraduate study? And crucially, can they find the time to do it?
Busy lives
For those fortunate enough to be able to fund a part-time Master’s, it will require the considerable investment of another increasingly scarce commodity: time. And this is particularly the case among the largest segment of potential domestic postgraduate students, those aged 30+. This mature audience of prospective learners inevitably carries more personal and professional baggage – careers, relationships, families, caring responsibilities, community and volunteering roles, mortgages and loans.
That is why they are more likely to be considering part-time postgraduate study and so need to work out in very practical terms how to balance learning and living; to picture precisely what it will actually mean.
Drilling down into the detail
I know that universities do so much behind the scenes to address the needs of all types of learners, but sadly this does not come across in the following statements, the likes of which I frequently encountered when searching for part-time postgraduate course details online:
As the School timetable changes from year to year and is not finalised until August, we are unable to confirm this information in advance.
Part-time students are strongly advised to wait until the timetable is available before finalising their other commitments.
Classes can be timetabled Monday-Friday between 9am-6pm. We cannot give timetables in advance of enrolment unfortunately.
With such logistical and chronological vagueness, is it realistic to expect busy people to make life-changing decisions? Certainly timetabling is complicated but we need a clearer answer to the question, ‘So I can plan my life, can you give me an idea of what my timetable will look like?’
Postgraduate part-time learning may not generate the short-term financial boost that the sector needs right now, but we have to plan for today and tomorrow, especially if there is, ‘a need for more people with postgraduate skills in the workforce’. And if the largest segment of domestic students is older, we can assume that many will be looking at part-time in all its glorious forms (online, blended, block, burst, evenings, distance) as their preferred study mode. We have to up our game; timetabling challenges may pose us major headaches, but for prospective students, they are less relevant.
What I did
With a view to improving the information and guidance online for prospective part-time postgraduate students considering the University of Edinburgh, I carried out some exploratory analysis. I sought to understand how UK universities articulated the benefits and practicalities of part-time postgraduate study during the traditional core search period of early January. Typing ‘part time masters’ followed by the institution name into Google, I clicked on the most appropriate results, then evaluated these pages according to two categories:
Coverage: Whether part-time study was included, or contextualised, on the page and the extent to which this was done with empathy and understanding.
Specifics: The level of deeper detail provided (the ‘how, where, who and when’ of part-time delivery).
Pockets of best practice
I gathered the information to improve the content on my own institution’s website with a focus on these busy learners who are looking to successfully juggle high-level study with busy lives. It’s clear that collectively we must do better to address their requirements but there are nonetheless pockets of best practice I believe we can learn from:
Leeds: offers a blueprint for the provision of specific timetable information for each part-time course. It may not look beautiful but when you eventually get there, you find the details you need, combined with a helpful disclaimer
Bedfordshire: From a dedicated part-time page, you navigate to a list of what’s available part-time. From here, you find a course schedule and timetable of exactly when and where the units take place presented in a user-friendly format.
Birkbeck, RVC and Brighton provide extensive details of when and where teaching takes place so you can better manage your time.
Birmingham City University, scores strong on empathy, thinking deeply about the profile and specific needs of their prospective part-time learners
The Open University lives and breathes part-time. The ‘how’ section is fabulous, but I was expecting more on the ‘when and how do I study/attend classes?’
Some institutions promise innovative delivery models designed to support part-time learners’ needs, including De Montfort (‘Block Teaching’) and the RCA (‘Burst Mode’)
Kent is launching a new curriculum and a progressive approach to timetabling this year, designed to help busy people manage their lives better.
Universities with high or medium part-time learning coverage and/or specifics on their website
My recommendations
In concluding, here are some (relatively) easy-to-implement recommendations that will give postgraduate part-time students a clearer idea of the time they need to commit to their studies:
Publish sample timetables: definitive times and locations may not be possible, but is there a way of providing a sample timetable or sharing last year’s timetables?
Consolidate information on part-time study: consider bringing together all information on part-time learning into an easily findable resource or section
Provide bespoke part-time course structure details: interrogate the curriculum from a part-time learner’s perspective, then re-write and update
Show that we care: acknowledge that part-time learners have specific needs. Ideally, do this in a warm and welcoming tone.
It is complicated, but let’s aim to do part-time better – we owe it to our learners!
On our way to developing a curriculum for implementable real-world projects in professional classrooms, an interesting thing happened: Generative AI became ubiquitous. This provided a new perspective on the ideas we established in our previous article, Why Can’t Your Real-World Project Live in the Real World? (Faculty Focus, March 2022.)
In that article, we made a case for enabling real-world clients as partner educators. We tested this theory by working with a client, Artists Alliance Incorporated, a non-profit arts organization in New York City, who needed to rebuild its web presence. While we successfully redesigned the client’s website, we learned during this experience that the 15-week course structure presents a challenge for the production of an implementable project that has real-world impact. Why? Because there’s limited time for the students to gain the professional knowledge needed to generate recommendations that are implementable, and because of the limited capacity of the partner to consistently engage in answering questions about the project for the students. So, in trying to resolve these issues, we wondered, “Could we use generative AI to ‘hack time?’”
