This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.
Lessons In Leadership is an ongoing series in which K-12 principals and superintendents share their best practices as well as challenges overcome. For more installments, click here.
Umatilla School District — a 1,500-student school system in eastern Oregon with a 72% Latino student population, 54% English learners and a 45% student poverty rate — is setting the standard for effective, streamlined data management.
As an educator in the district since 2000 and superintendent since 2007, Superintendent Heidi Sipe has seen Umatilla’s data systems evolve from pivot tables and spreadsheets to a mix of digital platforms tracking myriad data points for each student.
Heidi Sipe
Permission granted by Heidi Sipe
Part of the key, she says, is ensuring that there’s a common platform that consolidates student data points from other tools being used. This allows educators to look for trends and actionable data so they can identify students who may be at risk or need intervention plans, Sipe said.
“We can check the efficacy of those supports and see if we need to make an adjustment or if we need to keep that going for that student to ensure their success,” Sipe told K-12 Dive.
We recently caught up with Sipe to learn more about how the district uses that data to organize interventions, manages data anxiety, and helps parents understand the numbers.
Editor’s Note: The following interview has been edited for brevity and clarity.
K-12 DIVE: For many people, the idea of using data and processing data can be kind of daunting. When you’re introducing any sort of data tool to educators or school leaders or even parents, how do you get them comfortable with the idea of working with that data if they have any sort of anxiety about it or are overwhelmed?
HEDI SIPE: I think part of the overwhelm is it’s kind of “Data, data everywhere, and not a drop to use.”
The data points we’re using every month in our data team meetings are attendance — we track historical and last 30 days — and we also track disciplinary incidents, whether it be referrals or in-school suspension, out-of-school suspension, detentions.
We also track grades in students’ core classes, as well as overall GPA and course pass rate. And then we track our MAP data in English reading, Spanish reading, mathematics, and English language usage. We track DIBELS at the elementary level — K-3 — for progress monitoring of students in their literacy development. We use a dyslexia screener through DIBELS, and then we also have some of our intervention programs that again are supplying more data.
So when we have all of those various pieces at play, it can be really hard for a teacher to go platform to platform to platform to check the status of a student. But when all of that’s consolidated into one place, it goes from a situation of overwhelm to a quick snapshot based off of all those various pieces, which helps us make better-informed decisions for students.
Let’s say you’re the classroom educator or the school principal, and you see in your data tools that a student is chronically absent or disengaged or their test scores are slipping, what are the first steps that you then take to put that data into action and figure out how to help that student?
SIPE: We have a color-coded intervention list. So, anything that’s green, a teacher team can assign a student without any admin approval. If they’ve tried at least a few green interventions and they have monitored those for at least a couple of months, then they can move up and assign an orange level intervention, again without any admin approval.
If that’s not working, they can assign a red intervention, and that would require admin approval. And then we also have various interventions where the admin can add it, and those are gray in our category. That’s things like an attendance letter to parents, a home visit an admin has done, etc., so the staff knows, “OK, here’s what the admin’s already doing for the student.”
There may be nursing services and things like that which are happening, and they can also refer students for those types of things. If they notice a student is, perhaps, chronically absent, but it’s a student who keeps having ear infections or earaches, we have a partnership with a local doctor. If the parents are participating in that partnership, we can actually run the student to the doctor during school hours, with the parents’ permission, and make sure the kids are getting to those appointments and that we’re able to work with parents as partners in supporting that student and getting the medical attention they need so they can stay in school.
Those types of partnerships happen because we can see that data. Those types of partnerships happen because families and teachers know these are the interventions available, and they can either request them from us or we can assign them. That’s really a helpful tool.
It’s also really empowering to staff to be able to make those decisions. They’re working with the kids every day. They know what’s up.
When staff — whether it’s school and district leaders or the classroom educators — are working with parents to help them make sense of their children’s data, what are some of the most effective ways they can help them do that?
SIPE: So, my children are grown now. However, when they were younger, whatever they were experiencing seemed normal to me at the time, and wherever they were at seemed normal to me, because I wasn’t in any way comparing them to another child.
But it’s another thing to realize, “Oh, goodness. My child’s really behind in this,” because they can see that comparative data.
That helped me get more onboard when one of my children needed some interventions. And then it was very helpful for me to see those interventions work and see that child really take off as a really strong reader after those interventions. The teachers were able to show me, “Hang on, this is different than peers,” and then, “Here’s what we’re going to do about it.”
That really helped me build trust in the teachers who were supporting my child.
You mentioned your district is primarily immigrant students. When it comes to working with data and helping parents make use of that data, are there particular steps you’ve found useful for communicating data to parents whose home language might not be English?
SIPE: Graphs and charts are universal. It’s really helpful to show a family the picture of the growth trajectory, to show them the growth line of other students in that grade level in that school versus the national average versus their own student.
It’s really helpful to drive home the point of “Look how much they’ve grown” or “Wait a minute. We have real concerns.” It just really backs up what the translators are explaining to parents in those meetings. Especially when we can see those positive growth trajectories, that’s just really comforting to parents to see that their child is on track.
And even if they’re not where they need to be for achievement yet, if they’re growing at or above their peers, we know they’re going to hit that growth trajectory or that growth target, and they’re on the right trajectory. That’s good for parents to hear.
Opinion Piece by Dean Hoke — Small College America and Senior Fellow, The Sagamore Institute
A Personal Concern About the Future of Public Education
It’s impossible to ignore the rising level of criticism directed at our nation’s public schools. On cable news, social media channels, political stages, and in school board meetings, teachers and administrators have become easy targets. Public schools are accused of being ineffective, mismanaged, outdated, or, in some corners, ideologically dangerous. Some commentators openly champion the idea of a fully privatized K–12 system, sidelining the public institutions that have educated the vast majority of Americans for generations.
For those of us who have spent our lives in and around education, this rhetoric feels deeply personal. Public schools aren’t an abstraction. They are the places where many of us began our education, where our children discovered their strengths, where immigrants found belonging, where students with disabilities received support, and where caring adults changed the trajectory of young lives.
Behind every one of those moments stood a teacher.
Amid this turbulence, there is one group of institutions still quietly doing the hard work of preparing teachers: small private nonprofit colleges.
Small Private Colleges: An Overlooked Cornerstone of Teacher Preparation
Despite the noise surrounding public education, small private colleges remain committed to the one resource every school depends on: well-prepared, community-rooted teachers.
They rarely make national headlines. They don’t enroll tens of thousands of students. But they are woven into the civic and human infrastructure of their regions—especially in the Midwest, South, and rural America.
This reality became even clearer during a recent episode of Small College America, in which I interviewed Dr. Michael Scarlett, Professor of Education at Augustana College. His insights provide an insider’s view into the challenges—and the opportunities—facing teacher preparation today. Note to hear the entire interview click here https://smallcollegeamerica.transistor.fm/28
I. The Teacher Shortage: A Structural Crisis
Much has been written about the teacher shortage, but too often the conversation focuses on symptoms rather than causes. Here are the forces shaping the crisis.
1. Young people are turning away from teaching
Data from the ACT show that only 4% of students express interest in becoming teachers—down from 11% in the late 1990s. Bachelor’s degrees in education have fallen nearly 50% since the 1970s. Surveys show that fewer than 1 in 5 adults would recommend teaching as a career.
The message is clear: Teaching is meaningful, but many no longer see it as sustainable.
As Dr. Scarlett told us: “The pipeline simply is not as wide as it needs to be.”
Recent data offers a glimmer of hope: teacher preparation enrollment grew 12% nationally between 2018 and 2022. However, this modest rebound is almost entirely driven by alternative certification programs, which increased enrollment by 20%, while traditional college-based programs grew by only 4%. This disparity underscores a critical concern: the very programs that provide comprehensive, relationship-based preparation—including those at small colleges—are not recovering at the same rate as faster, less intensive alternatives.
2. Burnout and attrition have overtaken new entrants
The pandemic accelerated an already-existing national trend: teachers are leaving faster than new ones are entering.
Reasons include:
Student behavior challenges
Standardized testing pressure
Emotional fatigue
Inequities across districts
Lack of respect
Political and social media hostility
As Scarlett notes, these realities weigh heavily on early-career teachers: “What new teachers face today goes far beyond content knowledge. They face inequities, discipline issues, emotional exhaustion… and they’re expected to do it all.”
3. Alternative certification can’t fill the gap
Alternative routes help—but they cannot replace the traditional college-based pipeline. Many alt-cert teachers receive less pedagogical training and leave sooner.
Scarlett captures the trend: “Teaching has always attracted people later in life… we’ve definitely seen an uptick.”
And while alternative routes have seen growth in recent years—increasing 20% between 2018 and 2021—this expansion has not translated into solving the shortage. As of 2025, approximately 1 in 8 teaching positions nationwide remains either unfilled or filled by teachers not fully certified for their assignments. The shortcut approach cannot substitute for comprehensive preparation.
“The national teacher shortage is real… and retention is just as big a challenge as recruitment.” — Dr. Michael Scarlett
II. The Quiet Backbone: How Small Private Colleges Sustain the Teacher Workforce
Small private colleges graduate fewer teachers than large public institutions, but their impact is disproportionately large—especially in rural and suburban America.
