One of the challenges for students entering the workforce is identifying how their experiences in and outside the classroom have prepared them for careers. A 2023 survey by Cengage found that one-third of recent graduates felt underqualified for entry-level roles, and only 41 percent believed their program taught them the skills needed for their first job.
Focused career development opportunities that address unique learner populations, such as working or neurodiverse students, can help bridge the gap between lived experiences and their application to the world of jobs.
Inside Higher Ed compiled various initiatives that increase career readiness for specific student populations.
Neurodiverse Learners
Beacon College in Leesburg, Fla., primarily serves students with learning disabilities, including ADHD and dyslexia. Last year the college established a career fair designed for these learners, which introduces them to employers looking to develop a neurodiverse talent workforce.
Survey Says
Just under half of college students believe their college or university should focus more on helping students find internships and job possibilities, according to a May 2024 Student Voice survey by Inside Higher Ed and Generation Lab.
This spring’s event, Internship Careers and Neurodiversity (ICAN), featured two dozen national and local employers. Success coaches were on site to support students and employers as they engaged with one another, and students could visit the Zen Den if they needed a quiet and private space to process.
ICAN “is designed to remove barriers and reduce anxiety often associated with large-scale ‘convention center’ type events, so Beacon College can empower neurodivergent college students and help increase their participation in networking events elsewhere,” according to an April press release.
Student Athletes
Student athletes have packed schedules while they’re in season, making it difficult to balance athletics, coursework and extracurricular activities, which can sometimes push career development opportunities to the background.
To help student athletes build their confidence in professional settings, Kennesaw State University created a “networking scrimmage” with employers so learners could practice introducing themselves, relay their academic and athletic accomplishments, and discuss career interests in a low-stakes environment, according to a university press release.
Students also heard from three former student athletes who shared their stories of transitioning from sports into the workforce, as well as advice on how to navigate postcollege life.
Adult Learners
In 2023, the University of Phoenix created a digital tool that allows working adult learners to identify skills and goals that will guide them on their career journey.
Students can access Career Navigator through the student portal. The tool allows them to build out demonstrated and self-attested skills and explore job features, including daily tasks and salary range, as well as identify skill gaps they may have when pursuing their desired career.
Student Veterans
After leaving military service, many veterans enroll in college to build career skills and gain further education, but connecting their military experience to civilian life can be a challenge.
The University of Colorado, Denver, provides a one-year cohort program for student veterans, Boots to Suits, to aid their journey, providing personalized academic and career-development resources. Program participants receive job search strategies and career coaching, as well as advice on networking and building their LinkedIn profile and résumé.
Major Programs
While general career fairs and networking opportunities can give students visibility into employers or roles they may not otherwise have considered, tailored events can connect students of a particular discipline to employers looking for their expertise.
Staff at Villanova University identified a problem at their career fairs: The number of employers looking for early-career civil engineers far overshadowed the number of students interested in such jobs. In response, staff created a new event specifically for civil engineering students, allowing employers to connect with potential interns earlier in their college career while also ensuring that students who were interested in other fields were able to engage with organizations that better fit their career goals.
The University of Maryland hosts a Visual Arts Reverse Career and Internship Fair, a flipped model of the career fair in which employers visit a student’s table or booth to engage with their portfolio of work. This allows students to display graphic design, video production and immersive media skills in an engaging way that better reflects their learning and accomplishments.
Do you have a career-focused intervention that might help others promote student success? Tell us about it.
“The Government will explore introducing a levy on higher education provider income from international students, to be reinvested into the higher education and skills system. Further details will be set out in the Autumn Budget.”
35 words that have put the sector into a spin, spun out tens of thousands of words of analysis and rebuttal, and set into motion a shared panic that the government is not only going to reduce the number of international students but tax the students that universities manage to recruit.
Design
The only things that we know about the levy is that the government has used a six per cent tax on international fees as an “illustrative example” in its technical annex, the government assumes this cost would be passed on to international students, and that passing on these costs will depress international student numbers by around 7,000. In terms of the levy design there is the promise that the money will be ringfenced for higher education and skills but which parts and how is not defined. It is of course also not guaranteed.
The sector’s response has been to point out that reducing the number of international students and devaluing the unit of resource they bring with them will put additional financial pressure on universities. The impact will also be uneven with the largest recruiters of international students paying the highest levy.
The government has made a hugely consequential policy signal with no details, scant impact assessment, and no analysis of the consequences. However, if a levy of some form is going to happen the sector should think carefully about which kinds of levy they believe would be preferable. Not all levies are built equally.
Australia
The idea for a levy seems to have come from the Australian Universities Accord. The UK government does not seem to have noticed that the idea was heavily edited and caveated in the final report but in the interim report it was noted that:
The Review notes various submissions support establishing a specific fund that could be used for future infrastructure needs, as well other national priorities. This could include consideration of a levy on international student fee income. The use of this revenue for sectoral-wide priorities could reflect the collaborative nature of the sector in building a strong and enduring system. The Review notes further examination is required, including consideration of some level of co-investment from governments.
There is a little bit more detail here but not much. Like the UK version the fund would be hypothecated toward higher education and used to fund things on a system wide basis. The politics on the face of it appear progressive that the institutions that benefit most from private capital, the flow of international students, pay a proportion of it back to fund public goods in the wider higher education system. The less progressive element is that international students pay once to their institution, they would then pay a levy which their provider would pass on to them in increased fees, and they then prop up an education system of a nation in which they are not permanently resident.
The University of Melbourne did some follow up work looking at the implications of such a levy. Some of the issues they picked up are whether this would be a levy on all international students in all kinds of education, whether it is reasonable to distribute funding from high income to low income institutions, whether the idea of a levy in and of itself would dampen demand, and whether the impact of taxing income from individual providers is more harmful than the collective benefits they may receive from a shared fund.
Depending how the government chooses to apply its levy we would expect to see very different results. An Australian model which redistributes funding from the wealthiest institution to the least wealthy would have a very different set of consequences to a levy which took a six per cent flat tax and put it into a general fund for infrastructure. It feels odd within a market based higher education system to make one provider dependent on the success of another. It also feels odd to make international students who are studying at a specific institution responsible for the health of the wider sector.
Some would see an intra-university levy as a recognition that the success of the system is the success of each provider. Some would see it as an unjustifiable tax on the most financially successful institutions.
