Tag: Moving

  • WEEKEND READING: Moving home for the start of the academic year

    WEEKEND READING: Moving home for the start of the academic year

    UK universities are under mounting financial pressure. Join HEPI and King’s College London Policy Institute on 11 November 2025 at 1pm for a webinar on how universities balance relatively stable but underfunded income streams against higher-margin but volatile sources. Register now. We look forward to seeing you there.

    This blog was kindly authored by Philip Bakstad, Diversity and Inclusion Manager at Liverpool John Moores University.

    Chris’s mum died soon after his birth and his dad was out of the picture. He was brought up by his Nan, living with her in her council house. Chris’s Nan passed away while Chris was doing his foundation year at Liverpool John Moores University. The council wanted the house back. Still grieving for his Nan, Chris was at risk of becoming homeless and dropping out of university.

    Stories like Chris’ are not uncommon, yet they are at risk of being overlooked as university staff across the country gear up for the return of students each September. More on Chris later…

    The start of the academic year is both an exciting and hectic time for students and staff on university campuses across the country. For care-experienced and estranged students (CEES), this time of year often comes with a unique set of anxieties and challenges, as they not only navigate the usual issues around meeting new friends, understanding timetables and deciding which Freshers events to attend, but also transition into new living set-ups which will often now be their permanent home while studying at their new university.

    A diversity of experience

    The terms ‘care-experienced’ and ‘estranged’ encapsulate a broad range of lived experiences of students who have faced particular challenges related to their family circumstances while growing up. This can include having previously lived in a formal foster care arrangement with a Local Authority; being raised by another family member in kinship care or becoming estranged from their parents after the age of 16.

    Much has been done across the sector over the past two decades to address the under-representation of care-experienced and estranged students in higher education, but there remains a great deal of inconsistency. Young people who meet the formal definition of a ‘Care Leaver’ are eligible for a level of statutory support but this varies by Local Authority. For students who do not meet this legal definition but have experience of care or have faced other family disruption, there remains no national benchmark for what key support should be offered by all institutions across the higher education sector.

    Organisations such as NNECL, the Unite Foundation and the much-missed charity StandAlone have been invaluable partners as universities have developed Access and Participation Plans and specific interventions to not only improve the number of care experienced and estranged students accessing higher education, but also ensure that each care-experienced or estranged student receives a holistic support package, tailored to their individual needs.

    A home for success

    A key element of most institutions’ offer will be the provision of extended tenancies or ‘all year round’ accommodation. This recognises that many care-experienced and estranged students will be making their new accommodation their permanent base once the academic year begins. While this is now broadly accepted as best practice across the sector, many students still face difficulties in providing a guarantor or raising the funds for a deposit to secure the accommodation that will best suit their needs.

    At Liverpool John Moores University, we have long operated a ‘Guarantor Waiver’ scheme as part of our partnership arrangements with our accommodation providers in the city, ensuring that no care-experienced or estranged student should be excluded from accessing accommodation at this key transition point in their lives.  The Unite Foundation, led by students on their scholarship programme, are now campaigning for all universities to provide similar support.

    The following case studies provide some insight into the experiences of care experienced and estranged students and highlight the importance of accommodation as an invaluable support during their degree studies. Some details have been changed to protect anonymity.

    Case study 1 – growing up in kinship care

    Chris had been raised by his grandmother since an early age. During his Foundation Year at LJMU his grandmother sadly passed away and he contacted the Student Advice team for support as he would no longer be able to return home to their council house at the end of the academic year. Chris’ mother had passed away shortly after his birth and he had no contact with his biological father so he was at immediate risk of becoming homeless over the summer period.

    In the first instance, our accommodation partnership meant the university was able to reassure Chris that he would be able to extend his tenancy over the summer. At the same time, LJMU provided academic and wellbeing support to ensure his studies weren’t adversely impacted. 

    Chris’ key worry was having a stable home for the duration of his studies. He was very clear that living in halls worked for him as he had built up good relationships with the staff there. Moving into private accommodation and the logistical issues that posed caused him a great deal of anxiety.

    The university signposted him towards the Unite Foundation Scholarship and his application was a success. Chris lived in a Unite Students property, with his rent and bills covered by the Scholarship, for the duration of his studies at LJMU.

    As he navigated this complex period in his life, knowing that his university accommodation was guaranteed for three years was an anchor for Chris. He graduated with a 2:1 and is currently working in the IT sector.

    Case study 2 – becoming estranged at 18

    Alice became estranged from her mother aged 18, following a breakdown in the relationship between her and her mother’s new partner. She was asked to leave the family home and slept on friends’ sofas before her college became aware of her circumstances. She then moved into a young person’s foyer – a supported living space for young people who would otherwise experience homelessness.

    Alice’s Foyer Support Worker contacted LJMU as she was unable to provide a deposit or guarantor to secure her accommodation and had questions about how to apply for student finance as an independent student. Our partnership agreement enables LJMU to request that partner accommodation providers waive the need for a guarantor for care experienced and estranged students, so the university was able to quickly provide reassurance that the absence of a guarantor and deposit would not be a barrier to Alice booking her chosen accommodation.

