Tag: college

FIRE to Congress: More work needed to protect free speech on college campuses

What is the state of free speech on college campuses? More students now support shouting down speakers. Several institutions faced external pressure from government entities to punish constitutionally protected speech. And the number of “red light” institutions — those with policies that significantly restrict free speech — rose for the second year in a row, reversing a 15-year trend of decreasing percentages of red light schools, according to FIRE research.

These are just a few of the concerns shared by FIRE’s Lead Counsel for Government Affairs Tyler Coward, who joined lawmakers, alumni groups, students, and stakeholders last week in a discussion on the importance of improving freedom of expression on campus.

Rep. Greg Murphy led the roundtable, along with Rep. Virginia Foxx, Chairwoman of the House Committee on Education and the Workforce, and Rep. Burgess Owens.

But the picture on campus isn’t all bad news. Tyler highlighted some positive developments, including: an increase in “green light” institutions — schools with written policies that do not seriously threaten student expression — along with commitments to institutional neutrality, and “more and more institutions are voluntarily abandoning their requirements that faculty and students submit so-called DEI statements for admission, application, promotion, and tenure review.”

Tyler noted the passage of the Respecting the First Amendment on Campus Act in the House. The bill requires public institutions of higher education to “ensure their free speech policies align with Supreme Court precedent that protects students’ rights — regardless of their ideology or viewpoint.” Furthermore, crucial Title IX litigation has resulted in the Biden rules being enjoined in 26 states due to concerns over due process and free speech.

Lastly, Tyler highlighted areas of concern drawn from FIRE’s surveys of students and faculty on campus, including the impact of student encampment protests on free expression on college campuses.

WATCH VIDEO: FIRE Lead Counsel for Government Affairs Tyler Coward delivers remarks at Rep. Greg Murphy’s 4th Annual Campus Free Speech Roundtable on Dec. 11, 2024.

Students across the political spectrum are facing backlash or threats of censorship for voicing their opinions. Jasmyn Jordan, an undergraduate student at University of Iowa and the National Chairwoman of Young Americans for Freedom, shared personal experiences of censorship YAF members have faced on campus due to their political beliefs. Gabby Dankanich, also from YAF, provided additional examples, including the Clovis Community College case. At Clovis, the administration ordered the removal of flyers YAF students posted citing a policy against “inappropriate or offensive language or themes.” (FIRE helped secure a permanent injunction on behalf of the students. Additionally, Clovis’s community college district will have to pay the students a total of $330,000 in damages and attorney’s fees.)

VICTORY: California college that censored conservative students must pay $330,000, adopt new speech-protective policy, and train staff

Press Release

Federal court orders Clovis and three other community colleges to stop discriminating against student-group speech based on viewpoint.

Read More

Conservative students aren’t the only ones facing challenges in expressing their ideas on campus. Kenny Xu, executive director of Davidsonians for Free Speech and Discourse, emphasized that free speech is not a partisan issue. Citing FIRE data, he noted that 70% of students feel at least somewhat uncomfortable publicly disagreeing with a professor in class. “I can assure you that 70% of students are not conservatives,” he remarked. Kyle Beltramini from the American Council of Trustees and Alumni, reinforced this point. Sharing findings from ACTA’s own research, he emphasized that “this is not a problem faced by a single group of students but rather an experience shared across the ideological spectrum.”

The roundtable identified faculty as a critical part of the solution, though they acknowledged faculty members often fear speaking up. FIRE’s recent survey of over 6,000 faculty across 55 U.S. colleges and universities supports this claim. According to the results, “35% of faculty say they recently toned down their writing for fear of controversy, compared to 9% who said the same during the McCarthy era.”

While this data underscores the challenges faculty face, it also points to a broader issue within higher education. Institutions, Tyler said, have a dual obligation to “ensure that speech rights are protected” and that “students remain free from harassment based on a protected characteristic.” Institutions did not get this balance right this year. But, ACTA’s Kyle Beltramini noted the positive development that these longstanding issues have finally migrated into the public consciousness: “By and large, policy makers and the public have been unaware of the vast censorial machines that colleges and universities have been building up to police free speech, enforce censorship, and maintain ideological hegemony in the name of protecting and supporting their students,” he stated. This moment presents an opportunity to provide constructive feedback to institutions to hopefully address these shortcomings.

FIRE thanks Rep. Murphy for the opportunity to contribute to this vital conversation. We remain committed to working with legislators who share our dedication to fostering a society that values free inquiry and expression.

