Join HEPI for a webinar on Thursday 11 December 2025 from 10am to 11am to discuss how universities can strengthen the student voice in governance to mark the launch of our upcoming report, Rethinking the Student Voice. Sign up now tohear our speakersexplore the key questions.
This blog was kindly authored by Dr Andrew Woon, Senior Lecturer in the Department of Management, Monash University Malaysia.
After teaching in the UK for nearly five years, I returned to Malaysia and joined Monash University. There I noticed a striking difference in the approach to teaching and learning methodologies.
Many universities have been grappling with low student attendance, a trend particularly acute since the onset of COVID-19. Additionally, the increasingly diverse student body (including a higher proportion of students from low socioeconomic backgrounds, mature-age learners and those studying with disabilities) requires greater flexibility in learning modes to accommodate their varied responsibilities and commitments. These pressures have significantly altered the traditional image of a bustling university campus filled with students, prompting institutions to rethink how education is delivered and experienced.
Some universities have taken dramatic steps to address these challenges, Adelaide University decided to discontinue face-to-face lectures, and many other major Australian universities have redefined their course delivery formats to incorporate digital content and self-paced modules.
Monash University has implemented both asynchronous and synchronous learning approaches as part of its transformative teaching and learning initiatives, aligned with the Impact 2030 strategic plan. At Monash, we view the Moodle learning platform not merely as a content repository, but as a dynamic “classroom” space. It serves as an interactive environment where educators can engage students through structured modules, collaborative activities, and timely feedback – going beyond simply sharing materials and resources.
At Monash, we have transitioned lectures to an asynchronous format, which we refer to as “own-time learning.” This allows students to engage with content at their convenience. Our tutorials, which represent the synchronous component of learning, are designed to be interactive and focused on higher-order thinking and practical application.
The goal is to redefine active learning across both asynchronous and synchronous learning spaces to empower students to take ownership of their educational journey. With the rapid advancement of AI fundamentally reshaping the educational landscape, it is high time for bold, intentional changes in how we design, support, deliver, and assess learning.
In an era where information and knowledge are readily accessible, we have reimagined passive lecturing by breaking it down into microlearning blocks. Traditional lectures are now delivered as short, topic-specific videos accompanied by thought-provoking questions and scaffolded learning activities. This structure prepares students for synchronous sessions by stimulating curiosity, promoting cognitive engagement, and cultivating practical skills.
Of course, this method is not without its challenges. Many educators rightly raise concerns about how many students actually complete the pre-session “own-time learning” and how effectively they engage with the material before attending tutorials. Yet, this very concern also applies to traditional live, large lecture sessions, where passive attendance does not necessarily equate to meaningful engagement or preparation. The shift to asynchronous formats simply makes this issue more visible and measurable, prompting us to rethink how we scaffold, motivate, and support student learning across modalities.
This transformation not only responds to the diverse needs of our student population (including those balancing work, caregiving, or accessibility challenges), but also enables more effective utilisation of physical classroom spaces. Traditional lecture theatres can be reimagined as interactive, collaborative learning environments that foster deeper engagement, peer dialogue, and practical application.
In addition, shifting classroom activities to online spaces enables students to better plan their timetables, reducing scheduling conflicts and long gaps between classes. This flexibility not only supports time management but also cultivates essential skills in online collaboration, digital communication, and self-directed learning — competencies that are increasingly vital in both academic and professional spheres.
The shift to asynchronous lectures represents a significant cultural change in learning, requiring adaptation from both students and educators. As educators, we must evolve from being mere content deliverers to becoming facilitators who thoughtfully design learning activities that promote engagement, critical thinking, and autonomy. This pedagogical shift challenges us to create meaningful learning experiences that guide students through inquiry, application, and reflection, rather than relying on the passive delivery of content typical of large lecture formats.
As a result, I do not see asynchronous lectures as a lesser form of teaching or an intellectual compromise, but rather as a strategic shift that empowers students to learn at their own pace, revisit complex concepts, and prepare more meaningfully for interactive sessions. When thoughtfully designed, asynchronous learning fosters autonomy, deepens engagement, and complements synchronous tutorials in cultivating higher-order thinking and practical skills.
