Tag: Enrollment

  • Cost Is Graduate Enrollment “Gatekeeper”

    Cost Is Graduate Enrollment “Gatekeeper”

    Many graduate programs face funding cuts, enrollment declines and uncertain futures, but a new report describes cost of attendance as the “ultimate gatekeeper” to enrollment.

    Between Aug. 20 and Sept. 8, 2025, the enrollment management consulting firm EAB surveyed 8,106 current and prospective graduate and adult learners about their motivations, financial concerns, program search methods and program preferences.

    The findings, published Thursday in EAB’s 2025 Adult Learner Survey, show that cost ranked as the most important factor in enrollment decisions, surpassing program accreditation, which was last year’s top factor.

    The majority of prospective students (60 percent) said they would eliminate a program from consideration if they perceived it to be “too expensive.” Although data from the National Center for Education Statistics shows that the average annual cost of graduate school is more than $20,000, EAB’s survey found that 39 percent of learners believe anything more than $10,000 is too expensive; 62 percent said they wouldn’t be willing to pay more than $20,000 a year for graduate school.

    “The hopes and expectations of today’s adult learners are colliding with a financial aid system in a period of significant transition,” Val Fox, a senior director and principal in EAB’s adult learner recruitment division, said in a news release. “Federal aid sources are shrinking, and students with low credit scores may not qualify for private loans. This mismatch will make it even harder to sustain enrollment at a time when institutions need domestic adult learners more than ever.”

    Learners’ heightened concerns about cost come as graduate programs also grapple with new federal policies—including caps on graduate student loans, cuts to research funding and visa restrictions for international students—that are making it even harder for institutions to balance their budgets and attract new students.

    At the same time, however, graduate students and adult learners increasingly rely on outside funding. Scholarships were the most commonly cited funding source (52 percent), followed by financial aid, loans or grants, though both categories fell several percentage points compared to last year. Meanwhile, the report found that 25 percent of respondents cited personal or household income as one of their top five funding sources this year, compared to more than 40 percent last year.

    “Success for U.S. graduate schools in 2026 will depend heavily on their ability to adapt recruiting strategies to accommodate policy shifts and evolving student priorities,” Fox said. “Schools need to communicate costs clearly, especially on digital channels, and align their value propositions to individual student interests through hyperpersonalized marketing.”

    Source link

  • New international enrollment dipped this fall, NAFSA survey finds

    New international enrollment dipped this fall, NAFSA survey finds

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    Dive Brief:

    • Many U.S. colleges are experiencing declines in undergraduate and graduate enrollment amid tightening visa policies, according to a new study released by NAFSA: Association of International Educators and other groups. 
    • U.S. colleges reported a 6% average drop in new international bachelor’s enrollment and a 19% drop in new international master’s enrollment for the fall. Of some 200 surveyed U.S. institutions, 48% saw declines in their international bachelor’s students, and 63% experienced a drop-off in international graduate enrollment. 
    • Canada suffered even more dramatic declines, while international student enrollment rose in Asian and European countries, according to the NAFSA study. Both U.S. and Canadian institutions primarily blamed restrictive government policies for the decline.

    Dive Insight:

    Since taking office, the Trump administration has launched a suite of aggressive policies that have made it difficult for many international students to study in the U.S. 

    Among other moves, dramatically slowed visa processing raised concerns this summer that tens of thousands of students might be stymied from coming to the U.S. for college. On top of that, the administration has revoked thousands of visas for international students already studying here and proposed a four-year cap on student visas, which could hit doctoral students particularly hard. 

    In the U.S., restrictive government policies were by far the No. 1 obstacle to international enrollment, with 85% of surveyed colleges citing them in the NAFSA study. That’s up from 58% of colleges that said the same in 2024. 

    “We are navigating one of the most dynamic moments in international education, driven in no small part by shifts in U.S. visa and immigration policy,” NAFSA Executive Director and CEO Fanta Aw said in a statement. “The ripple effects of these policy changes are being felt across campuses and communities around the world.”

    The distant No. 2 concern was tuition and living costs, with 47% of U.S. respondents citing them as an obstacle this year. 

    As international enrollment declines take a toll on college finances, 36% of colleges surveyed by NAFSA said they plan to expand into new markets to adapt. Another 28% are planning budget cuts, and 26% intend to expand online programming to gin up enrollment. 

    To be sure, the U.S. isn’t the only country where government restrictions weigh on foreign enrollment. In Canada — where new international bachelor’s and master’s enrollment fell by 36% and 35%, respectively — 90% of polled colleges listed restrictive policies as the top obstacle to enrollment. European colleges, excluding those in the U.K., also listed restrictions as the primary obstacle. 

    The survey was conducted in October and drew on responses from 461 institutions across 63 countries, including 201 U.S. colleges. 

    The NAFSA study adds to mounting evidence of international enrollment drop-offs this fall. A survey of more than 800 colleges found that their international enrollment declined overall by 1% in fall 2025, with their graduate student enrollment plummeting by 12%, per the annual Open Doors report from the Institute of International Education and the U.S. Department of State released earlier this month.

    New international enrollment fell even more overall — by 17% — this fall, according to the Open Doors survey.

    Source link

  • Austin ISD is closing 10 schools amid enrollment challenges

    Austin ISD is closing 10 schools amid enrollment challenges

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    Dive Brief:

    • Austin Independent School District’s board of trustees approved a plan Thursday evening to close 10 schools in the Texas district by the 2026-27 school year in the midst of ongoing enrollment declines. 
    • The closures will impact nearly 3,800 students who will be reassigned to new schools in the district and the plan will cut 6,319 open seats, according to Austin ISD.
    • The move is expected to save the district $21.5 million, according to Austin ISD Superintendent Matias Segura during the Thursday board meeting. That amount more than covers the district’s budget deficit of $19.7 million this school year.  