1. They prepare the teachers who stay
About 786 private nonprofit colleges offer undergraduate education degrees—representing roughly 20% of all teacher preparation institutions in the United States. Together, they produce approximately 25,119 graduates per year, an average of 32 per institution.
These numbers may seem modest, but these graduates disproportionately:
Student-teach locally
Earn licensure in their home state
Take jobs within 30 miles of campus
Stay in the profession longer
Public schools desperately need these ‘homegrown’ teachers who understand the communities they serve.
2. Small colleges excel at the one thing teaching requires most: mentoring
Teacher preparation is not transactional. It is relational. And this is where private colleges excel. Scarlett put it plainly: “Close relationships with our students, small classes, a lot of direct supervision… we nurture them throughout the program.” In a profession that relies heavily on modeling and mentorship, this matters enormously.
One of the most striking differences: “Full professors… working with the students in the classrooms and out in field experiences. Other institutions outsource that.”
This is not a trivial distinction. Faculty supervision affects:
Preparedness
Confidence
Classroom management
Retention
Where larger institutions rely on external supervisors, small colleges invest the time and human capital to do it right.
4. They serve the regions hit hardest by shortages
Rural districts have the highest percentage of unfilled teaching positions. Many rural counties rely almost exclusively on a nearby private college to produce elementary teachers, special education teachers, and early childhood educators.
When a small college stops offering education degrees, it often leaves entire counties without a sustainable teacher pipeline.
5. They diversify the educator workforce
Small colleges—especially faith-based, minority-serving, or mission-driven institutions—often enroll first-generation students, students of color, adult career-changers, and bilingual students. These educators disproportionately fill shortage fields.
“What we have here is special… students understand the value of a small college experience.” — Dr. Michael Scarlett
III. Should Small Colleges Keep Offering Education Degrees? The Economic Question
Let’s be direct: Teacher preparation is not a high-margin program.
Costs include:
Intensive field supervision
CAEP or state accreditation
High-touch advising
Small cohort sizes
Education majors also often have lower net tuition revenue compared to business or STEM.
So why should a small college continue offering a program that is expensive and not highly profitable?
Because the alternative is far worse—for the institution and for the region it serves.
1. Cutting teacher-prep weakens a college’s identity and mission
Many private colleges were founded to prepare teachers. Teacher education is often central to institutional mission, community trust, donor expectations, and alumni identity.
Removing education programs sends the message that the college is stepping away from public service.
2. Teacher-prep strengthens community partnerships
Education programs open doors to:
District partnerships
Dual-credit pipelines
Grow Your Own initiatives
Nonprofit and state grants
Alumni involvement
These relationships benefit the entire institution, not just the education department.
3. Education majors support other academic areas
Teacher-prep indirectly strengthens:
Psychology
English
Sciences
Social sciences
Music and arts
When teacher education disappears, these majors often shrink too.
4. The societal mission outweighs the limited revenue
There are moments when institutional decisions must be driven by mission, not margins. Producing teachers is one of them.
5. Addressing concerns about program quality and scale
Some critics question whether small programs can match the resources and diversity of perspectives available at large universities. This is a fair concern—and the answer is that small colleges offer something different, not lesser.
Graduation and licensure pass rates at small private colleges consistently match or exceed those of larger institutions. What smaller programs may lack in scale, they compensate for through personalized mentorship, faculty continuity, and deep community integration. These are not peripheral benefits—they are the very qualities that predict long-term teacher retention.
IV. Why Students Still Choose Teaching—and Why Small Colleges Are Ideal for Them
Despite all the challenges, students who pursue teaching are deeply motivated by purpose.
Scarlett described his own journey: “I wanted to do something important… something that gives back to society.”
Many education majors choose the field because:
A teacher changed their life
They want meaningful work
They value community and service
They thrive in supportive, intimate learning environments
This makes small colleges the natural home for future teachers.
V. What Small Colleges Can Do to Strengthen Their Programs
Below are the strategies that are working across the country.
1. Build Grow Your Own (GYO) teacher pipelines
Districts increasingly partner to:
Co-fund tuition
Support paraeducator-to-teacher pathways
Provide paid residencies
Guarantee interviews for graduates
2. Develop dual-credit and “teacher cadet” high school programs
Scarlett sees this as a major reason for hope: “We’re seeing renewed interest in teaching through high school programs… This gives me hope.”
3. Offer specialized certifications (ESL, special ed, early childhood, STEM)
These areas attract students and meet district needs.
4. Create 4+1 BA/M.Ed pathways
Parents and students love the value.
5. Provide flexible programs for career-changers
The rise of adult learners presents a major opportunity for private colleges. “We prepare our students for the world that exists.” — Dr. Michael Scarlett
VI. Why Small Colleges Must Stay in the Teacher-Prep Business
If small private colleges withdraw from teacher preparation, the consequences will be immediate and dramatic:
Rural and suburban schools will lose their primary source of new teachers.
Teacher diversity will shrink.
More underprepared teachers will enter classrooms.
Districts will become more dependent on high-turnover alternative routes.
Student learning will suffer.
And the profession will lose something even more important: the human-centered preparation that small colleges provide so well.
The teacher shortage will not be solved by legislation alone.
It will not be solved by fast-track certification mills.
It will not be solved by online mega-universities.
It will not be solved by market forces.
It will be solved in the classrooms, hallways, and mentoring relationships of the small colleges that still believe in the promise of teaching.
If we want public schools to remain strong, we must support the institutions that prepare the teachers who keep them alive. Small private colleges aren’t just participants in the teacher pipeline—they are its foundation.
When these colleges thrive, they produce educators who stay, who care, and who transform communities. That’s not just good for education—it’s essential for American democracy.
Dean Hokeis Managing Partner of Edu Alliance Group, a higher education consultancy firm. He formerly served as President/CEO of the American Association of University Administrators (AAUA). Dean has worked with higher education institutions worldwide. With decades of experience in higher education leadership, consulting, and institutional strategy, he brings a wealth of knowledge on colleges’ challenges and opportunities. Dean is the Executive Producer and co-host for the podcast series Small College America and a Senior Fellow at the Sagamore Institute based in Indianapolis, Indiana.
Nous Group CEO Tim Orton. Picture: The Australian.
The head of consultant firm Nous Group told a federal inquiry into university governance that most institutions have hired his firm, spending just under $40 million total.
Please login below to view content or subscribe now.
By Dean Hoke, October 13, 2025 – In the small towns of America, where factories have closed and downtowns often stand half-empty, a small college can be the heartbeat that keeps a community alive. These institutions—sometimes enrolling only a few hundred students—serve as economic anchors, cultural centers, and symbols of hope for regions that might otherwise face decline.
From the farmlands of Indiana to the mountain towns of Appalachia, small colleges generate economic energy far beyond their campus gates. They attract students, faculty, and visitors, stimulate local business, and provide the trained workforce that rural economies desperately need. They also embody something deeper: a sense of identity and connection that sustains civic life.
Economic Impact: Anchors in Fragile Economies
Small colleges are powerful, if often overlooked, economic engines. Their presence is felt in every paycheck, every restaurant filled with students and parents, and every local business that relies on their purchasing power.
Across the United States, nearly half of all public four-year colleges, over half of all public two-year colleges, and a third of private four-year colleges make up the 1,100 rural-serving institutions as identified by the Alliance for Research on Regional Colleges (ARRC). These colleges educate 1.6 million students, accounting for more than a quarter of total U.S. enrollments. Yet their role extends far beyond classrooms and degrees.
Rural-serving institutions are frequently among the largest employers in their counties, especially where other industries have faded. In areas where 35% or more of working-age adults are unemployed, 83% of local colleges are rural-serving, making them pillars of economic stability. Unlike large universities in metropolitan areas, their spending is highly localized—on utilities, food service, maintenance, and partnerships with small vendors.
Economic models underscore their importance. The Brookings Institution found that high-performing four-year colleges contribute roughly $265,000 more per student to local economies than lower-performing institutions, while two-year colleges add about $184,000. In many rural towns, every institutional dollar recirculates multiple times, magnifying its effect.
Beyond direct payroll and procurement, small colleges attract outside dollars. Students and visitors rent housing, dine locally, and shop downtown. Athletic events, alumni weekends, and summer programs bring tourists who fill hotels and restaurants. The IMPLAN consulting group estimated that when a college closes, the average regional loss equals 265 jobs, $14 million in labor income, and $32 million in total economic output—a devastating hit in thin rural economies.
Human Capital and Workforce Development
If small colleges are the economic engines of rural communities, they are also the primary producers of human capital. They educate the teachers, nurses, business owners, and civic leaders who sustain local life.
The Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond describes community colleges as “anchor institutions” that shape regional labor markets. Many partner with local employers to design training programs that meet specific workforce needs—often at minimal cost to businesses. In one case study, a rural college collaborated with an advanced manufacturing firm to tailor instruction for machine technicians, ensuring a steady local labor supply and convincing the company to expand rather than relocate.
Rural-serving colleges are also critical in addressing educational disparities. Only 22% of rural adults hold a bachelor’s degree, compared with 37% of non-rural Americans. This gap translates directly into income inequality: according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Economic Research Service, nonmetro workers with a bachelor’s degree earned a median of $52,837 in 2023, compared with substantially higher earnings for their urban counterparts. In states such as Indiana, Ohio, and Pennsylvania, rural degree attainment lags 10 to 15 percentage points behind state averages.
