Changing Higher Ed

View Details

The same students who say college costs too much are overwhelmingly saying it was worth it, and that contradiction is the key to the entire public confidence debate. In Gallup-Lumina polling cited in this episode, 93 percent of bachelor's students called their degree a worthwhile investment. The doubt is about price, not the education, and generative AI has raised the stakes for confusing the two.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Christa Acampora, philosopher and Dean of the College and Graduate School of Arts and Sciences at the University of Virginia, where she is leading the integration of AI into the curriculum, about the purpose of liberal arts education in the age of AI.

Acampora argues that the purpose of higher education is human formation, making people capable of authoring their own lives and helping to govern a free society, with preparation for good work as part of that purpose rather than a substitute for it. She and McNaughton separate the public's doubts about cost from the question of value, and discuss how UVA is making student formation visible through its first-year learning experience, the Commonplace Book, and an AI Literacy and Action Lab.

Topics Covered * Why the public's doubts about a degree center on price and debt, a different question from whether the education was worth doing * What AI's capacity to produce competent outputs reveals about what higher education has rewarded * World Economic Forum survey findings discussed in the episode on redesigning work and finding people with judgment who can adapt * Whether institutions that teach students how to think are helping students recognize that learning in themselves * UVA's first-year course sequence built around big human questions, the Commonplace Book, and the AI Literacy and Action Lab * How students describe their own use of AI and their concerns about evaluating its outputs

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leaders 1. Reframe the case for higher education around formation, for the individual and for society, rather than transferable skills that machines can now perform. 2. Keep cost and value separate: address cost and price transparency directly, and make the value case with confidence, not apology. 3. Make formation visible early and often through pedagogy and instruments that let students see their own growth.

This episode offers perspective for presidents, provosts, and board members on articulating and demonstrating the value of a liberal education as AI capabilities continue to change.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/purpose-of-liberal-arts-education-in-the-age-of-ai/]

#HigherEducation #LiberalArts #ChangingHigherEdPodcast

View Details

Program discontinuation is usually the fight presidents avoid. Fairleigh Dickinson University put a significant slate of program discontinuations and consolidations to a faculty referendum, and roughly 88 percent of the faculty endorsed it. The vote reflects a larger redefinition underway at FDU: a shift from the four-year degree to a university built around lifelong learning.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Michael Avaltroni, President of Fairleigh Dickinson University and the first FDU graduate to hold the office, about the four-P framework guiding that redefinition: programs, people, partnerships, and place.

Avaltroni explains how FDU is specializing in health, health-adjacent, and professionally focused programs rather than trying to be everything to everyone; designing for five generations of learners on one campus; delivering degrees inside corporations such as Merck, Novartis, Fiserv, and Barclays; and reimagining its campuses as intergenerational "impact cities" that place retirement living alongside student housing.

This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, provosts, and board members weighing program portfolio decisions, partnership strategies, and how to pursue radical change without losing faculty and community trust.

Topics Covered * Why the fundamental model higher education was built for is gone, and the optimistic "but" that follows * The four Ps of the university of the future: programs, people, partnerships, and place * Winning faculty endorsement of program cuts through a data-driven shared governance process * Serving five generations of learners concurrently, from pre-college pathways to retirement * Corporate classrooms, advisory councils, executives in residence, and a learn-while-you-earn platform with health systems * Humanics: preparing a healthcare workforce that is technologically literate, data literate, and human literate

Real-World Examples Discussed * A faculty referendum endorsing a significant slate of program discontinuations by roughly 88 percent * On-site MBA and leadership programs where practitioners, including a VP of HR, team-teach with FDU faculty * Plans to add university-based retirement living alongside student housing on FDU's two New Jersey campuses

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leadership 1. Know who you are. Be the institution you are called to be, serving the students you are called to serve, not a copy of anywhere else. 2. Rethink what higher education can be. The time-driven, hours-logged degree has run its course; the strategic question is how to deliver true lifelong learning, at its fullest a subscription-based model for life. 3. Be bold. Institutions that nibble around the edges risk obsolescence; take a big swing and adjust course, and bring everybody along.

This episode offers a working view of what redefining a university around lifelong learning actually requires: a clear identity, a disciplined portfolio, partners who carry what the institution should not, and governance strong enough to carry hard decisions.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/fairleigh-dickinson-lifelong-learning-ecosystem/

#HigherEducation #HigherEducationPodcast #LifelongLearning

View Details

At Manhattan University, the case for the liberal arts is being made with outcomes, not nostalgia. Its graduates rank in the top 2% nationally for mid-career salaries, and The Wall Street Journal ranked the university 73rd in the country for graduate salaries, social mobility, and cost-effectiveness. The more useful story for institutional leaders sits underneath those numbers: a set of deliberate decisions about program design, technology preparation, faculty adoption, hiring, and alumni engagement.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Fred Bonato, President of Manhattan University, about how the institution pairs a liberal arts core with universal technology preparation, on the premise that transferable skills hold even greater value when combined with technical fluency.

Bonato explains how Manhattan houses its interdisciplinary programs in AI, cybersecurity, and data science outside any single college under the new ARCH Innovation Exchange; requires every first-year student to earn an IBM SkillsBuild digital badge in AI; funds faculty adoption through an institutional ChatGPT license, workshops, and peer champions rather than mandates; screens faculty and staff hires for comfort with AI as a tool; and treats the university's alumni network as employment infrastructure, including the James Patterson-funded leadership development honors program.

This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, provosts, and board members weighing humanities cuts, planning AI integration, or looking for adoption strategies that work within shared governance rather than around it.

Topics Covered • Why Bonato defines the liberal arts by their transferable skills: problem-solving, creative thinking, and persuasive writing and speaking

• Housing interdisciplinary programs in AI, cybersecurity, and data science outside any single college to reduce the likelihood of ownership disputes

• The ARCH Innovation Exchange (analytics, research, creativity, humanity) and its speaker series open to the surrounding community

• The required IBM SkillsBuild AI course and digital badge for first-year students

• Driving faculty adoption through demonstrated value, resources, and peer champions instead of presidential mandates

• How hiring questions have shifted from comfort with online teaching to comfort with AI, for faculty and staff alike

• Experiential learning, intern-to-hire pipelines, and the alumni network's role in supplying opportunities

Real-World Examples Discussed • ARCH's inaugural speaker, a cardiologist and Manhattan engineering alumnus who leads AI at his hospital, framing AI as decision support with a human in the loop

• An institutional ChatGPT license and training workshops so faculty and staff can adopt AI at no personal cost

• The James Patterson Honors Program, a leadership development program seeded by the best-selling alumnus, which launched with more than 160 students

• Board chair and American Express CEO Steve Squeri speaking directly with students about building a career

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leaders 1. Keep the liberal arts in every program, including technical ones; graduates without them are less prepared and less well-rounded for the working world

Build the capacity to pivot; the world is changing quickly, and "this is how we've always done it" will no longer hold
Presidents need a deliberate way to disengage and recharge, even if only through adequate sleep; the job can consume its holder

This episode offers a practical look at how one institution operationalizes the pairing of liberal arts and workforce readiness through governance, partnerships, hiring, and culture, without waiting for the technology or the sector to stabilize.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/manhattan-university-liberal-arts-workforce-readiness/

#LiberalArts #WorkforceReadiness #HigherEducation #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

Most retention systems flag struggling students through grades and attendance. By the time those indicators fire, many students are already halfway out the door. Elvee's survey of 1,050 U.S. college students shows why: 86% start college highly motivated, 42% come close to dropping out at some point, and only 17% of those who struggle ever request help.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Raz Dar, CEO of Elvee, whose work with U.S. colleges centers on reading behavioral data for early signals of student disengagement.

Drawing on his background in commercial technology, Dar explains how patterns in study time, login frequency, and forum participation reveal disengagement before exam period and before failure reaches the gradebook. He and McNaughton examine why motivated students still leave, why institutions that wait for students to ask for help miss most of the students who need it, and why intervention without follow-up monitoring routinely fails.

This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, provosts, student success executives, enrollment executives, and board members looking to move retention from reactive support to proactive, early intervention.

Topics Covered * Why grades and attendance are lagging indicators that flag students too late * What disengagement looks like in behavioral data, and why a single dip can be benign * The help-seeking gap: 17% ask for help, 52% try to solve it alone first, 30% never reach out * The top dropout drivers: balancing work and school (72%) and mental health or stress (71%) * How the most successful institutions build a personalized bond from day one * Scaling a dozen advisors across thousands of students through prioritization and automation

Real-World Examples Discussed * A freshman who skipped two exams under acute stress and recovered because the institution initiated contact * Institutions that call students at term start to confirm they have books, Wi-Fi, and a computer * Cambridge's bridge week for first-generation students and Yale's required freshman life-skills course * The corporate benchmark: turnover above 10% triggers alarm in business, while higher ed absorbs far worse

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership 1. Build trust with students before they struggle; outreach in crisis only lands if a relationship already exists. 2. Move from reactive to proactive; only 17% of struggling students will ask for help, so use behavioral signals to know when to reach out and monitor afterward to confirm the intervention worked. 3. Make retention a strategic, measurable KPI from the top, and resource it with a real team.

This episode offers a practical look at what becomes possible when institutions stop waiting for students to raise their hands and start reading the signals students are already sending.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/using-ai-behavioral-signals-student-retention/

#StudentSuccess #StudentRetention #HigherEducation #HigherEducationPodcast #AIforStudentRetention

View Details

Half of college presidents worried about public trust are answering with a public relations campaign. According to the AAC&U report at the center of this episode, that is a reasonable instinct but the wrong one. Public confidence in colleges and universities has slid for more than a decade, and messaging alone will not turn it around.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Jeremy Young, lead author of The Trust Agenda: A Framework for Advancing Public Trust in Higher Education and he co-directs AAC&U's Advancing Public Trust in Higher Education initiative, about why trust has eroded and what campus leaders can actually do about it.

Their conversation moves past naming the crisis, which presidents and boards already feel, into the specifics: why the most prestigious institutions are the least trusted while community colleges and regional publics are the most, why distrust took root long before today's politics, and how the report's five recommendations translate into work a campus can start now.

This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, provosts, board members, and cabinet leaders weighing how to respond to declining confidence without defaulting to a PR campaign.

Topics Covered * Why public trust has fallen unevenly, and what the institution-type gap means for strategy * The deeper roots of distrust, including the sense of distance between campuses and their communities * Community engagement as the core of trust, and why it cannot live in a single office * Inclusive excellence as a student success strategy, including the position of conservative students * Defending academic freedom and university autonomy against government overreach * Telling a clearer story that connects to shared values, and why PR alone falls short * Accelerating internal innovation, from shared governance to AI literacy

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership 1. Connection is the thread through every recommendation: within a campus, across campuses, and with the community, society, and students. 2. Reform, defense, and communication are not an either/or; institutions have to pursue all three at once. 3. Higher education is a community asset, and it earns trust by being trustworthy and doing the work, not by asking for trust.

The most durable change, Young argues, will not come from convening the sector's leaders to design a single fix. It will bubble up from individual campuses that innovate, with others adopting what works.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/the-trust-agenda-advancing-public-trust-in-higher-education/

#HigherEducation #PublicTrust #HigherEducationLeadership #ChangingHigherEdPodcast

View Details

When the federal government freezes research funding, leaders tend to treat it as a budget problem: a number that was cut and might later be restored. The harder truth in this conversation is that much of the damage cannot be undone. Halted studies, shuttered labs, and departed early-career researchers do not simply resume when the money comes back. Research funding cuts are a strategic risk, not a line item.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Nick Dirks, President and CEO of the New York Academy of Sciences and former chancellor of UC Berkeley. Dirks first joined the show in 2018, as the podcast's third guest, reflecting on the protests that had put Berkeley at the center of national attention over controversial speakers on campus. He returns to discuss what the current research funding cuts are doing to American science, where AI fits in higher education, and the choices facing presidents and boards.

This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, provosts, and board members weighing how federal funding volatility, the loss of early-career research talent, and the rapid arrival of AI in the classroom should shape institutional strategy and risk planning.

Topics Covered • Why frozen research funding cannot simply be switched back on, and what that means for biomedical studies, drug trials, and animal research

• The damage to the early-career research pipeline, and why postdocs and graduate students are the most exposed

• What current data shows about US scientists weighing whether to leave the country or the field

• How the president's role has shifted from pleasing every constituency to making hard, unpopular choices

• Why bringing higher education's costs down depends on faculty and administrators rebuilding trust

Real-World Examples Discussed • Drug trials at Columbia that had to stop outright, ending years of work toward a potential cancer treatment that could not be restarted once funding returned

• Animal research populations that universities could no longer afford to maintain, forcing some labs to shut down entirely

• The mRNA vaccine effort spanning the University of Pennsylvania, Germany's BioNTech, and scientists originally from Turkey

• A National Postdoctoral Association survey Dirks worked on, and a January 2026 AAU brief quantifying how far the talent loss has progressed

• The calculator's arrival in the 1970s as a precedent for absorbing a disruptive new tool without banning it

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership 1. Research funding cuts are a strategic risk, not a budget event. The damage to studies and to the people who run them often cannot be reversed once the money returns.

The early-career pipeline is where the loss compounds. Protecting graduate students, postdocs, and research associates is protecting the institution's long-term research capacity.
Hard institutional decisions require trust. Cost discipline and AI adoption both depend on boards, presidents, and faculty working together rather than against each other.

This episode offers presidents and boards a clear-eyed look at how funding shocks, talent loss, and AI are reshaping higher education, and why the institutions that plan for these pressures will weather them better than those that wait.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/research-funding-cuts-are-a-strategic-risk-not-a-budget-problem/

#ResearchFunding #HigherEducation #HigherEdLeadership #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

Most AI conversations in higher education focus on the academic side. The administrative side gets less attention and is producing the bigger near-term financial wins for institutions willing to govern the rollout.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Justin Beck, CEO of Gravyty, about how AI is being applied across enrollment and advancement at institutions including Empire State University, Florida Southwestern State College, and Boise State University.

Drawing on his career across Blackboard, Instructure, Kaltura, and now Gravyty, Beck walks through the specific case studies behind administrative AI adoption: a reported 4% year-over-year retention gain at Empire State, 90% first-contact resolution of admissions inquiries at Florida Southwestern, and an 87% increase in donor volume at Boise State. He also explains where institutions go wrong, including bots that loop the way call-center bots loop and set-it-and-forget-it deployments that drift out of alignment within weeks.

This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, boards, and enrollment and advancement leaders building the business case for administrative AI and the governance to back it.

Topics Covered * Why administrative AI is producing measurable financial gains while most institutions still treat AI as an academic policy question * The retention math: how a 4% lift can translate into multi-million-dollar revenue protection at a mid-size institution * How AI sorts and triages carries admissions volume that hiring cannot keep up with * Why a poorly designed enrollment chatbot is worse than no chatbot at all * How AI surfaces structural fragmentation across student-facing offices * Advancement AI's real value: donor prioritization, not email generation * What good governance and human-review cadence actually look like in practice

Real-World Examples Discussed * Empire State University: a 25% engagement lift and a 4% year-over-year retention gain after deploying AI virtual assistants across roughly eight departments * Florida SouthWestern State College: 90% first-contact resolution of admissions inquiries and time to class registration cut in half * Boise State University: an 87% increase in donor volume, a 50% increase in donor interaction and response, and $635,679 raised through an AI-assisted advancement channel * A Missouri institution where an AI web crawler surfaced three different admissions deposit dates published on three active web pages * A New York institution where more than 40% of questions coming into the financial aid office had nothing to do with financial aid

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leadership 1. Move quickly, with an acceptable use policy on the books and defined institutional outcomes the AI work is supposed to drive 2. Control what you can control while pulling stakeholders in, including the faculty committee model 3. Iterate often on a recurring governance cadence, because the technology is changing month by month

Institutions that do not use AI to improve administrative efficiency are incurring opportunity costs in every cycle.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/administrative-ai-in-higher-ed-finding-revenue-friction/

#AdministrativeAI #HigherEducation #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

AI implementation in higher education is often framed as a technology question. California State University treated it as change management with technology as the catalyst, rolling out ChatGPT Edu to 22 universities in 18 months while running the largest AI survey ever conducted at a single university system.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Leslie Kennedy, Assistant Vice Chancellor for Academic Technology Services at the California State University Office of the Chancellor, about how the system designed and executed its generative AI implementation and what the Ahead of the Curve survey of 94,060 respondents reveals about AI adoption, faculty engagement, and student behavior.

Drawing on her work co-leading the academic side of CSU's GenAI initiative, Kennedy explains the governance structure that made the rollout possible, the campus-level training infrastructure that scaled adoption across 22 universities, and the survey findings that pushed back on common assumptions about cheating, faculty resistance, and AI access gaps.

This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, provosts, boards, and CIOs evaluating how to move from AI policy discussions to systemwide implementation.

Topics Covered:

The sequencing model behind CSU's 18-month AI rollout
Findings from the largest AI survey ever conducted at a single university system
Why faculty are the only group reporting both positive and negative AI impact
How CSU funded faculty-led innovation through the AI Educational Innovations Challenge
The communication challenges of running AI implementation across 22 independent campuses
What CSU plans next: hackathons, embedded credentials, and domain-specific tools

Real-World Examples Discussed:

The AI Educational Innovations Challenge received 417 faculty applications against an expected 50, with 63 funded at $3M
ChatGPT Edu deployment across all 22 CSU campuses, now at 225,000 active accounts
Student hackathons run with IBM Watson, AWS, NVIDIA, and Cal Poly partners across multiple disciplines
Faculty-led podcasts (My Robot Teacher from Cal Maritime and Unfixed from Chico State) that built peer-to-peer training resources

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership:

Sequencing matters more than budget or technology. Faculty resolution first, governance second, enterprise tool third, training and funded experimentation in parallel.
Faculty carry more complexity than staff or students in AI implementation, and need different support, training cadence, and communication than other groups.
Communication is a continuous operating discipline, not a launch campaign. The technology changes faster than any single training cycle.

This episode offers a practical view of what large-scale AI implementation actually looks like in higher education, and why the institutions getting it right are treating it as change management work supported by technology rather than a technology rollout in search of governance.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/https://changinghighered.com/csu-chatgpt-edu-rollout-lessons-higher-ed-leaders/

#GenerativeAI #HigherEducation #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

At sixteen, with straight A's in math and science, Dr. Karen Panetta's school career assessment told her to sell makeup or be a cook. A male friend with lower scores got engineer or politician. No AI was involved. Just a rules-based system applying gender and biographical filters to two teenagers. That same logic now sits inside AI tools landing in admissions offices and HR systems across higher ed, with one critical difference: AI does not eliminate human bias, it removes the human accountability that used to make bias correctable.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Karen Panetta, Dean of Graduate Education for the School of Engineering at Tufts University and an IEEE Fellow.

Panetta lays out a procurement framework presidents and boards can use to evaluate AI tools before signing a contract. She and McNaughton work through the four questions most vendors cannot answer, why IRB principles already give higher ed a working framework for AI, and what happens to graduate research when students ask AI for a unique contribution and accept whatever comes back.

This conversation is especially relevant for institutional leaders making decisions about AI procurement, classroom adoption, and data governance who want a clear set of questions to ask before they buy and a clear standard for keeping humans accountable for the decisions AI tools are increasingly being asked to make.

Topics Covered:

The four procurement questions every higher ed leader should ask before signing an AI contract
Why expert disagreement on ground truth limits what any AI tool trained on that judgment can do
How IRB principles apply to AI deployments, and why every kind use of technology has a misuse case sitting next to it
The risk of AI's interpretation of truth aging with the consensus
Why faculty in English, history, and the arts are essential to AI policy
What IEEE's 500,000 technical professionals are doing on AI standards that no single corporate vendor will do

Real-World Examples Discussed:

The career assessments that pointed a top math student toward cooking and a Navy veteran toward forest ranger work
A cancer detection project where six doctors agreed on whether something was cancer but disagreed on every grade beyond that
A conservation project where the same tracking data that helps park rangers could help poachers if security is weak
Graduate admissions committees where different faculty weight credentials, projects, and volunteer work differently, and what gets lost when only one set of weights is encoded into an AI screen

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership:

AI does not create bias. It scales whatever bias is already in the institution's decision systems, at the speed and volume the institution chose to deploy.
Every consequential decision needs a human in the loop who can explain the call out loud. Without that, the institution cannot defend the decisions it is making.
The sticker price on the AI tool is not the story. The data behind it is, and most vendors cannot tell you what it is.

This episode gives presidents, provosts, and boards a practical framework for AI procurement and governance, along with a clear answer to the trustee asking why the institution has not bought what everyone else is buying.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/ai-bias-procurement-framework-higher-education/

#HigherEducation #AIinHigherEd #HigherEducationPodcast #AIGovernance #AIBias #HigherEducationLeadership

View Details

Most business schools are still forming committees to figure out what to do about AI. Kogod School of Business at American University formed a committee, but far from the typical higher ed standards. Leadership gave it six weeks and a five-page limit, and used the recommendation to integrate AI into every department, major, and minor. Three years later, undergraduate enrollment is up 40%, applications are up 50%, and more than 90% of faculty are using AI in the classroom.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with returning guests David Marchick, Dean of the Kogod School of Business at American University, and Angela Virtu, Professor of IT and Analytics and Associate Director of Kogod's AI Institute, about how the school moved from a dean's instinct that AI would be big to a fully embedded, faculty-driven transformation that has redefined how business education is taught, assessed, and experienced by students.

Marchick and Virtu walk through how they navigated shared governance at speed, leaned into 14 core course coordinators to spread adoption like wildfire, and built a culture where faculty are making stuff up, trying things, and pivoting when something doesn't work. Virtu explains how courses are being rebuilt from the ground up, with professors shifting from lecturers to coaches and students building real software for real clients. Marchick shares the enrollment and media results, including being named the first AI-first business school by Bloomberg Businessweek.

This conversation is especially relevant for institutional leaders trying to figure out how to move on AI without blowing up their governance structures or losing faculty trust. Kogod's playbook worked within existing academic processes, and the results are measurable.

Topics Covered:

• How a conversation with a Google executive sparked the AI initiative before ChatGPT went mainstream

• Why Marchick gave the faculty committee six weeks and a five-page limit instead of a two-year study

• The top-down and bottom-up strategy that moved faculty adoption from a handful of volunteers to over 90%

• How 14 core course coordinators became the tactical lever for culture change across the school

• The shift from professors as lecturers to professors as coaches

• How non-quantitative students are programming and building functioning apps using AI

• Kogod's scaffolded four-year curriculum: AI literacy in year one, domain-specific applications in year two, deep dives in years three and four, and a capstone that combines all three pillars

• Why the school teaches what's wrong with AI before teaching what's right

• The AI assessment problem no institution has solved yet

• What's next: domain-specific AI apps, student portfolios, and an AI minor for non-business students

Real-World Examples Discussed:

• Tommy White's course with no readings and no textbook, where students use AI prompts to find their own materials and come to class with different sources on the same topic

• Kelly Frias's advertising class where students built a social media content tool and owner dashboard for a real college-apparel business with brand ambassadors at 75 campuses

• Brad Smith, president of Microsoft, telling Marchick that the specific AI tool matters less than teaching students to feel comfortable experimenting and trying new things

• A distinguished Kogod scholar describing AI as like having a PhD student for research productivity

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership:

Culture first, training second, technology third. Faculty adoption spreads when leadership creates permission to experiment and fail, not when it purchases a platform.
Teach what's wrong with AI before teaching what's right. A human has to be in the loop at the beginning and at the end. AI can be a collaborator, a partner, an assistant, but it cannot be a substitute.
Don't wait for the technology to stabilize. AI capabilities are changing in weeks. If you tried it two years ago and weren't impressed, try it again. The updates in just the last few weeks represent really big strides.

This episode offers a practical, replicable look at what happens when a business school treats AI integration as a culture change initiative and moves fast enough to stay ahead of the technology. Kogod's transformation is relevant to any institution trying to figure out how to act on AI without waiting for a perfect plan.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/kogod-ai-first-business-school-enrollment-growth/

#AIinHigherEd #BusinessEducation #HigherEducation #HigherEducationPodcast #ChangingHigherEdPodcast

View Details

AI adoption in higher education is moving faster than institutional change models were built to handle. Students are already using AI at high rates, while many institutions are still trying to decide where AI belongs, who should lead it, and how much change is required.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Nikki Barua, serial entrepreneur and founder of FlipWork, about why higher education's traditional change management playbook will not work in the AI age.

Drawing on her work with Fortune 500 companies and AI implementation, Barua explains why AI should be treated as institutional infrastructure, not an IT project. She discusses the growing gap between technology adoption and human readiness, why many AI pilots fail, and how institutions can move from slow, episodic transformation to shorter, people-centered reinvention cycles.

This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, boards, provosts, CIOs, and senior leadership teams trying to prepare students, faculty, staff, and institutional systems for an AI-driven future.

Topics Covered * Why incremental change management cannot keep pace with AI * How AI differs from previous technology disruptions like the internet and mobile * Why AI should be treated as infrastructure across the institution * What the AI readiness gap means for higher education leaders * Why many AI pilots fail when organizations focus on tools instead of people * How AI may reshape entry-level jobs and the graduate talent pipeline * Why skills-based hiring is changing what students need from higher education * How faculty roles may shift from content delivery to mentorship, ethics, and judgment * Why liberal arts and human skills may become more valuable in the AI age * How human-in-the-loop design can improve AI use in enrollment, advising, and student support * Why AI literacy must become a core institutional capability

Real-World Examples Discussed * AI adoption among students far outpacing institutional readiness * Corporate AI pilots failing because organizations did not prepare people to use the tools effectively * Entry-level jobs shrinking or changing as AI takes over early-career tasks * Employers moving toward skills-based hiring and project-specific teams * AI tutors, teaching assistants, adaptive learning tools, and student support applications * Enrollment chatbots that create frustration when they replace rather than support human interaction * Human-in-the-loop workflows that know when to hand a student or prospect to a person * Ethics in AI as a foundation for preparing graduates to use powerful tools responsibly

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leadership 1. AI is an opportunity for reinvention, not an IT project. Institutions should treat AI as a strategic leadership issue that affects competitive position, culture, academic delivery, student support, and institutional agility. 2. Students are already ahead of many institutions. Without governance, ethical guidelines, and structured leadership, AI use can become unmanaged shadow AI across the institution. 3. The cost of waiting grows exponentially. AI is advancing week by week, and institutions that delay action will face a widening readiness gap that becomes harder and more expensive to close.

This episode offers a direct look at why higher education cannot rely on its traditional pace of change in the AI age, and why institutional leaders must rethink what they offer that AI cannot replicate.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/closing-higher-educations-ai-readiness-gap/

#AIinHigherEducation #HigherEducation #HigherEducationPodcast #WorkforceReadinessGap

View Details

Scaling higher education is no longer a theoretical strategy. As the sector moves deeper into consolidation, institutional leaders need to confront whether their operating models, credential structures, partnerships, and delivery systems are built for the market ahead.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Stephen Spinelli, President of Babson College, about how an entrepreneurial mindset can help higher education respond to consolidation, AI disruption, and changing learner expectations.

Drawing from his experience as co-founder of Jiffy Lube International and president of one of the nation's leading entrepreneurship institutions, Spinelli explains why higher education's anti-scale culture has become a strategic problem. He argues that demand for learning is growing, but the sector's delivery model has not kept pace with what students, employers, and adult learners now need.

The conversation covers how AI is changing the economics of small-unit, high-quality education, why credentials are likely to become more modular and measurable, and how partnerships with other institutions and industry will shape the next era of higher education. Spinelli also outlines why strategy must be tied to action, accountability, and institutional values that do not shift with every market signal.

This episode is especially relevant for presidents, boards, and senior leaders working through questions of scale, consolidation, strategic partnerships, AI-enabled learning, and long-term institutional relevance.

Topics Covered * Why higher education is showing classic signs of market consolidation * How anti-scale thinking limits institutional durability and adaptability * Why demand for learning is growing while delivery models lag behind * How agentic AI changes the economics of small-unit education * Why credentials may become smaller, more measurable, and more industry-aligned * How strategic partnerships may extend beyond institutions into corporate and industry networks * Why lifelong learner relationships may become a new revenue and relevance model * How quarterly board-level strategic execution reviews keep institutions accountable * Why liberal arts capabilities matter more in an AI-enabled environment

Real-World Examples Discussed * Jiffy Lube's early growth model and what it taught Spinelli about scale * Babson's shift from entrepreneurship to entrepreneurial leadership * Babson's network of 45 or 46 partner schools building entrepreneurial leadership capacity * A group of seven New England institutions exploring partnership models to save resources * AI-supported teaching models that could allow one expert to reach far more learners * The doctor, lawyer, educator relationship model for lifelong learning

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leadership

Institutions need a crisp and understandable value proposition that clearly explains why they exist and what they believe.
Mission and values must drive strategy so institutions can adapt their actions without abandoning their core purpose.
Strategic plans must be actionable, measurable, and reviewed regularly by the board so they inform decisions instead of sitting unused.

This episode offers a direct look at what higher education leaders need to confront as consolidation, AI, modular learning, and partnership-driven delivery reshape the sector.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/scaling-higher-education-entrepreneurial-approach/

#HigherEducation #HigherEducationLeadership #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

Civic preparedness in higher education can no longer be treated as an assumed byproduct of a college education. In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Raj Vinnakota, president of the Institute for Citizens & Scholars, about how colleges and universities can rebuild the civic skills students need to navigate disagreement, evaluate credible information, and solve problems across difference.

Drawing on his work with college presidents, faculty, employers, and Gen Z leaders, Vinnakota explains why higher education has drifted too far toward a private-good narrative focused almost entirely on jobs and individual outcomes. He makes the case that institutions must also reclaim their public-good responsibility by preparing students to participate productively in civic life.

The conversation also explores College Presidents for Civic Preparedness, or CP², a coalition of 135 college and university presidents working together to lower the political and institutional risk of leading civic preparedness work alone. Vinnakota explains why opt-in programming is not enough, why faculty need support to teach contentious issues, and why shared measurement is needed to move civic preparedness from rhetoric to campus-wide culture change.

This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, boards, provosts, faculty leaders, and institutional teams working to strengthen civic learning, rebuild public trust, and prepare graduates for a more polarized and information-saturated world.

Topics Covered:

Why civic preparedness can no longer be assumed as a byproduct of college
How higher education's public-good mission has been crowded out by short-term job-focused framing
Why presidents who lead civic preparedness alone often face stakeholder pushback
How CP² lowers institutional risk through a coalition of 135 college and university presidents
The three civic skills every graduate needs: productive conversation, credible information use, and collaborative problem-solving
Why opt-in civic programming fails to reach most students
How institutions are embedding civic skills into orientation, general education, curriculum, residential life, and campus culture
Why faculty need training and peer support to teach contentious issues effectively
How shared measurement helps institutions assess whether civic preparedness work is changing campus culture
Why local trust remains one of higher education's strongest strategic assets

Real-World Examples Discussed:

A diverse group of college presidents who identified the same public-good challenge across very different institutions
The growth of CP² from 14 founding presidents to 135 institutional leaders
Forty-two institutions moving from opt-in civic programming toward campus-wide culture change
Faculty institutes that have trained more than 155 faculty members from over 60 institutions
Campus-based faculty cohorts designed to build enough internal capacity for institution-wide change
Shared measures tied to productive conversation, credible information, and collaborative problem-solving

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership:

Civic preparedness should not be led in isolation. Presidents have more leverage when they work through coalitions, peer networks, and shared institutional practice.
Local trust is one of higher education's most durable assets. Colleges and universities can strengthen public legitimacy by engaging their surrounding communities through visible, substantive civic work.
Student voice should be built into planning and governance. Students provide a different read on whether institutional efforts are producing real impact.

This episode offers a practical look at how higher education can move civic preparedness from isolated programming to institution-wide practice, and why presidents, boards, faculty, and students all have a role in rebuilding the civic capacity colleges were once assumed to produce.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/civic-preparedness-in-higher-ed-coalition-of-college-presidents/

#CivicPreparedness #HigherEducation #HigherEducationPodcast #CollegePresidents #StudentSuccess

View Details

International student enrollment in the United States reached record highs in 2024–2025, followed by a sharp and uneven decline heading into 2025–2026. While top-tier institutions continue to attract global talent, regional and private institutions are facing growing pressure as visa restrictions, geopolitical dynamics, and shifting perceptions of the U.S. reshape the enrollment landscape.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Shaun Carver, Executive Director of UC Berkeley's International House, about how institutions must rethink international enrollment strategy in response to these structural changes. Drawing on more than two decades of experience in international education, Carver explains why the traditional model of bringing students to U.S. campuses is no longer sufficient—and what institutions can do to remain competitive.

This conversation explores how global competition, parental decision-making, and policy shifts are influencing enrollment patterns, and why institutions must begin thinking beyond geographic boundaries to sustain international engagement.

Topics Covered:

Why international enrollment declines are impacting institutions unevenly
How global brand strength influences student decision-making
Why undergraduate international enrollment is more vulnerable than graduate programs
The role of parental perception in international student recruitment
Why universities are exploring global delivery models and partnerships
How foreign governments are funding international campus expansion
The broader economic and workforce impact of international students
Why institutional leadership must advocate for international students

Real-World Examples Discussed:

UC Berkeley increasing international enrollment despite broader national declines
International House's model of integrating students from over 80 nationalities
Countries like Qatar, UAE, and Saudi Arabia investing in global education hubs
Students choosing Canada, the UK, and Australia over U.S. regional institutions
The long-term impact of international students on innovation and workforce development

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership:

1. Universities should maintain institutional neutrality and create environments where all viewpoints are welcome and can be examined through civil discourse.
2. Institutional leaders must actively advocate for international students, clearly communicating their economic, academic, and societal contributions.
3. Regional and smaller institutions should position themselves as safe, supportive environments that appeal to international students and their families.

This episode provides a clear view into how international enrollment is being reshaped and what institutional leaders must do to adapt in a more competitive and constrained global environment.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/international-enrollment-strategy-for-regional-and-private-colleges/

#HigherEducation #InternationalStudents #EnrollmentStrategy

View Details

Higher education's track record with technology change is uneven for a reason, and the reason is rarely the technology. It is whether leadership treats change management as a discipline that runs from planning through sustainment, or as a rollout activity bolted on at the end.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Mike Toguchi, Chief Strategy Officer at Tectonic, about why technology projects in higher education succeed or fail on the strength of leadership behavior rather than tooling.

Drawing on 23 years working with universities, nonprofits, and foundations, including Stanford and UC Davis, Toguchi explains how the institutions producing durable digital transformation engineer trust, governance, and adoption into the project from day one. He shares why faculty resistance is empirically calibrated rather than culturally driven, why pilots should be sized for honest failure rather than confirmation of decisions already made, and why boards need to fund and govern transformation as an operating model rather than a discrete project. Throughout the conversation, McNaughton draws on his own consulting experience to surface common failure patterns, including the double-process trap that destroys trust by leaving legacy systems running alongside new ones.

This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, board members, CIOs, and senior leaders responsible for digital initiatives that span multiple departments and require sustained adoption across faculty, staff, and student-facing operations.

Topics Covered: • Why change management belongs in the planning phase, not at rollout

• The "trust as infrastructure" framework and how to design for it

• Scalability versus departmental fiefdoms in institutional technology systems

• Pilot design that allows departments to surface real problems and report honestly

• The double-process trap and the discipline of hard end-of-life dates for legacy systems

• How board governance choices shape every downstream failure pattern

• Reframing technology ROI as reclaimed staff capacity in a non-expansionary funding environment

Real-World Examples Discussed: • UC Davis disability center work that clarified workflow, saved staff time, increased compliance confidence, and produced documentation that gave leadership actionable data

• A multi-campus STEM admissions program that preserved each campus's unique workflow while keeping the underlying data consistent for funders and program leadership

• Two connected Stanford departments with shared faculty and joint ventures that consolidated systems and reduced the tool burden faculty were carrying

• Faculty teaching across multiple sections who routinely navigate 10 to 15 different tools as a baseline workload

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership: 1. Move change management to the front of the project lifecycle. The decisions that determine adoption are made during planning, not during launch communications.

Treat digital transformation as an operating model, not a project. Fund phase two before phase one ships and build governance reviews into the board's normal cadence.
Make trust the explicit design input. Faculty resistance is calibrated to past experience, and the way to change it is to give faculty a structural role in shaping the project, deliver visible reductions in their daily burden, and retire the legacy systems on a date everyone knows.

This episode offers a practical framework for institutional leaders who want their next digital initiative to deliver durable adoption rather than another fragmented rollout that quietly settles into legacy mode.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/higher-ed-change-management-tech-projects-digital-transformation/

#ChangeManagement #DigitalTransformation #HigherEducation #HigherEducationPodcast #ChangingHigherEdPodcast

View Details

Most institutions offer experiential learning. Few deliver it. The gap between the claim and the outcome is structural, and closing it requires more than a better course design.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Chris Crittenden, founder of Sandbox, a for-credit startup incubator operating at eight universities, about what it actually takes to produce the depth of learning that institutions advertise but rarely achieve.

Drawing on his experience founding and selling a technology company to Walmart, leading the entrepreneur center at Brigham Young University, and building Sandbox across multiple institutions, Crittenden explains how credit consolidation, real stakes, and interdisciplinary structure create the conditions for genuine learning. He also addresses how an AI-powered oral examination system solves the assessment problem that has long undermined open-ended experiential programs, and how institutions can build a program like Sandbox without triggering a substantive accreditation review.

This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, provosts, and academic leaders looking to close the gap between what their experiential learning programs claim to deliver and what they actually produce.

Topics Covered:

• Why most experiential learning is too shallow to produce genuine workforce capability

• How credit consolidation creates the structural conditions for deep learning

• The role of real stakes in developing professional skills that assignment deadlines cannot

• How to build an interdisciplinary program from existing approved coursework without a curriculum overhaul

• Why conventional milestone-based assessment undermines open-ended experiential learning, and what Sandbox does instead

• How to design a program that stays below the threshold for a substantive accreditation review

Real-World Examples Discussed:

• 18 Sandbox companies have received venture backing with a combined valuation exceeding $205 million

• Sandbox graduates who do not start companies consistently rank among the most competitive entry-level technology hires in their regional ecosystems

• The program has been replicated at eight universities by mapping to existing approved coursework, without triggering a substantive accreditation review at any institution

Key Takeaway for Leadership:

Universities already have the resources to build deep experiential learning programs. What is consistently absent is the leadership willing to pull them together: identifying faculty who want to work at the cutting edge, building the cross-departmental coalitions those faculty cannot form on their own, and absorbing the coordination costs personally. No new budget line required. What it takes is a leader willing to make the case, department by department, and follow through.

This episode gives institutional leaders a practical model for building deep experiential learning programs within the structural and accreditation constraints most institutions already face.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/build-workforce-readiness-through-startup-experience/

#HigherEducation #HigherEducationPodcast #WorkforceDevelopment #StudentSuccess

View Details

*]:pointer-events-auto scroll-mt-[calc(var(--header-height)+min(200px,max(70px,20svh)))]" dir="auto" data-turn-id= "request-WEB:10fa6b0c-40ea-4cf7-8ab6-3746009c82af-17" data-testid= "conversation-turn-36" data-scroll-anchor="true" data-turn= "assistant"> The One Big Beautiful Bill Act is changing higher education in ways many institutions still have not fully accounted for. Title IV loan limits change on July 1, 2026. Accreditation reform is next. Together, those developments are forcing institutions to confront graduate funding pressure, cost structure, program design, student demand, and the pace of institutional change.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Andy Vaughn, President and CEO of Alliant International University and one of three higher education representatives on the 2025 Negotiated Rulemaking RISE Committee, about how OB3 is changing higher education and what institutions need to do now to keep up. In part 2, the focus shifts from federal policy itself to the larger institutional consequences of those changes and the kind of leadership response they now require.

Drawing on his experience in higher education operations, institutional leadership, marketing, and negotiated rulemaking, Vaughn explains why graduate education faces the greatest immediate disruption under the new law, why private lending will not solve every student access problem, and why accreditation reform must be part of any serious affordability discussion. He also outlines Alliant's Project Evolve, a multi-part strategy designed to address funding access, innovation, differentiation, growth, and long-term sustainability.

This episode is especially relevant for presidents, boards, cabinet leaders, enrollment leaders, and anyone responsible for strategic planning in a period when higher education can no longer afford to move slowly while the environment changes around it.

Some of the Topics Covered: * How the One Big Beautiful Bill Act is reshaping higher education beyond a typical policy cycle * Why graduate and professional programs face the greatest immediate pressure * What tighter loan limits mean for student access and private lending * Why accreditation reform matters to cost, innovation, and program design * How student expectations and employer demand are shifting at the same time as federal policy * Why higher education's resistance to change has become a strategic liability * How Project Evolve is positioning Alliant to respond to permanent structural change

Real-World Examples Discussed * Alliant's modeling of how many graduate students may not qualify for private loan replacement options * The institution's effort to expand private loan access while exploring additional funding approaches * The need for institutions, accreditors, and the Department to work together if graduate education costs are going to come down * New campus investments, including Alliant's Sacramento campus and Phoenix nursing campus * The long-term wind-down of three small branch campuses that no longer fit the future model * Alliant's decision to enter this period of uncertainty with zero debt and greater room to invest strategically

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leadership 1. These changes are permanent. If institutions think a last-minute Hail Mary is coming, it is not. The structural federal changes Congress enacted and the Department responded to are here to stay. Do not underestimate your planning process. 2. It is late, but it is not too late. Institutions that have not started changing to prepare for federal shifts, changing demand, and what the next generation of students wants can still begin now and make meaningful change. 3. Plans matter, but execution matters more. Higher education has a habit of creating attractive strategic plans that sit on a shelf. Goals need to be measurable, and one person needs to own each goal so there is clear accountability and regular follow-up.

This episode provides a practical look at how one university leader is preparing for permanent federal change while also addressing the deeper market and operational pressures reshaping higher education. For institutions that need to move from policy awareness to institutional action, this is a useful framework for what that work can look like.

Read the article: https://changinghighered.com/2026-title-iv-changes-how-higher-education-can-adapt-obbba/

#HigherEducation #HigherEducationPodcast #GraduateEducation #StrategicPlanning #EnrollmentStrategy

View Details

Higher education has spent years hearing that affordability, student debt, and public skepticism are putting pressure on colleges and universities. What is different now is that those pressures are shaping federal action in ways that will directly affect Title IV funding, graduate program financing, accreditation reform, and institutional decision-making before July 1, 2026.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Andy Vaughn, President and CEO of Alliant University and one of three higher education representatives on the 2025 Negotiated Rulemaking RISE Committee, about what the latest Neg Reg signals for colleges and universities and why institutions that have not started preparing are already behind.

Drawing on Vaughn's firsthand experience in federal rulemaking and Dr. McNaughton's strategic perspective on higher education leadership, this conversation examines why this round of Neg Reg is different from prior cycles, why the One Big Beautiful Bill changed the operating landscape, and why the next major pressure point is likely to be accreditation reform tied to cost and value. The discussion also explores what these changes mean for graduate programs, why institutions need to involve faculty early in redesign decisions, and how leaders should be thinking now about financing, delivery costs, and institutional relevance in a rapidly changing environment.

This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, provosts, CFOs, trustees, graduate enrollment leaders, and others responsible for institutional planning, financial sustainability, and academic strategy in a time of federal change.

Topics Covered: * Why this Neg Reg is different from prior negotiated rulemaking cycles * How the One Big Beautiful Bill changed the Title IV and regulatory landscape * Why student debt is the political driver, but cost of delivery is the deeper issue * Why the accreditation Neg Reg is likely to focus on cost, value, and specialty accreditors * How graduate and professional programs may be affected by financing gaps * Why institutions should be modeling risk and redesigning programs before July 2026 * Why faculty and program leaders need to be involved early in institutional response * How AI is shifting from a compliance concern to a program quality and workforce issue

Real-World Examples Discussed * How Alliant began tracking Title IV changes before the bill passed and started preparing early * Why some graduate programs may face private lending gaps with no strong historical baseline * Examples of specialty accreditor requirements that can lock in delivery costs, including supervision expectations, program length, and student-to-faculty ratios * The institutional challenge of lowering tuition when accreditation structures still drive high-cost delivery * Why some institutions are still treating AI primarily as a containment issue instead of a graduate-readiness issue

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leadership 1. Institutions should treat these federal changes as structural, not temporary, and plan accordingly. 2. The real issue is not just tuition pricing. It is the cost of delivering programs under current academic and accreditation structures. 3. Colleges and universities that start redesigning early, especially with faculty involved, will have more options than those that wait for the pressure to become financial damage.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/2026-neg-reg-and-title-iv-changes-in-higher-education/

#HigherEducation #HigherEducationPodcast #NegReg

View Details

New data from Lumina Foundation and Gallup's Aligning Education and Work: What Employers Say Higher Education Must Deliver shows that employers still value college degrees — but have serious concerns about whether graduates are ready to use them.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Courtney Brown, Vice President of Impact and Planning and Chief Data and Research Officer at Lumina Foundation, about what 2,000 employers told Gallup about higher education, why public confidence in colleges has collapsed from 60% to one-third of Americans in a decade, and what institutional leaders must do about it.

Brown also discusses Lumina's new national goal: 75% of Americans in the labor force holding a credential of economic value by 2040, up from a current baseline of 43%.

Topics Covered:

What the new employer data shows about degree value, skills readiness, and preparation gaps
Why public confidence collapsed and which concern ranks first, second, and third among those losing faith
Why current students report dramatically different experiences than the general public perceives
The 43 million stopped-out Americans and why the system failed them
Why today's students are not a nontraditional population to accommodate around the margins
What Lumina's new credentials-of-value framework measures and why attainment without economic value is no longer sufficient

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership:

Stop playing defense and lead with evidence. Transparency about outcomes builds credibility. Defensive posturing does not.
Treat the skills gap as a question, not a verdict. Investigate what specific skills are missing before restructuring curriculum.
Redesign for the students who are enrolling, not the ones who were. Flexibility, mental health support, and advising connected to career outcomes are completion infrastructure, not amenities.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/2026-lumina-gallup-report-aligning-education-and-work/

#HigherEducation #WorkforceReadiness #LuminaFoundation #HigherEdStrategy #ChangingHigherEdPodcast

View Details

AI in higher education is no longer just a technology issue. The larger question is whether colleges and universities will redesign learning so students develop judgment, critical thinking, and decision-making skills in a world where AI can already generate summaries, essays, and plausible answers on demand.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with France Hoang, Founder and CEO of BoodleBox, about how higher education leaders can think more clearly and more strategically about AI. Hoang explains why AI should be used to augment human capability rather than replace it, and why educators matter even more in a world where AI can get students only part of the way.

Drawing on examples from the classroom and across campus operations, Hoang outlines how colleges can move from AI independent to AI enabled and eventually toward AI native models of learning and work. He also explains why colleges need to redesign assignments, rethink pedagogy, and focus more intentionally on the development of domain expertise, reflection, and higher-order thinking.

This episode is especially relevant for presidents, provosts, boards, CIOs, and academic leaders who need to make decisions about teaching, student support, workforce preparation, and institutional implementation in an AI-enabled environment.

Topics Covered * Why AI is forcing higher education to rethink what students should learn when AI can already do much of the visible academic work * Why AI often produces a B-minus answer and why domain expertise still matters * How the loss of routine entry-level work may weaken the apprenticeship path for graduates * Why colleges need to redesign assignments around judgment, application, and reflection * How faculty can use simulations, case studies, and human-AI collaboration in the classroom * What AI independent, AI enabled, and AI native mean for institutional strategy * How AI can support advising, counseling, and career services without replacing human connection * Why AI adoption is as much a training, culture, and change-management issue as it is a technology issue

Real-World Examples Discussed * A marketing course at Point Loma where students build an AI assistant from their own class notes and use it in case studies and simulations * A writing program at Pikes Peak State College where students compare their own writing with AI-generated writing and reflect on the differences * A reimagined history assignment that uses role-based simulation instead of a traditional reading-and-essay model * Institutional examples that show how colleges can move toward more applied, AI-enabled, and AI-native learning environments

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leaders 1. Leaders need to know where their institution currently sits on the AI continuum, from AI independent to AI enabled to AI native. 2. AI adoption is as much a training and human resource issue as it is a technology issue, so institutions need to invest in people as much as platforms. 3. A culture of innovation, experimentation, and collaborative implementation will outperform a purely top-down rollout.

This episode offers a practical framework for higher education leaders who want to move beyond AI policy and think more seriously about how learning, assessment, student support, and institutional strategy need to change when AI can already do much of the lower-level work.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/ai-in-higher-education-teaching-human-judgement/

#HigherEducation #ArtificialIntelligence #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

Jeff Dinski helped start Cold Pizza at ESPN, the morning show that eventually became First Take. On a daily show, ratings are everything. You either produce something people want to watch, or you do not last. He carried that discipline into edtech, and it is the lens through which he looks at higher education: are you really giving students what they need, or are you producing what is convenient for you?

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton and Jeff Dinski, Chief Strategy and Corporate Development Officer at Ellucian, the largest edtech company in the world serving roughly half of all U.S. colleges and universities, dig into the structural forces behind higher education's confidence crisis, what Workforce Pell Grants will actually change, and what institutional strategy has to look like from here.

This conversation is especially relevant for presidents and boards who want a clear-eyed, outside-in read on what students are demanding, where the federal policy environment is heading, and which institutions are best positioned to adapt.

Topics Covered: • Why the confidence crisis has bipartisan roots and why neither political party has done higher education any favors

• Why student pathways are becoming individualized and what that means for program design and delivery

• Real examples of institutions where undergraduates do actual corporate work, not fetch-coffee internships, as part of their degree programs

• What Workforce Pell Grants will fund for the first time and which institutions are best positioned to benefit

• Why the DBA vs. research PhD distinction matters for building workforce-aligned faculty pipelines

• The Silicon Valley master's program model: tenured faculty for foundational content, industry adjuncts for advanced applied coursework

• Why smaller private institutions face the steepest challenges and what community colleges are doing right

• Two strategic tenets every president and board should act on now

Real-World Examples Discussed: • Programs where freshmen through seniors do real corporate job functions as part of their degree requirements

• A Silicon Valley master's program that deliberately splits teaching between tenured faculty and cutting-edge industry practitioners

• Business schools' long-standing use of practitioners alongside academics as a model the broader curriculum can adopt

• Ellucian's Journey platform, built to help institutions launch and scale non-degree and continuing education programs

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership: 1. Experiment with non-degree courses now. Workforce Pell Grants will fund new program types at scale and institutions with existing capacity will be first to benefit.

Find workforce partners you trust. Aligning curriculum with employer needs requires real relationships with real hiring managers, not assumptions about market demand.
Create conditions for faculty innovation. The early adopters already exist at most institutions. Find them, support them, and let their demonstrated impact bring others along.

This episode offers a practical, outside-in perspective on the structural choices facing higher education and a concrete framework for how institutions can respond before circumstances force their hand.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/higher-education-disruption-workforce-pell-student-as-consumer/

#StudentSuccess #HigherEducation #HigherEducationPodcast #WorkforceDevelopment #EdTech

View Details

Accreditation is often treated as a compliance cycle, but SACSCOC is signaling a faster-moving, more transparent operating posture that will affect how institutions plan change, document quality, and explain outcomes to the public.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Stephen L. Pruitt, President of the Southern Association of Colleges and Schools Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC), about substantive change reforms, standards revision planning, outcomes transparency, and what institutional leaders should be watching right now.

Topics Covered * Substantive change reforms approved in December, including eliminating more than half of existing categories, shifting others to presidential review, and reducing approval times to as little as one week * Why SACSCOC is emphasizing student benefit as a decision lens for institutional change * The vice president liaison model and how it supports institutional navigation of SACSCOC processes * The planned three-member rapid response team concept and when it may be used * Law or Lore and why written requirements versus institutional assumptions can create unnecessary friction * Standards revision planning, including public drafts and how feedback is incorporated * The dynamic public-facing dashboard planned for spring and what it may make more visible * Torch Awards and how outcomes signals relate to public trust and accountability * Workforce alignment, affordability pressure, and the pathways from high school through postsecondary to careers * Credit transfer as a public trust issue and why it is often perceived as a money grab * Serving working adults as a design requirement, not an add-on

Real-World Examples Discussed * Georgia film-industry growth and the need to stand up new majors and degrees quickly * Gwinnett Tech's advising approach that helps students sequence coursework to earn certificates along the way * Workforce shifts such as autonomous trucking pilots and how programs could expand beyond a single credential to broader skills

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Ed Leadership 1. Faster change pathways increase the value of disciplined internal governance and clean documentation of readiness. 2. Student benefit and measurable outcomes are becoming a more visible way institutions will need to justify change and demonstrate quality. 3. Transparency tools and outcomes signaling will influence how stakeholders judge institutional credibility, affordability, and workforce relevance.

Read the transcript https://changinghighered.com/sacscoc-accreditation-substantive-change-standards-2026/

#Accreditation #SACSCOC #HigherEducation #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

Higher education's public trust problem is not something presidents can fix with better messaging. In this conversation, AAC&U President Dr. Lynn Pasquerella describes a structural squeeze on institutional independence that shows up as academic freedom fights, curriculum mandates, and growing skepticism about higher education's value.

In episode 300 of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Pasquerella about why liberal education is often misunderstood, why academic freedom is inseparable from institutional autonomy, and why presidents and boards need to treat this moment as a governance and mission issue, not a temporary political cycle.

Pasquerella explains how these pressures tend to escalate incrementally, why institutions lost control of the public narrative, and what it takes to rebuild credibility through community anchoring, transparency, and a renewed public-good case for higher education.

This conversation is especially relevant for institutional leaders navigating legislative interference, polarized stakeholder environments, and the operational consequences of eroding trust.

Topics Discussed * Why academic freedom and institutional autonomy erode incrementally * What Supreme Court precedent signals about academic freedom and university self-governance * Why liberal education is about intellectual freedom, not partisan ideology * How higher education lost the public narrative and why marketing is not the solution * Moral distress and moral injury in the presidency under coercive mandates * Belonging uncertainty, cognitive bandwidth, and the institutional impact of student wellbeing * Community anchoring as the practical path to rebuilding trust * How institutions can reimagine learning without abandoning rigor

Real-World Examples Discussed * Legislative interference that dictates curriculum and constrains shared governance. * The closure of a college as a community-level loss, not only an institutional event. * How belonging signals show up later as persistence, completion, and learning outcomes. * Why transparency about tradeoffs affects institutional credibility * How community advisory input can keep programs aligned with civic and workforce needs.

Three Key Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards 1. Treat academic freedom and institutional independence as a board-level governance priority, because erosion is gradual and easy to normalize. 2. Rebuild trust through consistent community presence and usefulness, not positioning statements. 3. Address belonging and wellbeing as institutional effectiveness variables, because belonging uncertainty reduces cognitive bandwidth and performance.

Read the transcript and the accompanying post: https://changinghighered.com/moral-distress-belonging-presidential-leadership-in-higher-ed/

#HigherEducation #HigherEducationPodcast #AcademicFreedom #PublicTrust #LiberalEducation

View Details

Free speech on campus is not an abstract constitutional issue—it's a governance challenge for presidents and boards.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton is joined by Dr. Sean Stevens, Chief Research Advisor at the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE), to examine the current state of campus free speech and what institutional leaders must do to protect open inquiry under increasing political and social pressure.

Drawing on FIRE's national research and campus speech databases, Stevens outlines the sharp rise in government-involved attempts to sanction speech, the growing prevalence of self-censorship among faculty and students, and the structural pressures reshaping intellectual life on U.S. campuses.

The conversation moves beyond partisan framing and focuses on leadership responsibility: preserving disciplined pluralism, reinforcing institutional neutrality, and ensuring that students graduate prepared to engage competing ideas with rigor and intellectual humility.

Some of the key topics covered in this episode include: * The increase in campus speech sanction attempts involving government actors * Faculty and student self-censorship trends and what the data reveals * Why exposure to competing perspectives is an educational obligation * Institutional neutrality as protection for viewpoint diversity * The distinction between protected speech and prudent speech in the social media era * Practical steps presidents and boards can take to strengthen expressive rights policies

Three Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards: 1. Defend expressive rights consistently—even when doing so is politically uncomfortable. Leadership credibility depends on principled application. 2. Recognize that sustained political and social pressure can narrow intellectual culture—and counter that contraction intentionally. 3. Preserve disciplined pluralism as a core academic value. Students must be able to hear, analyze, and argue competing perspectives without fear.

This episode provides a strategic lens for higher education leaders navigating campus speech controversies while protecting the fundamental mission of scholarship and inquiry.

Listen now or read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/free-speech-in-higher-education-fire-on-institutional-integrity-and-mission/

#HigherEducation #FreeSpeech #CampusLeadership #AcademicFreedom #BoardGovernance #ChangingHigherEdPodcast

View Details

Higher education is under mounting pressure to prove its value. But the data institutions need to respond already exists — most are just not using it strategically.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Melba Amissi, Chief Customer and Operations Officer at the National Student Clearinghouse, about how the Clearinghouse's cross-institutional data can help college presidents and boards navigate the accountability, affordability, and workforce alignment challenges reshaping higher education.

Drawing on a career in financial services, fraud analytics, cybersecurity, and operational transformation, Amissi brings an outsider's perspective to higher ed — one grounded in measurable outcomes and data-driven decision-making. She and Dr. McNaughton explore why institutions must embrace non-linear student pathways, improve credit mobility, strengthen employer partnerships, and lead with transparency to maintain public trust and institutional viability.

This conversation is especially relevant for institutional leaders grappling with how to demonstrate return on investment, serve the growing stop-out population, and align programs with workforce needs in a rapidly shifting political and economic landscape.

Topics Covered:

The National Student Clearinghouse's role beyond compliance reporting — as a strategic benchmarking and analytics resource
Why 42 million adults with some college and no credential represent both a challenge and an opportunity
How credit mobility and articulation agreements affect enrollment competitiveness
The Workforce Pell negotiated rulemaking process and its implications for program design
Why workforce alignment should be an "and," not an "or" alongside liberal education
How the FAFSA will now warn students about institutions with poor earnings-to-cost outcomes
The rising Higher Education Price Index and its compounding effect on institutional costs

Real-World Examples Discussed:

Franklin University's articulation agreements with over 1,400 institutions, enabling five-minute credit evaluations for transfer students
Paul Quinn College's work-integrated model partnering students with Southwest Airlines and other employers
Tennessee's statewide talent pipeline that maps graduate competencies directly to employer needs
Microsoft's partnership with Miami-Dade College community colleges to build cybersecurity workforce programs
Oregon's systemwide credit transfer framework as a model for state-level interoperability

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership:

Transparency is a survival strategy — proactively share graduation rates, employment outcomes, and student debt data to build trust and stay ahead of regulatory mandates.
Align programs with workforce needs through employer partnerships, stackable credentials, and continuous program assessment to demonstrate measurable ROI.
Demonstrate real impact — show students, families, and stakeholders the tangible outcomes of your institutional strategies.