    Dive Insight:

    Segura said during the board meeting that developing and carrying out this school closure plan has been “a very difficult process.” 

    Most of the schools impacted by closures are at the elementary level, according to the district.

    Segura also said he wished the district didn’t have to make this decision, “but the pressures are gargantuan.”

    Austin ISD instructed 72,700 students across 113 schools in 2024-25.

    When Austin ISD first announced it was considering school closures and consolidations earlier this year, Segura emphasized that the district lost over 10,000 students within the past decade, which led to a total of 21,000 empty seats.

    While the district’s preliminary fall enrollment data has yet to be released by the Texas Education Agency, Austin ISD has said it’s likely that the number of students attending its schools will continue to drop. 

    In recent months the district considered several factors before proposing which schools should close, including size, condition, student enrollment and operational costs.

    Elsewhere in Texas, Houston Independent School District laid off and reassigned hundreds of its teachers “to align” them “with student enrollment” as the district had previously projected a drop in enrollment by about 8,000 students this school year. 

    Houston ISD, which is under the leadership of the state, initially planned to announce a proposal this fall to close some schools during the 2026-27 school year. However, the district announced last week that Superintendent Mike Miles told principals he was no longer going to recommend any school consolidations to the board for 2026-27. There still may be a small number of consolidations needed in future years, the district said in a video update on Wednesday. 

    Texas’ districts student enrollment declines are part of a larger trend across states and districts nationwide, with the downward trajectory straining budgets tied to per pupil funding. Reasons for declining enrollment vary by state and district. An ongoing decline in birthrates has been a common factor while other education leaders have cited this year’s federal immigration crackdown and newer school choice policies for detracting students from attending their public schools. 

    As a result, plans for school closures similar to Austin ISD’s and teacher layoffs as seen in Houston are rippling across large and small school districts— from Arizona’s Kyrene School District to Atlanta Public Schools and Florida’s Broward County Public Schools to Oregon’s Corvallis School District.

    Source link

  • SUNY enrollment grew 2.9% in fall 2025, continuing upward trend

    SUNY enrollment grew 2.9% in fall 2025, continuing upward trend

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    Dive Brief:

    • The State University of New York’s fall 2025 enrollment rose 2.9% over last year, marking the third straight year of growth at the public system after a decade of steady student losses.
    • Enrollment in the 64-college system reached 387,363 students this fall. SUNY also experienced outsized first-time undergraduate enrollment growth this fall, with new students increasing by 3.1% to 70,401.
    • However, SUNY’s recent enrollment growth — up 6.5% since 2022 — is still well below the 500,000-student goal New York Gov. Kathy Hochul set that year.

    Dive Insight:

    From 2012 to 2022, SUNY’s enrollment steadily declined, losing more than a fifth of its students. Hochul has made changing SUNY’s fortunes, and the state’s public higher education more broadly, a policy priority since taking office in 2021.

    SUNY Fall Enrollment

    The university system lost roughly 100,000 students between fall 2012 and fall 2022.

    In that time, New York made completing the Free Application for Federal Student Aid a high school graduation requirement beginning in the 2024-25 academic year, a move SUNY supported publicly.

    SUNY has also introduced direct admissions at community colleges and guaranteed admissions at its selective colleges. Direct admissions programs offer students college acceptance without them first needing to apply, whereas guaranteed admissions programs generally promise students a spot if they submit an application and meet certain conditions.

    In fall 2025, headcounts at SUNY’s 30 community colleges jumped 5% to 173,893 students. Their first-time enrollment also grew, rising 4.8% to reach 34,425 students.

    Hochul on Tuesday partly attributed the enrollment growth at the system’s community colleges to the SUNY Reconnect initiative, launched earlier this year. 

    The program, also known as the Opportunity Promise Scholarship, allows New York residents ages 25 to 55 with no prior degree to attend community college for free if they study certain high-demand fields, such as nursing and engineering.

    As of Nov. 13, 5,608 people enrolled at SUNY community colleges through Reconnect, according to institutional data. Hochul’s office said each student in the program saves an average of $2,000 per year.

    Transfer enrollment also increased at SUNY in fall 2025, up 4.7% to 26,301 students.

    Like overall enrollment, however, the number of transfer students, first-time students, and students at community colleges still fell well below 2015 numbers.

    In contrast to SUNY’s overall growth this year, international enrollment dipped amid federal attacks on foreign students and an increasingly complicated visa landscape.

    Overall international enrollment at SUNY’s colleges declined 3.9% to 20,608 students. 

    The recently released annual Open Doors report found that international enrollment in the U.S. reached an all-time high in fall 2024.  But its preliminary fall 2025 survey of 825 colleges shows their international enrollment dropped 1% this term, driven by a 12% decline in foreign graduate students.

    SUNY’s institutional data aligned with these findings. Declines were steepest at doctoral degree-granting universities, where enrollment fell 6.9% to 15,352 students. International graduate enrollment decreased 13.8% compared to fall 2024, according to Hochul’s office.

    Other institutional types — the system’s comprehensive and technology colleges — saw increases, though they only enroll a combined 2,216 international students. 