Alumni are also speaking up, and at the roundtable they shared their perspectives on promoting free speech and intellectual diversity in higher education. Among them was Tom Neale, UVA alumnus and president of The Jefferson Council and the Alumni Free Speech Alliance, who highlighted the importance of connecting with alumni from institutions like Cornell, Davidson, and Princeton, since they’re “all united by their common goal to restore true intellectual diversity and civil discourse in American higher-ed.”

Other participants at the roundtable included members of Speech First, and Princetonians for Free Speech.

So what can be done? Participants proposed several solutions, including passing legislation that prohibits the use of political litmus tests in college admissions, hiring, and promotion decisions. They also suggested integrating First Amendment education into student orientation programs to ensure incoming undergraduates understand their rights and responsibilities on campus. Additionally, they emphasized the importance of developing programs that teach students how to engage constructively in disagreements — rather than resorting to censorship — and to promote curiosity, dissent, talking across lines of difference, and an overall culture of free expression on campus.

FIRE thanks Rep. Murphy for the opportunity to contribute to this vital conversation. We remain committed to working with legislators who share our dedication to fostering a society that values free inquiry and expression.

You can watch the roundtable on Rep. Murphy’s YouTube channel.

Source link

December 19, 2024
College faculty are more likely to self-censor now than at the height of McCarthyism

For a number of faculty members, the threat of censorship is so pervasive on campuses across America that not even the cloak of anonymity is enough to make them feel safe expressing their ideas.

This year, FIRE surveyed 6,269 faculty members at 55 major colleges and universities for “Silence in the Classroom: The 2024 FIRE Faculty Survey Report,” the largest faculty free speech survey ever performed.

What we found shocked even us here at FIRE. A deeply entrenched atmosphere of silence and fear is endemic across higher education.

We found that self-censorship on US campuses is currently four times worse than it was at the height of the McCarthy era. Today, 35% of faculty say they have toned down their written work for fear of causing controversy. In a major survey conducted in 1954, the height of McCarthyism, by the sociologists Paul Lazarsfeld and Wagner Thielens, only 9% of social scientists said the same.

Front page of The Michigan Daily newspaper on May 13, 1954.

In fact, the problem is so bad that some academics were afraid even to respond to our already anonymous survey for fear of retaliation. Some asked us by email, or in their free response replies, to keep certain details they shared private. Some asked us to direct all correspondence to a private personal email. Others reached out beforehand just to confirm the results would truly be anonymous. Still others simply refused to speak at all.

For some, the danger is clear and concrete. As one professor wrote, “I am not at liberty to even share anonymously for fear of retribution.”

For others, it’s more nebulous, but the fear is no less real.

“I almost avoided filling out the survey for fear of losing my job somehow‚” one professor told us, adding that they “waited about two weeks before getting the courage to take the risk.”

It is totally unacceptable that this is a reality on today’s campuses.

For what I’m paid to teach the courses that I do, it’s just not enough to outweigh the risk of potential public excoriation for wrong-think and its personal and professional impact on myself, my family, and my business.

We at FIRE even had to devise additional ways of disguising academics and their schools so others could not “out” them using their responses, including by describing certain schools in general terms such as “a flagship state university in the south.” As one professor remarked, “The fact that I’m worried about even filling out polls where my opinions are anonymous is an indication that we, as institutions and as society, have lost the thread concerning ideas.” This person isn’t wrong.

So the next time you’re talking politics with friends or having dinner conversation, remember this fact — four times as many faculty are scared to speak candidly than at the height of McCarthyism!

FIRE SURVEY: Only 20% of university faculty say a conservative would fit in well in their department

Press Release

A third of faculty say they self-censor their written work, nearly four times the number of social scientists who said the same in 1954 at the height of McCarthyism.

Read More

Few other university issues — arguably, few other issues in America, period — matter more. The exchange of ideas and information is the entire reason universities exist. As the Rev. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. once said, “Our lives begin to end the day we become silent about things that matter.” For more than a third of faculty, that ending has already begun.

Consider this final heartbreaking message from an educator who told us they felt the urge to self-censor on the survey even though it was anonymous.

“I had already decided that this year will be the last one I teach at the university,” they reflected. “For what I’m paid to teach the courses that I do, it’s just not enough to outweigh the risk of potential public excoriation for wrong-think and its personal and professional impact on myself, my family, and my business.”

Read the full report and learn more about the full extent of what the climate of higher ed is doing to faculty’s search for truth in higher education today.

Source link

December 19, 2024
Helping Families See the True Cost of College
When it comes to choosing a college, the sticker price can be a major turnoff. A significant 65% of prospective students and 67% of their families report ruling out institutions based solely on the advertised “sticker price”.