Beyond Economics: RSIs as Equity Infrastructure
Rural-serving institutions are more than economic engines—they are critical equity infrastructure, often providing the only realistic pathway to higher education for students the system has historically marginalized.
RSIs enroll far higher proportions of high-need students than their urban counterparts. Nearly 50% of undergraduates at RSIs receive Pell Grants, compared to 34% nationally. These institutions also serve disproportionate numbers of first-generation students, working adults, and students from underrepresented communities who lack access to flagship universities.
For many rural students, the local college isn’t a choice—it’s the only option. Geographic isolation, family obligations, and financial constraints make residential college attendance impossible. Research shows that every ten miles from the nearest college reduces enrollment probability by several percentage points. For students without transportation, without broadband for online learning, or without family support to relocate, the local institution is existential.
When rural colleges close, equity suffers most. Displaced students, if they re-enroll at all, face higher debt burdens and lower completion rates. Wealthier students can transfer to distant institutions; low-income students stop out. Communities of color, already underserved, lose ground.
Policymakers often evaluate colleges through narrow metrics: completion rates and graduate earnings. But this ignores mission differentiation. RSIs serve students that flagship universities would never admit, in places that for-profit colleges would never enter, at prices that private colleges could never match. Investing in rural-serving institutions isn’t charity—it’s infrastructure investment in equity, ensuring every region has pathways to economic mobility. If America is serious about educational equity, it must recognize RSIs as essential public infrastructure, not discretionary spending.
Despite these barriers, rural institutions remain lifelines for upward mobility. They offer affordable tuition, flexible programs for working adults, and pathways for first-generation students who might otherwise forgo higher education.
However, the pressures are real. Rural students face tighter finances, higher borrowing costs, and fewer grant opportunities. Nearly half of rural undergraduates receive Pell Grants, but average aid remains lower than that at urban institutions. Many graduates leave rural areas to find higher-paying jobs, a “brain drain” that weakens local economies. Yet for those who stay—or return later—their impact is outsized, driving new business formation, civic leadership, and generational stability.
Example: Goshen College and Elkhart County, Indiana — A Model of Mutual Benefit
The following example illustrates the positive interdependence of a small college and its surrounding community—how shared growth, service, and opportunity can strengthen both the institution and the region it calls home.
Few examples better demonstrate this relationship than Goshen College in northern Indiana. Founded in 1894 by the Mennonite Church, Goshen sits in Elkhart County, a region best known for its manufacturing and recreational vehicle industries. While the area has long been an economic hub, its continued success depends heavily on education and workforce development—both areas where Goshen College has quietly excelled for more than a century.
Goshen employs more than 300 full-time and part-time faculty and staff, making it one of the city’s largest private employers. Its local purchasing—from food services to maintenance and printing—injects millions of dollars annually into the county’s economy. The student body, drawn from across the Midwest and around the world, supports rental housing, restaurants, and small businesses throughout the region.
According to the 2024 Independent Colleges of Indiana Economic Impact Study, Goshen College contributes roughly $33 million each year to the regional economy through employment, operations, and visitor spending. Beyond the numbers, the college enriches community life. The Goshen College Music Center and Merry Lea Environmental Learning Center are regional treasures, hosting performances, lectures, and research programs that attract thousands of visitors annually. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the college partnered with local health officials to serve as a testing and vaccination site—further demonstrating its civic commitment. Its nursing, environmental studies, and teacher preparation programs continue to meet critical workforce needs across Elkhart County and beyond.
Goshen College stands as a model of how a small private college and its community can thrive together. Its example underscores a broader truth: when rural colleges remain strong, the benefits extend far beyond campus—bolstering jobs, sustaining income, and enriching the civic and cultural life that define their regions.
Social and Cultural Role: The Heart of Civic Life
Beyond numbers, the social and cultural influence of rural colleges may be their most irreplaceable contribution. In many counties, the college auditorium doubles as the performing arts center, the gym as the public gathering space, and the library as a community hub.
Rural colleges host art shows, festivals, lectures, and athletics that bring people together across generations. They sponsor service projects, tutoring programs, and food drives that connect students with their neighbors. For residents who might otherwise feel isolated or overlooked, the local college provides a sense of belonging and civic pride.
Research from the National Endowment for the Arts underscores that local arts participation strengthens community bonds and well-being. Rural colleges amplify that effect by providing both venues and expertise. Their faculty often lead community theater, music ensembles, or public workshops—bringing culture to places that might otherwise lack access.
The COVID-19 pandemic vividly demonstrated this social bond. While large universities shifted to remote learning with relative ease, small rural colleges had to improvise with limited broadband access and fewer resources. Yet many became essential service providers—hosting testing centers, distributing food, and maintaining human contact in otherwise isolated communities.
In these moments, small colleges revealed what they have always been: not just educators, but neighbors and caretakers.
Challenges: Fragility and the Risk of Decline
Despite their immense value, small rural colleges operate under fragile conditions. Their scale limits efficiency, their funding sources are volatile, and demographic shifts threaten their enrollment base.
Enrollment Declines and Demographic Pressures.
A steep decline in traditional-age students is projected to start by 2026, with the number of new high school graduates expected to fall by about 13 percent by 2041, according to The Chronicle of Higher Education, March 3, 2025, article “What is the Demographic Cliff”. For rural colleges already competing for a shrinking pool of students, this decline threatens their enrollment base and financial viability. Many have already experienced double-digit enrollment drops since the Great Recession. Rural public bachelor’s/master’s institutions enroll 5% fewer students today than in 2005, while community colleges struggle to recover from pandemic-era losses.
Financial Constraints. Small colleges rely heavily on tuition revenue and relatively modest endowments. According to the Urban Institute, the median private nonprofit four-year college holds about $33,000 in endowment assets per student, compared with hundreds of thousands of dollars per student at elite universities such as Amherst or Princeton. For many rural private colleges, endowment resources are often well below this national median. Their financial models depend heavily on tuition and auxiliary income, leaving them vulnerable when enrollment softens. Fundraising capacity is also limited: alumni bases are smaller and often less affluent than those of major research universities, making sustained growth in endowment and annual giving more difficult to achieve.
Operational Challenges. Compliance, accreditation, and technology costs weigh disproportionately on small staffs. Many rural colleges lack the personnel to pursue major grants or expand programs quickly. Geographic isolation compounds difficulties in recruiting faculty and attracting external partnerships.
Brain Drain and Opportunity Gaps. Even when colleges succeed in educating local students, retaining them can be difficult. Many leave for urban areas with higher wages and broader opportunities. The irony is painful: the better a rural college fulfills its mission of empowerment, the more likely it may lose its graduates.
Closures and Community Fallout. When a small college shuts its doors, the ripple effects are severe. Studies estimate average regional losses of over $20 million in GDP and hundreds of jobs per closure. Local businesses—cafés, landlords, bookstores—suffer immediately. Housing markets soften, municipal tax revenues drop, and cultural life diminishes. It can take a decade or more for a community to recover, if it ever does.
Reversing the Talent Flow: Retention Strategies That Work
The brain drain challenge is not insurmountable. Several states and institutions have pioneered retention strategies that show measurable results.
Loan forgiveness programs specifically targeting rural retention have gained traction. Kansas’s Rural Opportunity Zones offer up to $15,000 in student loan repayment for graduates who relocate to designated counties. Maine provides annual tax credits up to $2,500 for graduates who live and work in-state. Early data suggests these programs can shift settlement patterns, particularly in high-demand fields like nursing and teaching.
The most effective models involve tri-party partnerships: colleges provide education and career counseling, employers offer competitive wages and loan assistance, and municipalities contribute housing support or tax relief. In one Ohio example, a regional hospital, community college, and county government created a “stay local” nursing pathway that reduced turnover by 40% over five years.
Place-based scholarships are also emerging as retention tools. “Hometown Scholarships” provide enhanced aid for students from surrounding counties who commit to working regionally after graduation. When paired with community-engaged learning and local internships throughout the curriculum, these programs cultivate regional identity—shifting the narrative from “I have to leave to succeed” to “I can build a meaningful career here.”
Federal policy could amplify these efforts. A Rural Talent Corps modeled on the National Health Service Corps could leverage student loan forgiveness to address workforce shortages while stabilizing rural economies. The brain drain will never disappear entirely, but intentional investment can shift the calculus from inevitable loss to manageable flow.
Policy Pathways and Strategies for Resilience
Sustaining small colleges—and the communities they support—requires creativity, collaboration, and policy attention.
1. Deepen Local Partnerships. Rural colleges thrive when they align closely with regional needs. Employer partnerships, dual-enrollment programs, and apprenticeships can connect education directly to local labor markets. In Indiana and Ohio, several colleges now co-design health care and manufacturing programs with regional employers, ensuring steady pipelines of skilled workers.
2. Form Regional Alliances. Small institutions can collaborate rather than compete. Shared academic programs, cross-registration, and joint purchasing agreements can reduce costs and expand offerings. Examples such as the New England Small College Innovation Consortium show how collective action can extend capacity and visibility.
3. Diversify Revenue and Mission. Rural colleges can strengthen financial resilience by expanding adult education, microcredentials, and workforce training. Many are converting underused buildings into community hubs, co-working spaces, or conference centers. Others are developing online and hybrid programs to reach place-bound learners in neighboring counties.
