Tag: Student

  • College Student Satisfaction: Reflecting on 30 Years

    College Student Satisfaction: Reflecting on 30 Years

    College students have changed greatly in 30 years, but how has student satisfaction changed?

    Think back 30 years ago to 1995. What is different for you now? Where were you and what were you doing in the mid 1990s? Perhaps you were still in school and living at home, or not even born yet. Perhaps you were in your early years of working in higher education. Take a moment to reflect on what has (and has not) changed for you in that span of time. 

    Thirty years ago, I was just starting my position at what was then Noel-Levitz. What stands out for me was that I was about to become a mom for the first time. Now my baby is grown and will be a new mom herself later this year. And I find myself being on one of the “seasoned professionals” in the company, working alongside members of my team who were still in elementary school back in 1995. 

    Thirty years ago, we were just beginning to utilize email and the internet. Now they have become the primary way we do business, communicate professionally, and discover information.  Artificial intelligence (AI) is the new technology that we are learning to embrace to improve our professional and personal lives.   

    Thirty years ago, students were arriving on our campuses, seeking an education, guidance, growth, belonging, value for their investment and ultimately a better life.  That’s still the case today.  Plus, students are navigating more technology options, they are more openly seeking mental health support, and they are living in a world full of distractions. Online learning is a reality now and continues to become more accepted as a modality, especially after the experiences of 2020. As the demographic cliff looms, colleges are expanding their focus to include lifelong learners. 

    Thirty years ago is also when the Student Satisfaction Inventory (SSI) was launched to provide four-year and two-year institutions with a tool to better understand the priorities of their students. (In the early 2000s, we added survey instruments specifically for adult and online populations.) The data identified where the college was performing well and where it mattered for them to do better in order to retain their students to graduation. The concept of looking at satisfaction within the context of the level of importance was new back then, but in the past three decades, it has become the standard for capturing student perceptions. Since 1995, we have worked with thousands of institutions and collected data from millions of individuals, documenting what is important and where students are satisfied or dissatisfied with their experience. As we reach this 30-year milestone for the SSI, I took some time to reflect on what has changed in students’ perceptions and what has stayed the same.

    Consistent priorities

    What stood out to me as I reviewed the national data sets over the past 30 years is that what matters to students has largely stayed the same. Students continue to care about good advising, quality instruction and getting access to classes. The academic experience is highly valued by students and is the primary reason they are enrolled, now and then. 

    Another observation is that there are two areas that have been consistent priorities for improvement, especially at four-year private and public institutions:

    • Tuition paid is a worthwhile investment.
    • Adequate financial aid is available for most students. 

    These two items have routinely appeared as national challenges (areas of high importance and low satisfaction) over the decades, which shows that institutions continue to have opportunities to communicate value and address the financial pain points of students to make higher education accessible and affordable. 

    Campus climate is key

    One thing we have learned over the past thirty years is how students feel on campus is key to student success and retention. The research reflects the strongest links between students’ sense of belonging, feeling welcome, and enjoying their campus experience to their overall levels of satisfaction. High levels of satisfaction are linked to individual student retention and institutional graduation rates. Campuses that want to best influence students remaining enrolled are being intentional with efforts to show concern for students individually, building connections between students from day one, and continuing those activities as students progress each year. It is important for institutions to recognize that students have lots of options to receive a quality education, but the environment and the potential student “fit” is more likely to vary from location to location. What happens while a student is at the college they have selected is more impactful on them than which institution they ultimately chose. Creating welcoming environments and supporting students’ sense of belonging in the chosen college is a way for institutions to stand out and succeed in serving students. Colleges often ask, “Why do students leave?” when they could be asking, “Why do students stay?” Building positive campus cultures and expanding the “good stuff” being done for students is a way to critical way to improve student and institutional success.

    One sector where the data reflect high satisfaction scores and good consistency, especially in the past five years since the pandemic, is community colleges. Students attending their (often local) two-year institutions want to be there, with high percentages of students indicating the school is their first choice.  Community college students nationally indicate areas such as the campus staff being caring/helpful, students being made to feel welcome, and people on the campus respecting each other, as strengths (high importance and high satisfaction). These positive perceptions are also reflected with overall high levels of satisfaction and indications of a likelihood to re-enroll if the student had it to do over again. The data indicate that two-year institutions are doing a nice job of building a sense of community among primarily commuter student populations. 

    Systemic issues and pockets of improvement

    Everyone talks about “kids today,” but in reality, they have been doing that for generations. It can’t be a reason not to change and respond appropriately to the needs of current students. When we consider the priorities for improvement in higher education that have remained at the forefront, we may need to recognize that some of these areas are systemic to higher education, along with recognizing that higher education generally has not done enough to respond. There are certainly pockets of improvement at schools that have prioritized being responsive and, as a result, are seeing positive movement in student satisfaction and student retention, but that is not happening everywhere. Taking action based on student feedback is a powerful way to influence student success. The campuses that have bought into that concept are seeing the results. 

    Current student satisfaction national results

    Want to learn more about the current trends in student satisfaction?  I invite you to download the 2024 National Student Satisfaction and Priorities Report. 

    This year’s analysis takes a closer look at the national results by demographic subpopulations, primarily by class level, to get a clearer view on how to improve the student experience. Institutions have found that targeting initiatives for particular student populations can be an effective way to have the biggest impact on student satisfaction. Download your free copy today.

    Source link

  • Cosmetologists can’t shoot a gun? FIRE ‘blasts’ tech college for punishing student over target practice video

    Cosmetologists can’t shoot a gun? FIRE ‘blasts’ tech college for punishing student over target practice video

    Language can be complicated. According to Merriam-Webster, the verb “blast” has as many as 15 different meanings — “to play loudly,” “to hit a golf ball out of a sand trap with explosive force,” “to injure by or as if by the action of wind.”

    Recently, the word has added another definition to the list. Namely, “to attack vigorously” with criticism, as in, “to blast someone online” or “to put someone on blast.” This usage has become a common expression.

    That’s what Leigha Lemoine, a student at Horry-Georgetown Technical College, meant when she posted in a private Snapchat group that a non-student who had insulted her needed to get “blasted.” 

    But HGTC’s administration didn’t see it that way. When some students claimed they felt uncomfortable with Lemoine’s post, the college summoned her to a meeting. Lemoine explained that the post was not a threat of physical harm, but rather a simple expression of her belief that the person who had insulted her should be criticized for doing so. The school’s administrators agreed and concluded there was nothing threatening in her words.

    But two days later, things took a turn. Administrators discovered a video on social media of Lemoine firing a handgun at a target. The video was recorded off campus a year prior to the discovery, and had no connection to the “blasted” comment, but because she had not disclosed the video’s existence (why would she be required to?), the college decided to suspend her until the 2025 fall semester. Adding insult to injury, HGTC indicated she Lemoine would be on disciplinary probation when she returned. 

    Screenshots of Leigha Lemoine’s video on social media.

