Tag: Colleges

Beyond the Click: Why Students Really Reach Out to Colleges
The Scroll

Picture this: A high school sophomore is scrolling Instagram at midnight and stumbles on a college reel that feels… real. Maybe it is a marching band. Maybe it is students chatting on the quad. Maybe it is a 10-second video about living in the dorms. Whatever it is, something sparks.

But here is the twist: what students do next is not always what colleges think they do.

Take Anna, a 10^th grader in Minnesota:

“I followed my dream school on Instagram for a year before I filled out a form. I wanted to see if it was really for me.”

Intentional. Curious. Not rushed.

Nearly 90% of teens use social media, with Instagram and TikTok especially popular among high school students as they shape their opinions about colleges (Pew Research Center, 2024; Statista, 2023). Students now use social platforms as a low-pressure way to assess fit before filling out a form (Šola & Zia, 2021). For first-generation and underrepresented students, social media often serves as a critical window into campus life, offering stories and info they might not find elsewhere (Wohn et al., 2013).

Here is where the institutional side comes in. The 2025 Marketing and Recruitment Practices Report (RNL, 2025) shows that while colleges rank social media ads as one of their most effective tactics, they still put most of their dollars into Facebook and Instagram. The 2025 E-Expectations Report (RNL et al., 2025) shows that students spend much of their time, but campuses underuse these channels (RNL, 2025). That platform gap is a big reason students scroll without always finding authentic, peer-driven content that sparks action.

The 2024 College Planning Report (RNL & Halda, 2024) adds another layer: many students describe the early stages of college exploration as “confusing” and “overwhelming,” especially when they do not see affordability clearly explained. Social becomes a safe space to watch, wait, and observe before risking that first outreach.

Digital dominance: The top outreach methods

According to the 2025 E-Expectations Report, nearly 90% of first college contact happens digitally.
Students most often make that first move by:
- Filling out a form on the college website (31%)
- Sending an email (28%)
- Following the school on social media (27%)
That last one? Not just casual scrolling. One in three 9th graders is already following colleges online, long before they are ready to apply (RNL et al., 2025).

Students are also more likely than ever to use digital inquiry forms and direct email, confirming that a digital-first mindset is now the norm (JohnXLibris, 2024; Pew Research Center, 2024).

On the college side, the RNL Marketing Practices data reinforces the digital-first story: email and SMS are the most effective outreach methods (RNL, 2025). That is one place of alignment. But here is the catch: colleges often lead their early campaigns with brand identity, facilities, or rankings. Students, meanwhile, are looking for something more practical: programs, scholarships, and campus life glimpses. It is not just about being digital. It is about being relevant.

The 2024 College Planning Report shows why: when asked about their top concerns in the process, students point first to affordability (42%) and finding the right academic fit (31%) (RNL & Halda, 2024). If early outreach misses those notes, students scroll past.

What sparks a student to reach out?

The top motivations for contacting a college are (RNL et al., 2025):
- Information about a specific major or program
- Details on how to apply
- Financial aid questions
- Talking to an admissions counselor
Among first-generation students, financial aid is even more central; they are more likely to initiate contact specifically about affordability (Affordable Colleges Online, 2024).

Barriers like complex forms and confusing language make it harder for first-generation and low-income students to confidently reach out (Inside Higher Ed, 2024). That is why clear, transparent messaging matters from day one.

The College Planning Report reinforces this finding: students consistently name financial aid and cost as their most significant barriers, with 55% saying affordability worries may limit their options (RNL & Halda, 2024). The 2025 Marketing Practices Report makes the contrast clear: Colleges invest heavily in brand storytelling and polished digital ads. Students, however, are motivated to act when they see clear pathways, majors, application steps, and affordability details (RNL, 2025).
Read the E-Expectations Report

How can you increase engagement with prospective students? How you can you better align your recruitment strategies with their expectations. Find all this and more in the E-Expectations survey of college-bound high school students, with findings on:

What they expect from college websites

Which communication channels they prefer

How they use AI in the search process

How they value video when learning about campuses

Download now
From social scroll to serious inquiry

Social media is a leading gateway for college exploration among younger students, particularly those in 9th and 10th grades (RNL et al., 2025). At this early stage, students are not necessarily ready to fill out inquiry forms or attend information sessions; they are observing. Following colleges on Instagram, watching TikTok videos, or seeing a YouTube dorm tour gives them low-pressure insight into student life, culture, and fit (Šola & Zia, 2021).

Over half of high school students report using social media to explore colleges (Statista, 2023). Instagram and TikTok are now more popular among teens than Facebook or X/Twitter (Pew Research Center, 2024).

However, here is the rub: the Marketing Practices Report shows that institutions still prioritize Instagram and Facebook for ad buys, with TikTok and YouTube trailing (RNL, 2025). Students are signaling where they scroll, but colleges are not always meeting them there. The result? Missed chances to connect when students are most curious and impressionable.

The 2024 College Planning Report echoes this generational divide: while older students lean into email as their primary channel, younger students treat social media as their first stop, often months before they enter the formal admissions funnel (RNL & Halda, 2024).

Do not sleep on the follow-up.

Once a student reaches out, timing and tone are everything.
- 68% of students prefer follow-up via email.
- 40% favor text messages for quick updates or deadline reminders.
- Only 32% are willing to share their home address (RNL et al., 2025).
Teens are increasingly skeptical of institutions that over-collect data or send irrelevant messages (Pew Research Center, 2024). They expect transparency about why information is collected and how it will be used (EDUCAUSE, 2021).