New Zealand
Australia’s Antipodean partner already has a form of student levy.
New Zealand’s Export Education Levy is charged as a proportion of the fee international fee-paying students pay to their providers. Depending on the kind of institution this is charged at between .5 per cent and .89 per cent of tuition fees.
The levy has a direct relationship between funders and beneficiaries. Although it is a tax on learners, and by extension a tax on providers, the funding is used for the development of the export education sector, a recovery scheme should a provider be unable to continue teaching, the administration of the international element of The Education (Pastoral Care of Tertiary and InternationalLearners) Code of Practice 2021 (this includes a range of safety, wellbeing and advice support), and the funding of the International Student Contract Dispute Resolution Scheme (a scheme for students to resolve disputes with their providers on contracts and financial issues.)
This system has been in place with some variations and the occasional suspension since 2002. The international education system is much smaller in New Zealand than the UK and the amount of funding the levy raises is modest at close to three million dollars in 2022/23. The model in operation here is a relatively small tax to fund things which providers have a shared interest in. It’s not a direct cash transfer between providers but a collective pot to reinvest into the economic commodity of international education. The scheme was suspended during COVID-19 as a measure to support the sector, so its financial impacts are clearly not negligible, but post COVID-19 international enrolments are recovering strongly. Whether they would have recovered even more strongly without a levy is impossible to know.
This is a light-touch, shared endeavour, we all should have some investment in international education, kind of a levy and it is not the only levy New Zealand has.
The Student Service Levy is a fee applied to all student fees to fund non-academic services. The University of Auckland surveys students every year on what they would like their fees to be spent on and in 2024, in descending order by amount, funding was spent on sports, recreation and cultural activities, counselling services and pastoral care, health services, child care services, clubs and societies, careers advice, legal advice, financial advice, and media.
This is a general levy but the principle has broader applications. It would be entirely possible to levy international student fees to pay for non-academic services. For example, university access budgets are effectively paid for by a levy on fees. This system seems fairer in some ways than a general levy. The place where a student studies is the primary beneficiary of their fees. From a policy perspective it would allow the government to move institutional behaviour toward things they care about by stipulating what the fee could be spent on. However, given that international student fees subsidy much of university work already it would again feel like they are paying twice. Additionally, if providers didn’t have to redistribute their funding on a national basis the providers with the most international students would be able to spend the most on non-academic elements.
Where else
It is also worth stating the government’s proposed levy would not function like the Apprenticeship Levy. The Apprenticeship Levy is a tax on employer’s payroll but employers are able to access the funds they contribute to spend on apprenticeships with any underspend clawed back by the government. Plainly, if government allowed providers to access the fees they contribute to the levy for the education of their own students there would be no point in having a levy in the first place beyond giving universities the political coverage to raise fees. Presumably, not an outcome the government is intending.
The argument against a levy of international student fees will dominate the sector for months to come. Should a levy come to pass universities would be well disposed to think of which kinds of levy they might prefer. A model which redistributes funding across providers and if so which providers and for what projects. A model which internally redistributes funding toward student support. Or, likely the least popular, a model which allows the government to reinvest the funding broadly and perhaps outside of higher education.
In making the case of the harm a levy could cause the sector may also win over more sympathy if it can explain which kinds of levies in which places have what kinds of effects depending on how they are applied. A levy may generally be a bad idea but some versions are much more harmful than others.
Higher education is operating in a time of rapid change and uncertainty. Changes in federal and state policy, funding, and increasing polarization are reshaping campus environments and profoundly affecting many students’ experiences. As leaders, it is critical to understand how these forces are impacting student wellbeing—and what actions institutions can take to adapt and strengthen their supports for students.
The Action Network for Equitable Wellbeing (ANEW) is a networked community of higher education changemakers working together to advance systems-level transformation to improve student wellbeing. Drawing on the involvement of more than 200 colleges and universities, our experience shows that while there is no single solution, institutions can act quickly and intentionally to strengthen student support using a practical, data-driven, human-centered approach.
Through this collaborative work, we’ve identified three strategies that are helping campuses respond more effectively to the rapidly evolving needs of their students: using real-time disaggregated data, conducting empathy interviews, and building a rhythm of frequent data collection and sense-making.
Collect real-time quantitative data and analyze it thoughtfully
How students are doing can change rapidly as policies and rhetoric shift, availability of external resources change, significant events on campus or in the world occur, and new barriers or supports emerge. Relying on older data (e.g. survey data collected nine months ago) can miss important changes. Without timely insight, decisions may be based on outdated information or an incomplete understanding. Systematically collecting real-time data helps institutions stay aligned with students’ current realities.
To support this kind of real-time data collection, ANEW institutions have used the Wellbeing Improvement Survey for Higher Education Settings (WISHES)—a short survey, available at no cost, that provides institutions with timely and actionable data on a range of outcomes and experiences influencing student wellbeing. WISHES helps institutions monitor student wellbeing and stay responsive to the present moment.
But aggregate data tell only part of the story. To understand how different groups of students are faring, disaggregating data by relevant student characteristics can reveal patterns that may be hidden in campus-wide averages and allow institutions to focus support where it is most needed, such as groups of students who might be disproportionately struggling.
In fall 2023, the University of California, Irvine administered WISHES, disaggregated its data, and found that Middle Eastern students seemed to be experiencing more challenges than their peers in some measures. “Aggregate data really doesn’t tell you anything [about what to do]—you have to disaggregate,” said Doug Everhart, director of student wellness and health promotion at UC Irvine. “In order to find meaning behind the data, you have to follow up and ask questions to dig into the lived experience and the ‘why’. That focus is what makes [the ANEW] approach so useful.” The real-time disaggregated data allowed the team to better understand the Middle Eastern student experience and develop strategies responsive to their needs.
Conduct empathy interviews to develop actionable, human-centered insights
Real-time disaggregated survey data can reveal where differences exist—but it likely won’t explain them. Empathy interview is a method used in diverse sectors and settings to understand what’s behind the patterns in quantitative data. These insights are important for informing what specific changes are needed to better support students.
An empathy interview is a one-on-one session that uses deep listening and responsive prompts to explore the lived experience of an individual on a specific topic such as wellbeing. Empathy interviews uncover holistic and nuanced perspectives about a student’s life—including what they’re facing, what matters to them, and how they navigate challenges and opportunities. Empathy interviews are not formal research, but they offer a structured way for leaders to move beyond assumptions and gain insights that are authentic, revealing, and actionable from those who are most affected.
