The Trump administration is slashing the funding for new projects focused on STEM education and has terminated hundreds of grants focused on equitable STEM education. This will have enormous effects on education and science for decades to come.
Meaningful science education is crucial for improving all of our lives, including the lives of children and youth. Who doesn’t want their child or grandchild or neighbor to experience curiosity and the joy of learning about the world around them? Who wouldn’t enjoy seeing their child making careful observations of the plants, animals, landforms, and water in their neighborhood or community? Who wouldn’t want a class of kindergartners to understand germ transmission and that washing their hands will help them keep their baby siblings and grandparents healthy? Who doesn’t want their daughters to believe that science is “for them,” just as it is for the boys in their classroom?
Or, if those goals aren’t compelling for you, then who doesn’t want their child or grandchild or neighbor to be able to get a well-paying job in a STEM field when they grow up? Who doesn’t want science itself to advance in more creative and expansive ways?
More equitable science teaching allows us to work toward all these goals and more.
And yet, the Department of Government Efficiency has terminated hundreds of grants from the National Science Foundation that focused squarely on equity in STEM education. My team’s project was one of them.
At the same time, NSF’s funding of new projects and the budget for NSF’s Education directorate are also being slashed.
These terminations and drastic reductions in new funding are decimating the work of science education.
Why should you care?
You might care because the termination of these projects wastes taxpayers’ hard-earned money. My project, for example, was 20 months into what was intended to be a 4-year project, following elementary teachers from their teacher education program into their third year of teaching in classrooms in my state of Michigan and across the country. With the termination, we barely got into the teachers’ first year–making it impossible to develop a model of what development looks like over time as teachers learn to engage in equitable science teaching.
You might care because not funding new projects means we’ll be less able to improve education moving forward. We’re losing the evidence on which we can make sound educational decisions–what works, for whom, and under what circumstances. Earlier NSF-funded projects that I’ve been involved with have, for example, informed the design of curriculum materials and helped district leaders. Educators of future teachers like me build on findings of research to teach evidence-based approaches to facilitating science investigations and leading sense-making discussions. I help teachers learn how they can help children be change-makers who use science to work toward a more just and sustainable world. Benefits like these will be eliminated.
Finally, you might care because many of the terminated and unfunded projects are what’s called NSF Early Career Awards, and CAREER program funding is completely eliminated in the current proposed budget. CAREER grants provide crucial funding and mentoring for new researchers. A few of the terminated CAREER projects focus on Black girls and STEM identity, mathematics education in rural communities, and the experiences of LGBTQ+ STEM majors. Without these and other NSF CAREER grants, education within these fields–science, engineering, mathematics, data science, artificial intelligence, and more, from preschool through graduate school–will regress to what works best for white boys and men.
To be sure, universities have some funds to support research internally. For the most part, though, those funds are minimal. And, it’s true that terminating existing projects like mine and not funding new ones will “save” the government some money. But toward what end? We’re losing crucial evidence and expertise.
To support all children in experiencing the wonder and joy of understanding the natural world–or to help youth move into high-paying STEM jobs–we need to fight hard to reinstate federal funding for science and science education. We need to use every lever available to us–including contacting our representatives in Washington, D.C.–to make this happen. If we aren’t successful, we lose more than children’s enjoyment of and engagement with science. Ultimately we lose scientific advancement itself.
Elizabeth A. Davis, University of Michigan
Elizabeth A. Davis is a professor of science education and teacher education at the University of Michigan in the Marsal Family School of Education. She teaches beginning elementary teachers how to teach science and studies how these teachers learn to teach science, particularly with a focus on how they learn to engage in justice-oriented science teaching. Davis has published over 60 peer-reviewed papers, focusing on aspects of science education, teacher education, and curriculum materials, and her work has been cited over 16,000 times. She chaired a recent report from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine focused on preschool through elementary science and engineering education. Davis has received around $9 million dollars in grant funding, starting in the early 2000s when she received the Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers at the White House (a version of the NSF Early Career Award mentioned in the commentary). Most of that funding has come from the National Science Foundation. She has mentored about a dozen doctoral students. Most importantly, Davis has taught over 800 preservice teachers in her 28 years as a teacher educator at Michigan, helping to launch them into their careers as elementary teachers.
Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)
Kurt Micklo lost interest in academics after he failed to make the basketball team as a sophomore at Chapin High School. Soon after, he fathered a son and began to work full time, which put him further behind in his studies.
A counselor finally advised him during his junior year that he should withdraw and try to earn a GED. He dropped out and – through hard work – found professional success as a general manager of a subcontracting logistics company. However, the lack of a high school diploma haunted him. He wants one to give his family – especially his mother – another reason to be proud of him.
A busy work and family schedule have kept him from returning to school, but the flexibility of a new state program aimed at people aged 18 and older without a high school diploma will allow him to earn a diploma and a college career and technical education, or CTE, credential for programs such as health care, welding or computer science at the same time.
The concept of Opportunity High School Diploma was part of House Bill 8, which the state Legislature passed in 2023. The state funneled about $2 million into this program to help the approximately 4.3 million Texans as of 2023, including about 30,000 adult El Pasoans, without a diploma to earn the academic credits most of them will need to acquire higher-paying jobs. The program is scheduled to launch in spring 2026.
“If I could juggle it, I’d be pretty interested” in the program, said 34-year-old Micklo, a father of three ages 15, 10 and 5. He is the general manager of three warehouses, two in El Paso and one in Laredo, Texas, as well as four sites near the international ports of entry with Mexico in El Paso, Tornillo and Santa Teresa, New Mexico, were commodities are offloaded.. “It would make my stepfather (a retired educator) and my mother happy if I earned my high school diploma.”
El Paso Community College is one of five community college districts in the state selected for the design and implementation phases of this program. The other institutions in the design phase are Alamo Colleges District, Austin Community College, Dallas College and San Jacinto College near Houston.
They work under the direction of the Texas Higher Education Coordinating Board. The board will review the instructional outcomes and performance expectations that the college collaborators created during an October meeting. Once finalized, the college faculty will begin to work with school districts to design the curriculum.
The program is flexible for students who probably work full time and have family obligations. Courses would have suggested timelines, but students would turn in assignments as their schedule allowed through the end of the term.
Micklo, a Northeast resident, said the promised flexibility is the only reason he might consider the program. As for his credential, he said he would need to review EPCC’s career and technical education options. The college offers more than 100 career programs such as HVAC, or heating, ventilation and air conditioning, and electrical, automotive or diesel technologies.
Students will be co-enrolled in competency-based high school curriculum such as math, civics, sciences and communication, and a career and technical workforce program. Competency based courses are focused more on a students’ mastery of a skill or subject than the amount of time spent in a classroom.
Isela Castañón Williams
Isela Castañón Williams, professor and coordinator of EPCC’s teacher preparation programs, is in charge of the college’s 13-member team. She called the project a “monumental task” because of its scope and uniqueness. She said her team, and its counterparts, played a critical role in the design phase.
“Faculty at EPCC are very innovative,” she said. “I think that my colleagues have approached this process with a great deal of enthusiasm. We’re always looking to provide better services and educational experiences to the community we serve.”
EPCC faculty advocated for the program to be designed to accommodate English Second Language and English Language Learner populations, a THECB spokesman said in a July 1 statement. He said last year that the board selected EPCC for the project’s design phase because of its border insights, and because its CTE degrees and credentials are in line with the program.