    HGTC administrators claim Lemoine’s post caused “a significant amount of apprehension related to the presence and use of guns.” 

    “In today’s climate, your failure to disclose the existence of the video, in conjunction with group [sic] text message on Snapchat where you used the term ‘blasted,’ causes concern about your ability to remain in the current Cosmetology cohort,” the college added.

    Never mind the context of the gun video, which had nothing to do with campus or the person she said needed to get “blasted.” HGTC was determined to jeopardize Lemoine’s future over one Snapchat message and an unrelated video. 

    Colleges and universities would do well to take Lemoine’s case as a reminder to safeguard the expressive freedoms associated with humor and hyperbolic statements. Because make no mistake, FIRE will continue to blast the ones that don’t.

    FIRE wrote to HGTC on Lemoine’s behalf on Oct. 7, 2024, urging the college to reverse its disciplinary action against Lemoine. We pointed out the absurdity of taking Lemoine’s “blasted” comment as an unprotected “true threat” and urged the college to rescind her suspension. Lemoine showed no serious intent to commit unlawful violence with her comment urging others to criticize an individual, and tying the gun video to the comment was both nonsensical and deeply unjust. 

    But HGTC attempted to blow FIRE off and plowed forward with its discipline. So we brought in the big guns — FIRE Legal Network member David Ashley at Le Clercq Law Firm took on the case, filing an emergency motion for a temporary restraining order. On Dec. 17, a South Carolina federal district court ordered HGTC to allow her to return to classes immediately while the case works its way through the courts. 

    Jokes and hyperbole are protected speech

    Colleges and universities must take genuine threats of violence on campus seriously. That sometimes requires investigations and quick institutional action to ensure campus safety. But HGTC’s treatment of Lemoine is the latest in a long line of colleges misusing the “true threats” standard to punish clearly protected speech — remarks or commentary that are meant as jokes, hyperbole, or otherwise unreasonable to treat as though they are sincere. 

    Take over-excited rhetoric about sports. In 2022, Meredith Miller, a student at the University of Utah, posted on social media that she would detonate the nuclear reactor on campus (a low-power educational model with a microwave-sized core that one professor said “can’t possibly melt down or pose any risk”) if the football team lost its game. Campus police arrested her, and the Salt Lake County District Attorney’s Office charged her with making a terroristic threat. 

    The office eventually dropped the charge, but the university tried doubling down by suspending her for two years. It was only after intervention from FIRE and an outside attorney that the university relented. But that it took such significant outside pressure — especially over a harmless joke that was entirely in line with the kind of hyperbolic rhetoric one expects in sports commentary — reveals how dramatically the university overreacted.

    Political rhetoric is often targeted as well. In 2020, Babson College professor Asheen Phansey found himself in hot water after posting a satirical remark on Facebook. After President Trump tweeted a threat that he might bomb 52 Iranian cultural sites, Phansey jokingly suggested that Iran’s leadership should publicly identify a list of American cultural heritage sites it wanted to bomb, including the “Mall of America” and the “Kardashian residence.” Despite FIRE’s intervention, Babson College’s leadership suspended Phansey and then fired him less than a day later. 

    Or consider an incident in which Louisiana State University fired a graduate instructor who left a heated, profanity-laced voicemail for a state senator in which he criticized the senator’s voting record on trans rights. The senator reported the voicemail to the police, who investigated and ultimately identified the instructor. The police closed the case after concluding that the instructor had not broken the law. You’re supposed to be allowed to be rude to elected officials. LSU nevertheless fired him.

    More examples of universities misusing the true threats standard run the political gamut: A Fordham student was suspended for a post commemorating the anniversary of the Tianneman Square massacre; a professor posted on social media in support of a police officer who attacked a journalist and was placed on leave; an adjunct instructor wished for President Trump’s assassination and had his hiring revoked; another professor posted on Facebook supporting Antifa, was placed on leave, and then sued his college. Too often, the university discipline is made more egregious by the fact that administrators continue to use the idea of “threatening” speech to punish clearly protected expression even after local police departments conclude that the statements in question were not actually threatening.

    What is a true threat?

    Under the First Amendment, a true threat is defined as a statement where “the speaker means to communicate a serious expression of an intent to commit an act of unlawful violence to a particular individual or group of individuals.” 

    That eliminates the vast majority of threatening speech you hear each day, and for good reason. One of the foundational cases for the true threat standard is Watts v. U.S., in which the Supreme Court ruled that a man’s remark about his potential draft into the military — “If they ever make me carry a rifle, the first man I want to get in my sights is LBJ” — constituted political hyperbole, not a true threat. The Court held that such statements are protected by the First Amendment. And rightfully so: Political speech is where the protection of the First Amendment is “at its zenith.” An overbroad definition of threatening statements would lead to the punishment of political advocacy. Look no further than controversies in the last year and a half over calls for genocide to see how wide swathes of speech would become punishable if the standard for true threats was lower. 

    Colleges and universities would do well to take Lemoine’s case as a reminder to safeguard the expressive freedoms associated with humor and hyperbolic statements. Because make no mistake, FIRE will continue to blast the ones that don’t.

    Source link

  • Five areas of focus for student equity in CTE completion

    Five areas of focus for student equity in CTE completion

    Career and technical education can support students’ socioeconomic mobility, but inequitable completion rates for students of color leave some behind.

    NewSaetiew/iStock/Getty Images Plus

    Career and technical education programs have grown more popular among prospective students as ways to advance socioeconomic mobility, but they can have inequitable outcomes across student demographics.

    A December report from the Urban Institute offers best practices in supporting students of color as they navigate their institution, including in advising, mentoring and orientation programming.

    Researchers identified five key themes in equity-minded navigation strategies that can impact student persistence and social capital building, as well as future areas for consideration at other institutions.

    The background: The Career and Technical Education CoLab (CTE CoLab) Community of Practice is a group led by the Urban Institute to improve education and employment outcomes for students of color.

    In February and May 2024, the Urban Institute invited practitioners from four colleges—Chippewa Valley Technical College in Wisconsin, Diablo Valley College in California, Wake Technical Community College in North Carolina and WSU Tech in Kansas—to virtual roundtables to share ideas and practices. The brief includes insights from the roundtables and related research, as well as an in-person convening in October 2024 with college staff.

    “Practitioners and policymakers can learn from this knowledge and experience from the field to consider potential strategies to address student needs and improve outcomes for students of color and other historically marginalized groups,” according to the brief authors.

