Tag: Search

  • Paid Search vs. Paid Social: Why Schools Need Both

    Paid Search vs. Paid Social: Why Schools Need Both

    Reading Time: 11 minutes

    When it comes to digital student recruitment, many institutions feel they need to choose between Paid Search vs Paid Social. Budgets are tight. Teams are often siloed; admissions handles one, marketing handles the other. And with so many moving parts, it’s tempting to simplify: pick one channel and double down.

    But that’s a false choice. Here’s the reality: today’s prospective students don’t live in a single marketing lane. They might first discover your school on Instagram, then Google you weeks later to check deadlines, read reviews, or submit an application. Search and social are part of the same decision journey, and schools that favour one while ignoring the other are leaving attention, applications, and enrollments on the table.

    At Higher Education Marketing (HEM), the right approach isn’t to choose between Paid Search and Paid Social. Instead, the most effective strategy is to combine both channels to engage and optimize the entire enrollment funnel fully. Social media excels at generating awareness and early interest. Search converts when intent is high. Together, they create a powerful synergy, reinforcing your message, capturing more leads, and moving students smoothly from first click to enrollment. In this article, we’ll break down how both channels work, where each shines, and how schools can maximize performance by aligning them strategically.

    Changing Search Behaviours in 2025

    Student search behaviour is fragmented, fast, and heavily value-driven. Today’s prospective students, especially from Gen Z and Gen Alpha, don’t wait to be told what to think. They research across platforms long before filling out an inquiry form.

    This is the Zero Moment of Truth: when students validate a school by triangulating across ads, websites, reviews, and social content. Credibility must show up everywhere, because trust is built before contact is ever made. Zero-click searches, like featured snippets and Google answer boxes, are also reshaping the landscape. Being cited here or placing targeted ads can influence decisions without ever earning a click.

    The numbers speak volumes: 41% of Gen Z use social media to search, while only 32% use traditional engines, and 11% use chatbots. Gen Alpha takes it further. Their research is values-first. They’re looking for sustainability, inclusion, and innovation. And they’re starting earlier than ever.

    The Power of Paid Social

    One of the biggest misconceptions in education marketing is that paid social is only good for brand awareness. While it’s true that platforms like Instagram, Facebook, and TikTok are excellent for reaching new audiences, their real power extends far beyond the top of the funnel.

    Paid social can drive leads, retarget warm prospects, and support conversions when used strategically. It allows schools to engage students emotionally through storytelling and keep them in the conversation through personalized messaging and real-time interactions.

    Is paid search the same as paid social? No. Paid search displays ads based on keyword searches on platforms like Google, while paid social promotes content on social media platforms like Facebook or TikTok. They target users differently and serve distinct stages of the enrollment funnel.

    Best Use Cases:

    • Story-Driven Awareness Campaigns: Think student testimonials, day-in-the-life content, or campus highlights. These build connection and trust.
    • Lead Generation Ads: Click-to-convert campaigns using forms or optimized landing pages can capture inquiries on the spot.
    • Event Promotions and Student Life Visibility: Showcase open houses, webinars, or vibrant campus life to entice prospective students.

    Best Practices:

    • Awareness Ads: Use high-impact visuals and short videos that highlight a key outcome, like career success or global opportunities. Keep the message clear and focused, with an obvious CTA that invites students to learn more.
    • Lead Gen Ads: Avoid generic links to your homepage. Instead, use program-specific landing pages or native lead forms. Segment audiences to tailor messages, and emphasize value on different content, such as scholarships, graduate outcomes, or flexible learning options.
    • Messenger and WhatsApp Ads: These are ideal for live engagement. Use them to invite students to ask questions, book a meeting, or receive instant info.

    The Case for Paid Search

    What is the difference between search and social? While paid social excels at sparking interest and building emotional connection, paid search is unmatched when it comes to capturing high-intent prospects. These are the students actively looking for programs, comparing options, or ready to take the next step. Paid search meets them right at the decision-making moment.

    This channel is especially powerful for reaching mid- and bottom-funnel audiences. When someone types “best MBA programs in Canada” or “nursing diploma with January intake,” they are already considering enrollment. Paid search allows schools to appear at the top of those results, capturing attention before competitors do.

    On the flip side, what are the disadvantages of paid search vs paid social? Paid search can be costly due to high competition for keywords, especially in education. It also depends on users already showing intent, which limits brand-building. Without complementary channels, it may not generate enough awareness or early-stage interest.

    Ideal Use Cases:

    • Branded and Program-Specific Searches: Ensure your school shows up when a student searches your name or flagship program.
    • High-Converting Keywords: Focus on queries like “apply now,” “tuition fees,” or “open house registration.”
    • Deadline-Driven Campaigns: Push applications during key moments, like the final days before a semester starts.

    Recommended Tactics:

    • Responsive Search Ads (RSAs): Automatically test combinations of headlines and descriptions to maximize performance.
    • Dynamic Search Ads (DSAs): Let Google fill in the gaps by matching relevant queries to your website content.
    • Intent Segmentation: Use different ad groups and copy for high, medium, and low-intent keywords. This improves quality scores and keeps your messaging relevant.

    One of the benefits of paid search is that it enables clarity, timing, and precision to come together to convert interest into action.

    Building a Full-Funnel Strategy: Social + Search Together

    Many schools fall into the trap of treating paid search and paid social as separate silos. But in 2025’s student journey, they’re two halves of the same enrollment engine. When integrated properly, they guide prospects from first glance to final decision, boosting visibility, engagement, and conversions along the way.

    Funnel Roles: How Each Channel Contributes

    Let’s break down how these platforms complement each other throughout the marketing funnel:

    • Awareness: Paid social leads the charge. Platforms like TikTok and Instagram are perfect for storytelling, aspirational videos, and brand introductions. These top-of-funnel ads help your school get noticed by students who may not yet be actively searching.
    • Consideration: As interest deepens, both channels play a role. Paid search catches students researching specific programs or comparing schools, while social reinforces your value with student testimonials, video tours, and real-time answers to FAQs.
    • Decision: This is where paid search shines. When students start typing in branded or program-specific queries, they’re ready to act. Paid social can add fuel here with urgency messaging, think deadline countdowns, financial aid reminders, or last-chance open house invites.
    • Enrollment: Now it’s about closing the loop. Use search ads to reinforce time-sensitive messaging, while Meta and WhatsApp retargeting keep your brand top of mind and prompt final steps like booking a call or submitting an application.

    Matching Platforms to Funnel Stages

    To maximize impact, align your platforms with the right funnel phase:

    • TikTok & Instagram: Best for awareness and early engagement. Use these channels to build emotional resonance and plant seeds of interest.
    • Google & Bing: Ideal for high-intent actions. When students are actively searching for answers, programs, or deadlines, your ads need to show up.
    • Meta & WhatsApp: Great for nurturing leads mid-funnel. Messenger CTAs and remarketing help bring students back into the conversation.
    • LinkedIn: A go-to for graduate and professional programs, especially among career switchers and upskillers.
    • Niche Channels: Want to reach Gen Z authentically? Explore Reddit threads, Snapchat lenses, or user-generated TikToks that mimic how real students talk and share.

    What Does This Look Like in Practice?

    Here’s how a real-world campaign could unfold:

    • Week 1–3: Launch TikTok videos to raise awareness: spotlight student stories, “day in the life” clips, or big-picture program benefits.
    • Week 2–3: Add Instagram ads to deepen interest with engaging visuals and strong CTAs.
    • Week 3–6: Deploy Google Search ads targeting keywords like “apply to [Program Name]” or “college deadlines 2025.”
    • Week 6–8: Use Meta retargeting to reconnect with visitors who didn’t convert, offering application checklists or counselor consult invites.

    This layered strategy ensures your message is reinforced across platforms, leading to more informed, confident applicants.

    Sample Budget Breakdown

    • TikTok Ads: $500
    • Instagram Ads: $500
    • Google Search Ads: $2,000
    • Meta Retargeting Ads: $300

    By diversifying spend across the funnel and choosing the right tools for each stage, schools move from guesswork to strategy and from isolated clicks to full-funnel enrollment growth.

    Common Mistakes Schools Make

    Despite investing in digital ads, many schools fall into avoidable traps that limit performance. One of the most common mistakes is relying entirely on paid search. While it excels at capturing high-intent prospects, paid search often reaches students too late in their decision process. Without early-stage awareness from paid social, those leads may never warm up enough to convert.

    Another issue is the widespread misunderstanding of paid social’s role. Some marketers dismiss it as a brand play with no immediate ROI. In reality, paid social plays a crucial role in shaping perception, building familiarity, and generating qualified leads over time. When schools skip this step, they weaken their funnel.