While the state wants to attract students aged 18 and older, EPCC officials will aim for people 25 and older so as to not compete with K-12 school districts that have their own dropout recovery programs. EPCC, which will offer the program at its five campuses, expects some of the program’s younger students to come from rural areas outside El Paso.
Steven E. Smith
Steven E. Smith, vice president of Instruction and Workforce Education at EPCC, said the state will provide funds to the colleges to cover tuition for initial cohorts. He expects the first groups will range from 30 to 50 students and scale up from there.
“We think this is a big market in El Paso, and I think once the word starts to get out, that will grow tremendously,” Smith said.
The administrator said that he would work on ways to market the program later this month with the college’s External Relations, Communication & Development Division. He said the college would work with school district partners to build lists of potential OHSD students.
“As you might imagine, that is a pretty difficult population to identify and reach out to because they are not in the system anymore,” Smith said.
Higher Education is under intensifying scrutiny as federal regulations tighten, and public trust continues to waver. A growing threat to this is student aid fraud. Organized schemes are exploiting institutional systems to siphon millions in financial aid, particularly targeting Pell Grant disbursements and student aid refunds. The result is a direct hit to both institutional revenue and reputation. Institutions can no longer afford to operate passively. They must lead with transparency, accountability and systems built to withstand obstacles. In an era already marked by increasing skepticism surrounding higher education, this is a risk that institutions cannot afford to ignore
In June 2025, The US Department of Education announced identity verification measures for over 125,000 FAFSA applicants—a clear signal that proactive fraud prevention is no longer optional. Failure to act risks financial loss, audit exposure and reputational damage. Explore how your institution can recognize the warning signs, implement smart prevention strategies and build a strong foundation of trust that supports both reputational and revenue goals.
Understanding the Modern Fraudster’s Playbook
Today’s fraudsters are highly strategic. They understand how to game institutional processes—enrolling just long enough to trigger student aid refunds, then disappearing soon after. By carefully selecting enough credits to qualify for more aid, these fraudsters have fueled the rise of “ghost enrollments” — fraudulent student records created to claim federal aid without actual attendance.
This surge is fueled by gaps in infrastructure, less stringent verification procedures and siloed systems, all challenges that hit resource-limited institutions hardest. The rapid expansion of online learning has outpaced the sophistication of verification systems, reducing touchpoints to confirm student legitimacy. Adding to this challenge, outdated or isolated internal systems often lack real-time data sharing between critical departments such as admissions, financial aid and academic offices.
These deceptive tactics lead to more than just financial losses; they corrupt enrollment data, misguide long-term strategic planning and damage an institution’s reputation. Enrollment fraud is not just a compliance problem but a strategic issue that compromises the very accuracy of the data institutions depend on to create budgets, predict enrollment trends and allocate resources effectively.
Without real-time data sharing and alignment between systems, institutions remain vulnerable to fraud and flawed decision-making. EducationDynamics supports colleges and universities in closing these gaps through integrated data strategies that prioritize accuracy and system-wide consistency.
Identifying the Warning Signs
Early detection is an institution’s strongest defense against coordinated financial aid fraud. As schemes grow more sophisticated, so must the systems and vigilance required to stop them. Fraudsters are increasingly leveraging tools like AI to complete assignments, VPNs to hide their locations and fake identities to access financial aid. Even with these evolving tools, fraud leaves detectable patterns—and catching these patterns can become a valuable asset for institutions.
Red Flag Reports are among the most valuable tools institutions can use to identify fraudulent activity before financial aid is disbursed. These reports highlight anomalies in student data that may otherwise go unnoticed, offering a proactive mechanism to pause and review questionable activity. Implementing this type of reporting is a critical step toward closing system gaps and elevating your fraud prevention infrastructure.
To effectively intercept fraud, institutions should actively monitor for specific indicators across the enrollment and financial aid process, such as:
Multiple students tied to the same bank account or IP address
Invalid or recycled phone numbers tied to applicants
Unusual enrollment or participation patterns, such as registering for the maximum credit load with no subsequent academic engagement
Last-minute documentation or sudden changes to refund delivery preferences
VPN usage that obscures geographic location, particularly when login or application behavior conflicts with submitted residence information
By actively seeking out these red flags and embracing modern verification practices, institutions can significantly bolster their defense.
Actionable Strategies for Institutional Defense
This is the era of proactive defense, demanding that institutions build workflows that not only accommodate scrutiny but leverage it to strengthen their practices.
To achieve this, institutions must:
Empower Staff for Early Detection
Use Red Flag Reports to monitor for suspicious indicators such as shared IP addresses, duplicate bank accounts and invalid phone numbers. These reports empower your staff to pause questionable disbursements and trigger manual reviews, catching issues that might otherwise slip through.
Build Verification Workflows to Withstand Volume
Build scalable, repeatable workflows to efficiently handle identity checks, document intake and federal verification requirements. Implement triage systems that ensure timely reviews, minimizing student disruption while maintaining operational efficiency and compliance.
Create Strategic Friction
Introduce intentional friction points that deter fraudsters without impeding legitimate students. Examples include phone verification for refund information or holding disbursements until after the add/drop period. These small process shifts significantly raise the barrier for fraudulent activity, preventing large-scale losses.
Require the Financial Responsibility Agreement
Make it standard practice to collect signed Financial Responsibility Agreements (FRAs) before disbursement. Doing so strengthens your paper trail and creates another point of identity verification, helping deter those attempting to abuse the system.
Modernize Refund Security
Require muti-factor authentication (MFA) when students update refund profiles, and default to e-refunds over checks. Limit paper disbursements and ensure funds are only returned to verified payment methods, significantly reducing fraud risk and maintaining transaction integrity.
Showcase Strong Digital Infrastructure
When institutions adopt secure, transparent payment systems, they project competence. Adopting strong digital infrastructure is more than an operational improvement; it’s a powerful brand message. A secure system builds public trust and reinforces your institution’s responsible stewardship of student funds.
Break Down Silos and Align Teams
Financial Aid cannot combat fraud in isolation. Establish a collaborative task force with key stakeholders from IT, Registrar and Academic Affairs. Faculty, for instance, are often early observers of suspicious academic behavior. When departments share insights, vulnerabilities are closed far more swiftly.
Create Real-Time Communication Loops
Facilitate consistent touchpoints between Financial Aid, Accounts Receivable and IT to rapidly flag and act on anomalies. Integrated communication accelerates response times and minimizes oversight risks.
Strengthen Awareness Across Campus
Incorporate scam awareness into existing financial literacy programs. Students who understand phishing and fraud risks are less likely to fall victim and more likely to report suspicious behavior.
Develop a Crisis Communication Playbook
A public incident of financial aid fraud extends beyond headlines; it directly threatens an institution’s credibility. Build a comprehensive crisis communication playbook that ensures a fast, transparent, and coordinated response. Proactive planning is crucial, and institutions can significantly strengthen their efforts by partnering with trusted reputation management experts.
When institutions elevate fraud prevention to a core business function, they safeguard far more than their balance sheets, protecting their reputation, enrollment pipeline and overall standing.
Why This Matters for Institutional Leaders
Fraud prevention is a strategic responsibility that demands the attention of every institutional leader. The consequences of fraud aren’t limited to financial aid offices. Fraud compromises presidential planning, marketing performance and enrollment numbers—all while chipping away at public trust. If institutional leaders want to chart a course for sustainable growth, defense against fraud must be built into the foundation of that strategy.
