OPPORTUNITY FOR STUDENTS TO EARN FREE COLLEGE CREDIT
A new, high-quality path to free college credit was launched in 2017.
The goal of the program, dubbed “Freshman Year for Free,” is to make
college more accessible and affordable for high school students, college
students and adult learners, including active duty military personnel,
their families, and veterans.
WHO IS MAKING THIS POSSIBLE?
Modern States, the New York-based charitable organization behind the
effort, has funded production of online courses taught by college
professors. The courses prepare students for introductory College Level
Examination Program (CLEP) exams in Economics, Sociology, Algebra, and
other areas.
HOW DOES THIS LEAD TO COLLEGE CREDIT?
The CLEP exams, administered by the College Board, are accepted for
credit by more than 2,900 colleges and universities. Modern States is
partnering with high schools and colleges that are making students aware
of the opportunity.
WHY PARTICIPATE?
This is the first time there have been courses (see list below)
taught by top quality college professors for CLEP subjects. Also, Modern
States is paying the CLEP exam fee and scheduling fee for students who
enroll in the courses and take the exams. The benefit for participating
institutions is that this creates a free on-ramp to college that
facilitates learning and earning credits.
WHAT ELSE DO I NEED TO KNOW?
Modern States will pay for you to take the CLEP exam. After you complete the coursework and practice questions, request a CLEP voucher
code from the Modern States website. There are no prerequisites for the
32 courses that are available, and all of them are self-paced. Some of
the courses stem from a partnership between Modern States and edX, the
online education platform created by Harvard and MIT.
HOW DOES IT WORK?
Modern States Education Alliance™ offers free, high-quality online
courses taught by college professors that prepare you for the CLEP
exams, which are well-established and widely-accepted. Solid performance
on the exams (each participating college decides what scores you need
for credit) can earn you college credits and enable you to save tuition
dollars. You can take one course or many; if you do well on eight exams,
you can potentially earn Freshman Year for Free™.
By Michelle Morgan, Dean of Students at the University of East London.
In the UK, we have a well-established education system across different levels of learning including primary, secondary, further and higher education. For each level, there is a comprehensive structure that is regulated and monitored alongside extensive information. However, at present, they generally function in isolation.
The Government’s recent Curriculum and Assessment Review has asked for suggestions to improve the curriculum and assessment system for the 16-19 year study group. This group includes a range of qualifications including GCSEs, A-levels, BTECs, T Levels and apprenticeships. The main purpose of the Review is to
ensure that the curriculum balances ambition, relevance, flexibility and inclusivity for all children and young people.
However, as part of this review, could it also look at how the different levels of study build on one another? Could the sectors come together and use their extensive knowledge for their level and type of study, to create an integrated road map across secondary, further and higher education where skills, knowledge, competencies and attributes (and how they translate into employability skills) are clearly articulated? We could call this a National Learning Framework. It could align with the learning gain programme led by the Office for Students (OfS).
The benefits of a National Learning Framework
There would be a number of benefits to adopting this approach:
It would provide a clear resource for all stakeholders, including students and staff in educational organisations, policymakers, Government bodies, Regulators and Quality Standard bodies (such as Ofsted, the Office for Students and QAA) and business and industry. It would also help manage the general public perception of higher education.
This approach would join up the regulatory bodies responsible for the different sectors. It would help create a collaborative, consistent learning and teaching approach, by setting and explaining the aims and objectives of the various types of education providers.
It would explain and articulate the differences in learning, teaching and assessment approaches across the array of secondary and further education qualifications that are available and used as progression qualifications into higher education. For example, A-Levels are mainly taught in schools and assessed by end-of-year exams. ‘Other’ qualifications such as BTEC, Access and Other Level 3 qualifications taught in college have more diverse assessments.
It would help universities more effectively bridge the learning and experience transition into higher education across all entry qualifications. We know students from the ‘Other’ qualification groups are often from disadvantaged backgrounds, which can affect retention, progression and success at university as research highlights (see also this NEON report). Students with other qualifications are more likely to withdraw than those with A-Levels. However, as this recent reportPrior learning experience, study expectations of A-Level and BTEC students on entry to universityhighlights, it is not the BTEC qualification per se that is the problem but the transition support into university study that needs improvement.
It would also address assumptions about how learning occurs at each level of study. For example, because young people use media technology to live and socialise, it is assumed the same is the case with learning. Accessing teaching and learning material, especially in schools, remains largely traditional: the main sources of information are course textbooks and handwritten notes, although since the Covid-19 Pandemic, the use of coursework submission and basic virtual learning environments (VLEs) is on the increase.