    Upon arriving at LJMU, Alice met other estranged students at a social meet-up and chose to live in an LJMU partner hall with three other students for years 2 and 3 of their studies. While their family circumstances were all different, this sense of community and peer support was invaluable to Alice and her flatmates. She is now a high school teacher and keeps support staff at LJMU updated on new developments in her life.

    In conclusion

    There is so much to be excited about at the start of each academic year. Meeting new students and supporting them to step into independence is a privilege for both academic and Professional Service staff at universities across the country. It is an important milestone in every young person’s life but, for care experienced and estranged students, can be an even more pivotal moment of change and uncertainty. While I’ve only touched on the importance of accommodation in providing stability in this blog, it’s worth reflecting on the fact that not every student moving into university accommodation will be doing so with the support (and ‘Bank of’) Mum and Dad and that, for this group of students, we need to continue to go the extra mile to ensure they are able to get in and get on in higher education.

    Further information on LJMU support for care experienced and estranged students: https://www.ljmu.ac.uk/discover/student-support/inclusion/care-leavers

    Source link

  • Higher Ed Moving in “Wrong Direction”

    Higher Ed Moving in “Wrong Direction”

    The share of Americans who believe higher education has lost its way is on the rise, according to a new survey the Pew Research Center published Wednesday.

    Of the 3,445 people who responded to the survey last month, 70 percent said higher education is generally “going in the wrong direction,” up from 56 percent in 2020. They cited high costs, poor preparation for the job market and lackluster development of students’ critical thinking and problem-solving skills.

    The survey results come amid turmoil for the higher education sector, which was already facing rising public skepticism about the value of a college degree before Donald Trump took office earlier this year. But over the past nine months, the Trump administration has terminated billions in federal research grants and withheld even more money from several selective institutions.

    Another survey published this week found that most Americans oppose the government’s cuts to higher education.

    Earlier this month, Trump asked universities to sign a compact that would give them preference in federal funding decisions if they agree to make sweeping operational changes, including suppressing criticism of conservative views on campus.

    But the state of campus free speech is already one factor driving the public’s overall negative views about higher education, according to the survey.

    Forty-five percent of respondents said colleges and universities are doing a fair or poor job of exposing students to a wide range of opinions and viewpoints; 46 percent said institutions are doing an inadequate job of providing students opportunities to express their own opinions and viewpoints.

    Political leanings also influenced perceptions of higher education, though the gap between Republicans and Democrats has narrowed in recent years.

    According to the survey, 77 percent of Republicans and Republican-leaning respondents said higher education is moving in the wrong direction, compared to 65 percent of Democrats and Democratic-leaning respondents.

    Republicans were more likely than Democrats to say that universities are doing a poor or fair job of preparing students for well-paying jobs, developing students’ critical thinking and problem-solving skills, exposing students to a wide range of opinions and viewpoints, and providing opportunities for students to express their own opinions and views.

    republican vs democrats on higher ed

    Source link

  • A Framework for Moving Up or Moving On (opinion)

    A Framework for Moving Up or Moving On (opinion)

    Over my 16-plus years in higher education, mostly in administration, I’ve had many colleagues reach out and ask a version of the same question:

    “How do I know if I should stay or move on?”

    They are leaders in their field. Most are excelling on paper, teaching, mentoring, leading committees, serving on task forces and writing grants. But they’re tired, stuck or sense that something in the role, or the institution, no longer fits.

    Lately, I’m finding that we don’t talk enough about what to do when we’ve outgrown a role but aren’t sure what comes next. In academic culture, staying where we are is often seen as loyalty, moving up is luck and leaving can feel like defeat. But I’ve learned that career momentum doesn’t always mean climbing a ladder. Sometimes it means building a bridge or choosing a new path entirely.

    So, what do you do when you hit a fork in the road? I recently saw a post on LinkedIn that outlined a relatively simplistic framework, aligned with the business world, which can help if you find yourself questioning your next move: assess, align, act. I’ve taken the liberty to modify it, without losing the concept: reflect, revise, recommit.

    Reflect: Where Are You?

    Before planning your next move, take an honest look at your current professional state. Start by asking yourself the following:

    • Have I grown in the past year, or am I mostly going through the motions?
    • Am I viewed as a contributor or an afterthought?
    • How do I feel at the end of the day, mostly energized or mostly depleted?
    • Are my ideas welcomed or tolerated?
    • Do I see myself staying here for five more years?

    These questions aren’t about job satisfaction alone. They’re about where you are professionally. Assess your responses to the questions above. If you feel stuck where you are and don’t see changes or opportunities for professional growth in the future, it may be time to shift.

    Revise: Is This Still the Right Place for You?

    Consider how your values and contributions align (or don’t) with your work environment.

    In one of the classes I teach, we spend a considerable amount of time discussing values, both personal and professional. Keeping this in mind, ask yourself whether the following statements are true for you:

    • I can ask difficult questions or present unconventional ideas.
    • I feel heard and my input is valued.
    • I can contribute in ways that reflect my strengths.
    • My work is recognized, and not just when it’s convenient.
    • I feel hopeful about my professional future here.

    If you answer “no” more times than “yes,” it’s not a failure on your part. Instead, look at it as an opportunity to implement changes strategically.