    Strategies for equity: The four colleges shared how they target and support learners with navigation including:

    • Using data to identify student needs, whether those be academic, basic needs or job- and career-focused. Data collection includes tracking success metrics such as completion and retention rates, as well as student surveys. Practitioners noted the need to do this early in the student experience—like during orientation—to help connect them directly with resources, particularly for learners in short courses. “Surveying students as part of new student orientation also provides program staff immediate information on the current needs of the student population, which may change semester to semester,” according to the report.
    • Reimagining their orientation processes to acclimate first-year students and ensure students are aware of resources. Chippewa Valley Technical College is creating an online, asynchronous orientation for one program, and Diablo Valley College is leveraging student interns to collect feedback on a new orientation program for art digital media learners. Some future considerations practitioners noted are ways to incentivize participation or attendance in these programs to ensure equity and how to engage faculty to create relationships between learners and instructors.
    • Supporting navigation in advising, mentoring and tutoring to help students build social capital and build connections within the institution. Colleges are considering peer mentoring and tutoring programs that are equity-centered, and one practitioner suggested implementing a checklist for advisers to highlight various resources.
    • Leveraging existing initiatives and institutional capacity to improve navigation and delivery of services to students, such as faculty training. One of the greatest barriers in this work is affecting change across the institution to shift culture, operations, structures and values for student success, particularly when it disrupts existing norms. To confront this, practitioners identify allies and engage partners across campus who are aligned in their work or vision.
    • Equipping faculty members to participate in navigation through professional development support. Community colleges employ many adjunct faculty members who may be less aware of supports available to students but still play a key role in helping students navigate the institution. Adjuncts can also have fewer contract hours available for additional training or development, which presents challenges for campus leaders. Diablo Valley College revised its onboarding process for adjuncts to guarantee they have clear information on college resources available to students and student demographic information to help these instructors feel connected to the college.

    Do you have an academic intervention that might help others improve student success? Tell us about it.

    Source link

  • Sonoma State AVP of student affairs, access, success

    Sonoma State AVP of student affairs, access, success

    As a first-year college student, Sarah Ellison never imagined working in higher education or earning a doctorate, but her experiences have developed her passion for helping students identify their strengths and build strong foundations for their futures beyond graduation.

    Sarah Ellison, Sonoma State University’s associate vice president of student affairs

    Sarah Ellison, Sonoma State University

    Since Jan. 8, 2024, Ellison has served as associate vice president for student affairs at Sonoma State University, part of the California State University system, overseeing the university’s student access and success team. Ellison spoke with Inside Higher Ed about her work in and outside higher education, her portfolio at Sonoma State, and her goals for the future.

    Q: What led you to a career in higher education?

    A: I’ll have to say, it wasn’t something I was looking for.

    I, right out of high school, went to the University of Hawaii and was planning to do a business degree. I failed my entire freshman year and went to community college. In community college, I thought I would do a focus still in business, so I did do my associate’s, and then continued on to my bachelor’s at the University of La Verne in business.

    My whole entire plan was to go into sales. That’s what I thought I would do. I was really fascinated with companies like Coach and Michael Kors, Macy’s.

    But throughout that time, life just happens while you’re in college, right? You’re learning about yourself, you’re learning about your goals, defining them, more and more.

    During that time, I was very fortunate to meet my husband, and life started to happen during that time as well when I was finishing my undergrad. I actually went to work for a nonprofit organization, Goodwill, in California and got to work at Fort Irwin, which is a military base, serving as a career adviser for transitioning veterans. And I really loved it.

    Career services was a new field to me, and I really thought that’s what I wanted to do. And so I ended up doing my master’s in career services, and was trying to think about how I would advance my career from that role into career services in higher education. I really couldn’t find a direct path, but I got into academic advising, and fell in love with academic advising. I met a recruiter at one of our fairs for military folks, and she really introduced me to the whole field of higher education. I had been exposed through going to college and meeting with different mentors. I did my internship in career services at the University of La Verne, and the director there was phenomenal, and that’s what kind of started that piece.

    But that’s how I found myself working directly in higher education. I started at a small private university, then went into the Cal State system, then went to University of Kentucky, and then now I found myself back in the Cal State system. It’s been a bit of a wild ride, but it’s been a lot of fun.

    Q: Would you say that you’ve brought any of your career services experiences into the work that you do now?

    A: I felt that my experience working with transitioning veterans and working in career services really helped my advising platform and role working with students from the advising standpoint, because I was able to better connect with students, with their plans for their degree, and then all of the opportunities that come from different knowing different career fields and aspects, and then helping them leverage all of their experience.

    I worked with nontraditional students, first-generation students [and] traditional students, and it’s just amazing how much students can learn from the career aspect that helps with their finishing of their degree, so working towards retention and degree completion.

    While I don’t directly find myself in career services in higher education in my current role as associate vice president, I have a pretty large portfolio, and one of those areas being career services now. Now I get to oversee both academic advising [and] career services, as well as many other parts of my portfolio that include advising for equity and access program, disability services, and then also precollegiate programs. It is cool to find myself now directly overseeing those aspects.

    Q: Who are your learners at Sonoma State and what are some of the challenges and opportunities at the university based on your student population?

    A: Sonoma State has a very diverse student population. We are an HSI, so we do serve a large proportion of Hispanic students. We do have a large proportion of first-generation students, but our makeup is really, really diverse.

    I think with anything, like most institutions are facing right now in terms of serving our students, it’s really about showing that pathway, so really working within the community, so that our [high school] students see a path directly into a four-year institution.

    [Through] a lot of my precollegiate programs, which serve our K-12 setting, we’re really trying to strengthen and build pathways for those students who typically come from low income, and also our will-be first-generation college students, really helping them to define that pathway and see a clear vision for going into a four-year institution.

    I also think it’s the life after, it’s the career trajectory, it’s the employability plans for students that they see the value in their degree. That’s what we’re really working with here, with our students, is really helping them see the value of their degree, retaining them and helping them move them into careers that are both fruitful, exciting and in line with how they saw themselves, with their goals and what they wanted to do.

    Q: One of the cool things about working at a public institution is you get to serve your region and the state as a whole. How is that incorporated into your vision for student success?

    A: That is one thing I’ve always enjoyed about the Cal State system is that regional perspective and focus that we have.

    My first Cal State experience was at Cal State San Bernardino, and then now being here at Sonoma State, it’s amazing how different the Northern California and Southern California regions are—even the issues that we face with those students—but coming together in the system is always really exciting, because we do get to collaborate and think about how we serve the state, but then also, again, focus in on initiatives specific to the regions that all of the Cal State [institutions] are in.

    In the work that I do now, I find myself in the community a lot more: serving on different boards, working with different local employers, local community agencies. I will say that Sonoma State has had a pretty good grounding in that prior to my time here.

    Before coming to Sonoma State, I worked at the University of Kentucky, which is a land-grant–serving institution, and [that] also gave me a lot of experience to what it is to serve the community in the region and meet the needs of the state as well, too. I spent about three years there learning a lot about extension work.

    I strongly believe that it’s amazing to have those ties to the community, because it helps us keep a pulse on what the needs are of the community, helping to prepare our students to go into different career fields, but also have a civic tie as well to what they’re doing.

    Q: “Access” is a key word in your list of responsibilities, managing the student access and success team. How is access central to your role?