Katy Redd, executive director of the Longhorn Wellness Center at the University of Texas at Austin, reflected on the value of this strategy, “Going through this process pushed us to confront the gap between how we assume students experience college and what their day-to-day reality actually looks like for low-income students. Listening closely helped us notice invisible norms and structures that many students are expected to navigate without support. It shifted our mindset—away from surface-level solutions and toward deeper questions about how our systems function and for whom.”
Michelle Kelly, assistant vice president for health and wellbeing at the University of Texas at Arlington, described a similar shift in perspective: “There was a moment after our empathy interviews where it just clicked: we’d been asking students to navigate systems we ourselves hadn’t fully mapped. It was humbling—but also motivating. Hearing their stories reminded us that the data isn’t just about trends—it’s about real people trying to make it through college while juggling a hundred other things.”
These interviews, coupled with WISHES data, revealed insights that were difficult to uncover through other methods and have helped institutions think and act more systematically about what’s shaping students’ experiences and outcomes.
Develop a rhythm of frequent data collection and sense-making
Being responsive to student needs isn’t about changing course in response to every complaint—it’s about noticing patterns early and adjusting when needed, which requires more than one-time or yearly data collection. Institutions that build a regular rhythm of frequent data collection and sense-making are better equipped to detect shifts, learn from them, and adapt in ways that support student wellbeing.
WISHES is most effective when administered multiple times per semester over many years. Data collected frequently over time provide helpful context when trying to understand how students are impacted by significant events on campus or in the world. Institutions can better answer questions like: Are students struggling more or less than they were at similar points of the semester in previous years? In times of extraordinary change, it is easy to imagine that students are doing worse than they were previously. Frequent data collection and sense-making allow us to objectively determine if this assumption is true.
ANEW institutions that frequently collect data over time using WISHES have been able to understand in close to real time how large external events—such as the pandemic, October 7, and the shifting political environment—have impacted student wellbeing. Schools have reported that WISHES data enabled them to check their assumptions about the impact these events had on student wellbeing. In some cases, assumptions have been disproven using data, allowing schools to avoid trying to solve nonexistent problems or the wrong problem.
As the University of Maryland reflects, “We’ve administered WISHES 10 times over the past two years and have seen firsthand the benefits of frequent data collection and are excited for the future. We most recently have begun to build a dashboard to display our WISHES metrics over time and democratize these critical insights to a myriad of roles within our campus community, which we hope will lead to more effective support for students across our university.”
In the face of today’s challenges, higher education has a powerful opportunity—and responsibility—to lead with empathy, insight, and action. By embracing a data-driven, student-centered approach, institutions can move beyond assumptions and truly understand what their students need to flourish. The experiences shared by ANEW institutions demonstrate that meaningful change is not only possible but already underway. Now is the time for campuses to lean in, listen deeply, and build the systems that will support every student’s wellbeing.
This post was written by Joanna Adams (Rochester Institute of Technology), Jennifer Maltby (Rochester Institute of Technology), and Allison Smith (New York University), with the co-leadership and insights of hundreds of changemakers contributing to the Action Network for Equitable Wellbeing.
If you have any questions or comments about this blog post, please contact us.
Washington, D.C. –CoSN today awarded Delaware Area Career Center in Delaware, Ohio, the Trusted Learning Environment (TLE) Mini Seal in the Business Practice. The CoSN TLE Seal is a national distinction awarded to school districts implementing rigorous privacy policies and practices to help protect student information. Delaware Area Career Center is the sixth school district in Ohio to earn a TLE Seal or TLE Mini Seal. To date, TLE Seal recipients have improved privacy protections for over 1.2 million students.
The CoSN TLE Seal program requires that school systems uphold high standards for protecting student data privacy across five key practice areas: Leadership, Business, Data Security, Professional Development and Classroom. The TLE Mini Seal program enables school districts nationwide to build toward earning the full TLE Seal by addressing privacy requirements in one or more practice areas at a time. All TLE Seal and Mini Seal applicants receive feedback and guidance to help them improve their student data privacy programs.
“CoSN is committed to supporting districts as they address the complex demands of student data privacy. We’re proud to see Delaware Area Career Center take meaningful steps to strengthen its privacy practices and to see the continued growth of the TLE Seal program in Ohio,” said Keith Krueger, CEO, CoSN.
“Earning the TLE Mini Seal is a tremendous acknowledgement of the work we’ve done to uphold high standards in safeguarding student data. This achievement inspires confidence in our community and connects us through a shared commitment to privacy, transparency and security at every level,” said Rory Gaydos, Director of Information Technology, Delaware Area Career Center.
The CoSN TLE Seal is the only privacy framework designed specifically for school systems. Earning the TLE Seal requires that school systems have taken measurable steps to implement, maintain and improve organization-wide student data privacy practices. All TLE Seal recipients are required to demonstrate that improvement through a reapplication process every two years.
About CoSN CoSN, the world-class professional association for K-12 EdTech leaders, stands at the forefront of education innovation. We are driven by a mission to equip current and aspiring K-12 education technology leaders, their teams, and school districts with the community, knowledge, and professional development they need to cultivate engaging learning environments. Our vision is rooted in a future where every learner reaches their unique potential, guided by our community. CoSN represents over 13 million students and continues to grow as a powerful and influential voice in K-12 education. www.cosn.org
About the CoSN Trusted Learning Environment Seal Program The CoSN Trusted Learning Environment (TLE) Seal Program is the nation’s only data privacy framework for school systems, focused on building a culture of trust and transparency. The TLE Seal was developed by CoSN in collaboration with a diverse group of 28 school system leaders nationwide and with support from AASA, The School Superintendents Association, the Association of School Business Officials International (ASBO) and ASCD. School systems that meet the program requirements will earn the TLE Seal, signifying their commitment to student data privacy to their community. TLE Seal recipients also commit to continuous examination and demonstrable future advancement of their privacy practices. www.cosn.org/trusted
About Delaware Area Career Center Delaware Area Career Center provides unique elective courses to high school students in Delaware County and surrounding areas. We work in partnership with partner high schools to enhance academic education with hands-on instruction that is focused on each individual student’s area of interest. DACC students still graduate from their home high school, but they do so with additional college credits, industry credentials, and valuable experiences. www.delawareareacc.org
eSchool Media staff cover education technology in all its aspects–from legislation and litigation, to best practices, to lessons learned and new products. First published in March of 1998 as a monthly print and digital newspaper, eSchool Media provides the news and information necessary to help K-20 decision-makers successfully use technology and innovation to transform schools and colleges and achieve their educational goals.