Bonus Takeaway from Dr. McNaughton: Embrace diverse and non-linear student pathways. The traditional four-year linear journey is no longer the norm — institutions must design systems that serve students from all walks of life and keep the focus on student outcomes.

This episode offers a data-grounded look at why higher education's most urgent challenges — cost, accountability, and public trust — require leaders who are willing to use the information already at their disposal to drive strategic change.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/racking-stop-outs-transfers-and-roi-across-the-full-student-journey/

#HigherEducation #HigherEdROI #HigherEducationPodcast #StudentSuccess #WorkforceAlignment

View Details

Agile change management in higher education is no longer optional. Institutions are navigating continuous disruption from AI, shifting student expectations, workforce pressures, and internal cultural resistance. The challenge leaders face is not how to implement change once, but how to build the institutional ability to adapt continuously.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Christine Janssen Founder and CEO of Edstutia, an immersive learning company focused on adult learning, about why higher education must move from traditional change models to an agile, iterative approach to leadership, teaching, and institutional strategy.

Drawing on her experience in both higher education and entrepreneurial environments, Janssen explains why institutions struggle when they treat change as a project rather than an operating condition. McNaughton and Janssen outline how agile thinking, faculty adaptation, and a willingness to experiment have become essential leadership capabilities for presidents, boards, and faculty alike.

Some of the Topics Covered: · Why traditional change management models no longer match today's environment

· How agile, iterative approaches help institutions adapt faster than governance cycles

· Why AI is exposing weaknesses in traditional teaching and assessment methods

· The role of faculty culture as both a barrier and a solution to meaningful change

· Why preparing students for uncertainty requires faculty to be comfortable with it

· How institutions risk becoming the "yellow cab" in a world expecting "Uber-level" responsiveness

Real-World Examples Discussed: · How AI forces faculty to redesign assignments and assessment methods

· Why student evaluations often measure the wrong outcomes

· How other industries were disrupted by ignoring customer expectations

· Examples of leaders who prioritize faculty development and innovation

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leadership 1. Institutions must change how they think about change before they can change behaviors.

Faculty partnership and professional development are essential to institutional adaptability.
The greatest risk to higher education is waiting to see what others will do.

This episode offers higher education leaders a practical framework for understanding why many institutional struggles stem not from isolated issues, but from an outdated approach to change itself.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/agile-change-management-for-higher-education-leaders/

#HigherEducation #ChangeManagement #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Jeff Meade, Founding Director of the Every Quinnite is an Entrepreneur program at Paul Quinn College, about how the institution has embedded entrepreneurship into the operating model of the college itself.

Rather than treating entrepreneurship as an elective or a business school track, Paul Quinn uses it as a structural solution to some of higher education's biggest challenges: workforce readiness, student engagement, institutional costs, and student debt.

As one of only eight federally recognized work colleges in the United States, Paul Quinn requires all resident freshmen and sophomores to work on campus in meaningful operational roles. By junior and senior year, students transition into paid positions with corporate partners such as Southwest Airlines and Goldman Sachs. At the same time, every freshman completes a required entrepreneurship course during summer bridge, and students begin building and pitching real venture ideas that can receive seed funding from the college.

Jeff explains how this model allows the college to lower tuition by redesigning its business structure, how corporate partnerships create a true workforce pipeline rather than traditional internships, and how entrepreneurship is used to teach students to become entrepreneurs of their own lives.

This conversation is especially relevant for institutional leaders looking for practical ways to improve workforce readiness, reduce student debt, strengthen retention, and break down academic silos without adding new programs or increasing costs.

Topics Covered:

How the federal work college model changes both student engagement and institutional costs
Why Paul Quinn lowered tuition by changing its operating model rather than increasing discounting
How campus work transitions into paid corporate roles for juniors and seniors
The required summer bridge entrepreneurship course for every freshman
How student ventures are integrated into multiple academic disciplines
The role of faculty leadership development through supervising student workers
Why partnerships, both external and internal, are central to the model
How a seed fund is designed to be self-sustaining through student venture revenue

Real-World Examples Discussed:

A student learning grant research and development by working directly in the entrepreneurship department
Students working in enrollment management and representing the college at recruitment events
Corporate partners sponsoring pitch competitions and hiring students into paid roles
Students earning income that both offsets tuition and builds professional experience
Freshmen pitching business ideas based on problems they see in their own communities

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership:

Partner with other institutions, corporations, and entrepreneurs rather than trying to build everything internally
Design entrepreneurship and experiential learning models to be self-sustaining, not cost centers
Make entrepreneurship universal across the student body so it becomes part of the institutional DNA

Dr. McNaughton's Bonus Takeaway:

Partnerships must exist internally across departments as well as externally to prevent silos and fully integrate the model

This episode provides a clear example of how entrepreneurship can function as an institutional design strategy, not just a curricular offering.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/entrepreneurship-to-redesign-college-operating-model/

#HigherEducation #StudentSuccess #WorkforceReadiness #Entrepreneurship

View Details

Workforce readiness, hands-on learning, and flexible credentialing are no longer peripheral conversations in higher education. They are central to how institutions are being judged on value, relevance, and outcomes.

In this episode of Changing Higher Ed podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Jarred McNeely, Provost and Chief Academic Officer at Sonoran Desert Institute, about how applied, skills-based education can be delivered beyond traditional campuses without sacrificing rigor or quality.

McNeely shares how SDI redesigned hands-on instruction for distributed learners by moving labs into students' homes, rethinking assessment around demonstrated competence, and investing heavily in faculty training and support. The conversation explores what these approaches mean not just for trade and technical programs, but for institutions across higher education facing increasing pressure around cost, completion, and workforce alignment.

This episode is especially relevant for presidents, provosts, and academic leaders evaluating how applied learning, credential flexibility, and faculty systems can evolve to meet today's student realities.

Topics Covered * Why hands-on learning does not require centralized labs * How lab kits, video-based assessment, and staged progression support skill development * What it takes to train and support faculty in distributed, applied programs * How simulation and practicum models expand access without lowering standards * Why stackable credentials better align with real career movement * The role of critical thinking and problem identification in applied education

Three Key Takeaways for Presidents and Boards 1. Learning should be assessed by demonstrated competence, not physical presence 2. Faculty training and support systems are the primary drivers of instructional quality 3. Flexible, stackable credentials reduce student risk while supporting long-term engagement

Read the transcript or extended show summary: https://changinghighered.com/reduce-student-debt-risk-improve-employability/

#HigherEducation #WorkforceDevelopment #AppliedLearning #HigherEdLeadership #ChangingHigherEd

View Details

Empathy is easy to talk about and harder to practice when the pressure is high. In higher education, leaders are often navigating conflict, fatigue, and urgency, which is exactly when empathy gets misread as weakness instead of treated as a leadership competency.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Laura Parson, Associate Professor at North Dakota State University and founder of The Empathy Classroom, about building empathy as a practical skill leaders can use without surrendering standards or authority.

Parson breaks empathy down into usable behaviors, including perspective-taking, emotional self-management, and question framing that reduces defensiveness. The discussion also addresses "empathy light," when leaders perform empathy for external outcomes instead of practicing it authentically, and why that approach erodes trust.

This conversation is especially relevant for institutional leaders who want stronger communication, better decision follow-through, and a healthier leadership culture in environments where people are stretched thin and reactions run hot.

Some of the Topics Covered * What empathy is as a competency and how it differs from sympathy * Why empathy does not require agreement or abandoning standards * How to reduce defensiveness through better questions and language choices * Self-other distinction and why absorbing others' emotions accelerates burnout * Mindfulness and emotional literacy as leadership tools * "Empathy lite" and how performative empathy undermines trust * How leaders can develop empathy through practice, role play, and scenario rehearsal

Real-World Examples Discussed * Reframing accusatory "why" questions into curiosity-based questions that invite explanation * The "waves" metaphor for managing constant emotions as a senior leader without burning out * An executive's post-meeting reset ritual to physically "shake off" emotional residue * Using breath work or box breathing after emotionally charged interactions

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leadership 1. Model empathy visibly so others understand what it looks like in your environment. 2. Listen, demonstrate that you heard what was said, and reinforce it through action. 3. Treat perspective-taking as a discipline by learning to see issues through multiple stakeholder lenses.

Read the extended show summary or transcript: https://changinghighered.com/empathy-in-higher-education-leadership/

#HigherEducation #HigherEducationLeadership #EmpathyInEducation

View Details

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Dan Predoehl, assistant dean of Extended Learning and director of the Emeritus Institute at Saddleback College, one of the nation's highest-performing community colleges.

The conversation focuses on why enrollment challenges persist even at strong institutions and how treating enrollment as a shared responsibility—rather than a system with clear executive ownership—creates fragmentation across admissions, student services, academics, and outcomes. Dr. Predoehl explains the Chief Enrollment Management Officer concept and why a cabinet-level role is increasingly necessary to align enrollment strategy with institutional mission, student success, and long-term viability.

Drawing on experience across community colleges and four-year institutions, the discussion examines how enrollment, retention, completion, workforce alignment, and equity outcomes are shaped by leadership structure—not just tactics.

Topics Covered:

Why enrollment is a system, not a department
How diffused responsibility undermines retention and completion
The limits of presidential oversight without executive enrollment ownership
How workforce alignment strengthens enrollment strategy
Why open access increases the need for strategic focus
The role faculty partnership plays in sustainable enrollment management

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leaders:

Enrollment outcomes reflect system design, not individual office performance
Retention, completion, and workforce alignment are core enrollment responsibilities
Institutions risk long-term instability when enrollment lacks clear executive ownership

This episode is especially relevant for presidents, provosts, enrollment leaders, and senior administrators looking beyond short-term fixes toward structural solutions to enrollment pressure.

Read the transcript and extended show summary: https://changinghighered.com/chief-enrollment-management-officer-in-higher-education/

#HigherEducation #EnrollmentManagement #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

Institutional transformation in higher education is often described in broad terms. At Stevens Institute of Technology, Dr. Nariman Farvardin describes transformation in operational terms: disciplined strategic planning, academic realignment, and year-after-year execution systems that produced what Dr. Drumm McNaughton calls the Stevens Miracle.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Nariman Farvardin, President of Stevens Institute of Technology, about how Stevens achieved sustained success since he became president in 2011. Under Dr. Farvardin's leadership, undergraduate applications increased 294%, enrollment grew approximately 75%, research funding increased 199%, and the university invested more than $500 million in campus improvements. Stevens also reports first-year retention approaching 96%, graduation rates near 90%, and approximately 97% of graduates employed or in graduate school within six months.

Dr. Farvardin explains the institutional "secret sauce" behind those results: an inclusive strategic planning process that builds ownership across faculty, staff, students, administrators, and trustees, paired with execution discipline that keeps the plan active through regular progress reporting, annual written results, and objectives letters that tie leadership goals directly to strategic priorities. He also walks through Stevens' academic realignment, including the SUCCESS curriculum, which ensures every student graduates with foundational exposure to five areas: artificial intelligence, quantum computing, biotechnology, sustainability, and data science. The discussion also covers student support structures that reinforce student experience and outcomes, including the first-year experience model delivered in 45–47 sections annually, with faculty serving as coaches for small groups of students.

Topics Covered * How Stevens used inclusive strategic planning to build campus-wide ownership and momentum * Why execution systems matter more than a polished strategic plan document * How Stevens keeps the strategic plan active through regular updates, annual reports, and objectives letters * What the SUCCESS curriculum is and why it represents academic realignment, not a one-off initiative * The five technology areas every Stevens graduate is exposed to through SUCCESS * How the first-year experience course operates at scale and why it supports retention * How Stevens operationalized student-centered service so student issues are owned, not deflected * Why transparency and shared responsibility improved faculty engagement with change * How Stevens uses honesty about what did not work to keep planning credible * What presidents and boards should focus on if they want transformation that holds over time

Real-World Examples Discussed: * A leadership execution model that breaks strategy into smaller goals, distributes them across divisions, and updates them annually through objectives letters * A first-year experience structure delivered in 45–47 small sections (20–25 students each) with faculty serving as ongoing coaches * A student support expectation that staff "own" the student's problem until it is solved, instead of sending students office-to-office

Three Key Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards 1. A well-designed strategic plan paired with disciplined execution is essential, even when it requires difficult and unpopular decisions 2. A strong, functional relationship between the president and the board is critical to sustaining momentum and leadership effectiveness 3. Trust-based working relationships between leadership, faculty, and staff are required for long-term success and leadership sustainability

Read the transcript or extended show summary: https://changinghighered.com/stevens-tech-strategic-planning-transformation/

#HigherEducation #StrategicPlanning #UniversityLeadership #BoardGovernance #StudentSuccess

View Details

Higher education enters 2026 under conditions that are no longer hypothetical. In this 8th annual end-of-year episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton is joined by Tom Netting of TEN Government Strategies to review how the predictions made at the end of 2024 played out during the 2025 operating year and what those outcomes mean for institutional planning in 2026.

Rather than offering speculative forecasts, this episode uses 2025 as a calibration year. When predictions materialize, they remove ambiguity. They clarify which pressures are structural, which risks persist, and which leadership assumptions are no longer defensible. For presidents, boards, and senior leadership teams preparing for 2026, this conversation provides a grounded planning context based on conditions already in motion.

Topics Covered

What 2025 confirmed about federal policy instability, accountability, cost pressure, enrollment volatility, and governance risk
Why the Department of Education is likely to remain in place through 2026 and why its continued existence should not be mistaken for stability
How redistribution of authority across federal agencies increases compliance complexity for institutions
Where student loans are likely to move within the federal system and why institutions face growing exposure to borrower outcomes
Why broad student debt forgiveness remains unlikely and what limited relief options may realistically emerge
How accountability is shifting toward program-level scrutiny and the implications for academic realignment
Why accreditation reform remains unsettled and why leaders should treat accreditation as a strategic risk factor
Workforce Pell expansion, quality oversight challenges, and the risk of fraud and abuse in short-term credentials
The growing role of states in accountability as federal capacity contracts
Research funding as political leverage and the planning risk created by funding uncertainty
Polarization as an operational challenge affecting enrollment, safety, governance, and public trust
Technology, AI, cybersecurity, and NIST compliance as board-level responsibilities
Enrollment, demographic decline, cost escalation, and financial pressure entering the 2026 planning cycle
Mergers, closures, and structural collaboration as necessary adaptation strategies

Key Planning Judgments for 2026

The Department of Education will persist but continue to shrink and fragment
Student loans will move further away from the Department, increasing institutional exposure
Accountability pressure will intensify, particularly at the program level
Accreditation reform will remain unresolved beyond 2026
Workforce Pell will expand, bringing both opportunity and heightened oversight risk
Research funding will remain politically vulnerable
Cost pressure will continue to drive consolidation and closures
Technology and cybersecurity will demand sustained leadership attention

This episode is especially relevant for presidents and trustees navigating compressed decision timelines, thinner margins for error, and declining tolerance for ambiguity. The focus is not prediction for its own sake, but clarity about the forces institutions must plan around as they enter 2026.

#HigherEducation #HigherEd2026StrategicPlanning #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Ashley Finley, Vice President of Research and Senior Advisor to the President at the Association of American Colleges and Universities (AAC&U), about the findings of the 2025 AAC&U Employer Survey and what they reveal about employer expectations for higher education.

Based on nearly 20 years of longitudinal research, the 2025 survey challenges many of the dominant public narratives about the value of college. Employers continue to express strong confidence in higher education, place equal importance on workforce preparation and citizenship, and increasingly emphasize adaptability, judgment, and civic capacity as core professional requirements.

Dr. Finley explains how employers view civic skills as workplace competencies, why mindsets and dispositions are now baseline expectations rather than "soft skills," and how AI is reshaping what it means to be prepared for an uncertain future. The conversation also addresses generational differences among employers, the growing role of microcredentials, and why institutions must model the agility they expect from graduates.

This episode is especially relevant for presidents, trustees, provosts, and senior leaders navigating political pressure, workforce alignment, and questions about institutional value.

Topics Covered:

What the 2025 AAC&U Employer Survey reveals that public narratives often miss
Why employers see preparing informed citizens and a skilled workforce as inseparable goals
How civic skills, including constructive disagreement, translate directly to workplace success
Why motivation, resilience, initiative, and self-awareness are now baseline hiring expectations
How employers think about AI readiness beyond simple tool proficiency
Which student experiences increase hiring likelihood beyond internships
How employers evaluate the credibility and value of microcredentials and certificates
Generational shifts in employer expectations and what they signal for the future

Three Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards:

Institutions must communicate learning outcomes more clearly, including mindsets and dispositions, so students can articulate who they are becoming, not just what they know.
Career-relevant experiences extend far beyond internships; leadership roles, campus employment, and community engagement carry significant employer value and are often more scalable.
Agility must be modeled institutionally. Employers value adaptability, and colleges and universities cannot promote it in students while resisting change themselves.

Bonus Takeaway from Dr. McNaughton:

Employers continue to value higher education and the four-year degree, despite political rhetoric and cost-driven narratives suggesting otherwise. This disconnect presents both a risk and an opportunity for institutional leaders.

This conversation offers data-grounded insight into how employers actually view higher education—and what leaders can do to align strategy, communication, and culture with those expectations.

Read the full transcript: https://changinghighered.com/strategic-insights-2025-aacu-employer-survey/

#HigherEducation #HigherEducationLeadership #AACU #EmployerSurvey #WorkforceReadiness #ChangingHigherEdPodcast

View Details

Higher education communication is no longer a marketing function. It is a strategic discipline shaped by political pressure, governance risk, and real-time public scrutiny.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with David Maffei, Senior Vice President and General Manager of the Americas at Staffbase, about how university presidents and boards must rethink how communication functions inside their institutions under today's crisis-driven conditions.

Drawing on more than two decades of enterprise and higher education communications leadership, Maffei explains why internal communication now determines external credibility, why preparedness is the defining variable in crisis response, and how fragmented communication structures quietly undermine institutional trust. The discussion also explores how technology and AI amplify leadership discipline rather than replace it, and why presidential communication can no longer be delegated.

This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, boards, and senior leadership teams navigating political pressure, public scrutiny, and rising expectations for transparency, alignment, and trust.

Topics Covered * Why internal communication now drives external brand credibility * How crisis preparedness exposes governance strength or weakness * Why internal notification must come before public announcements * How political pressure reshapes presidential communication risk * Why communication is now a core presidential competency * The role of ego management in institutional leadership * How siloed communication tools fracture institutional alignment * Why unified board and presidential signaling protects credibility * How technology and AI magnify leadership discipline * Why communication is now embedded inside strategy, not downstream from it

Three Takeaways for Higher Ed Leadership 1. Preparedness determines whether crisis strengthens or destabilizes trust. 2. Internal communication discipline now shapes external credibility in real time. 3. Unified signaling between presidents and boards is no longer optional.

This episode offers practical, governance-level insight into why communication performance is now inseparable from institutional performance — and how higher education leaders can protect credibility under sustained pressure.

Read the transcript or extended show summary: https://changinghighered.com/higher-education-communication-strategy-crisis/

#HigherEducation #HigherEducationPodcast #UniversityLeadership #HigherEdCommunication

View Details

Higher education is facing a growing disconnect between public perception and the realities of campus life. In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Peter Murphy Lewis, CNN political analyst, filmmaker, and director of People Worth Caring About, about how institutions can reclaim their narrative and rebuild trust through authentic human stories.

This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, trustees, and senior leaders navigating public skepticism, political pressure, and communication environments where external voices often define higher education's story.

Some of the Topics Covered * The forces driving negative public narratives about higher education * How political rhetoric and social media distort campus realities * Why families respond more strongly to human stories than to data or institutional claims * How student and faculty voices build credibility across audiences * Ways to adapt a single story for parents, prospective students, legislators, and alumni * The importance of short-form storytelling for modern communication channels * The CARE framework (Confront, Amplify, Reshape, Evergreen) for building narrative strategy

Real-World Examples Discussed * How the documentary model helps institutions show their value through lived experience * Using student and faculty stories to counter assumptions about campus culture * Why a 45-second authentic clip can strengthen trust more than a polished statement * How major industries changed public perception through narrative work (e.g., Formula One's "Drive to Survive")

Three Takeaways for Higher Education Leaders 1. Talk about the elephant in the room. 2. Talk about it through a story — show, don't tell. 3. Eat that elephant one bite at a time. You can start tomorrow with your cell phone or an intern. One day at a time. One bite at a time.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/reclaiming-the-higher-education-narrative/

#HigherEdLeadership #InstitutionalStrategy #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

Higher education leaders are being asked to innovate faster than their institutions are built to move. This episode of Changing Higher Ed explores how presidents and boards can change that. Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Erika Liodice, Executive Director of the Alliance for Innovation and Transformation (AFIT), about how institutions can strengthen their innovation capacity through futures thinking, cross-sector insight, and structured team-based planning.

Topics Covered:

How futures thinking helps leaders anticipate demographic, workforce, and technology shifts
Why innovation efforts fail without planning discipline and shared vision
How AFIT institutions use cross-sector learning to improve student experience and operations
What VR, AI, and immersive environments reveal about modernizing curriculum and applied learning
How team-based learning accelerates decision-making and supports strategy execution
Why a long-horizon strategy must be paired with near-term planning cycles
How leaders can strengthen coordination across academic, student services, and operational units

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leadership: 1. Presidents and boards must anchor innovation in a future-oriented view of trends—environmental scanning, demographic forecasting, and technology signals should shape planning decisions. 2. Innovation succeeds when the right teams plan together. Cross-functional alignment and shared ownership accelerate execution and prevent fragmented efforts. 3. Institutions should treat innovation as an operational discipline tied to strategy, not a series of isolated pilots. Clear priorities, resource pathways, and coordinated leadership are essential.

Recommended For: Presidents, trustees, senior leadership teams, and academic and operational administrators responsible for strengthening institutional resilience, planning capacity, and innovation strategy.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/innovation-in-higher-education-adapt-foresight-planning-afit/

#HigherEducation #InnovationInHigherEd #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

Accreditation trends and expectations are shifting under rising accountability pressures, financial constraints, and increased scrutiny of student outcomes. This episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast features Maria Toyoda, President and CEO of the WASC Senior College and University Commission (WSCUC), in a strategic conversation with Dr. Drumm McNaughton about how institutions can strengthen accreditation readiness and support stronger student success.

This episode is essential for presidents, provosts, trustees, and senior leaders responsible for accreditation, mission alignment, evidence systems, governance oversight, and long-term institutional resilience.

Topics Covered * How WSCUC evaluates institutional effectiveness, learning outcomes, and mission alignment * The post-pandemic readiness gaps shaping student progression and support needs * Program-level earnings, debt, default rates, and transparency expectations * How institutional evidence must reflect the students served * Financial pressures affecting academic quality, resource planning, and program viability * Expectations for continuous improvement and documented assessment cycles * The role of governance in sustaining accreditation and institutional credibility

Real-World Examples Discussed * The Key Indicator Dashboard and how program-level data informs institutional planning * Program earnings and debt trends affecting default risk after the repayment restart * How military-connected learner documentation informs competency evaluation * Institutions balancing support structures with financial pressures and staffing constraints * Mission drift and its impact on planning, budgeting, and academic decision pathways

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Ed Leaders 1. Institutions must understand their students clearly and align academic design, support systems, and assessment with documented learning needs. 2. Program-level debt, earnings, and completion patterns should drive decisions about program viability, financial planning, and long-term strategy. 3. Continuous improvement requires evidence-based action; leaders must ensure that learning assessment results lead directly to curricular and support refinements.

Read the transcript or the extended show summary: https://changinghighered.com/how-wasc-is-shaping-the-future-of-accreditation-and-student-success/

#HigherEdLeadership #Accreditation #WSCUC

View Details

Improving how teaching happens in the classroom is one of the most effective ways to increase student retention, stabilize tuition revenue, and strengthen institutional reputation—yet most universities don't manage it strategically.

In this episode of Changing Higher Ed, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with David Gooblar, Associate Professor at the University of Iowa and author of The Missing Course, about how teaching quality has fallen outside institutional oversight and what presidents and boards can do to make it a core part of strategic leadership.

They explore how governance structures, incentive systems, and faculty preparation create a blind spot that limits progress on student success. Gooblar and McNaughton outline what leadership can do to realign teaching, strategy, and accountability to improve learning and institutional performance.

Topics Covered:

Why first-year GPA, driven by classroom experience, predicts retention and completion.
How tenure and incentive systems discourage teaching innovation.
The leadership role in integrating pedagogy into strategic and financial planning.
Practical ways to invest in teaching infrastructure and faculty capacity.
How governing boards can hold institutions accountable for the conditions that enable great teaching.

Why It Matters: When institutions manage teaching with the same rigor as finance and enrollment, they see measurable gains in persistence, lower cost per graduate, and stronger mission credibility. Teaching quality is not just a faculty concern—it's a leadership lever for institutional performance.

Three Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards:

Make teaching measurable and managed. Track instructional quality alongside financial and enrollment metrics.
Align incentives with institutional goals. Reward teaching innovation in evaluation and promotion.
Invest in the conditions for learning. Fund the infrastructure and faculty capacity that make engagement and feedback possible.

Read the full episode summary and transcript: https://changinghighered.com/real-cost-of-overlooking-teaching-quality-in-higher-ed/

#HigherEdLeadership #StudentSuccess #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

Free speech on college campuses has become one of higher education's most volatile and defining challenges. In this episode, Dr. Drumm McNaughton talks with Dr. Sean Stevens, Chief Research Advisor at FIRE—the Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression—about findings from FIRE's newly released College Free Speech Rankings and the state of academic freedom, the growing political pressures on universities, and how presidents and boards can protect open dialogue in today's divided climate.

Topics Covered:

Why FIRE expanded its mission beyond higher education and no longer stands for "Foundation for Individual Rights in Education."
How FIRE's College Free Speech Rankings and Scholars Under FIRE survey measure tolerance and academic freedom nationwide.
What the data shows about declining political tolerance among students and faculty.
How government pressure is influencing faculty terminations and speech policies.
The role of leadership in maintaining consistent, transparent free speech policies.
Examples from Vanderbilt and Dartmouth showing how structured dialogue programs improve campus discourse.

Three Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards:

Establish and Communicate Bright Lines – Define clear speech policies and enforce them consistently across all viewpoints.
Stand Firm in Times of Controversy – Uphold principles of free expression even when political or donor pressure mounts.
Promote Civic Dialogue and Intellectual Diversity – Support programs that help students and faculty engage constructively across ideological divides.

Read the transcript or extended show summary: https://changinghighered.com/free-speech-on-college-campuses-fire-report/

#HigherEducation #FreeSpeech #FIRE

View Details

Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton welcomes Dr. Harrison Keller, president of the University of North Texas and former Texas commissioner of higher education.

This episode of the Changing Higher Ed podcast helps higher education presidents, boards, and senior leaders rethink how to connect institutional mission with workforce readiness. It explores how institutions can better align employer partnerships, faculty innovation, and experiential learning to ensure graduates gain both economic and civic value from their degrees.

Listeners will hear how the University of North Texas is translating statewide strategy into campus-level change—showing what's possible when leadership, faculty, and employers collaborate to strengthen outcomes for students and the workforce alike.

Keller shares how Building a Talent Strong Texas redefined higher education's value proposition by tying attainment goals to time-to-value, graduate earnings, and measurable student outcomes.

He also discusses UNT's Texas Talent Accelerator, faculty externships, and cross-campus structures that link curriculum, research, and employer engagement.

Together, these efforts demonstrate how thoughtful strategy, data-informed planning, and shared governance can create lasting institutional and workforce impact.

Topics Covered * Measuring value through outcomes and earnings using time-to-value analysis * Aligning programs with workforce needs through employer partnerships and data * Texas Talent Accelerator: coordinated collaboration across institutions * Faculty externships connecting academic insight and workforce practice * Embedding civil dialogue and collaboration into student learning

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership 1. Use outcomes and earnings data to guide academic and financial strategy. 2. Build employer partnerships that sustain workforce readiness. 3. Support faculty collaboration and innovation through aligned governance and incentives.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/aligning-higher-ed-with-workforce-needs-and-student-value/

#HigherEdLeadership #StrategicPlanning #WorkforceReadiness #StudentOutcomes #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

At one of the smallest graduate schools in the nation, a system built to serve just over a hundred students is redefining how higher education can grow. CUNY's Craig Newmark Graduate School of Journalism has proven that scale isn't the key to enrollment stability—structure is.

By integrating admissions, student affairs, career services, and alumni engagement into one cohesive unit, the school has created a holistic enrollment strategy and management model that continuously fills its pipeline while centering student success.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Colleen Leigh, Assistant Dean of Enrollment Management and Student Success at CUNY Journalism, about how this model works—and how any institution can apply its principles.

They discuss how cross-departmental collaboration, empathetic leadership, and data-informed decision-making can transform student outcomes, strengthen retention, and build lasting alumni engagement.

Topics Covered

How CUNY Journalism unified admissions, student affairs, career services, and alumni engagement under one leadership structure
What makes holistic enrollment management more sustainable than traditional recruitment-focused models
How shared accountability and communication strengthen belonging and retention
The role of empathy and equity in leading institutional change
Why belonging—not policy—is the real driver of retention
Using alumni engagement as a continuous extension of recruitment and career development
How shared services allow small institutions to deliver enterprise-level results
The role of data-informed and equity-driven strategies in student success
How CUNY Journalism is expanding access through bilingual online and tuition-free programs
What presidents and boards can learn about aligning mission, management, and measurable outcomes

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership

Student Success Is a System, Not a Silo Enrollment, retention, and alumni engagement are interdependent. Breaking down silos creates a self-sustaining pipeline that continuously reinforces institutional value.
Data and Equity Drive Smarter Decisions Evidence without equity misses the point. Data should inform which students thrive—and equity ensures that more of them can.
Empathetic Leadership Sustains Change In times of transition, empathy and communication hold institutions together. Listening builds trust, and trust drives performance.

Recommended For: Presidents, boards, provosts, and senior enrollment leaders seeking sustainable systems that connect recruitment, student success, and alumni engagement across the student lifecycle.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/holistic-enrollment-strategy-and-management/

#EnrollmentStrategy #StudentSuccess #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

When every board discussion centers on deficits, deferred maintenance, or another “strategic realignment,” higher education leaders start asking what it would take to fix the system instead of just managing decline.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Beth Martin, President of Notre Dame de Namur University (NDNU), who led her institution through a complete financial and operational turnaround—eliminating institutional debt through strategic real estate use, risk planning, and sound financial governance.

Martin’s experience offers a rare look at what it takes to execute a true higher education turnaround. She shares how NDNU’s leadership aligned governance, mission, and financial strategy to not only survive but rebuild a sustainable model focused on graduate and online growth.

This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, trustees, CFOs, and institutional leaders facing financial strain, considering asset monetization, or preparing for large-scale organizational change.

Topics Covered: * How NDNU executed a debt-free turnaround through real estate strategy and risk planning * Applying business planning and systems theory to higher education transformation * Managing institutional debt while investing in academic and technological infrastructure * Governance structures that enable speed, trust, and accountability during turnaround * Aligning presidents, boards, and sponsoring orders in complex financial transactions * Leading cultural and organizational change while maintaining mission and morale

Real-World Examples Discussed: * NDNU’s 46-acre land transaction that retired institutional debt and funded new programs * Sequencing real estate sales to support strategy instead of short-term survival * Governance reform guided by a skills matrix and board-chair alignment * Realigning academic programs around graduate and online learning * Faculty and staff engagement during institutional transition

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership: 1. Treat land monetization as strategy, not salvage. Link every major financial decision to a defined business plan and measurable outcomes. 2. Integrate business and risk planning into every turnaround. Build contingencies for timing, regulation, and accreditation challenges. 3. Strengthen governance alignment. A unified president and board chair, supported by a skills-based board, determine turnaround success.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/debt-free-higher-education-turnaround-strategy-real-estate/

#HigherEdLeadership #HigherEdTurnaround #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

Higher education institutions are increasingly at risk from cyberattacks that threaten enrollment, accreditation, financial aid compliance, and reputation. In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Brian Kelly, Chief Information Security Officer at Community Health Networks of Connecticut and former higher education CISO, about why cybersecurity must be treated as an enterprise risk—not just an IT issue.

This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, trustees, and senior leaders who need to understand how cyber risk intersects with governance, strategic planning, crisis management, and accreditation readiness.

Topics Covered:

Why higher education is a prime target for cyberattacks
How ransomware and data breaches disrupt core institutional functions
The governance responsibilities of boards in overseeing cybersecurity
Cyber implications for strategic planning and reputation management
Why accreditation and compliance can be undermined by cyber breaches
Protecting research and intellectual property from cyber threats
Building a campus culture of shared cybersecurity responsibility
The leadership succession gap in higher ed cybersecurity
Core practices every institution should adopt during Cybersecurity Awareness Month

Real-World Examples Discussed:

United Healthcare and Social Security data compromises
PowerSchool breach exposing minors to identity theft
Target and Home Depot breaches as case studies in reputational damage
F-35 design theft highlighting the value of intellectual property
Scam examples including PayPal fraud, fake purchase confirmations, and LinkedIn phishing
Leadership succession in action: Cathy Hubbs’ retirement and Harry Hoffman’s appointment

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Ed Leadership:

Plan for resilience, not just prevention—institutions must continue to operate during and after cyber incidents.
Make cybersecurity a shared responsibility—leaders must ensure accountability across the campus community.
Include cyber in board oversight—cyber risk is part of governance, enterprise risk management, and accreditation readiness.

Read the transcript or extended show summary: https://changinghighered.com/cybersecurity-risk-management-in-higher-education/

#HigherEdCybersecurity #BoardGovernance #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

Higher education institutions face strained budgets, declining enrollments, and shifting donor behavior—making fundraising a strategic priority, not just an operational function. In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Bill Crouch, CEO of BrightDot and former university president, about how presidents and boards can strengthen higher education fundraising by aligning it with strategic planning.

Topics Covered:

Why fundraising must be integrated into institutional strategic planning
The shift from the 80/20 rule to today’s 95/5 donor reality
The concept of “mattership” and why donors need assurance that their lives matter
Eagles vs. Sparrows as a framework for donor tiers
Updating the Five I’s of fundraising with creativity and emotional intelligence
Why presidents should dedicate two hours a week to intentional donor cultivation
How boards can become fundraising multipliers through accountability and “Perk Banks”
The growing importance of local impact in donor decision-making

Real-World Examples Discussed:

A philanthropist redirecting gifts locally to ensure her contributions “mattered most”
The researcher who cried after 16 years without ever being thanked for her role in million-dollar gifts
A president telling his young faculty member, “You’re asking today,” in a million-dollar donor meeting
The lasting impression of a three-sentence handwritten note from President George H. W. Bush

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership:

Fundraising must be elevated into strategy, not treated as a background function.
Presidents should focus time and energy on cultivating high-capacity relationships while modeling gratitude across the institution.
Boards need clear expectations and creative tools to fully activate their networks and influence.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/higher-education-fundraising-and-strategic-planning-alignment/

#HigherEducationFundraising #HigherEdStrategicPlanning #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

AI dashboards offer higher education boards the opportunity to boost performance to improve their institutions.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed Podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Marc Huffman, CEO of OnBoard and eSCRIBE, about how AI dashboards provide trustees with better insight into board work and support more effective board governance.

This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, trustees, and board professionals seeking to strengthen board readiness and make governance more data-informed.

Topics Covered:

How AI dashboards consolidate board materials and surface the most important information
Methods for tracking progress against institutional strategy over multiple years
Ways dashboards support board secretaries and committee chairs in managing follow-ups
Why boards need AI use policies and trustee training to build digital literacy
The coming role of predictive analytics and benchmarking in board planning

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership:

AI dashboards give boards better visibility into performance trends and unfinished business.
Board composition and trustee development determine how well these tools are used.
Governance policies for AI create a secure, ethical framework for decision support.

Read the transcript on Changing Higher Ed: https://changinghighered.com/ai-dashboards-for-higher-education-board-governance/

#BoardGovernance #AIDashboards #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

Families are writing universities directly to ask if it’s safe to send their children to the United States. Institutions are also facing longer visa backlogs and growing competition from abroad.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Roger Douglas, Dean for International Programs and Development at St. Martin’s University, about how leaders can strengthen international enrollment pipelines, improve retention, and protect graduate research capacity.

Topics Covered: * The 23-touchpoint recruitment model that keeps students and families engaged until they commit * How graduate applicants often choose the first institution to deliver admissions and aid * Families’ growing concerns about campus safety and how institutions can respond * Why outcome-driven marketing and peer-to-peer outreach build more trust than traditional tactics * The effect of shrinking U.S. research funding on graduate student pipelines * Retention strategies such as host family placements, faculty check-ins, and cultural immersion

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership: 1. Presidents and trustees should engage directly with international students to understand barriers and improve the climate. 2. Retention investments—host families, advising, and cultural programming—are as critical as recruitment for revenue stability. 3. Boards must integrate international enrollment into institutional strategy, requiring documented plans, outcome-based marketing, and active policy advocacy.

Recommended For: Presidents, trustees, enrollment leaders, and academic administrators responsible for sustaining institutional revenue, research, and reputation through international education.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/international-student-recruiting-in-higher-education/

#HigherEducation #InternationalStudentRecruiting #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

This episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast focuses on enrollment management solutions presidents and boards can use to navigate the enrollment cliff. Bill Conley and Bob Massa of Enrollment Intelligence Now join Dr. Drumm McNaughton to share practical guidance on setting realistic enrollment goals, aligning enrollment with finance, and managing institutional risk. (Part one examined the challenges; this discussion turns to the solutions.)

Topics Covered:

Setting realistic enrollment goals using 3–5 years of funnel data
Why inflated projections undermine trust with CFOs and boards
Real-time dashboards and funnel monitoring for early intervention
Mission-driven messaging and authentic student/alumni voices
Balancing technology and AI with hospitality and personal interaction
Enrollment management as part of long-term institutional risk planning
Opportunities and risks of direct admission strategies
Pipeline programs, community-based partnerships, and legal/political constraints
Addressing the shrinking pipeline of experienced enrollment leaders

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership:

Monitor funnel data in real time and act on early warning signs.
Integrate enrollment management with finance and governance.
Invest in scenario planning, transparency, and leadership development.

Read the transcript or the extended show summary: https://changinghighered.com/enrollment-management-solutions-for-higher-ed-leaders/

#EnrollmentManagement #HigherEdLeadership #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

Institutions face converging pressures that are reshaping enrollment management. Declining participation rates, tuition discounting that erodes net revenue, international enrollment volatility, and political mandates are forcing colleges to rethink how they attract and retain students. Enrollment management is no longer just admissions and aid — it has become a strategic system linking recruitment promises to student success and institutional stability.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Bill Conley and Bob Massa, Co-Founders of Enrollment Intelligence Now. They share how enrollment management has evolved over the past fifty years and why it now sits at the center of higher education’s most pressing challenges.

Topics Covered * How shrinking pipelines and lower college-going rates are reshaping enrollment outcomes * Why unsustainable discounting is undermining financial health * The growing impact of alternative credentials and new competitors * The ways international enrollment declines and political mandates compound the crisis * Why enrollment management functions as an accountability system for institutions

Real-World Insights * The origins of enrollment management in the 1970s and how it spread * Lessons from institutions that discounted themselves into financial instability * How enrollment leaders balance institutional mission against market realities

Key Takeaway Enrollment management has become higher education’s strategic fulcrum — the point where mission and market realities meet, determining whether commitments to students translate into institutional sustainability.

Recommended For: Presidents, provosts, CFOs, board members, and enrollment leaders navigating today’s enrollment cliff era.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/reframing-the-enrollment-cliff-a-new-lens-on-enrollment-management/

#HigherEdLeadership #EnrollmentCliff #EnrollmentManagement #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

Caltech’s board once had nearly 80 members; too many for focused discussion or quick decisions.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton talks with Cathy Light, Caltech’s Secretary of the Board, about how the institution streamlined governance, strengthened committees, and made trustee reorientation mandatory.

Light, who has held senior roles at Carnegie Mellon University and the Semester at Sea program, outlines how Caltech conducts trustee assessments, structures its executive committee, and uses an ongoing governance review to keep the board working at its best.

Topics Covered:

Governance changes prompted by the pandemic
Defining trustee responsibilities in 2025
Using the executive committee for responsive decision-making
The role of the governance and nominating committee
Trustee assessments and renewal decisions
Making orientation and reorientation standard practice
Maintaining strategic oversight without micromanaging
Involving alumni and students without adding voting seats

Real-World Examples:

Reducing the board from 80 members to a manageable size
Giving young alumni trustees full voting rights
Using retreats and campus visits to connect trustees with faculty research

Three Takeaways for Leadership:

Keep governance review continuous and adaptive.
Use orientation and reorientation to maintain alignment.
Structure boards for informed, timely decisions without overstepping into operations.

For presidents, trustees, board chairs, board secretaries, and governance committees aiming to improve board effectiveness.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/caltech-private-higher-education-board-governance-model/

#HigherEdGovernance #BoardGovernance #HigherEducationPodcast #HigherEdGovernanceModel

View Details

40% of California’s licensed doctoral psychologists come from one university that nearly failed a decade ago. Their turnaround didn’t come from diversifying programs or chasing enrollment—it came from making the hardest decision in higher ed: cutting what wasn’t excellent.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Andy Vaughn, President and CEO of Alliant International University, about how institutional leaders can drive university transformation by making tough calls, realigning programs, and embedding scalable mental health support into their core operations.

Drawing from Alliant’s strategic shift, Vaughn explains why program focus and transparent leadership are more effective than traditional diversification models. He shares how embedding mental health services into academic programs created both a market advantage and a support system for students, faculty, and staff.

Topics Covered:

Why eliminating underperforming programs can drive institutional transformation
How program realignment strengthens financial stability and market positioning
Embedding scalable mental health services into academic programs and operations
The leadership imperative: transparency, inclusion, and decisive action
Codifying organizational values to guide behavior and decision-making
Managing faculty-administration relations with professionalism and respect
Preparing for unprecedented policy and legislative changes impacting higher ed

Real-World Examples Discussed:

Alliant International University’s strategic focus on licensure-driven programs
The integration of Alliant Clinics, providing community mental health services
Leadership communication practices to maintain trust during operational changes
Partnering with psychology schools for scalable mental health service delivery

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership:

Codify and normalize institutional values so that decision-making and behaviors align across all levels.
Be transparent with stakeholders about challenges and solutions, fostering trust and shared ownership of outcomes.
Involve the entire institution—including part-time staff—in transformation efforts to ensure unified execution during critical periods.

This episode offers a practical framework for institutional leaders navigating transformation, operational challenges, and the rising demand for campus-wide mental health support.

Recommended For: Presidents, trustees, provosts, CFOs, student affairs leaders, and higher education executives focused on institutional sustainability and student success.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/university-transformation-program-focus-scalable-mental-health/

#UniversityTransformation #HigherEdLeadership #MentalHealthSupport #ProgramRealignment #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

With first-generation and low SES students facing steep barriers to completion and career entry, Great Jobs KC has built a replicable model that starts in high school, continues through college, and delivers real workforce outcomes. In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Great Jobs KC CEO Earl Martin Phalen about how regional collaboration, wraparound services, and employer partnerships are helping underserved students succeed beyond graduation.

Phalen outlines how Great Jobs KC collaborates with 24 higher education institutions, over 150 employer partners, and K–12 feeder systems to support students from high school through college graduation and into strong first jobs. Through initiatives like KC Scholars and the Great Jobs KC scholarship, the organization provides $50,000 per student for tuition, transportation, and wraparound support—including case managers, success coaches, and career placement services.

This episode offers practical, data-backed insights for institutional leaders working to improve retention, increase degree completion, and strengthen job placement results for underserved students through strategic regional partnerships.

Topics Covered: * The unique needs of first-generation and low SES students * Designing holistic support systems that extend beyond financial aid * How to build college-employer partnerships that deliver job outcomes * Regional collaboration between 24 colleges and over 150 employers * The role of scholar advocates and success coaches in student persistence * How investing $50,000 per student can produce high ROI * Measuring impact: retention, completion, and employment rates

Real-World Examples Discussed: * Great Jobs KC’s partnership with regional colleges, including UMKC, Avila, William Jewell, and Donnelly College * How the KC Scholars program helps high school students complete FAFSA, ACT prep, and college planning * Employer partnership models, including apprenticeships, internships, and work-based learning * The importance of wraparound services like transportation and mental health support in student success * Scholar experiences navigating college with the help of long-term coaching

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Ed Leadership: 1. Institutions that want to serve first-gen and low-income students need more than scholarships—they need scalable systems of support. 2. Long-term coaching and employer-aligned programs can dramatically improve retention, completion, and career outcomes. 3. Regional collaboration between colleges, K–12 schools, and employers isn’t just ideal—it’s necessary to build equitable education-to-career pipelines.

Recommended For: Presidents, provosts, trustees, enrollment and student success leaders, and system executives seeking replicable strategies to improve access, retention, completion, and career outcomes for first-generation and low SES students.

Read the transcript on our website: https://changinghighered.com/first-gen-and-low-ses-student-success-strategies/

#HigherEdLeadership #StudentSuccess #FirstGenStudents #LowSESStudentSuccess #RegionalCollaboration #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

Higher education leaders are facing the most sweeping set of federal regulatory and funding changes in over a decade. In this Washington Update episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton welcomes back frequent guest Tom Netting, president of TEN Government Strategies, to discuss the July 2025 budget reconciliation bill—federal legislation that significantly alters student loans, Pell Grants, institutional accountability, and the rules governing program eligibility.

While not a formal reauthorization of the Higher Education Act, the bill introduces statutory earnings-based accountability for degree programs, lifetime loan caps, professional judgment changes, and new eligibility requirements for short-term Pell programs.

Netting also discusses concurrent developments in accreditation and distance education oversight, including the rise of a new accreditor in Florida and its potential implications for NC-SARA and federal triad stability.

This episode is a must-listen for presidents, trustees, CFOs, and compliance officers preparing for upcoming reporting deadlines, new negotiated rulemaking cycles, and long-term institutional planning under new federal constraints.

Topics Covered * How the July 2025 reconciliation bill rewrites federal student aid and accountability rules * What the new earnings-based accountability measure means for degree programs * Pell Grant expansion for short-term workforce programs and the required outcomes thresholds * The elimination of Grad PLUS loans and new lifetime borrowing caps for students and families * Changes to professional judgment authority and how institutions can apply it by cohort * New 90/10 revenue guidance and how it affects distance education classifications * Delayed implementation of Borrower Defense and Closed School Discharge regulations * The emergence of Florida’s state-based accreditor and its expected NACIQI review * Why NC-SARA recognition may be impacted by nontraditional accreditation * The likelihood of a second reconciliation bill or technical corrections package

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership 1. Institutional leaders must prepare now for dual accountability frameworks and new reporting obligations. 2. Expanded professional judgment offers new flexibility but must be applied with consistency and clear documentation. 3. Accreditation and state authorization pathways are shifting—compliance teams must monitor evolving standards across federal and state lines.

This episode provides critical insights for leaders navigating a changing regulatory environment, with practical implications for finance, compliance, and academic planning.

Recommended For: Presidents, trustees, chief financial officers, compliance officers, and accreditation liaisons responsible for institutional strategy and Title IV eligibility.

Read the transcript:  https://changinghighered.com/washington-update-july-2025-reconciliation-bill-impact-on-higher-ed/

#HigherEdPolicy #July2025ReconciliationBill #FinancialAidCompliance #FederalLegislation #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

Most colleges rely on more than 20 disconnected systems to support students, creating confusion, reducing engagement, and lowering graduation rates.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Elliot Felix is the founder of brightspot Strategy (acquired by Buro Happold in 2020) and the author of The Connected College: Leadership Strategies for Student Success about how building integrated systems where strategy, services, and technology work together can improve student outcomes without increasing institutional complexity or cost.

Felix, who has worked with more than 100 institutions including MIT, NYU, and the University of Virginia, draws on his background in architecture and design thinking to offer practical solutions for breaking down silos and creating seamless student experiences. This conversation provides actionable strategies for institutional leaders seeking to move from fragmentation to alignment while managing limited resources.

This episode is particularly valuable for presidents, trustees, and senior administrators looking to redesign operations and improve student success through systemic coordination rather than adding more programs and services.

Topics Covered:

Why the "additive culture" in higher education creates operational sprawl and student confusion
How design thinking can transform institutional strategy and student experience
Practical approaches to breaking down silos without major reorganizations
Using RACI models and governance structures to enable faster, smarter decisions
The critical importance of aligning strategic planning with budget decisions
Reframing risk as a condition for progress through prototyping and piloting
Strategic partnerships as tools for expanding capacity without internal complexity

Real-World Examples Discussed:

NYU's transformation of computer labs into "connect and create" collaborative spaces
UVA's co-location of different advising functions for seamless student support
Purdue University's Communicators Council as a model for decentralized coordination
Colorado State's IT governance process for strategic technology investments
The pitfall of institutions with both writing centers and writing labs in the same building
Quinnipiac's healthcare partnership providing both services and talent pipeline
Amarillo College's community partnerships that increased graduation rates from 14% to 65-80%

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership:

Create a focused strategy that prioritizes where to invest, makes hard tradeoffs, and aligns budget with institutional goals
Break the cycle of fragmentation by consolidating services and systems to improve access, reduce duplication, and enhance outcomes
Reframe risk as progress by encouraging piloting and iteration to unlock innovation without waiting for consensus or perfection

This episode offers institutional leaders a clear, actionable framework for moving from fragmentation to alignment while improving student outcomes through strategic execution rather than adding complexity.

Recommended For: Presidents, trustees, chief academic officers, student affairs leaders, and institutional planning teams focused on improving student success through systemic coordination.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/connected-college-strategy-to-improve-student-success/

#HigherEdLeadership #StudentSuccess #InstitutionalStrategy #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

AI can change how colleges and universities approach enrollment, making it faster, fairer, and more aligned with student success. In this episode of Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton talks with Ashish Fernando, founder and CEO of EDMO and iSchoolConnect, about how institutions can use artificial intelligence to improve admissions, automate routine tasks, and personalize support without losing the human touch.

Drawing on real-world implementations at Western Governors University, Franklin University, and others, Fernando outlines how AI enables institutions to make faster admissions decisions, better assess student fit, and improve long-term outcomes. He also explains where human judgment still matters and why redesigning broken enrollment processes is critical before adding automation.

This episode offers practical insights for presidents, provosts, enrollment leaders, and trustees seeking to modernize recruitment, increase yield, and align institutional capacity with student expectations.

Topics Covered * Why enrollment strategy must prioritize student fit, not just volume * How AI improves speed to decision and impacts yield * What admissions tasks are appropriate for automation * The strategic value of chatbots and real-time decision systems * How to avoid automating broken or biased processes * Balancing technology with human counseling in admissions * Real-world examples of AI implementation in higher education

Real-World Examples Discussed * Western Governors University’s scalable, self-paced enrollment model * Franklin University’s five-minute transfer evaluation and admissions decision * NYU’s BobChat and chatbot-supported student services National University’s approach to AI infrastructure

Three Key Takeaways 1. Think from the outside in. Understand student motivations and design enrollment to reflect their needs and expectations. 2. Use speed as strategy. Institutions that respond quickly improve yield, reduce melt, and gain a competitive edge. 3. Embed AI in operations. Treat AI as infrastructure built to support staff, not replace them.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/how-to-use-ai-to-improve-enrollment-and-admissions/

#HigherEdEnrollment #AIinHigherEd #AdmissionsStrategy #HigherEducationPodcast #InstitutionalEffectiveness

View Details

Digital transformation in higher education often focuses on technology. But for Utah State University, the transformation has been about outcomes: improving retention, strengthening equity, and building scalable systems of support without overhauling infrastructure.

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Rene Eborn, Associate Vice President of Strategic Initiatives and Deputy of Digital Transformation at Utah State University, about how the institution designed and implemented a connected campus strategy that integrates advising, communications, and academic support into a single mobile-first platform.

Drawing on her decades of experience in higher ed and edtech leadership, Eborn shares how USU replaced nine siloed tools with five integrated platforms, enabling early alerts, AI-powered nudges, and real-time visibility across departments. She explains how this model supports faculty, staff, and especially underserved student populations—including first-generation, commuter, and online learners—by surfacing what students need, when they need it.

This conversation is especially relevant for institutional leaders looking to align digital infrastructure with student success goals, without ballooning their tech stack or losing sight of their mission.

Topics Covered:

Why USU’s connected campus approach focuses on student equity and support
How the university integrated CRM, LMS, advising, and communications systems
The role of AI nudges and early alerts in preventing student disengagement
How faculty and staff use the system to support students in real time
What the rollout process looked like—and why stakeholder involvement was key
What’s next: building toward a full 360-degree student lifecycle view

Real-World Examples Discussed:

A first-generation student juggling three jobs flagged by the early alert system and connected to scholarship resources in time
Student dashboards that surface personalized academic, advising, and financial steps
A platform expansion that now includes parents, alumni, and prospective students
High adoption rates driven by student feedback and design input

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership:

Technology should be integrated, not layered—start with user needs and existing infrastructure.
Faculty and staff buy-in depends on systems that make their work easier, not more complicated.
Student success improves when support is timely, personalized, and accessible—especially for those who need it most.

This episode offers a practical look at what’s possible when digital transformation is driven by strategy, not software—and why connected campuses may be one of the most effective ways to support today’s diverse student population.

Recommended For: Presidents, provosts, CIOs, trustees, enrollment managers, and student success leaders building or scaling student-centered infrastructure.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/creating-a-connected-campus-strategy-for-student-success/

#ConnectedCampus #StudentSuccess #HigherEdTechnology #HigherEducationPodcast #DigitalTransformation

View Details

How Cross-Sector Partnerships Help Adult Learners Return, Persist, and Complete Degrees

With over 41 million adults in the U.S. holding some college credit but no degree, colleges and universities are under pressure to implement effective adult learner enrollment strategies. In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Malik Brown, President and CEO of Graduate Philadelphia, about how institutions can re-engage students who have stopped out through cross-sector partnerships that support enrollment, retention, and degree completion.

Drawing on their real-world experience in higher education and workforce development, McNaughton and Brown discuss how adult learners face unique barriers—including affordability, caregiving responsibilities, and outdated enrollment systems—and how intermediaries like nonprofits and employers can play a crucial role in supporting their return to college. The episode outlines practical, replicable strategies that institutional leaders can adopt to build sustainable pipelines for adult learner success.

This conversation is especially valuable for higher ed presidents, provosts, and enrollment leaders tasked with addressing demographic shifts and declining enrollments while aligning with workforce and community needs.

Topics Covered:

The economic and social reasons over 41 million Americans have stopped out
Why adult learners need support from application through graduation
How partnerships with nonprofits, employers, and funders extend institutional capacity
The importance of stackable credentials aligned to labor market needs
Why re-enrollment strategies must include systems changes and credit articulation
Reducing friction in the application, financial aid, and credit transfer processes

Real-World Examples Discussed:

Graduate Philadelphia’s intermediary role connecting students, colleges, and employers
How employers can provide scheduling flexibility and tuition assistance
Use of workforce credentials as an on-ramp to degrees
Models for credit articulation and co-governed partnerships
Community-based navigation support that increases persistence and completion

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership:

Build integrated partnerships that extend institutional reach. Nonprofits, workforce boards, and employers provide essential wraparound services that help adult learners succeed.
Design stackable pathways that start with workforce credentials. These programs allow adults to earn income and confidence while progressing toward a degree.
Fix enrollment systems that weren’t built for adults. From transcript access to unpaid balances, institutions must streamline re-entry to remove avoidable barriers.

This episode provides a framework for institutional leaders seeking actionable strategies to re-enroll adult learners and support them through to graduation.

Recommended For: Presidents, provosts, chief enrollment officers, board members, continuing education leaders, and workforce development professionals focused on adult learners and institutional sustainability.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/adult-learner-enrollment-completion-partnerships/

#AdultLearners #HigherEdEnrollment #WorkforcePartnerships #HigherEducationPodcast #DegreeCompletion #ChangingHigherEd

View Details

Higher education leaders are searching for better ways to engage students, improve retention, and close equity gaps—especially in the wake of COVID-related learning disruptions. In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Justin Shaffer, Associate Dean for Undergraduate Studies and Teaching Professor in Chemical and Biological Engineering at the Colorado School of Mines. They discuss Dr. Shaffer’s book, High Structure Course Design, which offers a proven framework for transforming student outcomes.

High structure course design—built on clarity, repetition, feedback, and engagement—originated in STEM education but is now widely recognized as effective across disciplines. This approach doesn't water down rigor; it scaffolds the learning process so students at all levels can succeed. The result: better retention, higher achievement, and greater equity in academic outcomes.

This conversation is especially relevant for institutional leaders seeking to scale evidence-based instructional practices and boost institutional performance.

Topics Covered:

Why many students struggle in gateway courses and what faculty can do differently
The long-term effects of post-COVID learning disruptions on student readiness
Three structural layers that drive student engagement and retention
Four foundational principles that support learning across all disciplines
How high structure pedagogy closes equity gaps without lowering standards
The undervalued impact of teaching-focused faculty on student success
Infrastructure and leadership decisions that enable faculty innovation
How structured courses also improve career readiness and workforce outcomes

Real-World Examples:

40–60% failure rates improved through course redesign
A biology field course that teaches both science and professional skills
Centers for teaching and learning that support faculty-wide improvements

Three Takeaways for Leadership:

Course design is one of the most powerful and underused levers for retention and equity.
Teaching-focused faculty are essential institutional assets and must be supported.
Scalable infrastructure for instructional quality is not optional—it’s a strategic necessity.

Recommended For: Presidents, provosts, academic leaders, board members, and faculty development directors who want scalable ways to boost student success and institutional outcomes.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/high-structure-course-design-for-student-engagement-retention-and-success/

#HigherEdLeadership #RetentionStrategies #StudentSuccess

View Details

Shared services and consolidation strategies are helping struggling small colleges stabilize operations, reduce costs, and pursue sustainable growth—without compromising institutional identity or student outcomes. In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, host Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Jason Duggan, CEO of Thesis Elements, about how these approaches are being used to help small colleges strengthen efficiency and financial sustainability.

Drawing on his experience helping small colleges modernize their operations through cloud-based student information systems, Duggan explores how shared services, academic partnerships, and digital transformation are enabling institutions to manage costs and expand capacity. He also offers insights into how leadership teams and boards are approaching these strategies in the current financial and demographic environment.

This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, trustees, and senior leadership teams evaluating whether shared services or consolidation strategies could support their institution’s long-term mission and sustainability.

Topics Covered:

The financial and operational pressures driving small colleges to explore shared services and consolidation
How administrative shared services are helping reduce overhead and improve service quality
Strategic approaches to institutional consolidation and how they can support enrollment and operational goals
Academic resource-sharing models and their role in expanding offerings while managing instructional costs
Innovative financial and academic strategies to strengthen institutional resilience
The role of cloud-based systems and digital transformation in supporting shared services and operational agility
How presidents and boards are facilitating leadership conversations about shared services and consolidation
Key considerations for aligning shared services and consolidation initiatives with institutional mission and values

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership:

Clarify institutional mission and target audience to guide strategic planning and resource allocation.
Prioritize student success and retention as core drivers of institutional resilience.
Evaluate shared services and consolidation strategies as potential options for improving efficiency and long-term sustainability.