Here, too, we see both alignment and friction. Colleges know email and text work; the 2025 Marketing Practices data confirms these are the most effective channels (RNL, 2025). But colleges also continue to lean on printed materials and phone calls for first contacts, even though students rank them not as high (RNL et al., 2025).

The 2024 College Planning Report drives home why this matters: slow response times can be fatal. Nearly half of students expect a reply within 24 hours, and interest drops sharply if schools take longer (RNL & Halda, 2024). The channel mismatch and speed gap risk undoing the goodwill colleges build digitally.

Key takeaways for enrollment teams

1. Email is not dead, but it must become smarter
- Personalize by name, grade, interests, and inquiry source.
- Use warm, student-centered language.
- Keep emails short, mobile-friendly, and action-oriented.
2. Text messaging is gaining ground, use it strategically
- Implement opt-in texting early in the funnel.
- Use for reminders, check-ins, and next steps.
- Align tone and frequency with the student’s stage.
3. Trust is the new conversion strategy
- Explain why each piece of information is collected.
- Be transparent about data use.
- Maintain consistent, clear communication.
4. Follow-up is a test and a turning point
- Respond quickly and personally after a student takes action.
- Boost engagement with timely, relevant replies.
5. Segment by stage, not just grade
- Use behavioral data to guide segmentation.
- Share exploratory content early, application and aid support later.
6. Communication is a relationship, not a task
- Every message is an opportunity to build rapport.
- The institutions that win make students feel known and respected.
Final word: It is about more than a click

Students are not just filling out forms; they are extending an invitation:

“I am thinking about my future. Help me see if you are part of it.”

If your institution can meet that moment with empathy, transparency, and good timing, you are not just capturing a lead, you are building a relationship.
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
References

Affordable Colleges Online. (2024). Guide to financial aid for first-generation students. https://www.affordablecollegesonline.org

Concept3D. (2024). The state of virtual tours in higher education. https://www.concept3d.com

EDUCAUSE. (2021). 2021 student technology report: Supporting the whole student. https://www.educause.edu

Hanover Research. (2024). Best practices in prospective student communications. https://www.hanoverresearch.com

Inside Higher Ed. (2024). Barriers to first-generation student engagement. https://www.insidehighered.com

JohnXLibris. (2024). Email communication preferences of college-bound students. https://www.johnxlibris.com

Ocelot AI. (2024). Personalized communication in higher ed recruitment. https://www.ocelotbot.com

Pew Research Center. (2024). Teens, social media, and technology 2024. https://www.pewresearch.org

RNL & Halda. (2024). 2024 high school student college planning report. Ruffalo Noel Levitz.

RNL. (2025). 2025 marketing and recruitment practices for undergraduate students. Ruffalo Noel Levitz.

RNL, Halda, & Modern Campus. (2025). 2025 E-Expectations trend report. Ruffalo Noel Levitz.

Šola, J., & Zia, A. (2021). Social media as an information source for prospective students: A review. Journal of Marketing for Higher Education, 31(2), 310–330. https://doi.org/10.1080/08841241.2020.1866521

Statista. (2023). Share of teenagers in the United States who use social media to research colleges. https://www.statista.com Wohn, D. Y., Ellison, N. B., Khan, M. L., Fewins-Bliss, R., & Gray, R. (2013). The role of social media in shaping first-generation high school students’ college aspirations: A social capital lens. Computers & Education, 63, 424–436. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.01.004
Source link
August 20, 2025
Alaska’s Colleges at the Meltdown’s Edge—Just as the Arctic Heats Up
Alaska’s higher-ed story is a preview of the national “College Meltdown,” only starker. The University of Alaska (UA) system—Anchorage, Fairbanks, and Southeast—has endured a decade of enrollment erosion and austerity politics, punctuated by a 2019 budget crisis that forced regents to declare financial exigency and consider consolidations. The immediate trigger was a proposed $130+ million state cut, later converted into a three-year reduction compact; the long tail is a weakened public research engine in the very state where climate change is moving fastest.

In 2025 the vise tightened again from Washington. UA’s president told regents that more than $50 million in grants had been frozen or canceled under the Trump administration, warning of staff cuts and program impacts if funds failed to materialize. Those freezes were part of a broader chill: federal agencies stepping back from research that even references climate change, just as the Arctic’s transformation accelerates.

This is not an abstract loss. Alaska is the frontline laboratory of global warming: thawing permafrost, vanishing sea ice, collapsing coastal bluffs. UA’s scientists have documented these trends in successive “Alaska’s Changing Environment” assessments; the 2024 update underscores rapid, measurable shifts across temperature, sea ice, wildfire, hydrology, and ecosystems. When the main public research institution loses people and projects, the United States loses the data and know-how it needs to respond.

Climate denial collides with national security

The contradiction at the heart of federal policy is glaring. On one hand, the Trump administration has proposed opening vast swaths of Alaska’s National Petroleum Reserve to drilling and reversing environmental protections—signaling a bet on fossil expansion in a region already warming at double the global rate. On the other hand, the same administration is curtailing climate and Arctic science, even as military planners warn that the Arctic is becoming a contested theater. You can’t secure what you refuse to measure.