If we clearly communicate to students the learning that occurs throughout each level of their study, and what skills, knowledge, competencies and attributes they should obtain as a result, this can help with their confidence levels and their employability opportunities as they can better articulate what they have achieved.
What could an integrated learning approach across all levels of study via a NationalLearning Framework look like?
The Employability Skills Pyramid created for levels 4 to 7 in higher education with colleagues in a previous university where I worked could be extended to include Levels 2/3 and apprenticeships to create a National Learning Framework. The language used to construct the knowledge, skills and attribute grids used by course leaders purposely integrated the QAA statements for degrees (see accompanying document Appendix 1) .
By adding Levels 2 and 3, including apprenticeship qualifications and articulating the differences between each qualification, the education sector could understand what is achieved within and between different levels of study and qualifications (see Figure 1).
Key stakeholders could come together from across all levels of study to map out and agree on the language to adopt for consistency across the various levels and qualifications.
Integrated National Learning Framework across Secondary, Further andHigher Education
Alongside the National Learning Framework, a common transition approach drawing on the same definitions across all levels of study would be valuable. Students and staff could gain the understanding required to foster successful transitions between phases. An example is provided below.
Supporting transitions across the National Learning Framework using similar terminology
The Student Experience Transitions (SET) Model was designed to support courses of various lengths and make the different stages of a course clearer. It was originally designed for higher education but the principles are the same across all levels of study (see Figure 2). Students need to progress through each stage which has general rules of engagement. The definitions of each stage and the mapping of each stage by length of course are in the accompanying document in Appendix 2.
Figure 2: The Student Experience Transitions Model. Source: Morgan 2012
The benefits for students are consistency and understanding what is expected for their course. At each key transition stage, students would understand what is expected by reflecting on what they have previously learnt, how the coming year builds on what they already know and what they will achieve at the end.
Taking the opportunity to integrate
The Curriculum Review provides a real opportunity to join up each level of study and provide clarity for all stakeholders. Importantly, a National Learning Framework could provide and help with the Government’s aims of balancing ambition, relevance, flexibility and inclusivity for all learners regardless of level of study.
It’s been another challenging year in higher ed, and colleges are unsure what 2025 could bring, especially with the Biden administration coming to an end and former president Trump returning to the White House. But that doesn’t mean there’s nothing for them to celebrate this holiday season, whether it’s increased enrollment, new awards and recognitions, a close-knit campus community—or just the fact that there are students on campus willing to star in a silly holiday video.
Here are Inside Higher Ed’s favorite greetings of this holiday season, including five presidential cameos, four mascot stunts, three live music performances, two Die Hard references … and a partridge in a pear tree.
University of Wisconsin–Superior
Since when can yellowjackets ice-skate? Google tells me that wasps need to find somewhere warm to hide away when temperatures drop below 40 degrees—but Buzz the Yellowjacket, the University of Wisconsin at Superior’s mascot, appears to be the exception. In this holiday greeting video, Buzz not only makes an impressive ice hockey goal but also displays some figure skating prowess, pulling off a top-rate arabesque. Could Buzz become the nation’s first ever apian Olympian?
Riverland Community College, Austin, Minn.
In this video from Riverland Community College in southern Minnesota, different groups of students wish viewers a happy holiday in turn. Their greetings give glimpses into the unique programs, clubs and spaces on campus, from cosmetology students giving pedicures in a salon to handy welders- and electricians-in-training showing off their skills.
Iowa State University, Ames, Iowa
Iowa State’s Cyclone Marching Band comes together in perfect harmony in this artfully choreographed video, marching across campus to provide some brassy musical accompaniment for the campus’s tree lighting. From what I could find in my research, the group first plays the university’s alma mater, “The Bells of Iowa State,” which was written in 1931 by Iowa State English professor Jim Wilson, followed by a rousing rendition of ISU’s fight song.
Georgia State University College of the Arts, Atlanta
Coniferous trees spring from sidewalks and dance studios in this collage-like animation by a GSU alumnus, featuring background music by a current undergraduate student. The video concludes with punny well-wishes for the holidays: “May the arts spruce up your season with good cheer!”
Eastern Washington University, Cheney, Wash.