Unibuddy, a higher education peer-to-peer engagement platform, has officially launched Assistant – an AI tool designed to support large-scale, authentic student-led conversations.
Following a successful beta phase, the tool is now fully live with 30 institutions worldwide and delivering impressive results: tripling student engagement, cutting staff workload significantly, and maintaining over 95% accuracy.
As universities face increasing pressure from tighter budgets and rising student expectations, Unibuddy said its Assistant tool offers a powerful solution to scale meaningful engagement efficiently, combining the speed of AI with the authenticity of real student voices.
65,000 unique students have used Assistant
100,000+ student questions answered automatically without requiring manual intervention
125% increase in students having conversations
60% increase in lead capture
five hours saved per day for university staff
“Today’s students demand instant, authentic and trustworthy communication,” said Diego Fanara, CEO at Unibuddy. “Unibuddy Assistant is the first and only solution that fuses the speed of AI with the credibility of peer-to-peer guidance – giving institutions a scalable way to meet expectations without sacrificing quality or trust.”
Unibuddy has partnered with more than 600 institutions globally and has supported over 3,000,000 prospective students through the platform. As part of this extensive network, it regularly conducts surveys to uncover fresh insights. Although chatbots are now common in higher education, survey findings highlight key limitations in their effectiveness:
84%of students said that university responses were too slow (Unibuddy Survey, 2025)
79%of students said it was important that universities balance AI automation (for speed) and human interaction (for depth) while supporting them as they navigate the decision-making process (Unibuddy Survey, 2025)
51%ofstudents say they wouldn’t trust a chatbot to answer questions about the student experience (Unibuddy Survey, 2024)
78% say talking to a current student is helpful — making them 3.5x more likely to trust a peer than a bot (Unibuddy Survey, 2025)
Only 14% of students felt engaged by the universities they applied to (Unibuddy Survey, 2025)
Unibuddy says these finding have shaped its offering: using AI to handle routine questions and highlight valuable information, while smoothly handing off to peer or staff conversations when a personal, human connection is needed.
Buckinghamshire New Universityused Unibuddy Assistant to transform early-stage engagement – generating 800,000 impressions, 30,000 clickthroughs, and 10,000+ student conversationsin just six months. The university saved over 2,000 staff hoursand saw 3,000 referrals to students or staff.
Today’s students demand instant, authentic and trustworthy communication Diego Fanara, Unibuddy
Meanwhile the University of South Florida Muma College of Business reported over 30 staff hours saved per month, with a 59% click-to-conversation rate and over a third of chats in Assistant resulting in referrals to student ambassador conversations.
And the University of East Anglia deployed Assistant across more than 100 web pages, as part of the full Unibuddy product suites deployment of peer-to-peer chat, with student-led content contributing to a 62% offer-to-student conversion rate compared with 34% of those who didn’t engage with Unibuddy.
The Association of Australian Education Representatives in India (AAERI), in a submission to the Minister for Home Affairs and the Minister for Education, has urged the Labor government to link student visas to the institution of initial enrolment.
The association, established in October 1996 to uphold the credibility of education agents recruiting students for Australian institutions, proposed that any change in course or institution should require a new visa application, with the existing visa automatically cancelled upon such a change.
“This proposed reform means that a student’s visa would be directly linked to the education provider (institution) listed in their initial Confirmation of Enrolment (CoE) at the time of visa approval. The student would be required to remain enrolled at that institution,” read a statement by AAERI.
The association expalined that if a student wishes to change their course or education provider, they must obtain a new CoE from the new institution, apply for a fresh student visa, and once again demonstrate that they meet all Genuine Student requirements.
“Such a measure will strengthen the integrity of Australia’s student visa program, reduce exploitation in the education sector, improve compliance with Genuine Student (GS) criteria, and safeguard Australia’s reputation as a provider of high-quality international education,” it added.
“Additionally, this reform will support ethical education agents and reputable institutions by discouraging course-hopping and misuse of the student visa system, thereby enhancing student retention and sector stability.”
Such a measure will strengthen the integrity of Australia’s student visa program, reduce exploitation in the education sector, improve compliance with Genuine Student (GS) criteria, and safeguard Australia’s reputation as a provider of high-quality international education. AAERI
Based on AAERI’s submission, such a policy would align with Condition 8516, which requires students to remain enrolled in a registered course at the same level or higher than the one for which their visa was originally granted.
As per reports, education loan applications from India, one of Australia’s biggest student markets, have quadrupled since the Covid pandemic, with the number of loan-seeking students expected to rise further.
With many students relying on Indian public and private banks for education loans, changes in their courses in Australia have often led to their original loans being considered void, placing many at significant financial risk.
“Based on our communication with several Indian banks, if a student changes their course or education provider after arriving in Australia, their loan arrangements may need to be reassessed, taking into account new course fees, institution credibility, and repayment ability,” stated AAERI.
“The original loan is void and stands suspended. This poses significant financial risks for students and impacts their compliance with visa conditions.”
According to AAERI, the problem is also prevalent among Nepali students, with nearly 60,000 currently studying in Australia.
The association also highlighted examples from other study destinations that Australia can learn from in implementing the proposed framework.
While New Zealand allows course or provider changes but may require a variation of conditions or a new visa, especially for pathway visa holders or when moving to lower-level courses, in the UK, the student visa system is closely tied to licensed sponsors through the Confirmation of Acceptance for Studies, so changing institutions generally requires a new CAS and immigration permission.
In Canada, stricter rules have been implemented requiring international students to be enrolled at the Designated Learning Institution named on their study permit, and to change institutions, students must apply for and obtain a new study permit, emphasising the importance of linking visas to specific institutions.
“Australia’s recent reforms, such as closing the concurrent CoE loophole and requiring CoEs for onshore visa applications, are steps in a similar direction but do not go far enough to address the core issue of unethical student poaching, misuse of student visa and provider switching,” stated AAERI.