    Recommit: Move Up, Move Over or Move On

    Once you’ve assessed your growth and alignment, you’re ready to make a deliberate decision to go deeper, shift roles or step toward something new. Here are three potential paths, each with concrete next steps:

    1. Move Up (Internal Advancement)

    If you still believe in the institution and want more responsibility:

    • Build your case: Document leadership wins, pilot programs or change initiatives—things that show you’re already operating at the next level.
    • Get visible: Let your supervisor or mentor know you’re open to advancement. Ambition isn’t arrogance; it’s clarity.
    • Ask for expanded roles: Volunteer to chair a new initiative or represent your unit on a strategic planning team.
    • Find advocates: You need more than mentors. Advocates promote and back you behind closed doors.
    1. Move Over (Lateral Change)

    If you like the institution but not the role:

    • Explore cross-campus opportunities in centers, institutes or new initiatives.
    • Consider a hybrid position that merges your skills (e.g., combining research and student success).
    • Talk with human resources or a trusted senior leader about other opportunities within your organization—professionally, quietly and strategically.

    Remember: lateral doesn’t mean lesser. Sometimes a lateral move can be the smartest option for long-term impact (and sanity).

    1. Move On (External Transition)

    If the position and the institution don’t fit your needs anymore:

    • Name what you want next: More autonomy? More responsibility? A different kind of leadership role?
    • Update your materials: Be sure to identify transferable skills. If you’ve led change, managed crises or built programs, remember these skills are valued in most industries.
    • Use your network: Former students, collaborators and conference contacts might hold the key to your next chapter.
    • Leave well: Give your employer sufficient notice. Offer to train your successor. Write a transition plan. Protect your reputation and exit with grace and gratitude.

    A Final Note: You’re Not Alone

    I recently spoke with a colleague who worried her career had stalled over the last several years and that she hadn’t grown in her position. When we discussed her accomplishments, we saw that she’d proposed several new initiatives, launched a new program, mentored students and staff, and learned to navigate the complexity of higher education with professionalism and courage. In short, she hadn’t wasted any time; she’d built resilience and capacity. She also realized she was more ready for change and leadership opportunities.

    If you’re at that fork in the road, know this: Moving on isn’t quitting; it’s choosing. Moving up isn’t selling out; it’s stepping in. And staying where you are is perfectly valid if it still serves your purpose, your values and your professional goals.

    Ask yourself this question: “Am I building a future here or am I just getting by?”

    Either way, you get to choose your next steps.

    Laura Kuizin is director of the master of applied professional studies in the Graduate School at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. Laura is a member of the Graduate Career Consortium, an organization providing an international voice for graduate-level career and professional development leaders. Laura dedicates this article to Sadie-dog, who was by her side as she navigated her professional path over the last 16 years.

    Source link

  • Moving beyond the quality wars

    Moving beyond the quality wars

    A decade since his passing, David Watson’s work remains a touchpoint of UK higher education analysis.

    This reflects the depth and acuity of his analysis, but also his ability as a phrasemaker.

    One of his phrases that has stood the test of time is the “quality wars” – his label for the convulsions in UK higher education in the 1990s and early 2000s over the assurance of academic quality and standards.

    Watson coined this phrase in 2006, shortly after the 2001 settlement that brought the quality wars to an end. A peace that lasted, with a few small border skirmishes, until HEFCE’s launch of its review of quality assessment in 2015.

    War never changes

    I wasn’t there, but someone who was has described to me a meeting at that time involving heads of university administration and HEFCE’s chief executive. As told to me, at one point a registrar of a large and successful university effectively called out HEFCE’s moves on quality assessment urging HEFCE not to reopen the quality wars. I’ve no idea if the phrase Pandora’s box was used, but it would fit the tenor of the exchange as it was relayed to me.

    Of course this warning was ignored. And of course (as is usually the case) the registrar was right. The peace was broken, and the quality wars returned to England.

    The staging posts of the revived conflict are clear.

    HEFCE’s Revised operating model for quality assessment was introduced in 2016. OfS was establishment two years later, leading to the B conditions mark I; followed later the same year by a wholesale re-write of the UK quality code that was reportedly largely prompted and/or driven by OfS. Only for OfS to decide by 2020 that it wasn’t content with this; repudiation of the UK quality code; and OfS implementing from 2022 the B conditions mark II (new, improved; well maybe not the latter, but definitely longer).

    And a second front in the quality wars opened up in 2016, with the birth of the Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF). Not quite quality assessment in the by then traditional UK sense, but still driven by a desire to sort the sheep from the goats – identifying both the pinnacles of excellence and depths of… well, that was never entirely clear. And as with quality assessment, TEF was a very moveable feast.

    There were three iterations of Old TEF between 2016 and 2018. The repeated insistence that subject level TEF was a done deal, leading to huge amounts of time and effort on preparations in universities between 2017 and early 2020 only for subject-level TEF to be scrapped in 2021. At which point New TEF emerged from ashes, embraced by the sector with an enthusiasm that was perhaps to be expected – particularly after the ravages of the Covid pandemic.

    And through New TEF the two fronts allegedly became a united force. To quote OfS’s regulatory advice , the B conditions and New TEF formed part of an “overall approach” where “conditions of registration are designed to ensure a minimum level” and OfS sought “to incentivise providers to pursue excellence in their own chosen way … in a number of ways, including through the TEF”.