This sketch from Washington’s EWU opens with the university’s president, Shari McMahan, jokingly bemoaning the fact that she had run out of acorns on which to use her large collection of nutcrackers. But the campus community takes that joke seriously and shifts into high gear, with each department researching how to help her get her hands on more “nutcracker food.” I hope those math students were able to finally solve for the numeric value of acorn!
Howard University, Washington, D.C.
Howard president Ben Vinson III highlights the university’s 2024 achievements in this holiday message, including the D.C. university’s record-breaking freshman class and its 100th homecoming. “As we prepare for the holidays, I look forward to all that lies ahead. I wish everyone a joyful and restful break and a successful start to the new year,” Vinson said.
Whitman College, Walla Walla, Wash.
Rhythmic choral music rings out through Whitman College’s Memorial Building before the singers are eventually joined by an instrumental septet in this distinctive holiday video. What makes this video so unusual is the choice to use not a well-known holiday carol but a choral song by living composer Jeff Newberry with lyrics by Malcolm Guite, a poet and Anglican priest, that nevertheless speak to the gratitude and peace of the holiday season: “Become an open singing-bowl, whose chime / Is richness rising out of emptiness, / And timelessness resounding into time.”
Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, Mass.
MIT’s video this year is a short animated sequence that shows what happens after it magically begins snowing inside one of the university’s academic buildings. A student walks through the snow-dusted hallway, eventually happening upon an atrium where her classmates are playing instruments crafted from ice, sledding and crafting a snow beaver in the image of the institution’s mascot.
University of North Carolina at Charlotte
What a beautiful message for this holiday season: the importance of friendship across differences. When Norm the Niner, the University of North Carolina at Charlotte’s gold-mining mascot, orders goose on a food delivery app, he’s expecting dinner to arrive. But instead, he finds a live goose at his door at ready to move onto UNC-Charlotte’s campus. At first, the goose only wants to cause chaos, but eventually he mellows out, learning to enjoy college basketball, fine art and taking selfies before eventually departing south for the winter.
Tarrant County College, Tarrant County, Tex.
In this heartfelt video from one of Texas’s largest counties, members of the Tarrant County College community join together at a beautifully set table for what looks to be a homemade holiday dinner, reminding TCC students that they will always “have a seat at the table.” Joining them is college chancellor Elva Concha LeBlanc and Toro the Trailblazer, the college’s blue bull mascot, which is dancing in the background.
Oral Roberts University, Tulsa, Okla.
Hot takes abound in this video of Oral Roberts students answering Christmas-related questions, like their favorite holiday songs and films. Is Home Alone 2 superior to the original? Does the Phineas and Ferb Christmas special really qualify as a Christmas movie? Does anyone actually know the words to “Grandma Got Run Over by a Reindeer”? If you and your family don’t have enough to argue about this holiday, these are some questions you could bring up to really cause a ruckus.
Yale University, New Haven, Conn.
Why does it seem like there’s a trend this year of rebuffing all the classic carols in favor of introducing new songs to represent the spirit of the season? I’m not complaining; apparently the song in this video is from Frozen 2, a movie I have never seen, but Yale’s student performers make it sound as loved and lived-in as a warm woolen sweater. This video also features Handsome Dale, Yale’s bulldog mascot, and Angus, the university’s First Puppy.
Clackamas Community College, Oregon City, Ore.
One of two institutions returning to this list from last year, Clackamas Community College in Oregon is back with another parodic holiday heist. This year, the college took inspiration from Die Hard. It stars Adam Hall, a math instructor at the college, in the role of John McClane, having to fight against a plot to “encrypt the digits of pi to ruin their holiday joy.” I’ve never seen Die Hard, but I have to assume that’s extremely accurate to what happens in the movie.
Oakland Community College, Oakland County, Mich.
Oakland Community College is the second to make another appearance on this list from last year. In this year’s self-aware video, chancellor Peter Provenzano decides to use ChatGPT—one its few, if only, appearances in any of these videos!—to gather ideas for a Christmas movie parody that Talon, OCC’s owl mascot, could star in. The AI spits out It’s a Wonderful Life, Die Hard, A Charlie Brown Christmas and more, but none satisfy Provenzano. The moral of the story? “There are a lot of stories Talon can tell to capture the season’s joy, but none better than the story we tell at OCC,” he says. (And stick around to the end for bloopers!)
This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.
Dive Brief:
A state audit of employee spending practices at the Connecticut State Colleges and Universities system found several financial transactions that broke university policies or lacked adequate documentation.