The security stakes are real. Russia has spent the past decade refurbishing Soviet-era bases, deploying ice-capable vessels, and leveraging energy projects along the Northern Sea Route (NSR). China has declared itself a “near-Arctic” power and partnered with Moscow on patrols and infrastructure. Meanwhile, the U.S. remains short on icebreakers and Arctic domain awareness—even as traffic through high-latitude passages grows more plausible in low-ice summers. Analysts project that a meaningful share of global shipping could shift north by mid-century, and recent reporting shows the region is already a strategic flashpoint.

That makes UA’s expertise more than a local asset; it’s a pillar of U.S. national security. The University of Alaska Fairbanks hosts the Center for Arctic Security and Resilience (CASR) and degree pathways that fuse climate, emergency management, and security studies—exactly the interdisciplinary skill set defense, Coast Guard, and civil authorities will need as sea lanes open and storms, fires, and thaw-related failures multiply. Undercut these programs, and you undercut America’s ability to see, interpret, and act in the Arctic.

The costs of disinvestment

The 2019 state-level cuts did immediate damage—hiring freezes, program reviews, and fears of accreditation changes—but their larger effect was to signal instability to students, faculty, and funders. Austerity invites a spiral: as programs and personnel disappear, grant competitiveness slips; as labs lose continuity, agencies look elsewhere; as uncertainty grows, students choose out-of-state options. UA leadership has tried to reverse course—prioritizing enrollment, retention, and workforce alignment in recent budgets—but it’s difficult to rebuild a research reputation once the pipeline of projects and people is disrupted.

The 2025 federal freezes amplify that spiral by hitting precisely the projects that matter most: those with “climate” in the title. Researchers report program cancellations and re-scoped solicitations across agencies. That kind of ideological filter doesn’t just reduce funding—it distorts the evidence base that communities, tribal governments, and emergency planners depend on for everything from permafrost-safe housing to coastal relocation plans. It also weakens U.S. credibility in Arctic diplomacy at a time when the Arctic Council is strained and cooperation with Russia is largely stalled.

Why this matters beyond Alaska

Think of UA as America’s northern early-warning system. Its glaciologists, sea-ice modelers, fire scientists, and social scientists collect the longitudinal datasets that turn anecdotes into policy-relevant knowledge. Lose continuity, and you lose the ability to detect regime shifts—abrupt ecosystem changes, cascading infrastructure failures from thaw, new navigation windows that alter shipping economics and risk. Those changes feed directly into maritime safety, domain awareness, and the rules-of-the-road that will govern the NSR and other passages.

Meanwhile, federal moves to expand Arctic drilling create additional operational burdens for emergency response and environmental monitoring—burdens that fall on the same universities being told to do more with less. Opening the door to long-lived oil projects while throttling climate and environmental research is a recipe for higher spill risk, poorer oversight, and costlier disasters.

A pragmatic way forward

Three steps could stabilize UA and, by extension, America’s Arctic posture:
1. Firewall climate science from political interference. Agencies should fund Arctic research on merit, not language policing. Reinstating paused grants and re-issuing climate-related solicitations would immediately restore capacity in labs and field stations.
2. Treat UA as critical national infrastructure. Just as the U.S. is racing to modernize radar and add icebreakers, it should invest in Arctic science and workforce pipelines at UA—scholarships tied to Coast Guard and NOAA service, ship time for sea-ice and fisheries research, and support for Indigenous knowledge partnerships that improve on-the-ground resilience.
3. Align energy decisions with security reality. Every new Arctic extraction project increases environmental and emergency-response exposure in a region where capacity is thin. If policymakers proceed, they owe UA and Alaska communities the monitoring, baseline studies, and response investments that only a healthy public research university can sustain.
The paradox of the College Meltdown is that it hits hardest where public knowledge is most needed. In the Lower 48, that might mean fewer nurses or teachers. In Alaska, it means flying blind in a rapidly changing theater where Russia and China are already maneuvering and where coastlines, sea ice, and permafrost are literally moving under our feet. The University of Alaska is not a nice-to-have. It is how the United States knows what is happening in the Arctic—and how it prepares for what’s next. Weakening it in the name of budget discipline or culture-war messaging is not just shortsighted. It’s a security risk.

Sources
- University of Alaska Office of the President, FY2020 budget overview (state veto and reductions).
- University of Alaska Public Affairs timeline (2019 exigency and consolidation actions).
- Alaska Department of Administration, Dunleavy–UA three-year compact (2019).
- Anchorage Daily News, “$50M in grants frozen under Trump administration” (May 28, 2025).
- The Guardian, “Outcry as Trump withdraws support for research that mentions ‘climate’” (Feb. 21, 2025).
- UA/ACCAP, Alaska’s Changing Environment 2.0 (2024 update).
- UAF Center for Arctic Security and Resilience (programs and mission).
- Empower Alaska: UA Arctic expertise overview.
- Wall Street Journal, Russia/China Arctic power projection and U.S. capability gaps (Feb. 2025).
- The Arctic Institute, shipping projections for the Northern Sea Route.
- Arctic Review on Law and Politics, vulnerabilities and governance challenges on the NSR.
- The Guardian, rollback of protections in the National Petroleum Reserve–Alaska (Aug. 2025).
- Alaska Public Media, uneven cuts to Arctic research under Trump (Apr. 2025).
Source link
August 15, 2025
The Key Podcast: Colleges Are Planning for the Unknown

The Key Podcast: Colleges Are Planning for the Unknown

sara.custer@in…

Thu, 08/14/2025 – 03:00 AM

Byline(s)

IHE Staff

Source link

August 14, 2025
Survey Explores How Colleges Rate Their Value Versus Cost

Growing public skepticism in higher education has fueled a number of polls and surveys aimed at understanding how families, students and taxpayers perceive the value of a college degree.