Source: 2024 Prospective Family Engagement Report

But what does this mean for colleges and universities, and how can they help families look beyond the sticker shock to understand the true affordability of a degree?

The rising tide of sticker shock

Sources: 2024 Prospective Family Engagement and 2022 Prospective Family Engagement reports

Ruling out colleges based on the sticker price is on the rise – and it’s happening fast. In just three years, the percentage of families eliminating schools from consideration due to high upfront costs has jumped from 58% in 2022 to 67% in 2024.

This suggests that concerns about affordability are increasingly driving the college planning process, with families taking a hard look at the bottom line before even exploring other factors. But is this sticker shock reaction always a rational response, or might colleges be losing out on applicants who could afford to attend with the help of financial aid?

The generational divide

Sources: 2024 Prospective Family Engagement and 2024 High School Students’ Perceptions of College Financing

A notable divide emerges when comparing the sticker shock responses of first-generation college students to their continuing-generation peers. A full 69% of first-generation students reported ruling out schools based on sticker price, compared to 64% of continuing-generation students.

This disparity is also reflected in families’ perceptions, with 68% of first-generation families eliminating schools due to cost versus 62% of continuing-generation families. This could suggest that first-generation students and families are less familiar with the intricacies of college financing and the crucial distinction between sticker and net price.

As a result, they may be more likely to focus on the daunting upfront cost without fully exploring the available aid options. How can colleges better reach, educate, and support these first-generation students about affordability to prevent them from ruling out institutions that could be a great fit financially and academically?

The role of family involvement

Source: 2024 High School Students’ Perceptions of College Financing

The level of family involvement in the college search process also plays a role in sticker shock decisions. Students with very involved parents were less likely to rule out colleges based on sticker price (63%), suggesting that parental guidance may help applicants look beyond the initial cost to consider the bigger financial picture.

But what about students with less involved parents? A striking 75% of students with uninvolved parents ruled out colleges based on sticker price. How can colleges step in to provide the necessary counseling and education about affordability for these applicants?

Loan anxiety and sticker shock: A shared concern for students and families

For both students and their families, concerns about loan debt play a significant role in the sticker shock equation. A striking 70% of students who expressed concerns about borrowing to finance their education were more likely to rule out colleges based on high prices. Families share this loan anxiety – 73% of families with loan concerns reported ruling out institutions based on sticker price. This underscores the need for colleges to address loan concerns head-on through transparent communication about financing options, debt management strategies, and a degree’s long-term return on investment.

Source: 2024 High School Students’ Perceptions of College Financing

By providing reassurance and resources, institutions can help applicants feel more comfortable with the financial commitment and less likely to rule out schools due to initial sticker shock. Importantly, 72% of students and 79% of families reported that their borrowing concerns were negatively impacting their college planning, suggesting that proactive support from institutions is crucial in mitigating loan anxiety and promoting a more holistic view of affordability.

The net price imperative

While sticker price can be a major deterrent, the actual net price of attendance paints a very different picture. Institutions must do a better job of clearly communicating net price information to prospective students and families.

This means highlighting available aid, scholarships, and financing options to demonstrate affordability. Tools like net price calculators can be powerful in helping applicants understand the true cost of attendance. But are these resources being effectively utilized and communicated to offset the sticker shock reaction?

To help families and students look beyond sticker shock, institutions can take the following steps:
1. Clearly communicate net price information: Highlight the difference between sticker price and net price on your website and in recruitment materials.
2. Provide transparent financing information: Break down the costs of attendance and explain financing options in clear, easy-to-understand language.
3. Offer user-friendly net price calculators: Help families estimate their actual out-of-pocket costs with interactive net price calculators.
4. Proactively counsel about aid: Don’t wait for families to ask – offer personalized financial aid counseling to prospective students.
5. Address loan anxiety: Provide resources and guidance to help students and families understand responsible borrowing and debt management.
6. Highlight value beyond price: Showcase the long-term value and outcomes of a degree from your institution to demonstrate the return on investment.
7. Partner with high schools: Collaborate with high school counselors to provide early education about college financing and affordability.
8. Target outreach to first-gen students and their families: Recognize that first-generation students may need additional support and education about the college financing process.
9. Follow up with sticker-shocked applicants: If a student expresses interest but seems deterred by the sticker price, proactively reach out with information about aid and affordability options.
10. Leverage video and AI to personalize the process: Use video content and artificial intelligence tools to provide personalized, interactive explanations of financial aid and affordability. AI-powered chatbots can offer 24/7 support to answer families’ financing questions, while personalized video messages can break down complex aid packages in an easy-to-digest format. By embracing these technologies, institutions can create a more engaging, self-service-oriented experience that empowers families to confidently navigate the affordability landscape.
The bottom line and more findings from our Perceptions report

The sticker shock phenomenon is a real and growing concern in college admissions. However, by understanding the factors that drive these decisions and taking proactive steps to educate families, colleges can help prospective students see beyond the advertised tuition rate to consider the true affordability of a degree. This requires a nuanced understanding of the college financing landscape and a commitment to clear, transparent communication. With the right approaches, institutions can attract diverse applicants who may have otherwise been deterred by sticker shock.