    Turn and face the strange

    So in less than a decade English higher education experienced: three iterations of quality assessment; three versions of TEF (one ultimately not implemented, but still hugely disruptive to the sector); and a rationalisation of the links between the two that required a lot of imagination, and a leap into faith, to accept the claims being made.

    Pandora’s box indeed.

    No wonder that David Behan’s independent review of OfS recommended “that the OfS’s quality assessment methodologies and activity be brought together to form a more integrated assessment of quality.” Last week we had the first indications from OfS of how it will address this recommendation, and there are two obvious questions: can we see a new truce emerging in the quality wars; and given where we look as though we may end up on this issue, was this round of the quality wars worth fighting?

    Any assessment of where we are following the last decade of repeated and rapid change has to recognise that there have been some gains. The outcomes data used in TEF, particularly the approach to benchmarking at institutional and subject levels, is and always has been incredibly interesting and, if used wisely, useful data. The construction of a national assessment process leading to crude overall judgments just didn’t constitute wise use of the data.

    And while many in the sector continue to express concern at the way such data was subsequently brought into the approach to national quality assessment by OfS, this has addressed the most significant lacuna of the pre-2016 approach to quality assurance. The ability to use this to identify specific areas and issues of potential concern for further, targeted investigation also addresses a problematic gap in previous approaches that were almost entirely focused on cyclical review of entire institutions.

    It’s difficult though to conclude that these advances, important elements of which it appears will be maintained in the new quality assessment approach being developed by OfS, were worth the costs of the turbulence of the last 10 years.

    Integration

    What appears to be emerging from OfS’s development of a new integrated approach to quality assessment essentially feels like a move back towards central elements of the pre-2016 system, with regular cyclical reviews of all providers (with our without visits to be decided) against a single reference point (albeit the B conditions rather than UK Quality Code). Of course it’s implicit rather than explicit, but it feels like an acknowledgment that the baby was thrown out with the bathwater in 2016.

    There are of course multiple reasons for this, but a crucial one has been the march away from the concept of co-regulation between universities and higher education providers. This was a conscious and deliberate decision, and one that has always been slightly mystifying. As a sector we recognise and promote the concept of co-creation of academic provision by staff and students, while being able to maintain robust assessment of the latter by the former. The same can and should be true of providers and regulators in relation to quality assurance and assessment, and last week’s OfS blog gives some hope that OfS is belatedly moving in this direction.

    It’s essential that they do.

    Another of David Watson’s memorable phrases was “controlled reputational range”: the way in which the standing of UK higher education was maintained by a combination of internal and external approaches. It is increasingly clear from recent provider failures and the instances of unacceptable practices in relation to some franchised provision that this controlled reputational range is increasingly at risk. And while this is down to developments and events in England, it jeopardises this reputation for universities across the UK.

    A large part of the responsibility for this must sit with OfS and its approach to date to regulating academic quality and standards. There have also been significant failings on the part of awarding bodies, both universities and private providers. The answer must therefore lie in partnership working between regulators and universities, moving closer to a co-regulatory approach based on a final critical element of UK higher education identified by Watson – its “collaborative gene”.

    OfS’s blog post on its developing approach to quality assessments holds out hope of moves in this direction. And if this is followed through, perhaps we’re on the verge of a new settlement in the quality wars.

    Source link

  • After Michigan State trustees told students to call professor a racist, his lawsuit is moving ahead

    After Michigan State trustees told students to call professor a racist, his lawsuit is moving ahead

    Professor Jack Lipton scored a victory for free speech last week after a federal court allowed his lawsuit to move forward against two Michigan State University trustees who he claims not only urged students to call him racist, but told them how to phrase it.

    In his lawsuit, Lipton alleged that two trustees, Rema Vassar and Dennis Denno, met with MSU students, encouraged them to file complaints against Lipton with MSU’s internal civil rights office, and asked students to condemn Lipton as racist in public statements, op-eds, and on social media. MSU hired the law firm Miller & Chevalier to conduct an independent investigation, producing a report you can read online. According to Lipton, it found that Vassar and Denno planned the attacks and even provided others with specific language to paint Lipton as racist, anti-Palestinian, and anti-Muslim.

    For example, in one recorded conversation, Denno told students, “The other thing you can do to help us is attack Jack Lipton, the Chair of the Faculty Senate . . . call him out, call him a racist.”

    What was Lipton’s “racist” crime?

    In October 2023, at a public Board of Trustees meeting that followed an open letter accusing then-BOT Chair Vassar of ethics violations, Lipton read a resolution on behalf of faculty calling for Vassar’s resignation. The meeting erupted in chaos, marked by jeers from Vassar’s supporters.

    The Constitution doesn’t cease to exist just because someone’s feelings got hurt at a trustee meeting.

    The next day, while making clear he was speaking in his personal capacity and not as a faculty representative, Lipton told a reporter that Vassar could have stopped the chaos of the meeting with “a single statement … yet she elected to let the mob rule the room.”

    That single word — mob — triggered what Lipton describes as a coordinated retaliation campaign by Vassar and Denno.

