Tag: changed

  • College Marketing: 7 Ways It Has Changed and How to Stay Ahead

    College Marketing: 7 Ways It Has Changed and How to Stay Ahead

    …and What You Need to Do to Stay Ahead

    The higher education enrollment landscape is undergoing a significant transformation, driven by shifting demographics, technological advancements, and economic uncertainty. To remain relevant and competitive, colleges and universities must adapt to these changes and develop strategies to succeed in a challenging environment. But before you can adapt, one must first look at some of the major innovations that have disrupted how consumers engage with brands.

    Are you engaging students the way they engage with other brands?
    1. Short form video content: Platforms like TikTok, Instagram Reels, and YouTube Shorts have dominated, offering snackable content that informs, entertains, and inspires within seconds. Influencers (see #5) use this medium to tell stories, drive trends, and engage consumers on behalf of sponsored brands. Students use the medium to assess campus life and inform college choices.
    2. Voice and visual search optimization: The rise of “smart assistants”and digital assistants have changed the way we engage with brands, discover products, and complete research, transactions, and more. A good digital assistant is becoming as essential as a solid logo design in marketing.
    3. AI personalization: Artificial intelligence has revolutionized marketing by enabling hyper-personalized experiences, analyzing real-time data, and predicting consumer behavior to deliver tailored content. For cash strapped institutions, it has the added benefit of allowing you to zero in on your highest potential return prospects and curate content.
    4. Augmented reality (AR) experiences: AR is transforming how consumers shop, learn, and engage with brands, creating immersive experiences that drive both engagement and sales. George Mason University developed a successful AR campus tour for transfer students, and I expect to see prospective students and their families wandering campus with branded AR glasses on campuses everywhere before long.
    5. Influencer marketing: The focus has shifted from big-name endorsements to micro- and nano-influencers, offering niche expertise and deeper connections with audiences. Universities are leveraging student influencers on campus for enrollment and advancement opportunities.
    6. Data privacy regulations and ethical marketing trends: With increasing concerns about data breaches, consumers demand transparency and ethical practices in data handling and marketing. Layer an ever changing and tightening regulatory environment and you will need solid governance and procedural guidance to ensure compliance without limiting effectiveness.
    7. Omnichannel integration: Marketers now focus on providing a seamless experience across all touchpoints, ensuring brand consistency and cohesive customer interactions. The same experience is paramount during the college search process to stand out, stay top of mind, and draw students to your engaging (AR powered?) on campus events.

    5 keys to optimizing your college marketing strategy to address these changes

    That is the how, but what about the what. A great tech stack is one thing, but the meat of your strategy and message must center around what is central to your mission, your goals, and your prospective student audience.

    1. Gear your strategy to your prospective students

    As the student population becomes increasingly diverse, institutions must develop targeted recruitment and communication strategies to engage with underrepresented groups, including Hispanic, African American, and first-generation students. According to RNL’s most recent study of undergraduate marketing and recruitment practices, 51% of four-year private, 42% of two-year public, and 37% of four-year public institutions have specific strategies for recruiting Hispanic students. The vast majority of institutions also do not have materials and communications available in Spanish. Depending on your locality, these populations may be your best bet for stable growth, but without a specific marketing strategy, you will miss the opportunity.

    2. Assess the suite of marketing tools, vehicles and assets at your fingertips

    How cohesive, consistent and connected are they? Students use a variety of resources to learn about colleges and universities, from websites and social media to videos and printed brochures. Institutions must adopt a balanced, omnichannel approach to marketing, leveraging multiple channels to reach students at various stages of their decision-making process.

    3. Plug the leak

    As the demographic cliff approaches, institutions must prioritize student success and retention strategies. A recent study found that public colleges and universities use market research and print/electronic campaigns to impact student yield and summer melt, but there is room for improvement in collecting data to inform retention policies. (Our report on retention practices provides very helpful benchmarks and ideas for student success strategies.)

    4. Improve the experience and reduce the stress

    The college search process can be a significant source of stress and anxiety for students. Institutions can help mitigate this by providing resources and support services, such as mental health counseling and academic advising, to help students manage their emotions and stay on track.

    5. Embrace change

    To succeed in a rapidly changing environment, institutions must be willing to adapt and innovate. This includes investing in technology, such as AI-powered enrollment management systems, and exploring new revenue streams, such as online and graduate programs.

    College marketing is evolving at an unprecedented pace. How can you keep up?

    To remain competitive, colleges and universities must embrace strategies that prioritize personalization, authenticity, and innovation. From leveraging short-form video content and AI-powered tools to integrating augmented reality experiences and omnichannel approaches, institutions have a wealth of opportunities to connect with prospective students in meaningful ways.

    However, success will require more than technology; it demands a deep understanding of the diverse needs and aspirations of the modern student population. By aligning marketing efforts with institutional goals, fostering inclusivity, and enhancing the overall student experience, higher education institutions can not only navigate these changes but thrive in a rapidly shifting environment. Now is the time to adapt, innovate, and future-proof strategies to ensure sustainable growth and relevance in the years ahead. Reach out and we can connect on your marketing strategies. We will find a time to talk about your opportunities to make sure your marketing efforts resonate with students and reach them in the channels they use.