You can read more insights and findings in the 2024 High School Students’ Perceptions of College Financing report, co-sponsored by our partners Ardeo and Halda. This report captures data from a survey of more than 2,100 11th- and 12th-grade students. Read it now.
Source link
December 17, 2024
5 Reasons to Administer the Refreshed College Employee Satisfaction Survey (CESS)

The expectations of higher education faculty and staff have changed. Understanding the experiences, opinions, and satisfactions of your faculty and staff is invaluable to creating a healthy culture and work environment. But it’s not just about fostering a positive atmosphere—it’s also critical for retaining your employees, improving the student experience, and reducing the risk of lost institutional knowledge.

To help institutions better understand and support their faculty and staff, RNL is excited to introduce the refreshed College Employee Satisfaction Survey (CESS), designed with enhanced features to delve deeper into employee engagement and satisfaction at colleges and universities. Here are five reasons your institution should consider administering the updated CESS in 2024-2025.

1. Gain a comprehensive view of your employee experience

The updated CESS measures key aspects of faculty and staff morale, including workplace recommendations, overall job satisfaction, and retention rates. With this data, you’ll have a clear picture of your university’s workplace culture, helping you make meaningful improvements driven by faculty and staff input.

2. Identify what matters most to your team

The refreshed CESS explores key aspects of the employee experience including internal communication, prioritization of institutional goals, work-life balance, and satisfaction with compensation. Your employees also highlight institutional strengths and opportunities for improvement, giving you direct feedback on what they value most.

3. Benefit from detailed, actionable reports

With your participation in the CESS, you’ll receive comprehensive reports, including faculty and staff segment analyses, the raw survey data, and the RNL CESS Benchmark National Norms report.* This information empowers you to take targeted action to boost employee morale.

4. Support accreditation and strategic planning

Survey results from the CESS can be a powerful asset in accreditation and strategic planning processes. Demonstrating a commitment to understanding the employee experience helps to demonstrate compliance with key standards and conveys that your institution is proactive about maintaining a thriving educational environment.

5. Take advantage of special pricing and longitudinal analysis

To celebrate the launch of the refreshed survey, RNL is offering a 25% discount on standard administration fees for surveys conducted in 2025. Moreover, institutions engaging in the CESS more than once within a five-year span will receive a complimentary longitudinal comparison report. This report is invaluable for tracking changes and trends over time, providing a deeper understanding of the long-term impact of implemented policies and changes.

The refreshed College Employee Satisfaction Survey from RNL is more than just a survey; it’s a comprehensive tool that empowers higher education institutions to thrive by fostering a healthy campus culture and satisfying work environment. By participating in the CESS, your institution can gain critical insights, enhance strategic planning, and ultimately, elevate the overall campus culture.

To learn more or to schedule your institution’s participation, please visit our dedicated College Employee Satisfaction Survey webpage.

*Benchmark reports will be sent to participating institutions once seven institutions of their type like 4-year publics, 2-year publics, or 4-year private conduct the 2024 CESS.

Source link

December 17, 2024
Doctoral Recipients by Undergraduate College, 1958–2023

This is a popular post each year with high school and independent counselors working with students who are already thinking about a doctorate. It shows the undergraduate institutions of doctoral recipients from 1958 to 2023. (It does not show where the doctorate was earned, to be clear.)

It’s based on data I downloaded from the National Science Foundation using their custom tool. It’s a little clunky, and–this is important–it classifies academic areas differently before 2020 and after, but with a little (OK, a lot) of data wrangling over the long weekend, we have something for the data junkies out there.

This is for fun and entertainment only, because, as I indicated, the categories are not quite the same, and for the sake of clarity, I had to combine similar (but not identical) disciplines.

There are two views, using the tabs across the top. The “All Data” view allows you to filter to your heart’s content. The purple boxes allow you to limit the type of institution of the bachelor’s degree recipients: You may want to look at Public Universities in the Southeast, for instance, or all Catholic colleges (listed as “Roman Catholic” in the filter, by the way). The tan boxes allow you to specify the doctoral degree area (Chemistry, or Political Science, for instance), and to limit the years. You might want to look at 2017 to 2023, or you might want to get nostalgic and look at 1958 to 1965, for instance.