    Disjointed campaigns also create problems. Running separate social and search efforts without coordination means you miss opportunities for synergy and message consistency.

    Additionally, many schools neglect retargeting. If a prospective student browses your program page but leaves, that should trigger follow-up ads to reignite interest. Failing to retarget leaves valuable leads on the table.

    Finally, default settings on ad platforms can be misleading. Relying on them often results in wasted impressions and mismatched audiences. Custom targeting and exclusions are essential to reaching the right students with the right message at the right time.

    Search Trends & Emerging Platforms

    The digital landscape is evolving rapidly, and student search behaviour is shifting along with it. One major trend is the rising cost and competitiveness of Google Ads. As more advertisers bid on the same education-related keywords, prices continue to climb, making it harder for schools with modest budgets to compete effectively.

    At the same time, prospective students are changing how they search. Many now prefer visual, snackable results and quick answers over scrolling through text-heavy webpages. This shift is fueling the rise of social platforms as search engines in their own right.

    TikTok is a clear standout. Its new Search Ads feature allows schools to place short, captioned videos directly within search results, reaching students who are actively exploring options.

    To stay visible, schools must also optimize their organic content for discovery. Think FAQ-style posts, hashtag strategy, and short videos that answer common questions in the formats students prefer.

    Measurement: How to Track Campaign Impact

    Running great campaigns is only half the battle; measuring their true impact is where the real insight lies. To understand which channel is delivering results, schools must go beyond surface-level metrics like clicks or impressions.

    Start by tracking key funnel metrics: Cost per Inquiry (CPI), Cost per Lead (CPL), Cost per Application (CPA), and Cost per Enrollment (CPE). These figures help quantify the effectiveness of your campaigns at every stage of the recruitment journey.

    To gather this data, use platforms that support full-funnel tracking. CRMs like HubSpot or Mautic are ideal for managing contact progression, while Google Analytics 4 provides visibility into multi-touch user journeys across platforms.

    Most importantly, ensure that all campaigns are tagged with UTM codes and that your CRM accurately records lead sources. This lets you attribute not just the first click, but the entire path to enrollment, helping you optimize future budget allocation with confidence.

    Real-World Examples of Integrated Paid Search & Social in Education

    Story-Driven Awareness Campaign: The Rivers School (a private high school in Massachusetts) regularly hosts Instagram student takeovers, where current students share a day in their life via the school’s official Instagram Stories. These takeovers give prospective families an authentic glimpse of campus life. Such story-driven content humanizes the school experience and builds trust with audiences in the awareness stage.

    HEM BP Image 2

    Source: Instagram

    Event Promotions & Student Life Visibility: Concord University (West Virginia) ran a Fall Open House campaign on Facebook, urging students to “REGISTER NOW for Fall Open House”. The official post emphasized that whether you’re just starting your college search or already set on Concord, you should “come experience what being at Concord is like”. This call-to-action, boosted to target local high schoolers, drove sign-ups by promising an immersive campus visit.

    HEM BP Image 3HEM BP Image 3

    Source: Instagram

    Messenger and WhatsApp Engagement: The University at Buffalo (SUNY) launched an official WhatsApp channel for prospective international students. By opting in, students receive personalized updates – announcements, event invites, deadline reminders – right in WhatsApp, a platform they use daily. This allows UB’s admissions team to handle inquiries and nurture leads through quick chats and broadcasts on a familiar channel.

    HEM BP Image 4HEM BP Image 4

    Source: University at Buffalo

    Branded and Program-Specific Search Campaigns: A real example is Assiniboine Community College in Canada, which runs search ads for terms such as “January intake Nursing diploma” – ensuring that students searching for nursing programs with upcoming start dates find Assiniboine’s program page first. By focusing on branded queries (school name, flagship programs) and niche program keywords, schools across the board make sure they capture students who are already intent on a particular school or offering.

    HEM BP Image 5HEM BP Image 5

    Source: Google

    High-Converting Keyword Campaigns: Educational marketers also bid on bottom-funnel keywords that signal immediate intent – like “apply now,” “admissions deadline,” or “tuition fees [School].”  University of Louisville business school promoted its online MBA program with an urgent message: “Don’t miss out – this is your last chance to apply before the application deadline on 12/1! Start your application here.” By targeting such high-converting phrases in ads and search (and using urgency-laden copy), schools push motivated prospects to take action.

    HEM BP Image 6HEM BP Image 6

    Source: Facebook

    Recap: Why You Need Both Paid Search and Paid Social

    Schools that depend on just one marketing channel risk falling behind. Students don’t stick to a single path when researching their options. Instead, they move fluidly between search engines and social platforms, using both to gather information, compare schools, and make decisions.

    This is why a dual-channel strategy matters. Paid Social helps schools introduce themselves, tell a compelling story, and spark curiosity early in the decision journey. It creates awareness and builds emotional connection. Paid Search, on the other hand, reaches students who are actively looking for specific programs, deadlines, and next steps. It captures intent and drives action.

    When both channels are aligned, schools gain full-funnel coverage. Retargeting efforts become more strategic, and nurture campaigns stay relevant from the first interaction to enrollment. As a result, conversions improve and return on investment increases.

    But to unlock the full value, schools must track every touchpoint, not just the final click. Integrating CRM data with UTM tags and analytics tools ensures you’re seeing the full picture and making smarter marketing decisions moving forward.

    Frequently Asked Questions

    Question: Is paid search the same as paid social?
    Answer: No. Paid search displays ads based on keyword searches on platforms like Google, while paid social promotes content on social media platforms like Facebook or TikTok. They target users differently and serve distinct stages of the enrollment funnel.

    Question: What is the difference between search and social?
    Answer: While paid social excels at sparking interest and building emotional connection, paid search is unmatched when it comes to capturing high-intent prospects. These are the students actively looking for programs, comparing options, or ready to take the next step. Paid search meets them right at the decision-making moment.

    Question: What are the disadvantages of Paid Search?
    Answer: Paid search can be costly due to high competition for keywords, especially in education. It also depends on users already showing intent, which limits brand-building. Without complementary channels, it may not generate enough awareness or early-stage interest.



    Source link

  • Class Divide, Debt, and the Search for a Future

    Class Divide, Debt, and the Search for a Future

    For Generation Z, the old story of social mobility—study hard, go to college, work your way up—has lost its certainty. The class divide that once seemed bridgeable through education now feels entrenched, as debt, precarious work, and economic volatility blur the promise of progress.

    The new economy—dominated by artificial intelligence, speculative assets like cryptocurrency, and inflated housing markets—has not delivered stability for most. Instead, it’s widened gaps between those who own and those who owe. Many young Americans feel locked out of wealth-building entirely. Some have turned to riskier bets—digital assets, gig work, or start-ups powered by AI tools—to chase opportunities that traditional institutions no longer provide. Others have succumbed to despair. Suicide rates among young adults have climbed sharply in recent years, correlating with financial stress, debt, and social isolation.

    And echoing through this uncertain landscape is a song that first rose from the coalfields of Kentucky during the Great Depression—Florence Reece’s 1931 protest hymn, “Which Side Are You On?”

    Come all you good workers,

    Good news to you I’ll tell,

    Of how the good old union

    Has come in here to dwell.

    Which side are you on?

    Which side are you on?

    Nearly a century later, those verses feel newly urgent—because Gen Z is again being forced to pick a side: between solidarity and survival, between reforming a broken system or resigning themselves to it.

    The Class Divide and the Broken Ladder

    Despite record levels of education, Gen Z faces limited social mobility. College remains a class marker, not an equalizer. Students from affluent families attend better-funded universities, graduate on time, and often receive help with housing or job placement. Working-class and first-generation students, meanwhile, navigate under-resourced campuses, heavier debt, and weaker professional networks.

    The Pew Research Center found that first-generation college graduates have nearly $100,000 less in median wealth than peers whose parents also hold degrees. For many, the degree no longer guarantees a secure foothold in the middle class—it simply delays financial independence.

    They say in Harlan County,

    There are no neutrals there,

    You’ll either be a union man,

    Or a thug for J. H. Blair.

    The metaphor still fits: there are no neutrals in the modern class struggle over debt, housing, and automation.

    Debt, Doubt, and the New Normal

    Gen Z borrowers owe an average of around $23,000 in student loans, a figure growing faster than any other generation’s debt load. Over half regret taking on those loans. Many delay buying homes, having children, or even seeking medical care. Those who drop out without degrees are burdened with debt and little to show for it.

    The debt-based model has become a defining feature of American life—especially for the working class. The price of entry to a better future is borrowing against one’s own.