For instance, a majority of Americans believe at least one type of postsecondary credential holds value, according to a 2025 study by Gallup, and most parents want their kids to attend college. But few of those studies have looked at how colleges and universities see themselves improving students’ lives.

A new survey by Tyton Partners released Thursday found three in four college stakeholders strongly believe their institution’s education is worth the cost of tuition. However, two-year institutions were more likely to say this is true, compared to private universities.

Only 28 percent of administrators and support staff working at private four-year institutions strongly agree that their institution’s education is worth the cost, compared to 68 percent of community colleges. The survey, fielded in late June and early July, includes responses from more than 1,600 stakeholders at 825 institutions.

The sector breakdown wasn’t a surprise to Catherine Shaw, Tyton’s managing director, in part because of how the vocational missions of two-year colleges to prepare the local workforce compare to four-year private institutions that focus more on holistic student development.

“That part of it was so squarely within the value proposition of the reasons we have two-year degrees,” Shaw said.

For students, there’s a direct relationship between those who say their college is worth the cost and those who think the college prepares students well for jobs and careers. Among the 792 student respondents who do believe their college is worth the cost, 95 percent believe college is preparing them well for jobs and careers. Inversely, fewer than half (48 percent) of students who don’t see the value of their degree believe college is preparing them well for a career.

“In short, perceptions of value hinge on whether institutions effectively prepare students for the workforce,” the report states. This was true regardless of an institution’s sector, size, selectivity or demographic makeup.

This was the first time Tyton’s survey has asked respondents about perceived value, which Shaw said was in part because of larger national studies gauging perceived value among individuals in the U.S.

“It was interesting that there wasn’t the institutional perspective captured at scale [in previous surveys],” Shaw said. “We wanted to contextualize [the conversation] and see if our institutional stakeholders and our students are asking themselves the same questions and how they feel relevant, because they’ve got skin in the game.”

What Creates Value

More than a quarter of all institutions pointed to career readiness as a top college outcome beyond earning a credential, but two-year colleges were most likely to say this was the top outcome (37 percent). In comparison, the most popular outcome among four-year public and private institutions was critical thinking skills (41 percent and 36 percent, respectively).

Faculty members were most likely to say critical thinking skills were a top college outcome, which Shaw said makes sense given their role in higher education. Administrators and advisers were more likely to point to career readiness as a top outcome for students.

Tyton’s survey also asked administrators, support staff and faculty members which support services improve students’ value of education. Academic and career advising rose to the top, with over half of respondents in all roles ranking these services higher than tutoring, financial aid counseling or mental health counseling.

How institutions deliver high-impact career preparation varied based on institution type. Thirty-eight percent of community colleges said apprenticeships were the most meaningful measures to improve student employment metrics, followed by career pathways at 35 percent.

In comparison, embedded career exploration ranked highest among four-year institutions (54 percent of public universities, 50 percent of private) as did guaranteed internships for all students (31 percent of four-year public institutions) and experiential learning coursework (33 percent of four-year privates).

Student awareness of these opportunities is the greatest barrier to career readiness, according to career services professionals (45 percent), followed by limited capacity (17 percent) and a lack of consistent programming throughout the year (13 percent). Fewer than half of surveyed students (42 percent) said they were aware of career services available to them.

“This focus is especially timely as institutions prepare for increased scrutiny under new federal measures, such as the earnings accountability test,” the report states. “Programs that do not result in gainful employment risk losing eligibility for federal aid. Embedding career readiness across offerings isn’t just about boosting ROI: It’s fast becoming essential for institutional viability.”

Source link

August 14, 2025
July Brought Cuts at Public and Private Colleges

July was marked by steep cuts at some of the nation’s wealthiest institutions while fewer small, cash-strapped colleges made significant workforce reductions.

While some of the nation’s wealthiest universities—institutions with multibillion-dollar endowments—laid off hundreds of employees last month due to federal research funding issues, an uncertain political landscape and rising costs, those cuts were an anomaly. Colleges outside the top financial stratosphere, contending with issues such as declining enrollment, shrinking state support and other challenges, didn’t cut as deep compared to the megawealthy.

Inside Higher Ed recently covered how the Trump administration is driving cuts at wealthy institutions. Now here’s a look at other layoffs and program cuts announced in July as both large, well-resourced institutions and smaller colleges with less capital contend with challenging headwinds for the sector.

Temple University

Grappling with a budget deficit that was projected as high as $60 million, Temple laid off 50 employees and eliminated more than 100 vacancies in July, The Philadelphia Inquirer reported.

The 50 layoffs equal less than 1 percent of Temple’s total workforce, according to the university.

Altogether Temple eliminated “190 positions across the university, with the vast majority of these coming through attrition, retirement or elimination of vacant positions,” President John Fry wrote in a message to campus last month. Fry added that those reductions narrowed the projected budget gap from $60 million to $27 million, cutting Temple’s structural deficit by more than half.

Michigan State University

The wealthiest institution represented here, with an endowment valued at more than $4.4 billion, the public university in Lansing cut nearly 100 jobs last month, The Detroit Free Press reported.