I believe UK institutions should take a bold step forward, as the current format of delivery is unlikely to drive meaningful progress. The traditional reliance on large, live lectures and rigid timetabling no longer aligns with the evolving needs of students or the realities of a digitally transformed educational landscape. Embracing asynchronous and blended learning models that are paired with thoughtful curriculum design can foster deeper engagement, greater flexibility, and more inclusive learning experiences for all.
Higher education stands at an unprecedented inflection point. After decades of incremental change, universities worldwide are grappling with converging forces that are fundamentally reshaping what it means to deliver truly connected digital experiences to students, faculty, and staff.
This disconnect reveals the challenge: traditional approaches to digital transformation in universities focused on digitising existing processes rather than reimagining the entire student experience.
According to Paul Towers, country manager for Liferay Australia, “there’s a clear mismatch between how fast student expectations are evolving and how slow institutions are responding. The next generation of learners have higher expectations than ever for what an optimal student experience looks like.”
Today, four powerful forces are converging to redefine what “connected” truly means in the university context.
Force 1: The consumer-grade expectations revolution
Today’s students are digital natives who don’t differentiate between university services and the consumer applications they use daily. They expect the same personalisation they get from Netflix, the same convenience they experience with Amazon, and the same responsiveness they receive from their banking app.
This convergence of financial pressure, everyday student challenges, and digital nativity creates unprecedented expectations. Universities must deliver consumer-grade personalisation while addressing the complex, multifaceted nature of student success.
It’s no longer enough to have separate portals for academics, student services, and campus life, students expect one unified experience that understands their complete journey and responds to their changing needs.
Force 2: The everything online imperative
The second force reshaping university digital experiences is students’ expectation that anything they can do on campus, they should be able to do online – efficiently and intuitively.
However, recent research reveals an important nuance – while students want digital convenience for routine transactions, they increasingly value in-person interactions for complex, collaborative activities.
“Students don’t think in terms of departments or administrative offices, they think in terms of outcomes. If your digital experience adds friction, you’re making student success harder than it needs to be,” Mr Towers said.
Leading universities embrace ‘digital-first, human-when-it-matters’ models – removing friction from routine tasks while preserving meaningful human connection.
Force 3: The AI acceleration effect
Perhaps no force is reshaping university digital experiences as rapidly as artificial intelligence. The statistics are staggering: 92 per cent of students now use AI in some form, with 88 per cent having used generative AI for assessments.
“AI is no longer a future trend – it’s a present reality in student workflows,” Mr Towers said.
Universities that proactively integrate AI into their connected digital experiences can deliver unprecedented personalisation and support. Leading institutions envision AI-powered learning analytics and improved accessibility for both students and faculty.
The AI revolution in university digital experiences isn’t about replacing human connection – it’s about augmenting it. AI handles routine tasks, supports 24/7, and predicts student challenges early. This frees human staff to focus on the complex, empathetic, relationship-building activities that truly matter in education.
Force 4: Real-time connected experience
These three forces are converging toward a vision of truly connected digital experiences that goes far beyond current university technology implementations. The future of a real-time connected experience includes:
Predictive intelligence: Systems that anticipate student needs before they arise, identifying at-risk students early and proactively connecting them with appropriate support services.
Hyper-personalisation: Modern learners expect flexible, personalised study paths that align with their commitments.
Seamless integration: Rather than forcing students to navigate separate systems for academics, student services, career development, and campus life, connected experiences will provide a unified platform with a single source of truth about each student’s complete university journey.
Accessibility excellence: Universities recognise that AI tools can significantly improve accessibility, creating more inclusive experiences for students with diverse needs and learning preferences.
As Mr Towers outlines, “this future for students is not just digital. It’s intelligent, integrated and deeply personalised. And more importantly it will become what students expect by default.”
What this means for universities
The convergence of these forces is redefining what “connected” means in university digital experiences. It’s no longer sufficient to simply digitise existing processes or provide students with access to multiple systems. True connection requires:
Ecosystem thinking: View university experiences as a unified whole.
Student-centric design: Design around student journeys, not silos.
Proactive engagement: Anticipate needs with data and AI.
Human-digital balance:Use tech to enhance human interaction.
Universities that embrace these principles and invest in truly connected digital experience platforms will be positioned to thrive in an increasingly competitive landscape. Those that continue with fragmented, process-centric approaches risk falling behind as student expectations continue to evolve.
The question isn’t whether these forces will reshape higher education – they already have. The question is how quickly and strategically institutions will adapt to serve their students in this new reality.