4. Increase State and Federal Support. Federal recognition of Rural-Serving Institutions within the Higher Education Act could unlock targeted funding similar to programs for Minority-Serving Institutions. States should adapt funding formulas to reflect mission-based outcomes—rewarding colleges that serve low-income, first-generation, and local students rather than penalizing them for small scale.
5. Encourage Philanthropic Investment. Foundations and donors have historically overlooked rural institutions in favor of urban flagships. Increasing awareness of their impact could mobilize new giving streams, particularly from community foundations and regional philanthropists.
6. Invest in Infrastructure. Broadband access, housing, and transportation are essential to sustaining rural higher education. Expanding digital infrastructure allows colleges to deliver online learning, attract remote faculty, and connect to global markets.
Looking Ahead: The Role of Small Colleges in Rural Renewal
As rural America seeks to reinvent itself in the 21st century, small colleges are uniquely positioned to lead that renewal. They combine local trust with national expertise, and they possess the physical, intellectual, and moral infrastructure to drive change from within.
Their future will depend on adaptability. Colleges that align programs with regional industries, embrace digital learning, and form strategic alliances can thrive despite demographic headwinds. Institutions that cling to older models may struggle.
Yet the measure of success should not be enrollment size alone. A rural college’s value lies in its multiplier effect—on jobs, community life, and civic identity. For many counties, it is the last remaining institution still rooted in the public good.
Conclusion: Investing in Irreplaceable Infrastructure
Small colleges in rural America are far more than schools. They are community builders, employers, cultural anchors, and symbols of local resilience. Their closure can hollow out a county; their success can revive one.
The rural-serving institutions identified by ARRC represent a quarter of U.S. enrollments but touch nearly half the nation’s geography. They serve regions facing population loss, persistent poverty, and limited opportunity—yet they continue to educate, employ, and inspire.
The choice facing policymakers, philanthropists, and citizens is simple: either we invest in these engines of opportunity, or we risk watching the lights go out in hundreds of rural towns.
The question is no longer whether we can afford to support small rural colleges but whether America can afford not to.
Sources and References
Alliance for Research on Regional Colleges (ARRC).Identifying Rural-Serving Institutions in the United States (2022).
Brookings Institution.The Value of Higher Education to Local Economies (2021).
Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond.Community Colleges as Anchor Institutions: A Regional Development Perspective (2020).
National Student Clearinghouse Research Center.High School Benchmarks 2022: National College Progression Rates.
National Endowment for the Arts.Rural Arts, Design, and Innovation in America (2017).
Lumina Foundation.Stronger Nation: Learning Beyond High School Builds American Talent (2024).
National Skills Coalition.Building a Skilled Workforce for Rural America (2021).
IMPLAN Group, LLC.Measuring the Economic Impact of Higher Education Institutions (2023).
U.S. Census Bureau.Educational Attainment in the United States: 2023 (American Community Survey Tables).
Bureau of Labor Statistics.Employment and Earnings by Educational Attainment, 2023.
Goshen College.Economic Impact Report 2022 and institutional data from the Office of Institutional Research.
Dean Hoke is Managing Partner of Edu Alliance Group, a higher education consultancy, and a Senior Fellow for the Sagamore Institute located in Indianapolis, Indiana. He formerly served as President/CEO of the American Association of University Administrators (AAUA). Dean is a champion for small colleges in the US. and is committed to celebrating their successes, highlighting their distinctions and reinforcing how important they are to the higher education ecosystem in the US. Dean is the creator and co-host for the podcast series Small College America.
On the eve of what was expected to be a long and gut-wrenching trial, a small schooldistrict in Santa Barbara County has settled a sexual abuse lawsuit for $7.5 million with two brothers, now 65 and 68 years old, who claimed a long-dead principal molested them in the 1970s.
The brothers had sought $35 million for the harm they said they suffered, an attorney for the youngest brother said.
The settlement equals about 40% of the 350-student district’s 2025-26 budget, although the district did not disclose the terms and timetable for the payment. The district’s superintendent acknowledged in a statement that there would be an impact on the budget.
Board members of the Montecito Union School District announced the settlement over the weekend. The trial was scheduled to start Monday.
The case was brought under a 2019state law, Assembly Bill 218, that removed a statute of limitations for filing claims that employees of public agencies, including school districts and city and county governments, sexually abused children placed in their care.
Estimates suggest settlements and jury awards could cost California school districts as much as $3 billion by one projection, and possibly a lot more. Los Angeles County alone has agreed to pay $4 billion to settle abuse claims with more pending, mostly involving plaintiffs who were once in foster care.
With many larger lawsuits with multiple victims yet to be settled or go to trial, the financial impacts are hard to predict. Small districts are worried that multimillion-dollar verdicts could devastate budgets, if not lead to insolvency. Insurance costs, meanwhile, have soared by more than 200% in five years, according to a survey of districts.
In the Montecito case, the brothers were seeking $35 million in damages combined, John Richards, a lawyer representing one of them, said outside of court Monday.
Montecito is not alone in facing decades-old accusations. The San Francisco Unified School District is embroiled inan ongoing suit involving a teacher who allegedly molested a student in the mid-1960s, records show.
School boards association helps with legal fees
TheMontecito case drew the attention of the California School Boards Association, which gave the district a $50,000 grant to help with legal costs, said spokesman Troy Flint.
Flint said Montecito Union Superintendent Anthony Ranii has “been a staunch advocate for AB 218 reform because he understands how this well-intentioned law carries such significant unintended consequences that compromise the educational experience of current and future students.”
Montecito Union “is just one example of what potentially awaits school districts and county offices of education statewide,” Flint added.
The settlement came just weeks after state Assembly members let a measure that would have restored a statute of limitations to such cases, Senate Bill 577, go without a vote in the final days of the legislative session. Its sponsor, Sen. John Laird, D-Santa Cruz, said he would bring it back next year.
At a brief hearing Monday, Santa Barbara County Superior Court Judge Thomas P. Anderle called the Montecito matter “a case of real consequence.” He had scheduled 17 days for trial, court records show. The district’s lawyers did not attend the hearing.
The brothers’ lawsuit was filed in 2022 and alleged that Montecito Union’s former superintendent and principal, Stanford Kerr, molested them in the early 1970s, including raping one of them. Kerr died in 2013 at 89. He never faced criminal charges.
A third plaintiff who also claimed Kerr abused him settled earlier with the district for $1 million. He had described a full range of abuse covering many types of conduct, which included rape, court filings state.
Just recompense for years of suffering
The brothers, identified in court documents as John Doe 1 and John Doe 2, pushed forward, Richards said, hoping to be compensated for years of agony. The younger of the two, Richards said, has suffered a lifetime of substance abuse, which is blamed on Kerr’s assaults.
“The money is nice,” Richards said, but the younger brother also seeks “social acknowledgment that what happened to (him) was terrible. He has a long way to go,” in recovering.
The district admitted no liability in making the settlement.
Montecito Union has no insurance coverage going back to the period the brothers said the abuse occurred — 1972 to 1978, Ranii said in a statement.
“We were prepared to mount a vigorous defense,” he said. But the possibility of a jury awarding far more than the district could afford pushed the idea of a settlement after years of pretrial maneuvering.
The superintendent’s statement did not directly address the brothers’ claims. It also did not mention Kerr.
“We are deeply mindful of the enduring pain caused by sexual abuse and feel for any person who has experienced such abuse,” Ranii said in the statement.
A large award in the event of a trial would have “diminished our ability to serve students now and well into the future,” Ranii said. “Continued litigation created exceptional financial vulnerability. Settling now allows us to stabilize operations and remain focused on today’s students.”
Montecito is an unincorporated oceanfront community just south of Santa Barbara in the shadows of the Santa Ynez Mountains. Its residents include Oprah Winfrey and Prince Harry and Meghan Markle. The district is one of the state’s richest, with more than $40,000 per student in funding due to tax receipts from high-value properties.
The district will manage the costs through a hiring freeze, staff reductions “when natural attrition occurs,” and redirecting “funds previously designated for capital repair,” Ranii said. The settlement allows the district to avoid layoffs, he said.
The brothers’ case was built around the testimony they would have given about Kerr’s abuses, Richards said. There was no physical evidence. At one point, a district employee went to the brothers’ home and forced their parents to sign a document requiring them to make sure the boys came right home after school and avoided Kerr, according to court filings.
Richards said the district did not produce such a document in discovery. It had no records that the boys ever attended the school, he said, although their photos appear in yearbooks. The district also had no records that Kerr ever faced accusations of abuse or sexual misconduct.
Two school board members from Kerr’s time as superintendent said in depositions taken for the brothers’ suit that they would have taken action had they known he was abusing students, Richards said. But with the case settled, the elderly former members won’t be called to testify.
All that remains is a final hearing that the judge scheduled for Nov. 19 to make sure the payment has been received “and that the check’s been cashed,” he said.
Editor-at-Large John Festerwald contributed to this story.
This story was originally published by EdSource. Sign up for their daily newsletter.