The bars, which are colored by Broad Carnegie type, display the counts. Us the scroll function at the right to see more data.

The “Top 30” view limits to those places that produce the most students earning doctorates. The labels show you the Rank (in orange), the counts (in blue) and the percent of total (in purple). The percents are only calculated on the group you’ve selected, not the grand totals.

This always generates four questions:

Can you show these as a percentage of the graduates of this institution? No, because not everyone who graduates with a doctorate does it in the same time. I’d have to take lots of data and make some wild guesses.

Can you show what these students majored in at the undergraduate level? No, that’s not available in the public sets, and I don’t want to apply for the restricted use license. If you do, and you want me to work on this, let me know.

Can you crosstab this data to show, for instance, where the Stanvard graduates earned their doctorate? Again, it’s not in the public data set, so no.

What about other doctorates, like MD or Pharm.D or DDS? It’s not included: These are research doctorates only.

If you use this in your business and want to support my time and software and hosting costs, you can do so here. If you’re a high school counselor or a student or parent, just skip that link.

Source link

December 3, 2024
For Adult Learners, College Means More Than Just Jobs and Wages
Title: Multiple Meanings of College: How Adult Learners Make Sense of Postsecondary Education & Why It Matters

Authors: Melanie Shimano and Becky Klein-Collins

Source: Council for Adult and Experiential Learning, Stanford Pathways Network, and Strada Education Foundation

When adults decide to go back to college, some people assume their motivations are purely economic—to get a better job, make more money, or move up the corporate ladder. However, a new study by Council for Adult and Experiential Learning, Stanford Pathways Network, and Strada Education Foundation challenges this narrow view. Researchers interviewed 120 adult learners and found that they have many different reasons for wanting a college degree.

While most people said they wanted to advance their careers and make more money, they also had personal reasons that were just as important. For example, they want to:
- Set a positive example for their children
- Push back against racism and discrimination through educational attainment
- Gain skills to better serve their communities
- Fulfill a lifelong ambition and gain a sense of achievement
- Grow as individuals by developing new capabilities and identities
The people interviewed said support from their schools, employers, coworkers, friends, and family was key to their success. Programs designed for adults, caring advisers, and supportive loved ones made it easier to juggle school, work, and life. When asked if college was “worth it,” many said yes because of what they learned, how it helped their careers, and the personal goals they achieved. But some who took on a lot of debt or felt they weren’t learning enough had doubts.

To serve adult students well, institutions should consider all the reasons they go back to school. Here are some key recommendations from the report:
- Craft recruitment messages that resonate with a range of motivations beyond just economic benefits
- Explicitly recognize and celebrate personal, familial, and civic goals in advising
- Provide college credit for completion of alternative credentials to leverage the symbolic power of a college degree
- Assess student success comprehensively, incorporating metrics like community involvement in addition to earnings
While there is growing enthusiasm for alternative educational pathways, adult learners remind us that a college degree still holds significant value for Americans in many ways. As institutions work to create more paths to success, it is crucial to understand and build upon the multifaceted meaning of college for adult learners.

Click here to read the full report.

—Alex Zhao

If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.
Source link
November 23, 2024
Troubled FAFSA Rollout Linked to Sharp Decline in First-Year College Enrollment

Title: Fewer Freshmen Enrolled in College This Year Following Troubling FAFSA Cycle

Author: Katharine Meyer

Source: Brookings Institution, National Student Clearinghouse Research Center

The rollout of the new FAFSA form last year triggered cascading consequences across the higher education community. The launch was delayed, customer calls remained unanswered, and the number of filings decreased by about three percent. As the form’s issues compounded, experts predicted that the fumbled rollout would likely negatively impact the higher education sector across several metrics, particularly new student enrollment.

The National Student Clearinghouse Research Center collected data at the beginning of the academic year to begin painting the updated enrollment picture and will follow up with final enrollment numbers for the 2024-25 academic year. The Brookings Institution analyzed the preliminary data and observed large declines in FAFSA filings, followed by a decrease in first-year enrollment.

Across all institutions, first-year enrollment is down 5.8 percent among 18-year-olds and 8.6 percent among 19-20-year-olds. At public four-year institutions, first-year enrollment declined 8.5 percent, and it declined 6.5 percent at private four-year institutions. White freshman enrollment declined the most (11.4 percent), followed by multiracial (6.6 percent) and Black (6.1 percent) first-year student enrollment. Enrollment at HBCUs, however, increased 5.9 percent from last year and has cumulatively increased 12.6 percent since fall 2022.