    Don’t scab for the bosses,

    Don’t listen to their lies,

    Us poor folks haven’t got a chance

    Unless we organize.

    If Reece’s song once called miners to unionize against coal barons, its spirit now calls borrowers, renters, adjuncts, and gig workers to collective resistance against financial systems that profit from their precarity.

    AI and the Erosion of Work

    Artificial intelligence promises efficiency, but it also threatens to hollow out the entry-level job market Gen Z depends on. Automation in journalism, design, law, and customer service cuts off rungs of the career ladder just as young workers reach for them.

    While elite graduates may move into roles that supervise or profit from AI, working-class Gen Zers are more likely to face displacement. AI amplifies the class divide: it rewards those who already have capital, coding skills, or connections—and sidelines those who don’t.

    Crypto Dreams and Financial Desperation

    Locked out of traditional wealth paths, many young people turned to cryptocurrency during the pandemic. Platforms like Robinhood and Coinbase promised quick gains and independence from the “rigged” economy. But when crypto markets crashed in 2022, billions in speculative wealth evaporated. Some who had borrowed or used student loan refunds to invest lost everything.

    Online forums chronicled not only the financial losses but also the psychological fallout—stories of panic, shame, and in some tragic cases, suicide. The new “digital gold rush” became another mechanism for transferring wealth upward.

    The Real Estate Wall

    While digital markets rise and fall, real estate remains the ultimate symbol of exclusion. Home prices have climbed over 40 percent since 2020, while mortgage rates hover near 8 percent. For most of Gen Z, ownership is out of reach.

    Older generations built equity through housing; Gen Z rents indefinitely, enriching landlords and institutional investors. Without intergenerational help, the “starter home” has become a myth. In America’s new class order, those who inherit property inherit mobility.

    Despair and the Silent Crisis

    Behind the data lies a mental health emergency. The CDC reports that suicide among Americans aged 10–24 has risen nearly 60 percent in the past decade. Economic precarity, debt, housing insecurity, and climate anxiety all contribute.

    Therapists describe “financial trauma” as a defining condition for Gen Z—chronic anxiety rooted in systemic instability. Universities respond with mindfulness workshops, but few confront the deeper issue: a society that privatized risk and monetized hope.

    They say in Harlan County,

    There are no neutrals there—

    Which side are you on, my people,

    Which side are you on?

    The question lingers like a challenge to policymakers, educators, and investors alike.

    A Two-Tier Future

    Today’s economy is splitting into two distinct realities:

    • The secure class, buffered by family wealth, education, AI-driven income, and real estate assets.

    • The precarious class, burdened by loans, high rents, unstable work, and psychological strain.

    The supposed democratization of opportunity through technology and education has in practice entrenched a new feudalism—one coded in algorithms and contracts instead of coal and steel.

    Repairing the System, Not the Student

    For Generation Z, the American Dream has become a high-interest loan. Education, technology, and financial innovation—once tools of liberation—now function as instruments of control.

    Reforming higher education is necessary, but not sufficient. The deeper work lies in redistributing power: capping predatory interest rates, investing in affordable housing, curbing speculative bubbles, ensuring that AI’s gains benefit labor as well as capital, and confronting the mental health crisis that shadows all of it.

    Florence Reece’s song endures because its question has never been answered—only updated. As Gen Z stands at the intersection of debt and digital capitalism, that question rings louder than ever:

    Which side are you on?

    Sources

    • Florence Reece, “Which Side Are You On?” (1931).

    • Pew Research Center, “First-Generation College Graduates Lag Behind Their Peers on Key Economic Outcomes,” 2021.

    • Dēmos, The Debt Divide: How Student Debt Impacts Opportunities for Black and White Borrowers, 2016.

    • EducationData.org, “Student Loan Debt by Generation,” 2024.

    • Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis, Gen Z Student Debt and Wealth Data Brief, 2022.

    • CNBC, “Gen Z vs. Their Parents: How the Generations Stack Up Financially,” 2024.

    • WUSF, “Generation Z’s Net Worth Is Being Undercut by College Debt,” 2024.

    • Newsweek, “Student Loan Update: Gen Z Hit with Highest Payments,” 2024.

    • The Kaplan Group, “How Student Debt Is Locking Millennials and Gen Z Out of Homeownership,” 2024.

    • CDC, Suicide Mortality in the United States, 2001–2022, National Center for Health Statistics, 2023.

    • Brookings Institution, “The Impact of AI on Labor Markets: Inequality and Automation,” 2024.

    • CNBC, “Crypto Crash Wipes Out Billions in Investor Wealth, Gen Z Most Exposed,” 2023.

    • Zillow, “U.S. Housing Affordability Reaches Lowest Point Since 1989,” 2024.

    Source link

  • Spanberger urges UVA to pause presidential search until she takes office

    Spanberger urges UVA to pause presidential search until she takes office

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

    Dive Brief:

    • Virginia Gov.-elect Abigail Spanberger is calling on the University of Virginia’s governing board to hold off on naming a new president or selecting finalists for the role until she takes office in January.
    • Over the past six months, UVA’s Board of Visitors has “severely undermined the public’s and the University community’s confidence” in its ability to act transparently and in the best interests of the state flagship, Spanberger said in a Wednesday letter to board leaders.
    • Spanberger, a Democrat and an alumna of UVA, said five appointees to the board “failed to achieve confirmation” by the Virginia Assembly as law requires. That raises concerns about the legitimacy of any decisions made by the current board, as it isn’t “fully constituted,” she argued.

    Dive Insight:

    UVA’s governing board has been in a state of flux since June. Outgoing Gov. Glenn Youngkin, a Republican, is in the midst of a fight with Virginia’s Democrat-controlled Senate committee over his selections for several public college boards, including UVA.

    The committee rejected eight of Youngkin’s appointments in June, but the governor instructed them to begin serving anyway. In July, a judge ruled that those eight board appointees for UVA, George Mason University and Virginia Military Institute could not serve on those boards. An appeal from outgoing Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares is before the Virginia Supreme Court.

    Democratic lawmakers similarly rejected another round of Youngkin appointees in August, bringing the total number of board seats under contention at Virginia public colleges to nearly two dozen.

    At UVA, five appointees are in legal limbo. 

    Because of this, “the Board is not fully constituted and its composition is now in violation of statutory requirements in crucial respects, further calling into question the legitimacy of the Board and its actions,” Spanberger said in her letter.

    UVA’s board currently has 12 voting members, well above the five it requires for a quorum. The university did not immediately respond to questions Thursday. 

    The governor-elect advised the board to pause its presidential search until it is “at full complement and in statutory compliance,” adding that would entail her appointing new members and the General Assembly approving them.  

    In turn, Spanberger pledged to make her appointments to the UVA board “quickly upon my swearing in.”

    UVA formed a special committee in July to select a new president following the abrupt departure of its former leader, Jim Ryan, less than a month earlier. 

    Ryan, who originally planned to leave the role at the end of the 2025-26 academic year, stepped down early amid reports of a pressure campaign orchestrated against him by the U.S. Department of Justice. The DOJ had been probing UVA’s diversity, equity and inclusion efforts, which expanded following the deadly 2017 Unite the Right rally on the university’s campus and Ryan’s inauguration as president a year later.

    In his resignation announcement, Ryan said he wouldn’t challenge the Trump administration out of concern that attempting to keep his job would cost UVA research funding and student aid, as well as put international students at risk.

    UVA said in November that in-person interviews for Ryan’s replacement would take place late this month.

    Spanberger in her letter Wednesday criticized Ryan’s ouster as “a result of federal overreach” and noted that it went unchallenged by UVA’s board members.

    That lack of response, she argued, among other actions taken by the board over the last six months, has resulted in a “loss of confidence” in the governing body. She cited no confidence votes from both the UVA faculty senate and the university student council in July and August, respectively.

    In October, UVA struck a deal with the DOJ to formally close the agency’s investigations over its DEI work by 2028. In return, the university agreed to several changes, including adopting the DOJ’s contentious anti-DEI guidance and making quarterly compliance reports.

    Because the deal doesn’t include a financial penalty, it did not require a formal vote from the board, the university said in an FAQ.

    Leaders of Virginia’s Democratic-controlled Senate have called for a legal audit of the agreement, questioned its constitutionality and labeled it “a fundamental breach of the governance relationship” between the university and the state.

    Last month, the Trump administration also offered the research university a separate deal — preferential access to federal research funding in exchange for enacting several wide-ranging and unprecedented conditions. UVA ultimately declined the compact, as did six other colleges to which the administration initially offered it.