The universities that get this right won’t just improve their digital offerings; they’ll transform their ability to support student success at scale while maintaining the human connections that make higher education transformational.
With the AI education market projected to reach $20 billion by 2027, the investment and innovation in this space will only accelerate. The time for universities to reimagine their digital experiences isn’t tomorrow – it’s today.
Universities like Queensland and George Washington are already moving from fragmented systems to unified digital experiences that meet evolving student expectations.
If you’re exploring how to unify your university’s digital ecosystem and create more responsive student experiences, Liferay has the expertise and platform to support your journey.
By Somayeh Aghnia, Co-Founder and Chair of the Board of Governors at the London School of Innovation.
University rankings have long been a trusted, if controversial, proxy for quality. Students use them to decide where to study. Policymakers use them to shape funding. Universities use them to benchmark themselves against competitors. But in an AI-powered world, are these rankings still measuring what matters?
If we’ve learned anything from the world of business over the last decade, it’s this: measuring the wrong things can lead even the most successful organisations astray. The tech industry, in particular, has seen numerous examples of companies optimising for vanity metrics (likes, downloads, growth at all costs) only to realise too late that these metrics didn’t align with real value creation.
The metrics we choose to measure today will shape the universities we get tomorrow.
The Problem with Today’s Rankings
Current university ranking systems, whether national or global, tend to rely on a familiar set of indicators:
Research volume and citations
Academic and employer reputation surveys
Faculty-student ratios
International staff and student presence
Graduate salary data
Student satisfaction and completion rates
While these factors offer a snapshot of institutional performance, they often fail to reflect the complex reality of the world. A university may rise in the rankings even as it fails to respond to student needs, workforce realities, or societal challenges.
For example, graduate salary data may tell us something about economic outcomes, but very little about the long-term adaptability or purpose-driven success of those graduates or their impact on improving society. Research citations measure academic influence, but not whether the research is solving real-world problems. Reputation surveys tend to reward legacy and visibility, not innovation or inclusivity.
In short, they anchor universities to a model optimised for the industrial era, not the intelligence era.
Ready for the AI paradigm?
Artificial Intelligence is a paradigm shift that is changing what we value in all aspects of life including education, especially higher education, how we define learning, what we want as an outcome, and how we measure success.
In a world where knowledge is increasingly accessible, and where intelligent systems can generate information, summarise research, and tutor students, the role of a university shifts from delivering knowledge or developing skills to curating learning experiences focusing on developing humans’ adaptability, and preparing students, and society, for uncertainty.
This means the university of the future must focus less on scale, tradition, and prestige, and more on relevance, adaptability, and ethical leadership. These are harder to measure, but far more important. This demands a new value system. And with that, a new approach to how we assess institutional success.
What Should We Be Measuring?
As we rethink what universities are for, we must also rethink how we assess their impact. Inspired by the “measure what matters” philosophy from business strategy, we need new metrics that reflect AI-era priorities. These could include:
1. Adaptability: How quickly and responsibly does an institution respond to societal, technological, and labour market shifts? This could be measured by:
Curriculum renewal cycle: Time between major curriculum updates in response to new tech or societal trends.
New programme launches: Number and relevance of AI-, climate-, or digital economy-related courses introduced in the last 3 years.
Agility audits: Internal audits of response times to regulatory or industry change (e.g., how quickly AI ethics is integrated into professional courses).
Employer co-designed modules: % of programmes co-developed with industry or public sector partners.
2. Student agency: Are students empowered to shape their own learning paths, engage with interdisciplinary challenges, and co-create knowledge? This could be measured by:
Interdisciplinary enrolment: % of students engaged in flexible, cross-departmental study pathways.
Student-designed modules/projects: Number of modules that allow student-led curriculum or research projects.
Participation in governance: % of students involved in academic boards, curriculum design panels, or innovation hubs.
Satisfaction with personalisation: Student survey responses (e.g., NSS, internal pulse surveys) on flexibility and autonomy in learning.
3. AI and digital literacy: To what extent are institutions preparing their staff and their graduates for a world where AI is embedded in every profession? This could be measured by:
Curriculum integration: % of degree programmes with AI/digital fluency embedded as a learning outcome.
Staff development: Hours or participation rates in AI-focused CPD for academic and support staff.