First-year enrollment at four-year schools declined across all levels of Pell Grant recipience. Institutions that experienced the largest declines in first-year enrollment, though, were public and private four-year institutions with the highest shares of students receiving Pell Grants (-10.4 and -10.7 percent, respectively). First-year enrollment at four-year colleges is also down across all levels of selectivity, with the largest decline occurring at very competitive public four-year institutions (-10.8 percent), followed by competitive public four-year institutions (-10.3 percent).

Despite declines in first-year enrollment, total college enrollment increased three percent, due in part to a 4.7 percent increase in community college enrollment. Interestingly, this increase occurred at certain types of two-year institutions but not all of them. At colleges that predominantly award associate degrees and some bachelor’s degrees, freshman enrollment increased 2.2 percent, and at two-year institutions that enroll a higher proportion of low-income students, first-year enrollment increased 1.2 percent. At community colleges only awarding associate degrees, however, enrollment decreased by 1.1 percent.

The author notes these insights come with caveats; many factors have contributed to enrollment decline over the last decade, notably falling public confidence in higher education and the ever-growing cost of attending college. The sharp decline in first-year enrollment, however, correlates with the troubled FAFSA launch. Continuing to collect data over time will provide more insight into the implications of recent disruptions to enrollment trends, particularly following the COVID-19 pandemic and the FAFSA rollout. The 2025-26 FAFSA form will be available this December, and its functionality will determine the gravity of the past year’s enrollment decline.

To view the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center data dashboard, click here. To read the Brookings Institution analysis, click here.

—Erica Swirsky

If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.

Source link

November 18, 2024
College Recruitment Strategies and Ideas to Boost Enrollment

Student Recruitment Ideas for Better Enrollment Marketing

College recruitment strategies have undergone a seismic shift in recent years with the rise of an always-on digital audience and the growing accessibility of online programs. Fewer geographical constraints and heightened competition have fueled this realignment, prompting institutions to craft student recruitment strategies that are as dynamic as the students they aim to enroll.

In the modern, digital-first landscape of higher education, recruitment season is no longer confined to the traditional August to December window. Students are applying and enrolling year-round, and your institution must constantly assess which strategies are driving results and which are falling flat.

By embracing smarter, data-driven marketing tactics, you can stand out in the crowded landscape of online education, uniting students under the shared mission of your institution.

The Importance of Student Recruitment Strategies

You’ve been working in higher education for over a decade, but recently, student recruitment seems harder. You’re not alone. Prospective students are going in less traditional directions and finding cheaper, faster ways to become qualified for the workforce through modalities such as online certificates and boot camp programs. Inflation isn’t helping either.

But through a realignment of strategy to meet digital native consumers, you can meet students where they are and capitalize on projected enrollment growth.

Don’t get scared into sticking with outdated ways of reaching prospective students. Instead, rise to the challenge, get a better understanding of the landscape you’re working with, and refresh your enrollment marketing strategy.

3 Student Recruitment Strategies

We won’t tell you that all traditional marketing strategies are outdated, but we do want to make it crystal clear that students are online. They’re surfing the web on their smartphones and discovering new universities and programs through (mostly mobile) online journeys. If your enrollment strategy isn’t rooted in this reality, you’re at risk of losing more than half of your potential students.

1. Meet Them Where They’re At (On Their Phones!)

With 91% of the U.S. residents owning a smartphone, it’s no surprise prospective students are surfing the web from their mobile devices. In fact, a recent report by Oberlo tells us that over 60% of all internet traffic comes from mobile devices.

Most of the time, however, our web developers, brand managers, and marketing professionals are viewing and building websites on their desktop computers. While working from a computer is convenient, it’s imperative that every single UX/UI change made to your university/program website is tested on both desktop and mobile.

Don’t lose out on prospects just because you didn’t consider both desktop and mobile website views in your design process. It may seem obvious, but plenty of colleges and universities aren’t considering this important strategic detail.

2. Consider Utilizing Paid Media

Now that you’ve cleaned up your mobile site, you’re ready to start pushing students from other platforms to your program pages through a key college recruitment strategy: paid media. While paid media isn’t the cheapest option, it’s often one of the most effective. Google Ads, LinkedIn, and Facebook provide fairly straightforward ways to spend for clicks.

We recommend starting with PPC (pay per click) campaigns to attract prospective students to your site. These campaigns help the most with bringing in entirely new audience members whom you may not have been able to reach through organic efforts. The internet is vast, and it’s not always easy to track down potential candidates without some extra help.