Presidents
For presidents, fraud erodes the central pillars that define institutional stability—financial resilience and decision-making confidence. Ghost enrollments and fake students distort budget forecasts, inflate success metrics and mask areas of real vulnerability.
Fraud prevention supports long-term vision by ensuring that enrollment, funding and performance data reflect institutional realities, not manipulations. In an environment where every resource must be justified, clarity is a leadership requirement.
Marketing Leaders
Marketing teams are measured by outcomes. Fraud makes those outcomes unreliable. Invalid inquiries and ghost enrollments inflate to the top of the funnel, while wasting precious budget. For leaders who rely on brand perception to drive engagement and attract prospects, fraud directly undermines their efforts, risking a loss of trust and diminished return on investment.
Enrollment Leaders
Enrollment leaders face rising stakes driven by declining traditional student populations and heightened expectations for conversions. In this environment, fraud distorts the metrics that enrollment leaders depend on. It artificially inflates applicant numbers, conceals melt and obscures true student movement through the funnel.
More importantly, fraudulent applications divert the time and energy of enrollment coaches. Every moment spent chasing a ghost applicant is a moment stolen from a real applicant who may never get the support they need. Over time, this leads to higher melt, poorer service and declining performance. Strategic financial aid conversations can refocus coaching efforts on real prospects and improve yield through trust-building and transparency.
Fraud prevention empowers enrollment leaders to understand their true audience and make decisions rooted in authentic student behavior, not artificial patterns. Aligning enrollment management strategies with proactive fraud prevention creates a foundation that drives sustained success.
Building a Resilient Institution
Fraud prevention is an ongoing commitment to institutional resilience. As fraudsters evolve their tactics, institutions must continually refine their defenses with smarter workflows, updated red flag criteria and technology. The most resilient schools treat fraud prevention as core infrastructure, integrating it into strategic planning rather than siloing it within financial departments. More importantly, many fraud safeguards also enhance the experience of students and staff by eliminating confusion and freeing teams to focus on supporting real students. When institutions take a proactive approach to fraud, they’re not only protecting their operations—they’re actively preserving the credibility and brand reputation that define long-term success.
EducationDynamics is here to help you turn defense into momentum. By aligning revenue strategy with reputation stewardship, we empower institutions to lead with clarity, act with confidence and build a foundation for success in an increasingly high-stakes environment.
In an era where higher education faces unprecedented challenges and opportunities, the recent Meltwater Summit offered crucial insights for leaders navigating a rapidly changing landscape. This gathering of creative minds, brand leaders and technology experts explored the critical intersection of compelling storytelling, branding and the power of artificial intelligence. Explore strategic takeaways poised to reshape how institutions connect with prospective students, build brand equity and harness AI to drive creative processes.
Creativity Flows with You
Reese Witherspoon set the tone with an honest reflection on the nature of creativity: it’s constantly flowing but rarely on a set schedule. The challenge isn’t finding ideas—it’s cultivating the environment and carving out dedicated time for them to flourish. The solution? Clear, consistent and intentional communication. Whether you’re bridging teams or brainstorming with collaborators, creating space for dialogue is what truly transforms good ideas into great ones. At EducationDynamics, we aren’t just completing tasks; we are constantly collaborating with each of our partners to ensure we produce the best content possible. Our solutions span creative services, brand strategy, awareness marketing and more—turning inspiration into action and strategy into results.
AI: A Teammate, Not a Replacement
AI emerged as a powerful ally throughout Meltwater Summit sessions, particularly when leveraged for the content creation process. One standout tactic shared was the “sandwich approach” to content creation, a straightforward framework for combining human creativity with AI support:
Draft with Intent: Begin by outlining your core message or ideas. This first layer is where your expertise and objectives take shape, setting the foundation for compelling content.
Expand with AI: Use AI tools to build upon your draft—generating copy variations, enhancing clarity or exploring new angles you may not have considered.
Refine with Purpose: Continue to refine and rework AI-enhanced content through your own lens. Strengthen the structure, sharpen the voice and align it with your audience and brand tone. Great content takes more than one pass; it’s built through deliberate iteration.
The takeaway was clear—AI isn’t here to replace your creativity. It should be used to to amplify it. When used intentionally, it becomes a partner in the process, helping ideas take shape faster than before.
At EducationDynamics, we embrace AI as a collaborative tool that helps streamline ideation and improve efficiency. It should be a jump-off point, not a final destination, supporting the creative process without replacing the human insight that drives it.
Prompt Writing with AI
AI can be an amazing content marketing tool, especially when used to generate fresh ideas, streamline workflows, and tailor messaging for specific audiences. In order to achieve these goals using AI, effective prompt writing is also a critical asset.
While a typical Google search might consist of just a few words, an effective AI prompt can span hundreds. The more detail you provide, the better your results will be. Don’t hesitate to ask AI to evaluate or improve your original prompt; collaboration is your asset when using AI. Treat an AI assistant as a teammate. Work with it, and understand it is there to work the foundation, not complete it.
Important Tip: Protect your data. Avoid sharing sensitive information with public AI tools, and use secure, private systems that align with your institution’s compliance and governance policies.
Smarter Workflows with AI
AI isn’t just for writing. It can streamline your entire workflow. From summarizing analytics and setting alerts for media mentions to helping coordinate across teams, AI is becoming an indispensable partner in day-to-day operations.
The takeaway: AI won’t take your job—but it might take over the tasks that are holding you back from your best work.
Content That Captures and Connects
Creative content marketing has the power to elevate your institution’s voice and drive meaningful engagement across platforms. Today’s most effective content does more than inform; it creates an emotional connection. That means capturing content that feels real, engaging and multi-layered. Even one filming session can yield a wealth of valuable content. In each filming session, aim to produce the following:
A core message or question
Authentic behind-the-scenes footage
At EducationDynamics, our creative services span the full content spectrum—including Organic Social strategies designed to help institutions tell their stories in ways that resonate and inspire, reaching students right at their fingertips.
Strategic Content Planning
For university marketing leaders and content marketing managers alike, every piece of content should align with your larger content calendar and overarching brand goals. Don’t post just to fill the gap. Each piece should serve one (or more) of three purposes:
Educate: Deliver useful and relevant information.
Engage: Spark genuine conversation and connection.
Encourage: Motivate your audience to act, advocate, or explore further
In higher education, for example, students crave content that both informs and resonates emotionally. Whether highlighting everyday moments or preparing for crisis communication, a plan—and a designated point of contact—ensures you can respond quickly and effectively.
Always ask: How does this content deepen connections, build school pride or inform? You’re not just telling a story—you’re shaping your institution’s impact.
Build With Intention
From AI integration to authentic content creation, one message echoed throughout this year’s Meltwater Summit: success in today’s digital world means being intentional.
The institutions that thrive are the ones building with purpose, thoughtfully engaging audiences and effectively leveraging technology. They listen, adapt and invest in strategies that meet the Modern Learner where they are, contributing to overall brand health and engagement.
Purposeful creation begins with understanding your community, amplifying their voices and delivering value through every interaction. As a higher education marketing agency, we empower institutions to transform attention into enrollment and inspire students to become advocates.
Your institution has the foundation: vision, community and purpose. With the right tools and the right partner, you can turn that foundation into measurable growth that aligns with your goals. If you are ready to grow with intention and engage on a deeper level, EducationDynamics is here to support you.