Insights from three post-COVID presidents on enrollment, financial sustainability, and strategic innovation
September 3, 2025, by Dean Hoke: Small colleges across America face an unprecedented convergence of challenges—demographic shifts, federal policy changes, evolving student expectations, and the lingering effects of COVID-19. In an August 27th Small College America webinar hosted by Dean Hoke and Kent Barnds, three presidents shared how they are navigating these pressures with fresh strategies and resilient leadership: Dr. Anita Gustafson of Presbyterian College, Dr. Andrea Talentino of Augustana College, and Dr. Tarek Sobh of Lawrence Technological University.
Their conversation revealed that while the obstacles are significant, thoughtful leadership and adaptive strategies can position small colleges to not just survive but thrive.
The Enrollment and Financial Sustainability Imperative
Finding Opportunity in Transfers
For Presbyterian College, located in growing South Carolina, President Gustafson has found opportunity amid challenge. “About 60% of our students come from South Carolina, and the state is growing, which helps us,” she noted. However, rather than relying solely on traditional recruitment, the college has pivoted to focus on transfer students—a population they hadn’t previously targeted.
This strategic shift required significant cultural change. “We have very robust general education requirements, and we are working with our faculty to be more transfer-friendly,” Gustafson explained. The result has been a notable enrollment bump, demonstrating how institutional flexibility can open new pathways to growth.
The Four R’s Framework
At Augustana College in Illinois—a state that isn’t growing—President Talentino has developed what she calls the “four R’s” approach: recruitment, retention, revenue, and results. This framework drives their strategic planning and helps the entire campus community understand how their work connects to institutional sustainability.
“We budget actually 11 years out,” Talentino shared, acknowledging that “it’s a little bit like the weather—once you get past day three or four, it could rain when it’s supposed to be sunny.” This long-term perspective allows the college to anticipate challenges and make gradual adjustments rather than reactive cuts.
Both presidents emphasize conservative budgeting practices. As Gustafson put it: “When we build our budget, we build it on conservative numbers so that we’re not trying to overextend our budget. I think that’s really key to sustainability—making sure you’re being realistic.”
Confronting Federal Policy and International Student Challenges
The STEM Advantage and Vulnerability
Lawrence Technological University’s focus on STEM education has provided both advantages and vulnerabilities in the current environment. President Sobh noted that domestic demand for technologically trained professionals has driven significant interest in their programs. “Our programming, given the surge and the need for technological education, has been serving us well from a domestic growth point of view,” he explained.
However, like many engineering-focused institutions, Lawrence Tech has experienced a decline in international student enrollment. Sobh emphasized that this challenge extends beyond individual institutions: “The same statement would probably be true of every single one of the universities in the country that is home to a college of engineering.”
International Student Success Stories
Despite broader challenges, Augustana College achieved remarkable success with international student recruitment. President Talentino reported that they expect to bring in close to 85% of their original international student goal, “probably one of the few places in the country where we’re going to come that close.”
This success resulted from intensive, hands-on communication and their focus on undergraduate rather than graduate international students, who faced fewer visa complications. About 20% of Augustana’s student body consists of international students, making this achievement particularly significant for their financial sustainability.
Managing Financial Aid Changes
The recent changes to federal financial aid programs have created additional complexity. Talentino noted that Augustana has some protection through a generous alumnus who funds a program meeting 100% of the needs of high-achieving, high-need students. However, she acknowledged ongoing challenges: “There’s a lot of folks in the middle where parent loans are being squeezed and caps on borrowing are being squeezed.”
Strategic Technology Investment and AI Integration
The Liberal Arts Approach to AI
President Gustafson acknowledged the challenge of staying current with AI developments at a liberal arts institution. Presbyterian College has taken a pragmatic approach, partnering with external agencies for micro-credentialing programs that will eventually extend to alumni.
“Our graduates need to understand AI. They need to know how to use it in order to be competitive in the job market,” Gustafson emphasized. The college has also established a technology committee with campus-wide representation to develop long-term budgeting strategies for technology infrastructure.
AI as an Institutional Efficiency Tool
At Lawrence Tech, President Sobh described AI integration as both natural and transformative. Beyond curriculum integration, the university has embraced AI for business processes. “Our marketing, branding, and public relations departments are using AI for the development of marketing campaigns, which is 100 times more efficient, faster, cheaper, and more productive than not using AI,” he noted.
This efficiency extends across departments, from budget management to communications, though Sobh acknowledged that implementation remains “work in progress” for non-academic staff who need training and support.
Evolving Student Experience and Support
Becoming “Student Ready”
President Talentino introduced the concept of institutions becoming “student ready” rather than expecting students to be “college ready.” This perspective shift has driven comprehensive changes at Augustana, from streamlining onboarding processes to reconsidering when and how students want to engage with services.
“We can’t take things that we used to take for granted,” Talentino observed, noting that students today have different expectations and needs than previous generations. The college has revamped peer mentor programs, developed success teams for every student, and created specialized support centers like their new STEM center.
Supporting First-Generation Students
Presbyterian College’s focus on first-generation students—about one-third of its population—has led to innovative programming. Their “PresbyFirst Plus” program brings first-gen students to campus two days early and has earned recognition as a “first-gen forward network champion.”
This targeted support reflects broader changes in student demographics. As Gustafson noted: “Students of today don’t have the reading skills and the math skills that previous generations have had.” This reality has required faculty to adapt their approaches, sometimes focusing on foundational skills before advancing to advanced content.
Bold Strategic Moves
Creating New Academic Pathways
Lawrence Tech’s establishment of a fifth college—the College of Health Sciences—represents a significant strategic pivot for the 95-year-old institution. “It was quite a bold move to establish a new college 50 years or so after the last one had been established,” President Sobh noted.
This expansion into health sciences aligns with the growing demand for technologically trained healthcare professionals. The college now offers programs in nursing, physician assistant studies, and cardiovascular perfusion, and more programs are planned.
Community Development as Institutional Strategy
Perhaps the most innovative approach comes from Augustana College’s creation of a community development corporation (CDC). President Talentino explained that the condition of the surrounding neighborhood had become a recruiting challenge, with prospective students and families expressing concerns about the area.
Rather than simply hoping for external improvement, Augustana committed to an active partnership with the city of Rock Island. The CDC purchases and renovates properties to create mixed-use developments with retail on the first floor and housing above. “We really committed to putting our money where our mouth is,” Talentino said.
This initiative aligns with Lutheran principles of service to neighbor while addressing a practical institutional need. The city has become an enthusiastic partner, and the project has energized both campus and community.
Leadership Principles for Uncertain Times
Transparency and Partnership
President Gustafson’s leadership philosophy centers on transparency and symbiotic relationships. Her first-year theme, “Symbiosis—stronger together,” emphasized that the academic community functions best when operating collaboratively rather than in silos.
Her second-year pivot to “don’t panic, navigate”—borrowed from the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities—has helped the leadership team manage multiple simultaneous challenges. This approach emphasizes thoughtful response over reactive decision-making.
Cultural Understanding and Patience
President Sobh, who transitioned from provost to president at the same institution, emphasized the importance of cultural understanding. Despite the temptation to implement changes quickly, he spent his first semester meeting with every colleague on campus—”literally hundreds” of people—to understand institutional culture and aspirations.
“The tendency of leaders to effect changes immediately is, in my opinion, the wrong decision,” Sobh reflected. “Waiting and listening to the culture of the institution, understanding the aspiration and history, and how my own interests can be integrated into that vision is absolutely worthwhile.”
Institutional vs. Individual Focus
President Talentino identified a key leadership challenge: helping people understand institutional needs beyond their individual or departmental perspectives. She noted that this represents one of her biggest adjustments from faculty and provost roles to the presidency.
“Focus on self and focus on own department rather than institutional-wide awareness was a little bit of a surprise to me,” she admitted, “but I guess that’s what makes it challenging and never boring.”
The Value Proposition Message
All three presidents emphasized the importance of clearly articulating their institutions’ value propositions to various constituencies. President Sobh stressed the power of concrete outcomes: “Being able to say 97% of my students continue on and are employed at this level and they are guaranteed a job and 85% live locally—that’s an incredibly powerful statement.”
President Gustafson focused on framing liberal arts education in terms of workforce development and democratic leadership: “All of us are important contributors to workforce development. If we can shape our message around workforce development, economic development, and providing leaders for a democratic society, that’s very helpful.”
Looking Forward
These three presidents demonstrate that successful leadership during uncertain times requires a combination of strategic thinking, cultural sensitivity, and adaptive capacity. Their approaches vary based on institutional type and regional context, but common themes emerge: the importance of transparency, the need for long-term planning with short-term flexibility, and the value of viewing challenges as opportunities for innovation.
As small colleges continue to navigate demographic shifts, policy changes, and evolving student needs, these leadership insights offer practical guidance for presidents, boards, and stakeholders committed to the distinctive mission of small college education.
The conversation reveals that while the challenges facing small colleges are significant, innovative leadership and strategic adaptation can position these institutions not just to survive, but to thrive in serving their communities and students.
Small College America is a podcast series that presents critical discussions at the forefront by interviewing small college higher education leaders, policy experts, and innovators. The podcast will delve into the evolving role of small colleges, their economic impact, innovative strategies for sustainability, and how they can continue to provide a highly personalized educational experience. The series is co-hosted by Dean Hoke and Kent Barnds.
These days, most faculty members are tired, sad and as anxious as our tired, sad students. We spend time doing things that aren’t what our advisers did, or what they trained us to do, or even really what we want to do.