AAERI’s call for action comes at a time when the return of the Labour government is viewed as “offering little comfort to an international education sector already under-siege”, as highlighted in a recent article by Ian Pratt, managing director of Lexis English, for The PIE News.
In Anthony Albanese’s second term, the Prime Minister established a new role – assistant minister for international education – and appointed Victorian MP Julian Hill.
“It’s important that students who come here get a quality education… This sector is complex and Julian Hill is someone who’s been involved as a local member as well, and I think he’ll be a very good appointment,” Albanese stated at a press conference this week.
You don’t think much about doormats unless you’re at HomeGoods, but they serve many purposes — a place to wipe your shoes, a way to distinguish otherwise identical-looking apartments, and a vessel for personal expression, whether serious or funny.
Graduate student Amelia Roskin-Frazee chose the last of these. Her UC Irvine apartment doormat read, “No Warrant. No Entry.”
For that alone, UC Irvine is now subjecting Roskin-Frazee and other students to disciplinary proceedings, ordering them to remove personalized doormats or face punishment.
“Doesn’t UC Irvine have anything better to do than to censor my doormat?” said Roskin-Frazee. “The university should refocus its energy where it belongs: on educating its students.”
Administrator admits to selective policy enforcement
The dispute dates back to late 2023, when Roskin-Frazee emailed an administrator to express her concerns about a university policy banning “any signage in windows or on doors facing outside that have words on them.” She (rightly) argued the rule could violate students’ expressive rights and raised concerns about censorship — particularly regarding speech about LGBT issues and sexual assault awareness.
In response, the coordinator cited an even broader university housing policy that prohibits “[a]ll outward‐facing signs, decorations, and expressions in windows/on doors.” While restricting certain types of signs or flags in windows for fire safety reasons may be reasonable under the First Amendment, this total ban is not narrowly tailored to those specific concerns.
Worse, the coordinator added that the policy is selectively enforced based on content, explaining that the office probably wouldn’t ask someone to remove a holiday snowflake display but that it has asked “people to take down things like Pride flags, country flags, and advertisements for businesses.”
This is classic content discrimination.
Back in 2005, Pastor Clyde Reed of Good News Community Church put up a few signs directing people to his Sunday service in Gilbert, Arizona. But the town’s sign code restricted how large signs could be and how long they could stay up depending on what they said. So Reed sued, and 10 years later in the landmark case Reed v. Town of Gilbert, the Supreme Court said that if a law treats speech differently based on its content, it’s probably unconstitutional.
Free speech means free speech. You don’t get to play favorites based on what the message says. Reed helped remind the country that the First Amendment isn’t just a suggestion. But apparently, UC Irvine never got the memo.
Students threatened with punishment for doormats
On April 14, 2025, the same administrator notified Roskin-Frazee that her doormat could violate yet another onerous university policy that says only doormats “without words or images” are allowed — and ordered her to remove it.
It’s hard to imagine this sort of content discrimination serves a compelling university interest, because it’s not about the actual doormat—it’s about the expression on the doormat. If doormats present a risk to safety in the hallways, for instance, by impeding the ability of emergency services to move in the hallway, shouldn’t any doormat pose that kind of risk? Why does the message on the doormat matter?
FIRE wrote to the university on April 21 explaining that the UC Irvine cannot “maintain speech-restrictive policies that it enforces only when staff or administrators disapprove of the content or viewpoint of speech,” and urging it to refrain from punishing or threatening to evict Roskin-Frazee from her apartment because of her doormat.
The university responded to us on April 23, telling us that it was not threatening Roskin-Frazee with eviction. That’s a relief. But our concerns about these policies and their enforcement remain.
Flawed policies lead to flawed enforcement
FIRE wrote to the university again on May 14, taking issue with its broader policies on displays. As we told the university, it “has discretion to impose restrictions on unprotected speech, such as obscenity or images for which the university holds a copyright. But banning any expressive doormat, regardless of whether the doormats pose any safety concerns or otherwise violate university policy or the law, is not a reasonable time, place, and manner restriction of protected speech.”
Targeting doormats for removal based on their content violates the First Amendment. Period.
The university’s policies on outward-facing displays are similarly flawed. Why would an outward-facing display in an apartment pose a different safety or fire risk than an inward-facing display? Delineating between displays like signs or posters based on whether or not they’re visible from the outside, as opposed to whether or not they pose fire or safety risks, is a restriction on student expression, plain and simple.
Chancellor Howard Gillman knows this better than most. After all, he wrote his doctoral thesis on constitutional ideology. This isn’t hard. UC Irvine must reform its policies to align with the First Amendment.
63% of over 1,000 efforts to suppress student speech resulted in administrative investigation or punishment.
In the wake of Hamas’s 2023 attack on Israel, administrators overtook students as the main instigators of attempted speech suppression.
Speech about race and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict led to most attempts.
PHILADELPHIA, May 15, 2025 — A new reportfrom the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression found that 637 college students and student groups were punished or investigated by administrators for their constitutionally protected expression between 2020-2024.
“Students Under Fire” documents over 1,000 efforts to punish students for speech and expression over a five-year span, 63% of which resulted in some form of administrative punishment. The research provides the most detailed collection of speech-related campus controversies involving students to date. The underlying data will be compiled in an interactive database that will be regularly updated and searchable by the source of the outrage, demands made of the institution, whether the pressure is from the political left or right of the student’s speech, the outcome, and more.
“Every instance of censorship threatens students’ ability to engage in a free exchange of ideas,” said FIRE Senior Researcher Logan Dougherty. “Open minds and free debate, not self-censorship and punishment, must be the standard across our nation’s campuses.”
There were two dominant incendiary topics on campus: race and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The report found that following the murder of George Floyd in 2020, race was the topic that most commonly landed a student in hot water. The Oct. 7 Hamas attacks on Israel, and subsequent debates over the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and Israel’s military response, then quickly became the topic that most often produced attempts at punishment.
Other notable findings from the report include:
The problem spans ideologies. When it comes to speech about race, most students are targeted from their left, while students speaking out about the war in Gaza are more likely to be targeted from their right.
Among the worst punishments were 72 students or groups who were suspended, 55 who were expelled, lost student group funding, or were otherwise separated from their university, and 19 more who were unenrolled under ambiguous circumstances. In one case, a student had to sleep in his car after his university kicked him out of campus housing. In another, a student was suspended for sending a survey about mental health to his peers.