AI usage in teaching and assessment: Extent of AI-enabled platforms, feedback systems, or tutors in active use.
Graduate outcomes: Employer feedback or destination data reflecting readiness for digital-first/AI-ready roles.
4. Contribution to local and global challenges: Are research efforts aligned with pressing societal needs amplified with advancements of AI such as social justice, or the AI divide? This could be measured by:
UN SDG alignment: % of research/publications mapped to UN Sustainable Development Goals.
AI-for-good projects: Number of AI projects tackling societal or environmental issues.
Community partnerships: Active partnerships with local authorities, civic groups, or NGOs on social challenges.
Policy influence: Instances where university research or expertise shapes public policy (e.g. citations in white papers or select committees).
5. Wellbeing and belonging: How well are staff and students supported to thrive, not just perform, within the institution? This could be measured by:
Staff/student wellbeing index: Use of validated tools like the WEMWBS (Warwick-Edinburgh Mental Wellbeing Scale) in internal surveys.
Use of support services: Uptake and satisfaction rates for mental health, EDI, and financial support services.
Sense of belonging scores: Survey data on inclusion, psychological safety, and campus climate.
Staff retention and engagement: Turnover data, satisfaction from staff pulse surveys, or exit interviews.
These are not soft metrics. They are foundational indicators of whether a university is truly fit for purpose in a volatile and AI-transformed world. You could call this a “University Fitness for Future Index”, a system that doesn’t rank but reveals how well an institution is evolving, and as a result its academics, staff and students are adapting to a rapidly changing world.
From Status to Substance
Universities must now face the uncomfortable but necessary task of redefining their identity and purpose. Those who focus solely on preserving status will struggle. Those who embrace the opportunity to lead with substance – authenticity, impact, innovation – have a chance to thrive.
AI will not wait for the sector to catch up. Students, staff, employers, and communities are already asking deeper questions: Does this university prepare me for an unpredictable future? Does it care about the society I will enter after graduation? Is it equipping us to lead with courage and ethics in an AI-powered world?
These are the questions that matter. And increasingly, they should be the ones that will shape how institutions are evaluated, regardless of their position in the league tables.
It’s time we evolve our frameworks to reflect what really counts, that increasingly will be defined by usefulness, purpose, and trust.
A Call for Courage
We are not simply in an era of change. We are in a change of era.
If we are serious about preparing our learners, and our society, for a world defined by intelligent systems, we must also be serious about redesigning the system that educates them.
That means shifting from prestige to purpose. From competition to contribution. From reputation to relevance.
Because the institutions that will lead the future are not necessarily those that top today’s rankings.
They are the ones willing to ask: what truly matters now and are we brave enough to measure it?
By Professor Isabel Lucas, Pro-Vice Chancellor for Education at the Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine and outgoing Chair of the national Heads of Educational Development Group (HEDG).
In higher education, prestige and promotion have long hinged on research output. But with growing numbers of academics focused on teaching, educational leadership and knowledge exchange, the old metrics no longer fit. A report by the European Association for Universities places academic career reform at the heart of its 2030 vision, highlighting the need to recognise impact beyond traditional research publications. This shift is not only about fairness – it’s about organisational effectiveness and employee wellbeing.
Research has long dominated academic prestige, promotions, and funding. Sterling et al. (2023) argue that current academic career frameworks are weighted heavily toward research, often sidelining innovative teaching and educational leadership. Yet, as the higher education sector evolves, so too must our understanding of what counts as impactful academic work.
The reality is already shifting. Data from HESA (2022) shows a 10% rise in teaching-only contracts between 2015 and 2022, balanced by a 9% decrease in research-related roles. This suggests a growing academic population for whom the current research-heavy promotion pathways simply don’t apply. However, ‘teaching-only’ staff (a problematic term as it is inevitably not only teaching) often find themselves ineligible – or unrecognised – within traditional academic progression systems. The lack of progression routes for these high-quality staff capable of transforming the education and student experience at a strategic level risks undermining job satisfaction and retention.
What’s more, staff on Professional Service contracts, including roles like educational developers and academic skills support tutors, are engaged in academic work without the benefits or recognition of an academic title. HESA’s own definitions blur the lines: academic function is tied to the contract, not necessarily the work performed. This disconnect creates a situation where talented, impactful educators are ‘othered’ – excluded from meaningful recognition and progression.