    Talk with our marketing and recruitment experts

    RNL works with colleges and universities across the country to ensure their marketing and recruitment efforts are optimized and aligned with how student search for colleges.  Reach out today for a complimentary consultation to discuss:

    • Student search strategies
    • Omnichannel communication campaigns
    • Personalization and engagement at scale

    Request now

    Source link

  • You may not know this example of translation research, but it will have changed your life . . .

    You may not know this example of translation research, but it will have changed your life . . .

    Arguably, the most recognisable example of translational research in recent years was the swift development and rollout of the COVID-19 mRNA vaccine. The world was waiting for this research to meet its real-world ambition. Many members of the public would recognise that some of this research was undertaken at Oxford University and, with some exceptions, would also recognise the beneficial impact of the vaccine for both individuals and society. Following the rollout, there was even a public discussion that touched upon the idea of interdisciplinarity. How could the benefits of the COVID-19 vaccine be communicated to communities who felt reluctant to have the jab or distrustful of medical science?

    However, there was another piece of research that was translated into real-world effect with serendipitous timing.

    In 2013, Professor Andrew Ellis was working at the Aston Institute of Photonic Technologies. Ellis had previously worked at BT, where his observations and experience suggested that the ‘capacity’ needed in the telephone infrastructure had and would increase consistently over time and was consistently underestimated. Ellis recalls an ongoing refrain of ‘surely we have enough capacity already’. This continued to be true once the copper phone lines were used to deliver data for home internet usage.

    At this point, most residential properties were on ADSL (Asymmetric Digital Subscriber Line) internet connections. That is where copper wires are used to deliver broadband internet. Homes were typically working at speeds of around 8 megabits per second (Mbps).

    The Government had developed a strategy setting out that the majority of residential properties should be able to work at speeds of ‘at least 2 Mbps per second and 95% of the UK receiving far greater speeds (at least 24 Mbps) by 2017’. Fibre broadband was beginning to be rolled out, which used fibre optic cables to transmit data much more quickly. However, these fibre optic cables were generally only used to reach the street cabinet, with copper wires connecting the street cabinets to individual homes, restricting the broadband speed that could be achieved.

    From his previous work, Ellis could see that this ambition was neither competitive internationally nor of sufficient use long-term when demand for emerging applications was taken into account. He demonstrated that capacity was falling well below the predicted need and that the UK was slipping down the league table for connectivity in economically developed countries. Estonia, Poland, Korea and Norway were all streaking ahead.

    Ellis contacted MPs working on this strategy via the Industry and Parliament Trust. Two breakfast meetings and a dinner meeting were held to discuss the lack of ambition in the strategy. However, only the fortuitous attendance of a senior civil servant at the dinner meeting led to a policy breakthrough. Further momentum and publicity were generated by a meeting organised by the Royal Society to discuss ‘Communication networks beyond the capacity crunch’, including a presentation by Dr Andrew Lord.

    Ellis was lobbying for an increase in ambition. There was resistance to this as there was no additional money to spend on improving infrastructure outside of the spending review cycle. Ellis convinced the Government that no additional spending was needed to change the ambition. Changing a number in a policy document wouldn’t (on this occasion) cost the government any more money. (The terms ‘pure-fibre’ and ‘full-fibre’ were also coined at these meetings, meaning using fibre optics cables to the street cabinet and from the cabinet to individual homes.)

    With the Government changing their ambition, providers such as Clear Fibre, Gigaclear and BT Openreach would need to improve the infrastructure to deliver faster broadband to our homes.

    It was estimated that upgrading the whole UK to full fibre would cost £40-60 billion as part of the EU-funded Discus project. Research by the AiPT team showed that it would be closer to £8-10 billion if the network was reconfigured according to their research proposals, a one-for-one replacement of network equipment from copper to fibre-based ones. Further, research demonstrated that fibre is also more energy efficient.

    Optical networks were using about 2% of the electricity in the developing world. (Ellis explained that BT objected to this figure, stating that it was, in fact, 1.96%!) Not only was a full-fibre network faster, it was also more energy efficient. (This now pales in significance to the energy consumption that will increasingly be needed to power AI data centres.)

    BT began rolling out full-fibre broadband to 80% of the UK. In 2019, BT hired heavily for this work, much of which was completed in the first few months of 2020. The increased activity and presence of BT vans helped fuel the 5G coronavirus conspiracy!

    In a moment of serendipity, this meant that by the 23rd of March 2020, when the then Prime Minister, Boris Johnson, announced the first lockdown, there was enough access capacity for many of us to begin working at home. As we got used to Zoom and Teams, multiple people were using video calls in one household for work and homeschooling. Not only did this allow for a relatively smooth transition to remote working, but it allowed our children to continue accessing their education and for us to keep in touch with friends and family (Zoom quiz, anyone?) The societal shift to remote working, prompted by lockdowns but enabled by full-fibre, remains both contested in terms of productivity and profound in terms of impact.