The most frequently targeted or punished student groups spanned the political divide: Students for Justice in Palestine (75 incidents), Turning Point USA (65 incidents), and the College Republicans (58 incidents)
The report also found that after a decade of surging efforts by students to silence campus speech, administrators have taken up the censorial mantle in the wake of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. In 2020, only 27% of cases were initiated by administrators. By 2024, that number increased to 52%.
“This is unacceptable coming from people whose job it is to serve college students and ensure that their rights are protected,” said FIRE Chief Research Advisor Sean Stevens. “Their job should be to protect students’ free speech rights, not torpedo them.”
The First Amendment protects students at public institutions — and those institutions cannot legally punish students for the expression in the report (though they often do). Private institutions, though not directly bound by the First Amendment, often make institutional promises of free speech and academic freedom. FIRE advocates for targeted students at both types of institutions.
Students at public institutions should contact FIRE if they face punishment for their expression by submitting a case.
The Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) is a nonpartisan, nonprofit organization dedicated to defending and sustaining the individual rights of all Americans to free speech and free thought — the most essential qualities of liberty. FIRE educates Americans about the importance of these inalienable rights, promotes a culture of respect for these rights, and provides the means to preserve them.
Over the last ten years – and particularly since the pandemic – the complexity of student wellbeing issues in higher education has increased significantly. It became clear to us at the University of Exeter that the traditional model of academic tutoring alone was no longer sufficient to meet the needs of our students.
Like many other higher education institutions, we had long utilised an academic support model where most academic staff were allocated groups of tutees to provide both academic and pastoral support alongside a range of professional services in areas such as welfare, wellbeing, accessibility and financial support. Our review and research into higher education institutions best practice – both in the UK and internationally, and drawing on approaches from schools and further education providers, identified a clear need for dedicated expertise to provide pastoral support at Exeter.
This led to the development of our Pastoral Mentor model, which we began piloting in autumn 2023. By 1 August 2025, we will have rolled out Pastoral Mentors to every department. Our model was described briefly in Wonkhe last year but you can also read more about it in the Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education. In summary, Pastoral Mentors are dedicated, non-teaching student support staff embedded in departments, serving as a friendly first point of contact for students facing challenges affecting their studies. They proactively reach out to students based on engagement and attainment data, offer a non-judgmental space for conversations, and connect students with specialist support services as needed. Our pastoral mentors work closely with discipline based staff and wider support services to identify the best way to assist students and ensure that the help they need is connected and timely.
Lessons from transformation
While institutions will adopt different approaches to student support, in this piece we reflect on what we’ve learned from implementing institutional change at Exeter, and share the key principles which underpin our model – offering insights we hope will be useful for others working in this space.
Early identification is key. The earlier students identify they are struggling the easier it is to provide support and put remedies in place. Often, the causes of student failure and drop out begin as relatively low-level challenges, but these can escalate over time – non-attendance leads to missed submissions, which in turn result in failed modules, referrals and potentially withdrawal. If we can identify students whose attendance pattern drops early and support them to get back into the classroom, we can mitigate against many of these larger issues.
Data is key to this. All institutions now hold large amounts of data on our students; attendance, engagement with the VLE, submissions, grades. We need to use this to support students and at Exeter we developed a bespoke engagement dashboard to enable us to identify students who might be struggling.
Clear lines of responsibility are vital. It’s no good having access to data if it’s not clear who is going to act on it. Our Pastoral Mentors are responsible for using the engagement dashboard to identify students of concern and do the initial reach out. They then are responsible for linking students who require more specialist support with the correct service, not just telling the student who to contact but in some cases making that contact for them or following up with the student later to ensure they have accessed the support they need. It’s vital that students don’t slip through the net – whether because no one acts on the data or because they fall unnoticed between services.
Clear escalation processes need to be established. It’s critical to have a clear understanding of where one person’s responsibility ends and when a student should be confidently referred to a specialist. We’ve developed well-defined escalation processes so that our Pastoral Mentors don’t feel pressured to take on issues beyond their expertise and remit, and to ensure we make full use of the specialist staff elsewhere in the institution – helping to maintain the integrity of the overall support ecosystem.
Presence is a must. Early feedback from our students’ union and students’ guild highlighted the importance of face-to-face, named support, with students finding it easier to seek help from someone they already know. Our Pastoral Mentors are present in departments, they attend welcome and transition events, informal department gatherings and department social events for students. Students should know who the Pastoral Mentor is before they need help to facilitate that first conversation. As a core part of the education team, Pastoral Mentors also become specialists in the rhythm and challenges of the discipline and can thus provide contextualised support and advice relevant to the students’ programme.
Clarity of message for students is essential. Students are often put off seeking support because they fear disciplinary or fitness to study processes, in particular international students sometimes do not seek support from traditional academic tutors because they do not want to disclose problems to those teaching them or marking their work. Our Pastoral Mentors aim to decouple support from formalised processes around unsatisfactory progress or visa compliance and rather focus on reaching out compassionately, emphasising the importance of a students’ wellbeing and success. Students have reported that this enhanced their sense of belonging and mattering, making it easier to seek support early.
Supporting colleagues through change
Institutional change is never easy and while many staff recognise the need to enhance our student support offer to students, it remains an emotive issue. Some departments embraced the new model from the outset, while others found the transition more difficult. There’s never “enough” evidence, particularly when the change you are implementing is both transformative and innovative.
As academics we often spend a lot of time seeking and compiling evidence to support a theory, but sometimes we have to be brave enough to enact change because it’s the right thing to do and have confidence that we can bring people along over time. If everyone waits for the evidence from others, innovation will never happen. We have found that co-creation is powerful; in order to address the “evidence” challenge, we had to deploy compassion and communication rather than additional data.
We have to meet colleagues where their concerns lie, not t diminish those concerns but to listen to and recognise both the opportunities and risks associated with change. At Exeter, we adopted a phased co-creation model for our Pastoral Mentor approach, being open with departments that we didn’t have all the answers upfront and that we needed to work together to meet students’ needs. Through this iterative approach we were able to take all our departments with us at a pace that suited them and subsequent feedback on the roll out has been overwhelmingly positive.