Key findings from sector analysis undertaken in 2024 via the Heads of Educational Development Group (HEDG) showed some alarming disparities among middle managers with institutional responsibility for learning and teaching:
Career Blockages:
100% of academic contract holders in the study had access to promotion to Reader/Professor.
Only 39% of Professional Service contract holders had similar access—even when doing the same academic work as peers on academic contracts.
Misalignment of Identity and Contract:
Staff whose professional identity did not match their contract type (e.g. self-identifying as academic but on a Professional Service contract) reported significantly lower satisfaction and empowerment scores.
Promotion Criteria Gaps:
Respondents noted they could meet academic promotion criteria, but were ineligible due to contract type.
Job satisfaction scores were lowest where staff reported that promotion routes existed but were inaccessible due to the nature of their role.
So, how can HE evolve its career structures beyond research? Establishing clear, visible academic promotion routes to Reader/Professor that recognise leadership in education, curriculum innovation, and pedagogic research would be a good starting point. Making sure promotion frameworks include non-research excellence – impact on student learning, institutional strategy, and sector-wide education initiatives – would be even more inclusive. Neither of these things should pose a significant operational or cost challenge to universities and would reap significant rewards in staff retention and satisfaction.
Institutions that fail to adapt risk not just losing talent, but falling behind in impact, innovation, and reputation. It’s time to value all forms of academic excellence. The future of higher education, now more than ever, depends on it.
The way higher institutions define and acknowledge student success in higher education today is changing rapidly. Today, diplomas and transcripts are no longer the benchmarks for measuring the success rate of students in their academics. To define success, you have to consider a complete and holistic journey and vision. Factors like the student’s academic excellence, mental and physical growth, and preparation for what comes next are increasingly becoming key to defining academic success. This is why universities are looking beyond enrolment figures, they are now more focused on helping their students thrive academically, socially, and professionally.
This brings us to the role of modern digital marketing tactics and advanced CRM tools. Colleges can create an environment that supports every student with the right resources they need to succeed, using the data-driven outreach and personalized support that these tools offer. In this blog post, we’ll explore the true meaning of student success and what key metrics are best placed to measure student success in higher education. We’ll also show you how marketing automation and CRM platforms (including HEM’s own Mautic for Education and Student Portal) can help drive real student achievement. Read on to find out what strategies and tools are best suited to define modern student success.
Looking for an all-in-one student information and CRM solution tailored to the education sector?
Try the HEM Student Portal!
Redefining Student Success Metrics in Higher Education: Beyond GPAs and Graduation Rates
Who you ask about the definition of academic success will also determine the type of answer you get. Administrators might lean towards metrics and retention rates. Students tend to have a more personal definition of success, like having supportive mentors, developing confidence, and building lasting connections.
This brings us to the question: What is the definition of student success? The definition of student success encompasses building communication skills and critical thinking activities, career or grad school readiness. In essence, a successful student grows through campus life, engages with the community, and adequately prepares themself for future opportunities.
Below are components of a comprehensive student success definition:
Academic Achievement: Mastering course material and maintaining strong GPAs
Persistence and Retention: Continuing enrolment term after term until graduation
Personal Development: Cultivating critical thinking, communication skills, and emotional intelligence
Engagement and Belonging: Finding community through meaningful campus involvement
Career Readiness: Building the confidence and skills needed for post-graduation success
As EDUCAUSE, a prominent education technology organization, points out, student success programs “promote student engagement, learning, and progress toward the student’s own goals through cross-functional leadership and the strategic application of technology.” This reaffirms the fact that true success calls for a harmonious relationship between human connection and technology.
Measuring What Matters: The Metrics of Achievement
How do we truly and correctly measure student success if we say that there are many sides to it? What is the definition of a successful student, and how to measure student success in higher education? While this question has intrigued higher educational professionals for decades, today’s schools are finding the right answers by combining traditional metrics and emerging indicators.
Traditional measurements include retention rates (are students returning each semester?), graduation rates (are they completing their degrees?), and academic performance (are they mastering the material?).
Now, these numbers matter. They help us tell to a reasonable degree if students are progressing toward their educational goals, or not. However, there’s a richer story to be told beyond these statistics, and you’ll learn about it shortly.