    Lipton apologized for using the word “mob,” as well as for any unintended racial undertones, but did not stop calling for accountability over Vassar’s alleged ethics violations — and he says Vassar and Denno’s harassment of him continued.

    In November 2023, the NAACP Michigan State Conference Youth & College Division released a statement accusing Lipton of “racial terrorism.” Also that month, the organization Diverse: Issues In Higher Education published an op-ed arguing that Lipton had used the word “mob” because he wanted to traumatize black and Palestinian students. At a BOT meeting that December, Denno read a statement accusing Lipton of “criminalizing students” and described his use of the word “mob” as “racism and violent language.”

    What’s more, even though the board eventually voted to censure both Vassar and Denno, as advised by investigators for a range of misconduct including their attacks on Lipton, Vassar didn’t stop there. At a meeting in September 2024, she mocked Lipton and questioned his right to speak on matters of civil discourse, which he cites as yet another effort to chill his speech.

    In language as dry as it was devastating, the court summarized the allegations that these trustees abused their power to carry out what amounts to a smear campaign. Lipton claims that Vassar and Denno “used their positions as BOT members to attack Lipton for the comment he made as a private citizen” and “used their BOT pulpit to funnel adverse action towards Lipton via proxies, leveraging their BOT membership to speak through students, supporters, and members of the public.”

    The court also noted that Lipton’s original “mob” comment was “speech regarding matters of public concern,” as it critiqued the behavior of a public official at a public meeting, and Lipton made the remark as a private citizen. The First Amendment protects faculty when they speak as private citizens on matters of public concern, such as raising state university ethics violations to the media, as Lipton did.

    UPDATE: Another federal appeals court backs academic free speech for public employees

    After FIRE secured a lawyer for a law professor at the University of Illinois Chicago, the school reached a resolution but later reneged on the deal. That’s when the professor sued.


    Read More

    While the court dismissed MSU and its Board of Trustees as defendants, Lipton is now free to pursue his claims against Vassar and Denno themselves — and they have not exactly covered themselves in glory. The university investigation that recommended their censure found that Vassar had taken courtside tickets and free flights while Denno had pressured consultants reviewing MSU’s response to the 2023 mass shooting on campus to tone down any criticism of the trustees. In fact, just this week, Gov. Gretchen Whitmer declined the MSU board’s official request to remove Vassar and Denno, though the governor’s counsel said this “by no means indicates a condoning of the conduct alleged in the referral.” Vassar and Denno may have retained their seats on the board, but they are hardly out of the woods. 

    Now, Lipton’s case moves to discovery, where we’ll get a closer look at how MSU’s top brass reacted when a faculty member stepped out of line by doing his civic duty, and potentially to trial. While this week’s court decision is far from a final ruling, it shows the court believes Lipton’s allegations deserve to be heard, and it’s a reminder that the Constitution doesn’t cease to exist just because someone’s feelings got hurt at a trustee meeting.

    Source link

  • Enrollment Strategies for Moving Students through the Funnel

    Enrollment Strategies for Moving Students through the Funnel

    Strategies for Each Stage of the Enrollment Journey

    Higher education institutions face many challenges in their efforts to engage with potential students and keep them motivated while they navigate the enrollment process. In a 2024 Lumina Foundation/Gallup survey on the state of higher education, prospective adult students cited cost, work conflicts, emotional stress, and lack of remote learning opportunities as their top barriers to enrolling in a college program. 

    Institutions and enrollment teams have the unique opportunity to support students on their journey through each stage of the enrollment funnel — awareness, interest, consideration, intent, application, and enrollment — to help them achieve their goals. 

    To learn more, check out the infographic below, created by the Higher Education Marketing Journal.

    Stage 1: Awareness

    In the first stage of the enrollment funnel, prospective students search for colleges and universities and find out about the different programs they offer. The challenge that universities face during this stage is: How do we reach as many potential students as possible?

    Prospective students learn about institutions in the following ways:

    1. College and university websites
    2. Emails from schools
    3. Videos 
    4. Printed brochures
    5. Financial aid and scholarship calculators
    6. Marketing campaigns

    According to a recent survey of prospective students, 83% find videos from colleges and universities helpful, 79% find virtual tours helpful, and 63% have clicked on a college’s digital ad.

    Universities can use the following strategies to reach potential students:

    • Use a mix of digital and traditional marketing. Digital tactics include social media ads, blog content, and search engine optimization (SEO), while traditional methods include college fairs, in-person events, direct mail, and phone calls.
    • Personalize your tactics. Recent high school graduates may prefer text messages and emails, while adult students may prefer phone calls. 

    Stage 2: Interest

    In the next stage, also known as the familiarity stage, students narrow their focus and move closer to deciding which program is right for them. Universities face this challenge during the interest stage: How do we stand out among the competition and promote our institution’s brand?

    Strategies to stand out include the following:

    • Promote your brand. Use strategic marketing strategies to emphasize the unique value propositions (UVPs) and benefits of earning a degree at your institution.
    • Provide informative content. Anticipate your audience’s questions by describing how a degree can benefit their life and help them reach their career goals. Tactics include career-focused blog articles, informational webinars, and customized emails.

    Stage 3: Consideration

    At this stage, students have several options and may now take the time to reach out to the institutions they’re interested in to get more information before they make their decision. By engaging directly with students, colleges and enrollment teams can build relationships with them and establish trust. 