Officials announced 94 employees in MSU’s extension division were being laid off due to a loss of federal grant funding. The cuts come as a result of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program–Education program being discontinued this fall, which provided a $10 million grant. Layoffs will affect employees across the state.

Additional jobs cuts also loom at Michigan State, where officials recently announced cost-cutting plans, citing the need to trim its budget by about 9 percent over the course of the next two years.

University of Florida

One of the wealthiest institutions on this list with an endowment of more than $2 billion, UF eliminated 75 jobs last month, largely through attrition and closing vacant roles, WCJB reported.

A university spokesperson told Inside Higher Ed the cuts were part of a 5 percent reduction in administrative expenses, which amounted to $20 million in cost savings for UF. In addition to the 75 jobs eliminated, UF closed its Office of Sustainability, reportedly cutting another three jobs.

UF is also shutting down its Health Science Center Police Service Technician program at the end of the year, which officials said will affect 15 positions, though seven are currently vacant.

Barnard College

The private women’s college affiliated with Columbia University, but with a separate and much smaller endowment, cut 77 jobs last month as part of a restructuring effort announced July 31.

Barnard president Laura Ann Rosenbury wrote in a message to campus that the cuts were a “painful moment” but the “strategic realignment” reflected “evolving operational needs.” She added that no faculty positions or instructional services personnel were included in the cuts.

Founded in 1889, Barnard had an endowment valued at $503 million in fiscal year 2024 and has dealt with rising debt in recent years.

Southern Oregon University

Last month officials at the public university in Ashland declared financial exigency and announced plans to cut SOU’s budget by 15 percent, Oregon Public Broadcasting reported.

University officials are working to shrink SOU’s budget from $71 million to a more manageable $60 million. In the short term that means finding $5 million in savings for the 2025–26 fiscal year.

The budget cuts will play out over three years and eliminate an estimated 65 jobs through a mix of voluntary retirements, leaving some positions vacant and cutting about 20 positions. SOU also plans to cut 15 majors and 11 minors, shrinking its academic portfolio as it restructures.

SOU president Rick Bailey is also taking a voluntary 20 percent pay cut amid budget issues.

Meredith College

Cost-cutting measures prompted layoffs at the private women’s college in North Carolina, with 6 percent of the workforce—roughly 25 employees—affected, local TV station ABC 11 reported.

None of Meredith’s full-time faculty members were laid off, according to ABC 11.

“These strategic budget reductions were necessary and proactive steps in preserving Meredith’s long-term financial strength and helping it grow and thrive for the future,” college officials wrote in a statement to media outlets detailing the reason for the layoffs. “When making budget adjustments, Meredith leaders focused on protecting programs and services essential to fulfilling its mission. These difficult decisions were made for the good of the College as a whole.”

Sullivan University

The private Kentucky university is cutting 21 jobs, seven of which are vacant, closing two educational sites and selling its only residence hall, The Louisville Courier Journal reported.

The changes come at a rocky time for the university, which was declared the worst company in the city to work for by LEO Weekly, another local news outlet, based on feedback on Glassdoor, a website used for job searches and employer reviews. Sullivan officials subsequently began offering a 1 percent 401(k) match, which officials told the Courier Journal was already planned.

Sullivan also parted ways with President Tim Swenson, who abruptly resigned last week. The university had placed Swenson on administrative leave just a few days prior. Officials wrote, in an email obtained by the newspaper, that he was placed on leave “to allow time for a review of internal matters and to ensure the process is handled fairly and without disruption.” Sullivan officials did not specify the reason for his departure in a message to employees.

Kalamazoo College

The small, private liberal arts college in Michigan laid off 11 staff members due to financial pressures, to enrollment challenges and “an inflationary environment,” MLive reported.

“This difficult decision was not made lightly, and it is part of a broader effort to ensure the long-term financial stability and sustainability of the institution,” officials said in a statement.

Xavier University

A challenging enrollment picture is driving layoffs at the private Catholic university, where officials are also cutting salaries and making other changes, The Cincinnati Enquirer reported.

Though the full number of layoffs is unclear, a university spokesperson told the newspaper that the cuts include two jobs in Xavier’s executive cabinet as well as some temporary faculty and staff. University officials noted that no full-time faculty members have been part of the cuts.

Xavier will also maintain restrictions on nonessential travel.

Source link

August 11, 2025
Trump Orders Colleges to Supply Data on Race in Admissions

President Donald Trump issued an executive action Thursday directing colleges to prove they are not considering race in admissions.

Brendan Smialowski/AFP/Getty Images

President Donald Trump issued an executive action Thursday afternoon mandating colleges and universities submit data to verify that they are not unlawfully considering race in admissions decisions.

The order also requires the Department of Education to update the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System to make its data more legible to students and parents and to “increase accuracy checks for data submitted by institutions through IPEDS,” penalizing them for late, incomplete or inaccurate data.

Opponents of race-conscious admissions have hailed the mandate as a victory for transparency in college admissions, but others in the sector have criticized its vague language and question who at the department is left to collect and analyze the data.

“American students and taxpayers deserve confidence in the fairness and integrity of our Nation’s institutions of higher education, including confidence that they are recruiting and training capable future doctors, engineers, scientists, and other critical workers vital to the next generations of American prosperity,” the order reads. “Race-based admissions practices are not only unfair, but also threaten our national security and well-being.”