We serve on too many committees, busy with work that’s unrewarded and mostly invisible, and we must explain to civilians that, no, we don’t have summers off—we just don’t get paid to do the research we have to produce to survive, even if no one ever reads it. Some of us juggle zillions of courses at multiple institutions and can barely afford dog food. Most people getting Ph.D.s these days can no longer expect to land a permanent job. And many of us who were lucky enough to get on that last gravy train to tenure are ready to hop off, if we could only think of something else we’re qualified to do.
As tired, sad and anxious as I am, I still find this gig a privilege: indoor work, no heavy lifting. And the academic world, with all its wacky quirks, is fascinating. Like other cultural niches, we have our own jargon, celebrities unknown to the wider public, rituals that make zero sense to outsiders (and to many of us) and a deeply entrenched caste system that keeps us humble. (Ha-ha.)
I’ve been in multiple rings in the academic circus. After I bailed out of scholarly publishing—first at Oxford University Press and then at Duke—I worked in undergraduate admissions at Duke. I wrote a snarky book about that experience, then published two more to atone for my sins. That experience fed into my next act: For a quarter century, I spouted off in columns for The Chronicle of Higher Education a rival publication, hoping to give academics permission to write for and like humans.
When I became a faculty member, I felt I’d won the lottery. Who else has this kind of job security and so many degrees of freedom? I try to remember how fortunate I am when I’m tempted to complain. (Doesn’t stop me.) It helps to remember that having tenure is luxurious compared to being staff, where I was sometimes treated as one notch above custodians and had to deal with almost as much shit.
Two years ago, I was asked by Inside Higher Ed’s co-founder, my old buddy Doug Lederman, to create a paywalled newsletter for industry leaders. I got a crash course in governance and learned how little I understood about how universities are run. In off-the-record chats with presidents, I’ve realized that rarely does anyone see the full picture, including faculty members like me who believe they know it all.
Those conversations opened my eyes to just how brutal the job has become—death threats, harassment by frat-boy trustees, vicious attacks from faculty senates, black mold in presidents’ houses and other crap that would make most of us run screaming. It’s enough to think presidents deserve those big honking salaries. Unless they suck. Which, undoubtedly, some of them do. Just not the ones willing to talk to me and write anonymously for no rewards other than the rare opportunity to be truthful and vulnerable on the page.
Of course, the problems in higher ed go far beyond presidential housing crises and governance theater. The sector’s challenges create genuine existential threats to a shocking number of the nearly 4,000 institutions that make up our ecosystem. And yet, we beat on, boats against the current, trying to figure out how to keep doing meaningful work in this strange, insular, endlessly complicated world we’ve chosen, one that’s always been isolated from what others call “the real world” (and not in a fun MTV way) and that is, in many ways, small.
Small World is, in fact, the title of the middle novel in David Lodge’s campus trilogy. Long ago in a galaxy far, far away (the ’80s, NYC), I read it after gulping down the first, Changing Places, which includes one of the best bits in academic fiction. In a game called Humiliation, each person in the English Department names a book he hasn’t read but assumes the others have. So caught up in wanting to succeed, a poor sap calls out Hamlet. He wins the game and is denied tenure.
Lodge’s fictional world captured something true about academic insularity, but even his juicy satire couldn’t anticipate the daily reality most of us don’t want to face today—the fact that we are no longer trusted and respected by the public, we’re going through leaders like Kleenex during flu season, the feds are taking a chain-saw approach to federal funding, previously dull topics like accreditation are now going to change all of our lives and ideas of inclusion and access we were naïve enough to think would change the world are being thrown into the trash heap
It’s a shit show big yikes. In some ways, though, academe is still a small world, even if the days of budgets for international conference hopping à la Lodge are not within the reach of most of us. But if you read The New York Times, The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal, you might think higher ed consists of about 20 schools, plus another dozen or so when they’re trying not to be snobby.
Most of us do not live in that world.
Most of us don’t live in a world where a degree-seeking student is an 18- to 22-year-old whose only job is going to class.
Most of us don’t work at institutions where the six-year graduation rate is 90 percent. Or 80 percent. Or even 60 percent.
Most of us don’t work at places that will be hit hard by the rise in the endowment tax.
Most of our schools were in decline even before the recent upheavals, facing eroding public trust and not enough butts to put in our classroom seats. And each department plays a zero-sum game trying to attract majors, which are, if you speak with employers, as I’ve done for my most recent book, important to no one (save faculty and department chairs).
Yet many faculty, staff and students don’t pay enough attention to what goes on beyond their campus gates to notice that everything else in our society has changed while we remain conservative stolidly averse to adaptation. With so many colleges and universities circling the drain, “Don’t look up!” feels like a reasonable response.
In this space, each I’ll draw on my experience to explore corners of our small world that may be overlooked. What I can promise is no bullshit candor about both the disasters and the unexpected moments of grace. Because even as our world grows smaller and more precarious, it remains endlessly fascinating. And well worth fighting for.
Rachel Toor is a contributing editor at Inside Higher Ed and the co-founder of The Sandbox, a weekly newsletter that allows presidents and chancellors to write anonymously. She is also a professor of creative writing and the author of books on weirdly diverse subjects. Reach her here with questions, comments and complaints compliments.
“Guiding Through Change: How Small Colleges Are Responding to New Realities”: A Live Conversation with Three Small College Presidents
August 2, 2025, by Dean Hoke: Over the past several months, higher education has experienced an unprecedented wave of transformation. The elimination or curtailment of Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) initiatives, shifting federal financial aid policies, declining enrollment in traditional undergraduate programs, and heightened visa scrutiny and geopolitical tensions pose potential risks to international student enrollment, an area of growing importance for many small colleges.
Dr. Chet Haskell, in a recent piece for the Edu Alliance Journal, captured the mood succinctly: “The headlines are full of uncertainty for American higher education. ‘Crisis’ is a common descriptor. Federal investigations of major institutions are underway. Severe cuts to university research funding have been announced. The elimination of the Department of Education is moving ahead. Revisions to accreditation processes are being floated. Reductions in student support for educational grants and loans are now law. International students are being restricted.These uncertainties and pressures affect all higher education, not just targeted elite institutions. In particular, they are likely to exacerbate the fragility of smaller, independent non-profit institutions already under enormous stress.”
Small colleges—often mission-driven, community-centered, and tuition-dependent—are feeling these disruptions acutely.
As we enter the third season of Small College America, a podcast series that spotlights the powerful impact of small colleges across the nation, my co-host Kent Barnds and I wanted to mark the moment with something special. Rather than recording a typical podcast episode, we’re hosting a live webinar to engage in a timely and candid discussion with three dynamic presidents of small colleges.
Join us for a special Small College America webinar:
“Guiding Through Change: How Small Colleges Are Responding to New Realities”
Wednesday, August 27, 1:00 PM – 2:00 PM Eastern
Our panelists bring deep experience, insight, and a strong commitment to the mission of small colleges:
Dr. Andrea Talentino is the president of Augustana College in Rock Island, Illinois. She previously served as provost at Nazareth College in Rochester, N.Y., and Dean of the College of Liberal Arts at Norwich University in Northfield, Vermont. In her administrative work, she has focused on building strong teams and developing a positive organizational culture.
Dr. Tarek Sobh is the President of Lawrence Technological University. A distinguished academic leader, he previously served as Provost at LTU and as Executive VP at the University of Bridgeport. An expert in robotics, AI, and STEM education, Dr. Sobh has published extensively and presented internationally. He is passionate about aligning academic programs with workforce needs.
Dr. Anita Gustafson, President of Presbyterian College, is a historian and long-time faculty leader who assumed the presidency in 2023. She has been a strong advocate for the value of the liberal arts and the importance of community engagement. Dr. Gustafson returned to PC after seven years as the dean of the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences and a professor of history at Mercer University in Macon, Ga.
This one-hour webinar will explore how small private colleges are navigating today’s evolving environment and planning strategically for the future.
July 28, 2025, by Dr. Chet Haskell: The headlines are full of uncertainty for American higher education. “Crisis” is a common descriptor. Federal investigations of major institutions are underway. Severe cuts to university research funding have been announced. The elimination of the Department of Education is moving ahead. Revisions to accreditation processes are being floated. Reductions in student support for educational grants and loans are now law. International students are being restricted.
These uncertainties and pressures affect all higher education, not just targeted elite institutions. In particular, they are likely to exacerbate the fragility of smaller, independent non-profit institutions already under enormous stress. Such institutions, some well-known, others known only locally, will be hard hit particularly hard by the combination of Trump Administration pressures and the developing national demographic decline for traditional-age students.(https://www.highereddive.com/news/decline-high-school-graduates-demographic-cliff-wiche-charts/738281/) These small colleges have been a key element of the American higher education scene, as well as for numerous local communities, for many decades.
It is widely understood that the vibrancy of American higher education comes, in part, from the diversity of its institutions and educational goals. The rich mixture of American colleges and universities is a strength that many other nations lack. Students have opportunities to start and stop their educations, to change directions and academic goals, to move among different types of institutions.
Smaller undergraduate colleges play important roles in this non-systemic system. They provide focused educational opportunities for younger adults, where they can build their lives on broad principles. Impressively large percentages of small college graduates go on to graduate education for various professions. Small colleges provide large numbers of graduates who enter PhD programs and eventually enter the professorate.