Where to begin hacking
The time-intensive elements we believe need to be “hacked” to help students develop the skills necessary to effectively respond to the client’s needs are:
Bringing the students up to speed on content knowledge so they can provide a viable scope to the client
Providing the students feedback on their thinking and recommendations without overloading the client
With the introduction of AI, we wondered if it could be used to augment the access students have to the teacher and the client. For example, could AI be harnessed to help students understand the core concepts of the course and increase their foundational knowledge? Could it also give on-demand feedback based on the client’s stated needs? Both are time-intensive, yet essential, components for implementing a real-world project.
To test our thinking, we developed two generative AI bots and introduced them to our students in a course we were teaching. One was a “Subject Knowledge Bot” (SKB), trained on introductory course content, and the other was a “Project Knowledge Bot” (PKB), trained on transcripts from a client interview detailing their business goals. The SKB provided students with timely knowledge to support the development of their ideas and solutions, while the PKB reduced demands on the client’s time by offering students project-specific insights.
So, how did the bots do?
We piloted the two bots in a Strategic Communications course taught at the NYU School of Professional Studies, Division of Programs in Business, during the spring 2024 semester. During the course, students were asked to redesign a monthly newsletter sent out by the administration to internal stakeholders. To start, the students were given previous newsletters to better assess their quality and efficacy based on the foundational concepts of internal communications being taught in the course. The students submitted their personal assessments and course examples to the SKB, requesting the bot’s feedback. Based on the bot’s response, the students developed a set of recommendations for how the administration could improve the newsletter. The purpose of this exercise was to strengthen the student’s knowledge of internal communications and fill in any gaps students may have had in their understanding. The bot streamlined the time required to build and enhance the students’ knowledge base, enabling students to respond more swiftly to the client’s needs.
After faculty review, the students shared their recommendations with the PKB, which had been trained on a transcript of an interview we conducted with the client. In the interview, the client discussed and assessed their newsletter, focusing on layout, design needs, and the suitability of the content for the target audience. Using the bot’s feedback, the students reevaluated their recommendations and prepared a revised response. The students then developed a final presentation outlining what they considered to be their top recommendations based on their conversations with the PKB. The project concluded with the client selecting the most viable ideas, which were then used to produce a year-end newsletter presented as “for-students, by-students.”
What comes next?
When we began this effort, we assumed that AI could provide a way to strengthen the student-client relationship by giving the students unrestricted access to:
the skills and strategies taught in the course using a bot trained on the course content and
the client using a bot trained on the project requirements and needs.
Based on what we had previously discovered (Is Your Real-World Experience Real Enough?Faculty Focus, March 2020), our thinking was that deepening the linkages between the learner and the client could foster a collaboration that would lead to an implementable project.
Overall, the bots were successful because they helped the students achieve several outcomes in a shorter period of time. The students became better versed in basic strategies for stakeholder communications, and the bots provided immediate feedback on their communication recommendations. These aspects had previously been challenging due to the constraints of the course schedule and the impracticality of expecting clients to address the high volume of student inquiries.
While we were pleased with the experience and the students were able to produce recommendations that were implemented by the client, we believe it is still too early to determine how effective this approach would be in applied classrooms on a broader scale. For example, some issues that still need to be addressed include:
Access to Generative AI tools: For this pilot, students had to have access to paid ChatGPT accounts to use the bots we designed, and those who did not had to use untrained, free-tier generative AI tools.
Strengthening student AI skills: Unfortunately, many of the students resorted to using the bots to simply write their recommendations, not recognizing the bot as a conversational and collaborative partner.
However, despite limitations, we believe there is real potential for AI to “hack time,” i.e., respond to some of the real challenges we, as teachers, have faced in working within a 15-week timeframe to produce implementable projects in professional, applied classrooms. We intend to continue utilizing AI in this manner while refining our approach based on our findings. This includes enhancing the bots’ knowledge base, improving equitable access to the bots, and developing clearer norms and guidelines for their use.
Dr. Paul Acquaro is a lecturer at FOM University of Applied Science for Economics and Management in Berlin and an adjunct assistant professor teaching online with New York University’s School of Professional Studies. He teaches undergraduate and graduate courses in database development, web technologies, IT management, business communication, and project development. Acquaro has over 20 years of experience in information technology, communications, and curriculum development and teaching, and earned a doctorate in education, focusing on instructional technology from Teachers College, Columbia University. Among his many interests is exploring how to combine the possibilities of online learning and the power of problem-based pedagogy.
Dr. Steven Goss, Ed.D., is a clinical faculty member and chair of the Management and Technology program in the Division of Business Programs at NYU School of Professional Studies (NYU SPS). He joined NYU SPS after serving as the Dean of the School of Professional Studies at Manhattan University. Before Manhattan, he led several successful online initiatives at Teachers College, Columbia University, Bank Street College of Education, and New York University, including The Center for Faculty Innovations in Teaching and Learning at NYU Tandon School of Engineering. He has taught diverse student audiences, including K-12, undergraduate, and graduate students. His courses closely relate to his academic interests, including online education, technology innovation, and experiential learning. He has received awards from The Association for the Advancement of Education in Computing (AACE) and the Online Learning Consortium (OLC) for his research on learner-centered online education. Dr. Goss received his Ed.D. in Instructional Technology and Media from Teachers College, Columbia University. He has published a book on practices for transformative online teaching through Teachers College Press, titled Transforming Online Teaching in Higher Education, Essential Practices in Engagement, Inquiry, and Equity, with co-authors Dr. Robin Hummel and Laura Zadoff.