It’s now up to the secretary of education, Linda McMahon, to determine what new admissions data institutions will be required to report. The administration’s demands of Columbia and Brown Universities in their negotiations to reinstate federal funding could indicate what the requirements will be. In its agreement with Brown, the government ordered the university to submit annual data “showing applicants, admitted students, and enrolled students broken down by race, color, grade point average, and performance on standardized tests.” Colleges will be expected to submit their admissions data for the 2025–26 academic year, according to the order.

What resources are in place to enforce the new requirements remains to be seen. Earlier this year the administration razed the staff at the Department of Education who historically collected and analyzed institutional data. Only three staff members remain in the National Center for Education Statistics, which operates IPEDS.

‘It’s Not Just as Easy as Collecting Data’

Since taking office, the Trump administration has launched a crusade against diversity, equity and inclusion in higher education, often using the Supreme Court’s 2023 ruling against race-conscious admissions as a weapon in the attacks.

Students for Fair Admissions, the anti–affirmative action advocacy group that was the plaintiff in the 2023 cases, called the action a “landmark step” toward transparency and accountability for students, parents and taxpayers.

“For too long, American colleges and universities have hidden behind opaque admissions practices that often rely on racial preferences to shape their incoming classes,” Edward Blum, SFFA president and longtime opponent of race-conscious admissions, said in a press release.

But college-equity advocates sounded the alarm, arguing that the order—which also claims that colleges have been using diversity and other “overt and hidden racial proxies” to continue race-conscious admissions post-SFFA—aims to intimidate colleges into recruiting fewer students of color.

“I will say something that my members in the higher education community cannot say. What the Trump administration is really saying is that you will be punished if you do not admit enough white students to your institution,” Angel B. Pérez, CEO of the National Association for College Admission Counseling, told Inside Higher Ed.

Like many of Trump’s other orders targeting DEI, that mandate relies on unclear terms and instructions. It does not define “racial proxies”—although a memo by the Department of Justice released last week provides examples—nor does it outline what data would prove an institution is or is not considering race in its admissions process.

In an interview with Inside Higher Ed, Paul Schroeder, the executive director of the Council of Professional Associations on Federal Statistics, questioned the government’s capacity to carry out the president’s order.

“Without NCES, who’s going to actually look at this data? Who’s going to understand this data? Are we going to have uniform reporting or is it going to be just a mess coming in from all these different colleges?” Schroeder said.

“It’s not just as easy as collecting data. It’s not just asking a couple questions about the race and ethnicity of those who were admitted versus those who applied. It’s a lot of work. It’s a lot of hours. It’s not going to be fast.”

Source link

August 7, 2025
Justice Department threatens federal funding for colleges over DEI policies
This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

Dive Brief:
- The U.S. Department of Justice released guidance Wednesday that threatens to strip grant funding from colleges and other federally funded institutions over what the agency deems unlawful diversity, equity and inclusion practices.
- The agency’s memo targets a sweeping set of practices, including offering race-based scholarship programs, allowing transgender women to access bathrooms that correspond with their gender identity and having identity-based lounges or study spaces on campus — even if they are open to all.
- But the nine-page memo goes a step further, saying even neutral criteria — such as recruitment strategies targeting certain regions — could be deemed unlawful if the Justice Department determines they are chosen because of their demographic composition.
Dive Insight:

The Justice Department’s memo comes after a federal judge temporarily blocked similar guidance from the U.S. Department of Education that broadly targeted diversity, equity and inclusion programs at federally funded colleges and K-12 schools. The order came in response to a lawsuit that alleged the guidance “radically upends” federal antidiscrimination laws.

The guidance from the Justice Department illustrates the major shift in how the agency under President Donald Trump approaches enforcement of civil rights laws, with officials now targeting programs that were often actually launched to fight systemic discrimination.

Earlier this month, the National Urban League declared a “state of emergency” for antidiscrimination policies, calling the Trump administration’s overhaul of the Justice Department’s enforcement priorities “an existential threat” to civil rights laws, according to The Associated Press.

Like the Education Department’s blocked guidance, the Justice Department’s new memo warns that government officials could pull federal funding from institutions that don’t comply. That threat comes at the same time the agency has ramped up investigations into colleges over their diversity initiatives and their responses to antisemitism on campus.

The DOJ memo contains examples of practices it lists as “unlawful” and says could lead to federal funding being revoked, as well as a list of recommendations, which it says are not mandatory, to avoid “legal pitfalls.”

“This Department of Justice will not stand by while recipients of federal funds engage in illegal discrimination,” U.S. Attorney General Pamela Bondi said in a Wednesday statement. “This guidance will ensure we are serving the American people and not ideological agendas.”

As examples of unlawful practices, the agency highlighted race-based scholarships or programs, including mentorship programs or leadership initiatives reserved for members of certain racial groups.

The memo could upend admissions. It recommends colleges end programs “designed to achieve discriminatory outcomes” even if they have “facially neutral” criteria, such as targeting scholarships to certain regions to increase enrollment or participation among certain racial groups.

“Instead, use universally applicable criteria, such as academic merit or financial hardship, applied without regard to protected characteristics or demographic goals,” the memo said.

The memo also takes aim at what it describes as “unlawful proxies” for race and sex. As an example, the memo calls out universities that ask job applicants “to demonstrate ‘cultural competence,’ ‘lived experience,’ or ‘cross-cultural skills’ in ways that effectively evaluate candidates’ racial or ethnic backgrounds rather than objective qualifications.”