Student support is an emotive area, and it’s important to recognise existing best practice alongside the benefits of change. While we should acknowledge the great work many have done and continue to do, it is also important to recognise the pressure providing pastoral support can put on colleagues. We were keen to ensure that specialising support wasn’t seen as a criticism but a way to relieve pressure on colleagues and ensure more sustainable support for our whole community.
Student retention remains one of the biggest challenges in higher education, with dropout rates continuing to concern institutions worldwide. For colleges and universities today, student retention in higher education has evolved into something far more holistic than it once was.
Recent data underscore the scope of the problem: roughly one in four undergraduates will leave college without completing a degree. For example, data from the Australian Department of Education shows that nearly 25% of higher education students who began in 2017 had not completed their programs by 2022. The United States reports a comparable figure, with NCES data showing first-year retention rates for full-time undergraduates averaging around 75% to 78%, indicating an attrition rate of approximately 22–25%.
Our targeted email marketing services can help you attract and enroll more students.
Discover how we can enhance your recruitment strategy today!
Behind these statistics are myriad reasons. Financial pressures, mental health struggles, and a lingering sense of disconnection (exacerbated by post-pandemic-era remote learning) are among the top factors driving students to leave.
This early departure is not just a personal setback for students (many of whom incur debt without obtaining a credential) but also a serious concern for universities. Every student lost represents a missed opportunity to fulfill someone’s potential and a significant cost to the institution in lost tuition and wasted recruitment efforts. It’s no surprise, then, that in 2024/25 the conversation around student success has zeroed in on retention, keeping those first-year students engaged to graduation.
Amid these challenges, colleges and universities are exploring new ways to support students beyond the classroom. Interestingly, one of the most powerful tools is quite ordinary: email. While often associated with marketing departments or alumni fundraising, email communication has proven to be an unsung hero in student retention strategies. Done right, regular digital touchpoints – from welcome emails and deadline reminders to check-ins and newsletters – can nurture a sense of belonging and keep students from “falling through the cracks.” This blog post explains how.
What Is the Meaning of Student Retention?
Student retention refers to an institution’s ability to keep students enrolled continuously, usually from one academic term to the next, until they complete their program. Retention in higher education means the same as student retention, but in the context of colleges and universities. It typically refers to the percentage of students who return each year and progress toward graduation. It’s often measured as the inverse of dropout or attrition rates and serves as a key indicator of institutional effectiveness and student satisfaction.
But while the metric is important, it doesn’t tell the whole story. Retention intersects with numerous aspects of the student experience, including:
Academic preparedness and performance
Emotional and mental well-being
Financial stability and support
Social integration and sense of belonging
Clarity around future goals and career pathways
In short, high retention signals that a school is providing the tools and environment students need to thrive. Low retention often suggests systemic gaps that need attention, whether in support services, communication, or curricular alignment.
When schools understand the deeper “why” behind retention patterns, they can begin building strategies to support students in more intentional and effective ways.
Why Do Some Students Stay and Others Leave?
Understanding college student retention means examining both barriers and motivators that influence whether a student chooses to continue or withdraw. Here are some of the most common reasons students make that decision:
1. Academic Challenges
A student who feels unprepared for their coursework or overwhelmed by expectations may quickly disengage. This can be especially true for first-generation students or those entering a competitive academic environment without sufficient support.
What helps: Proactive emails that demystify academic expectations, offer success tips, and highlight tutoring resources early in the term can make a real difference.
Example:At the vocational education level, Oconee Fall Line Technical College (OFTC) in Georgia provides a good example of communication-driven retention support. OFTC employs dedicated Retention Specialists who monitor student progress and intervene when issues arise.
Using an internal early-alert system, the college flags at-risk students (such as those with irregular attendance or missing assignments) and initiates proactive outreach. Retention staff then reach out to students, often via college email or phone, to check in and connect them with help. This includes emailing a student about available tutoring when they struggle academically, or discussing solutions if a student is considering withdrawal.
2. Lack of Community or Belonging
The feeling of being “invisible” on campus can be just as impactful as academic performance. Students who don’t feel they belong are significantly more likely to leave, particularly during their first year.
What helps: Targeted emails that invite students to join clubs, attend welcome events, or connect with peers can foster a stronger sense of connection.
Example:AAPS circulates an official newsletter to share recent happenings in the pharmaceutical field and celebrate student achievements. Students consent to having their names and photos featured in these newsletters. This practice personalizes communications and recognizes student accomplishments. This targeted content helps build a sense of community and keeps current students motivated to persist in their programs.
Source: AAPS
3. Financial Stress
Tuition fees, housing costs, and daily expenses can make the college experience financially unsustainable for many students. Some may not even know what aid or resources are available.
What helps: Email reminders about scholarships, payment plans, emergency aid, or financial counseling empower students to seek help before small issues become major obstacles.
Example: In London, City, University of London runs City Cares, a dedicated support programme for vulnerable student groups – including those estranged from family, or young adult caregivers. A key element of City Cares is consistent personal communication: staff send regular check-in emails and updates to these students to see how they are doing and offer help.
Students in the program have a designated staff contact whom they can reach by email or phone for one-to-one support. City Cares also provides practical resources like bursaries, housing assistance, and priority access to opportunities, all communicated through targeted outreach.
4. Unclear Career Direction
Students who lose sight of how their studies connect to real-world opportunities often lose motivation. Without a sense of purpose, continuing can feel pointless.
What helps: Emails that highlight internship opportunities, alumni career paths, and academic-to-career connections help students stay focused and inspired.
5. Personal and Mental Health Struggles
From stress and anxiety to family emergencies or health issues, life challenges can derail even the most motivated students.
What helps: Compassionate, well-timed emails from student services that highlight wellness resources, counseling services, and peer support groups remind students they are not alone.
Example: DCC uses digital content to address student well-being, which is crucial for retention. A blog post on the college’s site, shared via email and social media, discussed how emotional well-being impacts learning, noting that a student’s mental health influences “focus, engagement, social interactions, and overall academic success.” By openly guiding mental health, DCC shows students and parents that the college cares about more than academics.
In each of these cases, the common thread is communication. When institutions deliver the right messages at the right moments, they can provide reassurance, guidance, and pathways forward, all of which contribute to stronger retention outcomes.
How Email Marketing Supports the Entire Student Journey
Email marketing is not just about promotion. In the context of higher education, it is a structured communication framework that allows institutions to be consistently present for their students, especially when automated and segmented based on academic year, behavior, or demographic indicators.