This episode offers valuable insights for institutional leaders exploring new operational models to support their mission and navigate today’s higher education landscape.

Recommended For: Presidents, trustees, board members, chief financial officers, provosts, and senior administrative leaders focused on institutional sustainability and operational strategy.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/shared-services-and-consolidation-strategies-for-small-colleges/

#HigherEdLeadership #SharedServices #ConsolidationStrategies #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

While higher education leaders often cite leadership development as a priority, few institutions treat it as a teachable, measurable skill. In this episode of Changing Higher Ed®, host Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Scott Cowen about why leadership education should be integrated into the academic curriculum—and how institutions can implement it effectively.

President Emeritus of Tulane University, Cowen shares insights from leading the university through Hurricane Katrina and from his new book, Lead and Succeed, which outlines strategies to develop leadership skills in students and early-career professionals. He dispels the “born leader” myth and offers a framework for embedding leadership development at every level of the institution.

This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, trustees, and academic leaders seeking to build leadership capacity across campus.

Topics Covered:

Why higher education often fails to treat leadership as a strategic priority
How to embed leadership development into the academic curriculum
Emotional intelligence and the behavioral traits of effective leaders
Leadership lessons from Tulane’s post-Katrina recovery
Creating institutional systems that reinforce leadership behaviors
The role of succession planning in long-term institutional health

Real-World Examples Discussed:

Tulane University’s relocation to Houston and Cowen’s daily crisis communication strategy
The development of a for-credit leadership course and workbook, Lead and Succeed
Mentorship from Dr. Norman Francis, president of Xavier University for 50 years
Cowen’s “thinking out loud” email updates during crises at Tulane and Case Western
Scaling structured leadership practices across institutions

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership:

Formalize leadership education. Establish structured academic courses with measurable outcomes. Integrate mentoring and reflection into the curriculum to build leadership competencies.
Develop repeatable crisis leadership practices. Use structured daily meetings and transparent communications to align institutional response during disruption.
Implement strategic succession planning. Treat leadership transitions as long-term planning initiatives. Build internal pipelines and normalize leadership exits to support institutional continuity.

This episode offers a practical framework for establishing a leadership-ready culture in higher education academic curricula.

Recommended For: Presidents, provosts, deans, academic affairs leaders, trustees, and student success strategists.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/leadership-development-academic-curriculum-design-in-higher-ed/

#HigherEdLeadership #AcademicCurriculum #StudentDevelopment #LeadershipEducation #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

Higher education’s approach to DEI is under fire—from political pressure, public skepticism, and internal fatigue. But abandoning DEI isn’t the only option.

In this episode of Changing Higher Ed®, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Columbia Law professor Susan Sturm about how higher ed institutions can continue to drive inclusive institutional change—without relying on traditional DEI frameworks that may no longer be viable.

Sturm, author of What Might Be: Confronting Racism to Transform Our Institutions, reframes DEI as a long-term, systems-level strategy rooted in leadership, trust, and organizational learning. She introduces the concept of “full participation,” where individuals from all backgrounds can thrive and contribute to the institution’s mission—and outlines the leadership mindsets and practices necessary to build that reality.

Through examples from UMBC, Columbia, and court systems, Sturm shows how change begins with local experimentation, paradox navigation, and support for “organizational catalysts” who bridge across roles and perspectives. She also explores how discomfort, conflict, and even failure can become engines for cultural learning—if leaders are willing to embrace vulnerability and complexity.

Topics Covered:

Why current DEI models fall short in higher education
The paradox of racial salience and its impact on reform
How institutions can foster “full participation”
Why local experimentation drives scalable change
The role of discomfort and rupture in institutional learning
How to resource and support internal change agents
What boards and presidents must do to align DEI with strategy

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership:

Train leaders to recognize and hold paradox—not resolve it
Invest in internal catalysts who can bridge across silos and groups
Reframe DEI as mission-aligned infrastructure, not add-on programming

Recommended For: Presidents, provosts, board members, DEI officers, and change leaders looking to move beyond check-the-box diversity efforts and create meaningful, sustainable institutional change.

Transcript: https://changinghighered.com/dei-is-off-the-table-how-higher-ed-can-still-drive-institutional-change/

#HigherEdLeadership #HigherEdChangeManagement #HigherEducationPodcast #DEI

View Details

Higher education is facing a growing disconnect between traditional academic pathways and the needs of today’s learners and employers. In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Kathleen deLaski, founder of Education Design Lab and author of Who Needs College Anymore?, about how institutions can realign academic programs to better serve nontraditional students and meet workforce demands.

Drawing from her experience supporting over 1,200 colleges and regional systems, deLaski explores how modular credentials, skills-based learning, and short-term pathways can make higher education more accessible and valuable to adult learners. The conversation highlights how institutions can use design thinking, industry data, and step-ladder credentialing to connect academic outcomes to employment opportunities—without abandoning their core mission.

This episode is especially relevant for presidents, trustees, and academic leaders tasked with redesigning programs and structures to improve learner outcomes, increase enrollment, and strengthen workforce relevance.

Topics Covered:

The rise of nontraditional students and the failures of a degree-first model
How institutions can implement skills-based learning and credential transparency
Examples of how colleges like Western Governors University are aligning learning with job market demands
The importance of employer engagement in curriculum design
Why internal silos and legacy structures hinder meaningful innovation
How to use step-ladder pathways to improve access, confidence, and long-term outcomes

Real-World Examples Discussed:

Western Governors University’s use of skills profiles tied to labor market data
How community colleges are building modular micro-pathways in partnership with employers
The impact of state policy and funding shifts (e.g., Virginia, Colorado, Texas) on institutional priorities

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Ed Leadership:

Aligning academic programs with workforce needs requires intentional curriculum design and employer input.
Modular, stackable credentials offer nontraditional students realistic entry points and long-term pathways to degrees.
Institutional structures must adapt to support new models—program redesign alone is not enough.

This episode offers actionable insight for institutional leaders committed to expanding access, improving workforce outcomes, and strengthening institutional sustainability.

Recommended For: Presidents, provosts, trustees, academic planners, workforce and career pathway leaders, and board members addressing enrollment challenges and labor market alignment.

Read the transcript on our website: https://changinghighered.com/align-academic-programs-with-workforce-needs-serve-nontraditional-students/

#HigherEdLeadership #AcademicRedesign #WorkforceAlignment #NontraditionalStudents #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

Higher education faces increasing external pressures and diminishing public trust—creating an urgent need for institutional adaptation. In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Brian Rosenberg, former president of Macalister College and author of "Whatever It Is, I'm Against It," about why resistance to change has made colleges and universities particularly vulnerable to current attacks.

Drawing on his 17 years of presidential experience and current perspective as a Harvard visiting professor, Rosenberg analyzes the economic, political, and structural factors undermining public confidence in higher education while offering candid observations about what institutional leaders must do differently to navigate this challenging landscape.

This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, trustees, and institutional leaders seeking to understand both external threats and internal barriers to necessary change.

Topics Covered:

The multiple factors driving declining public confidence in higher education
How political polarization and economic concerns about affordability create challenges
Why traditional governance structures struggle to implement transformational change
The impact of low completion rates (under 60% nationally) on public perception
The relationship between boards and presidents during challenging periods
Why institutions need to collaborate more effectively against external threats

Real-World Examples Discussed:

Columbia University as a target of coordinated attacks on higher education
Wellesley College's $100,000 comprehensive fee and its impact on public trust
The contrast between campus protests today and those of the 1960s
Institutions with 30% completion rates that would signal catastrophic failure in other industries
The success of community-connected support structures at Amarillo College

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership:

Presidents must be honest and transparent with stakeholders about institutional challenges.
Board members have a responsibility to defend institutional mission—service is a privilege that carries obligations.
The board-president relationship is the single most important factor in institutional effectiveness.

This episode provides thoughtful analysis for institutional leaders navigating external pressures while managing internal resistance to necessary change.

Recommended For: Presidents, trustees, board members, chief financial officers, and enrollment leaders concerned about institutional sustainability and public perception of higher education.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/resistance-to-change-attacks-on-higher-education/

#HigherEdLeadership #InstitutionalChange #BoardGovernance #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

Strategic affiliation in higher education offers an alternative path for institutional sustainability—one that maintains mission and autonomy while accessing shared infrastructure and support. In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Matt Nehmer, President of The Colleges of Law, about his institution’s affiliation with The Community Solution Education System (TCS) and what other leaders should know before pursuing similar strategies.

Drawing on his experience as both a college president and former system executive, Nehmer shares how the affiliation was structured, how accreditation and compliance were handled, and what shared services have allowed The Colleges of Law to professionalize operations without sacrificing identity.

This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, trustees, and institutional leaders considering affiliation models to improve long-term viability.

Topics Covered:

Why The Colleges of Law pursued affiliation before it became a necessity
The dual-board governance structure that balances autonomy and accountability
How legal safeguards protected institutional assets during transition
Shared services provided through The Community Solutions system and how they’re managed
Accreditation coordination with WASC and the implications of a system model
Academic collaboration across system institutions without curriculum loss
Leadership communication and the president’s role in system-level engagement

Real-World Examples Discussed:

Asset protection using a legacy nonprofit entity
Cross-listed family law course shared with affiliated institutions
Accreditation contingency planning in case of system dissolution
Strategic planning coordination across multiple colleges

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership:

Presidents must actively educate stakeholders about how system affiliation works.
Legal and governance structures matter—protect assets and clarify responsibilities.
Affiliation doesn’t require cultural compromise; it enables operational focus.

This episode provides practical insights for institutions exploring strategic affiliation as a pathway to long-term resilience without sacrificing independence.

Recommended For: Presidents, trustees, board members, general counsel, provosts, and system executives considering affiliation or system alignment models in higher education.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/strategic-affiliation-in-higher-education/

#HigherEdLeadership #StrategicAffiliation #Governance #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

Strategic planning in higher education isn't just about setting goals—it's about building the kind of stakeholder engagement and leadership alignment that can drive lasting institutional change. In this episode of Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Andrew T. Hsu, President of the College of Charleston, about how a collaborative planning process helped increase enrollment, launch new academic schools, and move the college toward national university status.

Drawing on his background in both industry and higher education, Dr. Hsu shares insights into balancing urgency with collaboration, the importance of faculty engagement, and the realities of leading strategic change within shared governance environments.

This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, boards, provosts, and leadership teams navigating strategic growth, governance challenges, or long-range institutional transformation.

Topics Covered:

How strategic planning anchored the College of Charleston’s enrollment growth and academic expansion
Why broad faculty engagement strengthens institutional resilience and accelerates change
Lessons from balancing urgency for change with the realities of shared governance
How industry experience shaped Dr. Hsu’s leadership approach in higher education
Governance missteps: What happens when leadership bypasses consultation—and how to correct course
Long-term growth planning and the move toward national university status

Real-World Examples Discussed:

College of Charleston’s creation of Schools of Health Sciences, Natural and Environmental Sciences, and Engineering, Computing, and Mathematics
The enrollment surge from 11,000 to 32,000 applications annually under Dr. Hsu’s leadership
Policy changes at Charleston to formalize academic reorganization processes after early challenges

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership:

Build stakeholder ownership early: Strategic planning must involve faculty, staff, students, alumni, and governing boards to ensure success.
Respect governance processes: Even well-intentioned leadership actions can falter without proper consultation and transparency.
Balance urgency with collaboration: Sustainable change in higher education requires leaders to move decisively while honoring shared governance culture.

This episode offers practical strategies for institutions seeking to strengthen their strategic planning efforts and drive sustainable growth through collaborative leadership.

Recommended For: Presidents, provosts, trustees, board members, strategic planning leaders, and senior administrators focused on institutional transformation and governance alignment.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/higher-education-strategic-planning-and-growth/

#HigherEdLeadership #StrategicPlanning #SharedGovernance #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

With state capital support on the decline and infrastructure aging out of usefulness, higher education leaders are under pressure to find new ways to fund capital projects—without compromising mission, control, or long-term sustainability. In this episode of Changing Higher Ed®, Dr. Drumm McNaughton explores creative capital funding strategies institutions are using to meet urgent facility and housing demands.

His guest, Brent Miller—Higher Education Market Sector Leader at HED—shares how colleges and universities across the country are structuring public-private partnerships (P3s), securing transformational donor gifts, and leveraging local bond initiatives to move large-scale capital plans forward.

This conversation is especially relevant for presidents, CFOs, trustees, and VPs of facilities navigating deferred maintenance, campus growth, or strategic repositioning. Brent brings 30+ years of architectural and capital planning experience to the conversation, offering insights from some of the most innovative projects in higher ed capital development.

Topics Covered: * Why traditional state funding is no longer enough—and what institutions are doing about it * How public-private partnerships (P3s) work, and which types of projects they’re best suited for * Case studies from USC, UC Irvine, University of Michigan, UC Merced, and more * Donor and corporate partnership models that align with institutional missions * How local bond initiatives are changing the future of community colleges * What boards and presidents need to know about aligning capital projects with strategy and risk

Real-World Examples Discussed: * USC’s Iovine and Young Academy, funded by a $70M gift from Jimmy Iovine and Dr. Dre * UC Irvine’s interdisciplinary health sciences building—merging donor intent and design * University of Michigan’s Ford Robotics Building, a co-developed corporate-academic research hub * UC Merced 2020, a $1.3B P3 that doubled the university’s physical capacity * Cal State San Marcos’ early mixed-use P3 development for housing and retail * A facilities deal struck to replace plant equipment at cost and pay via utility savings * General Motors University as an early model of industry-aligned higher ed

Three Key Takeaways for Leadership: 1. Ensure capital alignment with strategy: Every capital initiative should support the university’s mission, enrollment trajectory, and long-term vision. 2. Build in lifecycle costs: Deferred maintenance and energy savings must be part of the upfront planning—not afterthoughts. 3. Communicate across stakeholders: From boards and donors to students and local communities, transparency is essential to success.

This episode provides both a strategic framework and actionable insight into how today’s institutions can overcome capital constraints through innovation, collaboration, and long-range thinking.

Recommended For: Presidents, provosts, CFOs, trustees, board chairs, and facilities executives leading campus master planning, housing expansion, or long-term capital strategy.

Read the transcript: https://changinghighered.com/capital-funding-strategies-higher-education/

#HigherEdLeadership #PublicPrivatePartnerships #HigherEducation #HigherEducationPodcast

View Details

Public confidence in colleges and universities has dropped dramatically—only a third of Americans say they trust higher education. In this episode, Dr. Drumm McNaughton talks with Dr. Courtney Brown, Vice President of Strategic Impact and Planning at Lumina Foundation, about Gallup–Lumina’s latest findings and what institutional leaders must do to address the affordability and workforce relevance concerns behind this erosion of trust.

They also explore Lumina’s new 2040 goal: 75% credential attainment—with a focus on value, not just completion.

What we cover in this episode:

Gallup data on declining public trust in higher education
The ROI paradox: affordability vs. long-term economic benefit
Why public perception is shifting—even as current students see value
What Lumina’s 75x2040 goal means for institutional strategy
How colleges can realign offerings to workforce expectations
Supporting adult learners and restoring trust through transparency

Read the full show summary and access the transcript here: https://changinghighered.com/public-trust-in-higher-education-lumina/

#HigherEducation #CollegeAffordability #CollegeROI

About Our Guest Dr. Courtney Brown is Vice President of Strategic Impact and Planning at Lumina Foundation. She leads research, learning, and strategic initiatives aimed at increasing access to quality credentials for all Americans.

About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton is CEO of The Change Leader and host of the Changing Higher Ed podcast. He works with higher education boards and leadership teams to improve governance, lead strategic transformation, and navigate accreditation and institutional effectiveness.

View Details

Most institutions survey their faculty, but few turn that data into meaningful action. This episode explores how higher education leaders can use faculty satisfaction data to inform strategic planning, strengthen shared governance, retain talent, and lead institutional change.

Dr. Drumm McNaughton is joined by Dr. R. Todd Benson, Executive Director of COACHE (Collaborative on Academic Careers in Higher Education), to examine how institutions are applying faculty data in more intentional ways. The conversation focuses on how leadership can move from reporting results to building trust, aligning leadership decisions with faculty needs, and implementing sustained improvements.

Benson outlines COACHE’s three-year cycle, where survey data serves not as a static report card, but as the starting point for structured, campus-wide conversations. Institutions are encouraged to engage faculty in interpreting the data, identifying top priorities, and co-owning the solutions. This approach helps shift the focus from compliance and benchmarking to long-term capacity building.

Shared governance is a recurring theme throughout the episode. Benson explains how survey questions are designed to test whether faculty and administration are operating in a framework of mutual trust and responsibility. He shares examples where even well-documented governance structures break down due to weak relationships or inconsistent communication—issues that leadership can’t fix with policy alone.

The episode also breaks down COACHE’s findings from the national Faculty Retention and Exit Study. Three factors consistently predict faculty satisfaction and attrition: how time is allocated, how resources align with expectations, and whether leadership is seen as trustworthy and transparent. These drivers connect directly to institutional risk, culture, and long-term sustainability.

Examples from Georgia State University and the University of Texas at Arlington show how institutions can take action. Georgia State created a public-facing COACHE dashboard that connects findings to actual decisions. UT Arlington’s faculty senate led the charge, collaborating with administration to develop a shared scorecard and secure resources to address salary equity and improve doctoral student recruitment.

For presidents, provosts, and boards, the message is clear: collecting faculty data isn’t enough. The real work happens in what you do next.

What higher ed leaders will learn in this episode:

How to engage faculty in prioritizing and interpreting satisfaction data
What shared governance metrics reveal about institutional health
How time, trust, and support shape retention
Why transparency and follow-through matter more than data volume
What successful institutions are doing to move from insight to action

Three takeaways for higher ed leadership:

Communicate clearly and consistently—before, during, and after surveys
Share the human impact of faculty work, not just metrics
Recognize and reflect value back to your faculty in ways that build trust

Bonus insight: “The absolute worst feeling of a leader is to turn around and find no one’s following.” As Dr. Drumm McNaughton explains, leadership isn’t just about making decisions—it’s about building the trust and relationships that make people want to follow. Without that, strategy fails before it begins.

Read the transcript of this episode at https://changinghighered.com/faculty-satisfaction-data-for-strategic-change-in-higher-ed/

#HigherEducationPodcast #HigherEducation #FacultySatisfaction

View Details

As short-term credentials gain traction, higher ed leaders face a critical question: Are these programs truly cost-effective and accessible—or just shorter?

In this episode, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Jinann Bitar, Director of Higher Ed Research and Data Analytics at Education Trust, about the cost-efficiency, accessibility, and policy implications of short-term credential programs.

They discuss new research on program affordability, disparities across states and industries, and the limited long-term earnings data available. Jinann shares what institutions need to consider before integrating short-term credentials into their academic portfolios and how leaders can ensure these programs support—not undermine—student success.

Topics Covered:

Are short-term credentials really affordable?
How their costs compare to traditional academic programs
State-level enrollment trends and policy drivers
Gaps in ROI and earnings data
Why stackable credentials matter
How presidents and boards should approach academic restructuring

Three Takeaways for College Leaders:

Use data to guide program decisions
Collaborate with external partners to align with labor market needs
Design short-term programs that meet the expectations of today’s learners

This conversation is especially relevant for institutions exploring academic realignment, workforce partnerships, or strategic planning initiatives.

Read the transcript at https://changinghighered.com/what-college-leaders-must-know-about-short-term-credentials/

#HigherEducation #ShortTermCredentials #HigherEducationPodcast

Guest: Jinann Bitar, Director of Higher Education Research and Data Analytics, Education Trust

Host: Dr. Drumm McNaughton, Higher Education Consultant and CEO of The Change Leader

View Details

Tom Netting, president of TEN Government Strategies and a trusted Washington insider, returns to provide a critical update on sweeping federal changes affecting higher education. In conversation with Drumm McNaughton, he breaks down the Trump administration’s executive order to dismantle the Department of Education, a move that’s already led to major staff reductions and the redistribution of responsibilities across other federal agencies.

Key Discussion Points

Structural Overhaul of the Department of Education:

Nearly 50% of ED staff have been laid off, including in core offices such as Federal Student Aid and the Office for Civil Rights.
Regional participation offices have been shut down, leaving institutions without direct support contacts.
The shift of student loan collections to the Small Business Administration signals an unprecedented reorganization of oversight.

Title IX and Civil Rights Rollbacks:

The Supreme Court overturned Biden-era Title IX rules, reinstating Trump-era standards.
Protections for transgender students and DEI-related compliance structures are being reversed or defunded.
OCR layoffs jeopardize ongoing investigations and reduce institutional support.

Policy Enforcement Through Funding Threats:

Columbia University’s $400M in federal funding was withheld and later restored after accepting federal conditions, including police authority to arrest student protesters and the appointment of an academic overseer.
These enforcement tactics set a new precedent, raising concerns about academic freedom and governance.

Student Loan Crisis and Risk Exposure:

Delinquency rates are reportedly spiking, with internal policy discussions suggesting 70–80% of borrowers may be behind.
Institutions face growing exposure as default risks rise, with potential Title IV eligibility consequences.
Risk-sharing legislation and budget reconciliation proposals could place financial liability on colleges for unpaid loans.

Governance, Autonomy, and Institutional Strategy:

Boards must take a more active role in navigating federal restructuring and enforcement trends.
The implications go beyond compliance—federal funding is increasingly tied to campus culture, policy, and speech.
Strategic responses now require governance-level attention to protect institutional mission and integrity.

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leaders and Boards

Reassure students that aid is still available and prepare them for repayment obligations now managed under new federal structures.
Support compliance and financial aid staff as they navigate the loss of regional ED contacts and fast-changing guidance.
Re-evaluate governance-level policies on Title IX, DEI, and civil rights to ensure legal alignment and institutional resilience.

Download the March 2025 Higher Ed Board Briefing (PDF) → Read the transcript at: https://changinghighered.com/washington-update-dismantling-the-department-of-education/

#HigherEducation #DepartmentofEducation #HigherEdPolicy

About Our Podcast Guest Tom Netting

Having spent all of his professional career devoted to higher education policy oversight and implementation, Tom Netting has an extensive knowledge of the laws and regulations governing all aspects of higher education. His considerable background and experience have afforded him the opportunity to view the development and implementation of federal higher education and workforce development policy in their entirety – including issues related to higher education and workforce development, health care, veteran affairs policies, and the procurement of federal appropriations.

About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton is the founder, CEO, and Principal Consultant at The Change Leader, Inc. A highly sought-after higher education consultant with 20+ years of experience, Dr. McNaughton works with leadership, management, and boards of both U.S. and international institutions. His expertise spans key areas, including accreditation, governance, strategic planning, presidential onboarding, mergers, acquisitions, and strategic alliances. Dr. McNaughton’s approach combines a holistic methodology with a deep understanding of the contemporary and evolving challenges facing higher education institutions worldwide to ensure his clients succeed in their mission.

View Details

Enrollment marketing strategy is no longer optional—it’s essential for institutions looking to grow in a competitive, high-cost digital environment. In this episode, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Max DesMarais, Director of Strategy at Vital, about how colleges and universities can use data, content strategy, and full-funnel marketing to improve student recruitment and ensure academic offerings align with demand.

Building an Effective Enrollment Marketing Strategy

Validate program demand before launch using research, polling, and student behavior data.
Use student-friendly program names that match what prospective learners are searching for.
Treat marketing as a strategic function, not just an operational cost.

Improving Program Visibility and Differentiation

Define what sets your programs apart—and communicate it clearly.
Avoid generic messaging; focus on outcomes, flexibility, and student needs.
Promote content that supports early-stage decision-making, not just applications.

Aligning Programs with Market Needs

Adjust program format, pricing, and positioning to reflect real-world demand.
Consider flexible tuition strategies and delivery models for nontraditional learners.
Use community and employer input to shape offerings before they launch.

Three Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards

Lead with Research – Don’t greenlight programs or campaigns without validating student and employer interest.
Invest in Full-Funnel Marketing – Build awareness and trust early to reduce cost per lead and improve conversions.
Clarify Differentiation – Know what makes your institution unique and ensure it’s reflected in every message.

Institutions that align marketing, academic planning, and student insights will be positioned to thrive in a shrinking enrollment environment. Tune in to learn how to sharpen your enrollment marketing strategy and build a more responsive, competitive institution.

Read the transcript on our website: https://changinghighered.com/enrollment-marketing-strategy-how-to-attract-students-and-align-programs/

#EnrollmentMarketing #HigherEdLeadership #AcademicProgramGrowth #StudentRecruitmentStrategy

About Our Podcast Guest Max DesMarais runs the digital marketing strategy and paid advertising departments at Vital, managing online marketing activity and processes for a wide variety of clients - including Vital's own marketing department. He has a specialization in education and has helped dozens of clients improve the results and efficiency of their marketing strategy.

Connect with Max DesMarais on LinkedIn →

About the Podcast Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton is the founder, CEO, and Principal Consultant at The Change Leader, Inc. A highly sought-after higher education consultant with 20+ years of experience, Dr. McNaughton works with leadership, management, and boards of U.S. and international institutions. His expertise spans key areas, including accreditation, governance, strategic planning, presidential onboarding, mergers, acquisitions, and strategic alliances. Dr. McNaughton’s approach combines a holistic methodology with a deep understanding of the contemporary and evolving challenges facing higher education institutions worldwide to ensure his clients succeed in their mission.

Connect with Drumm McNaughton on LinkedIn→

View Details

80% of Champlain College graduates land jobs in their field of study—because the college designed its model to make students workforce ready. In this episode, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Alex Hernandez, President of Champlain College, about how higher education institutions can build their innovation muscle to realign academic programs with workforce needs and improve graduate outcomes.

Building the Innovation Muscle

Strategic planning is treated as an annual, living process—not a static document.
Faculty co-design new academic models, driving institution-wide innovation.
Innovation is embedded in culture, not dependent on top-down initiatives.

Aligning Curriculum with Workforce Demands

Champlain’s Upside-Down Curriculum introduces major-specific coursework in year one.
Students access internships early, building career experience before graduation.
Programs are shaped by employer input to match real workforce needs.

Leveraging Employer and Community Partnerships

Industry partnerships inform curriculum and create pathways to employment.
Dual enrollment initiatives like Vermont Cybersports expand access and impact.
Regional collaboration addresses talent shortages and economic development.

Three Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards

Clarify the North Star – Align planning and programs around a focused mission: preparing students for work, life, and impact.
Focus Resources Strategically – Prioritize high-value initiatives and say no to what doesn’t serve institutional goals.
Build Institutional Trust – Innovation happens at the speed of trust. Engage faculty and staff in designing the future.

Higher education leaders have an opportunity to evolve their institutions through intentional planning, faculty-driven innovation, and academic realignment that prepares graduates for today’s—and tomorrow’s—workforce.

Read the transcript on our website: https://changinghighered.com/higher-education-innovation-builds-workforce-ready-graduates/

#HigherEdInnovation #StrategicPlanning #AcademicRealignment #WorkforceReadyGraduates

About Our Podcast Guest Alex Hernandez is the tenth president of Champlain College, a private independent college in Burlington, VT renowned for its innovative approach to getting students Ready: Ready for Work, Ready for Life, and Ready to Make a Difference. Over eighty percent of Champlain graduates are employed in jobs related to their field of study. Champlain College is Building on Vermont’s Strengths through innovative pathways that prepare students for careers in leading industries and grow local economies. Prior to Champlain, Alex was the Dean of the School of Continuing and Professional Studies (SCPS) and Vice Provost of Online Learning at the University of Virginia. Before that, Alex was a leader in K-12 education, working as a teacher, administrator, and partner of a national foundation. He is a fierce advocate for education opportunity, access, and innovation. He lives in Burlington with his wife Michelle and has twin sons in college.

Connect with Alex Hernandez on LinkedIn →

Connect with Drumm McNaughton on LinkedIn→

View Details

There are 41.5 million Americans who left college without earning a degree—but many would return if given the right opportunity. In this episode, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Alana Rose, Vice President of Academic Networks at InStride, about how workforce education and corporate partnerships can unlock a hidden enrollment market.

The Workforce Education Advantage * Employer-funded education provides debt-free learning opportunities for employees. * Workforce development programs help companies upskill employees and retain talent. * Higher education institutions gain access to non-traditional learners and new revenue streams.

Meeting the Needs of Non-Traditional Students * Online and hybrid learning formats offer flexibility for working adults. * Stackable credentials and credit for prior learning support degree completion. * Institutions must provide tailored student support to improve retention.

Aligning Higher Ed with Workforce Needs * Corporate partnerships ensure programs match industry demands. * Employers seek a balance of technical, business, and durable skills. * Advisory boards help shape relevant curricula.

Three Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards 1. Leverage Corporate Partnerships – Workforce education is a growing enrollment strategy. 2. Lower Barriers to Access – Flexible pathways and support services drive student success. 3. Invest in Institutional Resources – Dedicated staff is essential for scaling employer-funded education.

Workforce education presents a major opportunity for higher education leaders. Tune in to learn how institutions can align with corporate needs, create sustainable enrollment pipelines, and provide meaningful educational pathways for non-traditional students.

Read the transcript on our website: https://changinghighered.com/hidden-enrollment-market-in-workforce-education/

#HigherEdEnrollment #WorkforceEducation #EmployerSponsoredEducation

About Our Podcast Guest Alana Rose is Vice President of Academic Network at InStride, where she leads partnerships with top-tier universities and educational institutions to deliver innovative workforce education programs. With over a decade of experience in higher education and university relations, Alana has a proven track record of fostering partnerships that drive institutional growth and expand access to education for working learners. Prior to InStride, Alana held leadership roles at Emeritus and 2U, overseeing operations for university partners and scaling global online education programs. Alana earned her B.A. in Psychology from the University of Southern California.

Connect with Alana Rose on LinkedIn →

Connect with Drumm McNaughton on LinkedIn→

View Details

Higher education institutions continue to struggle with student retention, career readiness, and underemployment among graduates. Traditional college advising models focus heavily on selecting a major, yet many students graduate with empty degrees that fail to translate into meaningful careers. In this episode of Changing Higher Ed®, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Scott Carlson and Dr. Ned Scott Laff, authors of Hacking College: Why the Major Really Doesn’t Matter and What Really Does, about how institutions can rethink academic advising, faculty engagement, and student success strategies to better serve today’s learners.

Carlson, a senior writer for the Chronicle of Higher Education, and Laff, who has over 35 years of experience in college and university settings helping students design successful undergraduate experiences, discuss how universities can shift away from a rigid, major-centric model to a personalized student success framework. They explain how students who lack career clarity often end up in underemployment, taking jobs unrelated to their degrees. Their research shows that institutions must evolve their advising structures to help students identify vocational purpose, leverage experiential learning, and navigate the hidden job market.

The Problem with Traditional Academic Advising * The outdated focus on major selection leads students into rigid career paths, often misaligned with their strengths and interests. * A one-size-fits-all advising model leaves first-generation and low-income students struggling to navigate the complexities of higher education. * Limited faculty-student engagement prevents students from leveraging university resources and professional networks. * Lack of career-aligned experiential learning results in students graduating without the necessary skills and industry connections.

Revolutionizing College-to-Career Transition Carlson and Laff propose a new model where higher education leaders integrate career-focused advising and faculty mentorship into the student experience. This involves:

Helping students explore hidden intellectualism—their deeper interests and skills that could shape their career trajectories.
Connecting students with faculty and industry professionals to uncover career pathways beyond traditional job titles.
Expanding experiential learning opportunities through internships, mentorships, and project-based learning.
Teaching students to research the hidden job market to discover roles they might never encounter through a standard career fair.

Institutional Strategies for Student Success For university presidents, boards, and executive leaders, improving student outcomes requires a fundamental shift in how advising and faculty engagement are structured. Institutions should:

Encourage faculty to act as mentors, guiding students beyond coursework to explore real-world career applications.
Train advisors to support students in creating flexible, goal-oriented academic plans that integrate experiential learning.
Strengthen career services by building industry partnerships and embedding career readiness into academic programming.
Utilize existing institutional resources—including government affairs, research opportunities, and alumni networks—to connect students with career pathways.

The Hidden Job Market and Career Readiness Career exploration should begin early in a student’s academic journey. Institutions must help students develop the ability to recognize opportunities beyond traditional job titles by:

Encouraging proactive networking with faculty, professionals, and industry leaders.
Teaching students to research and navigate the hidden job market, where many opportunities exist outside of standard recruitment channels.
Expanding experiential learning options, such as internships and project-based coursework, to provide practical experience that aligns with evolving workforce demands.

With AI-driven automation threatening traditional advising roles, institutions must act now to redefine how they support student career pathways. Colleges that fail to adapt will continue to see declining retention, underemployment, and dissatisfaction among graduates.

Five Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards 1. Be Open to Change – Institutions must actively remove barriers that prevent student success. The current advising model is failing many students, and colleges need to adopt a more flexible, student-centered approach that helps learners navigate their academic and career paths effectively. 2. Preserve Academic Variety – Colleges are eliminating liberal arts programs due to financial pressures, but this limits students' ability to create multidisciplinary educational experiences. Institutions should strive to maintain a diverse academic landscape that allows students to explore various career pathways. 3. Engage Directly with Students – University leaders should make an effort to understand student concerns firsthand. By informally engaging with students—whether in common areas or casual settings—presidents and board members can gain valuable insights into what students need to thrive. 4. Empower Students to Take Ownership of Their Education – Instead of following rigid degree structures, students should be encouraged to design their own academic experiences by integrating coursework, experiential learning, and industry engagement in ways that align with their career goals. Advisors and faculty should support this by shifting from a prescriptive model to one that helps students think critically about their education. 5. Rethink Institutional Priorities – Colleges can maintain their research and tenure agendas while also fostering a culture that encourages student success. Leaders should create systems that help students perceive higher education as an interconnected network of opportunities rather than a series of disconnected courses.

Higher education institutions that fail to evolve will continue to see declining retention and job placement rates. Listen in as Dr. Drumm McNaughton, Scott Carlson, and Dr. Ned Laff explore how colleges can implement meaningful advising reforms to improve student success, institutional sustainability, and long-term career outcomes. Institutions looking for solutions to align their academic programs with evolving student needs should explore Academic Realignment and Redesign strategies.

Read the podcast transcript on our website: https://changinghighered.com/transforming-college-advising-new-approach-to-student-success/

#AcademicAdvising #HigherEducation #StudentSuccess

About the Podcast Guests Dr. Ned Scott Laff has over 35 years of experience in college and university settings, helping students design successful undergraduate experiences. He has taught both English and Honors courses and has broad interests in liberal arts education, the quality of undergraduate education, and the role of academic advising in liberal learning. He was Founding Director of the Center for the Junior Year at Governors State University; Director for Advising at Augustana College; the Director for General Education, Director of Contractual Studies, Director for Service-Learning and Director of the Center for Engaged Learning at Columbia College; former Academic Program Coordinator for Core Curriculum and Director for First Year Seminar at Loyola University Chicago. He has served as Director for Academic Program Development at Barat College of DePaul University; and as Associate Dean for Curriculum at Mundelein College of Loyola University Chicago.

Connect with Ned Scott Laff on LinkedIn →

Scott Carlson is a senior writer at The Chronicle of Higher Education who explores where higher education is headed. Since 1999, he has covered a range of issues for the publication: college management and finance, facilities, campus planning, energy, sustainability, libraries, workforce development, the value of a college degree, and other subjects. He has written such in-depth reports as “Sustaining the College Business Model,” “The Future of Work,” “The Right Mix of Academic Programs,” “The Campus as City,” and “The Outsourced University.” Carlson has won awards from the Education Writers Association and is a frequent speaker at colleges and conferences around the country. His work has also appeared in The Baltimore Sun and Baltimore City Paper, among other publications. He is a graduate of the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities.

Connect with Scott Carlson on LinkedIn →

Connect with Drumm McNaughton on LinkedIn→

View Details

Justin Kollinger, Senior Risk Management Consultant at United Educators (UE), brings valuable perspective in helping colleges and universities develop strategic risk initiatives. As co-author of "Risk Management: An Accountability Guide for University and College Boards" and creator of UE's annual Top 10 Risks report, Kollinger works with institution leaders to develop strategic risk initiatives, prioritize risk management goals, and launch enterprise risk management programs.

Higher Ed's Current Risk & Liability Environment The higher education sector faces what United Educators calls "social inflation" - increases in insurance costs above regular inflation. This trend is driven by:

Increased third-party litigation financing
Growing recruitment of plaintiffs to bring cases
Rising defense costs
Higher settlements and awards

Top Risks in Higher Education McNaughton and Kollinger discuss these top risks revealed in the UE's annual survey:

Enrollment
Data Security
Operational Pressures
Recruitment and Hiring
Regulatory and Legal Compliance
Student Mental Health
Funding
Facilities and Deferred Maintenance
Public Safety
Three-way tie:
- General Premises Safety
- Title IX
- Political and Societal Pressures

Notable findings include the consistency of the top seven risks over the past three years despite 2024's tumultuous environment. Surprisingly, climate change and environmental risks did not make the top ten despite increasing natural disasters affecting campuses nationwide.

Enterprise Risk Management in Higher Education Dr. McNaughton noted that only about 5% of institutions have formalized risk management programs. Both experts emphasized that when creating strategic plans, institutions must include risk management planning, or they leave themselves exposed. Risk management should distinguish between:

University Level: Risk management and identification
Board Level: Risk oversight and appropriate questioning

Data Security Challenges The conversation highlighted growing concerns about data security:

Rising costs for data breach coverage
Need for centralized IT management
Growing sophistication of phishing attempts with AI
Importance of comprehensive security training

Three Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards 1. Culture of Risk Management ("Cool Head, Warm Heart")

Manage risk with thoughtful foresight and consistent policies
Show care to your community before, during, and after incidents
Focus on building trust through demonstrated care and communication
Elevate Your Risk Manager
Risk managers often know everything happening on campus
They have unique problem-solving tools
They should be positioned as strategic contributors
If you don't have a risk manager, get one
Use Third-Party Experts
Take advantage of insurer resources (like UE's checklists and online courses)
Utilize insurance broker resources
Access association resources and experts
Remember these experts are part of your support ecosystem

Kollinger's insights emphasize that while establishing risk management programs may seem daunting, having basic frameworks in place can help institutions better prepare for and respond to various challenges. His message underscores the importance of both strategic thinking and demonstrated care in building effective risk management programs.

The changing landscape of higher education requires leaders to remain vigilant in their approach to risk management, making it an essential component of institutional strategy and governance.

#HigherEducation #HigherEducationRiskManagement #HigherEducationPodcast

Read the transcript on our website: https://changinghighered.com/top-risks-in-higher-education-erm-programs/

Links to Resources: * UE's Top Risks Report: Insights for Higher Education * UE's Large Loss Report (featuring settlements over $2.5 million) * Risk Management: An Accountability Guide for University and College Boards (AGB) * Enterprise Risk Management In Higher Ed Part 1: An Overview of the Planning Process * Enterprise Risk Management in Higher Ed Part 2: Risk Planning and its Critical Role in Higher Education * Enterprise Risk Management in Higher Ed Part 3: Risk Oversight and the Board’s Role in Higher Education Risk Management * Strategic Risk Planning to Chart Higher Ed’s Course in Turbulent Times * What is Enterprise Risk Management in Higher Education?

About Our Podcast Guest Justin Kollinger serves as Senior Risk Management Consultant at United Educators, an education-owned liability insurance carrier serving 1,500 institutions across the country. In his role, Justin advises college and university leaders as they develop strategic risk initiatives, prioritize risk management goals, and launch or refresh enterprise risk management (ERM) initiatives. He co-authored Risk Management: An Accountability Guide for University and College Boards, published by AGB Press, and creates reports and tools to help United Educators’ members address their top risks, including risks relating to enrollment and student life. Risk & Insurance recognized Justin as one of its Risk All Stars in 2023, and Justin has previously worked in enrollment at two private institutions in the Mid-Atlantic and as a consultant to community college presidents and independent heads of school.

Connect with Justin Kollinger on LinkedIn →

Connect with Drumm McNaughton on LinkedIn→

View Details

New Federal ADA Regulation Deadlines Are Approaching – Is Your Institution Ready? Colleges and universities must now meet stricter ADA compliance requirements for websites and digital content or risk legal consequences, fines, and loss of federal funding. With the Department of Justice’s latest update to Title II of the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), institutions must ensure all web content, mobile apps, and digital resources meet WCAG 2.1 AA accessibility standards. For many schools, the deadline is approaching fast.

In this episode of Changing Higher Ed®, host Dr. Drumm McNaughton has a conversation with Eugene Woo, CEO and founder of Venngage, to discuss what these new ADA regulations mean for higher education institutions and what they must do to comply.

Understanding the New ADA Requirements for Higher Ed The Department of Justice’s update to Title II clarifies long-standing accessibility expectations, removing ambiguity about digital compliance. Now, all institutions receiving federal funds—including financial aid, research grants, or disaster relief—must ensure their online content adheres to Web Content Accessibility Guidelines (WCAG) 2.1. AA

The key changes include:

Explicit standards for websites and mobile apps – Digital accessibility is no longer optional.
Clearer rules on compliance deadlines – Larger institutions (50,000+ students) must comply by April 2026, while smaller institutions have until April 2027.
Greater enforcement risks – ADA lawsuits have historically driven accessibility improvements, and these new regulations are meant to make institutions proactive rather than reactive.

Woo explains that many universities operate hundreds, if not thousands, of websites across different departments and programs, making compliance a daunting task.

Why ADA Compliance Matters for Colleges and Universities Accessibility Isn’t Just a Legal Obligation—It’s a Universal Design Best Practice Woo highlights that designing for accessibility benefits everyone, not just individuals with disabilities. Features like captions for videos were initially created for the hearing impaired but are now widely used by all viewers.

The Biggest Accessibility Challenges for Higher Ed Websites According to WebAIM’s annual survey of the top one million websites, these are the most common accessibility issues:

Missing alt text for images – Over 50% of homepage images lack descriptions, making content inaccessible to screen readers.
Poor form accessibility – Online forms frequently lack proper labels, creating barriers for those using assistive technology.
Non-descriptive links and buttons – Generic link text (e.g., “Click here”) makes navigation difficult for screen reader users.
Inaccessible PDFs – Many course materials, syllabi, and administrative documents are in PDF format but lack proper tagging and readability.
Color contrast issues – Up to 20% of men have some form of color blindness, yet many websites fail to meet the contrast requirements.
What Institutions Should Prioritize First Given the scale of most universities’ digital footprints, Woo recommends:
Conducting an ADA compliance audit to identify accessibility gaps.
Prioritizing high-traffic pages and critical student services for remediation.
Implementing universal design principles in new content to prevent future accessibility issues.

How Universities Can Ensure ADA Compliance Designating Leadership Responsibility Presidents and institutional leaders must appoint a compliance officer or team responsible for ensuring accessibility across all digital platforms. Without clear ownership, accessibility efforts can fall through the cracks.

Leverage AI and Automated Accessibility Tools for ADA Compliance Woo notes that institutions can use AI-powered tools to scan websites for accessibility violations and assist in remediation. Some platforms can even auto-correct PDFs and web pages to bring them closer to WCAG 2.1 standards.

Budgeting for Digital Accessibility Compliance Compliance isn’t just a policy issue—it requires financial investment. Schools must allocate resources for accessibility audits, technology upgrades, and training to ensure long-term compliance.

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leaders 1. Determine whether your institution must comply—and by when Institutions receiving any federal funding must meet the new standards, with large universities facing an April 2026 deadline. 2. Appoint a leader or team to oversee accessibility compliance Without clear accountability, compliance efforts will stall. Universities must assign responsibility to IT, compliance, or academic leadership teams. 3. Invest in accessibility tools and training ADA compliance isn’t just a one-time fix. Schools should budget for ongoing accessibility improvements, staff training, and technological upgrades.

Higher education institutions can no longer afford to overlook digital accessibility. With the DOJ’s new enforcement push, now is the time to act.

Listen to the full episode for more insights from Eugene Woo and practical strategies for making your institution’s digital content fully accessible.

Read the podcast transcript on our website: https://changinghighered.com/ada-compliance-in-higher-education/

#HigherEducation #ADACompliance #HigherEdPodcast

About Our Podcast Guest Eugene Woo is the CEO and founder of Venngage, an infographic design platform that enables users to create compelling and accessible visual content. With over two decades of experience in software engineering and product development, Eugene has a strong background in engineering and a passion for visual storytelling. Prior to Venngage, he founded Vizualize.Me, a platform for creating visual résumés, which was acquired by Parchment in 2013. Eugene holds a Master of Science in Planning from the University of Toronto and a Bachelor of Science in Electrical Engineering from the Illinois Institute of Technology

Connect with Eugene Woo on LinkedIn →

Connect with Drumm McNaughton on LinkedIn→

View Details

According to recent ACE presidential survey data, women now constitute 33% of university presidencies, yet a troubling pattern has emerged: these leaders are often appointed during times of institutional crisis, creating what researchers call "the glass cliff" phenomenon.

In this episode of Changing Higher Ed®, Dr. Lori Varlotta, former president of Hiram College and California Lutheran University and current Distinguished Professor of Higher Education Leadership at Cal Lutheran, shares insights from her research on the glass cliff phenomenon in higher education. Drawing from her first research sabbatical in 40 years, she explores how women presidents are often hired during periods of institutional vulnerability and what can be done to ensure their success.

The glass cliff differs significantly from the well-known glass ceiling concept. While the glass ceiling refers to invisible barriers preventing women from reaching top leadership positions, the glass cliff describes a phenomenon where women are specifically recruited for leadership roles during times of institutional crisis or vulnerability. In higher education, this vulnerability typically manifests as enrollment declines, decreasing net tuition revenue, grant funding challenges, or cultural crises.

Dr. Varlotta's research reveals that women presidents face unique obstacles when leading institutional turnarounds, often facing implicit bias, gender-based generalizations about their performance, and disproportionate scrutiny of their appearance and leadership style through gender-charged reporting.

Key Takeaways for Prospective University Presidents and Boards 1. Due Diligence: Carefully assess whether the campus truly wants the bold, transparent leadership they claim to seek during the hiring process. Engage in extensive conversations with the board to ensure alignment between stated goals and actual support.

Resource Commitment: Secure essential resources before accepting the position, including PR support, crisis communication expertise, and a dedicated board committee willing to serve as change management partners.
Gender-Charged Reporting: Be prepared for heightened scrutiny of appearance, mannerisms, and communication style. As highlighted in the research, women leaders often face disproportionate attention to non-performance factors compared to their male counterparts.

As higher education faces continuing challenges, understanding and addressing the glass cliff phenomenon becomes increasingly essential for institutional success. Dr. Varlotta's research highlights the importance of careful preparation, adequate support systems, and recognition of the unique challenges faced by women leaders in academic turnaround situations.

Read the transcript on our website: https://changinghighered.com/the-glass-cliff-in-higher-education-challenges-faced-by-women-university-presidents/

#GlassCliff #UniversityGovernance #HigherEdLeadership

About Our Podcast Guest For four decades, Lori Varlotta, Ph.D., has held leadership positions at universities large and small, public and private, faith-based and secular, stand-alone and system-embedded. For 20+ years, she has served at the executive level: Senior VP at Sacramento State and President at Hiram College (OH) and California Lutheran University. In both presidencies, Varlotta was the first woman at the institution to hold the post. At each, she was recruited to lead systemic changes to reposition the institution for the future. Along with the turnaround and repositioning work for which she is known, Varlotta contributes routinely to national conversations and publications on student success, systemic change, integrated planning and budgeting, curricular and co-curricular prioritization, shared governance, and DEIJ. As a first-generation college student, she is grateful for the educational opportunities she has experienced. She credits her blue-collar family and community, however, for teaching her life’s most important lessons.

Connect with Lori Varlotta on LinkedIn →

Connect with Drumm McNaughton on LinkedIn→

View Details

Creating new colleges, new college programs, and growing enrollment is not an easy task in our current academic environment. Building enrollment for a brand-new academic program is one of higher education's toughest challenges. Yet, the University of Oklahoma's Polytechnic Institute (UOPI) successfully recruited its first class by flipping the traditional mindset. Instead of expecting students to be "college ready," they designed their programs to be "student ready."

In this episode of Changing Higher Ed®, Dr. Teri Reed, inaugural director of the University of Oklahoma Polytechnic Institute at OU Tulsa and veteran creator of innovative engineering education programs, shares insights on launching new academic programs and colleges, revealing how strategic partnerships with Google and local community colleges helped launch new degrees that attract students to high-demand fields like cybersecurity and artificial intelligence.

Podcast Overview Industry-Driven Program Design * Extensive consultation with industry partners identified skills gaps, particularly in applied technical fields. * Curriculum development focused on producing "industry ready" graduates. * Programs include cybersecurity, applied artificial intelligence, and software development integration. * Industry certifications embedded within courses to enhance graduate employability.

Strategic Faculty Recruitment and Structure * Innovative group interview process to ensure a collaborative mindset. * Faculty hired across disciplines to prevent silos. * Over 200 years of combined industry experience among 10 faculty members. * Integration of industry professionals as university affiliates (including a current Google employee).

Continuous Improvement: Curriculum Agility and Innovation * Annual curriculum reviews and updates based on industry feedback. * Willingness to modify programs multiple times per year to stay current. * Two faculty "owners" per course to encourage collaboration and innovation. * Focus on cross-disciplinary integration rather than traditional departmental structures.

Strategic Partnerships * Close collaboration with local community colleges for seamless transfers. * The "Intentional swirling" approach allows students to progress while completing associate degrees. * Industry partnerships inform curriculum and provide real-world expertise. * Marketing and communication strategies to build program awareness.

Creating Programs Focused on Student Success * "Student ready" philosophy rather than the traditional "college ready" approach. * Emphasis on meeting students where they are academically. * Focus on reducing time-to-degree completion. * Integration of industry certifications within coursework.

Three Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards 1. Listen broadly, especially to stakeholders who don't typically feel heard. 2. Be bold in creating unique programs that differ from traditional approaches. 3. Embrace opportunities in the high-tech world and move quickly to implement changes.

Bonus Takeaway from Dr. McNaughton * Hire faculty and staff who embrace change and are willing to continuously update curriculum based on industry needs.

Wrapping Up This case study of the OU Polytechnic Institute provides valuable insights for higher education leaders looking to develop new programs that build enrollment and meet industry needs while maintaining academic rigor and ensuring student success.

#HigherEducation #HigherEdEnrollment #HigherEducationPodcast

Read the show transcript on our website: https://changinghighered.com/launching-new-college-programs-that-build-enrollment/

About Our Podcast Guest Teri K. Reed, Ph.D., is the inaugural director of the OU Polytechnic Institute at OU-Tulsa. An OU alumna, internationally recognized leader in the field of engineering education, and advocate for research-informed approaches to engineering education and administration, Reed has made significant contributions to higher education nationally. She helped establish the scholarly foundation for engineering education as an academic discipline through co-authorship of several landmark 2006 Journal of Engineering Education’s special reports. She serves as an executive board member and fellow of the American Society for Engineering Education, and she is a former president of the Women in Engineering ProActive Network. She is the recipient of many accolades that recognize her teaching and leadership abilities, including two awards from the University of Oklahoma: the Distinguished Service Award from the Mewbourne College of Earth and Energy, and selection as one of the inaugural recipients of the OU Regents’ Alumni Award.

Connect with Teri Reed on LinkedIn →

About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton is the founder, CEO, and Principal Consultant at The Change Leader, Inc. A highly sought-after higher education consultant with 20+ years of experience, Dr. McNaughton works with leadership, management, and boards of U.S. and international institutions. His expertise spans key areas, including accreditation, governance, strategic planning, presidential onboarding, mergers, acquisitions, and strategic alliances. Dr. McNaughton’s approach combines a holistic methodology with a deep understanding of the contemporary and evolving challenges facing higher education institutions worldwide to ensure his clients succeed in their mission.

Connect with Drumm McNaughton on LinkedIn→

View Details

According to the Consortium for Analysis of Student Success through International Education (CASSIE), students who participate in study abroad programs are 6.2 percentage points more likely to graduate within four years and 3.8 percentage points more likely to graduate within six years compared to their non-study abroad peers. Additionally, these students tend to earn higher GPAs and accumulate more credit hours upon graduation. This University System of Georgia infographic shows these outcomes directly enhance institutional key performance indicators such as retention and persistence.

In this episode of Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Scott Marshall, President and CEO of the Institute for Shipboard Education, about how Semester at Sea transforms students’ lives and enhances institutional outcomes through innovative study abroad programming.

Why Semester at Sea is a Game-Changer Semester at Sea offers students the opportunity to visit up to 10 countries during a single semester while earning 12 to 15 college credits through a partnership with Colorado State University. The program is supported by 180 universities worldwide, attracting a diverse student body of 450 to 550 students per voyage. While onboard the ship, students engage in a robust academic curriculum and participate in a living-learning community. This unique environment fosters strong relationships among peers, faculty, and staff while encouraging deep reflection on cultural experiences gained at each port of call.

The program creates a profound impact on students by integrating global learning, critical thinking, and community-building into a single, cohesive experience. Alumni frequently credit Semester at Sea with shaping their careers and life paths, emphasizing how the iterative process of experiencing different cultures followed by reflection can permanently transform mental models and worldviews.

The Impact of Study Abroad on Institutional Success The importance of study abroad programs in improving institutional metrics is significant. Research shows that students who study abroad graduate faster, earn higher GPAs, and complete more credit hours than their peers. This results in improved retention rates and better long-term outcomes for universities. Semester at Sea’s unique model of comparative experiential learning sets it apart from traditional study abroad programs, making it an invaluable asset for institutions seeking to enhance student outcomes and global competencies.

Semester at Sea Benefits for Universities As a “third-party provider” program, Semester at Sea allows universities to partner without the financial burden of running their own study abroad initiatives. While institutions may lose one semester’s worth of tuition from participating students, the long-term benefits—such as higher retention rates, faster graduation times, and increased alumni loyalty—far outweigh the costs. By investing in study abroad programs, institutions can position themselves as leaders in global education and prepare their students for the challenges of an interconnected world.

Innovations for the Future of Study Abroad Programs and Semester at Sea Looking ahead, the program is exploring new ways to remain at the forefront of global education. Plans include creating an artificial intelligence (AI) floating lab, which would allow students to gain AI literacy while participating in the program’s transformative experiential learning model. Collaborating with corporate partners like Nvidia, this initiative aims to equip students with cutting-edge skills that are increasingly critical in today’s job market.

The Case for Expanding Study Abroad Destinations While Europe remains a popular destination for study abroad, institutions are encouraged to expand their programs to include Asia, Africa, and other emerging economies. With three of the world’s top five economies located in Asia (Japan, China, and India), exposing students to these regions is essential for preparing them to succeed in a globalized workforce. Semester at Sea’s itineraries reflect this need by offering students a diverse range of cultural and economic contexts to explore.

The Importance of Faculty Engagement Faculty play a crucial role in the success of Semester at Sea. Participating faculty members enhance the student experience and bring fresh perspectives and global insights back to their home campuses. This ripple effect benefits future cohorts and strengthens the institution’s academic community. Faculty on Semester at Sea voyages are carefully selected for their passion for teaching and ability to contribute to the program’s unique living-learning environment.

What Makes Semester at Sea Unique? Much of the program’s success is attributed to its living-learning community, which fosters deep connections among students, faculty, and staff. Students live and learn together on a ship for 105 days, participating in high-impact practices such as global learning and common intellectual experiences. The program’s structure ensures that students develop intercultural competencies, adaptability, and critical thinking skills that are vital in today’s interconnected world.

Three Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards 1. Consider Study Abroad Offices as Revenue Supporters Reframe how study abroad offices are viewed—not as cost centers but as revenue enhancers. These programs drive institutional success by improving retention, graduation rates, and overall student outcomes. 2. Invest in Study Abroad Programs Institutions should provide incentives for students to participate in study abroad, such as financial aid scaled to family contributions. These investments yield significant returns through better institutional KPIs and stronger alumni engagement. 3. Encourage Expansion Beyond Europe Study abroad offices should prioritize robust, comparative programs outside Europe, focusing on emerging economies like Asia and Africa. This approach aligns with global trends and equips students for success in diverse cultural and economic contexts.

Bonus Takeaway from Dr. McNaughton: Involve your faculty in study abroad programs. Faculty who participate in programs like Semester at Sea return with enriched perspectives that benefit students and strengthen institutional outcomes.

Final Thoughts As higher education leaders face mounting challenges in student retention, persistence, and graduation rates, innovative programs like Semester at Sea offer an intriguing solution. The combination of experiential learning, cultural immersion, and academic rigor provides students with a transformative experience that shapes their futures and strengthens institutional performance. By investing in global education and expanding opportunities beyond traditional boundaries, institutions can prepare students to succeed in an interconnected world while achieving vital organizational objectives.

Read the transcript on our website at https://changinghighered.com/semester-at-sea-improves-student-outcomes-and-boosts-institutional-success/

#HigherEducation #StudyAbroad #SemesterAtSea

About Our Podcast Guest

Scott Marshall is the host of the As Unexpected Podcast and President and CEO of the Institute for Shipboard Education, which directs Semester at Sea, a leading study abroad program. His passion for global education began with a study abroad experience in Japan as an undergraduate. Marshall sailed with his family on Semester at Sea in Spring 2017, later joining the organization as Vice President of Academic Affairs and becoming President in 2020. Previously, he was a Professor of Management and Vice Provost at Portland State University, publishing over 40 works on management, marketing, and entrepreneurship while teaching strategy and international business. He earned a B.A. in Business Economics from Willamette University, an M.A. in International Affairs from George Washington University, and a Ph.D. in International Business from the University of Oregon. His career reflects a lifelong dedication to education, travel, and fostering cross-cultural understanding.

About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton is the founder, CEO, and Principal Consultant at The Change Leader, Inc. A highly sought-after higher education consultant with 20+ years of experience, Dr. McNaughton works with leadership, management, and boards of U.S. and international institutions. His expertise spans key areas, including accreditation, governance, strategic planning, presidential onboarding, mergers, acquisitions, and strategic alliances. Dr. McNaughton’s approach combines a holistic methodology with a deep understanding of the contemporary and evolving challenges facing higher education institutions worldwide to ensure his clients succeed in their mission.

View Details

Higher Education Enrollment Decline 2024-2040: You Can’t Recruit Your Way Out of a Declining Market The enrollment cliff is no longer a distant threat—it’s here, and institutions must act decisively to adapt. In this episode of Changing Higher Ed, Dr. Drumm McNaughton hosts Bill Conley and Bob Massa of Enrollment Intelligence Now to explore the demographic shifts, financial realities, and strategic imperatives reshaping higher education. With over 80 years of combined experience from institutions including Johns Hopkins, Bucknell, Dickinson College, and Columbia University, these enrollment experts provide insights into the demographic and enrollment decline.