Student success metrics commonly include:
Retention Rates: The percentage of students who return for subsequent terms
Graduation Rates: How many students complete their degrees within expected timeframes
Academic Performance: Beyond grades—how students grow intellectually over time
Student Engagement: Participation in everything from research opportunities to campus events
Student Satisfaction: Feedback that reveals how students experience their education
Post-Graduation Outcomes: Career placement, graduate school acceptance, and alumni achievements
Away from these quantifiable measures, today’s schools value the essence of student-defined success. For them, it could be a first-generation student finding their voice, an international student building cross-cultural friendships, or a working parent balancing studies with family life. The schools that manage to combine statistical trends with individual stories will ultimately get the most complete picture of things.
Examples: ULM developed FlightPath, an open-source advising system for degree audits, early alerts, and “What If?” planning. It is designed to help you determine your progress toward a degree.
What do marketing strategies have to do with student success? What does digital marketing contribute to student success? Higher education marketing and student success are interconnected through a series of key touchpoints.
The path to college student success often begins with that first Instagram post that catches a high school junior’s eye or that personalized email that addresses their specific interests. It is all part of the coordinated digital marketing campaigns that today’s schools employ, to great success.
Attracting the right-fit students: When marketing materials paint an authentic picture of campus culture, incoming students arrive with realistic expectations and are more ready to engage.
Personalized communication: Tailored messages that speak to individual aspirations create early connections. When a prospective engineering student receives content about robotics competitions or research labs, they begin envisioning their place in your community.
Seamless onboarding: The summer before freshman year can be overwhelming. Automated campaigns that introduce new students to campus resources, share advice from current students, and foster peer connections help transform nervousness into excitement.
Feedback loops: Savvy marketing teams don’t just broadcast – they listen. Social media monitoring and regular surveys help identify pain points before they become barriers to success.
Examples: Gonzaga’s English Language Center moved from siloed data to a Student Success CRM on Salesforce, improving collaboration and early-alert capabilities for ESL learners.
Customer Relationship Management (CRM) systems are now important tools for tracking and supporting the student journey, especially in today’s data-driven world. These platforms present themselves as centralized hubs that help schools track student progress, identify potential challenges, and carry out timely interventions.
Colleges can transform how they engage with students at every stage using the right CRM. Take this scenario for example: A first-year student misses out on many classes and fails to log into the learning management system for two weeks. While this might have gone on without being detected in the past, probably until midterm grades showed a significant gap, not anymore. With a CRM, a trigger will set off based on this pattern and send automatic alerts to the students’ advisor, who can now contact support resources to arrest the decline before it further spirals.
Example: King’s College uses CRM Advise to flag risk factors, like missed classes, and automatically route alerts to advisors and support centers.
Here are six ways CRM tools elevate student success in higher education:
Centralizing the 360° Student View: Modern CRMs integrate data from admissions, advising, financial aid, and student life to create comprehensive student profiles. When an advisor can see that a struggling student is also working 30 hours weekly, they can provide more targeted support.
Enabling Early Alerts: By analyzing patterns like missed assignments or decreased LMS activity, CRMs can identify at-risk students before a crisis develops.
Automating Support Workflows: Smart CRMs ensure consistent communication throughout the student journey. From congratulatory messages when students ace exams to gentle nudges when they miss classes, automated workflows maintain continuous engagement without overwhelming staff.
Providing Data-driven Insights: Institutions can analyze which interventions are best-suited to promote student success, using comprehensive data collection.
Streamlining Administrative Processes: By simplifying registration, financial aid processes, and advising appointments, CRMs eliminate frustrating barriers that might otherwise derail student progress.
Promoting Community: Many platforms include features that connect students with mentors, study groups, and support communities. These all help to nurture the sense of belonging that anchors students during challenging times.
With solutions like Mautic by HEM, schools can enjoy robust CRM and marketing automation tailored specifically for them. The platform provides a central hub where you can manage all of your leads, applicants, agents, and parent contacts, enabling personalized support throughout the student lifecycle.
Example: Michael Vincent Academy, a Los Angeles-based beauty school, sought to enhance its student recruitment efficiency by streamlining lead management and follow-up processes. With HEM’s Mautic CRM, the academy automated key marketing tasks and introduced lead scoring, enabling staff to focus on high-value prospects. This allowed the team to dedicate more time to building meaningful connections with prospective students, ultimately improving recruitment outcomes.