    A: When it comes to access, I think it’s critical for students, because when we think about the different student populations we serve, there’s also these technology pieces. In higher ed—at least at all of the institutions I’ve worked at—we love new technology. We love starting new programs and new platforms.

    I think it’s always really critical that we ensure our students understand and have a knowledge base as well, and that the technology works for them. So how they schedule appointments, the flexibility to do Zoom, and then also thinking about some of our students who are native in other languages. Do we have opportunities and space for students to be able to speak with advisers and faculty and have support in their native language? That’s always been really critical, because the meaning is different.

    When I was at Cal State San Bernardino, we had some really great faculty from our Spanish department who would come in and help in group advising sessions and do it in Spanish, which is really helpful for our students.

    When we think about the technology pieces, that’s critical, how they apply to come to any university. And then when they get to campus, and that consistent communication from the time that they’re interested to … actually enrolling, and then when they’re here, can I get ahold of and work with folks in all of the offices that I need to? That’s critical for us in higher ed to always consider and be mindful of, because that is another part of the student experience.

    Q: What are some of your short- and long-term goals at Sonoma State?

    A: I’m a year in, so I still consider myself very new in my role.

    In terms of some short-term goals … we’re really looking at making sure students have an adviser, someone they can connect with. That we’re breaking down silos within the institution, so that way, advisers, faculty, staff [and] directors feel comfortable working with each other and communicating and supporting each other.

    In terms of long term, it’s really strengthening that career side. We have a lot coming down from the governor here in California related to workforce development and those things. I’m partnering with our vice president for student affairs and our provost and associate provost, building out and strengthening our career services programming. So that’s another focus, and some long-term planning that we really need to think about for the future here at Sonoma State, while still continuing to focus on improving equity gaps, retention rates, graduation rates and enrollment as well.

    Q: Career services is a growing focus nationally within higher education. What are some of those barriers that you’re facing, or where do you need those resources to really strengthen that arm of the institution?

    A: I would say, throughout my time in higher ed for all the institutions I’ve worked at, I think staffing is a huge piece of career services, being able to have enough career staff to meet the needs of the campus.

    I also think there’s a training and development piece, and that, to me, ties in to the connection with the faculty and academic departments to make sure that the career advising aligns with the major and department and career pathways.

    Leveraging the network as well, I think that’s another thing with career services, is really building strong portfolios for professional networks, and that can be an issue depending on the institution, what their access, their leadership, being embedded in the community and those things, as well as embedded nationally to see new trends, new careers.

    That’s another exciting piece about careers, that there are jobs that we don’t even know of that are going to be created here soon. How do we think about skill sets and plans and helping students see their strengths in everything that they’ve accomplished throughout their time, in their academics and at the institution, to prepare for [future] fields? And then we have emerging fields, in AI, green technology, agriculture, health services and all of that.

    That’s what’s kind of the fun side of career services, but also creates the challenges, because you’re thinking about current trends, emerging trends and then the trends that you don’t even know are going to exist yet. Helping students define and understand the skill sets that they have, and making sure they’re building and aligning those to those professional fields.

    Do you have a career preparation program that impacts student success? Tell us about it.

    Source link

  • How the university can support student digital learning freedom

    How the university can support student digital learning freedom

    Feelings of belonging have a significant positive impact on academic success and progression, but we know that creating belonging isn’t as simple as putting up a welcome sign.

    Belonging is not something that can be automatically created by an institution, regardless of its commitment to access and inclusion. To make students feel they belong in a higher education environment, having the power to shape and co-create the environments in which they participate is essential.

    For students in higher education, liminal digital spaces (those informal areas of interaction that sit between formal academic environments and students’ broader social contexts) offer unique opportunities for students to lead, collaborate, learn and foster a sense of belonging, and the freedom to shape their learning environment and exercise agency in ways that may not be available within more formal institutional frameworks. They also offer opportunities for institutions to create places that nurture academic success without assuming responsibility for the development and delivery of all support.

    But squaring the ownership, credibility and safeguarding triangle is complex, so how can universities do this while also embracing digital tools?

    Taking ownership for learning

    Focusing on digital spaces allows institutions to expand the space their students feel comfortable inhabiting and learning in, without limiting engagement from those who may not be free to meet at a specific time or be able to meet in person.

    Digital learning resources can help students connect to their peers, further strengthening their sense of place within the institution. These spaces could act as connectors between university resource and student-driven exploration and learning in a way that more formal mechanisms sometimes fail to. At Manchester, resources such as My Learning Essentials (a blended skills support programme) can be used by the students within the spaces (via online resources) and signposted and recommended by peers (for scheduled support sessions).

    Although this model exists elsewhere, at Manchester it is enhanced by the CATE-awarded Library Student Team, a group of current students who appreciate and often inhabit these spaces themselves. The combination of always available online, expert-led sessions and peer-led support means there is a multiplicity of avenues in the support. This allows the University to partner with, for example, its Students’ Union, and work alongside students and the wider institution by hosting these digital spaces, acting as mediators or facilitators, and ensuring the right balance of autonomy and support.

    Keeping learning credible

    Wider institutional support like My Learning Essentials already takes advantage of digital spaces by delivering both asynchronous online support and scheduled online sessions, and it can be easily integrated, signposted and shaped by the students using it.

    These spaces need to be connected to the institution in such a way as to feel relevant and powerful. “Leaving” students to lead in spaces, giving them leadership responsibility without institutional support or backing, sets both them and these spaces up for failure.

    Universities can work alongside students to help them define collective community values and principles, much like the community guidelines found in spaces like MYFest, a community-focused annual development event. Doing so ensures these liminal spaces are inclusive and responsive to the needs of all participants. Such spaces can also help students transition ‘out’ of the university environment and support others to build skills that they have already developed, such as by mentoring a student in a year below.

    Safeguarding in a digital world

    Universities should also allow students to follow the beat of their own drum and embrace digital outside of university spaces to further their learning.

    Kai Prince, a PhD candidate in Maths at The University of Manchester, who runs a popular Discord server for fellow students, notes:

    If the servers are led by a diverse group of students, I find that they’re also perfect for building a sense of belonging as students feel more comfortable in sharing their difficulties pseudo-anonymously and receiving peer-support, either by being informed on solutions or having their experiences, such as impostor syndrome, acknowledged.

    Spaces like Discord allow students to engage in peer-led learning, but universities can enhance the quality of that learning by making available and investing in (as is done with My Learning Essentials) high-quality online materials, clear paths to wider support services and formal connections with societies or other academic groups. These mechanisms also help to keep the space within a student’s university experience, with all the expectations for behaviour and collegiality that entails.

    The higher education sector is a complex and diverse space, welcoming new members to its communities each year. But it is often mired in a struggle to effectively engage and include each individual as a true part of the whole.