Comptroller Sean Scanlon detailed over $19,000 in spending on food by system Chancellor Terrence Cheng in fiscal years 2022 through 2024, by far the majority of spending on his institutional credit card. Violations included missing receipts, missing guest lists and purchases of restricted items like alcohol.
Scanlon’s probe came at Connecticut Gov. Ned Lamont’s request after CT Insider reported Cheng spent lavishly on meals with a state-funded credit card over the past few years.
Dive Insight:
The report from CT Insider alleged that Cheng had spent as much as $1,114 at restaurants in a week, and paid for private chauffeurs despite having access to a state-provided car at the time. Once, he spent nearly $500 for the service, the outlet reported.
Scanlon’s office concluded that “while not technically violating state or university policy, we found that, in the absence of sound, comprehensive policies, the Chancellor utilized poor [judgment] when making P-Card purchases that were especially troubling given the financial stress on the CSCU system.”
The audit zeroed in on spending on food and transportation by the chancellor. Meals designated as business meetings accounted for 70% of the spending on the official’s card, and some transactions exceeded the $50 meal limit for system employees, the audit found. It also found 18 food purchases with tips deemed excessive — above 22% — which the report noted “is not a policy violation but a questionable use of university funds.”
Of the chancellor’s food-related transactions reviewed by the comptroller’s office, 43% had either no itemized receipts or were missing receipts entirely.
Among other violations were 30 instances where Cheng paid sales tax. That’s a violation of policy because institutional credit cards — also known as P-cards — are exempt from sales tax but must go through a process with vendors to credit those taxes.
However, the comptroller found that Cheng did not technically violate policy because as chancellor he can “override the policy at his own discretion.”
As for chauffeur use, the report noted three times when Cheng — who lives in New York state — paid for a private car service with his P-card, including two trips even more expensive than the one reported by CT Insider. Scanlon determined that these services did not represent violations but said that they “are of note as the Chancellor was provided with a state vehicle for their use.”
In an emailed statement Thursday, Cheng said that he appreciated the audit’s thoroughness and that the system is “committed to implementing stronger controls, policies, and comprehensive training.”
The system review also found issues with P-card use by other leaders, including the interim president of Southern Connecticut State University, Dwayne Smith. The audit found that Smith’s P-card “shows a wide variety of infractions spanning almost every category of restricted purchasing and failure to follow many of the policy requirements for documentation and reporting of transactions.”
Specifically, the comptroller’s office faulted Smith for failing to keep receipts, as well as purchasing tickets to an outside football game without stating its business purpose, among other issues.
In an emailed statement, Smith thanked the comptroller for his analysis and recommendations, adding that many of his office’s P-card transactions relate to his community engagement activities.
“These meetings have yielded significant support for our scholarship programs, internships, mentoring, and ultimately, enhanced job opportunities for our graduates,” Smith said.
Scanlon’s audit found many other issues across the Connecticut college system’s staff. His office’s report lists 10 recommended changes the system should make, including reinstating internal audits, establishing a central policy for P-card use, creating accountability measures for card misuse and establishing a policy for vehicle use.
“Unfortunately, this audit revealed troubling gaps in oversight and questionable spending practices,” Scanlon said in a Wednesday statement. “Our recommendations provide a clear path forward with more comprehensive policies, consistent enforcement, and greater overall accountability.”
In his statement, Cheng said the recommendations would “support the goal of accountability and transparency across the system.”
He added, “The system has begun to take steps in this direction and over the next 100 days, I’ve instructed my team to implement recommendations to improve compliance and reporting.”
The system’s governing board this fall moved to increase oversight of spending in its central office. As part of that process, the system recently hired a new chief compliance officer and legal counsel.
What is the state of free speech on college campuses? More students now support shouting down speakers. Several institutions faced externalpressure 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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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”.
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?
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?
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 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.
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:
Clearly communicate net price information: Highlight the difference between sticker price and net price on your website and in recruitment materials.
Provide transparent financing information: Break down the costs of attendance and explain financing options in clear, easy-to-understand language.
Offer user-friendly net price calculators: Help families estimate their actual out-of-pocket costs with interactive net price calculators.
Proactively counsel about aid: Don’t wait for families to ask – offer personalized financial aid counseling to prospective students.
Address loan anxiety: Provide resources and guidance to help students and families understand responsible borrowing and debt management.
Highlight value beyond price: Showcase the long-term value and outcomes of a degree from your institution to demonstrate the return on investment.
Partner with high schools: Collaborate with high school counselors to provide early education about college financing and affordability.
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.
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.
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.
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.
*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.