    Source link

  • Undergraduate enrollment on track to increase for third straight year

    Undergraduate enrollment on track to increase for third straight year

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    Dive Brief:

    • Undergraduate enrollment is on track to grow 2.4% year over year this fall, driving a 2% overall rise in higher education enrollment, according to preliminary data released Tuesday by the National Student Clearinghouse Research Center. This marks the third year in a row of undergraduate enrollment growth.
    • Graduate enrollment stayed largely level — up 0.1% compared to the year prior. Enrollment in master’s programs, which host almost two-thirds of this fall’s graduate students, declined by 0.6%. Conversely, doctoral-level programs saw a 1.1% increase in students.
    • The clearinghouse also found that students’ choice of studies is shifting. Enrollment in computer and information sciences dropped this fall — ranging from a 5.8% decline at two-year institutions to a 15% nosedive in graduate programs — while numbers of health and trade majors rose.

    Dive Insight:

    Enrollment increased in both shorter-term programs and those that prepare students to work in the trades, the clearinghouse found.

    Two-year institutions saw a 8.3% year-over-year enrollment increase in engineering technologies and technicians programs this fall. Mechanic and repair technologies and technicians majors also grew 10.4% at those institutions.

    And enrollment rose 6.6% in undergraduate certificates and 3.1% in associate programs. Bachelor’s degrees, in comparison, saw a smaller year-over-year enrollment increase of 1.2%.

    On a call with reporters Monday, Matthew Holsapple, the clearinghouse’s senior director of research, stressed that the organization did not conduct student interviews or collect data about their enrollment motivations.

    But when asked if the decline in computer science enrollment was a side effect of the proliferation of artificial intelligence, he acknowledged that researchers “have seen the same news reports that you all have seen about challenges in the field,” such as AI-related layoffs in technology sectors. 

    “I assume students are also seeing that, and they’re using that kind of information to make their decisions,” Holsapple said.

    Like last year, community colleges once again came out the winner among institutional types this fall. Public two-year colleges saw 4% annual enrollment growth. That’s compared to 1.9% growth at public four-year institutions and 0.9% at four-year private nonprofits.

    “Students continue to gravitate towards vocational certificates and associate degrees, leaving less momentum for growth among bachelors’ seekers,” Doug Shapiro, the clearinghouse’s executive director, said in a statement.

    Tuesday’s preliminary data is based on some 8.5 million students at just under half of the U.S. postsecondary institutions that report to the clearinghouse. The report marks the organization’s first preliminary enrollment dispatch since announcing a striking methodology error early this year.

    In January, the clearinghouse said an undisclosed number of its preliminary enrollment reports had mistakenly counted some first-year college students as dual-enrolled students, who are high school students also taking college classes. That preliminary enrollment report series, called Stay Informed, began in 2020.

    As a result, its preliminary fall 2024 findings incorrectly found that first-year enrollment had declined 5% — when it actually rose 5.5%.

    Holsapple said Monday that the clearinghouse did not include dual enrollment data in Tuesday’s report. It‘s the first of the group’s new preliminary enrollment series, called Clearinghouse Enrollment Insights. In a release, it said the report has “enhanced methodology, clarified reporting structure, and better connections between preliminary and final data.”

    The clearinghouse plans to release its final fall enrollment report in mid-January.

    Source link

  • States, districts grapple with declining enrollment

    States, districts grapple with declining enrollment

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    Declining student enrollment is plaguing public schools at state and district levels nationwide, with the impact being felt from falling birthrates and expanding school choice programs.

    As preliminary enrollment data for the 2025-26 school year has begun rolling out, school leaders are being forced to plan ahead for some tough decisions over staffing and school consolidations. 

    Significant enrollment declines have been cause for alarm in districts ranging from Texas’ Austin Independent School District and Arizona’s Kyrene School District to Atlanta Public Schools and Florida’s Broward County Public Schools — all of which are considering school closures or consolidations. 

    While K-12 finance researchers have warned of this trend for years, the historic and one-time federal COVID-19 relief funds delayed the inevitable financial challenge for some districts — until now.  

    Here is a look at how the development is affecting selected states and districts.

    Alabama

    Alabama experienced a 0.8% dip in public student enrollment from 720,181 in 2024-25 to 714,358 for the 2025-26 school year, according to data from the Alabama State Department of Education. 

    This marks the state’s steepest enrollment drop in 40 years, Alabama State Superintendent of Education Eric Mackey told an October board meeting. The state’s historic enrollment decline is most likely due to students opting into a new voucher program known as the CHOOSE Act, Mackey said. 

    Another key reason, though, is that some students “just disappeared” and never showed up despite being enrolled in an Alabama public school, he said. Alabama superintendents have told Mackey that it seems a majority of those students who were unaccounted for were Hispanic with unknown immigration statuses, he said.

    Because of the sharp decline in overall student enrollment, Mackey projects that the district will need 500 to 700 fewer teachers by the 2026-27 school year. 

    Over 23,000 students were approved this year to receive an estimated $124 million in education savings accounts through the CHOOSE Act, which allows families to use ESAs to cover private school tuition, fees and other qualified education expenses, according to an Oct. 17 announcement by Alabama Gov. Kay Ivey. 

    West Virginia

    West Virginia’s enrollment has been in steady decline for the last decade. Between 2023 and 2024, the state saw one of the largest public school enrollment drops in the nation, losing 1.7% of its student body, according to a June analysis by the Reason Foundation, a libertarian think tank. 

    Since 2017-18, the state’s public school enrollment has fallen steeply —  from 270,613 students to 241,013 in 2024-25, for a 10.9% decrease, according to the most recently available data from the West Virginia Department of Education. 

    This decline, along with the expiration of federal COVID-19 aid, an “outdated” state education funding formula and an increasingly popular state school voucher program have contributed to a wave of school closures statewide, according to the West Virginia Center on Budget & Policy. Over 70 West Virginia public schools have closed since 2019, “and more closures are on the way,” the center said. 