    Work to address this needs to incorporate the students in spaces where the balance of power is tilted, by design, in their favour. Recognising the potential for digital spaces, for accessibility, support and familiarity for students as they enter higher education means that universities can put their efforts towards connecting, but not dictating, the direction of students and helping them forge their own learning journeys as part of the wider university community.

    Source link

  • Understanding academic dismissal from the student perspective

    Understanding academic dismissal from the student perspective

    Personal life events impact students’ ability to meet academic expectations, which can result in academic dismissal, according to new research.

    visualspace/E+/Getty Images

    Around 40 million Americans have some college credit but no credential. While some of these students left higher education voluntarily, others left involuntarily due to academic dismissal, or repeated low academic achievement.

    Recently published research from a Texas A&M University, San Antonio, faculty member seeks to understand how students who experienced academic dismissal fared and how institutions can support these learners as they return to college.

    Author Ripsimé K. Bledsoe found a majority of learners experienced a major life event that contributed to their academic shortfall, including loss of a loved one or illness of self or others. Students who have returned to college after dismissal demonstrated greater self-awareness, help-seeking behaviors and understanding of how to achieve success.

    The background: While students stop out for a variety of reasons—with recent studies pointing to the high costs of higher education as a major driver—academic challenges are a common factor. At many colleges, students whose cumulative grade point average falls below 2.0 are placed on academic probation, followed by academic dismissal if they make insufficient academic progress.

    Previous research shows a gap in creating a model of academic dismissal reinstatement, one that has created challenges for institutions who want to assess readmission policies or create programs to address the issue, according to the report.

    The present study uses community college student survey and interview data to understand the factors that influenced them to return to college and what assisted in this process.

    Methodology

    All students who participated in the study had left a two- or four-year college due to academic dismissal; re-enrolled at a large, urban community college; and were taking a Strategies for Student Success course. The survey includes 171 respondents from 13 course sections, and researchers conducted semistructured interviews with 11 of the respondents. Data was collected in fall 2018.

    Students say: The survey results demonstrated that academic readiness from high school did not directly predict success in college, as a majority of students took key college preparatory coursework in high school, including AP classes or Algebra 2 or higher, and only 40 percent took developmental courses in college.

    Further, almost half of students were “downward transfers,” with 45 percent admitted to a four-year college, and 41 percent attended a four-year institution at some point. Around 75 percent of students had enrolled in college within three months of completing high school or a GED, and half of respondents passed some type of first-year seminar.

    The greatest share of students on academic dismissal (43 percent) appealed to return immediately after being placed on dismissal. One-third returned a year later or more time.

    Two-thirds (67 percent) of dismissed students said a life-changing event was the strongest reason their grades dropped, including the death of someone close to them (26 percent), sickness (24 percent), the birth of a child (17 percent), moving away from home (11 percent), involvement in a violent experience (8 percent), loss of a job (7 percent) or spousal problems (6 percent).

    Put in practice: In interviews, researchers identified five factors that affected students’ dismissal and could, conversely, impact academic momentum.

    1. College readiness. For some students, transitioning to college contributed to their dismissal because the environment was more challenging and less structured. To combat this upon their return, students sought more structure and community to ensure academic achievement, including investing in study skills, note taking, time management and self-monitoring.
    2. A critical incident. While many learners experienced dismissal following a challenging experience in their lives, academic dismissal provided a turning point, particularly for learners who spent their time away from college working, to reassess their goals and ambitions. The institution where study participants attended required learners to reflect on their experiences prior to re-enrolling, which also helped students’ self-evaluation. “Consequently, institutions with automatic reinstatement, loose structuring, or no policies at all, can potentially rob students of the critical impact of academic dismissal and an appeal process,” according to the report.
    1. Effective teaching. Students said faculty interactions and support was one of the most important factors of success in the classroom upon their return. Faculty who created an atmosphere for active learning and participation were more engaging and effective. Students also identified their own learning strategies, including metacognition and self-regulation, as previous barriers to success and now a focus area.
    2. Academic resilience. Learners who returned had motivational attributes including a strong growth mindset, clear goals, self-determination and sense of personal responsibility. Students also demonstrated resilience when they faced setbacks and found solutions for the obstacles in their way, including turning to peers, tutors or faculty members.
    3. Supportive guidance. All participants in the study participated in specialized advising to guide them through the appeal process as well as help around course choices, loads and majors. These experiences were relational, not transactional, and helped affirm students’ help-seeking behaviors in positive ways, mitigating students’ feelings of confusion or like they must navigate higher ed on their own.

    So what? While this study provides characteristics of students returning from academic dismissal, there is a need for more data around probation, time away after dismissal or forced withdrawals versus voluntary departure, according to the report.

    College and university leaders should also consider their appeal process to create greater connections between students and staff or faculty, rather than an automatic reinstatement policy or a loose policy.

    “Formulating a well-crafted, institution-specific policy provides a meaningful milestone for students to stop, seek support, and reassess,” Bledsoe wrote.

    The study does not advocate for dismissal programs but does ask institutional leaders to create policies with more awareness of the different factors that impact academic success and to tie dismissal to support systems.

    Get more content like this directly to your inbox every weekday morning. Subscribe here.

    Source link

  • The rubbish bin theory of the student experience

    The rubbish bin theory of the student experience

    Students have two kinds of problems.

    There are the big, systemic, institutional policy failures that make their lives miserable. These might be social ills of discrimination and prejudice rendered into the classroom experience. These might be reasonable adjustment policies that turn out to be entirely unreasonable. Or it might be the pecuniary architecture that collapses the student experience into unending part-time work and just about squeezing study in.

    In general students’ unions and universities are set up to address these kinds of challenges. There are committees, policies, liaison groups, central budgets, and a power and decision making architecture which faces these problems. This doesn’t mean they can always solve these issues, if they ever can be solved, but it does mean they are at least positioned to have a go at doing so.

    Power

    In the realm of the fundamentally bad and wrong a senior executive often can make things better. After all, they set institutional budgets, strategies, policies, contracts, and rules that impact every student. However, there is another kind of problem that impacts students where they just have less proximity to the issue.

    Imagine the student where things are basically ok. Life is tough, as it is for many students, but as far as they can tell they do not believe they are being treated unfairly, they seem to be broadly getting the big things they were promised when they turned up, and all available evidence suggests their lecturers are working within a set of policies that seem to be pretty fair. In other words, things aren’t too bad.

    However, as time goes on things don’t go badly wrong but they do go a little awry. The common room they went to before lectures doesn’t open until 09:30 in the winter. Their feedback has gone from arriving in six weeks to seven which adds a little bit more pressure on their exams. The library is suddenly much busier as the cold nights have set it. The buses are now much less frequent after a timetable change. The kit they need for their programmes is now more booked up as a new term has brought a new set of modules. And onward and onwards on the ever more bits of bad experience ephemera that clog up students’ lives.