After bringing in new prospects from platforms like Google and LinkedIn, your job is to create a journey where they’ll sign up for your newsletter or respond to a survey so you can effectively follow up and make their click worthwhile. It may seem pricey at first, but once the leads start coming in and you’re able to connect with them well after that first click, you’ll see the return on investment.

PPC campaigns can also help speed up the process if you’re finding yourself behind on your goals this quarter.

3. Tap Into Popular Platforms and Their Users

If paid media feels a bit too far out of reach, some high-growth organic options can help your student recruitment strategy.

Use Instagram to Engage With Students

Most institutions now have a presence on LinkedIn and Facebook, but university marketers may be missing a huge opportunity with Instagram. A recent article from RivalIQ cited higher ed’s impressive average engagement rate of 2.43% on Instagram, compared with the median across all industries of 0.43%.

Instagram should be used in a completely different way than Facebook and LinkedIn, which can be deterring for content teams, but clearly prospective students are interested in engaging there. Be sure to connect with them and provide tailored content.

Harness the Power of Testimonials

When you hear the words “influencer marketing,” you may think of famous teenagers with millions of followers dancing their hearts out to a 15-second song. While plenty of those influencers are out there, so are users who share their educational journeys, financial tips and tricks, and personal stories about their lives and experiences.

With the number of graduates, administrators, and staff members your school has on social media, you’re sure to find some influential users who are willing to share their satisfaction with your program on their channels. It doesn’t require millions of followers either.

Nano influencers (influencers with a following between 1K and 10K) are “everyday people” who come across as more authentic and with much more enthusiasm than the players in the big leagues (micro/macro influencers). According to a recent study from Matter Communications, 69% of consumers depend on recommendations from influencers, family members, and friends over information provided by brands. That means two of every three consumers want to read reviews from online personalities they see as trustworthy sources — an amplified version of word-of-mouth marketing.

Use Short-Form Video to Reach New Audiences

Short-form video is an important college recruitment strategy for engaging with students. Though the style of content may seem daunting and the editing may seem like a lot of work, recent studies have indicated that Gen Z users prefer TikTok for search over Google — making it an indispensable part of your strategy.

Although prospective student demographics look different across universities, your target students are likely on TikTok. And more importantly, they’re using it as a source of information. The hashtag #LearnOnTikTok had over 360 billion views as of 2024, according to The Leap.

Think of the reasons users visit your website — and the questions they have — and use that insight to inform the kinds of content you can provide to educate prospective students.

We Can Help Build Your Online College Recruitment Strategies

The higher-ed landscape is still undergoing unexpected shifts at a faster rate than most of us are ready for. Some days, you might feel like you’ll be playing catch-up for ages, and evolving marketing tactics might make that race feel even harder. It’s a lot to manage a robust omnichannel college recruitment strategy, but you don’t have to do it all internally.

At Archer Education, we partner with colleges and universities to create effective messaging that will illuminate your brand’s strengths and unique values to attract and convert high-quality students. Our experts are always in the know, employing tech-enabled, modern enrollment tactics to attract prospective students’ attention, drive engagement, and facilitate action. Don’t overstretch your team members — let us help. Contact us today for more information.

Source link

November 17, 2024
Unpacking the Transition to College

Title: High School Benchmarks

Source: National Student Clearinghouse Research Center

Each year, the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center reports on the transition from high school to college. The latest report finds that as we move further away from the height of the COVID-19 pandemic, policy and practice are reverting to “normalcy,” though there are still lasting inequities in student outcomes.

Throughout the report, the authors group high school graduates by several metrics to illustrate the nuances of the transition from high school to postsecondary education, using high school characteristics such as poverty level, income level, urbanicity, share of minority students, and enrollment over time, along with college characteristics and student outcomes.

Key insights include:

High school income classification changes during COVID-19

In 2020, the United States Department of Agriculture allowed schools to provide student meals through the Summer Food Service Program rather than the National School Lunch Program (NSLP). The number of students who qualify for NSLP is a key poverty indicator, so this change resulted in fewer schools classified as high-poverty and low-income. When NSLP resumed normal administration in 2023, school poverty levels reverted to pre-COVID-19 distributions.

Outcomes by high school graduating class

Rural high schools had the largest increase in immediate enrollment following high school graduation. In 2023, 54.8 percent of graduates from rural high schools enrolled in higher education immediately, a 0.9 percentage point increase from 2022 (53.9 percent).