There are approximately 1179 accredited private institutions with enrollments of fewer than 3000 students. Of these, 185 have between 3000 and 2000 students. Another 329 have enrollments below 2000 but above 1000. A final 650 institutions have enrollments below 1000. These 1179 institutions students include few wealthy colleges such as Williams, Amherst, Carleton or Pomona, as well as numerous struggling, relatively unknowns.
A basic problem is one of scale. In the absence of significant endowments or other external support, it is very difficult to manage small institutions in a cost effective manner. Institutions with enrollments below 1000 are particularly challenged in this regard. The fundamental economics of small institutions are always challenging, as most are almost completely dependent on student enrollments, a situation getting worse with the coming decline of traditional college age students. There are limited options available to offset this decline. Renewed attention to student retention is one. Another is adding limited graduate programs. However, both take investment, appropriate faculty and staff capacity and time, all of which are often scarce.
These institutions have small endowments measured either in total or per student value. Of the 1179. There are only 80 with total endowments in excess of $200 million. While a handful have per student endowments that rival the largest private universities, (Williams, Amherst and Pomona all have per student endowments in excess of $1.8 million), the vast majority have per student endowments in the $40,000 range and many far less.
Most of these schools have high tuition discount rates, often over 50%, so their net tuition revenue is a fraction of posted expense. They are all limited by size – economies of scale are difficult to achieve. And most operate in highly competitive markets, where the competition is not only other small schools, but also a range of public institutions.
So, what is the underendowed, under resourced small college to do?
The most common initiatives designed to address these sorts of challenges are consortia, collaborative arrangements among institutions designed to increase student options and to share expenses. There are numerous such arrangements, examples being the Colleges of the Fenway in Boston, the Five Colleges of Western Massachusetts, the Washington DC Metropolitan Area Consortium, and the Claremont Colleges in California, among others.
The particulars of each of these groups differ, but there are commonalities. Most are geographically oriented, seeking to take advantage from being near each other. Typically, these groups want to provide more opportunities for students through allowing cross-registrations, sharing certain academic programs or joint student activities. They usually have arrangements for cost-sharing or cost reductions through shared services for costs like security services, IT, HR, risk management options, pooled purchasing and the like. In other cases (like the Claremont Consortium) they may share libraries or student athletic facilities. Done well, these arrangements can indeed reduce costs while also attracting potential students through wider access to academic options.
However, it is unlikely that such initiatives, no matter how successful, can fundamentally change the basic financial situation of an independent small college. Such shared services savings are necessary and useful, but usually not sufficient to offset the basic enrollment challenge. The financial impact of most consortia is at the margins.
Furthermore, participating institutions have to be on a solid enough financial basis to take part in the first place. Indeed, a consortium like Claremont is based on financial strength. Two of the members have endowments in excess of $1.2 billion (Pomona’s is $2.8 billion.) The endowments of the others range from a low of $67 million (Keck Graduate with 617 students) to Scripps with $460 million for 1100 students.) The Consortium is of clear value to its members, but none of these institutions is on the brink of failure. Rather, all have strong reputations, a fact that provides another important enrollment advantage.
One important factor in these consortia arrangements is that the participating institutions do not have to give up their independence or modify their missions. Their finances, alumni and accreditation are separate. And while the nature of the arrangement indicates certain levels of compromise and collaboration, their governance remains basically unchanged with independent fiduciary boards.
At the other end of the spectrum are two radically different situations. One is merging with or being acquired by another institution. Prep Scholar counts 33 such events since 2015. (https://blog.prepscholar.com/permanently-closed-colleges-list). Lacking the resources for financial sustainability, many colleges have had no choice but to take such steps.
Merging or being acquired by a financially stronger institution has many advantages. Faculty and staff jobs may be protected. Students can continue with their studies. The institution being acquired may be able to provide continuity in some fashion within the care of the new owner. Endowed funds may continue. The institution’s name may continue as part of an “institute” or “center” within the new owner’s structure. Alumni records can be maintained. Real estate can be transferred. Debts may be paid off and so forth. There are multiple examples of the acquiring institution doing everything possible along these lines.
But some things end. Independent governance and accreditation cease as those functions are subsumed by the acquiring institution. Administrative and admissions staffs are integrated and some programs, people and activities are shed. Operational leadership changes. And over time, what was once a beloved independent institution may well fade away.
The end of a college is a very sad thing for all involved and, indeed, for society in general. Often a college is an anchor institution in a small community and the loss is felt widely. The closure of a college is akin to the closure of a local factory. As Dean Hoke and others have noted, this is a particular problem for rural communities.
Are there other possible avenues, something between a consortium and a merger or outright closure?
One relatively new model has been organized by two quite different independent institutions, Otterbein University and Antioch University, that came together in 2022 to create the Coalition for the Common Good. Designed to be more than a simple bilateral partnership, the vision of the Coalition is eventually to include several institutions in different locations linked by a common mission and the capacity to grow collective enrollments.
At its core, the Coalition is based on academic symbiosis. Otterbein is a good example of the high-quality traditional undergraduate residential liberal arts institution. It has been well-run and has modest financial resources. Facing the demographic challenges noted earlier (in a state like Ohio that boasts dozens of such institutions), it developed a set of well-regarded graduate programs, notably in nursing and health-related fields, along with locally based teacher education programs and an MBA. However, despite modest success, they faced the limitations of adult programs largely offered in an on-campus model. Regardless of quality, they lacked the capacity to expand such programs beyond Central Ohio.
Antioch University, originally based in Ohio, had evolved over the past 40 years into a more national institution with locations in California, Washington State and New Hampshire offering a set of graduate professional programs to older adults mostly through distance modalities in hybrid or low-residency forms. Antioch, however, was hampered by limited resources including a very small endowment. It had demonstrated the capacity to offer new programs in different areas and fields but lacked the funds necessary for investment to do so.
Within the Coalition, the fundamental arrangement is for Antioch to take over Otterbein’s graduate programs and, with Otterbein financial support, to expand them in other parts of the country. The goal is significant aggregate enrollment growth and sharing of new revenues. While they plan a shared services operation to improve efficiencies and organizational effectiveness, their primary objective is growth. Antioch seeks to build on Otterbein’s successes, particularly with nursing programs. It already has considerable experience in managing academic programs at a distance, a fact that will be central as it develops the Otterbein nursing and health care programs in a new Antioch Graduate School of Nursing and Health Professions.
It is assumed that additional new members of the Coalition will resemble Otterbein in form, thus further increasing opportunities for growth through enhanced reach and greater scale. New members in other geographic locations will provide additional opportunities for expansion. One early success of the Coalition has been the capacity to offer existing Antioch programs in Central Ohio, including joint partnerships with local organizations, health care and educational systems. Crucially, both institutions remain separately accredited with separate governance and leadership under a Coalition joint “umbrella” structure.
This is not to assert that this model would work for many other institutions. First, many schools with limited graduate programs will be reluctant to “give up” some or all these programs to another partner in the same fashion as Otterbein has with Antioch. Others may not fit geographically, being too remote for expansion of existing programs. Still others may not wish to join a group with an avowed social justice mission. Finally, as with some consortia, the Coalition arrangement assumes a certain degree of institutional financial stability – it cannot work for institutions on the brink of financial disaster, lest the weakest institution drag down the others.
Are there other organizational variants that are more integrated than consortia, but allow the retention of their independence in ways impossible in a merger or acquisition model? What can be learned from the Coalition initiative that might help others? How might such middle-ground collaboration models be encouraged and supported?
How can philanthropy help?
This is an opportunity for the segments of the philanthropic world to consider possible new initiatives to support the small college elements of the education sector. While there will always be efforts to gain foundation support for individual colleges, there will never be enough money to buttress even a small portion of deserving institutions that face the financial troubles discussed above
Philanthropy should take a sectoral perspective. One key goal should be to find ways to support smaller institutions in general. Instead of focusing on gifts to particular institutions, those interested in supporting higher education should look at the multiple opportunities for forms of collaborative or collective action. Central to this effort should be exploration of ways of supporting diverse collaborative initiatives. One example would be to provide sufficient backing to a struggling HBCU or women’s college to enable it to be sufficiently stable to participate in a multi-institutional partnership.
As noted, institutional consortia are well established as one avenue for such collaboration. Consortia have existed for many years. There are consortia-based associations that encourage and support consortia efforts. However, every consortium is unique in its own ways, as participating institutions have crafted a specific initiative of a general model to meet their particular situations and need. Consortia can be important structures for many institutions and should be encouraged.
But there is a large middle ground between consortia arrangements and mergers and acquisitions. The Coalition for the Common Good is but one such arrangement and it is still in its early stages. What has been learned from the experience thus far that might be of use to other institutions and groups? How might this middle ground be explored further for the benefit of other institutions?
One thing learned from the Coalition is the complexity of developing a new model for collective action. Antioch and Otterbein separately pursued individual explorations of options for two or more years before determining that their partnership together should move forward. It then took a full year to get to the point of announcing their plans and another year to complete negotiations and sign completed legal documents and to obtain the necessary accreditor, regulator and Department of Education approvals. The actual implementation of their plans is still in a relatively early stage. In short, it takes time.
It also takes tremendous effort by leadership on both sides, as they must work closely together while continuing to address the daily challenges of their separate institutions. Everyone ends up with at least two major jobs. Communication is vital. Boards must continue to be supportive. The engagement of faculty and staff takes time and can be costly.