    Wisconsin

    In Wisconsin, preliminary unaudited state data reveals that enrollment fell nearly 6%, or by about 46,180 students in September 2025-26 school year compared to the year-over-year counts. After that drop, the state enrolled 759,701 students this school year versus 805,881 in September of 2024-25, according to the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction.

    One Wisconsin state representative said in September that the number of public school districts in the state — currently at 421 — “is going to have to drop,” The Center Square reported. The legislator, Rep. Amanda Nedweski, added in a press conference that she plans to introduce state legislation by year’s end that would encourage school districts to consolidate as a shrinking population and lower birth rates continue contributing to declining enrollment. 

    Source link

  • International Graduate Student Enrollment Drops

    International Graduate Student Enrollment Drops

    Master’s programs at some college saw steep declines in international student enrollment.

    Photo illustration by Justin Morrison/Inside Higher Ed | skynesher/E+/Getty Images

    Federal actions to limit immigration have affected many international students’ decision to enroll at U.S. colleges and universities this fall, with several institutions reporting dramatic declines in international student enrollment.

    New data from the Department of Homeland Security from the Student Exchange and Visitor Information System for October shows an overall 1 percent decline of all international students in the U.S. SEVIS data includes all students on F-1 and M-1 visas, including those enrolled in primary and secondary school, language training, flight school, and other vocational programs.

    According to DHS data, bachelor’s degree enrollment among international students is down 1 percent from October 2024 to October 2025; master’s degree enrollment is down 2 percent, as well. Associate degree programs have 7 percent more international students in October 2025 than the year prior, and international doctoral students are up 2 percent.

    Campus-level data paints a more dramatic picture; an Inside Higher Ed analysis of self-reported graduate international student enrollment numbers from nine colleges and universities finds an average year-over-year decline of 29 percent.

    Some groups, including NAFSA, the association for international educators, have published predictions of how international student enrollment would impact colleges’ enrollment and financial health. NAFSA expected to see a 15 percent decline across the sector and greater drops for master’s degree programs.

    “Master’s [programs] have been very hit. And in addition to master’s being hit, programs like computer sciences and STEM in particular have been mostly affected,” NAFSA CEO Fanta Aw said in a Sept. 19 interview with Inside Higher Ed.

    At the University of Wisconsin at Madison, for example, master’s degree enrollment dropped 22 percent from fall 2024. Ph.D. program enrollment declined only 1 percent compared to the year prior, according to university data.

    While more selective or elite institutions have mostly weathered enrollment declines among undergraduate international students—reporting little or no change to their enrollment numbers this fall—Aw says graduate student enrollment is down everywhere.

    The University of Pennsylvania’s Wharton School of Business, for example, reported that international students made up 26 percent of its incoming master’s in business administration class, down five percentage points from the year prior, as reported by Poets and Quants (Poets and Quants is also owned by Times Higher Education, Inside Higher Ed’s parent company). At Duke’s Fuqua School of Business, 47 percent of the incoming class in 2024 hailed from other nations, but that figure dropped to 38 percent this fall.

    Because master’s degrees are shorter programs than undergraduate ones, averaging two years, Aw anticipates universities to see even more dramatic declines from 2024 in fall 2026.

    “The current environment is still too uncertain for [graduate] students to even consider potentially applying,” Aw said. “You cannot have enrollment if they’re not even applying.”

    Of colleges in the data set, Northwest Missouri State University reported the greatest year-over-year decline in graduate student enrollment, falling from 557 international students in fall 2024 to 125 in fall 2025. In April, Northwest Missouri State reported that 43 of its international students had their SEVIS statuses revoked; 38 of them were on optional practical training.

    At that time, Northwest Missouri State encouraged students who lost their SEVIS status to depart the U.S. immediately “to avoid accruing unlawful presence,” according to a memo from President Lance Tatum published by Fox 4 Kansas City. The university declined to comment for this piece.

    Nationwide, international students make up 22 percent of all full-time graduate students, according to Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System data. International students often pay higher tuition rates compared to their domestic peers, and some colleges rely on international students to boost graduate program enrollment.

    The dramatic changes in enrollment numbers are having budgetary impacts on some colleges.

    At Georgetown University, foreign graduate student enrollment dropped 20 percent, which was expected but steeper than anticipated, according to a memo from interim university president Robert M. Groves. In April, Georgetown cut $100 million from its budget due to loss of federal research dollars and international student revenue, and Groves said more cuts may be needed in December.

    DePaul University in Chicago saw a 63 percent year-over-year decline in new graduate students from other nations—a sharp drop that administrators, similarly, did not anticipate in this year’s budget.

    As more colleges solidify their fall enrollment numbers, the sectorwide decline in foreign students has become more clear.

    Inside Higher Ed’s initial data found colleges reported, on average, a 13 percent decrease in international student enrollment. The median year-over-year change was a 9 percent drop.

    Small colleges saw significant changes. Bethany Lutheran College in Minnesota, with a total head count of 900 students, reported a 50 percent growth in international students. At the other end, the University of Hartford in Connecticut lost half of its international students, only expecting 50 instead of 100 this fall.

    Community colleges are also feeling the loss of international students. Bellevue College in Washington State, a leading destination for international students in the two-year sector, reported a 56 percent year-over-year decline in enrollment.

    Southeast Missouri State reported a 63 percent decline in international students, with 494 individuals unable to secure visas, according to a university statement.