The latest Western Interstate Commission on Higher Education (WICHE) report projects significant declines in high school graduates, signaling major challenges for higher education institutions. After peaking at 3.9 million graduates in 2025, numbers will decline to 3.6 million by 2030 and below 3.4 million by 2040—a 13% drop over 15 years. Five states (California, Illinois, Michigan, New York, and Pennsylvania) will account for over 75% of this nationwide decline.

Key Demographic Shifts (2025-2040)

White student population: 26% decrease (1.6M to 1.2M)
Hispanic student population: 16% increase (940K to 1.1M)
Black student population: 22% decrease
Asian student population: 10% decrease
Growing gender gap: 2025 projection shows 52% female vs. 42% male degree holders

Market Segmentation Impact

Elite/Selective Institutions (Minimal impact)
- Institutions with

View Details

Exploring Academic Censorship and Its Impact on Free Speech in Universities This episode of Changing Higher Ed® podcast features Dr. Jeremy Young of PEN America, discussing the organization's efforts to combat censorship in higher education. PEN America's "Freedom to Learn" program actively opposes state legislative attempts to restrict academic freedom and free speech on college campuses. The interview highlights concerning trends like "educational gag orders," "jawboning," and DEI bans in various states, emphasizing the threat these actions pose to intellectual discourse and institutional autonomy.

Young advocates for universities to prioritize protecting free expression, even amidst political pressure, suggesting strategic approaches for presidents and boards to navigate these challenges. The discussion also covers PEN America's annual report, "America's Censored Classrooms 2024," which tracks these legislative trends.

Podcast Overview PEN America's Mission and Background * PEN America is a 100-year-old organization focused on defending the freedoms of writers, including academic freedom and freedom of expression. * Originally stood for Poets, Essayists, and Novelists but now just "PEN" to be more inclusive of all writers. * PEN International has over 140 PEN centers worldwide. * PEN America's activities include awards, literary festivals, global writer protection, advocacy against book bans, free speech advocacy, and higher ed advocacy (Freedom to Learn program). * PEN America is described as "center-left," maintaining relationships with organizations across the political spectrum.

The Threat to Academic Freedom and Free Speech * There's a growing movement to constrict the space of ideas available to students on college campuses. * The argument often made is that universities lean left, and the solution is to limit existing voices, not to add more conservative perspectives. * This trend manifests in attempts to ban courses, curricula, and harass administrators. * The "solution to speech is more speech," and increased voices are beneficial.

Book Banning and the Underlying Agenda * Book banning often involves claims of obscenity but is ultimately an attempt to constrain ideas, not to protect children from inappropriate material. * Analysis of banned books reveals they disproportionately feature minoritized identities, including LGBTQ, race, and sexual violence. * Those who want to ban these books view them as encouraging those types of identities. * PEN believes people need to see themselves reflected in books and that banning them is an attempt to cut off viewpoints for students.

"America's Censored Classrooms 2024" Report * An annual report tracking legislation that censors colleges and universities. * Tracks "educational gag orders" that censor topics/ideas and restrictions on university autonomy (DEI offices, curriculum, accreditation standards, tenure, governance). * Focuses on trends in proposed and passed legislation and predictions for the future.

Jawboning as a Form of Censorship * Jawboning refers to lawmakers threatening or bullying university presidents into actions they want without passing laws. * This includes pressuring universities to close DEI offices or eliminate certain programs. * It is a stealthy approach as there are no democratic elements, no hearings for public comment, and no laws in place to challenge. * It creates a difficult situation for presidents who have limited leverage and no recourse. * Congressional hearings on antisemitism have become another form of jawboning intended to intimidate university presidents and make political points. * The goal often isn't to address the issue at hand but to exploit them for political gain.

Florida as a Case Study in Censorship * Florida is cited as "Armageddon for higher education." * The state passed the "Stop Woke Act," which is a direct restriction of faculty speech. * SB 266 banned DEI and placed significant restrictions on curriculum, causing numerous course eliminations. * The University of North Florida removed its interfaith center due to thinking it was a DEI program. * The governor replaced the board of New College of Florida with conservative figures who dramatically altered the curriculum and mission. * PEN America has opened a permanent office in Florida to respond to these threats.

DEI Bans in Higher Education and Their Impacts * DEI bans result in the closing of cultural centers, women's centers, and multicultural centers. * Staff are often reassigned or laid off in states that pass bans. * Iowa has passed the most draconian ban, including a ban on developing any programming "with reference to race." * It restricts universities from opining on 16 topics related to race, gender, and identity or any related topics. * Universities can't even discuss bias, including the term.

Extremist Attacks on Accreditors * Project 2025 has a plan to weaponize accreditation, forcing accreditors to remove any reference to DEI. * The government is threatening to censor ideas by forcing this change in standards. * WASC considered preemptively removing DEI language but backed off after pushback. * PEN America is not concerned with DEI standards themselves but with government censorship of those standards.

The Impact of Censorship Laws * It takes years to reverse censorship laws, even if they are ultimately deemed unconstitutional. * Once laws are put into place, universities have to comply until they are challenged. * This can lead to the loss of programs, funding, and staff for years. * The "Stop Woke Act" was ruled on in four and a half months, which was exceptionally fast.

Institutional Neutrality and University Leadership * Presidents are scared, and there are laws banning them from commenting on anything. * Institutional neutrality is a good principle, but the judgment of what concerns the university's mission must be made internally. * The government is inserting its judgment over the judgment of the people who are running the institution. * Academic freedom is not possible if the leaders are under the direct ideological thumb of the government.

University Presidents' Responses and Strategies: Managing Laws and Defending Ideological Independence * Many presidents are doing the wrong thing, unilaterally disarming by preemptively closing DEI programs. * It is a strategy that is ineffective when they are dealing with a national campaign, not local lawmakers. * Presidents should be prudent about public statements but strategically defend the university's ideological independence. * They should embrace cooperation with lawmakers on non-ideological issues (budgets, safety, etc.), but not on controlling ideas. * Presidents need to use their limited leverage to protect the independence of the university.

Faculty's Role in Protecting Free Speech * Universities sometimes fail to share their strategies with faculty and restrict the faculty from expressing viewpoints that could help the institution. * Faculty can be more outspoken than institutions, and using the "I'm not speaking for the university" disclaimer can be helpful. * Universities should not comment on current events unless they directly affect the institution. * Universities should not silence alternative viewpoints. * Leaders should avoid inserting themselves in debates where there is no role for them.

Free Expression and Institutional Mission * Universities must welcome all viewpoints to allow for robust debate. * This allows the university to state whether a view aligns with the values of the institution. * They must defend the right for all to speak, but they must be able to freely express their own views on the matter. * There is no constitutional exception for hate speech, only incitement to violence.

Champions of Higher Education * PEN America has created the Champions of Higher Education, which is a group of over 300 former college presidents who speak out against these laws and attacks. * It is important to protect all kinds of speech on campus, as well as to maintain a safe campus environment.

Four Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards 1. "Don't do the censors work for them." 2. "Don't comply in advance." 3. "Promote the values of free expression, no matter what is happening in the country." 4. Train all members of the university community in how free expression works.

Final Thoughts Dr. Young's insights highlight the serious and growing threats to academic freedom in the U.S. The interview reveals the complex strategies used by those attempting to censor higher education, the challenges faced by university leaders, and the importance of actively defending free expression. PEN America's work is presented as a crucial effort to protect the fundamental principles of higher education as a place for diverse viewpoints and robust debate.

Read the transcript on our website: https://changinghighered.com/censorship-in-higher-education-a-pen-america-perspective/

#HigherEducation #Censorship #Project2025

About Our Guest Jeremy C. Young is the Freedom to Learn Program Director at PEN America, where he leads efforts to fight government censorship in higher education institutions. He directs PEN America’s work on educational gag orders, the Champions of Higher Education initiative, and an expanding network of coalitions to mobilize support for professors and teachers. A former history professor, Young holds a Ph.D. in U.S. history from Indiana University and is the author of The Age of Charisma: Leaders, Followers, and Emotions in American Society, 1870-1940 (Cambridge University Press, 2017).

View Details

In this 7th annual end-of-year episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton becomes the guest of our podcast as we welcome this year's guest host, Tom Netting, of TEN Government Strategies, to review McNaughton's higher ed predictions for 2024 and explore his higher education 2025 predictions. The discussion reveals how higher education fared over the polarizing election year and what to expect in the coming year.

Review of 2024 Higher Ed Predictions and Outcomes Political Environment and Higher Education: Grade A The prediction about increased political involvement in higher education proved remarkably accurate in 2024, particularly given the election year dynamics. The sector experienced unprecedented political scrutiny, culminating in the October 7th congressional hearings that led to the departure of three university presidents. State-level political intervention was particularly evident in Florida, where more than a fifth of University of Florida professors failed post-tenure review under new requirements.

A Foundation for Individual Rights and Expression (FIRE) survey of 6,000 faculty members across 55 colleges revealed that one in seven faculty members reported being disciplined or threatened with discipline due to their teaching, research, academic discussions, or off-campus speech. The election year amplified these tensions, with higher education becoming a focal point in political debates.

2024 Enrollment Challenges and Demographics: Grade A The prediction regarding enrollment challenges proved accurate, with institutions facing significant pressures:

FAFSA rollout complications created unexpected enrollment barriers
Regional institutions and private colleges were particularly affected
Institutions under 1,000 students faced the greatest vulnerability
Demographic realities showed concerning trends: from 3.4 million students in 2010 to 3.9 million by 2025, with a projected drop back to 3.4 million over the next 15 years.

Institutional Closures and Market Consolidation: Grade A The closure rate accelerated dramatically, rising from 50 closures in 2022 to 80 in 2023. In 2024, 16 nonprofits closed, with Christian colleges representing half of these closures. The impact extended beyond campuses - Wells College's closure in Aurora affected the town's elementary school, water treatment plant, and community medical center. Academic realignment became crucial, exemplified by West Virginia University's cuts of 143 faculty positions and 28 programs and PASSHE's consolidation of six universities into two regional entities.

As predicted, smaller private institutions became prime targets for acquisition:

Institutions under 1,000 enrollment faced greatest pressure
Those without strong endowments particularly vulnerable
Early movers in seeking partnerships fared better than those waiting until financial crisis
Market showing clear signs of mature-to-declining industry characteristics

Technology and Artificial Intelligence Adoption: Grade A- The sector showed a clear divide in AI adoption approaches:

Miami Dade College and Kogod Business School fully integrated AI across curricula
Other institutions maintained strict opposition to AI-generated content
Faculty concerns about AI replacing jobs emerged at institutions like University of Wisconsin
Progressive institutions recognized AI's potential in enrollment management, student outcomes measurement, and program assessment

Student Needs and Pandemic Recovery: A- Post-pandemic adaptation revealed mixed results:

Successful intense tutoring programs demonstrated three to four months of focused support could gain students a year in academic progress
Faculty resistance to changing traditional teaching methods remained stronger than anticipated
Growing sense of student and faculty disengagement emerged
Increased burden on faculty as informal student counselors
Shift toward more transactional educational relationships

Higher Education 2025 Predictions Legislative and Regulatory Environment 1. Higher Education Act Reform

Partial reform through budget reconciliation rather than comprehensive overhaul
Implementation of short-term Pell Grants with bipartisan support
Department of Education reorganization likely but not dissolution
Enhanced focus on workforce development while maintaining liberal arts values
Regulatory Changes
Significant modifications to existing regulations under new administration
Major changes to accreditation oversight through legislation
Evolution of NACIQI's role and authority
Enhanced institutional accountability measures
Challenges to regulatory authority through cases like Loper Bright

Market Evolution and Institutional Viability 1. Enrollment and Demographics

One-time enrollment increase in early 2025 due to FAFSA resolution
Subsequent decline as demographic cliff impacts materialize
Uncertainty in international student enrollment due to immigration policies
Critical need for innovative recruitment strategies
Expansion of direct admission programs
Institutional Sustainability
Accelerated pace of closures and mergers
Increased pressure on institutions under 1,000 enrollment
Four strategic options: acquire, sell, consolidate, or close
Enhanced focus on mission-critical programs
Need for proactive partnership exploration while financially viable

Academic and Administrative Transformation 1. Campus Climate and Governance

Continued pressure on DEI initiatives with more institutions modifying policies
Persistent free speech challenges requiring balanced approaches
Enhanced board engagement beyond traditional meeting schedules
Evolution of shared governance models
Balance between oversight and operational support
Technology Integration
Required AI adoption across operations
Integration of AI into teaching and administrative functions
Need for systematic faculty development in technology
Balance between innovation and academic integrity
Enhanced focus on critical thinking in AI use
Financial Sustainability
Limited progress on broad student debt forgiveness
Focus on program cost-benefit analysis
Innovation in financial aid delivery
Growing emphasis on affordability initiatives
Enhanced scrutiny of return on investment

Strategic Imperatives for Leadership Proactive Planning and Adaptation Institutions must:

Develop comprehensive contingency plans for enrollment fluctuations
Create distinctive value propositions
Implement effective academic realignment strategies
Balance workforce needs with educational mission
Consider strategic partnerships before financial pressure becomes acute

Governance and Leadership Evolution Boards must:

Increase engagement frequency
Maintain appropriate oversight without micromanagement
Consider institutional sustainability options proactively
Support presidents in navigating complex challenges
Ensure alignment between mission and market realities
Focus on student success and community impact

Wrapping Up McNaughton's 2025 Higher Ed Predictions The higher education landscape stands at a critical juncture where decisions made in 2025 will determine institutional trajectories for years to come. Success requires balancing traditional academic values with market realities while maintaining focus on student success and institutional sustainability. The sector must embrace transformation while preserving core educational missions, requiring unprecedented levels of strategic thinking and proactive leadership.

The demographic cliff, political challenges, technological change, and market evolution demand a new approach to higher education leadership. Institutions that survive and thrive will be those that can adapt to changing conditions while preserving their essential character and mission. The time for proactive strategic planning and decisive action is now, before external pressures force reactive responses.

Read the transcript on our website at https://changinghighered.com/higher-education-2025-predictions-2024-year-in-review/

#Highereducation #2025HigherEdPredictions #HigherEducationPodcast

About Our Podcast Guest Host Tom Netting

About the Co-Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton is the founder, CEO, and Principal Consultant at The Change Leader, Inc. A highly sought-after higher education consultant with 20+ years of experience, Dr. McNaughton works with leadership, management, and boards of both U.S. and international institutions. His expertise spans key areas, including accreditation, governance, strategic planning, presidential onboarding, mergers, acquisitions, and strategic alliances. Dr. McNaughton’s approach combines a holistic methodology with a deep understanding of the contemporary and evolving challenges facing higher education institutions worldwide to ensure his clients succeed in their mission.

View Details

Consolidating Higher Education: The Community Solution Model This episode of the Changing Higher Ed® podcast features Dr. Michael Horowitz, Chancellor of The Community Solution Education System (formerly TCS Education System), who discusses using innovative models for higher education consolidation as an additional category in or alternative to traditional mergers or acquisitions. Horowitz highlights the system's unique approach, a collaborative model prioritizing resource optimization and expertise sharing among member institutions while maintaining individual identities.

The conversation addresses challenges facing higher education, including increasing closure rates and the importance of proactive strategies like mergers, acquisitions, and consolidations. Both McNaughton and Horowitz emphasize the necessity of early planning and shared vision, particularly involving faculty, for successful integration.

They also touch on broader trends and challenges in higher education, such as increasing closures and the challenges boards face in adapting to the uniqueness of the business of higher education.

They conclude with practical advice for institutions considering consolidation, focusing on partnership development, early financial assessment, and resource amplification to strengthen academic missions.

Key Discussion Points The Community Solution Model: A Collaborative System * Alternative to Traditional M&A: The Community Solution operates as a "system" where institutions collaborate rather than compete. This approach aims to optimize resources, share expertise, and improve student success.

Quote: "The consolidation that operates as a system in which its institutions collaborate instead of competing, gain resources, share expertise, and optimize expenditures in the process." – Michael Horowitz

System Integration: The system model integrates non-student facing operations like finance, technology, and marketing. This allows individual institutions to focus on academic endeavors.

Quote: "All of that can be scaled. To better quality, for the same dollar... The uniqueness has to drive through the academics."– Michael Horowitz

Maintaining Institutional Identity: Each college within the system retains its own accreditation, president, board, leadership, assets, and liabilities. The system consolidates operations, not the institutions themselves.

Quote: "…each of our colleges keeps its own accreditation, president, board, leadership, their own assets and liabilities." – Michael Horowitz

Trends in Higher Education and the Need for Consolidation * Increasing Closures: The concerning trend of college closures, which have a significant negative impact on students and communities. Clayton Christensen's prediction of closures is revisited and said to be possibly understated.

Quote: " The closure rate is accelerating. Last year there were 80 closures total, including 16 nonprofits." – Drumm McNaughton

Mature and Declining Market: The higher education market is described as mature with overcapacity and declining student populations. The need for a new strategy to remain viable is clear.
Boards Waiting Too Long: Many college boards are hesitant to act proactively and address financial or enrollment trends until it is too late. Relying on 'hope' is not an effective strategy.
AI Prediction: AI models could accurately predict most college closures based on historical data, showing that many of these closures are foreseeable.

The Benefits of a System Approach * Resource Amplification: Consolidation of back-end services leads to cost savings that can be reinvested into academic programs. The system aims to "amplify" resources, not just save money. * Scalability and Efficiency: Shared resources and centralized functions create economies of scale and improve overall efficiency. * Shared Talent and Ideas: The system fosters collaboration and the sharing of best practices among institutions and staff, resulting in shared knowledge.

Quote: "...we're amplifying our brain power by coming together." – Michael Horowitz

Enhanced Faculty and Student Resources: The system provides faculty with resources like teaching and learning support and global engagement programs.

Implementation and Integration Challenges * Regulatory Process: Post-merger integration involves navigating a complex regulatory process that requires meticulous planning and execution and can take an extended amount of time. * Project Management: Successful integration requires strong project management skills to coordinate the various tasks and stages.

“The most valuable person that you have on your post-merger integration team is your project manager." – Dr. Drumm McNaughton.

Faculty Buy-In: Obtaining faculty support and ensuring clear communication are crucial for a successful transition.
Timeline: The process from initial discussion to full integration can be lengthy and can take up to three years.

Consolidation Governance Structure * Dual Board Structure: Each college retains its own board, which is deeply involved with the day-to-day operations, while a system board oversees the overall system mission, risk, and financial health. * System Board Role: The system board provides guidance and support but does not interfere with the day-to-day operations of the colleges. This board looks at how the system works together. * Shared Governance: Overlap between the two board structures allows for a shared understanding of institutional goals and needs.

Future Plans at The Community Solution (TCS) * New Facility in Chicago: The Community Solution is consolidating its system office and Chicago school into a new facility to increase collaboration and efficiency. This includes plans for a second medical school. * Canadian Recruitment: The system is planning to establish a presence in Vancouver, Canada, to recruit more international students without needing to create duplicative offices. * Global Perspective: The system sees the importance of global education and perspective in higher ed.

Three Takeaways for Institution Presidents and Boards Considering Consolidation 1. Seek Partnerships: Proactively explore potential collaborations with other colleges, universities, or community entities. 2. Act Early & Study Financials: Have these conversations early, don't wait until urgency arises, and be very aware of financial and enrollment trends. 3. Amplify Resources: Focus on amplifying resources through collaboration to strengthen both the academic mission and community impact.

Wrapping Up This podcast provides valuable insights into an alternative model for higher education consolidation that prioritizes collaboration, resource optimization, and the preservation of institutional identity. The Community Solution's approach serves as an example for other institutions facing challenges in a changing higher education landscape. The conversation highlights the necessity of proactive decision-making and strategic planning.

Read the transcript on our website at https://changinghighered.com/new-models-for-consolidation-in-higher-education/

#HigherEducation #HigherEducationConsolidation #HigherEducationPodcast

About Our Podcast Guest Michael Horowitz, Ph.D., is the founder and president of The Community Solution Education System, an integrated, nonprofit system of six colleges and universities that work collaboratively to increase student success and enhance community impact. Prior to founding The Community Solution, he served as president of The Chicago School for nearly a decade. Dr. Horowitz has more than 30 years of experience in higher education roles that include faculty member, program director, and dean. He holds a Ph.D. in Clinical Psychology from Northwestern University and a B.A. in Psychology from Columbia University.

Connect with Michael Horowitz on LinkedIn →

View Details

Higher Education Policy in the 119th Congress Part 2 of this podcast continues with Tom Netting, president of TEN Government Strategies and our Washington Update expert, examining ways in which the outcome of the 2024 US elections will transform higher education. Drawing from over three decades of policy expertise, Netting provides an insider’s perspective on the anticipated changes a Trump administration and the 119th Republican-controlled Congress could bring to higher education.

Netting analyzes shifts in key Congressional committees, focusing on the implications for higher education funding, accreditation, and the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act. He also addresses the impact of potential regulatory changes, executive orders, and court decisions on issues such as student loan repayment and Title IX. Finally, he offers advice to higher education institutions on preparing for these upcoming changes.

Higher Education Policy in the 119th Congress: 2024-2025 Impact Analysis Tom Netting, president of TEN Government Strategies and Washington Update expert, provides crucial insights into how the 2024 US elections will transform higher education. Drawing from over three decades of policy expertise, Netting offers an insider’s perspective on the anticipated changes under a Trump administration and Republican-controlled 119th Congress, exploring implications for institutions, students, and education policy.

Congressional Leadership Transformation and Committee Impact Critical Committee Changes Reshaping Education Policy * Senate HELP Committee leadership transition to Bill Cassidy (R-LA) from Bernie Sanders (D-VT), signaling a potential pivot toward healthcare-focused policy and reformed higher education priorities. * House Education and Workforce Committee leadership race between Joe Wilson (R-SC), Tim Wahlberg (R-MI), and Burgess Owens (R-UT), following Virginia Foxx’s retirement, with implications for education policy direction. * Significant Appropriations Committee turnover affecting crucial decisions on: + Pell Grant funding allocations + Student loan program resources + Financial aid program sustainability + Institution support mechanisms

Regulatory Transformation Immediate Regulatory Changes and Their Institutional Impact * Comprehensive revision of existing regulations: + Borrower defense mechanisms and institutional accountability + Updated gainful employment metrics affecting program viability + Modified 90/10 rule implementation for proprietary institutions + Reformed institutional quality standards * Status of proposed rules and NPRMs: + Student borrower relief programs + Program Integrity and Institutional Quality guidelines + TRIO program modifications + Distance education requirements + Return to Title IV (R2T4) calculations * Delayed or abandoned 2025 initiatives: + Cash management reforms + Accreditation standard updates + State authorization requirements

Executive Action Implications * Immigration policy changes affecting: + International student enrollment + Institutional revenue streams + Campus diversity initiatives * Title IX implementation challenges: + 26 states blocking new regulations + 24 states implementing changes + Institutional compliance complexities * Student loan repayment modifications: + New repayment structure implementation + Institutional reporting requirements + Student success metrics

Accreditation Evolution and Institutional Impact Fundamental Accreditation Reform * Reexamination of accreditor core mission and scope * Controversial DEI standards debate: + Five of six former regional accreditors requiring DEI standards + SACCOC’s contrasting approach + Potential prohibition implications * Academic freedom considerations: + Faculty concerns about restricted discourse + Institutional autonomy questions + Cultural and political influence on standards * Higher Education Act reauthorization implications: + Potential solutions for accreditation challenges + Updated oversight mechanisms + Reformed quality assurance frameworks

Liberal Arts Education Transformation Innovation and Adaptation in Liberal Education * Strategic evolution of traditional programs: + Career pathway integration + Skills-based learning incorporation + Industry alignment strategies * Public service value recognition: + Loan forgiveness program preservation + Community impact assessment + Social value metrics * Educational delivery modernization: + Hybrid learning models + Virtual education integration + Technology-enhanced instruction * AI integration strategies: + Curriculum enhancement + Administrative efficiency + Student support systems

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leaders 1. Stay tuned for leadership changes. The new leadership will set the tone and tenor for upcoming policy changes, and a lot of the direction will come from the new President-Elect. 2. Be prepared for discussions around accreditation and outcomes. There will be considerable discussion around accreditation and outcomes, as well as how the return on investment for all of education is assessed. Institutions should prepare to discuss outcome measures and how to demonstrate their return on investment, regardless of what type of institution they are. 3. Be aware of the upcoming student loan repayment process. All of Congress is aware that student loan repayments are going to become due, and the process that is undertaken by both Congress and the new incoming administration will be a major topic of discussion in 2025.

#HigherEducation #HigherEdPolicy #WashingtonUpdate

Read the transcript on our website at https://changinghighered.com/washington-update-implications-of-2024-elections-on-higher-ed-part-2/

About Our Podcast Guest Tom Netting

View Details

Higher Education Expert Analysis of Anticipated Federal Policy Changes Under the Incoming Administration Part 1 of this two-part podcast welcomes back Tom Netting, president of TEN Government Strategies and our Washington Update expert, to examine how the 2024 US elections will transform higher education. Drawing from over three decades of policy expertise on The Hill, Netting provides an insider's perspective on the anticipated changes a Trump administration and Republican Congress could bring to higher education.

The conversation unpacks major shifts within the Department of Education, from FAFSA modernization and Title IX overhaul to the future of student loan repayment. Netting addresses pressing questions about federal funding streams, potential departmental restructuring, and the impact of new IT security regulations. The discussion culminates in a penetrating analysis of how evolving ROI metrics could fundamentally alter higher education funding decisions.

Overview What Higher Education Leaders Will Gain from Listening to This Podcast Higher Education Implications of the 2024 Election – Part 1

The incoming presidential administration is expected to bring significant changes to the Department of Education, moving much faster than it did in the previous administration. Key personnel appointments are being announced quickly and are comprised of a more seasoned team.
Netting doesn’t believe the Department of Education will be abolished but expects significant changes in how it is run, particularly with Linda McMahon as the nominee for Secretary of Education. Her background suggests the Department will be run more like a business with an emphasis on fiscal responsibility.
Higher education leaders should be prepared to embrace potential changes, some of which might be positive. For example, the administration is expected to address the challenges with the FAFSA form and the administration of student financial aid, issues that have led to a decline in applications.

Federal Higher Education Reform: Key Policy Changes for 2025 Key areas of change within the Department of Education likely include:

Title IX: The current Title IX regulations are facing legal challenges, with 26 states blockading the regulations as put forward and 24 states trying to implement them in the new iteration, which is causing chaos for institutions. The new administration may revisit these regulations.
Gainful Employment and Financial Value Transparency Regulations: All institutions, not just proprietary or those subject to loss of eligibility, are supposed to submit information on all of their student cohorts to the Department of Education by January 15th. These regulations, requiring institutions to submit data on student cohorts and completers lists, are facing scrutiny and potential revision under the new administration.
Income-Contingent Based Repayment Plans: The administration will need to address the upcoming deadline for student loan repayments and may revise existing income-driven repayment plans. Netting succinctly explains the difference in opinion between Republicans and Democrats on student loan repayment.
Return on Investment (ROI) in Higher Education: The new administration is likely to focus on the ROI of higher education, potentially using a calculation similar to the one used for “exemplary institutions” under the previous administration. This could lead to an assessment of ROI across all sectors of higher education and influence funding decisions. The major difference, however, is that this new equation methodology recognizes a 10-year window, not a 3-year window of earnings potential.

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leaders 1. Engage with Policymakers: Actively engaging with policymakers at both the state and federal levels. This involves understanding their priorities, building relationships, and advocating for policies that support higher education. 2. Prioritize Cybersecurity: The increasing focus on cybersecurity, particularly the NIST 800-171 regulations, makes cybersecurity a top priority. This includes investing in necessary infrastructure and personnel to ensure compliance and protect sensitive data. 3. Focus on Workforce Development: Place a high priority on workforce development and the need for higher education institutions to align their programs with the needs of the economy. This includes forging partnerships with businesses and industries to provide relevant training and ensure graduates are well-prepared for the workforce.

Higher Education Policy Outlook 2025 Overall, it is recommended higher education anticipate a period of significant change under the new administration. Leaders should stay informed about policy developments, particularly those related to the issues listed above, and be prepared to adapt to a new regulatory environment.

Join us next week for Part 2 of this Washington Update with Tom Netting on anticipated changes coming in 2025 with the new administration.

Read the transcript on our website at https://changinghighered.com/washington-update-implications-of-the-2024-elections-on-higher-ed-part-1/

#HigherEducation #WashingtonUpdate #HigherEdPolicy

About Our Podcast Guest Tom Netting

View Details

Faculty Diversity: A Business Case for Higher Education Success When the PhD Project launched in 1994, you could count the number of diverse students at major business school recruiting events on one hand. Today, after 30 years of systemic change, the initiative has graduated over 1,700 faculty members of color with an extraordinary 90% completion rate – nearly double the national average for doctoral programs. Even more remarkable, 97% of these graduates stay in academia.

But here’s what makes this story particularly compelling for university leaders: Research has shown that the presence of a diverse faculty is the second highest correlating factor (after state demographics) in attracting diverse students to universities. It’s not just about representation – it’s about institutional success and survival in an increasingly global economy.

This episode of Changing Higher Ed® features Dr. Jeffrey Robinson, Graduate of the PhD Project, Interim Chancellor at Rutgers University, Newark, and Blane Ruschak, President of the PhD Project and Consultant with KPMG. The PhD Project is a 30-year-old initiative focused on increasing diversity in business school faculty.

The podcast highlights the project’s impact on diversifying the talent pipeline by providing mentorship and support to underrepresented students pursuing PhDs in business. Robinson and Ruschak share their personal experiences and explain the project’s systemic approach to change, emphasizing the economic benefits of a diverse workforce alongside recruiting, retaining, and supporting diverse faculty.

Key Discussion Points: The Origins and Mission of the PhD Project: * Founded nearly 30 years ago to address the lack of diversity in business schools and the workforce. * Aims to increase the number of underrepresented minority faculty in business schools, which in turn attracts more diverse students to the field. * Driven by the recognition of a changing global business environment and the demand for a diverse workforce.

How the PhD Project Works: * Sponsors an annual conference for underrepresented minority students to learn about business PhD programs. * Provides financial support, networking opportunities, and mentorship to students throughout their doctoral journey. * Boasts a 90% completion rate for its participants, with 97% staying in academia. * Continues to support graduates through developmental programs focused on teaching, research, and leadership.

The Benefits of Faculty Diversity in Academia: * Diverse faculty serve as role models for students, especially those from underrepresented backgrounds. * They bring different lived experiences, perspectives, and connections to the classroom, enriching the learning environment for all students. * Contributes to groundbreaking research and innovative solutions.

The Economic Imperative for Diversity: * Diverse workforces are better equipped to relate to a wider range of clients and customers. * Companies benefit from the diverse perspectives and talents of their employees.

The Role of Mentorship and Community: * The PhD Project creates a strong support network for participants, helping them navigate the challenges of doctoral studies. * Alumni continue to mentor and collaborate with each other, further strengthening the community.

Challenges and Solutions in Diversity Recruitment: * Retaining diverse faculty is crucial and requires universities to provide adequate support and protect them from excessive service demands. * Universities must hold leaders accountable for diversity recruitment goals.

Three Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards 1. Invest in recruiting and retaining diverse faculty, recognizing the long-term benefits of attracting and educating a diverse student body. 2. Provide necessary support and mentorship to diverse faculty, ensuring their success and protecting them from being overburdened with diversity-related tasks. 3. Hold university leaders accountable for achieving diversity goals and creating an inclusive campus environment.

Final Thoughts The PhD Project is a powerful example of how a focused effort can make a significant impact on diversifying higher education and the workforce. Its success lies in its comprehensive approach, which combines financial support, mentorship, and community building.

Read the transcript on our website at https://changinghighered.com/faculty-diversity-drives-enrollment-the-phd-project/

#HigherEducation #HigherEdPodcast #HigherEdDiversity

About Our Guests Dr. Jeffrey Robinson is an award-winning author and the Prudential Chair in Business at Rutgers Business School, currently serving as Interim Chancellor of Rutgers University – Newark following two years as Executive Vice Chancellor and Provost. His research focuses on the intersection of business and society, addressing community and economic development in urban areas in the United States and abroad. Through academic leadership and community-engaged scholarship, he has a direct impact on corporate workplaces, entrepreneurs, and economic development policy in New Jersey and beyond. He has conducted groundbreaking studies on African American women entrepreneurs, social innovation, and minority representation in technology entrepreneurship. His recent book “Black Faces in High Places,” co-authored with Dr. Randal Pinkett, won a Gold Medal Axiom Book Award. An accomplished scholar with five degrees spanning engineering, urban studies, and business, Dr. Robinson has delivered keynote speeches and presentations across six continents during his distinguished 25-year academic career.

Connect with Jeffrey Robinson on LinkedIn →

Blane Ruschak serves as the President of The PhD Project, where he oversees the strategy and operations of The PhD Project, which is a program designed to create more diverse business leaders by supporting diverse professionals to get their PhD in business and become role models in the classroom, academic administration and academic leadership positions. He lives in Charleston, South Carolina, and works out of Montvale, New Jersey.

Connect with Blane Ruschak on LinkedIn →

About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton is Principal Consultant and CEO of The Change Leader, Inc.—a highly sought-after higher education consultant with 20+ years of experience. Dr. McNaughton works with leadership, management, and boards of both U.S. and international institutions. His expertise spans key areas, including accreditation, governance, strategic planning, presidential onboarding, mergers, acquisitions, and strategic alliances.

Dr. McNaughton’s approach combines a holistic methodology with a deep understanding of the contemporary and evolving challenges facing higher education institutions worldwide to ensure his clients succeed in their mission.

Connect with Drumm McNaughton on LinkedIn →

View Details

The Declining Trend in Public Confidence Higher Education has a reputation crisis. Public confidence in higher education is declining dramatically. In 2015, a Gallup poll revealed that the vast majority of Americans expressed a great deal of confidence in higher education, with only 10% reporting little to no confidence.

By 2024, public confidence shifted significantly: only about a third maintained a great deal of confidence, while a startling 33% now held little to no confidence. This mirrors a broader trend of declining trust in American institutions.

Dr. Drumm McNaughton and Dr. Courtney Brown, Vice President of Impact and Planning for the Lumina Foundation, discuss the causes and solutions to declining public confidence in higher education. They also explore the evolving demographics of higher education students, with a significant portion being non-traditional learners balancing work, family, and education. Finally, the conversation proposes solutions, emphasizing the need for increased transparency, improved student support services, and a reevaluation of faculty roles to better meet the needs of today's students.

Key Points Covered in This Podcast: Reasons for Declining Confidence in Higher Education The latest Lumina-Gallup study on public confidence in higher education identifies three primary drivers:

Political bias: 41% of respondents lacking confidence cited concerns that colleges are too liberal, attempting to indoctrinate students.
Lack of relevant skills: Over a third criticized higher education for failing to impart skills directly applicable to the workforce, leaving graduates struggling to find employment.
Affordability: Just under 30% expressed concern about rising tuition costs and high debt levels.

Shifting Demographics and Needs Traditional student demographics no longer represent the majority.

Over a third of students are over 25.
Over half are students of color.
78% work, with a third employed full-time.
20% have dependents.
44% are financially independent.

Solving the Higher Ed Confidence Crisis: A Call for Change Higher education institutions need to adapt to the changing demographics and address the concerns driving declining confidence and reputation while discerning temporary spin from the true concerns of students and the underlying issues.

The Stop-Out Numbers * Over 42 million Americans started college but, for various reasons, did not finish. This suggests systemic issues within higher education that need to be addressed to better serve students.

Confidence Gap * While 54% of Americans hold post-secondary credentials, 33% have little or no confidence in higher education. * This suggests a disconnect between the perceived value of education and the experiences of many degree holders.

Value and Transparency * Despite the concerns, over 90% of respondents still believe that at least one post-secondary credential has value, but trust in the system’s ability to deliver is low. * 75% believe a college degree is as important or more important today than it was 20 years ago. * Transparency in costs and the career value of degrees is a high priority to restoring trust. * There is a need for greater transparency regarding both the true cost of college and the career pathways associated with specific credentials.

Workforce Alignment * Public concerns about graduates lacking job-ready skills highlight the need for stronger connections between institutions and industries. * Partnerships for internships, externships, and mentorships should be prioritized.

Partisan Divide * Republicans primarily cite political bias as the reason for their declining confidence, while Democrats focus on affordability.

The Demographic Cliff * The number of high school graduates is projected to decline sharply in 2025-26, forcing institutions to re-evaluate their business models and focus on attracting and serving adult learners.

Key Takeaways for Higher Ed Presidents, Boards, and Executive Leaders * Listen: Actively engage with current, former, and potential students to understand their needs and experiences. * Adapt: Re-evaluate institutional structures, offerings, and support services to better serve today's diverse student population. * Increase Transparency: Provide clear and accessible information about costs and career pathways. * Rethink Faculty Roles: Value and reward teaching, mentorship, and community engagement alongside research. * Embrace Partnerships: Collaborate with employers to offer relevant work-based learning opportunities and build stronger connections to local workforce needs.

Final Thoughts The declining confidence in higher education presents a significant challenge, but it also creates an opportunity for transformation. By listening to student needs, adapting to evolving demographics, and prioritizing transparency and relevancy, institutions can rebuild trust and ensure that higher education remains a valuable pathway to opportunity for all.

Last week's podcast with Sophie Nguyen and Kevin Carey with New America discussed their research on what Americans really think about higher ed, which looks at the public confidence and perception crisis from a different angle.

#HigherEducation #HigherEdPodcast #ValueOfHigherEd

Read the transcript on our website: https://changinghighered.com/the-crisis-of-confidence-in-higher-education/

About Our Guest Dr. Courtney Brown is the Vice President of Strategic Impact and Planning at Lumina Foundation, the nation’s largest private foundation focused specifically on increasing Americans’ postsecondary success. As the Foundation’s chief data and research officer, Brown oversees the Foundation’s efforts in the areas of strategic planning, research, evaluation, data, and learning. She also leads Lumina’s international engagement efforts. Brown has decades of experience and is a frequent national speaker and writer on postsecondary data, evaluation, performance measurement, and strategic planning. Dr. Brown received her B.A. from James Madison University and M.A. and Ph.D. from the University of Virginia.

Courtney Brown on LinkedIn →

Connect with Drumm McNaughton on LinkedIn →

View Details

Despite media narratives of declining confidence in higher education, new survey data reveals 80% of Americans view college costs - not value - as the primary barrier to enrollment. While only 36% think higher education is "fine how it is," bipartisan support remains strong, with a majority of both Democrats and Republicans favoring increased government funding for affordability.

On this episode of Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Kevin Carey, Vice President for Education and Work at New America, and Sophie Nguyen, Senior Policy Manager with the Higher Education team at New America, a nonpartisan think tank focused on social and technological issues, including education. The discussion centers around New America’s annual “Varying Degrees” survey, which examines how Americans perceive higher education.

Carey and Nguyen argue that, contrary to the media narrative, Americans have not actually lost faith in the value of higher education. They attribute the decline in enrollment not to a loss of confidence but rather to demographic shifts, the economic recession, and the unique nature of the pandemic.

They also highlight the partisan divide in perspectives on higher education, noting that Republicans have become more skeptical of higher education than Democrats, likely due to a changing composition of the two parties' constituencies in terms of educational attainment.

The conversation concludes with practical advice for college leaders on navigating these challenges, emphasizing the need for clear communication about the value of higher education, acknowledging student and parental concerns about affordability and career pathways, and continuing to advocate for higher education in the face of political and social shifts.

What Higher Ed Leaders Will Gain From This Podcast Here are some insights, facts, and trends you’ll hear discussed:

Americans do not hate higher education. While confidence in higher education as an institution is declining, this is consistent with declining American confidence in all institutions. Americans still largely believe in higher education.
Americans’ opinions on higher education have remained relatively stable over the years, even amidst significant events like the pandemic. This finding counters media narratives suggesting a dramatic shift in public opinion.
A majority of Republicans believe that the government should invest more money to make higher education more affordable. This suggests that there is a bipartisan consensus on investing in higher education.
There has been a partisan realignment around higher education, with Democrats increasingly becoming the party of education. This is likely due to an increase in the number of people with college degrees among Democrat voters.
The decline in college enrollment is mainly driven by demographic decline, not by a decline in demand for higher education. The number of college-age people in America peaked in the late 2010s and has been declining since.
The pandemic recession did not lead to an increase in college enrollment as previous recessions have. This is because the pandemic recession was brief, and the economy quickly rebounded.
The labor market has been very strong for non-college graduates in the middle and lower parts of the wage scale. This may be a factor in the decline in college enrollment.
Many parents who say they do not want their children to get a four-year degree actually do want their children to go to college for job training. They may not realize that most job-related training in the United States happens at colleges.
Colleges need to communicate the value of a liberal arts education to students and parents. Emphasize that a liberal arts education is not just about job training but also about developing critical thinking skills, exposure to diverse perspectives, and personal growth.
Colleges need to make a clear connection between a liberal arts education and career pathways. Highlight how the skills and knowledge gained in a liberal arts education can be applied to various careers.
Cost remains a significant concern for a vast majority of Americans, serving as a major barrier to college enrollment. The survey demonstrates bipartisan agreement on this issue.
Colleges need to address the cost of higher education: This includes providing more financial aid, lowering tuition, and exploring alternative models of education, such as three-year degrees.

Three Key Takeaways for Presidents, Enrollment Executives, and Boards

Communicate Education's Value
Demonstrate the lifelong benefits of liberal education
Make concrete connections between liberal education and career pathways
Don't ignore students' desire for clear career outcomes
Address Cost Concerns
Acknowledge that cost is a significant concern for students
Clearly communicate available financial options and solutions
Help students understand ways to manage educational costs
Embrace Public Support
Americans maintain strong support for higher education
The majority of both parties support increased government investment
Demographics present challenges, but core support remains strong
Institutions should acknowledge the need for change while maintaining confidence

Final Thoughts The survey responses suggest that higher education leaders must adapt to the real environment, not the selective representation filtered through political or media bias. They need to be aware of the partisan divide around higher education, the demographic decline, and the strong labor market for non-college graduates. They also need to be proactive in communicating the value of higher education to students and parents and in addressing the cost of higher education.

Read the transcript on our website at https://changinghighered.com/what-americans-really-think-of-higher-ed-new-americas-varying-degrees-2024/

#VaryingDegrees2024 #HigherEducation #HigherEdPodcast

About Our Podcast Guests Sophie Nguyen

Sophie Nguyen is a senior policy manager with the higher education team at New America. Her work focuses on college completion and public opinion in higher education. Nguyen leads Varying Degrees, New America’s annual survey that looks into how Americans perceive important higher education issues regarding value, funding, and accountability. Nguyen also manages the Higher Ed Public Opinion Hub, an online repository of higher education surveys, and co-authors Public Insight, New America's monthly newsletter that provides analysis on survey findings. Her work on public opinion has been featured in the New York Times, NPR, Inside Higher Ed, Higher Ed Dive, and other news outlets. Nguyen joined the program after graduating from Mount Holyoke College, where she earned a bachelor's degree in economics. She later earned a master's degree in higher education administration from the George Washington University School of Education and Human Development.

Sophie Nguyen on LinkedIn →

Kevin Carey

Kevin Carey is Vice President for Education and Work at New America, a Washington, DC-based think tank. He writes widely about higher education and other topics for publications, including the New York Times, Atlantic, Washington Post, Vox, Slate, Chronicle of Higher Education, Inside Higher Ed, Washington Monthly, and elsewhere.

Kevin Carey on LinkedIn →

Connect with Drumm McNaughton on LinkedIn →

View Details

Innovation in Higher Education Accreditation: How NECHE Leads Change Gone are the days of counting library books and checking boxes. With average presidential tenure plummeting to less than five years and a wave of institutional mergers reshaping American higher education, understanding the evolution from prescriptive to nuanced accreditation has become paramount for institutional survival.

In this podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton, in discussion with Dr. Lawrence "Larry" Schall, President of the New England Commission on Higher Education (NECHE), shares insights on how accreditation has transformed from a compliance exercise into a partnership that helps institutions navigate contemporary challenges while maintaining academic quality and institutional accountability.

Transformative Trends in Institutional Consolidation Demographic challenges are driving unprecedented changes in higher education structure. According to Schall, New England's unfavorable demographics have accelerated institutional mergers and consolidations, with public systems leading transformative change:

12 Connecticut community colleges have consolidated into a single college with multiple campuses
Five Vermont state colleges merged to create Vermont State University.
Maine pioneered the country's first system-wide consolidated accreditation.

This seismic shift in institutional organization signals a fundamental change in how accrediting bodies must approach quality assurance and institutional oversight.

Pioneering Approaches to Accreditation Innovation The conversation around accreditation has moved beyond traditional compliance to encompass comprehensive institutional transformation. NECHE exemplifies this evolution through:

Implementation of accelerated degree programs
Authorization of Spanish-language graduate programs within the U.S.
Expansion of international accreditation
Support for innovative educational delivery models

Meeting Modern Higher Education Challenges NECHE's approach demonstrates how accreditors can maintain rigorous standards while supporting institutional innovation:

Trust-based relationships with member institutions
Regular presidential appearances before the commission
Proactive communication about institutional challenges
Flexible standards that encourage innovation while ensuring quality

Three Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards 1. Leadership stability and board-president alignment are critical for institutional success. With presidential tenure averaging less than five years, institutions struggle to implement meaningful change. Strong alignment between boards and presidents is essential for effective governance and institutional advancement. 2. Traditional educational models are becoming outdated, with more innovation happening internationally than domestically. Institutions that proactively develop new models of education delivery are more likely to succeed in the next 25 years. Higher education leaders should look beyond conventional approaches to prepare for future disruption. 3. The independence of higher education from government control is increasingly at risk. Political intervention in curriculum, governance, and accreditation threatens the fundamental strength of the American higher education system. Institutions must work to maintain their autonomy while demonstrating accountability and quality.

Navigating accreditation challenges, merger discussions, or innovative program implementation can feel overwhelming. Your institution's mission and values matter. The Change Leader partners with you to tackle these complex challenges head-on, helping you stay true to who you are while meeting accreditation standards. We get it - you're not just another merger statistic. Your institution's unique identity and future matter.

These are just some of the key insights and opportunities you will hear in this podcast—listen to the full episode for more.

Read the transcript on our website: https://changinghighered.com/accreditation-neche-style-from-prescriptive-to-nuanced/

#HigherEducation #HigherEducationAccreditation #HigherEdChallenges

About Our Podcast Guest Dr. Lawrence Schall joined the Commission staff as President in 2020. Previously, he served as President of Oglethorpe University in Atlanta, Georgia, for 15 years. During his tenure, Dr. Schall led the transformation of Oglethorpe from an at-risk institution to a university boasting a doubled class size and rigorous spending safeguards, raised over one hundred million dollars, and secured a solid financial outlook for the institution. Schall currently serves on the Board of Spelman College, the highly-ranked historically Black women’s college also in Atlanta.

President Schall received his undergraduate degree from Swarthmore College and his J.D. and Ed. D. from the University of Pennsylvania. After practicing law as a civil rights attorney in Philadelphia for a decade, he served as Vice President of Administration at Swarthmore for 15 years before assuming the Presidency of Oglethorpe.

Visit President Schall's blog, NECHE On The Road, to learn more about him and his work at the Commission.

About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton is Principal Consultant and CEO of The Change Leader, Inc. A highly sought-after higher education consultant with 20+ years of experience. Dr. McNaughton works with leadership, management, and boards of both U.S. and international institutions. His expertise spans key areas, including accreditation, governance, strategic planning, presidential onboarding, mergers, acquisitions, and strategic alliances.

Connect with Drumm McNaughton on LinkedIn →

View Details

In this podcast, host Dr. Drumm McNaughton welcomes guest James R. Johnsen, the former President of the University of Alaska System, who is now a Vice President of Executive Search for Greenwood Asher & Associates. Johnsen discusses his new book, "Public University Systems: Leveraging Scale in Higher Education," which examines the importance of and challenges facing public university systems across the U.S.

What higher ed leaders will gain from this podcast: Understanding Public University Systems in Higher Education Governance A comprehensive overview of public university systems, their prevalence, importance, and the challenges they face. The different types of systems – homogenous and heterogeneous – and how they are structured, governed, and operated. This knowledge will be valuable for leaders in understanding the landscape of higher education in the context of their institutions.

Leveraging Scale for Efficiency and Impact Public university systems have a unique ability to leverage their scale to achieve political, social, and economic goals. Benefits include consolidation and collaboration in areas such as procurement, research administration, payroll, legal counsel, and accreditation. Leaders can identify and implement strategies to maximize efficiency and impact through system-level initiatives.

Navigating Political Dynamics in University Systems Political dynamics shape public university systems significantly, with roles for governors, legislators, and boards in forming higher education policy and funding. Understanding this landscape and developing strategies for effective advocacy is essential.

Change Management and Leading Transformational Change Higher education systems face challenges in implementing change due to bureaucratic structures. Effective change management requires a clear vision, strong leadership, and a culture that embraces experimentation and continuous improvement.

Prioritizing Student Success and Addressing State Needs Aligning higher education with student and state needs is crucial. Leaders can prioritize student success by streamlining processes, improving transferability, and focusing on outcomes that benefit both individuals and society, ensuring institutions contribute to the state's economic and social well-being.

How Public University Systems Work (Or Don’t) 75% of American college students attend institutions within higher education systems. These systems aim to govern and coordinate public higher education within a state, yet effectiveness varies depending on structure, governance, and alignment with state goals.

Structure and Governance Models in Public University Systems Public university systems vary in structure, affecting their governance and impact. Systems can be homogenous, like the University of California system, where institutions share similar missions, or heterogeneous, like the State University of New York system, which encompasses diverse missions. Governance models differ, with some states having a single board and others multiple boards with distinct responsibilities.

For example, Florida has a Board of Governors for the entire system, while each university has its own Board of Trustees.

Alignment and Collaboration for Higher Education Goals A key factor in system effectiveness is the alignment between state government, the system, and individual institutions. The governor’s vision should guide the system board, which then aligns institutional goals. Without clear alignment, systems risk fragmentation, duplicated efforts, and resource competition.

Recommendations for Improving Public University Systems Clarify Higher Purpose and Goals for System-Wide Alignment Systems should articulate a higher purpose and align with the state's vision for higher education. This alignment enhances decision-making, resource allocation, and collaboration.

Strengthen Leadership and Governance Skills System leaders need skills to navigate political landscapes, foster collaboration among institutions, and drive strategic change. Professional development focused on system leadership is essential.

Streamline Processes and Foster Collaboration in Higher Education Systems Systems should streamline processes, reduce redundancy, and foster collaboration. Standardizing data collection, developing common course numbering for transferability, and creating shared service centers are effective strategies.

Promote Data-Driven Decision Making in University Systems Effective governance relies on consistent, reliable data. Systems should invest in data infrastructure and analytics to support evidence-based decisions on resource allocation, program development, and student success.

Cultivate a Culture of Innovation and Experimentation in Higher Education Encouraging a culture of innovation across institutions includes providing seed funding for pilot projects, enabling faculty collaboration, and celebrating successful innovations.

By addressing these challenges and implementing these recommendations, public university systems can fulfill their mission of providing high-quality, accessible, and affordable education that meets the needs of students and the state.

Three Key Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards These takeaways highlight the essential elements for effective leadership and governance within public university systems.

Define a Higher Purpose Clarify the system's higher purpose. This purpose serves as a guiding principle for all decisions and actions, providing a shared understanding of the system's ultimate aim. It should transcend individual institutional interests and unite stakeholders around a common vision.
Align Goals and Plans Align state goals, state plans, system goals, system plans, and institutional goals and plans. This hierarchical alignment ensures that efforts at all levels are coordinated and contribute to the overall vision and purpose. This framework reinforces the importance of a cohesive system working towards shared objectives.
Develop Adaptive Leadership Develop adaptive leadership capabilities across the entire university, not just among those in leadership positions. Adaptive leadership involves fostering a culture where individuals at all levels are empowered to identify challenges, propose solutions, and adapt to changing circumstances.

Read the full transcript at https://changinghighered.com/improving-public-university-systems-at-scale/

#HigherEducation #PublicUniversitySystems #ChangingHigherEd

About Our Podcast Guest James R. Johnsen

"I believe that success requires strong moral and ethical principles. As Vice President of Executive Search at Greenwood Asher & Associates, LLC, I aspire to live up to this notion by embracing change, building consensus, and establishing unity.

Before joining GA&A, I served as a senior fellow at the National Association of System Heads (NASH). I helped develop a transformation agenda for public university systems and was the founding director of its Systems Center for State Policy.

Well-versed in higher education planning and administration, I have written and presented research on higher-learning systems and taught graduate courses in negotiation.

With a knack for evidence-based approaches to strategic planning, I’m passionate about finding innovative ways to solve critical pain points and attain organizational goals."

Connect with Jim Johnsen on LinkedIn →

Connect with Drumm McNaughton on LinkedIn →

View Details

In this episode of Changing Higher Ed, Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Daniel Greenstein, former Chancellor of the Pennsylvania State System of Higher Education (PASSHE), to explore strategic efforts in guiding one of the largest transformations in U.S. higher education. Over his six-year tenure, Greenstein led PASSHE’s integration of six universities into two larger institutions, tackling financial challenges, increasing program diversity, and improving student outcomes—all while maintaining each institution’s unique identity and local impact.

The discussion covers the complexities involved in large-scale university mergers, including the need for legislative support, active stakeholder engagement, and partnerships with regulatory bodies like accreditors and the NCAA. Greenstein emphasizes that mergers should prioritize student success and community needs over financial motivations, with a purpose-driven approach ultimately yielding greater stability.

Key Insights for Higher Education Leaders * Understanding the “Why” Behind Mergers: Mergers are most successful when driven by a commitment to student success and community needs. Financial benefits follow naturally when institutions focus on core values rather than cost-cutting.

Change Management as a Critical Tool: Advanced change management practices are essential, including careful planning, stakeholder engagement, and a governance framework that ensures accountability and data-informed decisions.
Navigating Complex Regulatory Requirements: Practical guidance is offered on working with regulatory bodies, emphasizing the importance of collaborative relationships to smooth the integration process.
Maintaining Brand Identity and Local Relevance: Particularly in rural areas, it’s essential to preserve each institution’s brand identity and community ties, ensuring integrated universities remain relevant and effective in serving local needs.
Holistic Planning and Stakeholder Engagement: A comprehensive planning process involving stakeholders across all university functions optimizes student outcomes, advances diversity and inclusion, and enhances institutional effectiveness.
Student-Centric Approach: McNaughton reflects on the need to prioritize student outcomes during mergers, agreeing that a student-centered focus is critical for long-term success.
Collaborative Leadership and Teamwork: Effective mergers rely on teamwork among university leaders, legislators, and other stakeholders, with a shared commitment to the mission driving meaningful progress.
Clear, Consistent Communication: Communication that is well-timed and consistent is essential in complex integrations, requiring disciplined messaging to keep all stakeholders aligned.
Flexibility and Adaptability: The need for flexibility and adaptability is emphasized, as unexpected challenges require leaders to adjust strategies to achieve successful outcomes.
Engaging External Expertise: External partners, such as accreditation bodies and project management firms, are invaluable in supporting complex mergers and helping to navigate the accreditation process.
Navigating the Political Landscape: Mergers within public institutions involve political realities. Building broad support among legislators and communities is key to gaining approval and securing resources.
Long-Term Perspective and Patience: Realizing merger benefits requires patience and a long-term outlook. Though initially challenging, such integrations ultimately lead to improved student outcomes, greater efficiency, and enhanced academic offerings.

Three Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards 1. You are not alone: Many institutions have undergone mergers, so seeking guidance from experienced leaders can provide invaluable insights and help prevent feelings of isolation.

Confidence is Key: Leaders must maintain confidence in their ability to succeed, with resilience and belief in their capacity to see the process through.
Focus on Core Values: Viewing mergers solely as cost-saving measures is limiting; prioritizing student and community needs naturally leads to financial stability and success.

Read the show transcript on our website at: https://changinghighered.com/effective-university-mergers-lessons-in-stability-from-passhe/

#UniversityMergers #HigherEducation #HigherEdMergers

About our guest Dr. Daniel Greenstein was the chancellor of Pennsylvania's State System of Higher Education from September 2018 to October 2024. In the role, he was the chief executive officer of the state's system of public universities, serving more than 80,000 students. Chancellor Greenstein led a system-wide redesign of PASSHE to increase student opportunities and university financial sustainability. Greenstein previously led the Postsecondary Success strategy at the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, where he worked with other higher education leaders on initiatives to raise educational attainment levels and to promote economic mobility, especially among low-income and minority students. He developed and implemented a national strategy for increasing the number of degrees awarded and for reducing the attainment gaps among majority and non-majority students at U.S. colleges and universities. Greenstein was Vice Provost for Academic Planning and Programs for the University of California (UC) system.

Connect with Dan Greenstein on LinkedIn →

Connect with Drumm McNaughton on LinkedIn →

View Details

This episode features host Dr. Drumm McNaughton and guest Dr. Caitlin Runne-Janczy, Chief Academic Officer for Scientific Interactive, a company that provides hands-on and virtual science lab experiments to students. Drumm and Cait focus on the growing demand for online science lab courses, particularly in STEM fields. Cait discusses the results of a recent survey that found a significant increase in online lab enrollment and a corresponding decrease in on-campus enrollment.

They also explore the challenges and opportunities of delivering quality online lab experiences, including safety considerations, lab setup, accreditation, and student learning outcomes. Cait highlights the importance of hands-on components in online labs and the potential for these courses to spark a passion for STEM beyond the individual student.

Podcast Overview

Some of the key insights and opportunities for higher education leaders who listen to this podcast:

There is a growing demand for online science lab courses. Deans and department chairs report a greater than 70% increase in online lab enrollments and a corresponding 56% decrease in on-campus lab enrollments. 88% of students surveyed said it was important for them to have the opportunity to take an online science lab course, and 60% of those students would have enrolled elsewhere or not enrolled at all if an online lab option had not been available.
Online science lab courses can be just as effective as on-campus courses if they include a hands-on component. Simulations have a place in the lab experience, but it must have some sort of hands-on element to really get students a comparable outcome to the campus counterpart. In the survey, 90% of faculty reported that students who take hands-on labs online have the knowledge and skills to continue in their degree progression.
Online science lab courses can help institutions reach a broader range of students, including those who cannot attend on-campus classes due to work, family, or other obligations. This can help institutions grow their enrollment and retain more students. Online options also have a broader impact beyond just the individual student. For example, students who do lab kits at home with their families are expanding that love of science beyond just the individual student.
Institutions need to be prepared to address the challenges of offering online science lab courses, such as ensuring student safety, providing adequate support to students, and meeting accreditation requirements. Safety is a key consideration for both students and institutions. Companies that provide lab kits typically cover liability insurance for the institution in case anything happens. Institutions need to provide adequate support to students who are taking online science lab courses, such as synchronous sessions, digital office hours, and digital lab partners. Accreditation bodies typically require online science lab courses to include a hands-on component to ensure that students have the transferable skills they need to continue in their degree program.
Institutions should consider using online science lab courses as a way to improve student preparedness for on-campus lab courses. Students can do digital experiments before they get to campus so they can be familiar with the techniques and safety protocols that they will need to implement once they get to the lab.
Institutions should partner with companies that have experience in developing and delivering online science lab courses. These companies can provide the expertise, resources, and support that institutions need to successfully offer these courses.