As higher education navigates rapid change, the Meltwater Summit, held in New York City in May, was a gathering of creative minds, brand leaders and technology experts. The Summit made one thing clear: compelling storytelling, intentional branding and the thoughtful use of artificial intelligence are interconnected forces that shape lasting reputations. Institutions that invest in purposeful content and strategic technology integration are best positioned to lead with both credibility and measurable impact, connecting brand reputation and revenue growth as part of a unified strategy.
Meltwater is a leading platform in media intelligence, powering reputation management, press monitoring and social listening. At EducationDynamics, we use Meltwater to uncover trends, track brand perception and guide strategies across channels for our partners.
This year, I had the opportunity to attend the Meltwater Summit—a two-day event designed for marketing and communications professionals focusing on how data and creativity shape brand strategy. In my role as Senior Social & Visual Strategist at EducationDynamics, I was especially tuned into the evolving role of social media.
The conversations throughout the Summit reaffirmed the importance of developing content strategies that are cohesive, intentional and fully aligned with broader brand goals. Explore the key takeaways we gathered from the event and how they can benefit higher education marketers.
Reese Witherspoon set the tone with a powerful opening session, delivering honest reflection on the nature of creativity. Creativity is constantly flowing but rarely on a set schedule. The challenge isn’t finding ideas—it is cultivating the environment and carving out dedicated time for them to flourish. The solution? Clear, consistent and intentional communication. Whether you’re bridging teams or brainstorming with collaborators, creating space for dialogue is what truly transforms good ideas into great ones.
What we learned about the creative process is clear: creativity is not merely a component but a foundational pillar of your university’s reputation. When internal teams collaborate, align and ideate together, they build a cohesive and authentic brand that shapes how your institution is seen from the outside.
Moreover, it is important to recognize that your organic social efforts, website content, press releases and all other communications are not isolated channels. They form an interconnected ecosystem. Each piece of content plays a role within a broader narrative of your institution’s reputation. Thinking holistically about how every element comes together and ensures that your university’s story is consistent and impactful at every touchpoint.
For university marketing leaders and content managers, content should do more than fill space—it should move the needle. Every asset should align with your broader strategy, reinforce your institution’s brand and serve at least one of the following purposes:
Educate: Share timely, valuable information your audience can trust.
Engage: Spark genuine conversation and connection.
Encourage: Motivate your audience to act, advocate, or explore further.
Today’s Modern Learners seek content that not only informs but also resonates with their experiences and aspirations. Whether showcasing everyday moments or navigating a crisis, having a clear plan—and a designated point of contact—ensures your team can respond with timely, thoughtful responses.
As you develop your content, ask yourself: Does this content deepen connection, build school pride or inform? Does it strengthen our institution’s reputation? If it does not accomplish any of this, you are just creating noise.
Success in today’s digital landscape demands intentionality. It is not just about telling stories—it is about using every piece of content strategically to shape perception, deepen engagement and build a brand that endures.
To build a brand that endures, every content piece should be seen as an opportunity to reinforce your institution’s voice and values. Strategic content creation, especially through organic social, plays a vital role in shaping how your audience connects with and trusts your brand.
When aligned intentionally, organic social media is a powerful channel that strengthens brand affinity while complementing awareness and digital marketing efforts across multiple channels. Creative content marketing, particularly in video, continues to grow in importance as a relevant medium for establishing reputation. Today’s audiences prefer content that feels authentic and emotionally resonant. To capture that depth, institutions should plan how content will be used across multiple channels. For example, to get the most out of every filming session, aim to capture:
A core message or question
Authentic behind-the-scenes footage
Action shots
Introductory context
Relatable soundbites
These assets do more than fill channels. They bring your strategy to life across multiple touchpoints in a format that is both attention-grabbing and engaging. When your content reflects lived experiences and community voices, it fosters trust and connection. In today’s crowded digital space, trust is a vital currency that drives reputation and results.
No conference in 2025 is complete without discussions of AI. Throughout the Summit, AI was highlighted as a powerful ally, particularly when leveraged within the content creation process. One key tactic shared was the “sandwich approach,” a straightforward framework for combining human creativity with AI support:
Draft with Intent: Outline your core message and ideas based on your expertise.
Expand with AI: Use AI tools to generate variations, improve clarity or explore new angles.
Refine with Purpose: Edit and polish AI-enhanced content to match your brand voice and audience.
Strong results also depend on clear, detailed prompts. Providing AI with context like tone, audience and format helps produce relevant output. Beyond content creation, AI can streamline workflows, freeing marketers to focus on strategy and adding creative touches.
At EducationDynamics, we view AI as a collaborative tool that boosts efficiency and creativity. It serves as a jump-off point, not the final destination, supporting the work driven by our team’s vision.
Meltwater reinforced that when AI is thoughtfully integrated into the creative process, it does not replace your unique insight. Instead, it amplifies it, freeing your team to focus on the meaningful and strategic work that shapes your institution’s brand.
If one message stood out at this year’s Meltwater Summit, it was that creativity and strategic content creation are essential to building a compelling strong and enduring reputation.
The institutions best positioned to thrive are those that engage their audiences intentionally, invest in the right technologies and meet the Modern Learner where they are.
Purposeful creation begins with understanding your community, amplifying their voices and delivering value through every interaction. As a higher education marketing agency, we empower institutions to transform attention into enrollment and inspire students to become advocates.
Your institution already has the foundation: vision, community and purpose. With the right tools and the right partner, you can turn that foundation into measurable growth that aligns with your goals. If you are ready to grow with intention and engage on a deeper level, EducationDynamics is here to support you.
Preparing for an AI-Powered Evolution in How Students Search
If you’ve ever been involved in your institution’s digital marketing efforts, you’ve undoubtedly heard of search engine optimization — otherwise known as SEO.
But after more than a decade of optimizing keywords and backlinks in content for search engines like Google and Bing, we’re now at the dawn of a new age spurred on by artificial intelligence (AI) and a new approach is required: generative engine optimization (GEO).
As prospective students turn to AI tools and large language models (LLMs) to guide their college search, traditional SEO tactics are no longer enough. Digital marketing teams must also incorporate new GEO-focused tactics into their strategies.
In an increasingly competitive and LLM-driven world, institutions must now rethink their visibility, branding, and recruitment strategies for a digital landscape that continues to evolve.
Understanding Generative Engines and Their Impact on Students’ Search Behavior
Generative engine optimization is emerging as a critical response to the way AI is reshaping how prospective students find and evaluate colleges. Unlike traditional search engines, generative engines powered by large language models deliver conversational, synthesized responses — often without requiring users to click through to a website.
This shift is impacting how institutions need to approach their digital visibility and student engagement efforts.
The Rise of LLMs
As students move away from traditional search engines toward AI search tools, LLMs and LLM-powered tools like ChatGPT, Claude, Perplexity, and Google’s Gemini and Search Generative Experience (SGE) are leading the way.
These platforms generate real-time, AI-powered answers that summarize information from across the web — often citing sources, but not always linking to them directly. Their growing popularity signals a move away from standard search engine results toward fluid, question-driven discovery.
The Impact of LLMs on Students’ Search Experiences
Prospective students are already turning to generative engines to ask nuanced questions such as, “What are the top 20 online MSW programs?” or “Which colleges have the best student support services for veterans?”
Instead of having to navigate a list of blue links, they’re receiving direct, synthesized answers to their questions. This introduces key shifts that digital marketers must consider, including:
Fewer clicks to their institution’s website
A higher priority for being cited in credible content
Reduced visibility in traditional search engine results pages (SERPs)
For colleges and universities, adapting to this new behavior is essential to staying prominent in students’ minds during their decision-making process.