    Source link

  • Enrollment Planning: Stop Chasing Student Leads

    Enrollment Planning: Stop Chasing Student Leads

    From Lead-Chasing to Mission-Aligned Enrollment

    I spent 16 years as an enrollment leader and another 10-plus years working with enrollment leaders. As a result, I’ve witnessed firsthand how the standard lead-generation model for building enrollment is failing institutions. 

    The promise is enticing: Your marketing agency delivers a list of thousands of names of prospective students, your enrollment team works the list, and students materialize. But this approach creates a vicious cycle that undermines everything mission-driven institutions stand for. It’s like the effects of taking steroids to enhance your athletic performance — you see short-term gains that appear to be unstoppable, but they ultimately take your money, identity, and health.  

    Here’s what I’ve learned about shifting from a lead-chasing mindset to a long-term perspective focused on building enrollment foundations that actually last.

    Why Lead-Generation Strategies Fail Mission-Driven Institutions

    Finding mission-aligned students requires more than asking your institution’s marketing agency to generate leads. The traditional model — buy bulk leads, work leads, generate students — seems efficient on paper. In practice, however, it produces low conversion rates, disengaged enrollment staff, escalating acquisition costs, and devastating attrition rates.

    The math alone should give you reason to pause. When you generate more leads, you need more enrollment personnel to work them. Now you have two major problems: low-converting prospects and mounting personnel costs. Your enrollment counselors spend their days chasing people who don’t understand your mission, don’t fit your institutional culture, and, if they do enroll, often disappear after a term or two (often because they become a lead for another institution).

    This isn’t just inefficient. It’s likely counterproductive to establishing your institution’s identity. Students recruited through generic lead generation don’t know anything about your institution or what it represents. They can’t articulate why your institution matters, which turns it into a commodity in their eyes. Students can simply ask “How long will it take?” and “How much will it cost?” and not fully realize that the college experience is about so much more than that. 

    Look Inward, Not Outward: The Moneyball Principle for Enrollment

    There’s a powerful scene in the movie “Moneyball” in which Billy Beane, the general manager of the Oakland A’s baseball team, tells his scouts: “If we think like the Yankees in here, we will lose to the Yankees out there.” The same principle applies to your enrollment strategy, particularly for online and adult learners.

    If you think like Grand Canyon University, Western Governors University, or Southern New Hampshire University when designing your enrollment strategies, you likely won’t win the enrollment game, and you’ll waste an extraordinary amount of money and time in the process. 

    Those institutions have built their models based on scale, national reach, and high-volume lead generation. They have the infrastructure, capital, and brand recognition to make that work. Your institution probably doesn’t, and it shouldn’t try to.

    Just as consumers often turn to unique restaurants and up-and-coming artists once the chain establishments and pop stars start to feel too ubiquitous and impersonal, prospective students are increasingly drawn to institutions that offer something distinctive and local. Niche markets can be extraordinarily powerful when you serve them authentically. They generate raving fans. They create word-of-mouth referrals. And they build communities that sustain themselves.

    Your competitive advantage isn’t going to come from outspending the national players. It can only come from your institution being exactly what it is, something that no other institution can be. It’s about attracting students who are attracted to your mission and vision. 

    Understanding the Complete New Student Journey

    Creating a mission-centric marketing strategy begins with understanding every aspect of how prospective students experience your institution: from the design of your logo the first time they see it through the response to their first communication, the cadence of subsequent touches, and the tone of every interaction.

    One of my greatest frustrations in how higher education operates is the request-for-information (RFI) process. We ask students to provide their information and then tell them to wait for someone to contact them. 

    Almost no other industry operates this way anymore. Imagine filling out a form on Amazon and receiving a message that says, “Thank you for your interest. Someone will call you within 48 hours to help you complete your purchase.” It’s absurd. Try it out for yourself. Request information from your institution and see what happens. 

    My advice is to move away from the “Thank you, someone will be in touch” message immediately. Create an instant post-RFI experience that welcomes students and allows them to explore right then and there. Give them immediate access to program information, faculty insights, student stories, and next steps. Let them self-serve while your enrollment team prepares for meaningful, high-value conversations with them.

    When students arrive at those conversations already informed and engaged, conversion rates improve dramatically and the students who enroll actually fit the university’s mission. Let’s also not forget that passionate graduates have historically led to alumni giving down the road. 

    Using Faculty as Your Most Credible Marketers

    Building a mission-centric enrollment strategy requires faculty involvement. In the age of large language models and content generated by artificial intelligence (AI), credible human voices matter more than ever. Prospective students can spot generic marketing copy instantly. What can’t be replicated is the authentic passion of a faculty member explaining why their discipline matters and how your institution approaches it differently.

    Your faculty are your best marketers, especially right now. They bring subject matter expertise, institutional knowledge, and genuine enthusiasm to your messaging. They can articulate your mission in ways that marketing agencies never will. When faculty are engaged in creating content, participating in virtual information sessions, and connecting with prospective students during the exploration phase, the return on investment is extraordinary.

    Embracing Cybernetics: Governance That Learns and Adapts

    If you haven’t read Robert Birnbaum’s “How Colleges Work,” I strongly recommend it. Birnbaum outlines four organizational models in higher education, and I can typically identify which model an institution operates under after just one interaction. I can definitely confirm it if I look at their historical enrollment data.

    For enrollment management specifically, I advocate for what Birnbaum calls the cybernetics model. Cybernetic systems are self-correcting. Teams gather feedback, learn from outcomes, and adjust their strategies accordingly. This stands in stark contrast to the way the political, bureaucratic, and collegial organizational models that often dominate campus decision-making operate.