Source: HEM
HEM’s Student Portal combines online application creation and management, SIS functionality, and lead-nurturing tools in one centralized system. As a student, this is designed to help you manage your journey – from initial application to enrolment to graduation and beyond.
As a school, using these specialized tools can help you address your institution’s unique needs and leverage the capacity of generic CRMs.
Source: HEM
Example: Students at Western Michigan University (WMU) use the Student Success Hub’s CRM to schedule and manage appointments, review advising notes, work on success plans, and tasks.
One of the key ingredients of college student success is the use of structured programming that helps students navigate important stages of their academic journey. Many schools have found value in offering a student success class or course, such as a freshman seminar or “College 101” course that equips students with essential skills and connections.
What is a student success class in college? It’s a course designed to help students be successful in college. It aims to help students properly navigate both academic requirements and college culture. Here is a list of subjects that these classes typically cover:
Effective study strategies tailored to college-level expectations
Time management techniques for balancing academic and personal demands
Campus resource navigation, introducing students to everything from tutoring to counselling
Financial literacy skills to manage college costs
Stress management and wellness practices
Career exploration and professional development
Research continues to show that the students who complete these courses earn more credits and have a higher graduation rate than those who don’t participate.
The Power of Storytelling in Student Success Marketing
By channelling authentic storytelling into their marketing narratives, schools can connect with prospective and current students. Stories have a way of transforming abstract content as “retention initiatives” into relatable human experiences that inspire action.
What if you created a series featuring diverse student voices? Think of the impact it can have. Think of first-generation students who initially had doubts about themselves but connected with mentors who had faith in them, the transfer student who found unexpected opportunities, or the international student who calls the school home.
Not only do these narratives attract prospective students, but they remind the current ones that challenges are not special and that success is very much achievable.
Tips to Boost Student Success with Marketing and CRM
Institutions looking to take advantage of digital marketing and CRM tools more effectively should consider these practical strategies.
Use Data to Personalize Outreach: Segment your communications based on student interests, challenges, and milestones to provide relevant support throughout their journey.
Implement Early Alert Systems: Configure your CRM to identify warning signs like decreased engagement or academic struggles, enabling timely, personalized interventions.
Integrate Your Systems: Ensure your marketing automation, CRM, and student information systems communicate seamlessly for a complete view of each student’s experience.
Maintain Consistent Communication: Develop messaging flows that accompany students from prospective inquiry through graduation while remaining authentic and supportive.
Leverage Student Feedback for Content: Gather testimonials and success stories that inspire current students and set realistic expectations for prospects.
Train Your Team on Tools: Invest in comprehensive training so everyone, from admissions counselors to faculty advisors, can effectively use your CRM to support student success.
Example:GSU’s Student Success 2.0 initiative includes implementing an enterprise CRM for a unified student record and early-alert triggers to boost retention by up to 1.2 % annually, with the National Institute for Student Success (NISS) also set up to that effect.
Creating a Culture of Success: A Holistic Approach
The most effective approach to student success blends marketing insights, CRM capabilities, and human connections in one big package. With these elements working in harmony, institutions can create environments where students from all backgrounds can thrive.
Remember that behind every data point is a student with dreams, challenges, and unlimited potential. When you align marketing, technology, and support programs around a student-centred vision of success, you can get positive outcomes in return. We don’t just improve statistics, we transform lives and fulfill higher education’s fundamental promise.
Looking for an all-in-one student information and CRM solution tailored to the education sector?
Try the HEM Student Portal!
Frequently Asked Questions
Question: What is the definition of student success?
Answer: The definition of student success encompasses building communication skills and critical thinking activities, career or grad school readiness.
Question: How to measure student success in higher education?
Answer: While this question has intrigued higher educational professionals for decades, today’s schools are finding the right answers by combining traditional metrics and emerging indicators.
Question: What is a student success class in college?
Answer: It’s a course designed to help students be successful in college. It aims to help students properly navigate both academic requirements and college culture.
The old scorecard for student success in higher education was simple: graduate on time with good grades. But in 2025, that definition feels as outdated as a flip phone.
Today’s colleges and universities are wrestling with a more complex question: What does student success mean in an era where traditional 18-year-old first-year students are no longer the norm and when career paths look more like jungle gyms than ladders?
Their answers reflect how profoundly higher education has evolved and tell a fascinating story about how institutions adapt their missions, metrics, and support systems to serve an increasingly diverse student population.