    This is the rubbish bin theory of the student experience. Nobody is doing anything terribly wrong, in fact many people will be doing the right thing in some context and doing the best with the time they have, but the little bit of bad experience builds up and up until the whole student experience stinks. Some of these bits of rubbish are bigger than others, some might even amount to breaches of OfS’s ongoing conditions, but nobody is doing anything which is intentionally malicious.

    The rubbish bin theory of the student experience posits that everyone within a students’ ecosystem can make perfectly reasonable decisions within their own domains, turning down the heating to save on budgets, reconfiguring communal meeting space for staff offices, and changing opening hours of the reception desks might make sense in the context of the university more generally and even for some students some of the time. It is that the university is too big, too bureaucratic, and does not always operate on a small enough level to always take the rubbish out.

    The rubbish bin

    The problem with the smelly rubbish bin is that it’s often only noticed when it’s full. For example, the classic students’ union response is to bring together lots of information from course reps, school reps, committees, and other sources, to then feedback for subsequent years about a different bin, different ways to take out the rubbish, new bin liners (you get it I have tortured the metaphor now). The challenge is that even if you really push down the rubbish in one place it will only pop out in another (ok I am really done this time).

    This is because the issues are often too small-scale to warrant institutional intervention, which the union is well set up to advocate for, and often too local, emerging in programmes or departments, to be wholly made visible to the union or to be wholly made to work with university policy. The bin is able to get more and more full because everyone just flings their bit of rubbish in and it’s not anybody’s job to take it out from time to time (ok, sorry).

    The university incentive is to deal with the regulatory challenges in front of them. And while these are ongoing conditions the information the university can rely on, publish, and collate, is often a retrospective indicator. To take only two examples. NSS reporting encourages universities to deal with the issues of students no longer at the insitution. Graduate Outcomes measure student performance at a point in time in an ever changing labour market.

    This isn’t to say students’ unions don’t do lots of things for individuals, it’s not to say that universities only care about the big issues, that isn’t true, it’s a question of how these two institutions keep an eye on both the structural problems and the emerging challenges.

    Public administration

    There are three interesting public administration and organising theories that might help conceptualise this challenge. Henry Mintzberg, one of the most important public administration theorists of the 20th century, imagines organisation strategy like a potter at a wheel. The raw ingredients exist (staff, committees, students’ unions, money, representatives, and so on), but the shape of the pot only comes into focus when hands are applied to it. This is strategy by doing says that strategic intent only becomes apparent through patterns in retrospect.

    This would mean that students’ unions would have much looser resource allocations and move across departments, programmes, central university structures, representative groups, and ways of working, where the challenges and insight led them. It would mean that universities find the means to have more hands at the wheel. Giving school, departmental, and faculty committees more power, allocating budgets for taking out the rubbish bin, and challenging central structures so they spend more time focussing on emerging problems, not the retrospective ones encouraged by the regulatory reporting cycle.

    Community organising, which is a direction of travel across students’ unions, is slightly different to Mintzberg’s theory of emergent strategy. As imagined by the likes of Saul Alinsky community organising assumes that communities have the solutions but not the positional power to address issues. Emergent strategy places a greater emphasis on cross-organisational actions that can both exist within and between sites of local organising. They are both about allowing ideas to emerge with greater flexibility; it is that ideas of emergent strategy places greater emphasis on the initiation of those ideas and the provision of the materials to affect change within an organisational context. This would hold that rather than having a committee of people to take the rubbish bin out let students do it themselves through helping them organise and giving them budgets and responsibilities.

    The other important theorists here are Denhardt and Denhardt and their idea of New Public Service which sets out organisations to serve rather than steer their stakeholders. In this model universities and students’ unions would spend much less time trying to fix the problems of their students but instead provide the spaces through which students could learn from each other, provide resources through which students could advocate for themselves, and provide insights that would allow students to more effectively make the case for change to the people in power. In this model the emphasis would be on how universities and students’ unions open up bureaucratic spaces to allow a greater plurality of student voices to come forward.

    These are just three models amongst many but they raise the question of the best means of keeping an eye on the accumulation of student issues that lead to generally bad experiences. It comes down to a set of trade-offs which could be brought into sharper relief. The extent to which the universities, students’ unions, and their partners, ultimately develop policy and ways of working to support people to solve their own problems and they extent to which they are better served putting the organisational bureaucracy behind these bigger issues.

    The rubbish bin theory although a metaphor brings into focus the literal problem of how universities value maintenance. The accumulation of student issues are partially addressed by the ongoing commitment to keeping stuff open, working, reliable, and functioning. In general, reward often follows doing a good new thing rather than keeping the good old thing working. The issue of the student experience is intrinsically tied to the recognition and reward of those who take the rubbish out.

    Source link

  • How Community Colleges Can Simplify the Student Enrollment Process

    How Community Colleges Can Simplify the Student Enrollment Process

    Key Takeaways:

    • Community colleges play a vital role in addressing enrollment barriers, offering tailored support to first-generation and working students.
    • Proactive strategies, such as early communication, community outreach, and wraparound services like food assistance and mental health support, help students navigate challenges and stay engaged.
    • Leveraging technology like CRM systems and AI tools simplifies the student enrollment process and enhances conversion rates.
    • Measuring success through metrics such as conversion rates, re-enrollment, and first-semester engagement lets colleges refine their strategies and better support student persistence and retention.

    The enrollment journey at community colleges can be far from straightforward, as many students face barriers beyond academics—from concerns over affordability to balancing family and work responsibilities and navigating financial aid. For example, nearly 75% of public two-year college students work while enrolled, including 46% working full time, and two-thirds of people enrolled in community colleges are first-generation students, who often do not receive the guidance and support that other students might receive from within their support systems.

    Community colleges are uniquely positioned to open doors for these students who might otherwise never step foot into higher education. By breaking down enrollment barriers, fostering early communication, and utilizing technology, community colleges can create an enrollment experience that meets students where they are. In turn, they can build pathways that lead to success, one student at a time.

    Identifying Enrollment Barriers

    For students new to the world of higher education, the student enrollment process can feel daunting. While community colleges are open-access institutions, this does not always translate to an easy path. Many students come from communities where attending college is not the norm, and some face resistance from family members or struggle with time constraints due to family responsibilities. Financial aid is also a common sticking point. Some students worry about taking on debt, while others have families unwilling to fill out the FAFSA due to privacy concerns, which adds to the complexity of obtaining financial assistance.

    Community colleges that proactively identify these barriers can uncover solutions tailored to each student’s situation. For instance, understanding the unique financial, familial, or community pressures facing students can inform how colleges offer support. Identifying opportunities to become more transparent, such as having standardized institutional aid packages that allow students to see how much aid they would receive, exemplifies this shift toward recognizing and removing institutional barriers. By locating obstacles early, colleges can guide students more effectively throughout the enrollment process, keeping them on track and engaged.