    A cybernetic approach to enrollment planning means:

    • Creating governance structures in which teams have genuine authority to act
    • Establishing clear feedback loops among marketing, admissions, student success, and academic affairs
    • Using data to inform decisions rather than defend territories
    • Building accountability that’s linked to shared outcomes rather than departmental metrics
    • Adapting strategies based on what actually works, not what teams wish would work

    A cybernetic approach requires institutional leaders, particularly presidents and provosts, to take ownership of the enrollment vision and build governance bodies that align departmental goals with shared institutional goals. Cross-functional committees need decision-making power, not just advisory status. And planning must extend beyond annual cycles to capture multiyear trends and institutional transformation.

    Reallocating Budgets for Mission-Aligned Impact

    Shifting to a mission-driven enrollment strategy requires budget reallocation. You must move dollars away from lead volume activities and toward initiatives that create lasting impact, such as:

    • Faculty-driven enrollment strategies that showcase your distinctive strengths
    • Mission-driven search engine optimization (SEO) and generative engine optimization (GEO) strategies that capitalize on these distinctive strengths 
    • Content creation that tells your institutional story authentically
    • Relationship-building programs that deepen community connections
    • Course scheduling systems that ensure students can access the right courses at the right terms

    These investments usually don’t generate immediate returns in the same way that purchasing 10,000 leads might. But they compound over time. They build an institution’s reputation. They create the conditions for sustainable enrollment growth rather than the enrollment roller coaster that exhausts everyone involved.

    Key Takeaways

    • Lead-chasing produces shallow growth that fades quickly and corrodes an institution’s culture. The alternative isn’t to abandon growth. It’s to anchor growth in the institution’s actual identity and what it genuinely offers.
    • Mission-aligned enrollment requires a commitment to optimizing the entire new student journey, from first awareness through graduation and beyond. It demands faculty involvement, genuine differentiation, and governance structures capable of learning and adapting.
    • Gone are the days when institutions could buy leads, work the leads, and generate students. That approach leads to poor outcomes for everyone: low conversion rates, disengaged employees, escalating costs, and high attrition.
    • The institutions that thrive in the coming decade won’t be those that outspend their competitors on lead generation. They’ll be the ones that know exactly who they are, communicate it with clarity and conviction, and build enrollment systems worthy of their mission.

    Stop thinking like the Yankees. Start building on the foundation you already have.

    Let Archer Help You With Enrollment Planning

    In my years of experience, I’ve helped many institutions establish a strong enrollment strategy. And I’m far from alone in my expertise at Archer Education. Our full-service team partners with colleges and universities of all kinds to help them build and scale their capacities. 

    Is your institution ready to work with a collaborative partner who takes the time to get to know you, then makes custom recommendations based on their decades of experience? Reach out to us today! 

    Source link

  • Breaking the Bottleneck: How Process Mapping and Policy Reform Drive Enrollment Growth

    Breaking the Bottleneck: How Process Mapping and Policy Reform Drive Enrollment Growth

    In today’s fiercely competitive higher education landscape, enrollment leaders are being asked to do more with less. That means more inquiries, more conversions, and more starts, all while working with fewer resources and a shrinking pool of students actively seeking traditional degree paths.

    What separates the institutions that are growing from those that are treading water? In my experience, it’s the willingness to question the status quo. The leaders seeing results are the ones taking a hard look at internal processes and policies and making bold decisions to remove what’s in the way of progress.

    The urgency to remove enrollment barriers

    Many institutions face enrollment plateaus not because they lack student interest, but because of self-imposed friction. Burdensome application requirements, slow review cycles, and legacy processes that haven’t evolved with changing student expectations can all stand in the way of progress.

    Students today expect seamless, responsive experiences. They compare your enrollment process not only to peer institutions but also to the intuitive digital experiences they encounter every day. If your application process is full of red tape or requires too many steps, students will disengage and likely move on to a more accessible option.

    Colleges and universities that want to stay competitive need to start clearing the path. By taking the time to understand how your enrollment process actually operates and identifying where students tend to get stuck, you can make meaningful changes that increase both efficiency and enrollment success.

    Start with a map: Uncovering friction through process review

    The first step to solving an enrollment slowdown is understanding where it’s happening. That’s where process mapping comes in.

    At Collegis, we partner with institutions to conduct comprehensive process assessments. We document and analyze every step of the applicant journey, from inquiry through registration, to uncover inconsistencies, delays, and points of friction that may be limiting your enrollment funnel. We often find that a student’s experience varies widely depending on who they interact with or when they enter the process, revealing a need for greater consistency and coordination.

    In many cases, we find students getting stuck at multiple points across the enrollment journey, starting with the application itself. Lengthy or confusing questions, lack of helpful guidance, and irrelevant fields can all create unnecessary complexity early on. Students may also encounter inconsistent or impersonal communication, making it unclear what to expect next or where they stand in the process.

    Further down the funnel, delays often occur during application review, sometimes taking a week or more due to internal handoffs or manual processes. In some cases, applications sit idle because there’s no system in place to move files forward or flag them for outreach. These gaps add up, slowing momentum and causing potential students to disengage.

    When you can see the entire process visualized, it becomes easier to ask the right questions:

    • Is the application process intuitive and easy to navigate, or are we introducing unnecessary complexity?
    • Are there clear next steps and calls to action for students at each stage?
    • Do students receive consistent, timely communication that reflects where they are in the journey?
    • Is the messaging and cadence of our marketing and operational emails aligned with what students hear from admissions counselors?
    • Are there opportunities to streamline handoffs, automate manual steps, or standardize the process to ensure every student receives a cohesive experience?