The Justice Department also flagged diversity statements — which typically ask job or graduate student candidates to explain their experience and commitment to diversity and inclusion initiatives — as potentially unlawful if they advantage “those who discuss experiences intrinsically tied to protected characteristics.” The memo said the same of asking for statements from applicants about “obstacles they have overcome,” a common essay prompt for college applications.

State lawmakers have likewise targeted diversity statements, with many outlawing public colleges from requiring them in job or admission applications.

The memo also said failing to “maintain sex-separated athletic competitions and intimate spaces” could violate federal law. The Justice Department’s examples of those violations include allowing transgender women to use bathrooms, showers, locker rooms and dormitories designated for women, as well as allowing them to compete in women’s athletic events.

And it mentions college lounges or other spaces designated for specific groups, such as a “BIPOC-only study lounge.”

“Even if access is technically open to all, the identity-based focus creates a perception of segregation and may foster a hostile environment,” the memo stated. “This extends to any resource allocation — such as study spaces, computer labs, or event venues — that segregates access based on protected characteristics, even if intended to create ‘safe spaces.’”

It also takes aim at diversity training, giving the example of requiring teachers at K-12 schools to complete a DEI training that includes statements such as “all white people are inherently privileged” or touching on “toxic masculinity.”

The memo says such trainings could violate civil rights laws “if they create a hostile environment or impose penalties for dissent in ways that result in discriminatory treatment.”
Source link
July 31, 2025
Schools and colleges nationwide face Trump investigations

The Trump administration moved quickly after taking office to open dozens of investigations into schools and universities nationwide. Most of those announced publicly mark a dramatic shift in priorities from previous administrations.

The Education Department and other agencies are looking into allegations of antisemitism and racial discrimination against white students at dozens of colleges. The agency also has begun investigating policies that protect transgender athletes and, in some cases, targeted entire state departments of education as part of that work.

Related: Become a lifelong learner. Subscribe to our free weekly newsletter featuring the most important stories in education.

Here’s a look at investigations the Trump administration has announced. This map and list will be updated. Know of an investigation we missed? Tell us: [email protected].

Although the majority of investigations that have been opened are in states considered to be liberal, almost every state in the country has at least one entity under scrutiny. And many institutions face more than one investigation.

Related: Tracking Trump: His actions to dismantle the Education Department, and more

To date, colleges and universities have received the most attention from the administration, with more than 60 targeted over alleged incidents of antisemitism and another 45 under scrutiny over their work with a program that aims to increase diversity among Ph.D. candidates. Most of the K-12 investigations involve transgender policies, including those about access to sports and locker rooms.

Contact investigations editor Sarah Butrymowicz at [email protected] or on Signal: @sbutry.04

This story about Trump investigations was produced by The Hechinger Report, a nonprofit, independent news organization focused on inequality and innovation in education. Sign up for the Hechinger newsletter.

The Hechinger Report provides in-depth, fact-based, unbiased reporting on education that is free to all readers. But that doesn’t mean it’s free to produce. Our work keeps educators and the public informed about pressing issues at schools and on campuses throughout the country. We tell the whole story, even when the details are inconvenient. Help us keep doing that.

Join us today.

Source link

July 28, 2025
Autistic Students are Building Community: Colleges Just Need to Listen
As dangerous myths about autism circulate on the national stage, many colleges echo a quieter, yet similarly misguided assumption: that autistic students are socially isolated or incapable of forming meaningful relationships. But the 43 autistic college students we interviewed tell a very different story—one grounded in connection, authenticity, and community, built on their own terms.

Dr. Karly Isaacson (Ball) Three years ago, we launched the Postsecondary Education: Autistic Collegians’ Experiences of Success (PEACES) national study, drawing participants from both community colleges and four-year institutions across the U.S. We invited autistic students—both self-identified and formally diagnosed—to share their experiences through annual surveys, in-depth interviews, and photo-based storytelling activities. To date, we’ve gathered over 1300 survey responses, nearly 80 interviews, and nearly 70 photo reflections across three waves of data collection, with a fourth wave launching in fall 2025.Dr. Brett Ranon Nachman

As we analyzed the second wave of interviews, one theme stood out: the central role of friendship. Again and again, students described how meaningful friendships shaped their college experiences, not in spite of their autism, but through it. We used this analysis to publish a journal article on autistic college student friendship earlier this month. In this op-ed, we describe three key ways in which autistic college students foster meaningful friendships: engaging in autistic spaces, practicing autistic authenticity, and bonding over shared interests. We hope that understanding how autistic college students think about and experience friendship can ultimately guide colleges in creating more supportive, inclusive environments for this largely misunderstood, minoritized student population.Dr. Bradley E. Cox
1. Autistic spaces offer connection without explanation.
  Contrary to the common myth that autistic students are inherently socially disconnected, many participants in our study described finding deep connections in spaces designed by and for autistic people. Whether through formal autism support programs (ASPs), campus disability centers, or informal sensory-friendly spaces, students emphasized how these environments allowed them to engage with others who shared similar communication styles, sensory needs, and lived experiences. These spaces didn’t just accommodate difference—they affirmed it.
  