    Strategies for Eliminating Barriers in the Student Enrollment Process

    Addressing these challenges often requires creative solutions that reach beyond academic support. A critical strategy lies in educating students—and, when possible, their communities—on the value of a college education. Many students find themselves questioning the worth of a degree, particularly in communities where traditional college education may be seen as unnecessary. To address this, some colleges have begun integrating community outreach programs that outline the tangible benefits of a college education, from career advancement to personal growth. Tracking college enrollment trends also offers insight into where additional guidance might be needed, ensuring that community colleges can adapt and refine their programs.

    Community colleges can better aid students by offering wraparound services, such as food assistance, mental health counseling, transportation services, and financial literacy courses. Food insecurity, for example, is a widespread problem affecting 23% of community college students. Liaison’s IMPACT Grant, which champions initiatives such as on-campus food pantries, is an excellent example of how colleges can tackle this barrier head-on. By promoting awareness of available resources, colleges make sure students know where to find the support they need, allowing them to focus on their studies rather than their next meal or car troubles.

    Free community college programs, now offered in 36 states, also alleviate the financial strain of pursuing a credential by removing student debt as a barrier to entry. As more colleges promote these programs, the cost of higher education becomes less intimidating, particularly for first-generation and low-income students who might otherwise forgo college due to cost concerns.

    The Critical Role of Early Communication

    Community colleges often enter the higher education conversation with prospective students later than four-year institutions, missing critical opportunities to provide guidance. While some universities engage students as early as their freshman year of high school, community colleges might not start outreach until a student’s senior year. This timing can make a significant difference: earlier communication lets students weigh all their options without feeling pressured by high tuition at traditional four-year colleges. It also opens up time to explore scholarships, grants, and other options.

    Reaching students sooner can reduce enrollment anxiety, allowing them to explore programs that align with their financial needs and career goals. By actively promoting programs and resources through social media, local events, and high school partnerships, community colleges can position themselves as accessible, affordable, and valuable options for higher education.

    Leveraging Technology to Support Enrollment Journeys

    Innovative technology, such as CRM systems and AI-driven tools, plays a transformative role in simplifying the enrollment process. Liaison’s TargetX and Outcomes CRMs, for example, provide tailored platforms for managing student engagement and application processing. With tools for omnichannel marketing, application management, and progress tracking, these platforms allow students to communicate with advisors and gain clear guidance throughout the admissions process. As a result, institutions are able to improve conversion rates and enroll more best-fit students.

    AI-powered chatbots, now integrated into these CRMs, also assist students in navigating questions and concerns in real-time. This technology offers immediate, practical support that keeps students on track toward enrollment and reduces logistical barriers.

    Measuring Enrollment Success

    To understand the impact of their enrollment strategies, community colleges must look at specific metrics that reflect student progress and satisfaction. Identifying conversion rates at each enrollment stage offers insight into where students might drop off and allows administrators to refine support systems accordingly. Once students are on campus, tracking their first-semester engagement—particularly through the crucial first four weeks—can highlight early challenges and help colleges design interventions to boost retention as well as persistence after the first year.

    Examining re-enrollment rates from semester to semester is another key indicator of success. Demonstrating steady improvements in these areas reflects well on the effectiveness of a school’s holistic support and technology. Such data can also indicate how effectively institutions are offsetting the rate of community college enrollment decline, a pressing issue for those seeking to sustain their missions.

    Community colleges serve as the best opportunity to access higher education for many students. By removing enrollment barriers, actively communicating early and often, and leveraging technology to simplify the admissions process, community colleges can create pathways that lead students to fulfilling educational journeys. The more colleges embrace these strategies, the more efficient and successful the enrollment journey becomes for all students, leading to an increasingly inclusive and accessible higher education landscape.

    Liaison is committed to helping community colleges streamline admissions and improve student outcomes. Contact us today to learn more about our products and services.

    Source link

  • Student Housing: A Question of Density

    Student Housing: A Question of Density

    (Or, why students get the halls they want but can’t afford rather than the ones they don’t and can.)

    David Tymms is a strategic advisor at QX Global. He previously held roles at London School of Economics as Director of Residential Services and at iQ Student Accommodation as Commercial Director.

    Student Numbers

    The number of full-time university students has grown rapidly in recent years according to the Higher Education Statistics Agency (HESA), rising by nearly a quarter in the last half decade to 2.36 million in 2022/23. Figures have risen most for students who are typically the main drivers of purpose-built student accommodation (PBSA) demand. ​Since 2014/15, the number of full-time international students has risen 81%. As a result, core demand – first-year UK undergraduates, international undergraduates and all postgraduates – now accounts for 61% of the UK’s full-time student population, adding additional pressure on the sector to deliver purpose-built housing.​

    Unmet core demand (‘000s)

    Source: JLL; HESA

    Changing wealth profiles

    In recent years, there has been a significant increase in participation rates from lower-income households as widening participation strategies begin to bear fruit and tuition fees continue to fall in real terms (the recent inflation uplift notwithstanding). ​Despite considerable noise about access to HE in the UK, data shows the two lowest quintiles of household wealth have seen the highest rates of growth in student numbers over the last five years, with the figure from the most deprived quintile rising an impressive 29% between 2018/19 and 2022/23. In that same period, the number from the least deprived quintile grew by just 2.4%. International patterns are also changing as growth from China slows and lower-income students from the Indian sub-continent and elsewhere come to the fore.

    Full-time domestic students by household wealth, England

    chart visualization

    Source: JLL; HESA

    The Decline in Applications

    Nevertheless, new hurdles seem set to slow several years of unabated growth, particularly for international students. Visa restrictions introduced in January 2023 bar most from bringing their families to the UK while Nigeria, recently the third largest international student cohort in the UK, faces a currency crisis that may continue to impact applications in years to come.​ Sponsored study visa applications from January to October 2024 (350,700) were 16% lower than for the same period in 2023. With the Universities and Colleges Admissions Service (UCAS) also reporting a small fall in undergraduate applications, the various data sets point to a tough period ahead for UK HE.

    New Build PBSA Viability

    PBSA, in common with other real estate sectors, has been heavily squeezed by rising construction, raw material, financing and regulatory costs, including the new Building Safety Act. Today, delivery in all but the highest value markets (min. £200pw+) remains, at best, challenging and in most cases unviable, thereby excluding many university towns and cities.

    University of Bath PBSA Study

    So what does this changing student demography and tightening development viability mean for PBSA, where falling levels of new scheme openings have resulted in a record core demand level of 61%?

    Jones Lang Lasalle (JLL) worked with a group of business students at the University of Bath to better understand the PBSA priorities of those studying in the UK. ​

    How would the following affect your decision in choosing student halls?

    chart visualization

    Source: JLL; University of Bath

    The research demonstrates that students still prioritise a single occupancy room with en suite bathroom. Twin rooms scored very poorly and only one third of students actively favoured catered accommodation. The results also confirm that students prefer ‘cluster flat’ accommodation types over studios and smaller apartments (4-6 sharers) over large. However, only 29% are prepared to pay more than £200pw.