    Universities at this stage wonder: How do we build trust and encourage prospective students to enroll?

    To build trust with prospective students, universities should employ tactics such as the following:

    • Maintain one-on-one communication. Admissions counselors can contact students directly via emails, phone calls, or video meetings to answer their specific questions and address any issues they may have on topics such as financial aid opportunities, program lengths and delivery formats, and support services. Adult students may prefer adult-specific messaging that relates to their lives, such as information about work-life-school balance, family-centered goals, and increased earning potential.
    • Connect students with faculty and alumni. Virtual Q&A sessions give students an opportunity to meet professors and faculty face-to-face and hear about the real experiences of current and former students.
    • Provide materials and resources. Be prepared to answer questions about credit hours and course descriptions, and to provide any other information that can help them make their decision.

    Stage 4: Intent

    In this stage, sometimes known as the choice stage, prospective students are very close to making a decision. Enrollment teams need to be ready and available to help them take the necessary steps to enroll. 

    These teams have the following challenge questions to solve: How do we continue to keep students engaged? What other information and encouragement can we provide?

    Over 14,000 prospective adult students who responded to the 2024 Lumina/Gallup survey ranked their reasons for not enrolling in a college program. The following challenges were flagged as very important or moderately important:

    • Cost: 85%
    • Work conflicts: 77%
    • Emotional stress: 72%
    • Program length (too long): 72%
    • Favorable job market: 71%
    • Lack of remote learning: 68%
    • Personal mental health reasons: 64%
    • Degree/credential not needed for job: 62%
    • Unprepared academically: 58%
    • Getting accepted: 56%
    • Personal physical health reasons: 55%
    • Lack of value in further education: 52%
    • Child care/adult family care: 47% 
    • Degree doesn’t fit with personal beliefs: 47% 

    Universities can employ strategies such as the following:

    • Continue personal engagement. As students come closer to making a decision, they may have more detailed concerns about costs, financial aid, and program specifics, so it’s important to check in and be available to answer any new questions.
    • Create urgency. Remind students about upcoming deadlines for enrollment and financial aid applications.
    • Provide incentives. Offer application fee waivers and other benefits for early application.

    Stage 5: Application

    At this stage, students have made their decision and are ready to apply to the institution. This is a big step for students who may need help submitting documents and fulfilling admission requirements.

    The challenge universities face involves this question: What can we do to ease the application process?

    Schools can employ strategies such as the following:

    • Check in regularly. Streamline the application process, and provide reminders of important dates and deadlines.
    • Create a help desk. Provide resources, application checklists, and video guides to students, and help them locate any missing or remaining information. 
    • Encourage and motivate. Send positive messages to students letting them know they’re near the finish line.

    Stage 6: Enrollment

    In the last stage, students complete their registration and begin the orientation process. Admissions advisors at this stage must keep students engaged and set them up for success. Students will choose classes, buy books, and meet teachers and other students, while also making decisions about how to manage their other life obligations while they are in school.

    The challenge question for universities: How can we provide support and promote retention?

    These schools can benefit from strategies such as the following:

    • Provide guidance and resources. Support students through the registration process, help them create manageable course loads, prepare them with the resources they need to succeed, and help them create long-term plans with the goal of graduating.
    • Analyze and evaluate enrollment process successes. Gather feedback from students and parents, analyze data, and make improvements to each stage of the enrollment process. 

    Create Enrollment Strategies to Support the Student Journey

    Enrollment teams not only help students choose the best program to reach their goals, they also support them throughout the enrollment and admissions process to ensure their success through graduation.

    Sources 

    The Council of Independent Colleges, 2023 E-Expectations Trend Report

    Lumina Foundation, The State of Higher Education 2024

    Lumina Foundation, From Outreach to Enrollment: Strategies to Engage Adults in Education Beyond High School 

    Modern Campus, “How To Optimize The Enrollment Funnel & Increase Matriculation”

    Higher Education Marketing, Essential Admissions Funnel Best Practices For Schools

    Higher Education Marketing Journal, “Enrollment Funnel: Tips for the Student Journey”

    Subscribe to the Higher Ed Marketing Journal:

    Source link

  • Women’s History Month 2025: Moving Forward Together

    Women’s History Month 2025: Moving Forward Together

    Reading Time: 7 minutes

    During the month of March, we celebrate Women’s History Month. This year’s theme is “Moving Forward Together! Women Educating and Inspiring Generations.” And we can’t think of a better way to celebrate than by paying tribute to the remarkable women educators who are doing just that.

    We’re so proud to highlight some of our women faculty partners who are shaping the next generation of experts in fields like astronomy, automotive and math. Your commitment to educating and inspiring students doesn’t go unnoticed. While no words can truly capture the impact you make every day, this is our chance to show our gratitude (and give you the applause you deserve).

     

    Kim Zoldak is a Teaching Assistant Professor at Oklahoma State University. Whether she’s teaching introductory astronomy, astrophysics or physics courses, her passion for sharing the wonders of the universe always shines through. She’s more than just an expert — she’s a guide who sparks curiosity and helps students discover new perspectives and ideas.