    Source link

  • Spanberger Calls on UVA to Pause President Search

    Spanberger Calls on UVA to Pause President Search

    Virginia governor-elect Abigail Spanberger has called on the University of Virginia to pause its presidential search until she takes office in January and appoints new members to the Board of Visitors.

    In a Wednesday letter to board leaders, Spanberger wrote that she was “deeply concerned” about recent developments at the state flagship, citing “the departure of President Jim Ryan as a result of federal overreach.” Ryan stepped down amid federal investigations into diversity, equity and inclusion practices at UVA. The board later reached an agreement with the U.S. Department of Justice to pause those investigations.

    Spanberger argued that the government’s interference “went unchallenged by the Board” and has “severely undermined” public confidence in its ability to “govern productively, transparently, and in the best interests of the University.”

    Spanberger also pointed to recent votes of no confidence in the board by both the UVA Faculty Senate and the Student Council. Given those concerns and the hobbled state of the board, which is missing multiple members after state Democrats blocked Republican governor Glenn Youngkin’s appointments, Spanberger called for a pause until her own picks are confirmed by the General Assembly.

    “The benefits of selecting a new president with a full, duly-constituted Board are clear,” the governor-elect wrote in her letter to board leaders. They include making the search process and decision credible and “removing any concern that the Board’s actions are illegitimate due to a lack of authority,” she wrote.

    So far, UVA has been noncommittal in its public response.

    “University leaders and the Board of Visitors are reviewing the letter and are ready to engage with the Governor-elect and to work alongside her and her team to advance the best interests of UVA and the Commonwealth,” spokesperson Brian Coy wrote to Inside Higher Ed by email.

    Spanberger is the latest state Democrat to clash with the UVA Board of Visitors, which is stocked with GOP donors and political figures. While politics have long been at play on Virginia’s boards, Youngkin’s appointments have represented a dramatic rightward shift, prompting pushback as Democrats have blocked recent nominations.

    (A legal battle over the state of those appointments is currently playing out; the Virginia Supreme Court heard oral arguments in the case last month but has yet to issue a decision.)

    Democrats have turned up the temperature on UVA in recent months, demanding answers about the agreement with DOJ and Ryan’s resignation and accused the board of giving in to “extortionate tactics.” Now, following an election that saw Democrats take the governor’s office and broaden their majority in the General Assembly, Spanberger will likely have political capital to reshape higher education at the state level as she sees fit—barring intervention from the federal government.

    Spanberger, the first woman elected governor of Virginia, is a UVA alumna.

    The governor-elect’s call to pause UVA’s presidential search prompted immediate pushback from the Jefferson Council, a conservative alumni group that has won influence with Youngkin, who appointed the group’s co-founder Bert Ellis to the board before removing him for his combative behavior.

    The organization argued in a statement that in 2022 a Democratic-appointed board “quietly extended” Ryan’s contract through 2028—even though it did not expire until 2025—without “Governor Youngkin having an opportunity to appoint one Board member.” They wrote that “the Board’s action was clearly intended to ensure Ryan’s tenure” beyond Youngkin’s term. (Governors in Virginia may not serve consecutive terms.)

    The group also defended the search committee and process.

    “In contrast, the current UVA presidential search committee, the most extensive and diverse in University history, was lawfully formed by the Board and has been operating since July 2025, working diligently through meetings and interviews. To suddenly ask the BOV to wait to choose a president is a bold act of political legerdemain representing a total historical double-standard,” the Jefferson Council wrote.

    However, faculty members have a different view of the search committee.

    In an Aug. 10 letter, the UVA chapter of the American Association of University Professors accused the board of shortchanging faculty by limiting their seats on the presidential search committee. The group wrote that the committee “is dominated by current and former members of the [Board of Visitors] and administrators,” with faculty members composing less than a quarter of the committee. Additionally, they noted that none of those members “were selected by the faculty.”

    Spanberger’s insistence that UVA pause its presidential search bears similarities to ways other governors have sought to influence leadership decisions before they took office, such as Jeff Landry in Louisiana. Shortly after his election in late 2023, the Republican governor called on the University of Louisiana system to hold off on hiring Rick Gallot, a former Democratic state lawmaker, as its next president.

    Landry said he wanted to make sure their visions for the system aligned. Ultimately, despite the pause, Gallot was hired as system president after meeting with Landry before he took office.

    Source link

  • Helping students to make good choices isn’t about more faulty search filters

    Helping students to make good choices isn’t about more faulty search filters

    A YouTube video about Spotify popped into my feed this weekend, and it’s been rattling around my head ever since.

    Partly because it’s about music streaming, but mostly because it’s all about what’s wrong with how we think about student choice in higher education.

    The premise runs like this. A guy decides to do “No Stream November” – a month without Spotify, using only physical media instead.

    His argument, backed by Barry Schwartz’s paradox of choice research and a raft of behavioural economics, is that unlimited access to millions of songs has made us less satisfied, not more.

    We skip tracks every 20 to 30 seconds. We never reach the guitar solo. We’re treating music like a discount buffet – trying a bit of everything but never really savouring anything. And then going back to the playlists we created earlier.

    The video’s conclusion is that scarcity creates satisfaction. Ritual and effort (opening the album, dropping the needle, sitting down to actually listen) make music meaningful.

    Six carefully chosen options produce more satisfaction than 24, let alone millions. It’s the IKEA effect applied to music – we value what we labour over.

    I’m interested in choice. Notwithstanding the debate over what a “course” is, Unistats data shows that there were 36,421 of them on offer in 2015/16. This year that figure is 30,801.

    That still feels like a lot, given that the University of Helsinki only offers 34 bachelor’s degree programmes.

    Of course a lot of the entries on DiscoverUni separately list “with a foundation year” and there’s plenty of subject combinations.

    But nevertheless, the UK’s bewildering range of programmes must be quite a nightmare for applicants to pick through – it’s just that once they’re on them, job cuts and switches to block teaching are delivering increasingly less choice in elective pathways than they used to.

    We appear to have a system that combines overwhelming choice at the point of least knowledge (age 17, alongside A-levels, with imperfect information) with rigid narrowness at the point of most knowledge (once enrolled, when students actually understand what they want to study and why). It’s the worst of both worlds.

    What the white paper promises

    The government’s vision for improving student choice runs to a couple of paragraphs in the Skills White Paper, and it’s worth quoting in full:

    We will work with UCAS, the Office for Students and the sector to improve the quality of information for individuals, informed by the best evidence on the factors that influence the choices people make as they consider their higher education options. Providing applicants with high-quality, impartial, personalised and timely information is essential to ensuring they can make informed decisions when choosing what to study. Recent UCAS reforms aimed at increasing transparency and improving student choice include historic entry grades data, allowing students, along with their teachers and advisers, to see both offer rates and the historic grades of previous successful applicants admitted to a particular course, in addition to the entry requirements published by universities and colleges.

    As we see more students motivated by career prospects, we will work with UCAS and Universities UK to ensure that graduate outcomes information spanning employment rates, earnings and the design and nature of work (currently available on Discover Uni) are available on the UCAS website. We will also work with the Office for Students to ensure their new approach to assessing quality produces clear ratings which will help prospective students understand the quality of the courses on offer, including clear information on how many students successfully complete their courses.”

    The implicit theory of change is straightforward – if we just give students more data about each of the courses, they’ll make better choices, and everyone wins. It’s the same logic that says if Spotify added more metadata to every track (BPM, lyrical themes, engineer credits), you’d finally find the perfect song. I doubt it.

    Pump up the Jam

    If the Department for Education (DfE) was serious about deploying the best evidence on the factors that influence the choices people make, it would know about the research showing that more information doesn’t solve choice overload, because choice overload is a cognitive capacity problem, not an information quality problem.

    Sheena Iyengar and Mark Lepper’s foundational 2000 study in the Journal of Personality and Social Psychology found that when students faced 30 essay topic options versus six options, completion rates dropped from 74 per cent to 60 per cent, and essay quality declined significantly on both content and form measures. That’s a 14 percentage point completion drop from excessive choice alone, and objectively worse work from those who did complete.

    A study on Jam showed customers were ten times more likely to buy when presented with six flavours rather than 24, despite 60 per cent more people initially stopping at the extensive display. More choice is simultaneously more appealing and more demotivating. That’s the paradox.

    CFE Research’s 2018 study for the Office for Students (back when providing useful research for the sector was something it did) laid this all out explicitly for higher education contexts.

    Decision making about HE is challenging because the system is complex and there are lots of alternatives and attributes to consider. Those considering HE are making decisions in conditions of uncertainty, and in these circumstances, individuals tend to rely on convenient but flawed mental shortcuts rather than solely rational criteria. There’s no “one size fits all” information solution, nor is there a shortlist of criteria that those considering HE use.