    Process mapping isn’t just a troubleshooting exercise. It’s a strategic investment in institutional agility and student-centered design. Institutions that complete this type of review often uncover both quick wins and opportunities for deeper transformation.

    Ready for a Smarter Way Forward?

    Higher ed is hard — but you don’t have to figure it out alone. We can help you transform challenges into opportunities.

    Rethink the rules: Policies that reduce friction and drive results

    Some of the most impactful improvements we’ve seen don’t require major investments or cutting-edge technologies. More often, they come from rethinking the policies that shape your admissions process and how those policies either support or hinder the student experience.

    When we conduct policy reviews with our partner institutions, we often find that some admissions requirements add more complexity than value. It’s crucial to determine whether each requirement is truly essential to making an informed admissions decision. By removing or refining requirements that no longer serve a clear purpose (such as excessive documentation or overly rigid review criteria) institutions can streamline internal workflows and reduce avoidable delays. These targeted adjustments not only improve operational efficiency but also create a more accessible and student-centered experience.

    Impact in action: Practical examples of enrollment transformation

    These are not just hypothetical improvements. We’ve worked directly with institutions to implement these strategies and have seen the tangible impact they can deliver. Here are a few real-world examples that show how practical adjustments have translated into measurable results:

    • Waiving letters of recommendation for applicants who meet a defined GPA threshold. This eliminates a common bottleneck while maintaining admissions rigor.
    • Simplifying transcript requirements by only requesting documentation that includes a conferred degree and any prerequisite coursework required for program entry. Additional transcripts are collected later if necessary, which speeds up the initial review process.
    • Automating workflows that trigger application reviews as soon as all checklist items are complete. This ensures students move through the process without unnecessary delays.
    • Setting up notifications to ensure timely engagement. For example, alerts can be set when a new inquiry or applicant hasn’t received contact from an admissions counselor within 24 hours, or when application reviews are taking longer than expected.

    These types of changes create a more efficient, student-centered process that helps institutions convert interest into enrollment more effectively.

    Don’t just tweak the process, transform it

    If your institution is still relying on outdated processes and rigid policies, now is the time to reevaluate. The enrollment environment is only becoming more competitive. But with the right changes, your institution can become more efficient, more agile, and more appealing to today’s students.

    This isn’t about cutting corners or lowering standards. It’s about rethinking how your process serves students. Process mapping helps uncover ways to simplify steps, ensure consistency, and build trust through clear communication and meaningful staff connections. The result is an experience that’s more efficient, more personal, and better aligned with your institution’s goals.

    Let’s break the bottleneck together

    A process mapping assessment is a powerful starting point. At Collegis, we go beyond identifying issues. We work side by side with our partners to solve them. Our approach is collaborative, our recommendations are practical, and our focus is always on impact.

    If your institution is ready to accelerate enrollment growth, strengthen internal operations, and deliver a more consistent and personalized experience for your students, let’s talk.

    Innovation Starts Here

    Higher ed is evolving — don’t get left behind. Explore how Collegis can help your institution thrive.

    Jim Callinan leads enrollment strategy and operational excellence at Collegis Education, where he partners with higher education institutions to design and deploy data-informed admissions and student-journey models. With nearly 20 years of higher education experience, Jim brings deep expertise in aligning cross-functional teams across technology, marketing, analytics, enrollment, and student success to drive growth, streamline operations, and elevate the student and staff experience. His collaborative approach helps institutions align strategy, process, and performance to achieve sustainable success.

    Source link

  • President’s Role in the Enrollment Experience

    President’s Role in the Enrollment Experience

    Why Enrollment Should Be a Shared Institutional Priority

    The future hangs in the balance as enrollment management at your institution spirals into chaos. 

    Siloed growth initiatives are relegated solely to marketing departments, which bear the full weight of institutional pressure yet lack the authority to grow enrollment throughout the entire funnel. Overburdened marketing teams bombard campus stakeholders with complex, opaque data and demand astronomical digital marketing budgets that few truly understand. It’s just easier to say no. 

    Meanwhile, admissions teams and faculty pursue divergent, often conflicting strategies to recruit students, each operating in isolation with little coordination. 

    Student success teams, critical to retaining and supporting new enrollees, are entirely excluded from strategic discussions, leaving vital continuity efforts out of the equation. 

    As these disconnected forces collide, the institution risks a catastrophic decline in enrollment, eroding its mission and future viability — an unfolding crisis in which collaboration is abandoned and the system teeters on the brink of collapse.

    This isn’t the latest thriller from your favorite streaming platform but instead a worst-case scenario of what some higher education institutions face today. The only one who can save them? You, the university president.

    The President as Chief Enrollment Champion

    It would be easy to assume that enrollment success and growth are mandates of marketing, admissions, and student support teams, as they focus on enrollment key performance indicators (KPIs), customer relationship management (CRM) systems, return on investment (ROI), lead-to-enrollment (L2E), and other such tools and metrics. For many university presidents and leaders, the details of enrollment management success are often isolated from broader priorities, such as mission, strategy, and resource allocation, even if enrollment growth is mentioned in the strategic plan. 

    Enrollment success is the lifeblood of institutional stability. The president and provost set the tone, vision, and degree of urgency around enrollment success initiatives. Without executive involvement, schools and departments compete instead of collaborating, pitting enrollment management teams against each other in a crowded market. This approach can lead to silos, missed opportunities, and uneven accountability. At worst, this approach leads to finger-pointing and a cycle of frustration and disappointment across the president’s cabinet.

    While marketing and enrollment management teams are the frontline drivers of enrollment strategies, the ultimate success of growth and student satisfaction hinges on the strategic leadership of university presidents and provosts. Effective leadership necessitates active engagement and oversight to ensure that these efforts are successfully integrated into the university’s priority initiatives. 