What is often referred to as “fit” – the melding of cultures and attitudes at both the institutional and individual levels – is essential. People must be able to work together for shared goals. The burdens of accreditation, while necessary, are time-consuming and multifaceted. There are many things that can go wrong. Indeed, there are examples of planned and announced mergers or collaborations that fall apart before completion.
Philanthropic institutions could support this work in numerous ways, first for specific initiatives and then for the sector, by providing funding and expertise to facilitate new forms of coalitions. These could include:
Providing financial support for the collaborative entity. While participating institutions eventually share the costs of creating the new arrangement, modest dedicated support funding could be immensely useful for mitigating the impact of legal expenses, due diligence requirements, initial management of shared efforts and expanded websites.
Providing support for expert advice. The leaders of two institutions seeking partnership need objective counsel on matters financial, legal, organizational, accreditation and more. Provision of expertise for distance education models is often a high priority, since many small colleges have limited experience with these.
Funding research. There are multiple opportunities for research and its dissemination. What works? What does not? How can lessons learned by disseminated?
Supporting communication through publications, workshops, conferences and other venues.
Developing training workshops for boards, leadership, staff and faculty in institutions considering collaborations.
Crafting a series of institutional incentives through seed grant awards to provide support for institutions just beginning to consider these options.
These types of initiatives might be separate, or they might be clustered into a national center to support and promote collaboration.
These and other ideas could be most helpful to many institutions exploring collaboration. Above all, it is important to undertake such explorations before it is too late, before the financial situation becomes so dire that there are few, if any, choices.
Conclusions
This middle ground is not a panacea. The harsh reality is that not all institutions can be saved. It takes a certain degree of stability and a sufficient financial base to even consider consortia or middle ground arrangements like the Coalition for the Common Good. Merging with or being acquired by stronger institutions is not a worst-case scenario – there are often plenty of reasons, not just financial, that this form of change makes great sense for a smaller, weaker institution.
It is also important for almost all institutions, even those with significant endowment resources, to be thinking about possible options. The stronger the institution, the stronger the resistance to such perspectives is likely to be. There are examples of wealthy undergraduate institutions with $1 billion endowments that are losing significant sums annually in their operating budgets. Such endowments often act like a giant pillow, absorbing the institutional challenges and preventing boards and leaders from facing difficult decisions until it may be too late. Every board should be considering possible future options.
In the face of likely government rollbacks of support, the ongoing demographic challenges for smaller institutions and the general uncertainties in some circle about the importance of higher education itself, independent private higher education must be more creative and assertive about its future. Also, it is essential to remember that the existential financial challenges facing these institutions predate the current Presidential Administration and certainly will remain once it has passed into history.
Just trying to compete more effectively for enrollments will not be sufficient. Neither will simply reducing expense budgets. New collaborative models are needed. Consortia have roles to play. The example of the Coalition for the Common Good may show new directions forward. Anyone who supports the diversity of American higher education institutions should work to find new ways of assuring financial stability while adhering to academic principles and core missions.
Chet Haskell is an independent higher education consultant. Most recently, he was Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs and University Provost at Antioch University and Vice President for Graduate Programs of the Coalition for the Common Good.
The authors of this article were three tenured and tenure-track faculty members in a teacher preparation program at a small private college in upstate New York. In December 2023, the college announced its closure following the spring, 2024 semester. After the announcement of our small private liberal arts college, we found ourselves redefining and reinventing our careers. Based on this experience of shock, mourning, and rebirth, we have advice to offer colleagues, especially those in teacher education.
It is no secret that enrollment in educator preparation programs nationwide has decreased by one-third to one-half over the last ten years. Simultaneously, costs associated with teacher preparation programs have increased. Accreditation costs, capstone portfolio software, and national and state certification exams have contributed to the enrollment “chill.” Political rhetoric regarding a teacher’s worth, teachers’ qualifications, and perception of the “return on investment” of a college degree have also contributed to lower enrollment numbers. We believe this adverse environment will continue for the foreseeable future.
The confluence of the political, economic, and practical factors is often hidden from faculty during the interview process. The philosophy of shared governance, displaying a college’s financial statements and “health statistics” is usually shrouded in “finance speak” at shared governance meetings. The administration and board of trustees fear the information will reach the press, thus shining a light on small endowments and how tuition-driven small private colleges are faring in today’s competitive climate. That open sharing only makes matters worse for an institution struggling to survive.
Here is our message: Take heed if you are a faculty member in educator preparation. We, the authors of this article, shared the same experience of college closure and loss of employment. However, we saw it through three different lenses: Jenni was an early tenure-track Assistant Professor; Julie was an Assistant Professor applying for rank and tenure; and Terri was a long-tenured Associate Professor who had once served as interim dean. Though viewed differently, we agree that tenure, and the pursuit of it, means little if your institution closes.
Jenni, the early career Assistant Professor, was in her second year of teaching at the institution after leaving an even smaller liberal arts institution which she felt was on shaky financial footing. She had the additional joy and stress of being pregnant with her second child when her new employer announced closure. The college would cease all operations at the close of the spring semester. She was now marked by an unlucky streak of two colleges, two closures. These circumstances had nothing to do with her competency. Jenni coordinated advisory board meetings and acted as the accreditation liaison for her entire department, and her teaching evaluations were strong.
Julie, the mid-career Assistant Professor, submitted her tenure portfolio in October, only to discover that the institution she believed would be her future academic home would no longer exist past the spring semester. The announcement left her in limbo. The board had not approved those recommended for tenure. The college also stated it was not going to vote on those submissions. A dedicated professional, with service hours, a record of scholarship, and stellar teaching evaluations should receive advancement in rank and tenure. Not only was she worthy of such recognition, but the faculty also believed that governance committees should continue their work, and the board should honor commitments to faculty, especially in light of the closure announcement. Julie had to find new employment. The advancement in rank would speak well for her future employment and contract negotiations.
For Terri, the tenured Associate Professor, the announcement came, not as a shock, since many knew the institution had experienced significant financial cutbacks over the years. However, she was looking toward another 5-10 years of dedication to scholarly work and shaping new teachers. She had dedicated 24 years to the institution and thought other institutions would not wish to hire someone who would indeed receive Professor Emeritus status had she retired immediately. She had been department chair, served as interim dean, and successfully led the last accreditation visit for the School of Education.
No matter the lens, each of us experienced a sense of shock, anger, and denial. We were living examples of Kubler-Ross’s stages of death and dying. The announcement came at the end of the fall semester when we gather evidence for accreditation, grade capstone portfolios, and perhaps, mentor student teachers who may have been unsuccessful during their last semester. In teacher preparation programs, the end of a semester is more complicated due to the external accreditation demands. It is always stressful, and knowing we were losing our jobs created more havoc. In addition, the college administration asked faculty to help develop teach-out plans for every current student and review transfer agreements with other institutions that were circling, like vultures, to acquire our students.
Though we cannot fully speak for one another, we agree that the holidays were a blur. The college’s last spring semester was about to start, and we were trying to support one another while performing triage on students. Going to campus was likened to caregiving for someone in hospice. The death was sure to come. We knew the date of the end of life. Simultaneously, we had to prepare for our professional futures.
Our questions at the time were as follows: Will I need to find work in another state? How does losing my job impact tuition exchange? How will we find employment for the following academic year when many searches have closed? Who will hire me, pregnant? Who will hire me at my advanced career stage? Should we re-enter the PK-12 classroom?
Based on this experience, we wish to warn our colleagues in educator preparation at small private institutions nationwide. Having tenure, going up for tenure, and moving early in one’s career to another institution thought to be more stable, spared none of us. So, take our experience as a cautionary tale. The most beneficial action you take now may help you leverage your next position, within or outside teacher preparation.
First, diversify your academic portfolio.
Develop a secondary passion in online pedagogy in teacher preparation, all matters of accreditation, or teacher induction through your state education department. These diversified interests may create new possibilities in state government policy development, technology, or research efforts.
Secondly, get involved in state and local teacher preparation professional organizations.
The meaningful connections you make within those networks provide you with the “inside scoop” on possible job openings, some of which may enable you to stay in your current home. Other colleges and universities surrounding your current institution may have opportunities that do not appear evident during extreme stress.
Finally, let your work and research ethic at your current institution be outstanding.
Should you move to another educator preparation position, your work on college or university governance, your knowledge of accreditation and certification, the record of acting as an involved and innovative club advisor, and strong collaboration with PK-12 partners will serve you well during stressful times. Tenure is nice, but diversified interests, your passion, a record of leadership in state and national professional activities, and a history of a strong work ethic will prove highly beneficial.
In the end, Jenni, the early career faculty member found a position ten miles from her current college in a neighboring private institution that agreed, with state approval, to subsume current programs so students could continue their education uninterrupted. She is currently on a tenure track line and has a beautiful new son. The mid-career Assistant Professor, Julie, received advanced rank and tenure at the closing institution. She is now an Associate Professor under a new contract at a new public comprehensive institution. She relocated approximately 100 miles to be near her new position. The senior faculty member, Terri, was sought out for her knowledge regarding accreditation and certification but was granted Assistant Professor status. She teaches at an entirely online public institution and has started the tenure process again.