    The study found that students rely heavily on family, friends, and university visits, and many choices ultimately come down to whether a decision “feels right” rather than rational analysis of data. When asked to explain their decisions retrospectively, students’ explanations differ from their actual decision-making processes – we’re not reliable informants about why we made certain choices.

    A 2015 meta-analysis by Chernev, Böckenholt, and Goodman in the Journal of Consumer Psychology identified the conditions under which choice overload occurs – it’s moderated by choice set complexity, decision task difficulty, and individual differences in decision-making style. Working memory capacity limits humans to processing approximately seven items simultaneously. When options exceed this cognitive threshold, students experience decision paralysis.

    Maximiser students (those seeking the absolute best option) make objectively better decisions but feel significantly worse about them. They selected jobs with 20 per cent higher salaries yet felt less satisfied, more stressed, frustrated, anxious, and regretful than satisficers (those accepting “good enough”). For UK applicants facing tens of thousands of courses, maximisers face a nearly impossible optimisation problem, leading to chronic second-guessing and regret.

    The equality dimension is especially stark. Bailey, Jaggars, and Jenkins’s research found that students in “cafeteria college” systems with abundant disconnected choices “often have difficulty navigating these choices and end up making poor decisions about what programme to enter, what courses to take, and when to seek help.” Only 30 per cent completed three-year degrees within three years.

    First-generation students, students from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, and students of colour are systematically disadvantaged by overwhelming choice because they lack the cultural capital and family knowledge to navigate it effectively.

    The problem once in

    But if unlimited choice at entry is a cognitive overload problem, what happens once students enrol should balance that with flexibility and breadth. Students gain expertise, develop clearer goals, and should have more autonomy to explore and specialise as they progress.

    Except that’s not what’s happening. Financial pressures across the sector are driving institutions to reduce module offerings – exactly when research suggests students need more flexibility, not less.

    The Benefits of Hindsight research on graduate regret says it all. A sizeable share of applicants later wish they’d chosen differently – not usually to avoid higher education, but to pick a different subject or provider. The regret grows once graduates hit the labour market.

    Many students who felt mismatched would have liked to change course or university once enrolled – about three in five undergraduates and nearly two in three graduates among those expressing regret – but didn’t, often because they didn’t know how, thought it was too late, or feared the cost and disruption.

    The report argues there’s “inherent rigidity” in UK provision – a presumption that the initial choice should stick despite evolving interests, new information, and labour-market realities. Students described courses being less practical or less aligned to work than expected, or modules being withdrawn as finances tightened. That dynamic narrows options precisely when students are learning what they do and don’t want.

    Career options become the dominant reason graduates cite for wishing they’d chosen differently. But that’s not because they lacked earnings data at 17. It’s because their interests evolved, they discovered new fields, labour market signals changed, and the rigid structure gave them no way to pivot without starting again.

    The Competition and Markets Authority now explicitly identifies as misleading actions “where an HE provider gives a misleading impression about the number of optional modules that will be available.” Students have contractual rights to the module catalogue promised during recruitment. Yet redundancy rounds repeatedly reduce the size and scope of optional module catalogues for students who remain.

    There’s also an emerging consensus from the research on what actually works for module choice. An LSE analysis found that adding core modules within the home department was associated with higher satisfaction, whereas mandatory modules outside the home department depressed it. Students want depth and coherence in their chosen subject. They also value autonomous choice over breadth options.

    Research repeatedly shows that elective modules are evaluated more positively than required ones (autonomy effects), and interdisciplinary breadth is associated with stronger cross-disciplinary skills and higher post-HE earnings when it’s purposeful and scaffolded.

    What would actually work

    So what does this all suggest?

    As I’ve discussed on the site before, at the University of Helsinki – Finland’s flagship institution with 40,000 students – there’s 32 undergraduate programmes. Within each programme, students must take 90 ECTS credits in their major subject, but the other 75 ECTS credits must come from other programmes’ modules. That’s 42 per cent of the degree as mandatory breadth, but students choose which modules from clear disciplinary categories.

    The structure is simple – six five-credit introductory courses in your subject, then 60 credits of intermediate study with substantial module choice, including proseminars, thesis work, and electives. Add 15 credits for general studies (study planning, digital skills, communication), and you’ve got a degree. The two “modules” (what we’d call stages) get a single grade each on a one-to-five scale, producing a simple, legible transcript.

    Helsinki runs this on a 22.2 to one staff-student ratio, significantly worse than the UK average, after Finland faced €500 million in higher education cuts. It’s not lavishly resourced – it’s structurally efficient.

    Maynooth University in Ireland reduced CAO (their UCAS) entry routes from about 50 to roughly 20 specifically to “ease choice and deflate points inflation.” Students can start with up to four subjects in year one, then move to single major, double major, or major with minor. Switching options are kept open through first year. It’s progressive specialisation – broad exploration early when students have least context, increasing focus as they develop expertise.

    Also elsewhere on the site, Técnico in Lisbon – the engineering and technology faculty of the University of Lisbon – rationalised to 18 undergraduate courses following a student-led reform process. Those 18 courses contain hundreds of what the UK system would call “courses” via module combinations, but without the administrative overhead. They require nine ECTS credits (of 180) in social sciences and humanities for all engineering programmes because “engineers need to be equipped not just to build systems, but to understand the societies they shape.”

    Crucially, students themselves pushed for this structure. They conducted structured interviews, staged debates, and developed reform positions. They wanted shared first years, fewer concurrent modules to reduce cognitive load, more active learning methods, and more curricular flexibility including free electives and minors.

    The University of Vilnius allows up to 25 per cent of the degree as “individual studies” – but it’s structured into clear categories – minors (30 to 60 credits in a secondary field, potentially leading to double diploma), languages (20-plus options with specific registration windows), interdisciplinary modules (curated themes), and cross-institution courses (formal cooperation with arts and music academies). Not unlimited chaos, just structured exploration within categorical choices.

    What all these models share is a recognition that you can have both depth and breadth, structure and flexibility, coherence and exploration – if you design programmes properly. You need roughly 60 to 70 per cent core pathway in the major for depth and satisfaction, 20 to 30 per cent guided electives organised into three to five clear categories per decision point, and maybe 10 to 15 per cent completely free electives.

    The UK’s subject benchmark statements, if properly refreshed (and consolidated down a bit) could provide the regulatory infrastructure for it all. Australia undertook a version of this in 2010 through their Learning and Teaching Academic Standards project, which defined threshold learning outcomes for major discipline groupings through extensive sector consultation (over 420 meetings with more than 6,100 attendees). Those TLOs now underpin TEQSA’s quality regime and enable programme-level approval while protecting autonomy.

    Bigger programmes, better choice

    The white paper’s information provision agenda isn’t wrong – it’s just addressing the wrong problem at the wrong end of the process. Publishing earnings data doesn’t solve cognitive overload from tens of thousands of courses, quality ratings don’t help students whose interests evolve and who need flexibility to pivot, and historic entry grades don’t fix the rigidity that manufactures regret.

    What would actually help is structural reform that the international evidence consistently supports – consolidation to roughly 20 to 40 programmes per institution (aligned with subject benchmark statement areas), with substantial protected module choice within those programmes, organised into clear categories like minors, languages, and interdisciplinary options.

    Some of those groups of individual modules might struggle to recruit if they were whole courses – think music and languages. They may well (and across Europe, do) sustain research-active academics if they could exist in broader structures. Fewer, clearer programmes at entry when students have least context, and more, structured flexibility during the degree when students have expertise to choose wisely.

    The efficiency argument is real – maintaining thousands of separate course codes, each with approval processes, quality assurance, marketing materials, and UCAS coordination is absurd overhead for what’s often just different permutations of the same modules. See also hundreds of “programme leaders” each having to be chased to fill a form in.

    Fewer programme directors with more module convenors beneath them is far more rational. And crucially, modules serve multiple student populations (what other systems would call majors and minors, and students taking breadth from elsewhere), making specialist provision viable even with smaller cohorts.

    The equality case is compelling – guided pathways with structured choice demonstrably improve outcomes for first-in-family students, students of colour, and low-income students, populations that regulators are charged with protecting. If current choice architecture systematically disadvantages exactly these students, that’s not pedagogical preference – it’s a regulatory failure.

    And the evidence on what students actually want once enrolled validates it all – they value depth in their chosen subject, they want autonomous choice over breadth options (not forced generic modules), they benefit from interdisciplinary exposure when it’s purposeful, and they need flexibility to correct course when their goals evolve.

    The white paper could have engaged with any of this. Instead, we get promises to publish more data on UCAS. It’s more Spotify features when what students need is a curated record collection and the freedom to build their own mixtape once they know what they actually like.