SEO vs. GEO in Higher Education
Search engine optimization and generative engine optimization share a common goal: to ensure content is discoverable, relevant, and credible. Both approaches rely on strategic keyword usage, high-quality content, and data-driven refinement to increase visibility.
SEO was built for traditional search engines that return ranked lists of links. GEO is designed for AI-powered engines that synthesize information and deliver complete answers.
For universities, this change requires a new, blended approach — one that takes both SEO and GEO into account when creating admissions materials, program pages, and search rankings-focused content such as blog posts.
SEO vs. GEO: A Side-by-Side Comparison
Category
SEO (Search Engine Optimization)
GEO (Generative Engine Optimization)
Primary Goal
Ranks web pages in search engine results pages
Surfaces content in AI-generated, conversational responses
Keyword Strategy
Optimizes for exact-match and high-volume keywords
Focuses on semantic relevance and contextual cues
User Experience
Prioritizes site structure, navigation, and readability
Prioritizes clear, structured content that AI can easily parse
Tracks AI referrals, citation frequency, inclusion in LLM answers
Content Strategy
Page-level optimization for ranking
Multisource optimization for synthesis in AI-generated content
Adaptability Requirement
Evolves with search algorithm updates
Evolves with AI behavior, model updates, and platform preferences
User Search Experience
List of blue links with snippets
Zero-click answers, direct responses, and conversational recommendations
How Generative Engines Pull and Rank University Content
Generative engines like ChatGPT and Google’s SGE don’t rank web pages the same way traditional search engines do. Instead, they synthesize information from multiple sources to deliver a single, cohesive answer.
To be included in these AI-generated responses, university content needs to strike a balance between academic credibility and an accessible, student-friendly structure. AI prioritizes information that is well-organized, clearly written, and backed by authoritative sources, such as:
Research publications
Program pages
Institutional blogs
Institutions that prioritize clarity and credibility in their content are more likely to be cited and surfaced in generative search results.
Key GEO Strategies for Colleges and Universities
To stay visible in AI-driven searches, institutions need to adopt innovative content strategies tailored to how generative engines interpret and deliver information. Here are some core GEO tactics:
Showcase Faculty Within Content
Highlight faculty expertise in program pages, blog posts, and FAQs.
Link to faculty bios and published research to boost credibility.
Feature quotes, profiles, or insights to personalize academic offerings.
Ensure AI- and LLM-Friendly Structure and Markup
Use schema (structured data) markup to help AI understand the content’s context.
Organize pages with clear subheadings that mirror common student questions.
Example: “Is an Online EdD Respected?”
Boldface key points and use callout boxes to surface important information.
Design site architecture for easy crawling and content parsing.
Create Concise and Clear Content
Use conversational, student-centered language.
Write in short, scannable paragraphs with clear takeaways.
Address common and next-level questions.
Examples: “How long does it take to complete this degree?” and “What can I do with my degree after graduation?”
Use Content Formats That Perform Well in GEO
Incorporate career outcome and salary tables.
Include degree comparisons.
Example: “MBA vs. MPA”
Use visuals and guides that explain steps for processes such as admissions, licensure, and the student journey.
Build Brand Authority and Trust
Invest in public relations campaigns to generate credible mentions and citations.
Maintain consistent messaging across the web, social media, and paid media.
Grow visibility through strategic content distribution and strong social media channels.
Measuring GEO Performance in Enrollment Marketing
As with every digital marketing initiative, it’s not enough to just roll out a GEO strategy — institutions need to measure its success. Here’s how it’s done in the GEO world:
Create LLM-Focused Dashboards via GA4 and Looker Studio
Institutions can build LLM-focused dashboards using Google Analytics 4 (GA4) and Looker Studio by creating filters for platforms like ChatGPT, Perplexity, Microsoft Copilot, Google Gemini, and Claude.
Google currently doesn’t provide direct data for AI Overview referrals, and they have been neutral in response to questions on if they will ever release AI Overview data.
While LLMs are still evolving, isolating referral traffic from these tools can provide institutions with early insight into how students are discovering their content through AI.
Use Attribution Models for AI-Influenced Student Journeys
To fully understand how GEO affects students’ enrollment behavior, marketers need to evolve their attribution models, or how enrollment conversions are attributed to different channels. AI-generated responses often play a role at the top of the enrollment funnel, influencing students before they ever land on a university’s website.
Measuring that influence through multitouch attribution and long-view funnel analysis will become increasingly important as AI tools reshape how students explore, compare, and commit to higher education programs.
Challenges and Ethical Considerations
As generative engines continue to shape how students discover universities, inherent challenges will likely arise.
AI tools can misrepresent data or present outdated information, raising concerns about their accuracy and whether they can be trusted. There’s also the risk that well-resourced, elite institutions may disproportionately dominate generative search results, reinforcing existing inequities. Lack of transparency in how algorithms surface and prioritize content makes it difficult for institutions to ensure they are receiving fair and accountable representation.
Future Trends in Higher Education GEO
When it comes to emerging digital marketing techniques like GEO, early investments can help institutions stay ahead of the curve.
Multimodal Optimization for Virtual Campus Tours and Visual Content
As generative engines evolve, optimizing for multimodal content — such as images, video, and virtual tours — will become increasingly important.
This goes beyond traditional desktop experiences. In Meta’s first quarter 2025 earnings call, Mark Zuckerberg predicted that smart glasses will eventually replace smartphones, describing them as ideal for AI and the metaverse.
With Meta already partnering with Ray-Ban on AI-integrated eyewear, higher ed marketers need to start preparing content that’s not just LLM-friendly but also immersive, interactive, and wearable-ready.
AI-Driven Personalization for Students
Rather than relying on static rankings or one-size-fits-all search experiences, AI is ushering in a wave of hyperpersonalization. Prospective students may soon interact with personalized advisors, see school rankings tailored to their goals, and receive customized digital content that aligns with their academic and career interests.
This shift will push institutions to deliver flexible, student-centered content that adapts to each individual’s intent and pathway.
Search by Outcome, Not Degree
Generative tools are beginning to trace backward from desired career outcomes by identifying what roles successful professionals hold, then linking those roles to specific programs, professors, and institutions.
For colleges and universities, this means alumni outcomes, employer partnership information, and job title visibility are essential signals. Institutions that surface these elements clearly will be better positioned to show up in outcome-based searches and AI-generated guidance.
Ready to Get Ahead of the Curve?
The use of AI and large language models in search is only going to increase, fundamentally reshaping how students discover, evaluate, and engage with higher education institutions.
Developing a strong generative engine optimization strategy is essential. GEO needs to be seamlessly integrated into your existing SEO and digital marketing efforts to ensure your institution stays visible and relevant in a rapidly shifting landscape.
With generative engines evolving at an unprecedented pace, now is the time to prepare for how you’ll reach the next generation of students.
Want to talk through how GEO fits into your broader enrollment strategy? Contact Archer Education to start the conversation.
This spring, the National Institutes of Health quietly began terminating programs at scores of colleges that prepared promising undergraduate and graduate students for doctoral degrees in the sciences.
At least 24 University of California and California State University campuses lost training grants that provided their students with annual stipends of approximately $12,000 or more, as well as partial tuition waivers and travel funds to present research at science conferences. The number of affected programs is likely higher, as the NIH would not provide CalMatters a list of all the cancelled grants.