    As the department’s dedicated teaching professor, Kim is always ready to jump in and teach whichever physics course is needed. So far, that’s included College Physics I & II and University Physics I. Kim’s journey to Oklahoma State started with a B.S. in meteorology from California University of Pennsylvania, followed by a Ph.D. in space and planetary sciences/astrophysics from the University of Arkansas. In addition to teaching, she oversees responsibilities for OSU’s Mendenhall Observatory. Above all, Kim believes that learning should be exciting and accessible to everyone. Her commitment to helping students grow — not just as learners but as thinkers — is what makes her an invaluable part of the OSU community and higher education.

    “As a female in a male-dominated area of the sciences, I think that I encourage other females to follow their passion in physics and astronomy simply by being their instructor in these courses. Every year I am seeing more and more women in my classes…When women see other women doing something that they thought was out of their reach — it gives them hope that they can do it too.” – Kim Zoldak

    Janalyn Kehm is the Department Chair in the School of Business & Computer Engineering Technology at Spartanburg Community College. Having taught at SCC since 2000, she’s devoted her career to shaping successful student outcomes and promoting meaningful collaboration with faculty members. In this role, she raises the bar, assessing learning needs within business and other courses, and working alongside faculty to develop quality curriculum. Before embarking on her decades-long career in higher education, she received her B.A degree in journalism – advertising/public relations from the University of South Carolina and her M.A degree in computer resource management from Webster University. But Janalyn didn’t stop there, continuing on to pursue her own educational growth by obtaining a Certificate of Graduate Studies in Higher Education Leadership from University of South Carolina and a DBA from California Southern University.

    Having been twice recognized by her peers and students with the Faculty of the Year award, she personifies exceptionalism in her field, creating remarkable connections with those she mentors and works with.

    After earning her B.S and M.S degrees in mathematics from Texas State University, Ellen Couvillion’s passion for the subject would lead her back there in the form of a teaching career. Now an Associate Professor of Instruction of Mathematics, she practices a growth mindset approach to teaching, prioritizing students’ individual learning needs and unique paths to development.

    In a nutshell, Ellen is a star educator, admired as a mentor by her students, and respected by her faculty peers who have an immense appreciation of her teaching contributions. She has won numerous awards, including the Service Excellence Award from the Department of Mathematics and the Favorite Professor Award, courtesy of the Alpha Chi National College Honor Society. Beyond teaching, Ellen immerses herself in every aspect of university life, serving as member, advisor and organizer of several committees, demonstrating her commitment to enhancing and shaping the campus community around her.

    Pam Schmelz is an Interim Dean for the School of Information Technology, School of Business,Pam Schmelz Logistics & Supply Chain and the Garatoni School of Entrepreneurship and Innovation at Ivy Tech Community College. With a lifelong passion for information technology, she’s earned several certifications, including CISSP (Certified Information Systems Security Professional), CCENT (Cisco Entry level Network Technician) and Amazon Cloud Practitioner, to name only a few. As a certified Quality Matters peer reviewer, she lends her critical expertise to the development of online courses, creating a quality learning experience for future generations of students.

    Being a consummate innovator with a fierce dedication to helping students thrive, Pam also started up the CyberAcademy at Muscatatuck Urban Training Center in Butlerville, IN. This intense and revolutionary program takes students through the AAS Cybersecurity program in a record-breaking 11 months, providing graduates with essential cybersecurity career skills, setting them for future success and elevating their levels of expertise to new heights.

    Samantha CandlerSamantha Candler is a General Motors World Class Technician with 18 years of experience in the automotive industry. As one of the few female World-Class Technicians and instructors nationwide, she’s no stranger when it comes to breaking down barriers. Her unwavering determination and immeasurable skillset speaks volumes. Before spending 10 years as a technician and 8 years as a GM ASEP Instructor, Samantha long had her sights set on making her mark in the field. Her passion for vehicles began in high school, leading her to achieve the highest level of GM technician training. As an automotive faculty member at Dallas College, she puts her immense knowledge into practice every day in the classroom, inspiring her students and undoubtedly setting an example for what heights they can reach and push beyond.

    Samantha would ultimately like to see more women enter the automotive industry, and believes that anyone with the determination to dive in and work hard can succeed. She considers herself fortunate to have worked in a dealership that allowed her the freedom to grow and thrive into the inspiration she is today.

    “Being a technician isn’t just about heavy lifting and getting greasy. Women bring unique strengths to automotive work — attention to detail, problem-solving, and adaptability— that are invaluable in today’s evolving automotive field…I’m proud and excited to be a part of the automotive transformation and to be training the next generation of technicians.” – Samantha Candler

    Jinhwa Lee is an Assistant Professor of Instruction of Mathematics at Ohio State University and anJinhwa Lee experienced educator. With a decade’s worth of experience teaching various mathematics courses, Jinhwa believes that all students can grow to become confident learners when given the right tools and individualized support. Her teaching philosophy centers on a common goal — helping students overcome their math anxiety. She wants students to find the fun and relevance within a subject she loves and believes is critical across multiple disciplines.

    As an educator, Jinhwa recognizes that her role is part of a much bigger picture. She’s proud to contribute to student development and hopes to inspire her learners to become future leaders in fields like economics, science and engineering.