    What little reform is coming is informed by the assumption that if students just had better search filters, unlimited streaming would finally work. It won’t.

    Source link

  • What does the K visa mean for China’s search for global talent?

    What does the K visa mean for China’s search for global talent?

    Earlier this month, China’s State Council amended the Regulations on the Administration of the Entry and Exit of Foreigners, highlighting the growing importance of its global talent strategy.

    Effective from October 1, the visa, which will be subject to approval by the authorities of the People’s Republic of China, will be open to international youths who have earned undergraduate or STEM degrees from leading domestic and global research institutions. 

    The visa will also be open to young international professionals engaged in education and research in STEM fields.

    As per reports, compared with ordinary visa categories in China, the K visa is designed to provide greater convenience for holders through multiple entries, longer validity, and extended stay durations.

    We see it as a powerful signal that China is not only open for business but is actively and competitively seeking to attract the world’s best and brightest minds
    Charles Sun, China Education International

    It will also create opportunities for exchanges and collaboration across education, science, technology, culture, business, and entrepreneurship with applications no longer needing sponsorship from a local enterprise, relying instead on the applicant’s age, educational background, and work experience.

    “We see it as a powerful signal that China is not only open for business but is actively and competitively seeking to attract the world’s best and brightest minds,” Charles Sun, founder and managing director of China Education International, told The PIE News.

    “A key attractive feature is the inclusion of provisions for spouses and children. Making it easier for families to relocate together is perhaps one of the most important factors in convincing top-tier talent to make a long-term commitment to a new country.”

    According to data from Studyportals, this move comes at a time when interest in pursuing Artificial Intelligence degrees in the US is declining, while interest in studying the same in China is on the rise.

    “When comparing January to July 2025 to the same period in 2024, relative demand for artificial intelligence degrees (on-campus Bachelor’s and Master’s and PhDs) in the US on Studyportals dropped 25% year-over-year, while interest in AI degrees in China rose 88%,” read a report shared by Studyportals.

    “Both Beijing and Washington are racing to secure technological leadership in the  ‘Race on AI’. According to Harvey Nash “Digital Leadership Report 2025” artificial intelligence has created the world’s biggest and fastest-developing tech skills shortage in over 15 years. This shortage has created a race for talent, with companies like Meta reportedly handing out $100m sign-on bonuses to win top talent.”

    While interest in pursuing such degrees in China is growing amid its global talent push, the US remains a powerhouse in the field.

    International students account for 70% of all full-time graduate enrolments in AI-related programs and make up more than half of all international students in the country enrolled in STEM disciplines.

    “Nations that succeed in drawing the brightest minds and in creating an environment for innovative business to thrive, will not just advance their economies, they will command the future of technology, security, and influence,” stated Edwin Rest, CEO of Studyportals.

    “International students do not only bring revenue to local economies and soft power, they also fuel innovation, startups, and job creation.”  

    Source link

  • How Marketers are Winning With AI-Powered Search

    How Marketers are Winning With AI-Powered Search

    Search Has Changed. Has Your Strategy?

    Paid search marketing has always played a central role in how students find and engage with colleges and universities. But how students search and what they expect from the experience has fundamentally changed. Today’s Modern Learners are digital-first and highly discerning, which raises the stakes for any higher education marketing strategy, especially when it comes to search visibility. Modern Learners are not just typing in keywords; they’re asking complex questions and increasingly expect fast, relevant answers that feel tailored to their individual goals.

    In this new reality, search is no longer just a tool; it is your institution’s reputational front door. For many students, the first impression comes from your search presence—whether your institution appears at all, and what shows up when it does. This moment shapes how they perceive your brand and can influence their decision to engage further.

    With advancements such as Google’s AI Overview and AI Mode, the line between paid and organic results is disappearing. These features pull from multiple sources to deliver a single, curated response designed to satisfy intent rather than merely match keywords. This means your search strategy can no longer operate in silos. Paid and organic efforts must work in tandem, and both need to be structured around how students actually search, not how institutions are used to marketing.

    Yet, many institutions still rely on legacy paid search strategies that are fragmented and overly focused on isolated keywords. These outdated tactics often miss the nuance of modern search behavior, leading to underperformance and missed opportunities.

    This is especially critical during a time when marketing budgets are under pressure and visibility is harder to earn. To remain competitive, higher ed marketers need to reimagine paid search not as a list of bid terms or ad placements, but as a strategic channel that influences both enrollment outcomes and institutional reputation. What’s at stake isn’t just performance. It’s how your brand is perceived in the channels that matter most.

    Intent Is the New Currency of Paid Search 

    Paid search has long been valued for its ability to deliver results quickly and cost-effectively. But in today’s environment, true efficiency means more than just driving volume through simply targeting the right keywords. Today, successful campaigns are built around understanding and aligning with the why behind a student’s search, not just the what.

    That’s where intent becomes essential. Intent reveals what a prospective student is trying to accomplish, what stage of the decision process they’re in and what they expect from their educational experiences. With today’s AI-powered platforms, marketers can now interpret and respond to this intent with greater precision than ever before.

    Modern tools like Performance Max—Google’s fully automated, goal-based ad campaign—and Broad Match—its flexible keyword matching option—draw from a range of real-time signals like device type, browsing behavior, location, and time of day. These platforms use that context to determine not just who to reach, but how and when to deliver the most relevant message.

    This shift is especially important when engaging adult and online learners. These prospective students often search in short, focused bursts across devices and platforms. Intent-based targeting helps ensure your message appears at the right moment, when a prospective student is most open to taking the next step.

    The benefit goes beyond smarter targeting. Institutions that embrace intent-based strategies often see improved efficiency, stronger lead quality and a higher return on investment. More importantly, they’re creating a search experience that meets students where they are.

    For higher education marketers, this requires a mindset shift. Paid search is no longer about chasing keywords or building lengthy lists of terms. It’s about reading behavior, responding with context and building relevance. Those who adapt to this new model will be better positioned to influence outcomes and build lasting brand reputations.

    Why Over-Segmentation Hurts AI Performance 

    Aligning with student intent requires more than new tools—it requires rethinking how campaigns are structured. That’s where over-segmentation becomes a critical barrier. Not long ago, higher education marketing professionals found success by keeping campaigns tightly focused. You’d build detailed audience segments, carefully tailor your messaging and control every aspect of targeting. It worked well in a time when more control often meant better results.

    That playbook doesn’t hold up in today’s AI-driven paid media environment. In fact, over segmentation actively holds your campaigns back.

    AI performs best when it’s given space to learn and optimize. It needs strong signals, such as first-party data, clear conversion goals and smart bidding strategies, to work effectively. Overly narrow targeting and rigid parameters create inefficiencies and limit performance.

    That’s why marketers should focus less on segmentation and more on supplying clear, meaningful data that helps AI reach the right students and drive outcomes like increased inquiries and stronger application intent. 

    At the same time, student journeys have changed. Modern Learners aren’t moving through the funnel in linear paths. Ther research process is fast-paced and shaped by real-life pressures like work schedules, finances and family responsibilities.  

    Prospective students don’t just want more content—they want information that’s relevant to their needs and arrives when it matters most. Modern paid media strategies must move beyond simple demographics to focus on behaviors, intent and how students search. 

    Transforming Strategy Into Results

    As search evolves, so too must the role of the higher ed marketer. In today’s AI-driven landscape, students are exploring their options in more nuanced ways. To keep pace, marketing strategies must shift from keyword-first thinking to approaches that prioritize context, content and the student journey. Here’s how forward-thinking teams are putting that into action:

    Smarter, Simpler Campaign Structures for Effective Paid Search Strategy

    AI works best when it has strong signals to learn from. That means it’s often more effective to group campaigns by intent rather than breaking them up by individual programs or markets. For example, grouping similar programs together can help your budget go further by focusing on where there’s actual search demand, even if it means less control over specific program-level results.

    Content That Works Harder

    When you’re working in a keywordless environment, your content does the targeting. Search platforms rely on your landing pages, headlines and descriptions to understand what you offer and who you want to reach. That’s why clear, relevant content is critical.  The schools seeing the best results are the ones creating content that aligns with what students are actually searching for. 

    Making the Most of First-Party Data 

    Performance Max campaigns are especially powerful when they’re fueled by high-quality first-party data. Feeding in enrollment signals, audience segments and behavioral insights allows AI to deliver more personalized outreach across platforms. This enhances reach and efficiency without compromising targeting precision.