The first year is foundational. It’s where impressions are formed, habits are developed, and questions abound.
Effective first-year campaigns include:
A welcome series that introduces campus leaders, outlines what to expect, and provides a friendly tone of engagement
Resource emails such as “How to Book Time With an Academic Advisor” or “Top Study Spots on Campus”
Surveys and wellness check-ins asking students how they’re doing and connecting them to specific supports based on their responses
Invitations to student orientation events, campus fairs, and mentorship programs
This early outreach reduces anxiety and builds a relationship of trust. When students know they can expect relevant, useful information in their inbox, they are more likely to engage with their institution in meaningful ways.
Example: John Cabot University (JCU) has made student retention a priority through robust student services and outreach. The university’s communications team uses segmented email lists to target different student groups – first-year degree seekers, study-abroad students, etc.
Upon arrival, all first-year students receive a series of orientation emails with tips on navigating campus life in Rome, introductions to support offices (counseling, academic advising), and invitations to community-building events. This email nurturing continues throughout the year. JCU’s focus on student engagement reflects its ongoing commitment to retention, with email outreach playing a key role in fostering community and support.
Sophomore and Junior Years: Momentum and Direction
The second and third years of college can be challenging. Students may experience mid-degree fatigue, uncertainty about their major, or a lack of motivation.
Email campaigns that support these years often focus on:
Important academic milestones, such as major declarations, registration deadlines, or capstone requirements
Career development, including internship announcements, networking events, or resume-building resources
Personal development opportunities, like study abroad, research assistantships, or leadership training
Wellness and retention-focused campaigns that flag disengaged students and prompt follow-up from advisors.
By continuing to communicate thoughtfully during this middle phase, institutions can ensure students maintain their momentum and receive targeted interventions before problems escalate.
Example:Southern Methodist University’s (SMU) Office of Student Success & Retention created the “Don’t Ghost SMU” initiative to re-engage students who stop attending without formally taking a leave. Each term, the university identifies “ghosters” – undergraduates who are neither enrolled for the coming term nor on an official leave of absence. The retention team then reaches out to these students three times via email and text message to ask about their plans and encourage them to re-enroll. Students who respond and decide to return are provided with one-on-one support to facilitate their re-entry.
Students approaching graduation often face a new set of stressors—final projects, job applications, and the pressure of “what comes next.” At this point, communication becomes about both support and celebration.
Senior-focused email strategies may include:
Step-by-step graduation guides that include deadlines for forms, fees, and ceremonies
Invitations to career prep workshops, mock interviews, or job search bootcamps
Highlight reels of student accomplishments or alumni stories to boost morale and confidence
Communications from deans or student leaders congratulating seniors and offering final words of encouragement
Example: NeuAge’s digital content provides career advice and skill-building tips as part of the institution’s ongoing commitment to graduates’ success. NeuAge also promotes free online workshops and webinars (often via LinkedIn and email) led by industry experts, giving current students and recent grads extra opportunities to network and upskill.
Best Practices for Retention-Focused Email Campaigns
If your institution wants to maximize the impact of email on student retention, consider the following best practices:
1. Segment Thoughtfully
A one-size-fits-all email won’t resonate across a diverse student body. Tailor content based on class year, academic discipline, or unique identifiers like international status or first-generation background. The more relevant the message, the more likely it will be read and acted on.
2. Use Automation With Intention
Automated emails shouldn’t feel robotic. Use your CRM to trigger messages based on behavior (like missed assignments or low engagement), but personalize them with the student’s name and relevant links or contacts. Automation should make the student feel seen, not surveilled.
3. Focus on Value
Each email should offer something of clear value: a helpful tip, a timely reminder, a story that inspires. Avoid sending messages just to fill space in a calendar. If the email doesn’t help the student succeed, it probably shouldn’t be sent.
Example: ENSR (a Swiss international school) maintains high transparency with parents through regular digital bulletins. The school posts and emails information on upcoming events. For instance, parents receive notices about scheduled parent-teacher meetings, ski trips, and even windsurfing camp well in advance. ENSR’s online parent info page archives these communications, noting what was sent when.
Track engagement data: open rates, click-throughs, and unsubscribes, and use this to inform future messaging. If a subject line isn’t working or a campaign doesn’t drive traffic, revise your approach. Feedback and responsiveness are key to any long-term strategy.
5. Collaborate Across Departments
Retention is not the sole responsibility of academic advising or marketing. Develop integrated campaigns that align messaging across departments, including career services, financial aid, and student wellness, so students receive cohesive, coordinated communication.
Why Email Marketing Belongs in Your Retention Strategy
Email marketing offers something uniquely powerful: it meets students where they already are, with messages that can be scheduled, targeted, and personalized at scale. When done well, it brings a human touch to institutional processes, building relationships that motivate students to stay engaged.
More than a tool for reminders or promotions, email can:
Prevent students from slipping through the cracks
Foster emotional connection and institutional pride
Reinforce the idea that success is not only expected, but supported
Ultimately, when students feel informed, included, and inspired, they are more likely to persist through challenges and complete their degrees. And that’s the heart of any successful retention strategy. Would you like to work on effective strategies for greater Higher Ed Student Retention?
Our targeted email marketing services can help you attract and enroll more students.
Discover how we can enhance your recruitment strategy today!
Frequently Asked Questions
Question: What is the meaning of student retention?
Answer: Student retention refers to an institution’s ability to keep students enrolled continuously, usually from one academic term to the next, until they complete their program. Retention in higher education means the same as student retention, but in the context of colleges and universities.
Question: What is retention in higher education?
Answer: Retention in higher education means the same as student retention, but in the context of colleges and universities. It typically refers to the percentage of students who return each year and progress toward graduation. High retention in higher ed indicates that students are staying enrolled and on track to finish their degrees.
Question: What are the reasons for student retention?
Answer: Students are more likely to be retained (stay in school) when key needs are met. Common reasons for strong student retention include effective academic support (so students don’t fall behind), a sense of belonging on campus (feeling connected to peers and the school), financial stability or aid (relieving tuition stress), and clear personal motivation or goals (seeing the value of their degree). Essentially, when students feel supported academically, socially, and financially – and they believe their education will benefit them – they are far more likely to stay through graduation.