    University Partnerships – The Opportunities and Challenges

    So how does the sector square the circle of delivering more viable – and thus affordable – room types given the clear evidence of students’ perceived priorities? ​Twins, non en suites, larger cluster flats and catered accommodation all provide potentially many more beds per land parcel. The Bath survey and other research, including by Student Crowd, is clear that these remain unpopular with students so we should be unsurprised developers and operators of ‘direct let beds’ generally build to these perceived priorities.

    Historically, one approach to increase PBSA density, and thus viability, has been university partnerships. This route sees occupancy either partially or completely de-risked for the accommodation provider. However, developing university partnerships can be challenging given the financial constraints in HE, the balance sheet treatment of such agreements and currently volatile student numbers. The Office for Students (OfS) recently forecast that 72% of institutions could have a deficit in 2025/26. Nevertheless, recent examples such as Unite Group’s deal with University of Newcastle and Urbanest’s with UCL, amongst others, show these challenges can be overcome, although examples are rarer for post-92 institutions. As Martin Blakey concluded in his recent HEPI Blog – Student Accommodation after 2024 and the Need for Strategic Realignment – ‘growth in student numbers no longer necessarily equates with the need for additional PBSA student bed spaces as has been the case over the last 20 years: future needs are changing and future accommodation provision cannot, for a whole variety of reasons, be more of the same’.

    Conclusions​

    The ‘direct let’ operators of PBSA, who dominate the UK market, face a challenging period ahead as they wrestle with development viability in all but a handful of markets and where their standing assets in some locations are becoming overpriced.  If the PBSA sector does not evolve, it risks forcing the fast-growing, lower income, domestic student population into different rental sectors (or to commute) and potentially damaging access to UK universities from emerging middle-income countries.

    This blog could not have been produced without the kind assistance of Marcus Dixon and Karl Tomusk at JLL.

    To download the full report please click here.

    Source link

  • Report on Grad Student Preferences

    Report on Grad Student Preferences

    According To the New UPCEA and Collegis Report, 71% of Prospective Graduate Students Prefer Fully Online Programs

    Findings highlight the need for strategic outreach to address master’s degree enrollment challenges in a competitive market

    [Washington and Illinois] – December 16, 2024 – A new report released today by UPCEA, the online and professional education association, and Collegis Education, a higher education solutions tech-enabler, highlights the growing interest in online master’s degree programs that provide flexibility, transparency and streamlined communication in graduate programs. Based on a survey of over 1,000 prospective graduate students, Building a Better Pipeline: Enrollment Funnel Needs and Perspectives from Potential Post-Baccalaureate Students reveals key insights for higher education institutions aiming to improve graduate recruitment strategies.

    “We are entering a period where every enrollment matters. Enrollment growth for graduate programs has been stagnant for the past 15 years, despite the number of baccalaureate degree holders growing. Future success requires colleges and universities to better align offerings with student preferences and communicating on their terms,” said Jim Fong, Chief Research Officer at UPCEA. “Listening to prospective students’ interests and addressing their needs provides a stronger roadmap for institutions to succeed in what will be a hyper-competitive landscape.”

    Key findings from the report include:

    • Delivery Preferences: Fully online programs are the most preferred format, with 71% of respondents showing strong interest, followed by hybrid formats (53%).
    • Program Priorities: A specific program of study is the top consideration (54%), followed by institutional reputation (28%) and delivery method (18%).
    • Communication Preferences: Email remains the preferred contact method for 47% of respondents during the inquiry process, with most willing to share basic details such as their name and email address.
    • Engagement Challenges: Sixty-two percent of respondents said difficulty finding basic program information on an institution’s website would cause them to disengage. At the same time, financial concerns dominated the latter stages of the application process.

    The report highlights a growing demand for master’s degree programs, which 65% of respondents identified as their top interest. It also points to an urgent need for institutions to address gaps in their outreach strategies to meet these demands effectively.

    “As higher education faces tightening budgets, strategic investments in program delivery and candidate outreach have never been more important. These findings emphasize the need for a fully transparent graduate search experience – from program research to application – to engage and inform students so they can see the value and affordability from the start,” said Tracy Chapman, Chief Academic Officer of Collegis Education. ”Institutions that leverage data, technology, and talent can strengthen relationships with prospective students to build communication and trust.”

    With graduate enrollment projected to grow by just 1.4% over the next five years, institutions must innovate to stay competitive. The report provides data-driven insights to help universities design more effective outreach and recruitment strategies, particularly in light of the 32% increase in master’s program offerings since 2017, which has led to a 15% decrease in average program size.

    Actionable Insights for Institutions

    With graduate enrollment projected to grow by just 1.4% over the next five years, institutions must innovate to stay competitive.The survey revealed that requiring too much personal information in online request-for-information (RFI) forms often leads to student disengagement. Institutions should streamline these forms and prioritize providing clear, accessible program details—such as tuition, course requirements, and job outcomes—on their websites. UPCEA’s analyses show that many institutions lack this essential information, which can deter potential applicants early in the inquiry process.

    In light of the 32% increase in master’s program offerings since 2017, which has led to a 15% decrease in average program size, this report provides vital data-driven insights to help universities design more effective outreach and recruitment strategies.

    Methodology

    Conducted in August, the survey was completed by 1,005 qualified participants. Qualified respondents were between the ages of 18 and 64, held at least a bachelor’s degree, were not currently enrolled in a post-baccalaureate program, and were at least somewhat interested in pursuing further education. Nearly a quarter (24 percent) of respondents were 55 to 64 years old, 18 percent were aged 46 to 54, and 14 percent were 23 to 26 years old, showing deep interest in fully online graduate programs regardless of age.

    For more information on the survey findings, download the report at https://collegiseducation.com/insights/student-experience/research-report-graduate-student-perspectives/

    # # #

    About UPCEA:

    UPCEA is the online and professional education association. Our members continuously reinvent higher education, positively impacting millions of lives. We proudly lead and support them through cutting-edge research, professional development, networking and mentorship, conferences and seminars, and stakeholder advocacy. Our collaborative, entrepreneurial community brings together decision-makers and influencers in education, industry, research, and policy interested in improving educational access and outcomes. Learn more at upcea.edu.

    About Collegis Education:

    As a mission-oriented, tech-enabled services provider, Collegis Education partners with higher education institutions to help align operations to drive transformative impact across the entire student lifecycle. With over 25 years as an industry pioneer, Collegis has proven how to leverage data, technology, and talent to optimize institutions’ business processes that enhance the student experience. With the strategic expertise that rivals the leading consultancies, a full suite of proven service lines, including marketing, enrollment, retention, IT, and its world-class Connected Core® data platform, Collegis helps its partners enable impact and drive revenue, growth, and innovation. Learn more at CollegisEducation.com.

    Media Contacts:

    UPCEA
    Molly Nelson
    VP of Communications
    [email protected]

    Collegis Education
    Alyssa Miller
    [email protected]
    973-615-1292

    Source link