    Scaling with AI Max and Broad Match 

    New tools like AI Max are opening doors to even more automation. AI Max combines broad match, keywordless targeting and AI-generated creative to help schools reach students in AI-driven placements. Paired with the right paid search strategy, Broad Match helps your content appear in the natural, conversational queries students actually use. 

    Aligning Paid and Organic Strategies  

    The strongest higher education marketing strategies bring paid search marketing and organic search marketing under one roof. When teams align on landing pages, keywords and messaging, both channels amplify each other—driving more qualified traffic, improving conversions and boosting visibility across search results. This gives AI clearer context and helps create a smoother experience for students. 

    Continuous Testing and Learning 

    AI doesn’t mean putting things on autopilot. The best results come when marketers stay involved—testing creative, improving landing pages and updating their audience signals. All of that helps the AI learn and get better over time. 

    When campaigns are built around clear intent and fueled by rich data and relevant content, AI moves beyond automation—it becomes a strategic partner. This empowers institutions to reach the right students with precision, reduce wasted spend and create meaningful connections that drive enrollment success. 

    Harness AI to Amplify Your Team’s Impact 

    AI isn’t here to replace your marketing team. Instead, it helps them work smarter and focus on what really matters. AI tools take care of the routine tasks like adjusting bids, testing creative and targeting audiences in real time. This gives your marketers more time to concentrate on strategy, keeping your brand consistent, understanding student journeys and improving conversions.

    This partnership between marketers and AI is the future of higher ed marketing. Adapting your strategy to today’s search landscape helps strengthen both your enrollment pipeline and your brand foundation.

    At EducationDynamics, we think differently about AI’s potential to power higher education marketing teams by combining creativity, data-driven insight and technology to drive meaningful growth.

    This is more than just a new way to run campaigns. It’s a shift toward meeting students more effectively—aligning enrollment and brand goals in a way that builds trust, boosts visibility and drives lasting success.

    Source link

  • What to Do When Your Job Search Stalls (opinion)

    What to Do When Your Job Search Stalls (opinion)

    Graduating into a tight job market can feel very daunting. You’ve invested years into your education and training, built strong skill sets, and followed the advice given by mentors and peers to make yourself competitive. So why aren’t the offers coming?

    If you find yourself in this situation, it’s normal to feel discouraged, demoralized or unsure of what to do next. Below are some steps you can take to help jump-start your job hunt by evaluating what’s working and identifying what might need adjusting so you can move forward and maintain momentum.

    Step 1: Evaluate Your Job Search Strategy

    Before making any major changes, start by examining your current approach.

    Are you submitting lots of job applications but not hearing back? This could be a sign that your application materials need refinement. Ask yourself: Are my CV or résumé and cover letter polished and tailored to each role? Am I clearly highlighting how my skills align with the job description? If you’re unsure, reach out to a professional in your field, mentor or career coach to review these materials and provide feedback.

    Are you getting interviews but not progressing to the next round or receiving final offers? This may signal that your interview approach needs improvement. Using structured interview methods, such as the STAR method (situation, task, action, result), can help you learn how to better organize your responses to highlight your experiences in a more focused manner. Practicing with a mentor or even a peer can help you identify gaps in preparation or missteps in how you present yourself. Many universities offer free career services, including mock interviews, to their students and alumni.

    In a competitive market, job searching also requires proactive strategies beyond submitting applications. I often see job seekers hyperfixate on tweaking applications that are already strong when their time would be better spent networking. Reach out to professionals, schedule informational interviews and make connections that help you uncover hidden opportunities and potentially receive internal referrals. These conversations can also help you better understand your target roles and the broader job landscape.

    Step 2: Broaden Your Search Strategically

    If networking and refining your materials isn’t enough, it may be time to broaden the types of jobs you’re considering. This doesn’t mean giving up on your long-term career aspirations; instead it means exploring bridge or adjacent roles that can help you stay on track while you continue to grow professionally. While bridge roles may not be your first choice, they can support future career moves by helping you gain relevant work experience, build new skills and expand your professional network.

    One way to identify bridge roles is to explore LinkedIn profiles of alumni and professionals in your field. Examining the positions they held after graduating and where they are now can help expand your list of possible bridge roles. Take this a step further during informational interviews by asking professionals about their knowledge of bridge roles. For example, a person targeting a medical science liaison role might ask an MSL in an informational interview, “I have been applying to MSL roles without any success; what other roles could help me work toward this path?” They might learn of opportunities in medical communications, clinical research or technical sales, positions that develop many of the same skills valued in MSL roles and often done by professionals before landing an MSL position.

    Bridge jobs can also provide financial stability while allowing you to build your skills. For example, I work with many students who aim to move directly into industry as scientists. However, if the job search stalls, an academic postdoc can be a strategic choice, especially when it aligns with building specific skills and provides much-needed income. One graduate I advised discovered through informational interviews that he would need additional expertise in advanced sequencing techniques to be competitive for the R&D roles he was targeting. He chose to take a two-year academic postdoc with a clear plan to build those exact skills, positioning himself for a stronger transition into industry while providing financial stability for his family. A postdoc can offer time to deepen your technical expertise, build a more competitive research portfolio and prepare for roles in biotech, R&D or other sectors.

    If you pursue a postdoc as a bridge role, be transparent with the postdoc mentor about your intentions. Take the earlier example of the graduate pursuing industry R&D roles. He was clear in communicating both the specific skills he needed to gain (RNA sequencing) and the time frame he would commit (two years). That kind of clarity helps establish shared expectations and ensures the postdoc experience is mutually beneficial for both you and the lab.

    Another important strategy for broadening your job search is to reflect carefully on your needs versus preferences. Needs are the nonnegotiables, such as visa requirements, caregiving responsibilities or a two-income household situation. A person’s preferences might include living in a specific city, having a certain job title or starting at a particular salary. While all of these are important to consider, being flexible on preferences can help you uncover new possibilities. Ask yourself: Are there geographic areas I’ve ruled out that might be worth reconsidering? Could I shift my salary expectations temporarily to get a foot in the door? Widening your criteria doesn’t mean compromising your goals; it’s a strategic step in reaching them.

    Step 3: Know When to Pivot

    If you’ve been searching consistently and not gaining traction, it may be time for a bigger strategic shift. Sometimes we become so focused on our initial ideas about our career that we overlook other options that could be equally or more fulfilling. Ask yourself: Could there be paths that better match my strengths or allow me to grow in ways my original plan didn’t? Have I overlooked opportunities that may better align with my values, interests or lifestyle goals as they are now?

    In the book Designing Your Life: How to Build a Well-Lived, Joyful Life (Knopf, 2016), authors Bill Burnett and Dave Evans suggest that being stuck can be a powerful launchpad for creativity and personal growth. They encourage readers to approach career planning as a design problem that benefits from curiosity, experimentation and iteration. One recommended exercise to stimulate curiosity is to brainstorm multiple career paths for yourself. Once you have your list of possible futures, you can then explore the most promising options through research and conversations with professionals in those roles.

    If you need help identifying new directions, the individual development plan can be a useful tool. Platforms such as myIDP or ImaginePhD offer exercises and assessments to help you identify your skills, interests and values and pinpoint career paths aligned with your results. These platforms also include resources to guide you toward researching and setting goals to reach a new path.

    Importantly, pivoting doesn’t mean giving up. It means recognizing that there are many viable paths available and you may end up at a better destination than originally planned.

    Managing the Emotions of Job Searching

    Job searching can take a real emotional toll, especially when it feels like you’re doing everything right and not seeing results. Many students feel intense pressure to secure a job after graduation, and when that doesn’t happen quickly, feelings of inadequacy can creep in. These feelings can make it harder to ask for help, reach out for support or even acknowledge how difficult the process has been. When the process feels overwhelming, shift your focus to what you can control. Set small, achievable goals each week to keep your momentum going during a slow-moving search. For example, set a goal of applying to a defined number of jobs, completing a short online course to build a new skill or attending a virtual or local networking event in your field.

    One trend I’ve noticed is that some students reach a point in which they are tempted to pay someone to “fix” the problem. If you are considering investing in paid career coaching, do your homework first. This should be a thoughtful decision, not an emotional reaction driven by frustration. Some paid coaches and services are legitimately helpful, but others overpromise results and prey on frustrated job seekers. Ask about outcomes, get referrals and make sure that their services align with your goals.

    Take Your Next Steps

    After reading this, you may have several new ideas or directions you are considering. To avoid feeling overwhelmed, start by writing down one microgoal you can complete in the next few days that is simple but still meaningful. For example, you might set up a meeting with a mentor, revise a section of your résumé or research a new role. Choose something that is doable and aligned with where you want to go. Small steps like these can really jump-start your progress.