Students who graduated from high-minority high schools in 2021 saw their first-to-second year persistence rates increase by 2.9 percentage points over students who graduated in 2020 (77.4 to 80.3 percent). Meanwhile, students from low-minority high schools’ first-to-second year persistence rates increased by 1.7 percentage points (85.2 to 86.9 percent).

Six-year completion rates among high-poverty high schools rose from the class of 2016 to the class of 2017 (24.5 to 25.1 percent), and completion rates among low-poverty high schools decreased (59.9 to 59.4 percent).

Outcomes by high school type

Across high school characteristics, the largest disparities in enrollment, persistence, and completion rates were between high- and low-poverty high schools. High-poverty and low-income high schools had the lowest first-to-second year persistence rates (76.0 and 78.3 percent, respectively), compared with their low-poverty and high-income counterparts (90.7 and 86.7 percent, respectively).

Disparities between high- and low-income schools widened when looking at schools with a high share of minority students. Whereas 66.5 percent of 2023 high school graduates from low-minority, high-income high schools enrolled in the first fall following graduation, only 52.1 percent of students from high-minority, low-income high schools did the same.

For the high school class of 2017, six-year postsecondary completion rates varied considerably across high school characteristics. The share of students graduating college within six years who attended low-poverty high schools was 34.3 percentage points higher than the share of students from high-poverty high schools (59.4 compared with 25.1 percent).

Enrollment by major

Across several high school characteristics, students from high-poverty, low-income high schools completed degrees in STEM fields at lower rates than students from low-poverty, high-income, low-minority high schools. Whereas 22.5 percent of students from low-poverty high schools completed their STEM degree within six years, only 7.8 percent of students from high-poverty high schools did the same. Moreover, 16.9 percent of students from low-minority high schools received their STEM degree within six years, compared with 10.6 percent of students from high-minority schools.

Among 2023 high school graduates, students from suburban high schools chose a major in business, management, marketing, and related support at a higher rate than students from rural and urban high schools (13.5 percent compared with 12.1 percent for rural and urban schools).

To view the data, click click here..

—Erica Swirsky

If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.

Source link

November 4, 2024
Families Use a Variety of Options to Keep Pace with Increasing College Tuition
Title: Covering the Tuition Bill: How Do Families Pay the Rising Price of College?

Author: Phillip Levine

Source: The Brookings Institution

The increasing costs of attendance at colleges and universities, especially higher “sticker prices,” have attracted attention from both families and policymakers. Although many families are not paying the full sticker prices due to financial aid, today’s families are still facing higher bills for postsecondary education.

A new analysis from the Brookings Institution examines the different funding sources that families use to pay for four-year nonprofit colleges and how these differ depending on family income. While the findings reflect the different limitations families face based on their incomes, they also suggest that rising net prices mean all households face additional hardships when their children enroll in college.

Key findings include:

Middle- and higher-income parents increasingly used their own income and savings.
- Between 1996 and 2008, payments to colleges from parents’ income and savings jumped by $1,500 to $4,600, depending on the family income and type of institution. These values likely increased again by several thousand from 2008-2020, but specific figures are not available.
Middle- and higher-income parents have borrowed more.
- Families with incomes below $50,000 and students attending private institutions saw the highest increases, an average of $1,200, in parents taking out loans from 2008 to 2020.
- Families with incomes between $50,000 and $100,000 borrowed, on average, $800 more in parent loans for students attending public institutions between 2008 and 2020.
- Parents were more likely than students to take out education loans, especially between 1996 and 2008 and among middle- and higher-income families.
Students from lower-income backgrounds worked more.
- Payments to colleges with funds from student earnings increased among families with incomes under $50,000 from 1996-2008. Student earnings likely also covered the bulk of net price increases for lower-income families between 2008 and 2020.
- Students from families earning less than $50,000 enrolled at public institutions were six percentage points more likely to work in 2008 compared to in 1996.
These findings provide reassurance that increased student borrowing is not the primary resource for students to cover increased net prices at four-year colleges. Although the student debt crisis continues to gain attention as overall student loan debt has grown broadly, that increase is largely not occurring at four-year nonprofit institutions.

However, increased borrowing by parents, especially in middle- and higher-income families, is a trend worthy of more attention. Given that lower-income families may be unable to take on parental loans due to creditworthiness, parental borrowing can contribute to increased inequality as cost may prevent lower-income students from selecting the best school for them or from attending college at all. Middle- and higher-income families can face other significant consequences: If parents deplete their assets or save less, they may not be able to retire until they are older or have decreased retirement income.

To read the full report, click here.

—Austin Freeman

If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.
Source link
November 4, 2024