Three Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards

Growing demand for online science labs is creating urgency around digital transformation. Students are actively seeking these options and may choose other institutions that offer them. Building out online laboratory options is becoming a strategic imperative.
Hands-on laboratory work remains essential for maintaining equivalency with on-campus experiences. While simulations play a role, physical experimentation must be part of online lab courses to ensure comparable learning outcomes.
Online lab options offer a broader societal impact beyond individual student success. By making STEM education more accessible and visible, these courses can inspire interest in STEM fields among students' families, peers, and broader communities.

Online science lab courses are a growing trend in higher education, and institutions that are prepared to embrace this trend will be well-positioned to meet the needs of their students and the demands of the 21st-century workforce.

These are just some of the key insights and opportunities you will hear in this podcast—listen to the full episode for more.

Final Thoughts

Accreditation is essential, and institutions must ensure that online labs meet the same standards as traditional labs. They need to understand the requirements of their accrediting bodies and have robust methods to assess and demonstrate student learning outcomes.

Partnering with experienced companies can be beneficial, but institutions are ultimately responsible for meeting accreditation standards and ensuring quality.

The idea of using virtual pre-labs to better prepare students for on-campus labs is promising and could improve student performance in both settings.

Institutions need to approach online science labs thoughtfully, balancing innovation with academic rigor and ensuring that students receive a high-quality education.

Read the transcript on our website at https://changinghighered.com/stem-enrollment-growth-online-labs-drive-student-retention/

#STEMOnline #HigherEducation #EnrollmentGrowth

About Our Podcast Guest

Cait Runne-Janczy

Dr. Runne-Janczy is the Chief Academic Officer and oversees all curriculum development and lab creation. She and her team endeavor to create the same lab experience in people’s homes that they might experience on campus, as well as digital simulations where appropriate.

She and her team of PhD experts have built, from the ground up, over 450 individual labs across 11 disciplines. She is passionate about increasing access to STEM education by delivering new modalities of instruction. Dr. Runne-Janczy is a graduate of Marist College and received her PhD from the University of Iowa.

About the Host

Dr. Drumm McNaughton is Principal Consultant and CEO of The Change Leader, Inc. A highly sought-after higher education consultant with 20+ years of experience. Dr. McNaughton works with leadership, management, and boards of both U.S. and international institutions. His expertise spans key areas, including accreditation, governance, strategic planning, presidential onboarding, mergers, acquisitions, and strategic alliances.

View Details

Innovative Accreditation: Transforming Higher Education

Dr. Sonny Ramaswamy and Dr. Selena M. Grace, leaders at the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities (NWCCU), join Dr. Drumm McNaughton in the second of this two-part podcast to discuss groundbreaking innovations in higher education accreditation. They explore accelerated degrees, competency-based education, and the evolving landscape of workforce development.

Key Discussion Points

Accelerated Bachelor's Degree Programs:

NWCCU's approval of a pilot three-year bachelor's degree program.
Historical context of the traditional four-year model and its limitations.
Rigorous evaluation processes to ensure educational quality in accelerated programs.

Competency-Based Education (CBE):

Focus on demonstrable skills and knowledge rather than seat time.
NWCCU's approach to evaluating CBE programs.
Emphasis on clear learning outcomes and robust assessment methods.

Innovations in Accreditation:

NWCCU's role as a facilitator of institutional innovation.
Implementation of a portfolio model and high-contact approach with institutions.
Support for a wide range of innovations while maintaining quality standards.

Workforce Development and Higher Education:

Addressing the needs of an estimated 40 million Americans requiring reskilling and upskilling.
Integration of micro-credentials and certification programs.
Balancing flexibility with maintaining high educational standards.

Assessment and Learning Outcomes:

Importance of clearly defined learning outcomes at course and program levels.
Use of multiple assessment methods and regular curriculum review.
Emphasis on programmatic assessment to capture disciplinary learning outcomes.

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leaders and Boards

Embrace innovation in degree formats and educational delivery methods.
Focus on workforce development and lifelong learning opportunities.
Prioritize clear assessment strategies and learning outcomes in new educational models.

Read the transcript and extended show summary on our website at: https://changinghighered.com/innovative-accreditation-accelerated-degrees-and-competency-based-education/

#HigherEducation #HigherEdAccreditation #AcceleratedDegrees

About Our Guests Sonny Ramaswamy is president of Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities, which accredits institutions in Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and British Columbia. President Barack Obama appointed Sonny to direct the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, which funded research and education in food, agriculture, and natural resources. He served as dean of Oregon State’s College of Agricultural Sciences, director of Purdue’s Agricultural Research Programs, university distinguished professor and head of entomology at Kansas State, and professor of entomology at Mississippi State. Sonny’s BSc (Agriculture) and MSc (Entomology) are from the University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore; his PhD (Entomology) is from Rutgers. He did postdoc research at Michigan State University. Selena M. Grace is currently the Executive Vice President of the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities (NWCCU). She has been at NWCCU since 2020. Previously, she served as Vice Provost for Academic Strategy & Institutional Effectiveness at Idaho State University. She was a member of the inaugural cohort of the WICHE Western Academic Leadership Academy, and her previous experience includes Chief Academic Officer at the Idaho State Board of Education where she was the primary author and manager of the Complete College Idaho Plan. She is a first-generation college graduate. She has a B.A. in English with a writing emphasis and a minor in Native American Studies from Boise State University, an M.F.A. in creative writing and non-fiction from George Mason University, and a Ph.D. in public policy and administration from Boise State University.

View Details

The Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities (NWCCU) is pioneering new approaches to higher education accreditation that emphasize student success, institutional innovation through collaboration, and continuous improvement. In a recent conversation, NWCCU President Sonny Ramaswamy and Executive Vice President Selena Grace shared insights into how the commission is transforming accreditation to help meet the challenges facing higher education.

What Higher Ed Leaders Will Gain from Listening:

Understanding Accreditation Changes: Gain insights into innovative accreditation approaches, such as NWCCU’s pilot for a three-year bachelor's degree, which could help your institution stay ahead of regulatory changes and trends.
Student Success Focus: Learn how accreditation bodies like NWCCU are prioritizing student success and equity, providing you with strategies to improve retention and graduation rates at your institution.
Institutional Innovation: Discover how the NWCCU is fostering innovation among member institutions, which could inspire you to implement new programs or policies that enhance both academic quality and operational efficiency.
Collaborative Accreditation Model: Hear about NWCCU’s portfolio model, which emphasizes building strong relationships with institutions, potentially offering your institution a more tailored and supportive accreditation experience.
Workforce Alignment: Explore how accreditation bodies are aligning educational outcomes with workforce needs, a crucial area for positioning your institution to attract students and meet future job market demands.

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leaders

Student-Centered Accreditation: NWCCU's approach puts student success at the forefront of accreditation, emphasizing the importance of understanding and supporting diverse student populations.
Data-Driven Decision-Making: Institutions should leverage disaggregated data to identify and address equity gaps, tailoring their support to meet the needs of different student groups.
Embrace Innovation: The NWCCU encourages institutions to think creatively about program delivery and institutional practices, supporting innovations like the three-year bachelor's degree that can make higher education more accessible and efficient.

This podcast offers actionable insights into improving institutional practices, staying compliant with evolving accreditation standards, and ensuring long-term success in higher education.

Read the transcript on our website: https://changinghighered.com/nwccu-advances-higher-ed-accreditation-with-3-year-bachelor-degree-and-collaboration/ #HigherEducation #HigherEdAccreditation #HigherEdPodcast About Our Guests Sonny Ramaswamy is president of Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities, which accredits institutions in Alaska, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, Utah, Washington, and British Columbia. President Barack Obama appointed Sonny to direct the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, which funded research and education in food, agriculture, and natural resources. He served as dean of Oregon State’s College of Agricultural Sciences, director of Purdue’s Agricultural Research Programs, university distinguished professor and head of entomology at Kansas State, and professor of entomology at Mississippi State. Sonny’s BSc (Agriculture) and MSc (Entomology) are from the University of Agricultural Sciences, Bangalore; his PhD (Entomology) is from Rutgers. He did postdoc research at Michigan State University. Selena M. Grace is currently the Executive Vice President of the Northwest Commission on Colleges and Universities (NWCCU). She has been at NWCCU since 2020. Previously, she served as Vice Provost for Academic Strategy & Institutional Effectiveness at Idaho State University. She was a member of the inaugural cohort of the WICHE Western Academic Leadership Academy, and her previous experience includes Chief Academic Officer at the Idaho State Board of Education where she was the primary author and manager of the Complete College Idaho Plan. She is a first-generation college graduate. She has a B.A. in English with a writing emphasis and a minor in Native American Studies from Boise State University, an M.F.A. in creative writing and non-fiction from George Mason University, and a Ph.D. in public policy and administration from Boise State University. About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton is the founder, CEO, and Principal Consultant at The Change Leader, Inc. A highly sought-after higher education consultant with 20+ years of experience, Dr. McNaughton works with leadership, management, and boards of both U.S. and international institutions. His expertise spans key areas, including accreditation, governance, strategic planning, presidential onboarding, mergers, acquisitions, and strategic alliances.

View Details

Improving Student Retention: A Proactive Approach

Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Carey Dukes, Assistant Professor of Management at North Greenville University, about innovative strategies to improve student retention and readiness for college.

Key Discussion Points:

The current state of student retention in higher education
The concept of "Academic Armageddon" and its impact on first-year students
A new model for improving student readiness before college begins
The six variables of student readiness
Implementing a pre-college readiness course
Real-world results and success stories
Long-term benefits of improved student preparation

Retention Challenges in Higher Education:

59% of college students don't graduate within four years
30-35% of students transfer after their freshman year
High attrition rates lead to financial strain on institutions and increased student debt

The Readiness Course Model:

Implemented between high school graduation and start of college
Focuses on time management, study techniques, and critical thinking
Addresses six key variables: context, value of degree, informational assessment, self-belief, overall readiness, and effort

Benefits of Proactive Preparation:

Reduced student anxiety
Academic head start
Improved self-efficacy
Better retention of scholarships
Increased likelihood of on-time graduation

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leaders:

Analyze current retention rates and their trends
Assess the financial impact of improved retention
Evaluate existing programs and consider implementing a comprehensive readiness course

Final Thoughts:

The skills taught in the readiness course are transferable and benefit students throughout their academic careers and beyond. He calls for higher education institutions to take bold steps to ensure student success from the moment of acceptance.

Read the transcript or extended show summary on our website: https://changinghighered.com/

#StudentRetention #CollegeReadiness #HigherEducation

About Our Guest Carey Dukes is a dynamic leader with over 30 years of expertise in business management and higher education. Currently an Assistant Professor of Management at North Greenville University, Carey’s career spans from serving as a CEO in multiple companies to driving innovation and efficiency in large-scale transportation operations. He holds a Doctorate in Business Administration and is renowned for his strategic insights into organizational development and change management. Drawing from his experiences as a first-generation college student, Carey has become a thought leader in addressing student retention, one of higher education's most critical challenges. He authored a groundbreaking book and developed a model to improve student readiness and retention, offering institutions actionable strategies to reduce dropout rates. Carey’s unique blend of corporate acumen and academic research provides fresh perspectives on both business and education, making him an engaging podcast guest on topics of student success, leadership, and transformative growth.

View Details

The Real Cost of Chasing Numbers: Balancing Enrollment Pressures and Student Success

Teege Mettille, a veteran with over 20 years in higher education enrollment, discusses the growing challenges faced by admissions counselors and the potential impact on student engagement. Drawing from his book "The Admission Counselor Malaise," Mettille shares insights on the evolving landscape of college admissions and offers strategies for maintaining a balance between institutional needs and student success.

Key Discussion Points

Current Challenges in Higher Education Enrollment:

Decreasing number of high school graduates and public funding
Increasing skepticism about the value of college education
Pressure on institutions to maintain and increase enrollment numbers

Impact on Admissions Counselors:

Growing applicant pools without proportional staff increases
Shift from student engagement to data management and administrative tasks
Misalignment between job expectations and actual responsibilities

Effects on Student Engagement:

Reduction in meaningful one-on-one interactions with prospective students
Increased reliance on mass communication strategies
Potential compromise in matching students with the right institutions

Strategies for Improvement:

Leveraging technology to enhance personal connections
Rethinking hiring and training practices for admissions counselors
Focusing on yield rates through targeted, personalized outreach

Balancing Institutional Needs and Student Success:

Recognizing the disconnect between revenue goals and counselor motivations
Celebrating the human side of admissions work
Adapting success metrics beyond pure enrollment numbers

Three Key Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards

Acknowledge the misalignment between institutional enrollment goals and admissions counselor motivations.
Focus on outperforming market position incrementally rather than attempting drastic changes.
Celebrate and support admissions counselors' mission-driven work in addition to meeting enrollment targets.

Final Thoughts

Mettille emphasizes the need for a balanced approach in college admissions, one that meets institutional needs while preserving the core mission of guiding students to their best-fit educational experiences. He calls for creativity and adaptability in addressing these challenges, highlighting the potential for technology and strategic planning to enhance rather than replace the human element in admissions.

Read the transcript on our website: https://changinghighered.com/impact-of-enrollment-pressure-on-admissions-teams-and-students/

#HigherEducation #HigherEdEnrollment #CollegeAdmissions

About Our Guest Teege Mettille is a thought leader in the field of college admissions with extensive experience on both the institutional and vendor sides of the industry. As a speaker, his primary focus is on addressing and solving pressing issues within the college admissions profession, ensuring ethical practices, and promoting the well-being of students over mere enrollment numbers. Teege is the author of the insightful book "The Admissions Counselor Malaise: Addressing the staff morale crisis in college admissions," which provides a critical yet constructive analysis of the current state of college admissions. The book has been praised for its candid approach to diagnosing systemic problems and offering actionable solutions for improvement. Teege's expertise and practical advice make it an invaluable resource for professionals in higher education.

View Details

Navigating the Future of University Governance: Lessons from 250 Years of Experience

Dr. Drumm McNaughton and Lauren Zalaznick, author of Letters from the Corporation of Brown University: Lives of Usefulness and Reputation, discuss the evolution and future of university governance. Drawing from over 250 years of trustee resignation letters at Brown University, they share invaluable insights on leadership, adaptability, and effective governance in higher education.

Key Discussion Points

Historical Context and Evolving Governance:

Brown University's founding charter from 1764 and its enduring mission
The impact of including recent alumni trustees on board composition
How diverse perspectives have transformed personal growth and institutional policies

Strategic Planning in Higher Education:

The importance of long-term thinking and continuous improvement
Balancing tradition with innovation in institutional governance
Strategies for adapting to changing societal needs while maintaining core values

Roles and Responsibilities of University Trustees:

The unique bicameral governing body at Brown University
Key responsibilities: policy setting, financial oversight, and presidential appointment
Qualities sought in effective board members: "work, wealth, and wisdom"

Navigating Campus Crises and Controversial Issues:

Lessons from handling periods of campus unrest and societal change
The importance of including diverse viewpoints in governance
Strategies for protecting academic freedom and fostering respectful dialogue

Leadership Development in Higher Education:

The role of governance structures in cultivating future leaders
Key leadership principles: humility, openness, and collaborative decision-making
Balancing short-term needs with long-term vision

Adapting Governance for the Digital Age:

Insights from recent alumni trustees on connecting with current student needs
The impact of technology on board operations and decision-making
Addressing new challenges in cybersecurity and data privacy

Three Key Takeaways for University Leaders and Boards

Embrace diversity in governance to enhance decision-making and responsiveness.
Foster a culture of continuous improvement through regular self-assessment and adaptation.
Balance institutional traditions with innovation to meet evolving societal needs.

Final Thoughts

The episode concludes with a call for university leaders to view governance as a foundation for effective leadership. By creating inclusive, adaptable, and purposeful governance models, institutions can navigate the complexities of modern higher education while staying true to their core missions.

Read the transcript or extended show summary on our website at https://changinghighered.com/university-governance-strategic-insights-from-brown/

#UniversityGovernance #HigherEducation #HigherEdPodcast

About Our Guest

Lauren Zalaznick has devoted her career in media to transforming the cultural landscape.

Zalaznick has received two Peabody Awards and numerous Emmy Awards. TIME magazine named her one of the “TIME 100: World’s Most Influential People,” and her interviews have been archived at the Television Academy Foundation. Her TED talk, “The Conscience of Television,” has been viewed and shared close to a million times. Zalaznick graduated with a degree in English from Brown University in 1984, magna cum laude and Phi Beta Kappa.

About the Host

View Details

Navigating the Transfer Maze: Improving Community College Transfer Student Success

Dr. Drumm McNaughton and Joshua Bay, an education reporter with The 74, dive deep into the critical challenges facing community college transfer students and explore innovative solutions to boost their success rates at four-year institutions.

Key Discussion Points

The Transfer Student Crisis:

Alarming statistic: Only 16% of community college transfers complete bachelor's degrees.
Fall 2023 paradox: Community college enrollment growth, but declining transfer rates.
Equity gap: Even lower completion rates for Black, Latino, and low-income transfer students.

Institutional Blind Spots:

Four-year colleges are often unprepared for transfer students' unique needs.
Credit transfer nightmares: Wasted time, money, and motivation.
Culture shock: Stark differences in faculty engagement between 2-year and 4-year institutions.

Guided Pathways: A Beacon of Hope:

The success of guided pathways model in community colleges.
Potential for adaptation at four-year institutions.
Key elements: Comprehensive planning, regular check-ins, clear transfer information.

Policy as a Catalyst for Change:

The power of centralized, state-level transfer policies.
Standardizing credit transfers and support services across institutions.
Leveling the playing field for first-generation and low-income students.

Fostering Belonging in a New World:

Transfer students struggle with isolation and disconnection.
Strategies: Transfer-specific orientations, peer mentoring, dedicated organizations.
Faculty engagement: Recognizing and valuing transfer students' unique experiences.

Adapting to the New Student Landscape:

Shift away from solely focusing on the traditional "high school to college" pipeline.
Understand diverse pathways: gap years, returning students, and career changers.
Need for flexible support systems and reimagined student services.

Diversity in a Post-Affirmative Action World:

Community college partnerships as a pathway to maintain diverse student bodies.
Targeted outreach, scholarships, and support for underrepresented transfer students.

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Ed Leaders

Centralize and standardize transfer policies at the state level.
Forge strong community college partnerships to enhance diversity and access.
Create a culture of belonging that embraces the unique experiences of transfer students.

Closing Thoughts

Bay and McNaughton emphasize that improving transfer student outcomes is not just an institutional imperative but a societal one. By breaking down barriers and providing targeted support, colleges can unlock the potential of millions of students, leading to a more educated workforce and a more equitable society.

Read the transcript and extended show summary on our website: https://changinghighered.com/improving-the-experience-for-community-college-transfer-students/

#HigherEducation #HigherEdEnrollment #CommunityCollegeTransfers

About Our Podcast Guest

Joshua Bay is an education reporter with expertise in policy analysis and data-driven journalism. He is currently a staff reporter for The 74, a nonprofit news organization covering America’s education system from early childhood through college and career.

Joshua’s coverage spans from artificial intelligence in the classroom to Gen Z’s growing apathy towards a college education. With support from his fellowship at the Poynter Institute, Joshua produced a three-part project taking a closer look into the struggles of earning a bachelor’s degree — particularly among community college transfers.

Prior to The 74, Joshua graduated with a master’s degree in education advocacy and policy at Georgetown University. There, he co-developed a policy research report on the educational, housing, and public health outcomes of Washington D.C. residents based on census redistricting.

View Details

In this Washington Update, Tom Netting, President of TEN Government Strategies, provides a comprehensive overview of recent regulatory changes and challenges facing higher education institutions. This update covers a wide range of topics, including FAFSA, Title IX, FSA, IDR, SAVE, NC-SARA, NACIQI, PPA, TRIO, Clery Act, Gainful Employment, Title IV, and Chevron Decision Impacts, and more.

Key Discussion Points Regulatory Environment and Negotiated Rulemaking: * Overview of the 2023-2024 federal Negotiated Rulemaking process * Proposed changes to distance education regulations, particularly affecting clock-hour programs * Potential expansion of TRIO programs to increase access for disadvantaged and disabled individuals

Title IX and State-by-State Implementation: * Complexities arising from state-by-state variation in Title IX implementation * Challenges for institutions operating under multiple, sometimes conflicting policies * Ongoing legal battles and potential Supreme Court involvement

FAFSA Rollout and Enrollment Implications: * Delayed rollout of the new FAFSA form and its impact on Fall 2024 enrollments * Phased implementation plan for the 2025-2026 FAFSA form * Potential challenges for institutions in admissions and financial aid processes

Student Loan Repayment and the SAVE Program: * Current repayment statistics and challenges as the loan pause ends * Introduction of the SAVE (Saving on a Valuable Education) program * Ongoing legal challenges to repayment initiatives

Institutional Quality and Oversight: * Proposed changes to accreditation processes and NACIQI oversight * Increased transparency in Program Participation Agreements (PPAs) and administrative enforcement actions * Implications for institutional reputation and compliance strategies

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leaders 1. Stay informed and engaged with the rapidly changing regulatory environment. 2. Develop flexible strategies to adapt to evolving requirements in areas like distance education, Title IX, and financial aid. 3. Prioritize compliance and transparent communication about institutional status and efforts.

Final Thoughts The current higher education policy landscape is marked by complexity and rapid change. Institutional leaders must stay proactive, informed, and adaptable to navigate these challenges successfully while maintaining focus on their core educational missions.

Read the transcript and extended show notes on our website at https://changinghighered.com/washington-update-neg-reg-clery-act-and-chevron-decision/

#HigherEducation #NegReg #HigherEdCompliance

About Our Podcast Guest Tom Netting

View Details

Fostering Global Understanding: The Role of International Houses in Higher Education The rising trend in international student enrollment, currently at its fastest rate in over 40 years, underscores the critical need for fostering global understanding in higher education. International Houses (I-Houses) have emerged as a powerful model for creating inclusive and globally-minded campus communities, addressing the challenges of integrating international students and enriching the educational experience for all.

Dr. Shaun Carver, Executive Director of UC Berkeley's International House, joined to discuss the transformative impact of the I-House model on cross-cultural exchange and global education. With over a century of history, I-Houses continue to play a crucial role in breaking down cultural barriers and fostering understanding through daily interactions and shared experiences.

Key Points Overview: The Origins and Evolution of International Houses: * The I-House movement began in 1908, sparked by a chance encounter at Columbia University. * John D. Rockefeller Jr. and the Cleveland Dodge family funded the first I-House, leading to establishments at UC Berkeley and the University of Chicago.

The I-House Experience: * UC Berkeley's I-House hosts approximately 620 residents from 80 different countries. * A balanced mix of international and domestic students (20%) ensures cross-cultural exposure.

Addressing Challenges of International Student Integration: * Pre-enrollment support is crucial for international students preparing for U.S. education. * Cultural and academic adaptation challenges are comparable to those faced by first-generation and low SES students. * Financial considerations include higher tuition rates for international students.

Creating a Diverse and Inclusive Environment: * Balanced admissions ensure no single nationality or academic discipline dominates. * Economic diversity is maintained through financial aid. * Intentional room assignments pair students from different countries.

Long-Term Impact of the I-House Experience: * Alumni report lifelong friendships and transformative experiences. * Notable alumni include Nobel Prize winners, heads of state, and business leaders.

The Unique Identity of I-House Residents: * Residents develop multiple affiliations: with the university, their specific schools, and I-House itself. * The I-House affiliation often becomes the strongest over time.

Future of International Houses and Global Education: * Potential for I-Houses to play an expanded role in fostering dialogue on controversial topics. * Aspirations to scale up the I-House impact globally.

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Presidents and Boards: 1. Lead with clear values and cultural principles, articulating them to all stakeholders. 2. Maintain consistent policies across all groups to build credibility and trust. 3. Protect freedom of expression by distinguishing between education and indoctrination.

Final Thoughts The International House model offers valuable lessons for higher education institutions seeking to create truly global learning environments. By intentionally fostering cross-cultural interactions and maintaining a commitment to open dialogue, universities can prepare students to thrive in an increasingly interconnected world. The principles embodied by International Houses provide a roadmap for creating inclusive, intellectually stimulating environments that benefit both international and domestic students, ultimately contributing to a more connected and empathetic global society.

Read the transcript and extended show summary on our website at: https://changinghighered.com/enroll-and-retain-international-students-i-house-uc-berkeley/

#HigherEducation #InternationalStudents #IHouse

About Our Guest With over 20 years of experience in international education and higher learning, Dr. Shaun Carver is the Executive Director and CEO of International House at UC Berkeley, a renowned institution that fosters intercultural respect and understanding among people from around the world. Dr. Carver holds a Doctor of Education in Organizational Change and Leadership from the University of Southern California and an MBA from California State University San Marcos.

View Details

Caitlin Andersen, founder and principal consultant at Auxilium Education, discusses with host Dr. Drumm McNaughton the challenges and strategies for U.S. universities in attracting and supporting international students. They explore the changing landscape of international student recruitment, the value these students bring to campuses, and effective methods for universities to differentiate themselves in a competitive global market.

Key Discussion Points Value and Challenges of International Student Recruitment:

The significant economic contribution of international students to the U.S. economy, totaling over $45 billion annually.
Declining international student enrollment, with a 15% drop in the 2020-2021 academic year, the steepest in over 70 years.
The challenge for U.S. universities to stand out when 98% of institutions offer similar programs.

Understanding International Student Motivations:

Career advancement is the primary driver for international students choosing U.S. universities.
The influence of industry strength in different regions on students' university choices.
The importance of practical experience and post-graduation work opportunities, particularly through Optional Practical Training (OPT) programs.

Effective Recruitment Strategies:

Highlighting industry partnerships and career opportunities in marketing materials.
Emphasizing STEM designations and OPT opportunities to attract and retain international talent.
Developing robust career services tailored to international students' needs.
Creating student ambassador programs to provide authentic insights to prospective students.

Supporting International Students on Campus:

Providing language support and bridging programs to ease academic transitions.
Leveraging alumni networks for recruitment and mentorship.
Optimizing online presence for international audiences, including multilingual landing pages.
Hosting virtual events and webinars at convenient times for global audiences.
Addressing visa and immigration concerns proactively.

Comprehensive Support Systems:

Developing orientation programs specifically for international students.
Organizing cross-cultural events and activities to foster integration.
Offering academic support services tailored to international students' needs.
Ensuring culturally sensitive mental health and wellness resources are available.

Three Key Takeaways for University Leaders

Focus on career advancement opportunities in recruitment strategies, highlighting industry connections and post-graduation prospects.
Utilize data-driven insights from current international students and alumni to inform and refine recruitment approaches.
Invest in comprehensive support systems that address the unique needs of international students, from pre-arrival through graduation and beyond.

Final Thoughts

The episode concludes by emphasizing the ongoing importance of international students to U.S. higher education. As global competition intensifies, universities must continually adapt their strategies to attract and support these valuable members of their campus communities. Success in this area not only benefits the institutions financially but also enriches the educational experience for all students, preparing them for success in an increasingly interconnected world.

Read the transcript and extended show summary at: https://changinghighered.com/supporting-and-attracting-international-students-strategies-for-u-s-universities/

#HigherEducation #InternationalStudentEnrollment #EnrollmentStrategies

About our Podcast Guest

Caitlin Andersen is the founder and Principal Consultant at Auxilium Education, an education consultancy that serves international graduate business school applicants. Trusted by Forbes 30 Under 30 and senior managers at Google, McKinsey, and Amazon, Ms. Andersen has helped international applicants from 30+ countries across 6 continents successfully apply to all the top business schools in the United States, United Kingdom, Europe, China, and Singapore.

Ms. Andersen currently serves as the Business Roundtable Chair for the Independent Educational Consultants Association (IECA) Graduate Committee. Recently, she was featured on GMAT Club’s Live YouTube Channel (114K+ subscribers).

Originally from Boston, Massachusetts, Ms. Andersen became an international student when she moved to England to get her MBA from the University of Oxford, Saïd Business School (SBS). She is on a mission to ensure applicants everywhere have the chance to competitively apply to the best business schools in the world.

About the Host

Dr. Drumm McNaughton is the founder, CEO, and Principal Consultant at The Change Leader, Inc. A highly sought-after higher education consultant with 20+ years of experience, Dr. McNaughton works with leadership, management, and boards of both U.S. and international institutions. His expertise spans key areas, including accreditation, governance, strategic planning, presidential onboarding, mergers, acquisitions, and strategic alliances. Dr. McNaughton’s approach combines a holistic methodology with a deep understanding of the contemporary and evolving challenges facing higher education institutions worldwide to ensure his clients succeed in their mission.

View Details

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton talks with David Marchick, Dean of American University's Kogod School of Business, and Angela Virtu, Professorial Lecturer in IT & Analytics at American University’s Kogod School of Business, about their rapid integration of artificial intelligence across the entire business curriculum in just six months. They discuss the urgency of AI in higher education, Kogod's implementation strategy, and valuable lessons for other institutions.

Key Discussion Points

The Urgency of AI in Higher Education:

Recognition of AI's growing importance in the business world
Need for AI literacy as an essential skill for future business leaders

Kogod School of Business's Rapid AI Integration:

Formation of a committee to develop an actionable plan within six weeks
Comprehensive approach: integrating AI into every major, developing new courses, creating AI certificates, and implementing faculty training

Strategic Steps for Rapid AI Implementation:

Development of two types of AI-integrated courses: Artisan and SAGE
Appointment of an AI Faculty Teaching Fellow to support the initiative

Overcoming Challenges in AI Adoption:

Balancing speed of implementation with quality and relevance
Supporting faculty adaptation to new teaching methods and content
Keeping pace with rapid AI developments
Incorporating ethical considerations alongside technical skills

Student-Centric Outcomes:

Cross-disciplinary integration of AI across all business majors
Practical applications of AI in various business disciplines

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leaders:

Act Decisively: Quick action is crucial in the face of technological change.
Embrace a Cross-Disciplinary Approach: Integrate AI across all majors to benefit all students.
Invest in Faculty Development: Provide resources and training for successful AI integration.

Looking Ahead: The Future of AI in Higher Education

Plans for continued refinement and expansion of AI curriculum
Hiring additional AI faculty and developing advanced AI courses
Expanding industry partnerships and exploring cross-pollination opportunities

Read the transcript and extended show summary on our website at: https://changinghighered.com/ai-integration-in-higher-ed-curriculums-how-kogod-did-it-in-six-months/ #HigherEducation #AICurriculum #AIEducation About Our Podcast Guests David Marchick is the Dean of the Kogod School of Business at American University, supporting over 2,000 students in over two dozen programs. He leads the committee for Kogod’s AI curriculum overhaul, an initiative focused on integrating AI into every major to prepare students for the global marketplace. Previously, Marchick was COO of the U.S. Development Finance Corporation, overseeing investments to produce 2 billion COVID-19 vaccine doses for developing countries. He spent 12 years at the Carlyle Group, where he served on the firm's Management Committee.

Angela Virtu is a Professorial Lecturer in IT & Analytics at American University’s Kogod School of Business. She teaches courses on technology, data analytics, machine learning, and coding. She’s also the AI Instruction Faculty Fellow, organizing training on AI developments for faculty and staff. Previously, she developed AI and ML solutions that combined theoretical advancements with practical, ethical applications for organizational integration and business impact.

View Details

Phil Hill, publisher of the On EdTech newsletter at Phil Hill Associates and EdTech expert, joins Dr. Drumm McNaughton to discuss the current state of educational technology, focusing on the recent bankruptcy of 2U, a major Online Program Management (OPM) provider and its implications for higher education.

Hill shares insights on regulatory changes, the evolving OPM market, and strategies for university leaders to navigate these challenges.

Key Discussion Points

EdTech Landscape and Regulatory Changes:

Shift in government approach from supporting innovation to increased skepticism towards EdTech vendors.
New regulations targeting online education, including virtual campus requirements and mandatory attendance tracking.
Potential overhaul of state authorization reciprocity agreements (SARA) and its impact on cross-state online program offerings.

2U Bankruptcy and OPM Market Implications:

Analysis of 2U's bankruptcy filing, including debt reduction and ownership transfer.
Implications for higher education institutions partnering with OPMs, including risk management and reputational concerns.
The need for institutions to reassess OPM partnerships and consider alternative models for online program delivery.

Cybersecurity in Higher Education:

Increasing cybersecurity threats in the education sector.
Shift towards comprehensive solutions from larger vendors for better accountability and insurance coverage.
Elevation of cybersecurity to a board-level concern, especially for institutions with large endowments.

Future of Online Education:

Continued importance of online and hybrid education for institutional growth and student access.
Need for innovation in program delivery while ensuring regulatory compliance.
Focus on student outcomes and employability to demonstrate the value of online programs.

Strategic Adaptation for Higher Education Institutions:

Importance of comprehensive risk management strategies covering OPM partnerships, cybersecurity, and regulatory compliance.
Need for ongoing monitoring of student outcomes and program performance.
Emphasis on leveraging existing technologies effectively across institutions.

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leaders and Boards

Implement comprehensive risk management strategies that encompass OPM partnerships, cybersecurity, and regulatory compliance.
Focus on demonstrating strong student outcomes and program effectiveness in online education.
Engage actively in regulatory discussions and advocate for institutional interests during negotiated rulemaking and public comment periods.

Final Thoughts

The episode concludes with a call for higher education leaders to stay informed about the evolving EdTech landscape and take proactive steps to manage risks and opportunities. Despite the challenges, online and hybrid education remain critical areas for institutional growth and student access in an increasingly digital and competitive environment.

Read the transcript on our website at: https://changinghighered.com/the-state-of-edtech-opms-2u-bankruptcy-implications/

#EdTech #HigherEducation #OPMs #2UBankruptcy

About Our Podcast Guest Phil Hill, publisher of Phil on EdTech Blog and partner at MindWires LLC. Phil has been a market analyst and consultant in EdTech for over two decades. He is most notably recognized for writing his blog, On EdTech.

Phill Hill on LinkedIn →

View Details

Nuno Fernandes, President of American Public University System (APUS), joins Dr. Drumm McNaughton to discuss how higher education institutions can leverage technology in marketing and branding and remain affordable and relevant. With his background in business and global education, Nuno brings a unique perspective on transforming the traditional higher education model.

Key Discussion Points

The Unchanging Higher Education Model:

Higher education hasn't fundamentally changed in nearly a millennium, despite global revolutions in technology and communication.
The traditional model of professors lecturing to students remains largely unchanged since the founding of the University of Bologna in 1088.

Challenges in Higher Education Branding and Marketing:

The shift from location-based to online education has transferred power from institutions to students.
Universities must differentiate themselves beyond academic offerings in a market where quality education is considered table stakes.

Technology-Driven Strategies for Higher Education:

Leveraging AI and data analytics to create personalized learning experiences and marketing campaigns.
Implementing 24/7 student support through AI-powered tools, including mental health support.
Using technology to enhance, not replace, human interaction in education.

APUS: A Case Study in Technology-Driven Transformation:

Rebranding effort centered around the concept of being "Digital by Nature, Human by Design."
Implementing AI tools to augment faculty capabilities and improve student experiences.
Maintaining affordability: APUS increased tuition by only 15% over two decades, compared to the industry average of 300%.

The Future of Technology in Higher Education:

Predictions of ongoing demographic declines and their impact on enrollment.
The necessity for higher education institutions to innovate and adapt to remain viable.
Potential for technology to lower costs while improving quality and accessibility of education.

Three Key Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards

Embrace technology and innovation as critical for the success of any university moving forward.
Prioritize personalization in both education delivery and marketing efforts.
Focus on continuously improving the student experience through technology while maintaining affordability.

Nuno Fernandes emphasizes that the core mission of higher education institutions should be to serve students better every day. By leveraging technology and maintaining a student-centric focus, universities can navigate the challenges of the modern education landscape and create a brighter future for themselves and their students.

Read the transcript on our website: https://changinghighered.com/using-technology-to-upgrade-higher-ed-branding-and-marketing/

#HigherEducation #HigherEdBrandingAndMarketing #HigherEdTransformation

About Our Guest APUS President Nuno Fernandes is a visionary leader who has succeeded in making online higher education more affordable and accessible while delivering top-quality education and favorable student outcomes. As President, he is focused on a global digital journey that integrates personalized, collaborative, technology-driven learning experiences to prepare students for tomorrow’s challenges and opportunities. Mr. Fernandes has a wealth of experience driving innovation across higher education, technology, and business. He has been APUS President since September 2022. Previously, Mr. Fernandes was president and CEO of Ilumno, the largest online program manager in Latin America and among the top 3 globally (in terms of managed students). He served in roles with increasing responsibilities at Ilumno for over a decade. Mr. Fernandes was instrumental in improving student retention, student satisfaction, graduation rates, and reputation at the company’s owned and partner universities. He also helped expand access to higher education in several countries.

View Details

Higher education institutions are facing a perfect storm of challenges that demand robust crisis management skills. From campus protests reminiscent of the 1960s to the lightning-fast spread of information (and misinformation) on social media, colleges and universities are navigating treacherous waters. How can they stay afloat – and even thrive – in this turbulent environment?

Crisis Management in Higher Education: Strategies for Institutional Resilience

Dr. Drumm McNaughton, CEO of The Change Leader higher education consulting firm, and guest Stephanie Craig, President of Kith crisis preparation, response, and recovery firm, discuss essential strategies for building crisis management and communication capabilities in higher education institutions.

Key Discussion Points

Higher Education's Unique Crisis Management Challenges:

The complex stakeholder environment in higher education is reminiscent of the turbulent 1960s but with added dimensions of social media and 24-hour news cycles.
The impact of poorly handled crises on various aspects of institutional operations, from student recruitment to donor confidence.

Building Crisis Management Muscle: The PIP2 Approach:

Plan: Develop comprehensive crisis strategies and response protocols.
Invest: Allocating resources for crisis preparedness, including training and technology.
Practice: Conducting regular crisis simulations to identify weaknesses and build muscle memory.
Prioritize: Embedding crisis preparedness in institutional culture at all levels.

The Clarity + Trust = Speed Formula:

Clarity: Ensuring a clear understanding of institutional mission, values, and stakeholder priorities.
Trust: Building trust within crisis management teams and with key stakeholders.
Speed: Responding quickly and decisively to crises without sacrificing accuracy.

Stakeholder Management in Higher Education Crises:

Navigating the diverse and often conflicting interests of multiple stakeholder groups.
Tailoring communication strategies to different stakeholder needs and preferences.

The Role of Leadership and Second-Level Thinking:

The importance of leadership visibility and engagement during crises.
Employing "second-level thinking" to anticipate the ripple effects of decisions and communications.

Integrating Risk Management and Crisis Communication:

The collaboration between risk management and communication teams.
Breaking down silos to ensure comprehensive crisis response strategies.

Opportunities in Crisis: Catalysts for Institutional Innovation:

Recognizing crises as potential drivers of positive change and innovation.
Examples of institutional transformation sparked by crisis situations.

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Presidents and Boards

Invest in crisis management now, prioritizing preparation as a matter of urgency.
Implement the PIP2 approach (Plan, Invest, Practice, Prioritize) to build crisis management muscle.
Adopt the Clarity + Trust = Speed formula for effective crisis response.

Read the transcript on our website at: https://changinghighered.com/ building-higher-ed-crisis-management-and-communication-muscle/

#HigherEducation #HigherEdRiskManagement #CrisisManagement

About Our Podcast Guest

Stephanie Craig is the President of Kith.co, where she provides strategic guidance and solutions for high-stakes issues and challenges faced by C-suite executives, high-profile organizations, and elected officials. She has built her reputation as a crisis expert by guiding some of the world’s most prominent people and organizations through their most trying moments. Combining her deep experience in politics, media, and business, she mitigates crises, repairs reputations, and inoculates against future crises. Stephanie has counted former First Lady Rosalynn Carter, the mayor of the nation’s 10th largest city, and some of the most notable global brands, as well as institutes of higher education, as clients. Stephanie is a prolific author on topics including crisis communications, reputational management, political communication, the intersection of law and communications, and entrepreneurship. If asked, she’ll even talk about being born in the Arctic.

About the Host

View Details

Addressing Student Mental Health in Higher Education: Expert Insights and Strategies

Dr. Drumm McNaughton is joined by Tony Walker, Senior Vice President of Academic Programs at The Jed Foundation, and James Kohl, Dean of Student Affairs at the University of Massachusetts Lowell, to discuss student mental health in higher education. They share insights on current challenges, effective strategies, and the evolving crisis of mental health on college campuses.

Key Discussion Points

The State of Student Mental Health:

Suicide remains the second leading cause of death among young people ages 10-34, according to the CDC.
Recent data shows a significant increase in mental health issues among young adults, with 36.2% experiencing a mental, behavioral, or emotional health issue in the past year.
Marginalized communities, particularly LGBTQ+ youth, face even greater challenges.

The Jed Foundation's Approach:

Overview of the JED Campus Programs initiative, which spans seven key domains to support student mental health.
Discussion of the implementation process, including needs assessment, strategic planning, and evaluation.
Insights into the impact of comprehensive mental health programs, including reduced suicide attempts and improved crisis response.

UMass Lowell Case Study:

Implementation of the JED Campus program at UMass Lowell, including the process and challenges faced.
Positive outcomes despite the COVID-19 pandemic, including better-than-national-average scores in student flourishing.
Key lessons learned, emphasizing collaboration, stakeholder buy-in, and adaptability.

Evolution of Mental Health Discussions in Higher Education:

Shift from stigmatization to open dialogue about mental health on campuses.
Growing recognition of mental health's importance in student success.
Movement towards more holistic approaches that include both prevention and crisis response.

Strategic Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders:

Prioritize mental health at the institutional level.
Foster collaboration and break down departmental silos.
Implement comprehensive screening and early intervention programs.
Enhance access to mental health services and destigmatize mental health through education.
Develop robust crisis management protocols.

Read the transcript of this podcast on our website: https://changinghighered.com/implementing-comprehensive-student-mental-health-programs/

#HigherEducation #StudentMentalHealth #HigherEdPodcasts

About Our Podcast Guests

Dr. Tony Walker joined The Jed Foundation in November 2022 as Senior Vice President of Academic Programs. In his role, he structures, expands, and leads JED’s K-12 and higher education programs to meet the organization’s strategic plan objectives. To fulfill this work, he connects strategy, people management, operations, fiscal responsibility, partnerships, and school recruitment functions. Prior to joining JED, Tony served as Vice President of Education Strategy and Innovation at the Meadows Mental Health Policy Institute. He previously worked in multiple roles in public education, including as a teacher, school counselor, and, most recently, as an executive district leader over Student Support Services at a large public school district in Texas. Tony is a Licensed Professional Counselor and Certified School Counselor and holds a Bachelor’s degree in Education from the University of Missouri, a Master’s degree in Counseling, and a PhD in Counselor Education and Supervision from Texas Tech University.

James Kohl, Ph.D., is the Dean of Student Affairs and Experiential Learning at the University of Massachusetts Lowell. He has been at UMass Lowell for over 16 years and previously worked at George Washington University as the director of housing programs. He received a B.S. in Psychology from Lafayette College, an M.A. in College Student Personnel Services from University of Maryland, College Park, and a Ph.D. in Educational Policy and Leadership from University of Maryland, College Park.

About the Host

Dr. Drumm McNaughton is the founder, CEO, and Principal Consultant at The Change Leader, Inc. A highly sought-after higher education consultant with 20+ years of experience, Dr. McNaughton works with leadership, management, and boards of both U.S. and international institutions. His expertise spans key areas including accreditation, governance, strategic planning, presidential onboarding, mergers, acquisitions, and strategic alliances. Dr. McNaughton's approach combines a holistic methodology with a deep understanding of the contemporary and evolving challenges facing higher education institutions worldwide to ensure his clients succeed in their mission. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website: https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

AI Integration in Higher Education: Miami Dade College's Innovative Approach Madeline Pumariega, President of Miami Dade College, discusses how the institution has embraced artificial intelligence (AI) across disciplines and integrated it into the student experience. She shares insights on developing AI programs, involving faculty, and addressing ethical considerations.

Key Discussion Points Miami Dade College's AI Journey: * Creation of stackable credentials in AI, from certificates to associate's and bachelor's degrees * Interdisciplinary approach, integrating AI across various programs beyond just technology * Development of AI Institutes and community engagement through speaker series and partnerships

Faculty Development and Adoption: * Investment in faculty training and workshops on AI * Grants for faculty to develop innovative AI-enhanced teaching approaches * Addressing skepticism by drawing parallels to past technological advancements in education

Strategic Implementation of AI: * Using AI for facilities management, student advising, and enrollment optimization * Focus on personalized learning experiences and communication with students * Balancing opportunities with challenges like consumption-based pricing models for AI platforms

Ethical Considerations and Assessment: * Emphasis on teaching ethics as a foundational part of AI education * Rethinking assessment methods to focus on knowledge application rather than information recall * Maintaining focus on critical thinking and proper attribution in the age of AI

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leaders and Boards 1. Harness the power of community partnerships and industry collaboration in AI initiatives 2. Align resource allocation with institutional values and strategic priorities 3. Lead with authentic leadership to address the future of higher education and community needs

Final Thoughts

Pumariega emphasizes Miami Dade College's role as a model for AI integration in higher education, serving as a "beacon of hope" for the community. She highlights upcoming focuses on Construction Trades Institute and programs in aviation, aerospace, and unmanned vehicles to align with future workforce needs.

Read the full transcript on our website →

#HigherEducation #AIEducation #HigherEdPodcast

About Our Podcast Guest Madeline Pumariega is the first female president appointed to lead one of the nation’s largest educational institutions, Miami Dade College (MDC). Adding to the historic nature of this appointment is the fact that Pumariega is an alumna of MDC.

Prior to becoming MDC’s president, Pumariega was appointed the first female and Hispanic chancellor of the Florida College System (FCS). In that role, she designed and implemented strategies to keep college accessible and affordable for Floridians, especially for those entering high-demand job fields. In 2019, Pumariega became the executive vice president and provost of Tallahassee Community College.

In her current role as President, Pumariega has prioritized working with business partners to identify the skills needed by key industries and tailoring higher education programs to match those needs. This intentional forming of strategic alliances and job pathways between companies and MDC students accelerates each graduate’s ability to enter the workforce immediately. Driving her relentless pursuit is the passion to develop leaders and build thriving communities.

Guest’s LinkedIn Profile →

About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton is a consultant to higher education institutions in governance, accreditation, strategic planning, change management, and mergers.

To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website: https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Dr. Courtney Brown, Vice President of Impact and Planning for Lumina Foundation, discusses key findings from the 2024 State of Higher Education Study conducted in partnership with Gallup. She shares critical insights into evolving student demographics, barriers to enrollment, and strategies for addressing challenges in higher education.

Key Discussion Points

The Changing Profile of Today's College Students:

Shift away from traditional recent high school graduates to more diverse, non-traditional learners.
Approximately 35% of students are financially independent from parents.
About one-third of students have children of their own.
60% of students work while in school, with 40% holding full-time jobs.
Over one-third of current students are over 25 years old.

Primary Barriers to Enrollment and Completion:

Cost and affordability remain the number one obstacle for potential and current students.
Emotional stress and mental health concerns have dramatically increased since 2020.
Work and family responsibilities create additional challenges for many students.
State policies on divisive issues influence enrollment decisions across demographics.

Students Stopping Out: A Growing Crisis:

41.9 million U.S. adults have some college credit but no degree, up 1.5 million from the previous year.
64% of currently enrolled students have considered stopping out in the last six months.
Emotional stress is the leading cause of student attrition, with 70% citing it as their primary reason for considering stopping out.

The Perceived Value of Higher Education:

Nearly all adults without a degree believe at least one type of credential is extremely or very valuable.
Almost 60% of adults who have never enrolled have considered doing so in the past two years.
84% of current or prospective students cite employment factors as reasons for enrolling.

Strategic Adaptation for Higher Education Institutions:

Need for transparent pricing models and innovative financial aid options.
Importance of enhancing mental health and support services for students.
Adapting programs to accommodate non-traditional students' needs.
Strengthening alignment between higher education and workforce demands.
Addressing systemic barriers and advocating for supportive policies.

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leaders and Boards

Actively collect data on student needs and experiences to inform decision-making.
Analyze community demographics to identify and serve potential future students.
Continuously explore ways to make education more affordable and accessible.

Bonus Takeaway: Include a non-traditional student on the board of trustees to provide valuable insights into diverse student needs.

Read the transcript on our website at: https://changinghighered.com/ state-of-higher-education-report-2024-lumina-gallup/

#TheStateOfHigherEducation #HigherEducation #LuminaGallupReport

About Our Podcast Guest

Courtney Brown, Ph.D., is vice president of impact and planning for Lumina Foundation, an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis that is committed to making opportunities for learning beyond high school available to all. As the chief data and research officer, Brown oversees the foundation’s efforts in the areas of strategic planning, learning, impact, and effectiveness. She also leads Lumina’s international engagement.

She joined the foundation in 2011 with a strong background in performance measurement, research, and evaluation. Before 2011, Brown was a senior research associate at the Center for Evaluation and Education Policy at Indiana University. There, she led studies and evaluations focused on education and post-high school programs within the United States and across Europe.

Brown is a frequent speaker and panelist in the United States and other countries regarding postsecondary strategy, student success, data-driven decision-making, and evidence-based practices. She has developed and shared manuals, working papers, articles, and books related to undergraduate research, performance measurement, randomized-control trials, and other evaluation methods, as well as conducted webinars and workshops on topics such as evaluation, performance measurement, and success in education beyond high school.

About the Host

Dr. Drumm McNaughton is a consultant to higher ed institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy, change, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Gil Rogers, founder and CEO of GR7 Marketing, joins Dr. Drumm McNaughton to discuss the current challenges faced by universities in improving their enrollment funnels, particularly in the context of emerging AI technologies. They share insights on the broken traditional funnel model, demographic shifts, affordability concerns, and reputation issues, addressing how AI can be leveraged to transform enrollment strategies.

Key Discussion Points

Enrollment Funnel Challenges and AI Solutions:

The limitations of the traditional enrollment funnel model in capturing modern student behavior.
Inefficient use of human resources in current admissions processes.
Potential of AI to automate repetitive tasks and personalize communication at scale.

Demographic Shifts and Competition:

Impact of the impending enrollment cliff on recruitment strategies.
Increased competition among institutions for a shrinking pool of traditional students.
Use of AI-powered predictive analytics for targeted recruitment.

Addressing Affordability and Financial Aid:

Challenges in balancing institutional financial needs with student accessibility.
Complexity of financial aid processes as a barrier to enrollment.
AI applications in optimizing financial aid strategies and improving yield management.

Reputation and Value Proposition:

Growing public skepticism about the value of higher education.
Need for clear articulation of institutional value propositions.
Leveraging AI to enhance yield management and re-engage stop-outs and non-completers.

Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leaders and Boards

Request an AI strategy from the enrollment management team.
Review current admissions staff time utilization.
Examine financial aid approaches for sustainability and effectiveness.
Develop a plan for staff upskilling in AI technologies.
Establish metrics for measuring AI impact on enrollment outcomes.

Final Thoughts

The episode concludes with a call for strategic integration of AI technologies in enrollment management. The experts emphasize the importance of ethical implementation and ongoing refinement of AI systems to address the complex challenges facing higher education enrollment.

Read the transcript on our website: https://changinghighered.com/how-can-ai-improve-enrollment-funnels-in-higher-ed/

#EnrollmentManagement #HigherEdEnrollment #HigherEducation

About Our Podcast Guest

Gil Rogers is a strategic innovator in education technology marketing, serving as a fractional CMO for EdTech companies. With a background in higher education enrollment management and marketing, he has led institutions through record-breaking recruitment cycles. Gil's career highlights include marketing roles at Zinch.com (acquired by Chegg) and the National Research Center for College and University Admissions (NRCCUA), where he advanced digital marketing and data-informed enrollment strategies. As founder of GR7 Marketing, he helps entrepreneurs effectively communicate their services to educational institutions. Known for his energy and enthusiasm, Gil frequently speaks at national conferences on marketing strategy for EdTech startups, leadership, and customer understanding. As a podcast guest, he offers valuable insights into effective marketing strategies and leadership in EdTech, making him an ideal speaker for audiences seeking innovation in this dynamic industry.

About Our Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton is a higher education consultant who works with college and university leadership, management, and boards of directors to ensure they succeed in their mission.

He is an innovator, strategic management pioneer, accreditation specialist, transformational and turnaround expert, and governance professional with P&L experience in multiple industries, having stimulated transformation that propelled double-digit growth for colleges and universities, startups, and Fortune 500 companies.

View Details

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed podcast, Drumm McNaughton welcomes back Dr. Zack Mabel, Research Professor and Director of Research, and Kathryn Campbell, Associate Director of Editorial Policy and Senior Editor/Writer, from the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce (CEW). They discuss the findings of CEW's recent report, "The Great Misalignment: Addressing the Mismatch Between the Supply of Certificates and Associates Degrees and the Future Demand for Workers in the U.S. Labor Markets," which highlights the severe disconnect between the credentials higher education institutions are producing and the skills employers need in the workforce.

Key Discussion Points

The Extent of the Misalignment:

Only 50% of colleges use labor market data to guide program development or share the information with prospective students.
To align with projected labor market demand through 2031, at least 50% of middle-skill credentials would need to be granted in different fields of study in half of the nation's local labor markets.

Importance of Labor Market Alignment for Middle Skills Providers:

Misalignment between credentials produced and employer needs varies substantially across regions.
Perfect alignment may not be realistic, but the magnitude of the mismatch shows considerable room for improvement.

Racial and Ethnic Disparities in Access to Aligned Programs:

American Indian and Alaska Native adults are 3 to 18 times more likely to live in a community with no local middle-skill provider.
Among those living near middle-skill institutions, Hispanics are the least likely to reside in communities with a strong alignment between credential production and workforce demand.

Strengthening Career Counseling and Transfer Pathways:

The current counseling system in high schools is understaffed and under-resourced to provide sufficient guidance.
Over a quarter of middle-skills students are in liberal arts and sciences programs oriented toward transfer, but fewer than half successfully make that transition within six years.

Using Labor Market Data for Program Improvement:

Institutions need to utilize labor market data more strategically and systematically.
Colleges need sufficient resources and staff expertise to collect, analyze, and translate this information into action.
A collaborative regional approach to program development is essential.

Three Key Takeaways for University, College, and Community College Presidents and Boards:

Explore ways to collaborate with other local education and training providers to optimize the alignment of credentials with labor market demand.
Invest heavily in interpersonal connections and support services that help students choose and complete programs leading to high-demand careers.
Be vocal about the need for resources and support to effectively utilize labor market data for program improvement.

Read the transcript on our website →

https://changinghighered.com/improve-student-employability-the-great-misalignment-report/

#HigherEducation #StudentEmployability #MiddleSkillJobs

About Our Podcast Guests

Kathryn Peltier Campbell is Associate Director of Editorial Policy and Senior Editor/Writer at the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce. In her role, she directs content development for CEW’s reports and collaborates on editorial strategy. She has extensive experience editing and writing publications focused on topics such as diversity and equity in postsecondary education, higher education’s civic mission, and the value of liberal education in contemporary contexts. She has a deep interest in ensuring that every individual has the opportunity and means to contribute to—and thrive in—the workforce, civil society, and life. Kathryn has an MA in English from the University of Virginia, where she additionally earned a BA with a double major in English and physics.

Zack Mabel is a research professor of education and economics at the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce, where he leads research projects that leverage insights from labor and behavioral economics to promote educational opportunity, equity, and economic mobility. His work is motivated by the goal of improving college and later life outcomes for members of historically marginalized groups to achieve a shared vision of economic prosperity in the United States. Prior to joining CEW, he worked most recently as a policy research scientist at the College Board. Zack earned his BA from Brandeis University, MPP from the University of Michigan, and EdD in Quantitative Policy Analysis of Education from the Harvard Graduate School of Education.

About the Host

Dr. Drumm McNaughton is a consultant to higher education institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website: https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton and Bruce Dahlgren, CEO of Anthology and trustee at Stetson University, explore the transformative potential of artificial intelligence (AI) in higher education. They discuss the parallels between human and AI development, address ethical concerns, and provide actionable recommendations for college and university leaders looking to integrate AI effectively.

Podcast Overview

Understanding AI's Learning Process and Addressing Concerns

§ AI systems, like humans, accumulate knowledge and experiences to grow smarter over time.

§ Natural language models like GPT now draw upon neural networks with over 1.7 trillion parameters, enabling sophisticated outputs.

§ Occasional "hallucinations" in AI outputs are a result of drawing upon mismatched patterns and will decrease with more data exposure.

§ Proper data, training, and policy frameworks can mitigate risks of AI misuse in higher education.

Piloting AI as a Faculty Productivity Tool

§ AI-powered "design assistants" streamline course preparation, saving faculty significant time.

§ 94% of faculty in a pilot study reported substantial time savings using AI assistants.

§ Faculty remain in control, reviewing and approving AI outputs before use.

§ Time saved allows faculty to dedicate more energy to working directly with students.

Developing a Proactive AI Policy Framework

§ University leaders should craft clear AI policy frameworks defining supported tools, guardrails, and benefits to students.

§ Gathering input from faculty senates, administrators, and trustees helps develop policies with broad support.

§ The goal is to help faculty build practical, adoptable policies and frameworks.

Empowering Staff and Administrators with AI

§ AI can predict enrollment likelihood, target personalized communications, and boost yield.

§ Demographic analysis helps universities understand the demand for new programs or facilities.

§ AI chatbots provide 24/7 student assistance while machine learning optimizes campus operations.

Three Key Recommendations for Higher Ed Leaders

Immerse yourself in new AI technologies and consider applications across all university functions.
Use shared governance to surface concerns, build consensus, and codify responsible AI usage policies.
Leverage technology to drive student success and support their growth and development.

By embracing AI as a performance tool thoughtfully and transparently, with the student experience at the center, colleges and universities can significantly improve institutional performance and student outcomes. The synergies between human and computer intelligence pave the way for incredible advancements in the years ahead.

Read the transcript on our website → https://changinghighered.com/ai-as-a-performance-tool-to-benefit-higher-ed/

About the Guest

Bruce Dahlgren is a seasoned technology executive with more than 30 years of leadership experience. As Chief Executive Officer at Anthology, Bruce leads our diverse team of higher education and technology experts to empower our clients with innovative solutions and services. He strongly believes in the importance of a company’s purpose and how organizations can serve the greater good.