    Even if it’s not going according to your original timeline, remember that the job search is a dynamic process. By keeping an eye on your long-term goals but remaining flexible, you’ll be open to the roles and experiences that can help you get there. Most importantly, give yourself credit for working the problem, pushing forward and continuing to put yourself out there.

    Raquel Y. Salinas is the assistant dean of career and alumni engagement at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center UTHealth Houston Graduate School of Biomedical Sciences. She is a member of the Graduate Career Consortium, an organization providing an international voice for graduate-level career and professional development leaders.

    Source link

  • USF Ditches Search Firm That Helped U of Florida Pick Ono

    USF Ditches Search Firm That Helped U of Florida Pick Ono

    SP&A previously helped UF select Santa Ono, a former University of Michigan president.

    Bryan Bedder/Stringer/Getty Images

    The University of South Florida has dropped SP&A Executive Search as the firm leading its presidential search, The Tampa Bay Times reported Tuesday. The move comes after the Florida Board of Governors rejected the candidate that SP&A had helped the University of Florida pick for its top job: former University of Michigan president Santa Ono, whom the UF board unanimously approved.

    Ono’s rejection came after conservatives mounted a campaign opposing him, citing his past support of diversity, equity and inclusion and his alleged failure to protect Jewish students.

    After that failed hire, Rick Scott, a Republican U.S. senator representing Florida, blamed SP&A, telling Jewish Insider that the firm didn’t sufficiently vet Ono.

    SP&A describes itself on its website as a “boutique woman- and minority-owned executive search firm.” Scott Yenor—a Boise State University political science professor who resigned from the University of West Florida’s Board of Trustees in April after implying that only straight white men should be in political leadership—highlighted that description in an essay he co-wrote, titled “How did a leftist almost become president of the University of Florida?”

    “We can only speculate about how the deck was stacked,” Yenor and Steven DeRose, a UF alum and business executive, wrote. “SP&A colluded with campus stakeholders, especially faculty, when they were retained. Together, they developed the criteria necessary to hire a Santa Ono.”

    They also pointed out that SP&A was leading the USF search. SP&A didn’t respond to Inside Higher Ed’s requests for comment Wednesday.

    USF didn’t provide an interview or answer written questions. In a June 20 statement, USF trustee and presidential search committee chair Mike Griffin said the university was now using the international firm Korn Ferry.

    “We value the expertise of our initial search consultant and thank them for their engagement,” Griffin wrote.

    Source link

  • High school sleuths search fish guts for clues to plastic pollution

    High school sleuths search fish guts for clues to plastic pollution

    NEW YORK — The fish, glassy-eyed and inert, had been dead for decades. Yet its belly held possible clues to an environmental crisis unfolding in real time.   

    Forceps in hand, Mia Fricano, a high school junior, was about to investigate. She turned over the fish, a bluegill, and slid in a blade, before extracting its gastrointestinal tract. Then, she carried the fish innards to a beaker filled with a solution that would dissolve the biological material, revealing if there were any tiny particles of plastic — known as microplastics — inside.

    Mia and two other high schoolers working alongside her in a lab this spring were part of a program at the American Museum of Natural History designed to give young people hands-on experience in professional science. Called the Science Research Mentoring Program, or SRMP (pronounced “shrimp”), the program enrolls roughly 60 high school juniors and seniors each year who collaborate with scientists on a research project. 

    Mia and her peers were matched with Ryan Thoni, an ichthyologist and curatorial associate in the museum’s division of vertebrate zoology. Thoni’s project to gather information on when and how microplastics began to enter the environment relied on the museum’s vast collection of fish specimens dating from more than a century ago — some 3.2 million in total.

    Concern about the tiny pieces of plastic debris has grown in the last few years, along with early-stage research on the health risks they pose. The particles are found in human blood, breast milk and even the brain — and in animals, including, as it turned out, nearly all the fish in Thoni’s lab.    

    “It was kind of shocking to see just how many we did find,” Mia said later. “We weren’t expecting to find more than two to three per fish but in some fish, we would find over 15.” Specimens from the 1970s or earlier were less likely to contain high levels of microplastic, more than three or so pieces, and fish near urban centers seemed to have more of the plastics, on average, than fish from less populated areas. 

    “It really does make you realize just how much the environment has been affected,” said Mia. “There hasn’t been a lot of research on it yet,” she added. “Our project might be able to help future people who are also doing research on microplastics.”  

    Related: Want to read more about how climate change is shaping education? Subscribe to our free newsletter.

    SRMP, started in 2009, is operating at a time when the federal government is eliminating fellowships and other support for early career scientists, and defunding scientific research broadly. That both amplifies the need for, and complicates the work of, programs like this one, said Amanda Townley, executive director of the nonprofit National Center for Science Education. Over the last 15 years in particular, such programs have played a big role in giving students a chance to do the kind of applied science that is rarely available in K-12 classrooms because of money and time constraints, she said. 

    “Museums, university extensions, sometimes libraries, have really done this tremendous job of creating spaces for high school and younger students to engage with scientists doing science,” said Townley. “Those museums, libraries and universities are all under attack.” She added: “We’re going to see a generational impact.” 

    While the American Museum of Natural History has received some federal government funding, the SRMP program’s money comes from private foundations and individual donors, with additional support from the New York City Council. Students in SRMP participate in a summer institute in August, when they learn basics like how to investigate research questions. Then they spend two afternoons a week during the school year on their projects. 

    Each student receives a stipend, $2,500 over the course of the year. “It’s really important for high school students to know their time is valuable,” said Maria Strangas, the museum’s assistant director of science research experiences. “They are doing something here that is really useful for the researchers; it’s an education program, but they aren’t the only ones who are benefiting.” 

    Students from New York City schools that partner with the museum can apply, as well as those who have participated in programs with the museum in the past. SRMP has also spawned a network of about 30 similar programs across the city, with institutions including Brooklyn College, Bronx River Alliance and many others participating. 

    In the lab on the sixth floor of the museum, Mia, who attends the New York City Museum School, cleaned out a beaker, while Yuki Chen, a senior at Central Park East High School, sat at a metal table, dissecting a pike. Thoni inserted a slide containing material harvested from one of the fish under a microscope, and pointed out a few microplastics, which looked like threads. 

    Ryan Thoni of the American Museum of Natural History, right, with high schoolers Mia Fricano (center) and Freyalise Matasar. Credit: Caroline Preston/The Hechinger Report

    Freyalise Matasar, a junior at the Ethical Culture Fieldston School in the Bronx, plucked a white sucker fish from a jar. She said SRMP had altered her career trajectory. Before the program, she was considering studying journalism in college, but her experience this year persuaded her to focus on engineering and data science instead. 

    “I have totally fallen in love with science,” she said. “It’s been an amazing experience to see what professional science looks like — and more than just see it, to be a part of it.”

    Freyalise said she wanted to build those skills in order to help fight climate change, perhaps by working on weather models to predict climate risks and ideally spur people to action. “It’s the biggest problem faced by our generation. It’s inescapable and unignorable, no matter how much people try,” she said. “It’s everyone’s responsibility to do what they can to fight it.”   

    Related: So much for saving the planet. Science careers, and many others, evaporate for class of 2025

    Microplastics contribute to climate change in several ways, including by potentially disrupting oceans’ ability to sequester carbon and by directly emitting greenhouse gases.

    Interest in climate science among young people is growing, even as the federal government tries to zero out funding for it. Other climate-related topics SRMP students explored this year included the climate on exoplanets, the ecology of sea anemones and aquatic wildlife conservation in New York City.

    Sometimes the fish dissections were gross: Mia, who plans to study biology and machine learning in college, sliced into one large fish to find poorly preserved, rotten innards — and a major stink. Sometimes they provided a lesson beyond pollution: Yuki identified a small pickerel inside a larger one. (Pickerels prey even on members of their own species, the students learned.) 

    The scientists in the program, most of whom are postdoctoral fellows, are trained on how to be effective mentors. “Scientists are often not trained in mentorship; it’s something that people pick up organically seeing good or bad examples in their own lives,” said Strangas. “A lot of it comes down to: ‘Think about the impact you want to have, think about the impact you don’t want to have, think about the power dynamic at play, and what this student in front of you wants to get out of it.’”  

    Thoni earned rave reviews from the students, who said he ensured they understood each step of the research process without being patronizing. 

    Thoni’s next steps include working to publish the microplastics research, which could earn the students their first co-authorship in a scientific journal. “Aside from forgetting to put on gloves,” he said in a playful jab at one student, “they can operate this machine on their own. They do science.”

    Contact editor Caroline Preston at 212-870-8965, via Signal at CarolineP.83 or on email at [email protected]. 

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

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

    Join us today.

    Source link