    “…every student can excel with the right support.” – Jinhwa Lee

    Monica Hampton Monica Hampton is a retired cybersecurity officer, an Adjunct Professor of Cybersecurity and Criminal Justice and an Instructional Designer at Benedict College. Monica’s teaching experience stretches far beyond the higher ed classroom, having previously taught firearms and safety, as well as cybersecurity to law enforcement officers at national and local levels. She now brings personal field experience and real-world insights to her students, teaching undergraduate cybersecurity and criminal justice courses. Before entering the world of cybersecurity, she earned a B.A. degree in criminal justice from the University of Central Florida and an M.A. degree in computer resources and information management from Webster University. Monica took a comprehensive approach to her teaching role. Striving to gain proficiency in both instructional design and the application of rubrics, she obtained a Quality Matters (QM) certification for Applying the QM Rubric and Designing Your Online Course.

    Dr. EmmaLeigh Kirchner is an Associate Professor of Criminal Justice and Chair of the Social Justice &EmmaLeigh Kirchner Community Health Department at Mercyhurst University. Her experience spans across undergraduate, graduate and study abroad programs, where she teaches multiple courses, both online and in-person. Some of those courses include Methods and Social Science Statistics. Holding a Ph.D. in criminology from Indiana University of Pennsylvania, EmmaLeigh’s focus has been primarily within the higher ed sphere. Yet, she’s also a leading example of how to enact meaningful community-based change outside the classroom. She currently serves on the executive board for the Northeastern Association of Criminal Justice Sciences and is the faculty advisor of the Criminal Justice Association. EmmaLeigh’s various outreach efforts and contributions represent her resolution to make a difference.

     

    Thank you to all of our women faculty partners. You’ve made an incredible educational impact on not only your students and institutions, but on the future of higher education overall.

     

    Women’s History Month reminds us to recognize the incredible achievements and contributions made by women throughout our history.

     

    Source link

  • When Will We Stop Moving to the Riskiest Regions? (PBS Terra)

    When Will We Stop Moving to the Riskiest Regions? (PBS Terra)







    Higher Education Inquirer : Climate Change: When Will We Stop Moving to the Riskiest Regions? (PBS Terra)




    Source link

  • Moving Beyond New Year’s Resolutions to Embrace a Multi-Year Enrollment Strategy 

    Moving Beyond New Year’s Resolutions to Embrace a Multi-Year Enrollment Strategy 

     

    Developing New Year’s resolutions for personal growth is something many of us do. Unfortunately, it is often a set-it and forget-it process that is simply reupped the following year. When done correctly, however, creating a resolution that is developed as a sustained, long-term strategy—and that is regularly returned to and adjusted as needed—seems to be the best way to meet our personal goals.  
     
    As enrollment managers, we all have pursued the first approach in our professional lives by evaluating last year’s successes and failures annually, making a few tweaks, and then seeing how it all works out again the following year. The truth of the matter is that this approach was relatively sustainable for a time. Simply buying more names, adjusting the aid-leveraging model annually, or a developing a wider marketing plan often could drive greater enrollments—mostly because those tactics generally were designed to “add more fuel to the fire.” As long as the applications continued to grow, annual tweaks could help to maintain the core enrollments as well as improve on the margins for many institutions.  

     

    The Need for More Effective Strategic Enrollment Strategies

    Unfortunately, outside of key private and public flagship institutions, headwinds have developed over the past decade that are affecting higher education enrollments in significant ways. Ultimately, they may lead to campus closures for some, and to campus financial distress for many. As outlined in a paper from the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, “Predicting College Closures and Financial Distress,” those pressures include:

    • Post-pandemic enrollment challenges from traditional students (decreasing 15% from 2010-2021).




    • Changes among adult learners (“The number of adult students over the age of 25 has fallen by nearly half since the Great Recession”).




    • Growing competition.




    • A lack of public support for higher education nationally. 

    The combination of all these factors has brought about the need for enrollment managers to develop a wider multi-year strategy that includes tools with the ability to enable deeper, more highly data-informed fine tuning throughout any given cycle. A one-size-fits-all approach to creating a nuanced strategy can no longer work in an environment of shrinking applications and increased competition. 

     

    Liaison’s Partnership Philosophy

    Liaison is uniquely positioned to assist with higher education institutions in a true partnership. With the technology, services, and consultative approach that we provide our partners throughout the nation, we can assist in developing a comprehensive enrollment approach unique to your campus—ranging from single-point to full-enrollment planning solutions that are uniquely tailored to your unique needs. Liaison’s partnership philosophy, technology solutions, and industry knowledge and insights can not only help strengthen your enrollment planning and goals for this year but also set you up for long-term enrollment success.  

     

     

    Craig Cornell is the Vice President for Enrollment Strategy at Liaison. In that capacity, he oversees a team of enrollment strategists and brings best practices, consultation, and data trends to campuses across the country in all things enrollment management. Craig also serves as the dedicated resource to NASH (National Association of Higher Education Systems) and works closely with the higher education system that Liaison supports. Before joining Liaison in 2023, Craig served for over 30 years in multiple higher education executive enrollment management positions. During his tenure, the campuses he served often received national recognition for enrollment growth, effective financial aid leveraging, marketing enhancements, and innovative enrollment strategies.

    Source link