About the Host

Dr. Drumm McNaughton is the CEO of The Change Leader consulting firm and consultant to higher education institutions specializing in accreditation, governance, strategic planning, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website: https://changinghighered.com/.

#AIinHigherEd #HigherEducation #TheChangeLeader

View Details

In Part 2 of this series, Drumm McNaughton, F. Joseph Merlino, and Deborah Pomeroy dive deeper into the strategies and approaches for driving transformative change in higher education, focusing on preparing teachers for the 21st century. They share valuable insights and real-world examples drawn from their extensive research and practical experiences.

Key Discussion Points

Change Theory and the Process of Change:

· Understanding change theory and the process of change is crucial for driving transformative change in higher education.

· Change must be driven by a meaningful purpose owned by all stakeholders.

· Transformative change takes time, requires support, space for experimentation, and acceptance of mistakes as part of the learning process.

Aligning Change with Core Identity, Mission, and Legacy:

· Ensuring that the desired change aligns with the institution's core identity, mission, and legacy is vital for successful transformation.

· The University of Texas at El Paso (UTEP) serves as an excellent example of aligning change with core identity and mission.

The Role of Service Learning in Pedagogy and Research:

· Service learning plays a crucial role in transforming teacher preparation programs and enhancing both pedagogy and research.

· Partnerships between universities and high schools reveal a rich, reciprocal relationship where professors learn as much from teachers as teachers learn from them.

· Service learning enriches research, enabling professors to explore new ideas and change their conceptual frameworks within and across disciplines.

Rethinking Tenure and Promotion:

· The traditional allocation of weight in tenure and promotion may need to be reconsidered to address changing demographics and challenges in higher education.

· Recognizing the importance of faculty engagement with the community and the potential for service learning to enhance both pedagogy and research.

Bridging the Gap Between High School and Higher Education:

· Collaborating with high school teachers to develop critical thinking skills and willingness to engage with novel problems among incoming students.

· Aligning with the findings from the American Association of Colleges and Universities (AAC&U) studies on employer expectations for essential life skills.

· Learning from the example of Lucy Cavendish College, University of Cambridge, in bridging the gap between high school and higher education.

The Importance of External Facilitators in the Change Process:

· The role of external facilitators in providing a neutral perspective, navigating institutional dynamics, and lending credibility to the change process.

· The value of a presidential onboarding process conducted by an external facilitator for presidents appointed from outside the institution.

Three Key Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards:

· Understand change theory and the process of change, recognizing that change must be driven by a meaningful purpose owned by all stakeholders.

· Ensure that the change aligns with the institution's core identity, mission, and legacy.

· Navigate the challenges of establishing networks and building trust, whether appointed from within the institution or coming from the outside.

The insights shared in this two-part series serve as a valuable guide for university presidents, boards, and executive leadership seeking to drive meaningful change in higher education.

Read the transcript on our website: https://changinghighered.com/transformative-change-models-in-higher-ed-p2/

About Our Podcast Guests

F. Joseph Merlino is the President of the 21st Century Partnership for STEM Education, and the co-author of a new book, New Era-New Urgency: The Case for Repurposing Education. For 35 years, he has served as the principal investigator or director of many National Science Foundation, U.S, Department of Education, and U.S. Agency for International Development projects. He was a co-PI on a six-year project to study transformative STEM change in six higher education institutions. Based on this past research, he has been working in Egypt for the past 12 years where he directs a $24M project to design five new undergraduate STEM teacher preparation programs involving 180 new courses in 5 universities. He oversaw the development of 21 new model Egyptian STEM high schools based on 11 Grand Challenges. He has a BA in Psychology from the University of Rochester and an MA in Education from Arcadia University.

Deborah Pomeroy, EdD, is an associate professor emeritus of science education at Arcadia University. After three years in scientific research, she shifted to a career in science education and taught high school science for 19 years in Fairbanks, AK. During that time, she received the Presidential Award for Excellence in Science Teaching. Following her high school teaching career, she completed a doctorate at the Harvard Graduate School for Education. She then taught science education at Arcadia University for 14 years where she consulted for several school districts and directed multiple education reform projects K-16. Much of her work in higher education involved both helping facilitate the development of new curricula and facilitating and studying the impact of partnerships between professors and high school teachers. Later, in Egypt, she helped to lead a massive project to develop a new integrated STEM education curriculum funded by the U.S. Agency for International Development.

About the Host

Dr. Drumm McNaughton is a higher education consultant specializing in governance, accreditation, strategic planning, change management, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website: https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#ChangeManagement #TeacherPreparation #HigherEducation

View Details

Transforming Teacher Preparation for the 21st Century In this two-part series, university presidents and higher education leaders gain valuable insights into the complex challenges of upgrading teacher preparation for the 21st century and strategies for driving transformative change.

In Part 1, Drumm McNaughton is joined by F. Joseph Merlino and Deborah Pomeroy as they identify and analyze the dilemmas (the Four Quandaries) impacting higher education institutions today.

Key Discussion Points

The Four Quandaries Facing Higher Education Presidents:

· Mission vs. Revenue: Balancing the historic mission of providing transformative education with the increasing emphasis on job readiness and financial sustainability.

· Interdisciplinary Collaboration and Integration: Overcoming the challenges posed by disciplinary silos and hierarchical systems to foster innovation and problem-solving.

· Addressing College Access and Equity: Ensuring access and equity while maintaining academic excellence in the face of shifting demographics and disparities in student preparedness.

· In-State vs. Out-of-State Students: Navigating the financial benefits of admitting out-of-state students while fulfilling the responsibility to serve in-state students effectively.

Transformative Change in Higher Education:

· Adopting a goal-oriented approach that considers the unique context and quandaries of each institution.

· Engaging stakeholders at all levels, including top-down, middle-out, and bottom-up strategies, to ensure the sustainability of transformative initiatives.

· Confronting existing conceptions and practices by exposing educators to evidence that challenges their assumptions and beliefs.

Three Key Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards:

· Understand change theory and the process of change, recognizing that change must be driven by a meaningful purpose owned by all stakeholders.

· Ensure that the change aligns with the institution's core identity, mission, and legacy.

· Navigate the challenges of establishing networks and building trust, whether appointed from within the institution or coming from the outside.

Stay tuned for Part 2, where Drumm McNaughton, F. Joseph Merlino, and Deborah Pomeroy share examples, practical insights, and actionable strategies for addressing these challenges and driving transformative change in higher education.

Read the transcript on our website: https://changinghighered.com/four-quandaries-facing-higher-ed-presidents/

About Our Podcast Guests

F. Joseph Merlino is the President of the 21st Century Partnership for STEM Education and the co-author of a new book, New Era-New Urgency: The Case for Repurposing Education. For 35 years, he has served as the principal investigator or director of many National Science Foundation, U.S. Department of Education, and U.S. Agency for International Development projects. He was a co-PI on a six-year project to study transformative STEM change in six higher education institutions. Based on this past research, he has been working in Egypt for the past 12 years, where he directs a $24M project to design five new undergraduate STEM teacher preparation programs involving 180 new courses in 5 universities. He oversaw the development of 21 new model Egyptian STEM high schools based on 11 Grand Challenges. He has a BA in Psychology from the University of Rochester and an MA in Education from Arcadia University.

About the Host

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#TeacherPreparation #HigherEducation #HigherEdChangeManagement

View Details

Cesar Santalo, Dean of the College of Communications and Design at Lynn University, shares how he applies design thinking to drive innovation and change in higher education.

The interview provides insights into how design thinking can transform universities to meet future demands through empathy, experimentation, and engaging all stakeholders in the process of innovation. Cesar's unique background as an artist/designer is leveraged to inject fresh thinking into academia.

Overview

The core principles of design thinking he discusses include:

Empathy - dive deep to understand the problem from the perspective of all stakeholders.
Problem definition - distill insights into a clear, actionable problem statement.
Ideation - brainstorm many creative ideas without judging.
Prototyping - create rough prototypes to test and learn from.
Testing - put prototypes into the real world for feedback, then iterate.

He provides examples of design thinking's successful implementation at Lynn, including:

Using it to develop their 2025 strategic plan by interviewing over 650 stakeholders.
Injecting design thinking into Lynn 101 and Citizenship courses so students gain self-awareness.
Creating the Pulse Agency, where students solve real business problems for clients.
Moving quickly to create an NFT museum during the NFT boom.

Cesar emphasizes the importance of stakeholder engagement, collaboration across disciplines, and creating job-ready graduates through practical learning experiences and internships.

Key Takeaways for Higher Ed Leaders:

Don't be afraid of failure! Go big or go home. Foster an environment where people feel happy and faculty feel their voices are being heard.
Allow faculty to live on the edge. Listen to them and empower them.
Create partnerships with local businesses that hire your students, provide internships, and bring equity to higher education.

Read the podcast transcript on our website →

About Our Podcast Guest

Cesar Santalo, Dean of the College of Communication and Design, is an award-winning visual communications professional, artist, animator, and educator with over 20 years of experience. He has taught at prestigious institutions such as Miami Dade College, The Art Institute of Pittsburgh, and the University of Miami, covering subjects ranging from traditional and digital drawing to project budgeting and advanced animation.

Santalo's impressive portfolio includes collaborations with Telemundo/NBC Universal on the Quibi project, as well as roles at Univision, where he served as art director for corporate marketing, promotions, and digital content. His artistic contributions have graced live performances for the Latin Grammy's, Premio Lo Nuestro, and renowned artists like Calle 13, Carlos Vives, Cirque du Soleil, and Marc Anthony. Santalo's pursuit of a doctorate at St. Thomas University and his Six Sigma Green Belt certification demonstrate his commitment to continuous improvement.

Cesar Santalo on LinkedIn →

About the Host

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

In this episode, we welcome Dan Oppenheimer, Director of Public Affairs for the UT Austin College of Liberal Arts, to discuss Civil Discord, a recent conference at UT Austin that brought together scholars and writers from across the political spectrum for a series of moderated arguments on issues of great public significance.

Key Points Overview:

Civil Discord was a unique collaboration between three academic entities in Austin: UT Austin College of Liberal Arts, the School of Civic Leadership, and the University of Austin. The conference aimed to model civil discourse and connect across scholarly, political, partisan, and ideological lines.
The conference featured five panels on topics such as colorblindness in America, the true founding of America (1619 or 1776), anti-racism in universities, the future of liberalism, and whether higher education is broken beyond repair. Each panel had a moderator and speakers representing different perspectives.
Oppenheimer shares advice for universities looking to host similar events, including retaining control over the process while being open and transparent, giving enough time for planning (ideally a year), and being prepared for unexpected political confrontations.
There is a shared interest across political lines in expanding the space for free speech and academic freedom on campus. Events like Civil Discord provide an opportunity for different sides to provide cover for each other and work towards this common goal.
Oppenheimer emphasizes the importance of modeling civil discourse and disagreement in a controlled setting, as it helps university leaders prepare for the high-stakes politics that may come at them unexpectedly.

Transcript: The full transcript of this episode can be found on the Changing Higher Ed website. https://changinghighered.com/civil-discord-bridging-ideological-divides-in-higher-ed/

About our Guest Daniel Oppenheimer is Director of Public Affairs for the UT Austin College of Liberal Arts. He is also the author of two books: "Exit Right: The People Who Left the Left and Reshaped the American Century" and "Far From Respectable: Dave Hickey and His Art." He has written for the Washington Post, Texas Monthly, Boston Globe, Slate.com, The Point, Washington Monthly, Guernica, The New Republic, Tablet Magazine, and Salon.com. He received an MFA in nonfiction writing from Columbia University.

About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton is a consultant to higher education institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers.

#CivilDiscord #HigherEducation #HigherEdChallenges

View Details

In this Washington Update, we welcome back our frequent guest and public policy expert, Tom Netting, president of TEN Government Strategies, who joins us to discuss the latest developments in higher education policy coming out of Washington. McNaughton and Netting dive into the significant revisions to Title IX regulations, detailing the implications for higher education.

Podcast Overview: Revised Title IX Regulations: Unpacking the Changes * Expansion of Definitions: The new regulations have broadened the definition of sexual harassment to encompass "unwelcome sex-based conduct," a shift from the previously narrower "severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive" standard. * Adjustments in Adjudication Standards: Institutions are now mandated to use the "preponderance of the evidence" standard for determining cases of sexual harassment, moving away from the "clear and convincing" evidence standard unless absolutely necessary. * Elimination of Live Hearings: The updated regulations remove the requirement for live hearings, aiming to reduce the potential retraumatization of victims during the adjudication process.

FAFSA Corrections and Their Impact on Enrollment The discussion extends to the recent corrections made to the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) and their potential impact on student enrollment:

Resolution of FAFSA Issues: After significant updates, the FAFSA system aims to facilitate smoother enrollment processes, which could help stabilize enrollment figures that were feared to decline due to previous errors.
Congressional Oversight: The upcoming hearing with Secretary Cardona will focus on these FAFSA updates, reflecting the critical attention these corrections are receiving at the governmental level.

Developments in Student Loan Debt Relief The episode also covers the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) on student loan debt relief, emphasizing its importance and controversy:

State Legal Challenges: The NPRM has faced lawsuits from 15 states, highlighting the contentious nature of the proposed student loan debt relief measures.
Public Comment Period: Stakeholders are encouraged to participate in the public comment process, open until May 17th, to help shape the outcome of these significant financial relief efforts.

Enhancements to Program Integrity and Institutional Accountability Further discussion points include the negotiations affecting financial aid administration and compliance:

Modifications in Resource Management: Proposals suggest that students might need to opt-in to receive resources such as textbooks and other materials, potentially changing how educational expenses are managed.
Ongoing Negotiations: The complexities of these discussions could deeply influence how institutions administer student loans and maintain compliance with federal standards.

State Authorization and Accreditation for Online Education The conversation also explores adjustments to state authorization and accreditation processes for online education providers:

Regulatory Simplification: Proposed changes aim to simplify compliance across different states, potentially easing the operational burden on institutions offering online programs.

Three Key Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards 1. Immediate Review and Adjustment to Compliance Measures: With the new Title IX regulations set to take effect soon, institutions must review and possibly revise their current policies and procedures promptly. 2. Active Participation in Public Comment Opportunities: Leaders should ensure their institutions engage in the NPRM discussion, particularly around student loan debt relief, to influence policies that directly affect their students and operational structures. 3. Preparation for Upcoming Accreditation and Authorization Changes: Universities offering online courses must prepare for the expected changes in state authorization and accreditation standards, ensuring compliance and minimizing disruption to student offerings.

Read the transcript on our website →

About Our Podcast Guest

Tom Netting

About Our Podcast Host

Dr. Drumm McNaughton is a consultant to higher education institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy, change, and mergers.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#WashingtonUpdate #NegReg #HigherEducation

View Details

With 98% of higher education institutions looking the same and offering similar programs, the challenge for any single institution to stand out is immense.

This episode of Changing Higher Ed, features Allen Adamson, co-founder of MetaForce, discussing the importance of branding and marketing in differentiating higher education institutions in an oversaturated homogeneous market. Adamson shares his insights from his vast experience in branding across various industries, emphasizing the need for higher education institutions to stand out to attract enrollment.

Key Discussion Points

The Branding Challenge in Higher Education:

Higher education faces an oversupply of institutions and an undersupply of students, creating a critical need for effective branding and marketing strategies to attract and retain students.

Why Higher Ed Institutions Should Look Outside the Industry for Branding and Marketing:

Higher education institutions can benefit from adopting innovative marketing strategies proven successful in other sectors, enhancing their distinctiveness and appeal.

Creating Unique Institution Identities:

Crafting unique identities that resonate with potential students is essential. Institutions should leverage their unique heritage, location, or academic strengths to form a compelling brand identity.

Strategies for Differentiation and Growth:

Differentiation in a crowded market requires institutions to offer unique educational experiences and communicate these differences through strategic marketing effectively.

Peripheral Vision in Branding:

Institutions should extend their view beyond direct competitors and the education sector to identify unique positioning strategies and innovations from the broader market.

The Role of Consensus in Decision Making:

The challenges of consensus-driven decision-making within universities often lead to diluted branding strategies. More decisive leadership could enable stronger and clearer branding initiatives.

Importance of Simplifying the Brand Message:

A clear and simple brand message is crucial for effective communication. Institutions should focus on conveying a few key strengths or unique attributes to avoid overwhelming potential students.

Differentiation Through Student Outcomes:

Emphasizing unique student outcomes and success stories can differentiate an institution more effectively than focusing solely on features and facilities.

Signature Experiences and Social Proof:

Developing signature experiences that define an institution’s brand and leveraging positive student testimonials can significantly enhance reputation and attractiveness.

Actionable Insights Over Descriptive Content:

Shifting focus from describing institutional offerings to highlighting actionable outcomes and real-world applications can make branding more effective and relatable.

Three Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards

Simplify and strategize: Prioritize simplicity in ideas for enhanced execution. Being ahead of the curve involves selecting straightforward concepts that can be brilliantly executed.
Expand horizons: Break free from the confines of the usual environment. Look beyond the immediate surroundings and industry standards. Being ahead of the curve means seeking inspiration from diverse sectors and preparing for future market trends.
Pursue excellence: Choose ideas that can be executed exceptionally rather than settling for mediocrity. Being ahead of the curve allows for iterative improvements, ensuring that when the timing is right, the execution is flawless, setting you apart from competitors.

Read the transcript on our website →

About Our Podcast Guest

Allen Adamson is a noted industry expert in all disciplines of branding. He has worked with a broad spectrum of consumer and corporate businesses in industries ranging from packaged goods and technology to health care and financial services, to hospitality and entertainment. Allen's newest book is Seeing the How: Achieving Market Advantage by Transforming the Stuff We Do, Not the Stuff We Buy. His previous books, BrandSimple, BrandDigital, The Edge, and Shift Ahead, are used as textbooks in higher education business programs across the country. A sought-after industry commentator, Allen has appeared on ABC News, NBC's Today Show, CNBC's Squawk Box and Closing Bell, and Fox Business Network. He is often quoted in publications including The New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, Advertising Age, the Washington Post, and Forbes. Allen is co-founder & Managing Partner of Metaforce, an elite marketing collective of the industry's top talent.

Allen’s LinkedIn Profile →

About the Host

Dr. Drumm McNaughton, host of Changing Higher Ed®, is a consultant to higher education institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website: https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#HigherEducation #HigherEdBranding #HigherEdPodcast #HigherEdEnrollment

View Details

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Cassie Sanchez, Director of Education at Warrior-Scholar Project (WSP). They discuss how WSP supports veterans in successfully transitioning to higher education. The conversation highlights the benefits these programs offer both to veterans and the institutions they attend, focusing on enhancing enrollment strategies, supporting veteran success, and leveraging the unique strengths veterans bring to academic environments.

This episode provides valuable insights for university leaders aiming to improve veteran enrollment and retention rates, thereby enriching the diversity and dynamism of their campuses.

Key Discussion Points

Enhancing Enrollment and Support Strategies for Veteran Students:

Warrior-Scholar Project (WSP) boosts veteran retention and graduation rates with a 92% success rate, significantly higher than national averages for traditional students.
WSP’s boot camps at institutions like Yale, Harvard, and Stanford integrate veterans into academic and social settings, foundational for their success.
Strategic partnerships between WSP and universities act as models for boosting veteran enrollment and expanding demographic reach and diversity.

Driving Veteran Academic and Social Success:

WSP prepares veterans for higher education through rigorous boot camps that facilitate college transition and build academic readiness.
Universities that replicate WSP’s support structures enhance veteran support, ensuring continuous assistance tailored to their needs, thus improving retention and success rates.

Building Lasting Institutional Benefits Through Veteran Inclusion:

Inclusion of veterans enriches the academic community with diverse perspectives and skills, enhancing campus dialogue and educational outcomes.
Cassie Sanchez emphasizes the importance of higher education leaders recognizing veteran potential, advocating for strategies that fully integrate veterans, and enhancing institutional profiles and standings.

Implementing Actionable Steps for Institutional Growth:

Insights for integrating veteran-focused educational programs into university strategies include adopting WSP’s intensive preparation and support networks.
Universities are urged to create veteran-specific admissions pathways, support centers, and inclusive campus cultures, supporting veteran success and contributing to diversity and graduation rate goals.

Three Key Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards

Understanding and Integration: Acknowledge the unique value and perspectives of veterans, integrating their experiences into campus culture.
Support Systems: Develop systems tailored to veteran needs, ensuring smooth transitions and academic success.
Strategic Partnerships: Form partnerships with organizations like WSP to leverage structured, successful programs that prepare veterans for academic success, benefiting both students and institutions.

Read the transcript on our website →

About Our Podcast Guest

Cassie Sanchez oversees all of Warrior-Scholar Project’s (WSP) curricular efforts, including developing, implementing, and evaluating the curricula, plus training academic staff. Prior to her current role, she was a senior associate at Amherst College’s writing center. Additionally, she taught for Upward Bound and the Noonan Scholars program.

Dr. Sanchez has decades of experience developing courses and support structures for students in transition, including community college, first-generation, and low-income students. She holds a Ph.D. in education policy, research, and administration from the University of Massachusetts Amherst.

Cassie Sanchez on LinkedIn →

About the Host

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#HigherEducation #WarriorScholarProject #HigherEdPodcast

View Details

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed podcast, host Drumm McNaughton is joined by Chris Gilmore, VP of Education Dynamics Enrollment Management. With extensive experience in online higher education and various leadership roles, Chris shares valuable insights into the evolving landscape of student demographics and the strategic approaches institutions need to adopt to effectively engage nontraditional students.

Key Discussion Points

The Changing Definition of Nontraditional Students

Evolving Definitions: Chris elaborates on how the term "nontraditional students" has expanded beyond age differences to include individuals integrating education into their already full lives, such as younger online students or older adults managing work and family commitments.
New Terminology: Emphasizing the evolution in terminology, Chris refers to nontraditional students as "nontraditional modern students" or simply "modern students," recognizing their diverse and dynamic educational needs and lifestyles.
Demographic Shifts: The discussion highlights how these shifts demand flexible educational offerings that cater to diverse life situations, reflecting broader societal changes in work and lifestyle integration.

Adopting the Product and Consumer Mindset for Modern Student Enrollment

Education as a Product: A significant shift towards viewing educational offerings as products designed to meet specific consumer needs, aligning with how modern students assess their educational investments.
Consumer-Centric Approach: Emphasizing the need for higher education to adopt a consumer mindset, focusing on the value, return on investment, and outcomes that educational programs offer to students.

Institutions Must Provide Three Clearly Stated Value Propositions

Career Advancement: Ensuring programs are directly aligned with the career aspirations of students, demonstrating how education can advance or change their professional trajectory.
Speed to Completion: Highlighting the importance of offering programs that allow for quicker completion to accommodate the immediate needs and goals of students.
Affordability: Making a strong case for the cost-effectiveness of programs, ensuring students understand the financial commitment and the expected return on their investment.

How to Design a Strategy for Marketing to Nontraditional Students

Data-Driven Marketing: Utilizing data to understand where and how nontraditional students gather information and make educational decisions, particularly emphasizing the importance of a strong digital presence.
Targeted Engagement: Tailoring marketing strategies to the unique needs and behaviors of nontraditional students, ensuring that messaging around flexibility, cost, and outcomes resonates clearly.

Shifts in Prospective Student Concerns Over the Last 20 Years

Consistent Concerns: Despite changes in the education sector, nontraditional students consistently prioritize affordability, time commitments, and clear outcomes.
Adapting Strategies: Higher education institutions must evolve their engagement and support strategies to remain responsive to these enduring concerns.

Moving Nontraditional Students from the Attraction Phase into the Recruitment and Enrollment Phase

Enhancing Recruitment Tactics: Adapting recruitment processes to be more responsive and flexible, recognizing the pre-existing knowledge and research prospective students bring to their enrollment journey.
Streamlining Processes: Emphasizing the importance of quick and efficient application and enrollment processes to meet the expectations of modern students for swift action.

Retention and Persistence of Nontraditional Modern Students Looks Different

Unique Retention Challenges: Addressing the specific risk profiles and life circumstances of nontraditional students that affect their persistence and retention in educational programs.
Support Systems Adaptation: Developing support systems that are flexible and responsive to the complex life dynamics of nontraditional students, facilitating their continued engagement and success.

Three Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards

Recognizing Unique Needs: Understanding that nontraditional students require different engagement and retention strategies, which should be a critical element of institutional planning.
Prioritizing Staff Training: Investing in training for staff to effectively interact with and support nontraditional students, enhancing the overall student experience.
Utilizing Third-Party Services: Considering partnerships and collaborations to extend capabilities and reach in supporting nontraditional students effectively.

This episode provides a comprehensive look at the strategies and mindsets that higher education institutions must adopt to succeed in a changing educational landscape, focusing particularly on the needs and expectations of nontraditional students.

Read the transcript and extended show summary on our website →

About Our Podcast Guest

Chris Gilmore is responsible for leading all aspects of the EducationDynamics Enrollment Management Services Contact Center operations. This includes internal enrollment advising teams working on behalf of EducationDynamics' Enrollment Management Services client institutions. Chris has spent his career in the online higher education field and has held various leadership roles at institutions, including the University of Phoenix and DeVry University. During his time as Chief Operating Officer of Educators Serving Educators, a higher education consulting division of Excelsior College, Chris partnered with institutions seeking to enhance their online operation by investing in enrollment management, student services, and innovative program development. Chris has a Bachelor of Arts in Psychology, a Master of Business Administration, and a Doctorate of Education in Education Leadership through the University of New England.

About the Host

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#HigherEducation #EnrollmentStrategies #NontraditionalStudents

View Details

Empowering Students for Career Success: Villanova's Innovative Approach

In this episode of Changing Higher Ed, Dr. Drumm McNaughton talks with Kevin Grubb, Associate Vice Provost for Career and Professional Development at Villanova University, about the innovative ways Villanova is preparing students for a successful start to their careers and setting them up to beat the odds of 43% under employment for many college graduates. Learn how Villanova embeds career readiness skills into the curriculum and prioritizes student well-being throughout the process.

Key Discussion Points

Preparing Students for Career Success from Orientation Onward:

Using the Clifton Strengths Assessment to help students develop a strengths-based mindset.
Research demonstrating the positive impact of strengths-based programming on student outcomes.

High-Tech, High-Touch Approach:

Villanova's balanced approach to career education, combining technology and personal interaction to enhance student career preparedness.
The responsible, effective, and ethical use of generative AI in crafting resumes and cover letters, and decoding job descriptions.

Embedding Career Readiness Skills into the Curriculum:

Providing career assessments and resources throughout the student journey.
Offering for-credit courses on job search skills, networking, and professional development.
Involving faculty in teaching career readiness competencies and integrating them into coursework.

Addressing Student Well-Being through Career Readiness:

Recognizing career readiness as a significant source of stress and concern for students.
Proactively supporting students throughout their journey to alleviate stress and promote well-being.

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Presidents and Boards

Embed career development into the student experience, making it a core component rather than an optional activity.
Prioritize student well-being by acknowledging the stress associated with career readiness and providing proactive support.
Embrace generative AI to benefit students and better prepare them for the future, while addressing its use thoughtfully.

Final Thoughts

The episode highlights Villanova's innovative approach to preparing students for career success. By embedding career readiness into the curriculum, using strengths-based learning and career focus, leveraging tools like AI, and prioritizing student well-being, Villanova is setting an example for other institutions looking to empower their students for the future. The insights shared offer valuable guidance for higher education leaders seeking to enhance their career readiness initiatives.

Read the transcript on our website: https://changinghighered.com/beyond-career-and-job-ready-graduates-beating-underemployment-odds/

About Our Guest

Kevin Grubb serves as the Associate Vice Provost for Professional Development and Chief Career Officer at Villanova University. He spearheads the strategic vision for career and professional development, aiming for top-notch career outcomes for students and alumni. His role includes integrating support across various university sectors, contributing to Villanova's national acclaim in career services and professional development.

His leadership has earned recognition from prestigious organizations, including the National Association of Colleges & Employers and the American Association of Colleges of Nursing. Grubb, a respected figure in the field, has received accolades for his contributions to career services and college recruiting from several bodies, including LinkedIn and Strada Education Network.

He holds a BS in Psychology, an MA in Higher Education Administration, and a certificate in Leadership in Performance Coaching. Grubb is an Associate Certified Coach with the International Coaching Federation and a Gallup Certified Strengths Coach, demonstrating his commitment to professional excellence and leadership.

Kevin Grubb on LinkedIn →

About the Host

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#VillanovaUniversity #HigherEducation #CareerReady

View Details

Program Integrity and Institutional Quality Committee: A Focus on Distance Education and the Return of Title IV Funds.

In this episode, host Drumm McNaughton is joined by Tom Netting, president of 10 Government Strategies, to discuss the recent Neg Reg 2024 proceedings and their implications for higher education institutions. They explore the key issues addressed during the negotiations, including distance education, accreditation, cash management, and more. The discussion highlights the importance of staying informed and engaged in the regulatory process to ensure the best outcomes for students and institutions alike.

Key Discussion Points Neg Reg 2024 March Consensus: One Out of Six

The first quarter of the year focused on federal negotiated rulemaking, specifically the Program Integrity and Institutional Quality Committee.
Consensus was achieved in one out of six major issues, which was related to trio and expanding access to grant assistance for students and immigrants.

The Issue Where Consensus Was Achieved

Consensus was reached on the issue of trio, which focused on expanding access to grant assistance for students and immigrants.
The work of the subcommittee was well-received by the full committee, and the proposed changes to increase opportunities for these student populations were supported by the negotiators.

The Five Issues Where Consensus Was Not Achieved

Cash management
State authorization
Distance education
Return to Title IV funds
Accreditation and a complete rewrite of all accreditation

Why is Neg Reg Important to Presidents, Boards, and Executive Levels of Higher Ed?

Neg Reg provides an opportunity for the higher education community to discuss and negotiate regulatory compliance issues that affect the delivery of education and the responsibilities of the Department of Education and the Triad.

Semantics Matter: Pay Close Attention to Neg Reg Revisions

The specific wording of regulations, such as "must" versus "shall" or "may," can have significant implications for interpretation and enforcement.
Higher education leaders must carefully review and scrutinize the language used in proposed regulations to ensure they align with the Department of Education's stated intent and do not result in unintended consequences for institutions or students.

Clarity Around Consensus, Non-Consensus, and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking

If consensus is not reached, the Department of Education can publish a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) based on the negotiations and public comments.

Major Points from Neg Reg March 2024:

Distance Education, Accreditation, NC-SARA, and Cash Management

Proposed changes to NC-SARA, the national process for online education standards, were met with opposition from both institutions and states.
The Department of Education appears to be moving more into the area of consumer protection in distance education.

Accreditation: Rewriting Part 602

The Department of Education proposed a complete rewrite of accreditation standards, which was met with pushback from accreditors and institutions who felt it was overreaching.

Cash Management, Tuition and Fees, Books and Supplies

Proposed changes to cash management regulations would exclude books, supplies, and equipment from tuition and fees, requiring opt-in processes for each payment period.

Why Higher Ed Leaders Need to Stay Involved in Neg Reg

It's crucial for higher education leaders to stay informed about regulatory changes and provide input during public comment periods to ensure the best outcomes for their institutions and students.

What's Happening on The Hill

Key bills under consideration include the bipartisan year-round Pell proposal, the Making America Stronger Act (WIOA reauthorization), and the College Cost Reduction Act (student loan proposals).

The 100 Percent Rule: Certifications and Licensures

A new bill, the Clock Hour Program Student Protection Act, aims to restore the 150 percent timeline for institutions to provide comprehensive training for state licensure or certification exams.

Title IX Revisions

Title IX revisions are expected before July 4th, and there may be some surprising changes that could significantly impact higher education institutions.

Key March 2024 Neg Reg Takeaways for Higher Ed Leaders

Higher education leaders should be prepared to advocate for their institutions and students, both on Capitol Hill and in response to Notices of Proposed Rulemaking. The issues discussed during Neg Reg 2024 will have significant implications for financial aid, IT departments, and other aspects of institutional operations.

Final Thoughts

The Neg Reg 2024 proceedings have highlighted the complex and often contentious nature of higher education regulation. As the Department of Education continues to push for increased consumer protection and oversight, it is more important than ever for higher education leaders to stay engaged in the process and advocate for their institutions' and students' needs. By working together and providing thoughtful input during public comment periods, the higher education community can help shape regulations that support student success and institutional sustainability in the face of evolving challenges and opportunities.

Read the transcript on our website →

About Our Podcast Guest

Tom Netting

About the Host

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#NegReg2024 #HigherEducation #WashingtonUpdate

View Details

In this episode of the Changing Higher Ed podcast, host Dr. Drumm McNaughton is joined by Amrit Ahluwalia, the incoming Executive Director for Continuing Studies at Western University. They discuss the evolving role and models of higher education institutions and the need for transformative change to remain relevant and sustainable in the evolving marketplace. Drawing from their diverse backgrounds and unique vantage points, they explore how continuing education divisions can play a broader role in shaping the university's impact.

Key Discussion Points The Shifting Models of Higher Education:

Changing expectations and perceptions of education among learners, driven by factors such as technological advancements and workforce demands.
The need for higher education institutions to adapt and respond to these changing needs, moving away from being gatekeepers of knowledge to facilitators of learner outcomes.
The role of institutions in supporting lifelong learning journeys and providing pathways for continuous skill development and career growth.

Redefining the Institutional Role:

Transitioning from a traditional teaching and learning-based business model to an information-based, learner relationship management approach.
Recognizing the diverse needs of learners and offering tailored learning opportunities to meet their specific goals and career aspirations.
Leveraging partnerships, outsourcing, and strategic collaborations to focus on core competencies and provide comprehensive support services.

Transforming Continuing Education:

Positioning continuing education divisions as catalysts for democratizing access to institutional expertise and resources.
Exploring innovative models like the "60 Year Curriculum" to foster lifelong learning and professional development.
Leveraging market research and industry partnerships to align program offerings with workforce demands and future trends.

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Presidents and Boards

Facilitate student-centricity by intentionally designing institutional processes and offerings around learner needs and outcomes.
Pivot towards a lifelong education ecosystem, positioning the institution as a facilitator of continuous learning journeys rather than a gatekeeper of short-term knowledge acquisition.
Resource and empower continuing education divisions to play a vital role in bringing institutional resources to diverse audiences and driving community, regional, and national growth.

Final Thoughts

The episode emphasizes the urgency of higher education institutions embracing transformative change and innovation. By adopting a learner-centric approach, fostering lifelong learning opportunities, and leveraging the potential of continuing education, institutions can remain relevant, sustainable, and aligned with the evolving needs of learners and the workforce.

Read the transcript on our website →

About Our Podcast Guest

Amrit Ahluwalia is the incoming Executive Director of Continuing Studies at Western University in London, Ontario, Canada. He joins Western University in March 2024 after over a decade leading The EvoLLLution publication, an online newspaper focused on transformation and change in the higher education space.

About the Host

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#LifeLongLearning #HigherEducation #HigherEdModels

View Details

In this transformative era for higher education, institutions are at a crossroads, balancing traditional academic rigor with the urgent need for graduates who are immediately employable and adept at upskilling to meet rapidly changing business demands. Miami Dade College (MDC), under the visionary leadership of President Madeline Pumariega, stands out as a beacon of innovation and adaptability.

In this podcast, Pumariega offers a compelling model for aligning curriculum with industry needs, embracing technological advancements, and fostering strategic partnerships to secure students' success in the workforce.

Madeline Pumariega leads Miami Dade College with profound insights rooted in her 20+ years of experience in higher education and dedication to uplifting low-SES communities and first-generation students through accessible, quality education.

Key Points Overview * Strategic Alignment with Industry Needs: How MDC excels in forming alliances with business partners to directly link education with emerging job opportunities. These collaborations ensure that programs are tailored to the skill sets demanded by key sectors, enhancing graduates' employability. * Comprehensive Skill Development: The college champions a holistic approach to education that encompasses academic knowledge, employability skills (including internships and apprenticeships), and digital competencies. These three pillars prepare students to be resilient and adaptable in a future-driven job market. * Leading the Way in AI Programs: MDC has proactively embraced AI by integrating it into its curriculum and, in 2023, launching programs specifically designed around AI, including a college-credit Certificate in Artificial Intelligence, an Associates in Science in Artificial Intelligence, and the first Bachelors in Artificial Intelligence approved in the state of Florida. The AI program at MDC saw over 400 students enroll, with the average age being 44. * Focus on Workforce Readiness: Through specialized programs and certificates, such as those in cloud computing and healthcare, MDC aligns its offerings with the precise needs of local and national employers, ensuring students are ready to contribute meaningfully to their fields upon graduation. * Accessibility and Community Engagement: Initiatives like the Idea Center and partnerships with entities like Amazon Web Services, IBM, and the Mark Cuban Foundation demonstrate MDC's commitment to supporting entrepreneurship and small business growth within the community, further enhancing students' real-world learning and job prospects.

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Presidents and Boards 1. Emphasize Industry Partnerships: Strengthen collaboration with industry leaders to ensure educational programs meet current workforce demands. This engagement fosters alignment between graduates' skills and employers' needs, enhancing employability and opening doors for students to make meaningful contributions in their respective fields. 2. Align Budgets with Strategic Priorities: Clearly define your institution's strategic priorities and ensure that budget allocations reflect these values. Whether focusing on reimagining student success, academic excellence, or innovation, financial resources must support these aims, driving impactful outcomes and institutional growth. 3. Cultivate a Culture of Care: Recognize and nurture your human capital—faculty, staff, and leadership—as their well-being directly influences the student experience and success. A culture that values and supports its members can transform an institution, making it a place where students and staff alike feel valued, engaged, and motivated to achieve excellence.

Final Thoughts MDC's proactive approach to education, characterized by its responsiveness to workforce trends, technological innovation, and commitment to accessibility, serves as a powerful model for institutions aiming to prepare students for rapid employability and workforce demands. Under Madeline Pumariega's leadership, MDC exemplifies how colleges can lead the way in bridging the gap between education and employment, ensuring a brighter future for students and communities alike.

Read the transcript on our website →

About Our Podcast Guest

Madeline Pumariega is the first female president appointed to lead one of the nation’s largest educational institutions, Miami Dade College (MDC). Adding to the historic nature of this appointment is the fact that Pumariega is an alumna of MDC. Prior to becoming MDC’s president, Pumariega was appointed the first female and Hispanic chancellor of the Florida College System (FCS). In that role, she designed and implemented strategies to keep college accessible and affordable for Floridians, especially for those entering high-demand job fields. In 2019, Pumariega became the executive vice president and provost of Tallahassee Community College. In her current role as President, Pumariega has prioritized working with business partners to identify the skills needed by key industries and tailoring higher education programs to match those needs. This intentional forming of strategic alliances and job pathways between companies and MDC students accelerates each graduate’s ability to enter the workforce immediately. Driving her relentless pursuit is the passion to develop leaders and build thriving communities.

Guest’s LinkedIn Profile →

About the Host

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#changinghighered #thechangeleader #higheredpodcast

View Details

NYU is flipping the script on many traditional educational models and mindsets, embracing a strategic shift to offer alternative pathways to top-tier degrees. This strategic evolution reflects a profound commitment to access and flexibility, directly addressing the needs of an expanded demographic of students.

Dr. Harrison shines a light on the practical implementations and thought processes behind such forward-thinking initiatives, aiming to demonstrate the successful delivery of education to a larger, non-traditional population.

In Part 2 of this two-part podcast, Drumm McNaughton and Doug Harrison continue the conversation where they left off in Part 1, discussing New York University's Applied Undergraduate Studies program at its School for Professional Studies' four key components of the delivery modality, which are: 1) Transfer credit friendly/expanded. 2) The delivery modality. 3) Offering an associate degree. 4) Prior learning assessment.

Podcast Highlights

Enhancing Online Learning Modalities

NYU's approach to online learning, encompassing both synchronous and asynchronous modalities.
Benefits of providing a flexible learning environment to accommodate the needs of diverse learners.
The role of support services in enhancing the online learning experience, including professional advising and career services.

Prior Learning Assessment and Additional Credits

Importance of recognizing the diverse backgrounds and experiences of students through prior learning assessment.
Examples of crediting students for external experiences, such as military service or professional certifications, to accelerate degree completion while containing cost.

Student Support Services and Data Analytics for Successful Outcomes

Utilizing data analytics to support successful outcomes.
The shift from reactive to proactive strategies in identifying and supporting at-risk students.
The comprehensive analysis of student data to allocate targeted resources and interventions effectively.
NYU's holistic approach to student support, spanning from enrollment through graduation, accommodating skill gaps due to K-12 inequities.
An explanation of various support services offered, including financial aid and career services.
The importance of a coordinated approach to ensure students receive comprehensive support throughout their educational journey.

Public-Private Partnerships for Workforce Alignment and Opportunities

The significance of partnerships with public schools, industry leaders, and community organizations in aligning education with workforce needs.
NYU's initiatives in creating pathways for students that lead to relevant and rewarding careers.
Examples of collaborations aimed at expanding economic opportunities and fostering a diverse workforce.

Pricing and Accessibility Strategies to Broaden Higher Ed Pathways

Strategies to make education more accessible through pricing models and financial aid options.
The impact of NYU's pricing policies on broadening access to higher education, including associate degrees at reduced prices.
NYU's commitment to supporting students from families with limited income, ensuring an affordable path to degree completion.

How Leadership’s Learning Mindset Impacts Student Success

The role of leadership in fostering a culture of innovation and continuous improvement within educational institutions.
Examples of how unified vision among board members and executives can drive the adoption of innovative educational strategies.
The importance of learning from failure and the strategies for implementing changes based on outcomes and evaluations.

Three Key Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards 1. Strategic Focus: Prioritize your institution's core strengths and values, directing resources and efforts towards areas of excellence to navigate the disruptive pressures in higher education. 2. Innovation and Learning: Foster a culture of innovation tailored to your institution's unique mission, encouraging experimentation and valuing the lessons learned from failure to build resilience. 3. Humanity and Civility: Champion a culture of integrity, professionalism, and collaboration, modeling these values to navigate the sector's challenges and maintain a positive, supportive community.

Read the transcript and detailed show summary: https://changinghighered.com/nyus-alternate-pathways-to-a-top-tier-degree-part-2

About Our Guest Douglas Harrison leads the Division of Applied Undergraduate Studies at NYU's School of Professional Studies. Prior to NYU, Harrison founded the School of Cybersecurity and Information Technology at the University of Maryland Global Campus. He has published and presented widely on access and inclusion in online learning, assessment security, and academic integrity. He is a past director on the board of the International Center for Academic Integrity and currently serves on Turnitin's Customer Advisory Board for AI in higher education and for the Sounding Spirit Collaborative at Emory University’s Center for Digital Scholarship. His scholarship has been awarded the John Kluge Residential Fellowship at the Library of Congress and the NEA’s Award for Excellence in the Academy.

Social Link: Doug Harrison on LinkedIn →

About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton, host of Changing Higher Ed podcast, is a consultant to higher education institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers.

To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website: https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#NYU #HigherEdInnovation #InclusiveEducation #AlternativePathways

View Details

NYU is responding to the large U.S. population that needs and wants affordable and flexible higher education that meets them where they are by creating unconventional pathways to top-tier degrees.

In this episode of Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton is joined by Dr. Doug Harrison, the head of New York University’s Applied Undergraduate Studies program at its School for Professional Studies, to discuss how NYU has built structures and processes that create alternative pathways for first-gen and low socioeconomic students that enable them to get an NYU degree.

Podcast Highlights · Introduction to NYU's Innovative Educational Pathways

o Overview of NYU's School for Professional Studies

o Dr. Doug Harrison's role in expanding access to education

· Targeting the "Some College, No Degree" Demographic

o The significance of this group in the U.S. education landscape

o Strategies to support students with interrupted education

· Non-Traditional Pathways for Higher Education

o Tailoring education for first-gen and low socioeconomic students

o The importance of stackable degrees and flexible learning options

· Maximizing Transfer Credits

o Addressing the challenge of diverse educational backgrounds

o NYU's approach to curriculum design for broader credit acceptance

· Online Programs and Work-Life Balance

o Expanding access through online degree programs

o Catering to students with work or family commitments

· Associate Degrees at Elite Institutions

o The role of associate degrees in NYU's educational offerings

o Financial accessibility for Pell and TAP-eligible students

· Apprenticeship Degrees and Real-World Skills

o Launching apprenticeship degrees to meet workforce demands

o The benefits of integrating education with practical experience

· Strategies for Student Recruitment and Engagement

o Digital marketing and SEO optimization for program visibility

o Personalized outreach and understanding non-traditional student pathways

· Collaborative Efforts for Student Success

o The creation of an equity and access inclusion network

o Cross-school collaboration for seamless educational transitions

· Vision for the Future

o NYU's commitment to education innovation and student inclusivity

o Leadership's role in fostering a supportive learning environment

Read the transcript or detailed show summary: https://changinghighered.com/nyus-alternate-pathways-to-a-top-tier-degree-part-1 About Our Guest Douglas Harrison leads the Division of Applied Undergraduate Studies at NYU's School of Professional Studies. Prior to NYU, Harrison founded the School of Cybersecurity and Information Technology at the University of Maryland Global Campus. He has published and presented widely on access and inclusion in online learning, assessment security, and academic integrity. He is a past director on the board of the International Center for Academic Integrity and currently serves on Turnitin's Customer Advisory Board for AI in higher education and for the Sounding Spirit Collaborative at Emory University’s Center for Digital Scholarship. His scholarship has been awarded the John Kluge Residential Fellowship at the Library of Congress and the NEA’s Award for Excellence in the Academy.

Social Link: Doug Harrison on LinkedIn →

About the Host

Dr. Drumm McNaughton, host of Changing Higher Ed podcast, is a consultant to higher education institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers.

To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website: https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#changinghighered #thechangeleader #higheredpodcast

View Details

This episode of Changing Higher Ed explores the win-win partnership between universities and organizations like The Oasis Institute, which is dedicated to lifelong learning and community engagement for older adults.

Host Drumm McNaughton interviews Paul Weiss, President of The Oasis Institute, about the benefits of engaging seniors in higher education, from enriching classrooms to fostering community connections.

Key Points: * The growing need for lifelong learning: As the population ages, universities face a crucial opportunity to cater to older adults seeking to continue learning and engage with their communities. * The Oasis Institute: A national non-profit promoting healthy aging through lifelong learning, health programs, and civic engagement, including an intergenerational literacy tutoring program. * Benefits for universities:

§ Research opportunities: OASIS programs offer fertile ground for research across various disciplines.

§ Enriched classrooms: Older adult learners bring unique perspectives and enthusiasm, fostering vibrant learning environments.

§ Financial benefits: Engaging older adults, a significant philanthropic demographic, can lead to increased support and legacy gifts.

§ Improved public perception: Universities demonstrate commitment to serving all age groups, strengthening community ties.

Strategies for success:

§ Develop and share content: Collaborate with organizations like OASIS to fill curriculum gaps, benefiting both institutions and the community.

§ Offer intergenerational learning: Explore tutoring programs or co-housing arrangements to create meaningful interactions between generations.

§ License specialized curricula: Utilize expertise from organizations like OASIS to address the specific needs of older learners.

Beyond education: Universities can support older adults in various ways:

§ Advocacy: Older adults can become powerful advocates for public funding if they feel connected to universities.

§ Mentorship: Programs like OASIS's intergenerational tutoring demonstrate the potential for older adults to mentor youth, fostering community and support.

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Presidents and Boards: 1. Acknowledge and embrace the role of universities in serving the entire community, including the aging population, to foster a more inclusive approach to education and engagement. 2. Prepare for the demographic shift towards an older population, necessitating strategic adjustments in educational offerings and services to meet the needs of this growing demographic. 3. Explore and invest in the field of older adult education as a ripe area for innovation and research, leveraging the university's resources to enhance the quality of life for seniors.

Final Thoughts This episode underscores the significance of integrating seniors into the higher education ecosystem, highlighting the mutual benefits of such engagements. Weiss’s leadership at The Oasis Institute exemplifies the potential for educational institutions to serve not just traditional student demographics but the broader community through innovative partnerships. For higher education leaders, the insights shared offer a compelling blueprint for fostering lifelong learning, enhancing civic engagement, and ultimately enriching the fabric of our communities.

Read the transcript or the extended show summary on our website →

About Our Podcast Guest Paul Weiss came to The Oasis Institute in June 2017 to serve as the third President in the organization’s 40-year history. Paul has spent his career helping mission-based nonprofit organizations exceed their strategic objectives, enabling them to help more people improve the quality of their lives. Originally from St. Louis, Paul holds a Ph.D. in Educational Research and Psychology from Washington University and has more than 20 years of experience in education, social enterprise leadership, program development, strategic planning, organizational growth, and team building.

Our Guests Social Link: Paul Weiss on LinkedIn

About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton, host of Changing Higher Ed®, is a consultant to higher education institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website: https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links * LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ * Twitter: @thechangeldr * Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#highereducation #changinghighered #higheredpodcast

View Details

Faced with an overwhelming number of complex issues, the higher education sector must urgently develop and adopt innovative business models to transform itself into a more accessible, affordable, and future-proof system.

Dr. Melik Khoury, whose visionary approach and adaptation of the university business model has navigated his institution through tumultuous times and set a new standard for academic excellence and operational efficiency.

Dr. Drumm McNaughton welcomes Dr. Khoury back for part two of the series to share his insights on leading Unity Environmental University to unprecedented growth. With a background rich in guiding higher education institutions through periods of disruption, Dr. Khoury's tenure at Unity is marked by a significant increase in enrollment, substantial budget growth, halving tuition fees, and a debt reduction—all achieved amid the challenges posed by the pandemic.

Remember to check out part one where they cover the leadership approach, an agile enterprise model, Sustainable Education Business Units (SEBUs), and the non-traditional org chart.

Brief Show Overview Strategic Growth Through Focused Leadership: · Unity Environmental University's transformation showcases the potential of focused leadership in academia. Under Dr. Khoury, the institution grew its student body from 500 to over 7,500 and increased its budget from $14 million to $58 million, demonstrating effective strategic growth and financial management.

Faculty Development and Specialization: · A reimagined approach to faculty roles allows educators at Unity to specialize in their strengths, moving away from traditional, all-encompassing expectations. This strategy has led to increased job satisfaction and teaching effectiveness, highlighting the benefits of aligning roles with individual talents.

Academic Structure Innovation: · Unity has redefined majors as interdisciplinary, encouraging a collaborative and flexible academic structure. This innovation reflects a commitment to preparing students for the complexities of the global job market, emphasizing adaptability and broad-based knowledge.

Efficiency in Governance: · Implementing the RACI model streamlined Unity's decision-making processes, enhancing organizational efficiency. This shift illustrates the importance of clear roles and responsibilities in institutional governance.

Adapting Financial and Governance Models: · The evolving landscape of higher education necessitates adaptive financial and governance models. Unity's approach serves as a case study in aligning institutional practices with contemporary challenges, ensuring sustainability and relevance.

Technological Advancements and Strategic Partnerships: · Unity's integration of AI and virtual reality, along with forming strategic partnerships, positions the university at the cutting edge of educational innovation. These initiatives bridge the gap between academic learning and real-world application, enriching the student experience.

A Vision for Responsive Higher Education: · Dr. Khoury advocates for a higher education system that is responsive to student and societal needs, challenging outdated structures and fostering a culture of innovation and flexibility.

Key Takeaways for Institutional Leaders: 1. Visionary Leadership: Unity's success underscores the impact of strategic, forward-thinking leadership in achieving institutional growth and financial health.

Faculty Empowerment: Empowering faculty to focus on their strengths enhances educational quality and job satisfaction, benefiting the entire academic community.
Innovative Academic and Governance Models: The necessity of revising academic and governance models to meet current and future challenges is critical for long-term success.

Final Thoughts This episode sheds light on the actionable strategies and leadership philosophies behind Unity Environmental University's success. For leaders in higher education, these insights provide a roadmap for embracing change, prioritizing innovation, and achieving sustainable growth.

Be sure to listen to Part One of this Two-Part episode with Dr. Melik Khoury to get all the valuable and actionable insights.

Read the transcript on our website →

About Our Podcast Guest Dr. Melik Peter Khoury is the 11th President and CEO of Unity Environmental University headquartered in New Gloucester, Maine. He holds a Doctorate in Business Administration (DBA), from the University of Phoenix, an MBA from the University of Maine Orono, and a Bachelor of Science in Business Management from the University of Maine at Fort Kent. During his time as President, he has led efforts to transform Unity Environmental University into a sustainable, student-centric institution of higher education by focusing on three core principles – affordability, accessibility, and flexibility. As a result, he has expanded its programs while growing its enrollment and national footprint exponentially.

About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton, host of Changing Higher Ed® podcast is a consultant to higher education institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website: https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#HigherEducation #UniversityBusinessModel #HigherEdGrowth

View Details

In this week's podcast, Dr. Melik Khoury, President of Unity Environmental University, shares the transformative journey of Unity from 500 to over 7,500 students and a budget increase from $14 million to $58 million.

Podcast Highlights

Our Inherited Academic Business Model is Cracking Under Pressure

Regulatory systems no longer hold up to the changes in higher education funding models post-evolution to loan-based funding.
75 percent of the universities and colleges that have closed or merged over the last five years were not under regulatory watch and/or warning or probation because our measuring stick does not meet the realities of the 21st-century institution.
Academia is excellent at identifying and deconstructing the problem yet stymied by the challenge of adapting to change in processes and governance to meet market demand, even at the risk of its survival.

High Achievement Growth in Institutional Performance

Unity went from 540 students to over 7,500, and expecting 10,000 within the next 2 years.
Graduation rates are impressively high, alternative loans are less than 3%, and placement rates are over 80%.

Dr. Khoury's mindset for achieving those big successes are:

Never be the smartest person in the room.
Be willing to (metaphorically) take a punch in the face and not fall down.
Figure out what you're really trying to do.

Building a Sustainable and Agile Enterprise Model

Building an Enterprise Model requires thinking outside the one-size-fits-all model to create a new program and model that:

o delivers what potential students want.

o delivers it in an adaptable model that lets students shift when they want or need.

o does not compromise on the pedagogy or the experience based on the student type.

Creating Distinct Independent Sustainable Education Business Units (SEBUs)

Sustainable Education Business Units (SEBUs): structuring the model into independent delivery mechanisms that utilize centralized shared services.
Unity currently has three academic SEBUs and one business ventures SEBU:

o Distance Education – online learning

o Hybrid Learning – in-person and online learning

o Sustainable Ventures – revenue-generating businesses that provide a real-world manifestation of our curriculum

o Technical Institute for Environmental Professions – in-person and online learning offering associate degrees and certificates

They segment verticals and treat them as subsidiaries with their own faculty, staff, and P&L.
When learning designers, faculty, and staff focus on the adult place-bound student, they don't have to compromise for the faculty, learning designer, or staff working on the community college commuter program, the residential program, and the like.
It allows the creation of programs, calendars, tuitions, and service types without the one-size-fits-all confines and compromises.

The Enterprise Model Non-traditional Org Structure

Unity's organizational structure emphasizes a balance between centralized decision-making for the enterprise and decentralized decision-making for subsidiaries.
The enterprise ensures compliance, assessment, and policy enforcement, while subsidiaries have authority over their own affairs within established guidelines.
Roles are differentiated based on the level of responsibility within the enterprise or subsidiary.

Efficient Curriculum Development: Streamlining Processes and Reducing Delays

Unity emphasizes collaboration between departments to avoid duplication and ensure unique offerings in their curriculum, aiming to streamline processes and reduce delays.
Instead of creating duplicate courses, departments "buy" courses from each other. For example, if one department wants an online course, they purchase it from another department specializing in online education.
The approach ensures consistency in curriculum across different departments, making it easier for students to transfer credits.
They have redefined traditional faculty roles, allowing curriculum design and pedagogy experts to collaborate with subject matter experts to create tailored courses.

Join Us Next Week for Part Two of This Podcast with Dr. Melik Khoury

Read the transcript on our website →

About Our Podcast Guest

Dr. Melik Peter Khoury is the 11th President and CEO of Unity Environmental University headquartered in New Gloucester, Maine. He holds a Doctorate in Business Administration (DBA), from the University of Phoenix, an MBA from the University of Maine Orono, and a Bachelor of Science in Business Management from the University of Maine at Fort Kent. During his time as President, he has led efforts to transform Unity Environmental University into a sustainable, student-centric institution of higher education by focusing on three core principles – affordability, accessibility, and flexibility. As a result, he has expanded its programs while growing its enrollment and national footprint exponentially.

About the Host

Dr. Drumm McNaughton, host of Changing Higher Ed® podcast is a consultant to higher education institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website: https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#HigherEducation #HigherEdSustainability #HigherEdGrowth

View Details

Not all news in higher ed is doom and gloom. San Jose State University is shining bright at the heart of innovation, building public-private partnerships that boost enrollment, community relationships, and public opinion about higher education.

In this inspiring discussion, Dr. Drumm McNaughton is joined by Dr. Cynthia Teniente-Matson, President of San José State University, who shares her insights on leveraging the power of public-private partnerships to elevate the institution's role in education, innovation, and community engagement. At the helm of SJSU, located in the dynamic ecosystem of Silicon Valley, she exemplifies leadership in navigating and enhancing the university's impact through strategic collaborations.

Key Points Overview

The Vision for San Jose State University

SJSU embodies Silicon Valley's spirit, aiming to be a cradle for innovation and entrepreneurship.
Focus on creating a mutually beneficial ecosystem for students, the institution, and the surrounding community.
Dedication to enhancing its brand and enrollment by strategically leveraging its position and partnerships to address contemporary educational challenges.

Addressing Urban Challenges and Enhancing Student Housing

In response to the need for affordable student housing, SJSU, with the use of HESH funds, is collaborating with a third-party developer to convert a former Fairmont hotel tower into a residence hall in the heart of the downtown Innovation Corridor.
A creative solution to address the occupancy levels in office buildings significantly contributes to the university's efforts in revitalizing the area and directly supporting students' needs.

Creating an Environment through Public-Private Partnerships

Prioritize corporate partnerships to provide students with job pipelines and opportunities for community betterment, aligning educational experiences with Generation Z's values and societal concerns.
Actively engage with leading corporations and thought leaders to tackle issues that reflect the priorities of its student body and broader community interests.

Why Corporate Partnerships Are Critical to Student Enrollment

The significance of aligning educational offerings with students' practical needs and societal aspirations, especially in addressing global challenges such as public health, climate change, and environmental stewardship.
How SJSU's strategic collaborations with corporations and community leaders enrich the student experience and contribute to societal well-being.

The Significance of Being an Anchor Institution

SJSU's role as a steadfast community pillar, providing stability, contributing to local development, and playing an irreplaceable role in the socio-economic fabric of the region.

The Role of Universities as Conveners

The university's capacity to bring together diverse groups for civic and social engagement, fostering dialogue and collaborative solutions to community and societal challenges.