    Strong executive involvement signals holistic institutional commitment. This helps break down barriers that can impede enrollment success and diminish the student enrollment experience, such as disconnects between the operational teams supporting enrollment management and the academic teams safeguarding quality, reputation, and ranking. 

    Here, we discuss why the university president must champion ambitious and responsible enrollment. We explore how executive leadership can ensure that enrollment efforts are appropriately resourced; aligned under a single vision; and integrated across governance, academics, operations, and administration to achieve the most compelling metrics: exceptional student experiences and outcomes.

    Ensuring Adequate Resources and Support

    One of the key ways presidents and provosts can bolster enrollment success is by ensuring that marketing, recruitment, and student success teams are sufficiently resourced. No one expects executive leadership to be in the weeds of enrollment management operations. 

    However, having a working understanding of digital marketing and how it differs from event-driven marketing (for example, enrollment fairs or conferences) can be helpful during budget allocation conversations for marketing campaigns. 

    Equally important is ensuring that faculty and enrollment management staff have access to training and development opportunities to stay current in a rapidly evolving field, which is full of new tools and approaches, as well as a diverse ecosystem of third-party support opportunities. Faculty and staff are on the front line of student engagement. Presidents and provosts can cultivate an environment of continuous professional development focused on inclusive teaching, technology integration, and student engagement strategies. Well-supported faculty and staff are more effective in creating positive learning environments that attract and retain students. 

    Finally, presidents and provosts should invest in a process for new academic program development that assesses whether programs meet market demand and provide graduates with specific professional outcomes. 

    When components such as the above are underfunded, efforts to increase enrollment and enhance the student experience are likely to falter over time.

    Leveraging Modern Data and Analytics

    Are enrollment management staff using outdated and siloed technology systems that require significant manual work to develop basic reporting and analysis? This is a critical area for institutional-level investment and support. 

    Data-driven decision-making is essential in today’s competitive enrollment environment. Presidents and provosts should champion investments in analytics platforms that provide insights into prospective students’ behaviors and indicate their likelihood of enrollment, academic performance, and postgraduation outcomes. 

    Using this data, enrollment management and academic leadership can tailor recruitment strategies, optimize academic pathways, and identify at-risk students early, enabling targeted interventions that improve retention and graduation rates.

    Championing a Student-Centric Institutional Culture

    At the heart of enrollment and student success is a culture that prioritizes the student journey, from initial inquiry through graduation and beyond. While the traditional student journey may be well understood, that of the adult and online learner may require special analysis and support. 

    Presidents and provosts must champion this student-first culture by fostering collaboration across academic units, student services, and administrative departments, ensuring that every touchpoint enhances the student experience for all types of learners. 

    Establish Intentional Governance for Enrollment Success With Shared Performance Metrics 

    Enrollment growth and student success are inherently cross-functional. Presidents and provosts can foster collaboration by establishing formal structures with the authority to act, such as integrated enrollment planning committees or task forces that bring together academic leadership, student affairs, admissions, marketing, and technology teams. This helps align cabinet-level leaders around a unified enrollment vision. 

    These cross-functional collaborations ensure that strategies are coordinated, data-driven, and responsive to emerging trends. For example, aligning ambitious enrollment growth plans with course section scheduling and staffing planning ensures responsible outcomes, rather than having faculty leaders scramble at the last minute to find instructors to cover overfull admitted-student course sections.

    To ensure sustained focus, presidents and provosts should embed enrollment growth and student experience metrics into the university’s performance evaluations. This reinforces their importance across the institution and encourages all units to align their priorities accordingly. Shared accountability metrics should measure success from inquiry through graduation and be accessible to all teams through executive dashboards and regular reviews.

    Promoting Innovation and Building External Partnerships

    Staying competitive requires ongoing innovation and connection to the broader marketplace. Presidential and provost leadership should support the development of flexible academic pathways, such as online or hybrid programs, competency-based education, and microcredentials that appeal to diverse student populations. 

    Partnerships with industry, community organizations, and alumni can keep academic programs and curricula relevant, expand opportunities for students, and enhance the institution’s reputation. Presidents and provosts can lead efforts to establish these collaborations, opening pathways for internships, research projects, and employment while keeping a finger on the pulse of evolving industry and workforce skills needs and gaps.

    Demonstrating Visible Leadership and Accountability

    Finally, effective presidents and provosts demonstrate visible leadership by regularly communicating progress, celebrating successes, and holding units accountable for results. Transparent reporting on enrollment trends, student satisfaction, and graduation rates fosters a culture of continuous improvement. Training everyone to understand the basic KPIs that connect marketing, admissions, academics, and retention ensures that all are speaking the same language and working in partnership.

    Key Takeaways

    The strategic leadership of university presidents and provosts is essential for sustainable enrollment growth and a high-quality student enrollment experience. By actively championing student-centric culture, ensuring appropriate resourcing, fostering aligned governance and collaboration, leveraging data, and embedding metrics into institutional goals, executive leaders can create an environment where enrollment strategies are not only initiatives but also integral components of the university’s shared mission, leading to higher retention; better outcomes; and a stronger, more competitive institution.

    Increase Leadership’s Role in Your Enrollment Experience

    Archer Education partners with institutional leaders and admissions, marketing, and strategy teams to help them overcome enrollment challenges. Using tech-enabled, personalized enrollment marketing and management solutions, we can help your institution align its teams and create a strategic roadmap to sustainable growth. 

    Click here to request more information about Archer’s full-funnel engagement strategies and digital student experience technology.

    Source link