  Catherine T. McDermottFor some students, these autism affirming communities were a lifeline, especially during vulnerable transitions like receiving a new autism diagnosis or navigating the pressures of living on one’s own for the first time. One student shared how knowing there was “somewhere to turn” in these difficult periods made all the difference. Others described naturally gravitating toward autistic peers before even knowing their friends’ diagnoses, drawn together by shared ways of thinking and being. Still, not every student stumbled into connection. Several expressed frustration that their schools offered few avenues to find others like them on campus. As one student put it, “you feel like the black sheep of the campus because there’s not really anything for you.” Institutions that take autistic students seriously must prioritize not just services, but creating autistic spaces on campus that are intentional, visible, and community-driven.
2. Practicing authenticity builds deeper relationships.
  For many autistic students, friendship flourished not when they tried to hide who they were, but when they stopped trying. Students described how letting go of masking (a strategy that some autistic people use to appear non-autistic), led to stronger, more affirming relationships. As one student put it, “the more authentic in myself that I become, the stronger my relationships become.” College, for many, provided a rare opportunity to explore what it meant to show up fully as themselves, autism and all. This wasn’t always easy. Several students shared fears of judgment or past experiences of exclusion, and some still found themselves masking in certain spaces. But when peers responded with respect and curiosity—whether during a class presentation, a theater performance, or an informal hangout—autistic students said they felt “seen,” “heard,” and “valued” when they presented their autistic characteristics and were met with acceptance. Vulnerability often became a gateway to connection. One participant recounted the anxiety of playing pool with friends, worried about motor difficulties, only to be met with patience and encouragement. These moments of openness helped students discern who was safe, who cared, and who was worth pursuing as a friend. Practicing authenticity didn’t always come without cost—but for many, it made friendship more meaningful and sustainable.
3. Shared passions spark connection.
  While autistic spaces and identity-based connections were vital, students also emphasized another major source of friendship in doing what they love. Shared interests—from playing Dungeons & Dragons to Taylor Swift fandoms—created natural entry points for relationship-building. Nearly every autistic college student we interviewed was involved in a club, job, or hobby that helped them find “their people.” These weren’t just time-fillers or a line to add to a resume—they were genuine community builders.
Many autistic students created their own spaces when they couldn’t find an existing affinity group or organization. One started a disability advocacy club; another launched an American Sign Language (ASL) group; a third founded a fiber arts circle. Whether through casual gaming nights, photography collaborations, or cat playdates, students built friendships by doing things they genuinely cared about—often with people who shared their pace, humor, and communication style. As one student shared, it meant everything to have even “just one person to go to coffee with who actually cared about the topic.” In these spaces, autistic passions weren’t sidelined—they were celebrated. And when peers leaned into those interests too, genuine friendships blossomed.

In a time when public discourse too often distorts what it means to be autistic, colleges have a unique opportunity—and responsibility—to listen to autistic students themselves. Our research shows that autistic students are not only capable of forming meaningful friendships, but that they do so in ways that are intentional and creative. Colleges that invest in spaces for connection, support students in showing up authentically, and celebrate shared interests will not only dismantle outdated stereotypes—they will foster communities where all students can thrive.

Dr. Karly Isaacson (Ball) is a Postdoctoral Research Associate at Michigan State University for Project PEACES.

Dr. Brett Ranon Nachman is an Assistant Professor of Higher Education at the University of Pittsburgh and Director of Research for College Autism Network.

Dr. Bradley E. Cox is an Associate Professor of Higher, Adult, and Lifelong Education (HALE) at Michigan State University and Founder of the nonprofit College Autism Network.

Catherine T. McDermott is a consultant for Project PEACES and Founder of McDermott Autism Services.
Source link
July 27, 2025
OCR to Investigate Five Colleges for DACA Scholarships

The Office for Civil Rights is investigating five universities for offering scholarships to undocumented students, the Education Department announced Thursday.

The universities of Louisville, Nebraska Omaha, Miami, Michigan, and Western Michigan University have been accused of violating Title IV of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which prohibits discrimination against or otherwise excluding individuals on the basis of race, color, or national origin, in offering the scholarships.

“Neither the Trump Administration’s America first policies nor the Civil Right Act of 1964’s prohibition on national origin discrimination permit universities to deny our fellow citizens the opportunity to compete for scholarships because they were born in the United States,” said Acting Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights Craig Trainor in a statement.

Trainor said the department is expanding its enforcement efforts to “protect American students and lawful residents from invidious national origin discrimination.”

The scholarships at issue that allegedly provide exclusionary funding based on national origin include the University of Miami’s U Dreamers Program and University of Michigan’s Dreamer Scholarship.

The investigations are in response to complaints submitted to OCR by the Equal Protection Project (EPP), an initiative from the Legal Insurrection Foundation (LIF), a national free speech advocacy group founded by Cornell law professor William A. Jacobson.

EPP describes itself as “devoted to the fair treatment of all persons without regard to race or ethnicity” and lists as part of its “Vision:2025” “continued OCR complaints” “strategic lawsuits” and “media-narrative setting.”

LIF also runs criticalrace.org, a series of databases cataloguing admissions policies, programming, funding models and other instances of alleged critical race training.

In a statement provided by the department, Jacobson said: “Protecting equal access to education includes protecting the rights of American-born students. At the Equal Protection Project, we are gratified that the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights is acting on our complaints regarding scholarships that excluded American-born students.”

The Department of Education also is planning to investigate the colleges for other scholarships detailed in the complaint that provide funding to undergraduate LGBTQ+ students of color, Hispanic students, Native American students, African American students and other underrepresented student groups.

Source link

July 24, 2025