Cal State San Marcos, a campus in north San Diego County with a high number of low-income learners, is losing four training grants worth about $1.8 million per year. One of the grants, now called U-RISE, had been awarded to San Marcos annually since 2001. San Marcos students with U-RISE stipends were often able to forgo part-time jobs, which allowed them to concentrate on research and building the skills needed for a doctoral degree.
The cuts add to the hundreds of millions of dollars of grants the agency has cancelled since President Donald Trump took office for a second term.
To find California campuses that lost training grants, CalMatters looked up known training grants in the NIH search tool to see if those grants were still active. If the grant’s award number leads to a broken link, that grant is dead, a notice on another NIH webpage says.
The NIH web pages for the grants CalMatters looked up, including U-RISE, are no longer accessible. Some campuses, including San Marcos, Cal State Long Beach, Cal State Los Angeles and UC Davis, have updated their own websites to state that the NIH has ended doctoral pathway grants.
“We’re losing an entire generation of scholars who wouldn’t have otherwise gone down these pathways without these types of programs,” said Richard Armenta, a professor of kinesiology at San Marcos and the associate director of the campus’s Center for Training, Research, and Educational Excellence that operates the training grants.
At San Marcos, 60 students who were admitted into the center lost grants with stipends, partial tuition waivers and money to travel to scientific conferences to present their findings.
From loving biology to wanting a doctoral degree
Before the NIH terminations, Marisa Mendoza, a San Marcos undergraduate, received two training grants. As far back as middle school, Mendoza’s favorite subjects were biology and chemistry.
To save money, she attended Palomar College, a nearby community college where she began to train as a nurse. She chose that major because it would allow her to focus on the science subjects she loved. But soon Mendoza realized she wanted to do research rather than treat patients.
At Palomar, an anatomy professor introduced her to the NIH-funded Bridges to the Baccalaureate, a training grant for community college students to earn a bachelor’s and pursue advanced degrees in science and medicine.
“I didn’t even know what grad school was at the time,” she said. Neither of her parents finished college.
The Bridges program connected her to Cal State San Marcos, where she toured different labs to find the right fit. At the time she was in a microbiology course and found a lab focused on bacteria populations in the nearby coastal enclaves. The lab was putting into practice what she was learning in the abstract. She was hooked.
“It just clicked, like me being able to do this, it came very easily to me, and it was just something that I came to be very passionate about as I was getting more responsibility in the lab,” Mendoza said.
Marisa Mendoza, right, and Camila Valderrama-Martínez, left, get ready to demonstrate how they use lab equipment for their research work at Cal State San Marcos on May 6, 2025. Photo by Adriana Heldiz, CalMatters
From Palomar she was admitted as a transfer student to San Marcos and more selective campuses, including UCLA and UC San Diego. She chose San Marcos, partly to live at home but also because she loved her lab and wanted to continue her research.
She enrolled at San Marcos last fall and furthered her doctoral journey by receiving the U-RISE grant. It was supposed to fund her for two years. The NIH terminated the grant March 31, stripping funds from 20 students.
For a school like San Marcos, where more than 40% of students are low-income enough to receive federal financial aid called Pell grants, the loss of the NIH training awards is a particular blow to the aspiring scientists.
The current climate of doctoral admissions is “definitely at a point where one needs prior research experience to be able to be competitive for Ph.D. programs,” said Elinne Becket, a professor of biological sciences at Cal State San Marcos who runs the microbial ecology lab where Mendoza and other students hone their research for about 15 hours a week.
San Marcos doesn’t have much money to replace its lost grants, which means current and future San Marcos students will “100%” have a harder time entering a doctoral program, Becket added. “It keeps me up at night.”
Research is ‘a missing piece’
In a typical week in Becket’s lab, Mendoza will drive to a nearby wetland or cove to retrieve water samples — part of an ongoing experiment to investigate how microbial changes in the ecosystem are indications of increased pollution in sea life and plants. Sometimes she’ll wear a wetsuit and wade into waters a meter deep.
The next day she’ll extract the DNA from bacteria in her samples and load those into a sequencing machine. The sequencer, which resembles a small dishwasher, packs millions or billions of pieces of DNA onto a single chip that’s then run through a supercomputer a former graduate student built.
“Once I found research, it was like a missing piece,” Mendoza, a Pell grant recipient, said through tears during an interview at Cal State Marcos. Research brought her joy and consumed her life “in the best way,” she added. “It’s really unfortunate that people who are so deserving of these opportunities don’t get to have these opportunities.”
Student Marisa Mendoza gets emotional while she speaks about her research at Cal State San Marcos on May 6, 2025. Photo by Adriana Heldiz, CalMatters
The origins of the San Marcos training center date back to 2002. Through it, more than 160 students have either earned or are currently pursuing doctoral degrees at a U.S. university.
The grant terminations have been emotionally wrenching. “There had been so many tears in my household that my husband got me a puppy,” said Denise Garcia, the director of the center and a professor of biological sciences.
Garcia recalls that in March she was checking a digital chat group on Slack with many other directors of U-RISE grants when suddenly the message board lit up with updates that their grants were gone. At least 63 schools across the country lost their grants, NIH data show.
In the past four years of its U-RISE grant the center has reported to the NIH that 83% of its students entered a doctoral program. That exceeds the campus’s grant goal, which was 65% entering doctoral programs.
Mendoza is grateful: She was one of two students to win a campus scholarship that’ll defray much, but not all, of the costs of attending school after losing her NIH award. That, plus a job at a pharmacy on weekends, may provide enough money to complete her bachelor’s next year.
Others are unsure how they’ll afford college while maintaining a focus on research in the next school year.
Student Camila Valderrama-Martínez in a lab at Cal State San Marcos on May 6, 2025. Photo by Adriana Heldiz, CalMatters
“You work so hard to put yourself in a position where you don’t have to worry, and then that’s taken away from you,” said Camila Valderrama-Martínez, a first-year graduate student at San Marcos who also earned her bachelor’s there and works in the same lab as Mendoza. She was in her first year of receiving the Bridges to the Doctorate grant meant for students in master’s programs who want to pursue a biomedical-focused doctoral degree. The grant came with a stipend of $26,000 annually for two years plus a tuition waiver of 60% and money to attend conferences.
She can get a job, but that “takes away time from my research and my time in lab and focusing on my studies and my thesis.” She relies solely on federal financial aid to pay for school and a place to live. Getting loans, often anathema for students, seems like her only recourse. “It’s either that or not finish my degree,” she said.
Terminated NIH grants in detail
These grant cancellations are separate from other cuts at the NIH since Trump took office in January, including multi-million-dollar grants for vaccine and disease research. They’re also on top of an NIH plan to dramatically reduce how much universities receive from the agency to pay for maintaining labs, other infrastructure and labor costs that are essential for campus research. California’s attorney general has joined other states led by Democrats in suing the Trump administration to halt and reverse those cuts.
In San Marcos’ case, the latest U-RISE grant lasted all five years, but it wasn’t renewed for funding, even though the application received a high score from an NIH grant committee.
Armenta, the associate director at the Cal State San Marcos training center, recalled that his NIH program officer said that though nothing is certain, he and his team should be “cautiously optimistic that you would be funded again given your score.” That was in January. Weeks later, NIH discontinued the program.
He and Garcia shared the cancellation letters they received from NIH. Most made vague references to changes in NIH’s priorities. However, one letter for a specific grant program cited a common reason why the agency has been cancelling funding: “It is the policy of NIH not to prioritize research programs related to Diversity (sic), equity, and inclusion.”