The Importance of Collective Impact

Address the need for collaborative efforts across various disciplines and sectors to address complex societal issues, advocating for unity in action for greater and more sustainable outcomes.

A Multidisciplinary Approach to Problem Solving

Breaking down silos within academia and beyond, promoting a culture of cross-disciplinary collaboration that drives technological, societal, and scientific advancement, creativity, and comprehensive problem-solving strategies.

Three Key Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards

Anchor Institution Significance: Embrace and communicate the irreplaceable value of universities as stable, integral parts of their communities.
Convening Role: Utilize the unique position to foster civic and social engagement, driving initiatives that anticipate the needs of future generations.
Collective Impact Focus: Champion multidisciplinary collaboration to address community challenges, emphasizing the importance of working together for greater innovation and impact.

Final Thoughts

Dr. Cynthia Teniente-Matson's leadership demonstrates the potential of universities to transform themselves and their communities. But can all institutions follow suit? What challenges and opportunities exist for wider adoption of these strategies?

Read the transcript or extended show summary on our website →

About Our Podcast Guest

Dr. Cynthia Teniente-Matson serves as the 31st president of San José State University. An internationally recognized Latina leader, President Teniente-Matson is a champion of student success initiatives, diversity, equity and inclusion, civic engagement, and experiential learning. With over 30 years in higher education, she has been instrumental in driving institutional growth and enhancing student experiences. Her tenure as the second president at Texas A&M University-San Antonio marked significant achievements, transitioning it into a comprehensive master’s university, securing the U.S. Department of Education Hispanic Serving Institution designation, and the prestigious Seal of Excelencia. She initiated key projects such as the Mays Center for Experiential Learning and Community Engagement, Cisneros Institute for Emerging Leaders, and the Institute of Water Resource Science and Technology, alongside establishing a Cyber Engineering Technology & Cyber Security Research Center. Her educational background is robust, holding a BA in Management from the University of Alaska Fairbanks, an MBA from the University of Alaska Anchorage, and a doctorate in Educational Leadership from California State University, Fresno.

About the Host

Dr. Drumm McNaughton, host of Changing Higher Ed® podcast, is a consultant to higher education institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website: changinghighered.com.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#ChangingHigherEd #HigherEducation #SJSU

View Details

With today’s heightened political and social focus on higher education, the role of strategic communications for university presidents and boards is more important than ever.

In this episode of Changing Higher Ed, Drumm McNaughton is joined in conversation by Erin Hennessy, Executive Vice President for TVP Communications, a firm specializing in higher education communications. Erin, with her extensive background in strategic and crisis communications, offers invaluable insights into the complexities of presidential communications.

This episode is particularly timely, considering the recent hearings in Washington, increased demands for statements from higher ed presidents on seemingly every social or political topic, and the evolving challenges for higher education presidents.

Key Discussion Points Strategic Communication in Higher Education: * The importance of using discernment in strategic communication in higher education, especially in the context of recent political developments. * The challenges and nuances of presidential communications emphasize the need for clarity, tact, and alignment with institutional values.

The Impact of Political Climate on Higher Education: * The recent Washington hearings have highlighted the significance of being politically aware and prepared in communication strategies for higher education leaders. * The discussion sheds light on the necessity for university presidents to be adept at handling various situations, including media relations and public perception.

Building Trust through Transparent Communication: * The essential role of transparency in building trust among stakeholders in the higher education sector. * The importance of consistent, clear, and honest communication from university leadership to maintain institutional integrity and trust.

Investing in Robust Communication Infrastructure: * The importance of investing in strong communication teams and infrastructure is emphasized, considering the evolving challenges in the higher education landscape. * A well-equipped communication team is key to effectively anticipating and responding to challenges and safeguarding the reputation and standing of the institution.

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Presidents and Boards 1. Prioritize Strategic Communication: Recognize and invest in strategic communication as a crucial aspect of effective leadership in higher education. 2. Foster Transparency and Trust: Develop and maintain trust with key stakeholders through transparent and consistent communication strategies. 3. Adapt to Changing Communication Needs: Embrace adaptability in communication approaches, continuously evolving to meet the changing dynamics of the higher education landscape.

Final Thoughts This episode provides a deep and nuanced understanding of the valuable role of strategic communications in higher education leadership. Erin Hennessy’s expertise highlights the need for university presidents and boards to be strategic, transparent, and adaptable in their communication. Her insights are particularly relevant in light of recent political events and the ongoing challenges in higher education. The episode is a rich resource for higher education leaders aiming to navigate the complex terrain of institutional communication effectively.

Read the transcript on our website →

About Our Podcast Guest Erin A. Hennessy

Erin, at TVP Communications, leverages her higher education expertise, policy knowledge, and understanding of leadership styles to develop internal communication plans and offer strategic counsel to senior leaders. She leads the agency's crisis communications and trains professionals in campus roles.

Before TVP Comms in 2014, Erin worked at the American Council on Education, enhancing its media presence and supporting member institutions. Her higher education journey began at Drew University, where she was deputy chief of staff to Presidents Kean and Weisbuch, handling various responsibilities, including crisis response.

Erin's background also includes roles as press secretary for U.S. Representative Frelinghuysen and in New Jersey Gov. Whitman's administration. A New Jersey native, she lived in Washington, D.C., for 15 years, earning a master's in communication from American University, and returned to New Jersey in 2021.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#HigherEdPresidents #HigherEducation #HigherEdCommunication

View Details

In this episode, Dr. Justin Grimes, founder and CEO of Stick With It and Apply to Graduate School, shares his expertise on enhancing graduate school enrollment through strategic enrollment management (SEM). Drawing on his extensive experience in higher education and diversity, equity, and inclusion in graduate education, Dr. Grimes offers practical strategies and insights for institutions looking to navigate and improve their graduate enrollment processes.

Key Discussion Points: The State of Graduate Enrollment: · Recent reports show a 6.9% decrease in graduate enrollment over the past decade, with engineering experiencing a 16.1% drop.

· This decline is notably significant among underrepresented minority and domestic students.

Differentiating Recruitment and Enrollment: · A clear distinction between graduate admissions (reviewing applications and making enrollment decisions) and recruitment (actively attracting and engaging with prospective students).

· Effective recruitment involves orchestrated communication and marketing to a diverse group of potential students.

Marketing, Sales, and Value Proposition: · Institutions must understand their value proposition and ensure public perception aligns with their identity.

· Marketing strategies should target potential students and clearly communicate the benefits and outcomes of the graduate programs.

Strategic Enrollment Management (SEM): · SEM is a comprehensive process to achieve optimal recruitment, retention, and graduation rates.

· It encompasses marketing, recruitment, and admissions, considering the academic context of the institution.

Stages of the Enrollment Funnel: · An outline of various student types in the enrollment funnel: Potential Students, Prospective Students, Applicants, Admitted Students, and Enrolled Students.

· Each category requires tailored strategies and communication.

Pathway Opportunities and Community Partnerships: · Establishing partnerships with community colleges, HBCUs, and other organizations can create seamless transitions for underrepresented students into graduate programs.

· Examples include FUSE at the University of Georgia and the Graduate Feeders Program at Florida A&M University.

Recruitment Strategies and Data: · Utilizing data to understand trends, gaps, and future directions is crucial.

· Institutions should analyze their demographics, faculty representation, and peer comparisons to identify areas for improvement in diversity and inclusion.

Differences Between Recruiting for Masters and Doctoral Students: · Master’s recruitment should focus on the immediate career benefits and ROI, while doctoral recruitment should emphasize research opportunities and expectations.

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Presidents and Boards: 1. Allocate student resources effectively to support areas crucial for student success, like counseling, childcare, and housing. 2. Analyze data to identify equity issues, especially in funding, and understand recruitment trends. 3. Develop a strategic plan to address recruitment needs, involving alumni, faculty, staff, and community partners.

Final Thoughts This episode provides valuable insights for higher education leaders looking to enhance their graduate school enrollment strategies. Dr. Grimes' expertise offers a comprehensive understanding of SEM, emphasizing the importance of tailored recruitment, strategic partnerships, and data-driven decision-making in increasing graduate school enrollment.

Read the transcript on our website → About Our Podcast Guest Dr. Justin Grimes is a distinguished educator deeply committed to equity, social justice, liberation, storytelling, service, and healing. Raised in the dynamic community of Little Rock, Arkansas, his experiences have profoundly influenced his dedication to extending grace, fostering understanding, and addressing issues of injustice.

Academically, Dr. Grimes holds a comprehensive educational background, including an undergraduate degree in Computer Information Systems with a Minor in African American Studies and a Master's in Workforce Development Education from the University of Arkansas at Fayetteville. He furthered his expertise by obtaining a Ph.D. in Counseling and Student Personnel Services (College Student Affairs Administration) from the University of Georgia.

As the visionary founder and CEO of Stick With It, LLC, and Apply to Graduate School, Dr. Grimes spearheads an education and consulting enterprise that facilitates connections between individuals and organizations, offering insights and resources on Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) and Graduate Education. His work assists individuals in navigating career and education decisions and provides strategies to propel them toward success.

About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton, host of Changing Higher Ed® podcast, is a consultant to higher education institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website: https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#GraduateEnrollment #StretegicEnrollmentManagement #HigherEducation

View Details

Recent changes in the Education Department's regulations are reshaping mergers and acquisitions in higher education. These regulatory modifications, coupled with new negotiated rulemaking, are affecting not only the dynamics of institutional changes but also the roles of accreditors and state authorization bodies.

Drumm McNaughton welcomes Mike Goldstein, Managing Director of the Center for Higher Education Transformation at Titan Partners, to discuss significant regulatory changes in the field of higher education.

Key Discussion Points:

New Regulatory Landscape:

Exploration of the Department of Education's recent regulatory changes and their impact on higher education institutions' merger and acquisition activities.
The critical distinction between ownership and control in the context of these regulatory changes.

Impact on Institutional Dynamics:

Insight into different models of mergers and acquisitions, illustrated through real-world examples.
Discussion on the economic challenges faced by private, non-profit institutions leading to increased merger and acquisition activities.

Federal Government's Role and Intentions:

Analysis of the federal government's objectives in implementing these regulations, focusing on student protection and institutional accountability.

Negotiated Rulemaking and State Authorization:

Discussion on the details of the new rulemaking process and its implications for accreditors and state authorization.
Mike Goldstein's perspective on the increasing scrutiny and expectations from regulatory bodies.

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Presidents and Boards

Explore Mergers and Acquisitions When Beneficial

If a school can benefit from merging with, being acquired by, or acquiring another institution in terms of its educational mission, community service, or finances, it should confidently consider such options.

Proceed with Caution and Strategic Partnership

It is crucial to choose partners carefully. Institutions should merge or acquire only if it leads to mutual benefits such as scale, management efficiency, or program diversity. Avoid merging failing institutions as it only leads to a larger failing entity.

Ensure Professionalism and Meticulous Planning

Mergers and acquisitions in higher education require sophisticated handling of legal, financing, and academic issues. Professional guidance is essential to navigate these complexities and to model successful institutional mergers.

Final Thoughts

As we navigate these pivotal regulatory changes, it's clear that their impact goes beyond mere compliance. These shifts represent a transformative moment in higher education, prompting institutions to rethink their strategies around mergers and acquisitions. The implications are profound, potentially reshaping the very fabric of higher education as we know it. Institutions must not only adapt to these changes but also seize the opportunities they present for innovation and sustainable growth.

Read the transcript on our website →

About Our Podcast Guest

Michael Goldstein is the Managing Director of the Center for Higher Education Transformation at Titan Partners. Mike is a pioneer in the development of the legal environment in higher education and a counselor at the highest levels of legislation in higher education.

He initiated the New York City Urban Corps, the first major intern program for less affluent students, funded through the Federal Work Study Program. This led to similar nationwide initiatives, supported by the Ford Foundation.

In New York City government, Goldstein served as Assistant City Administrator and Director of University Relations, later joining the University of Illinois Chicago as Associate Vice Chancellor for Urban Affairs and Associate Professor of Urban Sciences. In 1978, he moved to Dow Lohnes law firm in Washington, DC, creating a new legal practice focusing on higher education.

By 2014, under his leadership, this practice, now part of Cooley LLP, was one of the largest and most respected in the U.S. Goldstein pioneered alternative postsecondary education delivery methods, including significant reforms for online learning. He's received numerous awards for his contributions to adult learning.

Goldstein, a Cornell University and New York University School of Law alumnus, also held a Loeb Fellowship at Harvard's Graduate School of Design.

About the Host

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#NegReg #HigherEdMergers #highereducation

View Details

In this episode of Changing Higher Ed podcast, listeners will gain an insightful overview of how technology is reshaping the EdTech arena and the potential risks of the current state of OPMs.

Dr. Drumm McNaughton discusses contemporary EdTech trends and predictions with Phil Hill, publisher of Phil on EdTech Blog and partner at MindWires LLC. They explore topics ranging from the recent changes in the OPM market due to enrollment, regulations, and cost of money, the potential transformations brought about by generative AI in higher education, to how universities can navigate the existential changes impacting them.

Key Discussion Points EdTech Trends and Predictions:

The recent shifts in the Online Program Management (OPM) market influenced by enrollment trends, regulations, and financial aspects.
The growing importance of technology in education, breaking down traditional departmental silos, and leveraging technology to create specialized programs catering to specific student needs.

Significant Changes in the OPM Market: * Challenges facing major OPM providers like 2U, Pearson, Wiley, and Academic Partnerships, including financial crises and market exits. * The impact of these challenges on higher education institutions, particularly those heavily reliant on OPMs for their online offerings.

Risk Management and Planning: * The essential role of enterprise risk management in navigating the current upheavals in higher education. * The need for institutions to develop internal capabilities to manage tasks traditionally outsourced to OPMs.

Role of AI in Education: * The transformative potential of generative AI in education, moving beyond current models to potentially revolutionize content creation and delivery. * Challenges related to accreditation and quality assurance with the rise of personalized and dynamically generated educational content.

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Presidents and Boards: 1. Embrace Existential Change: Recognize the current challenges as opportunities to innovate and reach new student groups. 2. Humility in the Face of Generative AI: Acknowledge the transformative impact of AI and be prepared for continuous learning and adaptation. 3. Breaking Down Silos: Foster collaboration both within and outside institutions to develop comprehensive solutions to emerging challenges.

Final Thoughts This episode offers a rich and comprehensive overview of the current state and future prospects of EdTech. The insights shared by Phil Hill are invaluable for higher education leaders seeking to navigate the rapidly changing landscape.

Understanding the trends, challenges, and opportunities discussed will be imperative for institutions aiming to stay ahead and mitigate risk in a technology-driven educational environment.

Read the transcript and show summary on our website → About Our Podcast Guest Phil Hill, publisher of Phil on EdTech Blog and partner at MindWires LLC.

About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton, host of Changing Higher Ed® podcast is a consultant to higher education institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers. To learn more about his services, visit his firm’s website: https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#EdTech #OPMs #HigherEducation #GenerativeAI #StateofHigherEd

View Details

In this episode, host Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Mary Papazian, Executive Vice President of the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges.

They focus on higher education governance and discuss the significant "AGB Board of Directors’ Statement on Influences Impacting Governing Board Independence and Leadership." This document, a noteworthy publication in AGB's 110-year history and only the 13th such statement, addresses crucial issues in contemporary educational governance.

Podcast Highlights "Without academic freedom and autonomy, higher education institutions cannot fulfill the vital role they play in our democracy and economy. The global competitive positions of our nature and society are in jeopardy if board oversight of academic freedom is diluted." AGB

Key Discussion Points: * AGB’s Perspective on Board Roles: The dialogue begins with an examination of how boards should actively participate in governance, differentiating their role from that of university presidents in management. * Principles of Board Governance: Dr. Papazian unpacks the four fundamental principles of board governance: loyalty, care, obedience, and the preservation of institutional autonomy, particularly academic freedom. * Spotlight on Governance in Media: The discussion touches on the increased media attention towards board governance and its wider implications for higher education. * Strengthening Governance Practices: The importance of developing robust governance structures, especially before a crisis, and the role of AGB in aiding this development. * Academic Freedom - A Core Value: Comparing and contrasting the AAUP and AGB reports underscoring the critical role of academic freedom in American higher education. * Best Practices from the AGB Report: Insights into the latest AGB report, which offers guidance and strategies for institutions to uphold governance responsibilities. * Diversity in Board Decision-Making: Emphasizing the importance of diverse viewpoints in enhancing the quality of governance and shared decision-making. * Essentials of Good Governance: The conversation emphasizes the need for maintaining and adapting good governance practices to address various challenges. * Promoting Self-Assessment for Boards: The significance of regular board evaluations in sustaining and improving governance effectiveness.

Three Key Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards: 1. Fiduciary Duties as a Foundation: Reinforcing the core responsibilities of loyalty, care, and obedience in governance. 2. Upholding Academic Freedom and Independence: Highlighting the necessity of board independence and academic freedom for the integrity of higher education. 3. Supporting College Presidents: The critical role of boards in supporting university presidents, particularly in navigating complex situations.

Final Thoughts The episode wraps up with an emphasis on the importance of informed and adaptable governance in higher education. McNaughton and Papazian advocate for proactive engagement and strong leadership to effectively address the evolving challenges in the sector.

Read the transcript and extended show summary on our website →

About Our Podcast Guest Mary Papazian, PhD, is the executive vice president of AGB. She has served as president at San Jose State University, Southern Connecticut State University, and as interim president of the Business-Higher Education Forum. She has served as board chair of the Business-Higher Education Forum, the Coalition of Urban Serving Universities, and the Mountain West Athletic Conferences. She has been a board member of the American Association of Colleges and Universities, the NCAA, the Silicon Valley Leadership Group, and Haigazian University.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#AGBreport #BoardGovernance #AcademicFreedom #HigherEducation

View Details

Welcome to our 2023 Higher Education Year in Review and Predictions for 2024 podcast. In this episode, Deborah Maue, Aurora University Senior Vice President for Enrollment and Marketing, and Dr. Drumm McNaughton review last year's 2023 higher education predictions and provide insights into the unexpected developments and what to prepare for in 2024.

Review of the 2023 Predictions 1. Continuing Decline in College Enrollment: The prediction of a continued decline in college enrollment in 2023 was accurate. Factors like federal COVID assistance played a significant role in sustaining institutions, especially smaller colleges. This trend particularly impacted institutions with enrollments under 1500 students, leading to various strategic responses like forming alliances and sharing resources. 2. Colleges and Universities Mergers and Closures: The predicted trend of colleges and universities closing or merging continued in 2023, driven by financial pressures and declining enrollments. Strategic collaborations and adaptations were seen as a response to these pressures. 3. Hybrid and Fully Online Models: There was an increase in hybrid and fully online educational models in colleges and universities in 2023. However, the oversupply of these programs relative to student demand posed sustainability concerns. 4. Political Impact in Higher Ed: The impact of politics on higher education continued to be significant in 2023. The political climate influenced campus environments and policies across various states. 5. Growth of Alternative Credentials: The higher education sector saw substantial growth in alternative credentials. However, challenges in institutional implementation and market recognition persisted. 6. Increasing Complexity of University Presidents’ Roles: The complexity of the roles of university presidents escalated, with presidential tenures decreasing. This trend points to growing pressures and responsibilities in higher education leadership. 7. Technology Driving Innovation: Technology, especially AI, continued to drive innovation in higher education. However, challenges remain in fully integrating these technologies. 8. Faculty Governance: Faculty governance in higher education adapted to new challenges, showing resilience and flexibility in the face of changing governance demands.

2023 Higher Education Year in Review: Unexpected Developments in Higher Education * Intensified political involvement, especially in states like Florida. * Leadership changes at major universities reflect the growing politicization in university governance. * Declining public confidence in higher education, with the perceived gap between skills acquired by graduates and employer expectations.

Dr. Drumm McNaughton’s Top 10 Higher Education Predictions for 2024 →

Read the extended show summary and the show transcript on our website →

About Our Special Host Deborah Maue Deb Maue is the Aurora University Senior Vice President for Enrollment and Marketing.

Over the past 25+ years, Deborah has been helping organizations drive growth through strategic consumer branding, product development, and organizational development. She has led highly successful consumer marketing initiatives in highly complex organizations in consumer packaged goods, higher education, and agency settings.

After getting an MBA at Northwestern’s Kellogg Graduate School of Management, Deb started her career at Helene Curtis (now part of Unilever), leading and developing innovative products for large and successful brands, including Axe, Dove, Degree, and Suave.

Since transitioning to the higher education sector, she has developed and implemented unique and compelling brand stories for large public and private universities, healthcare universities, law schools, and independent K-12 schools. She is a sought-after speaker and regular contributor to Inside Higher Ed’s Call to Action blog.

About Our Podcast Guest Dr. Drumm McNaughton, CEO of The Change Leader, is a consultant to higher education institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website: https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links * LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ * Twitter: @thechangeldr * Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#ChangingHigherEd #HigherEd2023Review #HigherEducation

View Details

In this episode of 'Changing Higher Ed' Podcast, host Dr. Drum McNaughton and guest Dr. Carrie Lovelace Petr discuss the topic of creating a healthy workplace culture in Higher Education institutions.

Dr. Petr, a former senior education officer turned consultant, shares her expertise on leadership development and adapting to workplace culture. They discuss the impact of technology and the culture of 'always-on' availability on employees' quality of life and how this can be managed better. They also consider the concept of a 'vacation tax,' the importance of work-life integration, and how the improvements can strengthen shared governance.

Discussion Overview: * Workplace Culture in Higher Education: The episode explores the complexities of fostering a positive workplace culture in higher education institutions, emphasizing the critical role of presidents and leadership. * Technology's Influence: The conversation addresses the challenges posed by an 'always-on' technology culture, including its impact on staff and faculty well-being. * Setting Boundaries and Expectations: The importance of setting healthy boundaries and managing expectations to ensure a sustainable work environment. * Vacation Tax and Workload Management: The concept of 'vacation tax' and its implications for workload management are explored, underscoring the need for effective vacation policies and practices. * 24/7 Work Culture Consequences: Addressing the negative effects of a non-stop work culture. * Culture Continuum: Understanding the spectrum of good and bad practices in workplace culture. * Culture Sustainability: Evaluating the sustainability of the current work culture. * Faculty's Role in Expectations: Faculty's contribution to setting and managing expectations. * Consequences of Overworking: The impact of overwork and rapid response culture on staff. * Delayed Email Responses: The effectiveness of managing email and communication strategically. * Presidents and Workplace Culture: The critical role of university presidents in understanding and shaping workplace culture. * Invisible Labor: Highlighting the often unseen efforts in higher education. * Vacation and Workload Management: Discussing the importance of proper vacation time and workload management. * Boundaries Impact on Students: How setting boundaries can positively affect students. * Modeling Work-Life Integration: Leadership's role in demonstrating a healthy work-life balance.

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Presidents: 1. Modeling Healthy Work-Life Integration: Leaders should exemplify a balanced approach to work and personal life, setting a standard for their teams. 2. Managing Technology and Expectations: It's crucial to manage the impact of technology and set realistic expectations for response times and availability. 3. Addressing Vacation Tax: Leaders should be aware of the 'vacation tax' and work towards creating policies that allow employees to take meaningful breaks without undue workload upon return.

Final Thoughts: The episode concludes with a reflection on the essential role of leadership in cultivating a healthy workplace culture, emphasizing the benefits of a supportive and well-managed work environment.

Read the transcript on our website →

About Our Guest Carrie Lovelace Petr, Ph.D., PCC, BCC, is a seasoned executive administrator and holds a Ph.D. in Educational Leadership from the University of Nebraska-Lincoln. She trained as a certified professional and executive coach at the ICF-accredited College of Executive Coaching and is recognized as both an Associate Certified Coach by the International Coaching Federation and a Board-Certified Coach by the Center for Credentialing Education.

Carrie has lived her professional career in service to higher education staff, students, and faculty. Partnering with long-time professionals and aspiring leaders to help them thrive and nurture their talents is her passion.

About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton, host of Changing Higher Ed® podcast, is a consultant to higher education institutions in board governance, shared governance, accreditation, strategy, change, and mergers.

To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website: https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#ChangingHigherEd #HigherEdCulture #HigherEducation

View Details

The American Association of University Professors (AAUP) released its comprehensive report titled "Political Interference and Academic Freedom in Florida's Public Higher Education System." This report marks a critical juncture in the AAUP's history, being one of only eight special reports issued, and underscores a growing concern over political interference in the realm of academic governance.

Hank Reichman, co-author of the report and co-chair of AAUP, joins the Changing Higher Ed podcast to discuss the report and provides details about Governor DeSantis's legislative efforts to control what can be taught, how it's taught and who teaches, particularly attacking faculty rights and tenure.

The report includes the specific case of the hostile takeover of New College, describing it as a blueprint for potential future encroachments on public colleges and universities across the United States.

McNaughton and Reichman cover the processes and conclusions of the AAUP report, emphasizing the detrimental effects on academic governance, academic freedom, and the well-being of faculty and students.

Podcast Overview Unpacking the AAUP Report: A Critical Look at Political Interference in Florida's Higher Education:

· The rarity of such comprehensive reports by AAUP, with only eight instances in its history, three of which occurred in the last three years.

· The specific case of Florida under Governor DeSantis's administration highlights legislative and administrative actions perceived as politically motivated attacks on academic freedom, faculty rights, and tenure.

Investigation Approach: · Conducting over 65 interviews with various stakeholders, including faculty, students, alumni, and former presidents, while noting challenges in engaging current administrators and political leaders.

Major Findings: · The hostile takeover of New College is a model for potential future actions in other institutions.

· Academic administrators' failure to contest or, in some cases, complicity in these attacks.

· Legislative actions are collectively seen as an effort to enforce a narrow political ideology.

· The chilling effect of these actions on academic freedom and the higher education environment.

Human Impact: · The emotional and professional toll on faculty and students, with significant faculty departures and declining academic standards.

· The broader implications for the quality of higher education in Florida and potential nationwide consequences.

Key Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards: 1. Thoroughly Review the Report: University presidents, administrators, provosts, deans, and other leaders actively engage with the contents of the report. Don't just skim through it; understand its implications for your institution and its broader impact on academic freedom. 2. Build Resilience and Courage: Leaders in higher education are strongly urged to cultivate the strength to face political pressures. This involves developing a steadfast approach to defending the rights and freedoms of your institutions, faculty, and students against politically motivated pressures. 3. Stand Up for Academic Integrity: When confronted with situations that threaten academic freedom or the integrity of your institution, take a clear and firm stand, even if it entails personal or professional risks. Demonstrating leadership in such situations is crucial. 4. Voice Your Concerns Publicly: In Florida, it's mostly retired university presidents who are making statements against these issues. Encourage not only retired but also current university leaders to speak out against political interference. Public statements from active leaders can have a significant impact and inspire others to follow suit.

Final Thoughts The critical nature of the current situation in higher education is a pivotal moment in the history of institutions. We are reminded that what's happening in Florida is not just an isolated issue but a warning sign of the potential nationwide impact of political interference in academia. Leaders in higher education are urged to recognize the severity of this crisis and respond with conviction and strength. It's a call to action for maintaining the integrity and freedom of our academic institutions against partisan politics, ensuring these values are upheld for future generations.

Read the transcript on our website →

About Our Podcast Guest

Henry “Hank” Reichman is the chair of the American Association of University of Professors’ Committee on Academic Freedom and Tenure and a professor emeritus of history at California State University, East Bay. Hank co-authored the AAUP report, "Political Interference and Academic Freedom in Florida's Public Higher Education System," released on December 6, as co-chair of a special investigating committee.

About the Host

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links * LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ * Twitter: @thechangeldr * Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#AAUPReport #AcademicFreedom #HigherEducation

View Details

In this episode, Dr. Drumm McNaughton invites Dr. Brit Kirwan back to discuss the dynamic and challenging landscape of higher education. They discuss many of the high-stress challenges higher education presidents are facing today.

With more capacity than students and issues like political interference, the decline in public trust, and the threats to academic freedom, the higher education president's role is more stressful than ever before.

Overview: Dr. Kirwan shares his wisdom on the evolving landscape of higher education. His perspectives are a guiding light for current presidents and leaders in the field, offering strategies to navigate and overcome the myriad of challenges they face.

Key Topics: Political Incursions in Higher Education: * Rising political influence on university campuses threatening academic freedom and integrity. * The need for university leaders to balance political pressures while upholding educational values. * Strategies to navigate and mitigate political interference in academic institutions.

Financial and Enrollment Challenges: * Innovative approaches to handle fiscal pressures and enrollment declines. * Emphasis on strategic planning and adapting to changing financial landscapes in higher education. * Identifying alternative revenue streams and efficient resource allocation.

Maintaining Academic Independence: * Upholding academic freedom in the face of societal and political shifts. * The importance of academic integrity as a cornerstone of higher education. * Encouraging open dialogue and critical thinking in academic environments.

Leadership in Challenging Times: * Insights on effective leadership for current and future university presidents. * Embracing adaptive leadership styles to address evolving challenges. * The significance of visionary and empathetic leadership in higher education.

Higher Education's Role in Society: * The critical function of higher education in advancing national and global progress. * Fostering innovation, scientific advancement, and economic growth through education. * Preparing students to be informed, responsible, and active citizens.

This episode concludes with a synthesis of the perspectives shared, offering practical solutions and insightful strategies for leaders in the higher education sector. The guidance provided is essential for navigating the complexities of modern higher education and leading institutions towards a prosperous future.

Final Thoughts for Higher Education Presidents:

Kirwan emphasizes the importance for higher education presidents to remain actively engaged and involved in meaningful pursuits post-retirement.

He highlights the necessity of thoughtful planning for life after presidency, underscoring the benefits of leveraging years of experience to make impactful contributions.

This advice is coupled with reflections on the rewarding nature of choosing and focusing on areas where one can be most helpful, drawing from the wealth of knowledge and experience gained throughout a career in higher education leadership.

Read the transcript →

About Our Podcast Guest

Dr. William E. “Brit” Kirwan is chancellor emeritus of the University System of Maryland (USM). He is a nationally recognized authority on critical issues facing higher education. He served as chancellor of the University System of Maryland (USM) for 13 years (2002-2015), president of the Ohio State University for four years (1998-2002), and president of the University of Maryland, College Park for 10 years (1988-1998). Prior to his presidency, he was a member of the University of Maryland mathematics faculty for 24 years.

Dr. Kirwan is the past chair of, among other boards, the American Council for Higher Education, the Association of Public and Land Grant Universities, the American Association of Colleges & Universities, the Business Higher Education Forum, and the National Research Council Board on Higher Education and Workforce. He also served as the co-chair and chair of the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics from 2004 to 2016. Presently, he chairs a Statewide Commission on Innovation and Excellence in Education, which has been asked to make recommendations to the Governor and General Assembly to enable Maryland schools to perform at the level of the world’s best school systems.

About the Host

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#HigherEdProblems #HigherEducation #ChangingHigherEd

View Details

In this episode of the podcast, Drumm, serving as both host and guest, explores the theme of thankfulness, particularly focusing on its importance in university leadership. He reflects on the challenges faced by university presidents and the significance of gratitude in overcoming these obstacles.

Podcast Highlights * Drumm discusses the history of Thanksgiving and its global relevance, underlining the benefits of gratitude, as noted by the Mayo Clinic. * Emphasizing the role of thankfulness in difficult times, he relates this to the challenges in higher education, such as university closures and enrollment declines. * The importance of acknowledging those in service roles is highlighted, from frontline workers to educators. * Drumm offers advice to university presidents on understanding campus dynamics, caring for individuals on campus, and practicing humility. * He concludes by expressing personal gratitude to his clients, family, and faith, and extends holiday wishes to all listeners.

To read the full show notes and transcript, visit https://changinghighered.com/gratitude-in-university-leadership-challenges

About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides consulting for higher education institutions. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links * LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ * Twitter: @thechangeldr * Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#HigherEducation #HigherEdPodcast #HigherEdLeadership

View Details

This episode of Washington Update examines significant changes and updates in higher education policy, with a focus on the Higher Education Act of 2019, the FAFSA Simplification Act, and various Title regulations. The discussion highlights the Biden-Harris administration's active role in Negotiated Rulemaking since late 2020, bringing about a comprehensive set of regulations affecting higher education.

Washington Updates Discussed: * Higher Education Act 2019 Changes: Emphasis on the need for a comprehensive review of the act, touching on Title II (teacher education), Title IV (federal student financial aid), and Title IX (campus security). * Negotiated Rulemaking Under Biden-Harris Administration: Overview of the regulatory revisions, including a new oversight set for all higher education institutions, termed as financial value transparency, an extension of the gainful employment regulations. * Future Implementation: Discussion on the timeline for the implementation of these regulations, with the complete effect expected by July 1, 2024, and subsequent assessments in 2025 and 2026. * Major Regulation Changes: Insight into the recent large set of regulations impacting financial responsibility, administrative capability certification procedures, and ability to benefit regulations. * Title IX Updates: Exploration of changes brought about by Title IX, awaiting major revisions related to campus security, including LBGTQ+ communities, and protection against bullying and cyberbullying. * Impending FAFSA Updates: Discussion on the forthcoming 2024-2025 FAFSA, reflecting changes from the FAFSA simplification law of 2019, to be released by December 31st.

Three Takeaways for Higher Education Leaders: 1. Cybersecurity: Emphasis on compliance with FTC safeguard rules and upcoming changes from the Department of Education. 2. Regulatory Change Impact: Urging financial aid departments to understand the implications of recent proposals, especially on financial responsibility and administrative capability. 3. Borrower Defense to Repayment: Encouraging institutions to review claims thoroughly to understand their substance.

Final Thoughts: The episode provides a comprehensive analysis of the evolving landscape in higher education policy, highlighting the need for higher education leaders to stay informed and proactive in adapting to these changes.

Read the transcript →

About Our Guest Tom Netting

TEN Government Strategies CEO Tom Netting, a regular guest on the Changing Higher Ed® podcast, provides updates on the latest coming out of Washington, D.C., and how these will impact institutions and students.

Tom Netting on LinkedIn →

About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton, host of Changing Higher Ed® podcast, is a consultant to higher education institutions with a focus on governance, accreditation, strategy, change, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website: https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#NegotiatedRulemaking #NegReg #HigherEdPolilcy

View Details

Facing tough times ahead, higher education enrollment is at a critical juncture, as discussed by seasoned experts Drumm McNaughton, Bill Conley, and Bob Massa in this episode. They examine the current landscape, characterized by fluctuating student numbers, the next two demographic cliffs, and changing educational trends. Drawing from recent reports by the National Student Clearinghouse and the College Board, they explore changing demographics, public skepticism towards higher education, and the unintended results of trending financial strategies.

Key Discussion Points Enrollment Trends and Challenges: * Significant long-term changes in higher education enrollment patterns post-COVID-19. * Decreased enrollment in traditional four-year colleges, with a notable shift towards certificate programs. * Racial demographics show flat rates for white students and increases for Asian and Latin/Hispanic students, with challenges persisting for predominantly white institutions.

Reframing Financial Dynamics in Higher Ed: * Discussion on the disparity between the sticker price and the net price of college education. * Increased discounting by colleges is leading to reduced net revenues and potential implications for service and support levels. * Highlighting the need for transparent communication about true costs and financial aid opportunities.

Strategic Adaptation for Higher Education Institutions: * Importance of understanding and adapting to market needs, including an emphasis on employability and alignment with workforce demands. * The role of college missions in guiding responses to current challenges and the necessity to revisit and update them as needed. * Importance of investing in strong enrollment management leadership.

Accelerated Evolution of Higher Learning Structures: * Predictions of ongoing demographic declines and their impact on enrollment. * The necessity for higher education institutions to innovate and adapt to a potentially prolonged period of stagnation or decline in traditional student enrollment. * Emphasis on strategic mergers, collaborations, and program adjustments to remain viable.

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leaders and Boards * Acknowledge and respond proactively to the current demographic and financial challenges. * Prioritize transparent communication about the value and cost of education. * Embrace adaptability in institutional missions and practices to align with evolving market demands and expectations.

Final Thoughts The episode concludes with a call for boldness and creativity in addressing these unprecedented challenges in higher education. The guests emphasized the importance of strategic leadership and innovation in navigating these turbulent times.

Read the transcript on our website →

About Our Podcast Guests Principals at Enrollment Intelligence Now

Robert Massa

Dr. Robert Massa, a seasoned professional in higher education enrollment, began his career in 1974 at Colgate University and retired in 2019 from Drew University. His career trajectory included key positions at Union College, Johns Hopkins University, Dickinson College, and Lafayette College. Massa's expertise extends to teaching, currently as an adjunct professor at the University of Southern California. He is known for his insights on data modeling in admissions, financial aid strategies, and non-academic criteria in admissions, contributing to several national publications and speaking at conferences. His educational background includes a BA from the University of Rochester and an EdD from Columbia University.

William Conley

Bill Conley began his career in education as an AP History teacher and coach at Delbarton School, transitioning into higher education enrollment management in 1980. His notable career includes roles at Lafayette College, Drew University, Case Western Reserve University, and Johns Hopkins University, before retiring in 2020 from Bucknell University. Throughout his forty-year career, Conley significantly improved admissions metrics and developed strategic infrastructures for recruitment and retention at each institution. He has been actively involved in professional organizations, holding leadership positions and contributing to publications in the field of higher education. Conley is a respected voice in higher education, frequently quoted and sought after for his insights and expertise. His educational background includes a BA from Colgate University and an M.Ed. from Harvard University.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links * LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ * Twitter: @thechangeldr * Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#HigherEdEnrollment #EnrollmentCliff #ChangingHigherEd

View Details

Navigating New Frontiers in Higher Education In the quest for sustainability and relevance, universities worldwide are confronting a pivotal moment that calls for a transformative rethinking of their traditional business models.

The Ernst & Young white paper: How are you balancing the books for a digital future? discussed in the episode, created in partnership with Times Higher Education, delves into the global challenges facing the sector. The findings underscore a pressing narrative: enrollment numbers are plummeting, costs are escalating, and the old ways of cost-cutting are no longer sufficient lifelines.

The Crux of Financial Sustainability Rising costs, shrinking domestic enrollments, and stagnant government funding are painting a stark picture for universities. With employment rates soaring, the allure of higher education is under scrutiny, especially as alternative learning pathways burgeon. The conversation with Catherine Friday reveals that the value proposition of universities is increasingly contested, leading to softer financial outcomes and the necessity for strategic innovation.

A Paradigm Shift: Strategy, Scale, and Digitalization The traditional response to financial duress, such as downsizing and selling assets, is a mere stopgap, insufficient for long-term viability. Instead, universities are being urged to leverage their underutilized assets, like sprawling campuses now operating at a fraction of their capacity. The success stories of today's educational landscape are those institutions that understand their target students, deliver high-end educational experiences, and cultivate distinctive, tailored offerings.

The Digital Transformation of Education Digital integration stands as a cornerstone of the modern educational transformation. It's not merely about transitioning analog to digital, but reimagining the very essence of educational delivery. Leading universities are employing digital strategies to create personalized, accessible, and engaging learning experiences, harnessing AI, data analytics, and innovative technologies like AR and VR to enhance the academic journey.

Empowering Educators and Students Alike A resounding theme throughout the episode is the importance of teaching educators how to effectively employ digital tools to foster personalization and engagement. Students crave meaningful connections with faculty who are not just knowledgeable but also adept at nurturing these connections through digital means. Universities that excel in equipping their educators with these skills are seeing improved retention and student outcomes.

The Power of Collaboration and Distinctiveness Mergers and partnerships are emerging as strategic maneuvers for universities to achieve scale and distinctiveness. The episode highlights examples like the merger of Wheelock College and Boston School of Education, which combined high-quality curriculum with robust enrollment figures, underscoring the potential of such collaborations.

Rethinking Leadership and Engagement As universities navigate these changes, the role of leadership is pivotal. Transformation must be championed from within, with faculty and staff actively engaged in shaping and embracing the new direction. True leadership in higher education is about fostering collaboration, supporting innovation, and guiding institutions toward a sustainable and impactful future.

Three Key Takeaways for University Presidents and Boards: 1. Prioritize People: Focus on the individuals within the institution — the academics, students, and administrative staff — recognizing that they are the cornerstone of any transformative change. Ensuring that the needs and skills of these people are at the forefront can guide a university through change successfully. 2. Embrace Discomfort in Change: When strategies for change evoke discomfort, it often indicates a move toward meaningful progress. Leaders should not shy away from decisions that challenge the status quo if they believe these changes can lead to a better future for the institution. 3. Seek External Validation: Utilize external resources like consulting firms or peer networks for a "sanity check" on new strategies. This peer review approach can provide critical insights and validation, ensuring that new initiatives are sound and have considered various perspectives.

This comprehensive exploration not only encapsulates the current state of higher education but also charts a course for institutions to stay afloat and thrive amidst the changing tides. It emphasizes the urgency for non-Ivy League universities to recalibrate their strategies, embrace digital innovation, and foster deep connections with their academic communities to secure a prosperous future in the rapidly evolving educational landscape.

Read the transcript on our website →

About Our Podcast Guest

Catherine Friday

EY Oceania Managing Partner, Government and Health Sciences; EY Global Education Leader

Catherine has spent much of her career providing services to state and federal departments and regulators, ministerial councils, not-for-profits and NGOs in every state and territory in Australia, and in New Zealand. The implications of the work she does are far-reaching, delivering the best outcomes for citizens across education, health, human services, defense, transport and infrastructure, and central agencies.

Catherine Friday on LinkedIn →

About the Host

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#ShiftsInHigherEducation #HigherEdBusinessModel #HigherEdSustainability

View Details

Innovating Higher Education for a New Era When it comes to higher education, innovation isn't just about generating ideas; it's about knowing how to implement them effectively. In a world that's rapidly changing, colleges and universities need to adapt to meet the needs of today's students. Dr. Philly Mantella, the President of Grand Valley State University, is at the forefront of this innovation, breaking down the structural barriers of traditional education models and creating a student-centric approach to overcome enrollment challenges.

Breaking Barriers and Embracing Change The landscape of higher education has shifted dramatically over the years, and it's essential to break away from the traditional structures that were designed for a different demographic. This innovation recognizes the need to adapt to today's age and demographic.

A Student-Centric Approach One of the key aspects of this innovation is a student-centric approach. The focus is on the students themselves. By addressing their needs, aspirations, and challenges, new ways are being found to create a supportive and engaging educational experience.

Preparing Graduates for the Business World In today's competitive job market, it's not just about earning a degree; it's about being business-ready. The commitment is to ensure that graduates from Grand Valley State University possess the skills and knowledge necessary to thrive in their chosen careers. This means building a curriculum that goes beyond traditional subjects and includes essential skills like critical thinking, teamwork, and digital literacy.

Redefining the Public Good While higher education has long been associated with the concept of the public good, this innovation takes a broader view. Yes, it involves civic engagement and community service, but it also means producing graduates who are ready to contribute to the workforce and society. It's about equipping students with the skills they need to make a meaningful impact beyond the classroom.

Three Key Takeaways for Higher Education Leaders 1. Embrace innovation as a way to break down structural barriers and adapt to the changing landscape of higher education. 2. Prioritize a student-centric approach that addresses the unique needs and challenges of today's students. 3. Ensure that graduates are not just academically prepared but also business-ready, with skills that go beyond traditional disciplines.

Implementing innovation in higher education is not an option; it's a necessity. This approach serves as inspiration and how-to for colleges and universities looking to thrive in a new era of learning, prepare students for success in their careers, and benefit society.

Read the transcript on our website → About Our Podcast Guest Philomena V. Mantella is Grand Valley State University’s fifth president and the first woman to hold the position. Mantella is a recognized leader in strategic planning, market expansion, and educational innovation. Her drive and expertise come from more than 30 years in higher education administration, serving as an officer at public and private universities in New York, New Jersey, Michigan, and Massachusetts.

Dr. Philomena Mantella on LinkedIn

About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton, host of the Changing Higher Ed® Podcast, is a consultant to higher education institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website: https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links * LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ * Twitter: @thechangeldr * Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#HigherEducation #InnovationinHigherEd #ChangingHigherEd

View Details

In this conversation between Dr. Drumm McNaughton and Dr. David R. Decker, the President of Franklin University, we explore three strategic moves aimed at driving higher education enrollment. Franklin University, which primarily serves non-traditional, part-time adult learners, offers a unique perspective on higher education.

Podcast Highlights Applying the 4 Ps of Marketing to Higher Education David Decker discusses how applying the traditional marketing framework of the 4 Ps (Product, Price, Place, and Promotion) to higher education programs can lead to success. He highlights that in addition to content, academic programs should consider their structure, transferability, micro-credentials, and prior learning assessments as part of the product. This broader perspective allows universities to better align with the needs of students and employers.

"Backing into Costs" for Tuition Decker emphasizes that pricing in higher education should go beyond an institution's needs. Instead, it should consider fixed points in the universe, such as IRS guidelines for tax deductions, Pell Grants, and the ideal price of zero that students aim for. Franklin University aligns its tuition rates with these fixed numbers, aiming to make education more accessible and affordable for students. This approach ensures a market-driven pricing strategy.

Leveraging Alliances and Promotion David Decker highlights the importance of building alliances with community colleges, corporations, and other professional organizations. These partnerships enhance the credibility of the institution and provide students with clear pathways for credit transfer and career development. Additionally, promotion in higher education extends beyond traditional advertising, involving relationships, articulation agreements, and community college alliances to effectively reach prospective students.

Three Takeaways for Higher Education Leaders: Think Beyond Content Encourage academic institutions to expand their thinking about academic programs beyond content. Consider the structure, transferability, and practicality of programs to better meet the needs of students and employers.

Embrace a Market-Driven Pricing Model Move away from self-absorbed pricing models and align tuition rates with fixed points in the education ecosystem, making education more affordable and accessible to students.

Build Strategic Partnerships Foster alliances with community colleges, corporations, and organizations to enhance credibility, promote transferability, and provide clear pathways for students to succeed in their academic and professional journeys.

David Decker's insights from his experience at Franklin University shed light on innovative strategies that higher education leaders can adopt to drive enrollment, reduce costs, and provide high-quality education.

Read the transcript on our website →

About Our Podcast Guest

David R. Decker joined Franklin University as its President in 2007. Under his leadership, Franklin focuses on the demonstrable achievement of student outcomes, through which graduates are empowered to rise in their professions and strengthen their contributions to their families, communities, and employers.

Franklin University has become a doctoral-granting university under Dr. Decker’s tenure and has also established a world-class Instructional Innovation Center focusing on enhancing student learning and student success. Dr. Decker graduated from Grinnell College, holds the M.A. and Ph.D. from the University of Kansas, and earned the M.B.A. from the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania.

Guest Social Media Link:

David Decker on LinkedIn

About the Host

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#HigherEdEnrollment #ChangingHigherEd #HigherEducation

View Details

This thought-provoking conversation dissects the structural disruptions in the higher education landscape. Drawing parallels with the entertainment industry, McNaughton and Smith explore the strategic turbulence ahead for higher education leaders.

Key Discussion Points: * Introduction to structural disruption and its defining role in today's higher education. * A glance back at the entertainment industry and how technology shifted the ground beneath it. * Unraveling the parallels: Both sectors controlled critical, scarce resources, but how are they adapting or resisting change? * The tale of Joyce Carol Oates: A microcosm of the larger issue in higher education, exploring the challenge of exclusive access to premier knowledge resources. * The urgent need for change: Tackling the financial and moral challenges in higher education and understanding the roots of increasing public distrust. * Bright spots on the horizon: Institutions that are harnessing technology for more inclusive and affordable education.

Three Critical Takeaways for Higher Education Leaders: * Recognizing the challenges * Understanding their systemic nature * Embracing technological solutions

This episode serves as a wake-up call for higher education transformation. Drawing lessons from past industries, there's a pressing need to redefine missions, methods, and mindsets to ensure your institution remains relevant, accessible, and equitable in today's digital world.

About Our Guest Dr. Michael D. Smith is J. Erik Jonsson Professor of Information Technology and Marketing at Carnegie Mellon University's Heinz College of Public Policy and Management. Smith is coauthor of the book "Streaming, Sharing, Stealing: Big Data and the Future of Entertainment" (MIT Press, 2016) and author of the new book "The Abundant University: Remaking Higher Education for a Digital World" (MIT Press, 2023).

Michael D. Smith on LinkedIn →

About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton, host of Changing Higher Ed® podcast, is a consultant to higher education institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy, change, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website: https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#StructuralDisruption #HigherEducation #HigherEdPodcast

View Details

Strategies for Seamless K-12 to Higher Ed Transitions, Embracing Online Learning, and Building Strong Institutional Foundations The second half of this two-part series with Connecticut State Colleges and Universities (CSCU)’s Chancellor Terrence Cheng explores the strategy CSCU uses to better communicate to high schoolers how connected K-12 is to higher ed to ensure equity and accessibility for all students. Cheng also shares how his system is revolutionizing its online learning model to better serve local businesses and CSCU’s students across numerous campuses.

Evolving Online Learning Beyond COVID-19 Specifications Although in the early stages, CSCU is working to deliver online learning that’s effective, accessible, and cost-efficient. Cheng communicates to his presidents that the system-wide implementation of the online program does not have to be the same at every campus. These online programs need to amplify each institution’s unique offerings, assets, and stakeholders rather than relying on a one-size-fits-all solution.

Creating a Clear Pathway to Community College Using the Common App, CSCU created a legislature-driven, GPA-calibrated automated admission program that will be implemented at the state’s 17 technical schools and CSCU’s 17 community college campuses. Upon graduation, students will be automatically accepted at their local community college.

CSCU is also bringing its IBM P-Tech partnership with Norwalk Community College and Norwalk High School to scale. The goal is to effectively convey that there's a very clear bridge to higher education after 12th grade, almost like a “13th grade.”

Five Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders and Boards Trust your instincts. Remind yourself that you got to be where you are today by doing things a certain way, so it’s okay to rely on your instincts. However, it’s still important to listen.

Make changes sooner rather than later. If you know that you need to make some staff or organizational changes, give yourself enough time to gather the data. But don’t take too long because that can have detrimental effects.

Own the narrative of your story. Don't let others tell your story for you. Get out there. Be upfront. Be ruthlessly honest with the data. Have integrity in what you say. But make sure you say what needs to be said.

Have a good mentor. It’s helpful to have current and/or past presidents and chancellors who can provide support for you and even suggest what to steer clear of. This advice is critical, regardless of whether you’ve been a president or chancellor before. Every campus is different.

Build a strong relationship with your board chair. This is probably one of, if not the most critical, relationship a university president can have. It doesn't mean that you tell him or her what to do, or vice versa, but if the two of you can be joined at the hip, it's going to make things far smoother for you in the long run.

At a Glance * How higher ed is not meeting 21st-century students and what can be done to remedy this. * What higher ed needs to start destigmatizing to truly succeed. * Why having a “winning team” mentality is so important for higher ed.

Read the transcript →

About Our Guest Terrence Cheng

Terrence Cheng is president of the Connecticut State Colleges and Universities (CSCU) system, which oversees 12 community colleges, four state universities, and Charter Oak State College and serves more than 72,000 students.

About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton, host of Changing Higher Ed® podcast, is a consultant to higher education institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers.

#HigherEducation #ChangingHigherEd #TheChangeLeader

View Details

Learn how CSCU’s unification of its once-siloed community college is building a sustainable higher education model and helping improve retention and enrollment.

The first half of this two-part series with Connecticut State Colleges and Universities (CSCU)’s Chancellor Terence Cheng explores how CSCU partners with local businesses to ensure equity and workforce preparation for its majority-minority student population.

Forming Effective Partnerships with Local Businesses At UConn Stamford before coming to CSCU, Dr. Terrence pinpointed local businesses in the Stamford, Connecticut, area like NBC Sports and then identified the type of skills NBC Sports wanted to connect them with the programs UConn Stamford offered that could best meet their needs.

98% of CSCU’s students come from Connecticut and will remain there, so CSCU strives to create a strong relationship with local businesses where these businesses feel compelled to call the system if they have any needs. Dr. Terrence describes it as building “muscle memory” for them.

Higher ed leaders need to help local businesses realize a simple if/then value proposition if they partner with your system. You want them to say, “If I call CSCU, I will get this.”

Improved Retention Through Streamlined Transfers CSCU helped unite the system’s 12 legacy community colleges into one singularly accredited multi-campus institution. A united system provides a more streamlined and efficient shared services model on the back end that anticipates providing improved academic performance, retention, graduation rates, and job placements.

Most community college students cannot take 12 or even 9 credits at a time and regularly move across the state for various reasons. A unified curriculum makes transferring easier. To streamline transferring, higher ed must first identify the percentage of community college students who want to transfer but haven’t and those who transfer within and outside your system.

After performing this analysis, remove obstacles that complicate transferring, such as “the last-credit conundrum.” This can be accomplished by breaking down the perception that a course taken from a community college is not good enough for a university. Also, more effectively communicate the seamlessness of your continuum from community colleges to four-year institutions to help attract and retain students.

At a Glance

How systems like CSCU need to position themselves in relation to major flagship universities in their state like UConn
CSCU’s unique history when Governor Daniel Malloy created CSCU’s system more than 10 years ago
The challenges of navigating a siloed university system that is deeply rooted in its ways

Read the transcript on the website →

About our Guest Terrence Cheng

Terrence Cheng is chancellor of the Connecticut State Colleges and Universities (CSCU) system, which oversees 12 community colleges, four state universities, and Charter Oak State College and serves more than 85,000 students.

#HigherEdSustainability #HigherEducation #WorkforceReadiness

View Details

This episode delves deep into the challenges of diversifying student bodies in higher education, especially in the wake of SCOTUS decisions on Affirmative Action. Dr. Thomas Parham and Dr. Dilcie Perez, stalwarts from the California State University system, bring their expertise and insights to the table.

Drowning in Diversity Debates

Higher education has always been a battleground of ideologies and policies. The introduction of Affirmative Action intended to level the playing field, but its judicial scrutiny has thrown institutions into a quandary. How does one maintain a diverse student body while abiding by the rules?

For the California State University system, this is more than just a theoretical debate. Prop 209 left its mark, challenging institutions to innovate and find ways to promote diversity without relying on race-based decisions in admissions.

The responsibility isn't just on the institutions. Dr. Parham, referencing the literary greats Frantz Fanon and James Baldwin, emphasizes the role of society in shaping educational experiences. The legacy of generations past is heavy on the present one, which seeks to redefine inclusivity on campuses.

CSU's Symposium: Bridging Aspirations with Realities in Higher Education

The gravity of the situation was felt profoundly during CSU's Juneteenth symposium. As Dr. Perez recounted, the voices of Black students, faculty, and staff highlighted the disconnect between the aspirational goals of institutions and the realities on the ground. The symposium wasn't just an event; it was a call to action.

Yet, the scope of the challenge isn't limited to students alone. Faculty, staff, and every stakeholder in the educational ecosystem play a role in shaping the campus climate. Diversity, as Dr. Parham eloquently puts it, is more than just demographics.

Redefining Success and Inclusion

The intertwined fates of students, faculty, and staff necessitate a holistic approach. Success in one domain invariably affects the other. And this reciprocal relationship is what the CSU aims to strengthen. Their Black Student Success workgroup, although centered on Black student success, is not a siloed initiative. It's a blueprint, a model for broader inclusivity.

At its heart, the approach isn't just about numbers. It's about creating environments where everyone feels they belong, where aspirational visions of institutions align more closely with the reality on the ground.

Innovation in Inclusivity

CSU's strategies are groundbreaking in many ways. From early outreach to partnerships with community-based organizations, the efforts aim to foster lifelong relationships. The goal isn't just to admit students but to support them, ensuring their success inside and outside the classroom.

Dr. Perez's take on the matter is unequivocal. Institutions have a responsibility that goes beyond the classroom walls. And for CSU, that responsibility is being shouldered with conviction and vision.

Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders and Boards

Institutions need to ensure that their policies and practices truly reflect the diverse voices within their community. Listening sessions, feedback mechanisms, and open forums can offer deep insights.
While specific initiatives like the Black Student Success workgroup are essential, institutions must also ensure that these strategies have broader applications. The principles learned from one initiative can be applied to other demographics, ensuring wider success.
Success isn't the responsibility of just one stakeholder group. Institutions need to foster collaborations between students, faculty, staff, and external partners. Community-based organizations, alumni, and even businesses have roles to play in shaping the educational experience.

At a Glance

The landscape of higher education is continually evolving, with policies like Affirmative Action at its forefront.
The California State University system, grappling with the implications of Prop 209, seeks innovative ways to promote diversity.
Diverse voices, from students to staff, emphasize the need for genuine inclusivity.
CSU's initiatives, like the Black Student Success workgroup, offer blueprints for broader change.
Institutions need to balance aspirational visions with on-ground realities, ensuring that every stakeholder feels they belong.
Collaborations, both internal and external, are crucial in shaping the future of higher education.

Read the transcript on the website →

About our Guests

Thomas A. Parham

Thomas A. Parham, president of CSU Dominguez Hills since March 2018.

Dilcie Perez

Dilcie Perez is Deputy Vice Chancellor of Academic Student Affairs.

About the Host

#HigherEducation #UniversityDiversity #AffirmativeAction

View Details

Although a for-profit institution, Post University employs a unique and effective two-fold approach to ensure graduates are career-ready with lifelong learning skills that “not-for-profit” universities can emulate on their campuses.

In this podcast episode, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Director Camille Dumont of the Center for Career and Professional Development (CCPD) about how she aligned career services with academia at Post University to better prepare students for the workforce. Camille discusses how Post ensures students are thinking about their careers from the moment they enroll and how online-only learners receive and benefit from the same services as those who attend the university on campus.

Podcast Highlights

Camille’s mindset on lifelong learning is influenced by personal experience. She successfully transferred the skills she learned in the hotel industry to the healthcare industry and now to higher ed, where she works in career services.
Originally, only Post’s juniors and seniors took a critical Foundation course to learn critical information about their career choices alongside their cohorts in the same field of study. In these courses, students receive prompts to encourage online or in-person discussions so they can start thinking about what it is they want to do.
On the academic side, students now have conversations with admissions and advising as soon as they are accepted to determine what major or career they might be interested in. Students are then enrolled in a CTC College to Career course based on their answers to provide them with important information as early as possible about their chosen career path, such as the lifestyles of current employees or possible outcomes in related occupations. This can either validate their interests or give them the opportunity to switch early on.
On the non-academic side, a new CCPD program prepares students for the junior and senior Foundation courses as soon as they enroll. Students first take an assessment of who they are and then build different types of resumes, participate in mock interviews, and learn the art of interviewing and networking, along with the benefits of joining professional associations. CCPD also meets virtually with online students throughout the week.
CCPD uses the virtual job platform Handshake to conduct virtual career fairs for online students. Post’s webinars inform these students how to prepare for a virtual career fair such as how to ensure they have the proper background, lighting, and attire. Meanwhile, students create their resumes and upload them onto Handshake.
CCPD has programs where employers or alumni talk to students on campus. These events are livestreamed, recorded, and hosted on the university website and YouTube channel for online-only students. These recordings are also repurposed for additional learning opportunities. For example, students are asked to identify what skills employers say they need in these recordings and, if they can, to add them to their resume or incorporate them into their overall conversation with employers when applying for a job or internship.
Post University starts at the basics by not assuming students know everything about transitioning to the workforce to ensure everyone is on the same page. For example, students are taught what a discussion board, rubric, or resume is. Post also ensures that students understand that all work experience matters and that the skills they learned in these jobs are transferrable to various careers. For instance, retail workers acquire customer service and communication skills.
Post students have access to a locked closet with gently used professional men’s and women’s attire that have been donated by staff and faculty members. Students can try these clothes on and even take them for use in interviews and career fairs, etc.