Gone are the one-size-fits-all definitions of decades past, replaced by nuanced frameworks that acknowledge the complexity of modern student journeys. All institutions, regardless of their type, flavor the conversation. Private institutions emphasize personal growth and character development. Public universities tend to speak the language of data and systems, focusing on measurable outcomes. Two-year institutions? They’re the ultimate pragmatists, defining success through real-world impact – whether landing a job or successfully transferring to a four-year program.
But here’s what’s interesting: beneath these surface differences, five core themes kept showing up:
The completion conversation has changed
Gone are the days when graduation rates were the only metric that mattered. Yes, completion still counts—but institutions are getting more nuanced about what that means.
A community college student who completes a certification and lands a better job might be just as successful as one who transfers to a four-year university. Private institutions look at how graduation connects to personal transformation, while the public tracks how different pathways to graduation affect long-term outcomes.
Consider these representative definitions:
Private: “Student retention, graduation, and subsequent placement with a transformative experience.”
Public: “Students who successfully persist through their progression points in a timely manner”
Two-year: “Curriculum completion rates evaluated along three separate avenues: graduation rates, credit accumulation, and persistence”
Holistic development takes center stage
Universities finally acknowledge what employers have said for years: technical skills alone don’t cut it. Success increasingly means developing the whole person—emotional intelligence, adaptability, cultural competence, and even that buzzword-worthy quality: resilience.
Consider these representative definitions:
Private: “Our university defines student success as thriving in various aspects of life, including engaged learning, academic determination, positive perspective, social connectedness, and diverse citizenship”
Public: “Students being successful in all aspects of their well-being – academically, socially, emotionally, financially”
Two-year: “Achievement of academic, personal, and professional goals by students”
Career outcomes matter more than ever
With student debt in the spotlight and ROI under scrutiny, institutions are paying closer attention to what happens after graduation. But it’s not just about salary data anymore. Schools look at career satisfaction, professional growth, and how well graduates adapt to changing industry demands.
Their definitions reflect this priority:
Private: “Students complete their degree program and become gainfully employed in a field related to their degree”
Public: “End up with a career path that is rewarding and supports the desired lifestyle of the student”
Two-year: “Either secure employment and/or transfer to a four-year institution”
Student goals drive the definition
The most significant shift is recognizing that each student’s success looks different. A single parent completing their degree part-time while working full-time might have very different metrics for success than a traditional full-time student. Institutions are learning to flex their support systems accordingly.
As these institutions expressed:
Private: “Student success is defined differently for each student and their identified goals”
Public: “Student success is different for each student – for some, it may be passing a test or a course, and for others, it is completing their degree”
Two-year: “That the student achieves their goals (i.e., transfer to 4-yr, enter the job market, expand skills)”
Reimagining support systems
The most thoughtful definitions of success in the world mean nothing without the infrastructure to support them. Schools are rethinking everything from academic advising to mental health services, creating more integrated and accessible support networks.
The most thoughtful success definitions emphasize the institution’s role in providing support:
Private: “Giving students the support they need to achieve their goals while identifying and helping them overcome barriers to persistence”
Public: “Creating environments and opportunities that contribute to retention while providing academic and social services”
Two-year: “We define student success as helping students clarify, define, and reach their educational and career goals”
The road ahead
Measuring success becomes more complex when you are tracking personal growth alongside GPA. Resource allocation gets trickier when success means different things to different students.
But here’s the exciting part: this new way of thinking about success might help more students succeed. When we expand our definition of success, we create more paths to achievement. We acknowledge that the 22-year-old who graduates in four years with a 4.0 GPA isn’t the only success story worth telling.
The institutions that will thrive in this new landscape can balance accountability with flexibility and standardization with personalization. They are building systems that can adapt to changing student needs while delivering measurable results.
What this means for higher education’s future
The shift in defining student success reflects a broader evolution in higher education. We are moving away from a one-size-fits-all model toward something more dynamic and responsive. This isn’t just about keeping up with changing times – it’s about creating an educational system that serves today’s students.
For institutional leaders, the message is clear: your definition of student success shapes everything from strategic planning to daily operations. It’s worth taking the time to get it right.
For students and families, these changes mean more options, support, and responsibility to define what success means for them. And for society at large? We might finally be moving toward a higher education system that measures what truly matters—not just what’s easy to measure.