That’s a departure from the agency’s emphasis on developing a diverse national cadre of scientists. As recently as February, the application page for that grant said “there are many benefits that flow from a diverse scientific workforce.”
Future of doctoral programs unclear
Josue Navarrete graduated this spring from Cal State San Marcos with a degree in computer science. Unlike the other students interviewed for this story, Navarrete, who uses they/them pronouns, was able to complete both years of their NIH training grant and worked in Becket’s lab.
But because of the uncertain climate as the Trump administration attempts to slash funding, Vanderbilt University, which placed Navarrete on a waitlist for a doctoral program, ultimately denied them admission because the university program had to shrink its incoming class, they said. Later, Navarrete met a professor from Vanderbilt at a conference who agreed to review their application. The professor said in any other year, Navarrete would have been admitted.
The setback was heartbreaking.
Josue Navarrete at the Cal State San Marcos campus on May 6, 2025. Photo by Adriana Heldiz, CalMatters
“I’m gripping so hard to stay in research,” Navarrete said. With doctoral plans delayed, they received a job offer from Epic, a large medical software company, but turned it down. “They wanted me to be handling website design and mobile applications, and that’s cool. It’s not for me.”
Valderrama-Martinez cited Navarrete’s story as she wondered whether doctoral programs at universities will have space for her next year. “I doubt in a year things are going to be better,” she said.
She still looks forward to submitting her applications.
So does Mendoza. She wants to study microbiology — the research bug that bit her initially and brought her to San Marcos. Eventually she hopes to land at a private biotech firm and work in drug development.
“Of course I’m gonna get a Ph.D., because that just means I get to do research,” she said.
What Is a Program Viability Assessment, and Why Does It Matter?
“Knowing which pieces you want exchanged is a great help in finding the right moves.” – Graham Burgess, chess master and author
In a game of checkers, players often make tactical, reactive moves based on the immediate situation with game pieces that generally move in standard ways. In a game of chess, on the other hand, each type of game piece has a distinct movement potential. Players must leverage strategy and careful planning several steps in advance. Each move impacts future possibilities, so players try to analyze the current state and potential future scenarios to inform their decisions.
Make no mistake, in higher education today, you’re playing chess with your academic program portfolio and market strategy. To assist you in this process, we discuss Archer Education’s critical tool of Program Viability Assessment — the art and science of knowing how your programs best move across the market “game board” toward portfolio-level success.
Understanding the Program Viability Assessment: What Is It?
A Program Viability Assessment analyzes a higher ed program’s potential for demand and growth, net revenue, operational sustainability, and alignment with organizational goals. Through the assessment process, an institution can identify its risks and opportunities, allowing it to make informed decisions about its resource and investment allocations and strategic direction.
A Program Viability Assessment can be used for both current and potential new programs. For this discussion, we focus on current programs within an existing portfolio, asking: Are the current programs viable, and, if so, are they expected to continue to be? In an upcoming article, we will tackle new program opportunity assessment: Does the new program idea have a product-market fit?
Let’s discuss the process for conducting a Program Viability Assessment of your current programs.
Key Components of a Current Program Viability Assessment
Our Program Viability Assessment process uses a model that captures a program’s recent historical performance, determines its five-year growth potential, and then marries this view with its cost inputs and any institutional constraints (e.g., hurdle rates, margin mandates, and internal revenue share agreements).
Our typical process steps are as follows:
We analyze the past few years of enrollments for the program. How did the program perform in terms of gaining new enrollments and retaining students term over term and through to completion?
We analyze current market conditions for the program topic, including the institution’s brand strength and awareness in this topic area.
How can we leverage recent and real-time demand indicators (e.g., Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System [IPEDS] and Bureau of Labor Statistics [BLS] data, search demand trends and traffic, and competitor activity)?
How can we understand the alignment of the program topic with the institution’s signature brand profile, reach, and current impact?
Is the institution leaning into its known areas of strength, or is it educating the market on the institution’s capabilities in this topic vertical? (E.g., if you are an institution known primarily for its science, technology, engineering, and math [STEM] programming, how are your education programs faring?)
How does the institution compare with its primary competitive set in this area?
We develop a five-year enrollment projection for the program based on historical trends, current program performance, proprietary benchmarks such as term-over-term persistence rates, and external market data.
Based on the current state of operations, will the program enrollment grow, remain steady/stagnate, or decline?
Are there ways to alter its trajectory favorably, or would that require significant attention and resourcing?
We discuss the cost inputs to understand net revenue for the program.
Does the growth potential outpace the costs required to support growth?
Are there accreditation constraints to consider (e.g., rules that may require enrollment caps)?
The cost and “profitability drag” inputs do not need to be exhaustive. We try to focus on the big rocks in the container for the program analysis.
Finally, we place the program in an investment category (e.g., grow, maintain, test, divest) with executive recommendations for the program.
Developing a Program Portfolio Road Map
Applying the Program Viability Assessment to each program results in an investment road map for the program portfolio — akin to a multistep chess strategy. Basically, how do you think of each program (game piece) and its ability to move in the right direction in current and future market conditions? For example:
For which programs do you provide growth resources to realize scale (e.g., those with a strong product-market fit and favorable market conditions)? How do you position those “star” programs in the market to realize their full potential?
For which programs do you invest in market tests to determine their next iterations (e.g., those that are new or in evolving market conditions)? What are the best sources of information for those market tests (e.g., employer interviews, prospective student or consumer demand surveys, marketing messaging A/B testing)?
For which programs do you explore divesting, merging with other currently successful programs, or reimaging/transforming them into something else (e.g., a different credential type or a noncredit business-to-business offering)?
It is important to be transparent about the program viability process and the criteria for investment decisions at the institutional level to anticipate and avoid leadership bias concerns. It can also be useful to consider incentives (not necessarily monetary) for recognizing how and when to grow a successful program (i.e., the fun part) as well as incentives for recognizing how and when to sunset a program that has served its purpose (i.e., the challenging part).
By openly acknowledging the “product life cycle” of academic programs across the institution — i.e., a natural beginning, middle, and end to a program’s contribution to the portfolio — you can remove unnecessary reputational wear and tear on academic units working to meet evolving market demands.
Why Does Program Viability Matter?
At its heart, a Program Viability Assessment is a conversation among faculty and subject matter experts, enrollment management leadership, and institutional executives to steer the university’s market strategy, program resourcing, and strategic objectives. This is a robust, data-driven process that provides input opportunities for a variety of critical stakeholders.
Here’s why program viability matters.
Resource Allocation
Understanding the viability of a program helps the institution allocate resources (time, money, personnel) as effectively as possible. E.g., it prevents continued investment in programs that are unlikely to succeed.
Risk Management
Evaluating program viability allows an institution to identify the potential for upcoming risks and uncertainty, enabling leaders to develop strategies to mitigate those risks.
Strategic Alignment and Leadership Buy-In
Programs that align with an institution’s overall strategy are more likely to succeed. Assessing a program’s viability ensures that the program contributes to the institution’s current and future-oriented mission and objectives. This includes programs that have leadership support and those that intentionally test new topics or market areas.
Sustainability
A program’s long-term success is contingent upon its ability to sustain itself financially and operationally. Program viability analysis looks at factors such as ongoing demand, market competition, and resource requirements.
Data-Driven Success Measurement and Decision-Making
Conducting a Program Viability Assessment is a rigorous process that develops a common standard for defining success, enabling an institution to measure progress and adapt as necessary to improve its portfolio-level outcomes. It provides a framework for decision-making that can enhance overall institutional effectiveness.