    I asked Andrew what challenges he faced when trying to inform industry and policy of his research. He noted three key barriers:

    1. To impact Government policy, one needs to know the right person to talk to. There must be barriers to prevent a free-for-all lobbying system of civil servants. However, policy institutes, research impact centres and organisations such as the IPT should be able to facilitate connections when this is helpful to both parties.
    2. The second – is the structure of academic contracts. New ideas often come from, and are certainly implemented by, PhD students and Research Assistants. However, given that most research assistants are on two- or three-year contracts, their eyes are firmly on improving their CV to land the next contract. This often leads them to focus almost entirely on publications. To build good links with industry and engage in long-term strategy, longer-term job contracts are needed.
    3. Similarly, he feels a strong tension between metrics, such as 4* papers, required for REF and rapid publication of results in outlets read or attended by decision-makers in industry, where solutions are often required in months rather than years

    Whilst the success of the COVID vaccine development may have made global headlines, the work of the AiPT’s team (Andrew believes that others lobbied on the same topic, including Professor Dimitra Simeonidou at the University of Bristol, Professor Polina Bayvel CBE at University College London and Professor Sir David Payne at Southampton University) quietly allowed many of us to continue working and to be connected to our colleagues, friends, and family throughout the pandemic. Further, as Professor Sarah Gilbert, Professor of Vaccinology at the Jenner Institute and lead scientist on the vaccine project, explains, the ability to work remotely with trial volunteers (giving them information via video instead of in-person presentations) and collaborating with colleagues across the globe was vital in the vaccine production itself.

    Source link

  • Law professor challenges university after campus ‘shooting’ hypothetical changed in lesson plan

    Law professor challenges university after campus ‘shooting’ hypothetical changed in lesson plan

    Those concerned that law schools are shying away from teaching some areas of law to avoid controversy just got more reasons to worry, this time courtesy of the University of Hawai’i at Manoa and its absurd treatment of law professor Kenneth Lawson.

    Lawson, an accomplished faculty member at UH, used a simple hypothetical to teach the idea of “transferred intent,” a legal concept invoked when a defendant intends to harm one person, but ends up harming a second person instead. As is common in law school, Lawson offered a hypothetical to convey this idea: Imagine if a dean at his institution tried to shoot another dean, missed, and hit Lawson instead.

    Here’s a screenshot from part of his lesson:

    Those who have been to law school will understand that using campus figures to illustrate hypotheticals is not at all unusual, and is intended to add a bit of levity and grounding to what can be pretty esoteric topics.

    But when an anonymous student filed a complaint, calling the hypothetical “extremely disturbing” and citing the context of some shootings near the university’s campus, administrators summoned Lawson to a meeting near the end of last semester. Though they acknowledged he had not violated any university policy, they nevertheless mandated that he remove the thought experiment from a posted video of the class — or they would change it for him

    The ability of administrators to forcibly alter course materials is positively ripe for abuse.

    Lawson hadn’t thought twice about including the example, and had been using the example for years, not simply because it wasn’t unusual but because the protections of academic freedom give faculty wide latitude in determining how to approach controversial or potentially difficult material. When Lawson refused to alter the video of his presentation, given that he had not violated any policy, and using the hypothetical was well within his academic freedom rights, administrators just went on the school’s online curriculum system, where faculty submit presentations, to make the changes themselves.

    Remember: these changes were being made because, supposedly, some found a hypothetical of campus figures being shot to be disturbing. So this is what the administration came up with.

    Slide with an image of law professor Ken Lawson alongside generic man/woman icons

    You will note that there is still a campus figure on that slide, and it’s the person who was (hypothetically) shot: Professor Lawson. Only the deans have been removed. It seems that at UH, some hypothetical victims are more equal than others.

    There’s no denying that this is silly, and many will be tempted to chalk it up as just more campus craziness. But there’s a disturbing wrinkle here, which is that the ability of administrators to forcibly alter course materials is positively ripe for abuse. The university’s administrators have granted themselves unilateral authority to interfere with faculty teaching decisions, despite the fact that UH is a public institution bound by the First Amendment, which views academic freedom, which protects that right, as a “special concern.” If administrators can “memory hole” bits and pieces of curricula they don’t like, even when it violates no rule, where does it stop?

    UH still has an opportunity to do the right thing. It’s easy, too — all it has to do is step back and let faculty teach, and save the video editing for film class.

    FIRE wrote the university on Dec. 13, urging it to reverse course and restore Lawson’s original hypothetical. The university responded in early January, declining to substantively engage with our concerns or detail specific issues with our argument. Lawson, and all UH students, deserve better. As our second letter states: 

    FIRE’s concerns are only amplified by the fact that this alleged capitulation to sensitivity is occurring in a law school. To receive a proper education in the law, students will inevitably encounter difficult topics like sexual assault, homicide, physical assault, domestic violence, and may be faced in school and in their careers with descriptions of personal injuries far more graphic than those in Lawson’s hypothetical. Where do UH administrators draw the line regarding their interference in faculty instruction if they feel free to operate under a nebulous standard of protecting students from “disturbing and harmful” material? 

    Lawson has submitted a grievance about the situation, so UH still has an opportunity to do the right thing. It’s easy, too — all it has to do is step back and let faculty teach, and save the video editing for film class.

    Source link