Finally, let’s take a look at a few brief examples of how powerful this kind of assessment can be.
Examples of Program Viability Assessment Findings
Here are a few recent examples of Archer analyses that illustrate why taking the time to complete program viability analysis is important.
Analysis of a Regional Center Undergraduate Program Portfolio
A state university had built a regional center decades prior and wanted to understand why, after years of success, the center was barely breaking even instead of growing as it had in the past. The regional center offered several bachelor’s degree programs that enabled students in the area to come to a campus for in-person instruction, versus having to commute a significant distance to the main campus or commit to a fully online program.
The growth potential for these programs’ topic areas was generally sound. However, upon review of recent census data, Archer discovered that, in this particular region, there was very little difference in wages between those with a high school diploma and those with a bachelor’s degree, calling into question the value proposition of the center offering primarily degree programs.
The shift in regional income levels occurred due to some impactful employers leaving the area in recent years. This finding was enough to start an executive-level conversation about how best to deploy the center’s resources to support the community beyond the current degree program approach and to start a study to determine the economic impact of closing the center as a last resort.
Criminal Justice Bachelor’s Degree Evaluated in a Local Context
A small, private regional institution was concerned about the small enrollment numbers for its Bachelor of Science (BS) in Criminal Justice program, which had been in the market for more than five years. Despite the original market research showing demand for criminal justice skills in the area, the program did not reach viability (e.g., sufficient class sizes to reach break-even revenue). Costs to support the program were modest.
Upon deeper review of the local context, Archer learned that the police academies in the region had updated their training programs such that there was now significant overlap between the skills taught in the academy and those taught by higher education institutions in the region. The finding was the catalyst for a revamp of the program curriculum and enhanced coordination with local law enforcement academies.
Accounting Education Malaise Remedied by Curricular Update
A private institution with strong business programming showed a steady decline in enrollments in its undergraduate accounting degree program for the past five years. A broad market analysis revealed that the industry was suffering from a malaise — in short, the certification requirements were too onerous; the salaries lagged those of related content areas, such as finance and business technology; and there was not enough innovation in the topic area to appeal to current student populations.
Rather than close the program in defeat, the institution decided to test a new value proposition for the program by embedding data analytics and artificial intelligence (AI) content in the curriculum to provide enhanced skills acquisition. They also offered additional certified public accountant (CPA) exam preparation support at a modest cost. Marketing messaging immediately showcased these enhancements.
Assessing Your Program’s Viability
Program Viability Assessments can support institution-level strategic conversations, foster inclusive decision-making, and spark creative problem-solving. This ultimately drives the ambitious impact institutions seek, within the institution and in the broader market.
Contact our strategy and development team today to learn more about how Archer Education can help you assess the sustainability of your programs and achieve growth.
Leveraging Staged Growth for Online Learning Infrastructure
When it comes to building a successful online learning ecosystem in higher education, there’s no magic switch to flip — and certainly no one-size-fits-all strategy to follow. For colleges and universities navigating the complex shift to digital, growth isn’t linear. It’s staged. Enter the Good, Better, Best model, one of the most effective techniques an institution can use to grow online.
Unlike blanket approaches that assume every school has the same staff, resources, and readiness level, Good, Better, Best offers a practical, capacity-driven road map — a flexible framework that honors where an institution is while guiding it toward where it wants to go.
At its core, this model isn’t about chasing perfection; it’s about committing to measurable progress over time. “Best” isn’t a static end point. It’s a moving target that evolves alongside the institution’s goals, stakeholders, and capabilities.
At Archer, we view Good, Better, Best not as a ranking system, but as a framework for institutional improvement — one that works only when there’s transparency, alignment, and shared ownership across departments. Whether your institution is just beginning its online learning journey or fine-tuning an established program, Good, Better, Best meets you where you are — and grows with you.
You Might Need a Good, Better, Best Strategy If …
If your institution is experiencing any of the following roadblocks, you may benefit from adopting a Good, Better, Best strategy.
You’re not sure where to start to improve your online operations.
With so many moving pieces — in areas ranging from tech platforms to student support — it can be hard to know what to tackle first. Good, Better, Best helps you identify which areas should be your priority based on capacity, not guesswork.
Your leadership team’s alignment with your long-term goals is unclear.
When leaders aren’t on the same page, it’s easy to spin your wheels. Good, Better, Best creates a common language and plan that fosters alignment across departments and roles.
You’ve outgrown your current partner model and want more control.
If your outsourced solutions no longer fit your evolving needs, Archer’s Good, Better, Best partnership model can help you reclaim ownership of your operational processes with a scalable, strategic framework tailored to your team.
Teams aren’t sure who owns what (and it’s slowing you down).
Role clarity is critical to success. Good, Better, Best surfaces ownership gaps and overlaps so you can streamlineyour operations and empower your teams to move forward confidently.
You have an institutional vision, but no shared plan to execute it.
Ambition is great — but it needs direction. Good, Better, Best turns a vision into action with clear phases, milestones, and accountability across stakeholders.
You’ve made progress, but need a strategy to maintain it and scale it.
Momentum is hard-won, and sustaining it takes intention. Good, Better, Best supports continuous improvement so you can build on your success without burning out your team.
Why Good, Better, Best Matters in Enrollment Strategy
For institutions looking to grow their online programs, knowing where to go next starts with understanding where they are now.
At Archer, we help colleges and universities assess their current state across the core functions that shape the online student experience — from marketing and enrollment to student support and information technology (IT). Our Readiness Assessment is the first step in building a road map rooted in the Good, Better, Best model.
Rather than applying a rigid, one-size-fits-all playbook, we use Good, Better, Best to create a customized path forward for each institution, shaped by its unique capacity and goals. Each department involved in the assessment — whether it’s admissions, advising, IT, or marketing — gets to define what “Good,” “Better,” and “Best” look like for them.
This is what makes the framework so powerful. It’s not prescriptive; it’s practical and flexible, built around what institutions have today and where they want to grow tomorrow.
By anchoring their enrollment strategy in this kind of honest, department-level reflection, institutions can align their efforts, set realistic goals, and build momentum toward long-term success.
The Challenge of Transformation
In today’s competitive higher ed landscape — where enrollment patterns are shifting and online options are expanding — many institutional teams find themselves overwhelmed. They’re trying to do everything at once, often with stretched resources, siloed decision-making, and no clear sense of what should come first.
The result? Progress that feels more reactive than strategic.
But what’s missing isn’t more effort. It’s more structure.
We’ve seen that the most successful institutions don’t attempt to leap straight to “Best” on day one. Instead, they take the time to map out a clear, achievable path forward. That’s where the Good, Better, Best model makes a difference. It gives teams a way to define their current state, envision their future goals, and understand the phased steps required to get there.
This kind of structured transformation allows institutions to move with purpose — prioritizing what matters most, aligning cross-functional teams, and building momentum one phase at a time.
Is Your Institution Ready for Good, Better, Best?
At its core, the Good, Better, Best model isn’t about doing everything at once — it’s about doing the right things, at the right time, with the right people. It’s a strategic framework that meets institutions where they are and guides them forward with clarity and intention.
At Archer, we don’t just help you design your road map — we walk it with you. As your partner in strategy, delivery, and implementation, we’re here to support you as you achieve sustainable, long-term growth that’s aligned with your mission and built for your team’s unique capacity. With Good, Better, Best, progress isn’t just possible. It’s practical.