Read the transcript →

About Our Podcast Guest

Camille Dumont, recently named Director of the Center for Career and Professional Development (CCPD) at Post University, brings a wealth of experience to the role. She has been part of the university since 2011, initially as a faculty member and then in various leadership roles. With a background in health services management and a strong foundation in business skills gained from her early career at the Plaza Hotel in New York City, Camille is well-equipped to lead the CCPD. She has also been actively involved in professional organizations like CCCDA, NACE, and NCDA. Camille's goal is to expand CCPD services to benefit all Post students, both on-campus and online, with innovative programs and support for their career journeys.

About the Host

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
https://www.youtube.com/@ChangingHigherEd
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#CareerReadyGrads #PostUniversity #CollegetoCareer

View Details

By 2032, college football playoff revenue and new lucrative conference media contracts are projected to reach $16 billion annually for 54 schools with the most lucrative football programs, according to a new report from Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics in partnership with CLA (CliftonLarsonAllen).

During this same time frame, the report also finds that 26 of these 54 schools will likely pay their head football coaches and ten assistants more than what they spend on hundreds of athletes, their scholarships, lodging, food, medical expenses, and insurance coverage.

In this episode of Changing Higher Ed®, Dr. Drumm McNaughton discusses these shocking findings, along with where this money should go and how it must be spent, with Amy Privette Perko, CEO of the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics, an independent group with a legacy of impacting college sports policies to prioritize college athletic education, health, safety, and success.

Amy also cites other challenges these numbers present, such as how this will unfairly impact other sports at these institutions and what this means for higher education as a whole.

Podcast Highlights * Two years ago, NIL rule changes were made that allow athletes to earn compensation for the use of their name, image, or likeness in endorsements and social media. However, recruiting inducements haven’t been enforced, particularly among the powerhouse programs. There is also a lack of uniformity. The new NCAA president, Charlie Baker, is pushing for more athlete protections, such as the use of common contracts so athletes know what they're getting into and requiring agent registration. These will likely require federal legislation.

The Knight Commission had CLA (CliftonLarsonAllen) perform some projections that are featured in a new report that looks at the top 54 public institutions’ football programs, particularly in regard to the incoming revenue from college football playoffs and new lucrative conference media contracts. All sources of athletic revenues for these 54 schools will likely reach $16 billion annually in 2032. The report asks where all this money is going, how it’s going to be spent, if higher ed is going to move to an employee or revenue-sharing model, and how this will impact other sports.
The new report also finds that if head football coaches continue to be the chief beneficiary at nine institutions in particular, 26 of the 54 Power Schools are projected to pay their head football coaches and ten other countable assistants more than what they spend on hundreds of athletes, their scholarships, lodging, food, medical expenses, and insurance coverage.
Six public institutions in the Pac-12 recently announced they would leave the Pac-12 to join the Big Ten and the Big 12 because 85% of them are tied to big-revenue football. From the Knight Commission's view, that particular realignment and others like it only work for football and will force other sports to travel more and cause athletes to miss more classes.
The Knights Commission proposes there should be one governing association for football called the National College Football Association that's separate from the governing association. Meanwhile, the NCAA will govern all other sports. This isn’t a proposal to dismantle every conference. There should just be two FBS conferences like the Pac-12, SEC, or ACC, and there should be at least eight schools that play big-time football that will have to play a specific number of Olympic sports cones to receive an automatic qualifier for those tournaments.
The National College Football Association should be funded by the College Football Playoff since the College Football Playoff is already independent of and generates revenue separately from the NCAA. That said, the College Football Playoff does distribute the revenue back to the FBS conferences, which is then sent to the schools. The NCAA receives zero dollars in revenue from FBS football and the College Football Playoff. That’s significant because the NCAA absorbs $60 million a year in national costs for that sport.
The leadership is fragmented among power conferences. The Knight Commission feels that a unified structure would be better for the future of football, football players, and all other sports. To get it done, university presidents will need to tell conference commissioners to work together for the collective good, or Congress will get involved.
University presidents will need to identify what they want to achieve from college sports. If it's just about the revenue from conference contracts and the power of the brand, then they have to change the structure of how they treat athletes. If the answer is to provide opportunities for athletes, then presidents must be willing to leave a little bit of money on the table to provide a reasonable regional competitive structure for other athletes and must ensure these athletes don’t miss too many classes.
Schools have also signed onto an NCAA constitution that identifies on what principle higher education bases their revenue distribution. The Knight Commission says that incentives must be tied to these constitutional principles. First and foremost, the revenues need to take care of their own cost, but there needs to be some changes within that distribution.

Read the transcript →

About Our Podcast Guest

Amy Privette Perko has led the Knight Commission since 2005, serving as executive director until October 2016, when she was named chief executive officer. During Perko’s tenure, the NCAA has adopted a number of the Knight Commission recommendations. The most prominent of these actions include requiring teams to be on track to graduate 50 percent of their players to be eligible for postseason championships, reducing athletic time demands on college athletes, and revising its revenue distribution to include incentives for academic outcomes. The Knight Commission recommended all of these actions in its June 2010 report — “Restoring the Balance: Dollars, Values and the Future of College Sports.”

Perko serves as the Commission’s spokesperson and has been quoted and interviewed by leading news media, including ESPN, USA Today, The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, Bloomberg News, and numerous public radio stations. She has been a keynote speaker and lecturer at a number of events, including the CoSIDA Convention, the University of Florida’s Alan C. & Elizabeth Martin Moore Lecture Series, and UNC’s Parr Center for Ethics/Public Policy Carolina Forum.

About the Host

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#CollegeSports #KnightCommission #HigherEducation

View Details

Higher education must strive to increase the average tenure of university presidents, which currently stands at a dismal 3.7 years. This can be accomplished by addressing ineffective presidential onboarding processes and shared governance practices, among others.

In this second half of a two-part series, Dr. Drumm McNaughton discusses best practices and strategies with a nationally recognized authority figure who has one of the best track records and overall experience under his belt to speak on such a topic, Chancellor Emeritus Dr. William E. “Brit” Kirwan of the University System of Maryland. Brit has served as chancellor at the University System of Maryland for 13 years, president of The Ohio State University for four years, and president of the University of Maryland College Park for 10 years.

Part one of this series addressed the challenges facing university presidents and the root causes of tenure decline.

Podcast Highlights * The process for onboarding presidents includes hiring a search consultant, identifying a screening committee that’s representative of the university, gathering and narrowing down a pool of candidates, and bringing those candidates in for a 60- or 90-minute interview. This process is flawed.

Interviews don’t provide enough substance despite serving as the most critical factor in hiring a president. Every person on 15- to 20-member boards only gets to ask one question, and applicants are only expected to provide brief answers.
In addition, presidents who would have been perfect for the institution are oftentimes dismissed if they just happened to have an off day. Although the interview process is getting longer and involves more representation, the board is generally influenced by their one interview.
It is difficult to gauge the effectiveness of an applicant who has never served as a president before. There isn’t another campus role like the president, who serves as the face and voice of the institution in the public eye and can do it effectively in a way that advances the institution.
Universities and search committees are oftentimes too passive and rely too much on search consultants. Although search consultants play a valuable role, search committee members know the institution best and have the right contacts. This should be the primary or major source for presidential candidates.
Incoming presidents who are not familiar with their new university must become informed about its culture, traditions, interests, challenges, and priorities. New presidents can accomplish this by identifying a seasoned individual or a consultancy to interview administrators, faculty, staff, students, board members, and members of the community to understand the institution’s aspirations and challenges.
Presidents and board members must have a very clear understanding of their roles and responsibilities to prevent board intrusion and micromanaging. Ground rules must also be identified from the start. Additionally, presidents need to insist upon an annual board review so there’s a written record of what the board wants done and how successful the president was in addressing them. This will help prevent boards from inventing or revising points in their favor.
Shared governance in consultation with representative bodies must be respected. Presidents should resist the ongoing pressure from boards and external forces to take immediate action. The community must have demonstrated respect, trust, confidence, and commitment to consultation and shared governance.
Successful shared governance usually has a nonhierarchical three-tiered system. Tier one includes representative bodies of faculty, staff, and students. Some of them are rolled into one entity, while others are separate. The second tier is administration. The third tier is the governing board.
There needs to be a clear understanding that the board has the final authority on everything they choose because they are the legal entity created by the state to run the institution. However, the most successful systems see the board delegating a great deal of this authority. In particular, the board should delegate authority on matters they don’t have expertise in, such as academic curricula and academic appointments. Some boards rubber stamp tenure recommendations. Shared governance works effectively when the board delegates certain authorities to the president, such as appointments to cabinets and even for tenure.
Any campus constituency—such as faculty, staff, students, and, in some cases, all of them—that is affected by any major policy decision must be consulted. Recommendations must also go to the president. Based on the model, the president either acts on these recommendations or refines them so they’re appropriate for administrators and then takes these recommendations to the board, who then acts upon them. This is based on the RACI model.
Presidents must build a relationship of trust with the board, both collectively and individually. They must interact with the board outside of committee and/or board meetings. A successful practice includes speaking with one board member every week to see how they are doing, what is happening, and if they have any thoughts or concerns.
The board has to be kept informed on all matters. There can be no surprises. There’s nothing that board members should learn about by reading the newspaper, for example.
Successful presidents are accessible, visible, and good listeners. Good listeners can put themselves in another’s situation and fully understand why that other person holds that view. To build consensus and have strong support over an extended period, the community must believe they are heard and understand why certain decisions are made, especially if they go against what they want.
Presidents must walk the walk and talk the talk. Their behavior must emulate the values they’re espousing. For example, presidents should reject salary increases or bonuses if no one else is receiving raises.
Give bad news or admit mistakes when they happen rather than trying to cover them up. Presidents who are not candid will be haunted by this in the future.

Read the transcript →

About Our Podcast Guest

Dr. Kirwan is past chair of, among other boards, the American Council for Higher Education, the Association of Public and Land Grant Universities, the American Association of Colleges & Universities, the Business Higher Education Forum and the National Research Council Board on Higher Education and Workforce. He also served as the co-chair and chair of Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics from 2004 to 2016. Presently, he chairs a Statewide Commission on Innovation and Excellence in Education, which has been asked to make recommendations to the Governor and General Assembly that would enable Maryland schools to perform at the level of the world’s best school systems.

Among Dr. Kirwan's many honors is the 2010 TIAA-CREF Theodore M. Hesburgh Award for Leadership Excellence. Considered one of the nation's top higher education honors, this award recognizes outstanding leadership in higher education and contributions to the greater good. In 2009, he received the Carnegie Corporation Leadership Award, which included a $500,000 grant to support USM academic priorities. Dr. Kirwan was elected to the American Academy of Arts and Sciences in 2002 and inducted into the Baltimore Sun’s Maryland Business and Civic Hall of Fame in 2017.

Dr. Kirwan received his bachelor's degree in mathematics from the University of Kentucky and his master’s and doctoral degrees in mathematics from Rutgers, The State University of New Jersey, in 1962 and 1964 respectively.

About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton, host of Changing Higher Ed®, is a consultant to higher education institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website: https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links * LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ * Twitter: @thechangeldr * Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#HigherEducation #HigherEdPresidents #HigherEdPodcast

View Details

President university turnover is a major problem in higher education, with the average tenure of leaders serving in this capacity at one institution declining sharply from 10 years to a shocking 3.7 years.

In this first half of a two-part series, Dr. Drumm McNaughton discusses the challenges facing university presidents and why their tenures have become so short with a nationally recognized authority figure who has one of the best track records and overall experience under his belt to speak on such a topic, Chancellor Emeritus Dr. William E. “Brit” Kirwan of the University System of Maryland. Few are as qualified to do so as Brit, having served as chancellor at the University System of Maryland for 13 years, president of The Ohio State University for four years, and president of the University of Maryland College Park for ten years.

Part two of this series will cover what higher ed can do to improve university president retention.

Highlights

§ The role of the university president has become much more complex and challenging over the last few years, causing the average tenure of presidents to fall from 10 to 3.7 years. There has never been more political interference and influence on higher ed as there is now, especially in Texas, Florida, and North Carolina. For example, the governor of Florida recently directed his attorney general to file a lawsuit against the Department of Education on changing accreditors.

§ There's also an unprecedented amount of pushback on DEI when diversity and inclusion were once very much a part of higher ed. In Ohio, a very anti-DEI bill was introduced that would restrict what higher education could do on diversity issues. This change in focus is forcing presidents to juggle what can be taught in the classroom and their faculty, who are very much invested in DEI initiatives.

§ Divisions and political beliefs are also over-influencing boards, causing them to be more directive and engaged in operational issues than they should be. As a result, sound board governance has declined, with many boards going rogue. Politicized boards also are forcing presidents to translate policy into operations when this should be done in parallel and jointly by the board, while boards are sticking their noses into what can be taught, which should be decided by the president.

§ For example, at the University of Virginia, the board chair recently told the president to announce her resignation at the next board meeting before board members were made aware of this decision. At Chapel Hill, the board refused to grant tenure to a distinguished journalist for political reasons. A similar situation occurred at Texas A&M.

§ Funding issues are mounting and will likely worsen, forcing presidents to make massive cuts to programs, negatively affecting faculty morale. Presidents are also more involved in fundraising than ever, complicating their leadership roles. Meanwhile, big-time intercollegiate athletic programs are forcing presidents to cobble together money to keep these expensive enterprises afloat.

§ There are two reasons universities can still hire presidents despite these major problems. The first is that it’s human nature to want to advance and meet new challenges. As a result, many people are still compelled to rise to the top. The second is that salaries and compensation packages for presidents have escalated dramatically. There are several presidents earning compensation packages of $1 million or more per year.

Read the transcript →

About Our Podcast Guest

About the Host

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#HigherEducation #HigherEdLeadership #HigherEdChallenges

View Details

Although higher ed as a whole believes in the importance of freedom of speech, very few agree on what the free exchange of ideas looks like and how it should function on campus. But with the current hostile political and social climate, it’s now more important than ever for higher ed to unite on what truly matters—protecting respectful and productive speech that leads to a better and kinder society.

In his latest podcast episode, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with President Eric Hogue of Colorado Christian University on the topic of free speech in higher ed. Eric shares how students must approach disagreements to create a more forward-thinking society and, most significantly, how faculty, staff, and students should conduct themselves in public and in the classroom to elicit more mature behavior.

Podcast Highlights * Free speech is a constitutional right that’s an essential function of a democratic society. Free speech allows individuals to express their opinions, thoughts, and ideas without fear of censorship or persecution. A complete college education dives into understanding this right. Such an education also empowers students not to be swayed by the ideologies of the moment but to compare new ideas against centuries of accrued knowledge.

The free exchange of ideas works best when exercised with respect, maturity, positive behavior, and decorum. But society has lost respect for each other and the ability to agree to disagree.
Higher ed needs students to look at disagreements from the mind perspective—how we think about issues—and combine it with their heart perspective. This allows students to see arguments from other people’s views. Higher ed needs students, faculty, and staff to build resilience by realizing they are not a victim in every situation, everything isn’t a crime, disagreements don’t impinge on rights or freedoms, and if someone is different from them, that doesn’t make them evil people who must be silenced. Higher ed must always be in pursuit of truth, even though it might be categorized as “my” truth or “your” truth.
Colorado Christian University employs co-teaching practices where faculty with opposing views debate each other on topics in front of students. The students are more attentive and engaged when this happens. CCU also has a moot court, and the practicum is to learn how to create an argument. Sometimes, the assignment is to create an argument from a different perspective. Students learn that they disagree with topics, not the people they debate and that if somebody doesn't wholly agree with them, they're not evil or don't need to be silenced.

Read the transcript →

About Our Podcast Guest Eric Hogue was named president of Colorado Christian University by the Board of Trustees in March 2023 and took office in June 2023. Hogue previously served as vice president of University Advancement for CCU.

Hogue has a strong affinity for Christian higher education, having earned a Master of Arts in Theological Studies from Liberty University and a Bachelor of Science in Business Administration from Jessup University.

He brings a deep knowledge of CCU to his new role. Since 2018, Hogue has served as vice president of University Advancement, directing a comprehensive fundraising program totaling more than $45 million, including $33.5 million for the Armstrong Center Campaign. He launched a $44 million Science Center Campaign, established the CCU Endowment Foundation to prioritize the rapid and sustained growth of future resources for the University, and birthed the CCU Fund and Hope Fund, which will raise $1.5 million annually for student scholarships.

Before joining CCU, Hogue served for six years as the chief development officer of Jessup University, where he tripled JU's endowment fund and navigated two successful campus capital development campaigns.

Hogue is known for his roles as a former political candidate; practicing theologian and pastor; and long-tenured radio, television, and media professional. He is the author of The Winning Side of the Ask: The Heart and Skills of the Donor-Centric Professional Fundraiser, a book dedicated to helping nonprofits design a thriving philanthropic culture.

About the Host

Dr. Drumm McNaughton, host of Changing Higher Ed®, is a consultant to higher ed institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website: https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#FreeSpeech #HigherEducation #HigherEdPodcast

View Details

As higher ed faces enrollment challenges, fostering diverse pathways for first-gen students becomes crucial. Dr. Drumm McNaughton's podcast features Dr. Marielena DeSanctis, President of Community College of Denver, discussing innovative solutions based on her unique K-12 to community college leadership insights. She emphasizes essential K-12 partnerships for first-gen support and advocates for a family-oriented approach. Addressing orientation, graduation, and credit transfer, Dr. DeSanctis sheds light on vital issues in higher education equity.

· Prospective students, particularly first-gen, need confidence in college success. Partnering with high schools to guide students through higher ed processes is crucial, preventing doubts upon college entry. Communicating the value of post-secondary degrees is vital.

· Implementation of such supports at the K-12 level, not just during campus tours, aids student progress tracking.

· Recognizing the weight of traditional family roles, higher ed leaders must convince both students and families to enroll.

· The Community College of Denver holds an inclusive, outdoor graduation event, reflecting family importance. Flexible durations and guest participation foster inclusivity.

· Efficient student orientation is key; store relevant modules in the Learning Management System for anytime access.

· AP, ACE, or IB courses may favor out-of-state prospects. Dual enrollment credit disparities can arise even within a state due to high school recommendations.

· Dual enrollment at high schools can lack the college experience. Transfer credit inconsistencies hinder student progression.

· Retaking courses during transfers, especially within the same state, impedes student advancement.

· In a study, CCD students transferring between Denver universities faced redundant courses. Transparency, a task force, and aligned objectives addressed this.

· Aligning course objectives and identifying credit equivalency enhances credit transfer for students moving between institutions.

Read the transcript →

About Our Podcast Guest

Dr. Marielena DeSanctis, an accomplished education leader with over 23 years of experience, is a passionate advocate for first-generation student success. Her unique journey, transitioning from K-12 to community college leadership, brings a deep understanding of bridging educational sectors. As President of the Community College of Denver, she pioneers critical partnerships between K-12 and higher education, while championing a family-centric approach to enrollment. Dr. DeSanctis' innovative insights address key challenges, including equitable credit transfers and graduation formats. Her commitment to empowering students resonates through her roles in numerous educational organizations, reflecting a profound dedication to transforming lives through education.

About the Host

Dr. Drumm McNaughton, the host of Changing Higher Ed®, is a consultant to higher ed institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website: https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#FirstGenStudents #HigherEdEnrollment #EnrollmentCliff

View Details

Higher education leaders who want to increase inclusion while maintaining affordability at their campus can emulate the actions of the Illinois Institute of Technology. By following three core principles, Illinois Tech has ranked first in the state for people it has successfully moved from the bottom 20th percentile of household income to the upper 20th percentile.

Illinois Tech is also one of just 88 institutions named an American Talent Initiative ‘High-Flier’ by the Aspen Talent Institute and Bloomberg Philanthropies for ensuring college access and success. Moreover, Illinois Tech’s employment rate is 92% six months after graduation, even when 37% of its students receive Pell Grants.

In this episode of Changing Higher Ed® podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with President Raj Echambadi of the Illinois Institute of Technology about the four principles that have allowed Illinois Tech to experience so much success. They include boosting inclusion through experiential learning opportunities, providing more pathways for students, and embracing digital education.

Podcast Highlights

Illinois Tech pairs technology education with human-centered education by mandating experiential learning opportunities. These include not only students learning from faculty but also students learning from each other and faculty learning from students.
Because of how the public perceives higher ed, institutions must provide different pathways for students to receive an education. This involves no longer thinking of students as a monolith that can benefit from a one-size-fits-all solution. Instead, institutions must think about individual student groups and look at their different needs and motivations to develop more effective value propositions.
For example, after learning that students were concerned about affordability, Illinois Tech partnered with the local community college system, the City Colleges of Chicago, to create an innovative program. Students can now spend their first year at City Colleges to take post-secondary courses at community college prices while living on the Illinois Tech campus. They can also join student organizations and participate in activities at Illinois Tech. This not only addresses affordability but boosts a sense of belonging for students.
For its student-centered approach, Illinois Tech has been asked to join REP4 Rapid Education Prototyping, which is an alliance of like-minded institutions that devise strategies by learners for learners. It is a bottom-up orientation, where the learners design and dictate the learning strategy. At the same time, it becomes the job of educational leaders to make sure that those strategies get implemented so their learners remain empowered.
Illinois Tech embraces a hybrid model due to student demand and to increase accessibility for those who work full-time jobs, for example. Before joining Illinois Tech, Raj developed and launched the first scaled online MBA program in partnership with Coursera at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign. That program happens to be the largest online program in the world. Ten percent of all online MBAs in the United States come from the university.

Read the transcript →

About Our Podcast Guest

Raj Echambadi, the 10th president of Illinois Institute of Technology, is steering the institution towards preeminence by prioritizing economic mobility, accessible education, human-centered technologists, and purposeful citizenship. Collaborating with university leaders, he has launched the groundbreaking ELEVATE program, which offers experiential learning, personalized mentorship, and job readiness, resulting in remarkable enrollment growth and recognition as an ATI High-Flier institution by Bloomberg Philanthropies. Echambadi's previous role as dean of the D’Amore-McKim School of Business at Northeastern University and his involvement in pioneering online education further underscore his transformative vision.

About the Host

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#changinghighered #thechangeleader #higheredpodcast

View Details

Tier two (R2) research and smaller institutions, including two-year, minority-serving, and tribal colleges, can now build solid research infrastructures and perform groundbreaking discoveries through research enterprises on the same scale as larger R1 and flagship universities.

In this episode of Changing Higher Ed®, Drumm speaks with Sethuraman Panchanathan, President of the National Science Foundation (NSF). They discuss how his organization helps democratize ideas in higher education, enabling all colleges and universities to solve real-world problems and revitalize their communities.

The NSF achieves this through programs like the Nationally Transformative Equity and Diversity (GRANTED) and Enabling Partnership to Increase Innovation Capacity (EPIIC).

Dr. Panch also discusses NSF's mission and vision. He talks about its recent $44 million program that helps fund projects across the US. Additionally, Drumm refers to another NSF program as "a tech transfer on steroids." Moreover, they explore what smaller institutions with few resources need to do to start conducting research.

Podcast Highlights

NSF's Regional Innovation Engines is a $44 million investment that partners with communities to utilize regional potentials like the Hazleton pilot converting hemp into carbon-negative building materials through collaboration with Penn State University and community colleges.
The cross-cutting TIP Directorate pulls discoveries into the industry, creating impactful solutions by fostering partnerships and bringing back new ideas to address real-world problems.
GRANTED and EPIIC programs support the growth of research infrastructure and capacity at national and minority-serving institutions, enhancing access to resources and regional innovation ecosystems.
NSF's strategic focus includes research, education, partnerships, and research infrastructures, with initiatives like BP Innovate, EDU Racial Equity in STEM, and the Robert Noyce Teacher Scholarship Program to promote inclusion and quality in STEM education.
NSF partners with organizations like the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation, Schmidt Futures, and the Walton Family Foundation to improve the quality of US STEM education for all students.
GRANTED provides investment in research infrastructure, and institutions can reach out to the program coordinator to present competitive ideas and connect with successful participating institutions.

Read the transcript →

About Our Podcast Guest

The Honorable Sethuraman Panchanathan is the 15th director of the U.S. National Science Foundation (NSF), nominated by the President in 2019 and confirmed by the U.S. Senate in 2020. With over three decades of experience, he is a leader in science, engineering, and education. Before joining NSF, Panchanathan served as the executive vice president of the Arizona State University (ASU) Knowledge Enterprise, where he significantly advanced research innovation and strategic partnerships. His scientific contributions have earned him numerous awards, including Honorary Doctorates and the IEEE-USA Public Service Award.

Panchanathan's leadership extends to various interagency councils and committees, including the National Advisory Council on Innovation and Entrepreneurship and the Interagency Arctic Research Policy Committee. He is also known for his extensive publication record and mentorship of over 150 graduate students, postdocs, and research scientists.

Panchanathan is a fellow of multiple prestigious academies and societies, including the National Academy of Inventors and the American Association for the Advancement of Science. He is married to Sarada "Soumya" Panchanathan, an academic pediatrician and informatician, and they have two adult children, Amritha and Roshan.

About the Host

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#ChangingHigherEd #HigherEdResearch #HigherEdPodcast

View Details

It is well known that public perception of post-secondary education is at an all-time low, as politics, rising tuition, and higher student debt is saddling students and graduates with more stress. And, despite reports showing that people with student debt can negatively affect society, the Supreme Court recently ruled that the $1.7 trillion in student debt cannot be forgiven despite what the HEA clearly states in the statutes.

Research shows that students who must incur debt to attend college have lower GPAs, more health issues both before and after graduation, are less likely to buy a house, will get married and have children later in life, are less likely to start a business, and are less entrepreneurial. The problems are real and are affecting society as we know it.

In his latest podcast episode, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with economist and investment manager David Linton about his findings from his upcoming book, Crushed: How Student Debt Has Impaired a Generation and What to Do About It. David shares how much the cost of education has risen from 1969 to 2020, why most college and university managers plan to budget, why this doesn’t help address the problem, and what higher ed can do to improve this.

Podcast Highlights

§ The cost of higher ed in terms of percentage of household income has risen dramatically in the past 50 years. In 1969, the cost of public college education was $1,545 per year, 19% of the median household income. In 2020, it was just under $29,000, or 42% of the median household income. That's about two and a half times more expensive as a function of household income. On an inflation-adjusted metric from 1969 to 2020, it’s between 3 ½ - 4 times as expensive. In other words, the cost of four years in 1969 was the same as that of one year in 2020.

§ A driving force behind this rise in tuition is that some administrators and presidents prioritize rankings and performing well vis-à a-vie their competitors. They know what colleges the other students are applying to and want to ensure their students have a similar or better college experience, including more physical and mental health services, nicer campus facilities, larger research departments, more public services for the community, and other ancillary services. There are also more administrators per student than before.

§ Another theory as to why tuition is so high is because state support has dropped from 50-70% of the tuition a student pays to around 12%. However, in 2017, Professor Douglas Webber of Temple University roughly found that for every $1,000 in state budget cuts, students pay an extra $300 – $315 more per year in tuition and fees. This addresses only 30% of the problem.

§ Adding to the rising tuition costs, most administrators discuss expanding departments or hiring new faculty versus cost-cutting and reducing tuition—many plan to construct a new building once a year or every other year. Very few or no administrators say that one of their top five priorities is to adopt the Six Sigma approach, which involves constantly getting incrementally better over a very long period. This can include delivering the same quality education or same quality experience but with 2% fewer resources every single year. Higher ed leaders respond, “No, we have a budgeting process, and each department has to fit within their budget.” John Katzman, who founded Princeton Review, says up to a third of overall university expenses could eventually be cut without damaging the education experience.

§ One solution to rising tuition costs would be that a large consortium of schools, e.g., PAC-12 schools or all Midwest liberal arts schools that happen to compete with one another, should announce they are not going to raise tuition by more than inflation each year for the next ten years. These savings could go back to the school departments to figure out how to do more with less every year.

§ Higher ed presidents need to know the average debt per student upon graduation and the degree to which they've been able to pay it off in five or ten years. If they don’t, the first step is to figure out what that is. Boards need to establish the objective. If boards discover that 30%, 40%, or 50% of students ten years out cannot repay their debt, one objective can be for the president to improve that somehow.

§ Campuses must identify if certain types of students cannot pay, specific academic thresholds that make it unlikely for students to graduate, or more likely to take on more debt if they don’t cross them. Also, if there are certain areas of study where students are more or less successful when repaying their debts or not having debt. Then, institutions must establish a clear objective. For example, possible goals could include that within five years, graduates’ student debt delinquency rate will drop from 20% to 10%, the graduation rate will increase from 70% to 80%, or the debt upon graduation will decrease from $30k to $20k.

§ Cust-cutting must be included in prioritization. Most schools have an annual or semi-annual process whereby they look at objectives, whether it's new facilities for staff or a department, and then rank them in order. But cost-cutting is rarely ranked in the top five. Reducing tuition and cost-cutting doesn't have to be dramatic. It can be to freeze, maintain, or have budgets increase at inflation, minus 1%, every year and then force the department heads to figure out a way to work within that framework.

§ Bring in a consultant or have faculty figure out ways to increase revenue without raising tuition. Identify where the campus is getting other resources if they are selling their services to other areas, utilizing their facilities and research more efficiently, or partnering with other businesses.

Read the transcript →

About Our Podcast Guest

David E. Linton is an author and economist. A former adjunct professor at the University of Southern California’s Marshall School of Business, he taught Investment Analysis and Portfolio Management. His first book, Foundations of Investment Management, has become a mainstay among aspiring professionals who want to bridge the gap between an academic understanding and the practical application of investment management strategies.

Mr. Linton’s second book, Crushed, was researched and written after his tenure as a professor at USC. While wondering about the beautiful campuses of USC, University of Chicago, UT Austin, and several others, Mr. Linton couldn’t help but wonder: why are college campuses so nice? Why is college so expensive? How can I possibly afford to send my three kids to college? Is a college degree even worth it? And how can I balance what’s in the best interest of my kids without mortgaging their (and my) future?

If you want to know the answers to these questions – don’t do what Mr. Linton did, which is spend the next two years and ~2,000 hours researching the topic. Just read the book. It’s a better return on time.

Mr. Linton works at a multinational technology firm managing corporate and customer cash when he's not teaching or researching. He is a seasoned economist and asset manager, previously working as the Director of Portfolio Construction and Manager Research at Pacific Life and a Vice President and Portfolio Manager at PIMCO. Mr. Linton is a CFA® charter holder, has a BS in Business Administration from the University of Southern California, graduating magna cum laude, and an MBA from the University of Chicago Booth School of Business, graduating with honors. He enjoys reading with his oldest child, playing chess with his middle child, and wrestling with his youngest child. He thinks they enjoy those activities, too.

About the Host

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#studentdebt #crushed #HEA

View Details

The recent hack of MOVEit has serious implications for higher education. MOVEit, an application used by the National Student Clearinghouse and many other institutions to move large files, directly affects numerous higher ed institutions and solution providers. This, coupled with the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act going into effect in early June of 2023, has (should have) put cybersecurity at the top of mind for college and university decision-makers.

In his latest podcast episode, Dr. Drumm McNaughton once again speaks with virtual chief information security officer Brian Kelly, who this time returns to Changing Higher Education to discuss the ramifications of MOVEit getting compromised, tools that can help higher ed institutions protect themselves, all nine elements of the GLBA that colleges and universities must be in compliance with to receive financial aid, what GLBA enforcement could look like, and an online hub that states and higher ed can emulate to ensure students enter the cybersecurity field.

Highlights

§ MOVEit, a third-party tool used by the National Student Clearinghouse and others to move large data pieces, was recently compromised, compromising institutional data. This is having a downstream impact on higher ed since many institutions engage with the NSC.

§ In addition to performing triage and internal assessments, higher ed institutions must reach out to all of their vendors and contractors and ask if they use MOVEit and, if they are, what they are doing to protect their data.

§ It is important to have a process in place for vetting third-party risk. EDUCAUSE’s HECVAT can help address this and future problems. It’s a standard set of questions that institutions can ask third-party vendors about security and privacy. Over 150 colleges and universities use HECVAT version 3.0’s questionnaire in their procurement process. Large vendors like Microsoft and Google have completed it.

§ HECVAT makes it easier for vendors since they don’t have to answer bespoke questionnaires from numerous institutions that might have their nuances and differences. It also allows the community of CISOs and cybersecurity privacy practitioners in higher ed to have a conversation around a grounded standardized set of questions.

§ The Federal Trade Commission’s Safeguards Rule, which changed the standards around safeguarding customer information, went into effect on December 9th, 2021. The Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act that took effect in early June of 2023 required higher education institutions to meet the elements of those rule changes. There are nine elements.

§ The primary rule change is designating a CISO or a qualified individual responsible for protecting customer information or student financial aid data. The second is to perform a risk assessment at least annually by a third party or internally.

§ The third involves access review controls. Institutions must annually vet employees granted access to information and ensure more people haven’t been granted access. Institutions must know where all data resides and that all incoming data is identified. Institutions must ensure data is protected and encrypted when it's being stored and in use, ensure the coding or development of any software that interacts with the Department of Education’s data follows secure practices, ensure data that institutions should no longer have or that has aged out has been properly disposed of, and ensure change management has been implemented. Institutions must identify who has access to customer information and annually review their logs.

§ The fourth ensures that institutions annually validate that these controls are in place and working as intended. The fifth mandates that the individuals who interact with the Department of Education and use customer information are appropriately trained and aware of the risks involved. The sixth ensures institutions have a program and process to address and test for third-party risks. Seventh mandates having a prescriptive plan for responding to incidents, regularly testing and validating the plan to see if it’s working, and identifying the lessons learned. The ninth mandates that the CISO annually reports to the board or president.

Read the podcast transcript →

About Our Podcast Guest

Brian Kelly supports the safeguarding of information assets across multiple verticals against

unauthorized use, disclosure, modification, damage, or loss by developing, implementing,

and maintaining methods to provide a secure and stable environment for clients' data and related systems.

Before joining Compass, Brian was the CISO at Quinnipiac University and, most recently the

Cybersecurity Program Director at EDUCAUSE. Brian is also an Adjunct Professor at

Naugatuck Valley Community College, where he has developed and teaches cybersecurity courses.

Brian has diverse experience in information security policy development, awareness training, and regulatory compliance. He provides thought leadership on information security issues across industries and is a recognized leader in his field.

Brian holds a bachelor’s degree from the University of Connecticut and a master’s degree from

Norwich University. He has served in various leadership roles on the local boards of the ISSA,

InfraGard, and HTCIA chapters. Brian is also a retired Air Force Cyber Operations Officer.

About the Host

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#HigherEducation #HigherEdCybersecurity #MOVEitHack

View Details

The recently filed and highly publicized Florida versus the Department of Education lawsuit could change the face of higher education across the US. At stake is the ability of accreditors to set standards in the accreditation versus how much state governments can be involved in accreditation affairs. Essentially the lawsuit is pushing to allow institutions to change their accreditors without being restricted by the Department of Education and that, as the owner of state schools, the state has control over what these institutions can do.

In this podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton once again speaks with higher ed legal expert Michael Goldstein of Tyton Partners, who returns to Changing Higher Ed to discuss the background behind the lawsuit, its reasons, and its implications for higher education institutions and accreditation.

Podcast Highlights

Florida’s Gov DeSantis directed his attorney general to file a lawsuit against the Department of Education. The case, Florida v. Department of Education, questions the authority of the Department to have a third party certify the quality of education, require independent boards, and a host of other things. Florida’s complaint was filed in federal district court on June 21. The US Department of Justice has yet to file a response.
Before the lawsuit, Florida passed a law at Gov DeSantis’ direction that would require every institution in the State to change its accreditor in a relatively short cycle. The intent was to get Florida institutions out of the purview of SACSCOC and move to more conservative accreditors. This also had the intention of applying pressure on accreditors to back away from protecting the independence of institutional boards to allow states to take a more affirmative role in what they want to do.
The legislation basically asked, “Why doesn't the Department of Education have an accreditation process for determining what institutions are qualified for the same way that the federal government decides what drugs are suitable for use in medical treatment through the U.S. Food and Drug Administration?"
After a harsh reaction, the state changed its stance to say that within two years, the State required that all public institutions in Florida change their primary institutional accreditor.
In the current accreditation process, states authorize institutions to grant degrees by their criteria, and then the school must be accredited by an accrediting agency that the Department has determined to be a reliable arbiter of institutional quality. Then, if the Department of Education determines that the institution has the financial stability and the administrative capability to manage the student aid programs, it could enter into a participation agreement, give Pell Grant loans, and be in the Federal Family Education Loan [FFEL] program, and in the direct loan program, enabling it to access trillions of dollars of student aid.
The lawsuit says state governments are the owners of state institutions and that, as creatures of the state, these schools are responsible to the state legislature and the state government. So, if the legislature or the state government directs that these schools should act in a particular way, they should not be prohibited from doing so.
This is analogous to an accreditation standard rule that was made to allow for-profit institutions to participate in student aid programs. The rule says that the board must be independent, and a majority of the members of the board are required to be independent of ownership to provide some level of insulation between the financial interests of the parent company, who is the owner, and, by law, the conduct of the institution. This supports the lawsuit’s theory that the state owns state institutions.
The Florida lawsuit first asks the court to determine that outsourcing institutional assessment of institutional quality to a non-governmental entity is an unconstitutional delegation of governmental authority. If that argument is rejected, the lawsuit asks to prevent the Department of Education from restricting the ability of institutions to change their accreditor.
Because institutional accreditors are no longer restricted by region or country, Florida winning the lawsuit could result in the creation of different rules regarding the kinds of issues that the institutions are dealing with in Florida. There are also questions on how this could impact how NACIQI and the Department of Education approve accreditors.
This accreditation lawsuit is similar to the ongoing question of whether states have too much authority in SARA. If an institution is accredited, approved by a state, and that state is a participant in NC-SARA, SARA says that the state can offer its online courses anywhere in the US (except California, which is not a signatory to the SARA agreement) without further approval.

About Our Podcast Guest Mike Goldstein

Michael Goldstein has a long history of close engagement with higher education. He was the founding Director of New York City Urban Corps, the nation’s first large-scale student intern program designed to support access for less affluent students through the use of the Federal Work-Study Program. He went on to lead a Ford Foundation-supported effort to establish similar programs in cities across the U.S. He returned to New York City government as Assistant City Administrator and Director of University Relations. From there, Mike joined the then-new University of Illinois Chicago campus as Associate Vice Chancellor for Urban Affairs and Associate Professor of Urban Sciences. In 1978 Mike joined the Washington, DC, law firm of Dow Lohnes to establish a new legal practice focusing broadly on issues confronting higher education.

By 2014 when his firm merged with the global law firm Cooley LLP, the higher education practice he headed was the largest and one of the highest regarded in the country. Mike has been a pioneer in developing alternative mechanisms and institutional structures for delivering high-quality postsecondary education, including helping to accomplish substantial regulatory reforms that made telecommunicated and then online learning broadly available. He is the recipient of the WCET Richard Jonsen Award, CAEL’s Morris Keeton Ward, the President’s Medal from Excelsior College, and USDLA’s Distance Learning Hall of Fame Award, as well as an honorary Doctor of Humane Letters from Fielding Graduate University for his contributions to the field of adult learning. He graduated from Cornell University and New York University School of Law and was a Loeb Fellow at Harvard’s Graduate School of Design. He and his spouse Jinny, an education and media consultant and former head of education for the Public Broadcasting Service, live in Washington, DC.

About the Host

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#HigherEducation #HigherEdAccreditation #FloridavsBoardofEducation

View Details

Higher ed needs to provide more accessible, high-outcome internships to meet the current demands of the workforce and students.

A recent McKinsey report finds that more than 85% of companies feel there is a skills gap between education and industry, and the National Association of Colleges and Employers (NACE) has identified several career readiness skills students must have upon graduation but can only obtain through internships.

Meanwhile, more than a third of entry-level jobs require three years of work experience, and students who aren’t getting employed after graduating are already questioning the ROI of their degree.

In his latest podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton discusses the characteristics of a well-set-up intern program and how they can benefit students and higher ed with Daniel Nivern of Virtual Internships. This ed-tech company runs online internship programs across 18 career fields. Daniel discusses the pros and cons of each type of internship, what presidents should discuss with employers before creating internship opportunities, how internships should be structured to garner the best results, what communication should look like between the company and intern, how interns can become more part of a company’s work culture, and how to better promote diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Podcast Highlights

Universities need to ensure that the company and intern are both happy, which requires aligning the objectives of all parties involved. Identify what both sides seek regarding set criteria, tasks, and skills. What skills are companies looking to gain? What skills do they already have? What skills would the intern like to offer the company?
Verbal communication must occur before the program begins and should involve identifying projects that the intern must complete by the end of the program. For example, three to five mini-projects can be devised for the intern so they feel they've accomplished something by the end of the program. Ad hoc and spontaneous assignments can be beneficial, but more structure is recommended.
Integrate two-way feedback to encourage strong communication throughout the internship. The host company supervisor needs to provide structured, formalized feedback so the intern knows how they are progressing and what tasks they've accomplished.

Likewise, the intern needs to give feedback to the company to get accustomed to communicating upward and understanding what it means to show off what they've done. These communications are preferred daily, but must be done weekly at the very least. * The company should help integrate the intern into the workplace, and the intern should also make an effort. This involves speaking to as many employees as possible in an in-person setting. In a virtual setting, it may mean being part of the online communication channels, such as Slack groups, the all-hands town halls the company may run, etc. This needs to be considered well in advance of the programming. * It is encouraged to have these points agreed upon in writing, signed off by the company, and seen by the student before the internship. Failure to ensure alignment can result in a breakdown in the middle of the partnership. * In addition to costing the employer extra money, only providing in-person internships can limit the number of students who can participate in the program while diminishing diversity, equity, and inclusion.

Many students cannot dedicate additional commuting and in-person time outside of school by having to juggle family and work commitments, etc. Virtual internships are a more scalable, accessible, and equitable approach with many of the same advantages as in-person programs. * Higher ed is highly encouraged to create credit-bearing internships. Data has shown that students feel much more satisfied with their university course when embedded into the curriculum and believe they have a higher return on investment.

Read the transcript on our website →

About Our Podcast Guest Dan Nivern

Daniel is the Co-Founder & CEO of Virtual Internships, an ed-tech company that runs online internship programs across 18 career fields, bridging the gap between education and industry and helping learners from all backgrounds to gain global work experience.

Virtual Internships is one of the top 100 EdTech startups in Europe in the Holon IQ Europe EdTech list and was named the 23rd best remote company to work for in the world in 2022. Through partnerships with institutions including ASU, Aston University, Botho University, and Kaplan, Virtual Internships has supported thousands of students undertaking remote internships.

A graduate of Oxford University with a Master’s in Management and Chinese, Daniel has been featured on CNBC, BBC News, and Bloomberg for his work in developing global employability programs. He is also the founder of CRCC Asia, a company that has helped over 10,000 students to complete internships in Asia.

About the Host

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#Internships #WorkforceReadiness #HigherEdROI

View Details

Currently enrolled students, as well as people who stopped out or never attended a higher ed institution, are sharing what will keep them enrolled, re-enroll, or enroll for the first time, in addition to what could make them leave, not come back, or never attempt to enroll at all.

In the second half of his two-part podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton continues his conversation with Dr. Courtney Brown of the Lumina Foundation about the Foundation’s State of Higher Ed 2023 study that was conducted over three years in partnership with Gallup. Dr. Brown shares her findings on the top three barriers to continuing or starting education for all three segments, how important student loan forgiveness is to them and how much of their loans would have to be forgiven for them to return to school, what students of color value, and how important access to reproductive rights and divisive topics are in higher ed.

Podcast Highlights

Reasons for stopping out. For the third study in the Fall of 2022, the top two reasons students are considering stopping out are emotional stress at 69% and personal health reasons at 59%. The cost of the degree is third at 36%.
About half of those who have never enrolled in higher ed say they’ve considered enrolling in the last two years, and 47% of all enrolled students say they’re considering coming back. About 60% of people who stopped out are considering coming back, versus those who have never enrolled at just under 40%.
Cost of degrees. The number one reason why those who have never enrolled still haven’t tried is due to the cost of a degree at 55%. The second highest reason was due to inflation and work conflicts. Emotional stress came in third.
Student loan forgiveness. Of students asked how likely they would reenroll if some of their student loans were forgiven, 80% said “very likely” or “somewhat likely.” Of bachelor’s degree students who were asked the same question, 75% said “very likely” or “somewhat likely.”

Overall, the minimum percentage of their student loan that would have to be forgiven for them to re-enroll is 70%. For those specifically enrolled in certification programs, students needed about 66% forgiven. For those enrolled in bachelor’s degree programs, students needed about 74% forgiven. Although high numbers, these students shouldn’t be considered low-hanging fruit. The system didn’t work for them, so a lot will have to be done to get them back.

For students of color, the feeling of belonging is highly important. When they don’t feel like they belong, they are more likely to stop out. When there's a great deal of diversity, people feel like they belong more.
Diversity of faculty and administration. Colleges or universities shouldn’t just try to increase the diversity of the student body but of their faculty and administration. When students of color see people who look like them and who have had the same experiences as them in leadership roles, they will feel like they belong. If the only people who look like them are working in the cafeteria, that won’t.
Reproductive rights and health laws are important to students. Overall, 72% of currently enrolled students and 60% of people who have never enrolled said reproductive rights and health laws related to them are important.

When asked if they would be more likely to enroll or stay enrolled in a college that had greater access to reproductive rights, 81% of currently enrolled students and 85% of unenrolled students said they would be.

If a college was located in a state that allowed greater access to reproductive rights, 81% of all enrolled and 85% of unenrolled said they would be more likely to enroll or stay enrolled.

Political leaning and reproductive rights. Meanwhile, 86% of currently enrolled Democrats said they'd be more likely to enroll or stay enrolled if the college gave them greater access to reproductive rights, and 65% of currently enrolled Republican students said they'd be more likely to for the same reason.

Additionally, 89% of Democrats who are not enrolled said they'd be more likely to enroll if the college was located in a state that allowed greater access to reproductive rights, and 74% of Republican people who are not enrolled in college said they'd be more likely to enroll for the same reason.

Diversity of thought. Overall, 77% of people said they'd be more likely to enroll in a college and in a state that allowed the instruction of all viewpoints on divisive topics such as race, gender, or racism. Similarly, 82% of Democrats and 66% of Republicans said they wanted those same divisive topics presented.

Read the transcript →

About Our Podcast Guest – Courtney Brown

About the Host

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#changinghighered #thechangeleader #higheredpodcast

View Details

Higher ed leaders can learn what 6,000 current students, 3,000 people who stopped out, and 3,000 more who never enrolled in a U.S. college or university say their barriers have been to finishing their education over three years. The results come from a study by the Lumina Foundation called “The State of Higher Ed” in partnership with Gallup.

In the first of a two-part podcast episode, Dr. Drumm McNaughton talks with one of The State of Higher Ed’s leading architects, VP of Impact and Planning Dr. Courtney Brown of the Lumina Foundation, an independent private foundation that increased the number of states with attainment goals from one in 2008 to 48 today. It has also played a significant role in boosting the percentage of people in the U.S. with post-secondary credentials from 38% to 84% during the same period.

Dr. Brown discusses how “The State of Higher Ed” was conducted, what questions were asked, and why students wanted to stop out in 2020, 2021, and 2022. Other discussion topics include how to access Lumina Foundation’s attainment tool and the Foundation’s three concentrations.

Podcast Highlights * The Lumina Foundation partnered with Gallup for The State of Higher Ed and conducted the research in Fall 2020, 2021, and 2022. Early in the pandemic, participants were either unsure if they wanted to stay enrolled or still thinking about enrolling, but health and COVID concerns were at the forefront. People still valued post-secondary education and wanted to come back. In 2020, health concerns were the top reason for students thinking of stopping out. * In 2021, a large percentage of students said they were still thinking about stopping out, but the top reason was emotional stress. That number almost doubled from the year before. Reasons for the emotional stress included working full time, worrying about their family, and struggling to make ends meet. In the fall of 2022, a high percentage of students still considered stopping out because of emotional stress. * The Lumina Foundation, which ensures more people of color have opportunities not just to pursue but successfully complete a high-quality credential, releases an annual online tool called Stronger Nation, which breaks down where every state is regarding attainment by race and ethnicity. Since 2008, the Lumina Foundation has increased the number of states with an attainment goal from one to 48. * The Lumina Foundation has three different concentration areas: getting more people to enroll in post-secondary education, keeping them enrolled, and ensuring they complete a post-secondary credential that is high-quality, employment-aligned, and not dead ends.

Read the transcript →

About Our Podcast Guest – Dr. Courtney Brown Courtney Brown, Ph.D., is vice president of impact and planning for Lumina Foundation, an independent, private foundation in Indianapolis committed to making learning opportunities beyond high school available to all. As the chief data and research officer, Brown oversees the Foundation’s strategic planning, learning, impact, and effectiveness efforts. She also leads Lumina’s international engagement.

Brown is a frequent speaker and panelist in the United States and other countries regarding postsecondary strategy, student success, data-driven decision-making, and evidence-based practices. She has developed and shared manuals, working papers, articles, and books on undergraduate research, performance measurement, randomized control trials, and other evaluation methods. She has also conducted webinars and workshops on evaluation, performance measurement, and success in education beyond high school.

Dr. Courtney Brown on LinkedIn →

About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton, the host of Changing Higher Ed®, is a consultant to higher ed institutions in governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#changinghighered #thechangeleader #higheredpodcast

View Details

A lot has been happening up on the Hill that affects higher education. In his latest podcast episode, Dr. Drumm McNaughton catches up on the latest news with Tom Netting, president of TEN Government Strategies, who advocates before Congress, federal agencies, and state governments on behalf of private institutions of higher education and post-secondary education companies.

Tom discusses the parts of the infamous debt ceiling bill that are important to the higher ed community, the two-year cap on discretionary spending that will impact the Department of Education, the House and Senate voting in favor of disapproving the Biden administration's proposal for student debt cancellation, income-driven repayment changes being proposed at the regulatory level, and the return to the repayment, the Department’s reaction to the Biden administration’s Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, the Second Forum on NC-SARA, when the upcoming Neg Reg will likely take place, Title IX and short-term Pell eligibility updates, and the Department’s strong look at the definition of a third-party servicer.

Highlights

The McCarthy-Biden compromise codifies student loan repayments resuming since Congress and the president have recognized that the pandemic is over. The bill proposes that 60 days after June 30, the student loan repayment process begins anew, including the requirement for interest to start accruing, for collection agencies to connect, and for servicers to reconnect with the borrowers. The Department is once again beginning to discuss with servicers how to implement contact with borrowers to reeducate and refresh their memory of these responsibilities. The transition won't start right on September 1. There'll be some lag time for borrowers to get back into the transition.
The two-year cap on overall discretionary spending in the broader context of the McCarthy-Biden compromise will affect higher ed policy and likely complicate the ability to expand Pell Grants. Other spending programs will probably have to be reduced to expand Pell Grants. The two-year cap will worsen the Department of Education’s situation since it did not receive the money it requested in the fiscal year 2023 appropriations process for more staff.
Over the last three to four weeks in May and into the first week of June, the House and the Senate voted in favor of disapproving the Biden administration's proposal in the actual joint resolution for student debt cancellation, income-driven repayment changes being proposed at the regulatory level and the return to the repayment. The Biden administration will undoubtedly veto the disapproval, and there won't be enough votes to override the veto. So the Biden administration will continue to pursue these endeavors. But the Supreme Court will also weigh in on this process and the two pieces of litigation it heard on February 28, sometime in June. The Supreme Court will decide on race equality and admissions this month. The Court will likely reject it.
The Biden administration released a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking that addresses gainful employment, administrative capability, financial responsibility, certification procedures, and the ability to benefit.
For gainful employment, the Department came up with a new metric, which they're calling an Earnings Premium Test or Earnings Premium Metric. This attempts to assess the earnings potential of individuals shortly after they graduate from programs below the associate's degree level and up to associate’s, baccalaureate, and master’s degree offerings to determine whether the earnings potential is comparable to or literally more than the average of individuals aged 24 to 35. Schools will have their eligibility for their programs based on this metric and the prior borrower defense to repayment metrics. From the school's perspective, the ability for a cohort going all the way to individuals age 34 versus an individual two to three years after graduation doesn't seem to be a direct corollary.
The earnings potential and debt-to-earnings assessments will now be part of the Financial Value Transparency List. All programs at all institutions will start seeing publicly provided information on how their programs fare under both metrics. It will only impact the eligibility of those subject to the short-term program cap, meaning less than an associate's degree or state colleges, universities, and others, but all proprietary programs. The Department acknowledges it has four years of earnings and debt data for all institutions and their programs. The Department, this administration, and prior administrations have said that the way in which the definitions of an institution of higher education are structured in the law doesn’t suggest that that's the intent of Congress.
NC-SARA is doing a policy revision of its entire set of standards, including distance education and enrollment criteria. In early January and into the first couple of months of this year, communities provided about 60 recommendations. NC-SARA is currently in forum two and phase two, where groups can respond to the 60 or so proposals. The deadline for that recently passed. NC-SARA’s goal is to have its policy revisions completed by the end of this year to go into effect next year.
The Department recently questioned NC-SARA about its misrepresentation and aggressive recruiting, advertising, and marketing changes to the regulations that go into effect July 1 of this year to see if significant revisions need to be done or to have it dismantled.
The Title IX discussions on the concerns about athletes’ eligibility and participation in sports have been delayed. What also hangs in the balance is the broader, comprehensive retooling and recasting of the regulations around Title IX, including all the VAWA regulations and all the issues related to sexual discrimination, such as the institutions’ responsibilities, the support services for and regulations protecting the rights and the concerns of the accuser and the accused.
On June 9, new safeguard rules and regulatory changes under the Federal Trade Commission and the protection of personally identifiable information, cybersecurity, and the like will be enacted. They will require more substantive assessment routinely on an annual basis in relation to the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, the development of plans, and the development of more than just an individual responsible for this. It will be integrated into the very culture and core of all institutions that have any relation to federal dollars, including all institutions of higher education. This is a stepping stone to get to NIST 800-171.
Higher ed needs to consider one bill on short-term Pell eligibility and the opportunity for individuals in blue-collar work to potentially have access to Pell Grants to meet the demand for skilled workers in fulfillment of the infrastructure bill.
The Department is taking a strong look at the definition of a third-party servicer and proposed a Dear Colleague letter with changes to those regulations earlier in the year and then walked back to different timelines for implementation. The Department has some concerns with OEMs. How the Department attempted to define the third-party servicer may have included too many entities.

Read the transcript →

About Our Podcast Guest

Tom Netting

About the Host

Dr. Drumm McNaughton, the host of Changing Higher Ed®, is a consultant to higher ed institutions in the areas of governance, accreditation, strategy and change, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#changinghighered #higherednews #washingtonupdate

View Details

A new study on what campus leaders can do to help their graduates move into good jobs by age 30 found that the most effective ways for young adults to succeed in the workforce generally involve attaining post-secondary education degrees. The Georgetown Center for Education in the Workforce (CEW)’s “What Works: 10 Education, Training, and Work-Based Pathway Changes that Lead to Good Jobs” determines how much the likelihood of young adults getting a good job can be improved by some specific changes they make with a high school diploma, community college education, and/or university credits.

In this podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton talks with two CEW professors who worked on the study, Research Professor of Education and Economics Dr. Zack Mabel and Associate Director of Editorial Policy and Senior Editor/Writer Kathryn Campbell. They discuss how they conducted the study, the highlights, what the policy levers and interventions can be to help students make these top 10 pathway changes, some of the barriers campuses might face in achieving them, how higher ed can overcome these challenges, and some successful models.

Highlights

The study focuses on scenarios where one change with no predeterminations is introduced and identifies if it improved a young adult’s likelihood of having a good job by age 30. For example, what would happen if a person who started in a four-year program completed their degree instead of stopping out before their mid-20s?
The study defines a good job as one that pays a minimum of around $38,000 in 2020 for workers younger than age 35. The median pay is around $57,000 annually. Good jobs also provide health care and retirement benefits, etc.
Many of the top 10 effective pathway changes involve attaining post-secondary education. Young adults who enroll before their mid-20s see a 16% point boost in their likelihood of having a good job by age 30. Those who enroll in an AA or certificate program get a 6% point boost. Those who complete an associate's degree or certification instead of stopping out experience an 8% point boost.
For each pathway change, the study asks what policy levers and interventions higher ed institutions can introduce to make them a reality. Examples include expanding recruitment efforts and creating stronger partnerships between high schools and colleges. More outreach and advising can demystify college for students. Providing more financial aid and more information about financial aid can help prospective students make a true risk assessment.
Most families are turned off by the tuition price. What an institution's published or sticker price is and what the net price or out-of-pocket cost students will have to pay can be misleading.
Providing more generous financial aid targeted based on need and simple to apply for has a strong positive impact on increasing enrollment and persistence. For example, The Hill program at the University of Michigan makes students aware of how much financial aid they will receive when they're considering applying. This has increased the likelihood that students will apply to and enroll in the University of Michigan.
Wraparound support programs and comprehensive student support programs like the CUNY ASAP program for the community colleges in New York City is a holistic program that works. The Dell Scholars Program at four-year institutions provides financial aid and individualized continuous advisement in real-time with a full-time staff member. Although expensive, countless studies have demonstrated that the impacts they have in terms of increasing persistence and graduation pay off.
The college experience will not be linear for every student. Therefore, strengthen partnerships between two-year and four-year institutions, for example. Students who start off at a two-year institution will have a much easier means of making the leap to a four-year institution.
Develop reverse transfer interventions and degree-reclamation policies where students who stopped out before obtaining a four-year degree can still get an associate’s degree if they completed enough credits. Colorado automatically grants associate's degrees to these students instead of waiting for them to apply or for a college administrator to make them aware of the opportunity.
Build stronger and more effective college partnerships between institutions. Help students take advantage of the resources at another institution.

Read the transcript →

About Our Podcast Guests

Kathryn Peltier Campbell

Kathryn Peltier Campbell is associate director of editorial policy and senior editor/writer at the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce. Kathryn has extensive experience writing, editing, and directing content development for publications focused on topics such as diversity and equity in postsecondary education and the workforce, higher education’s civic mission, and the value of education in contemporary contexts. Prior to joining CEW, she edited periodicals and reports at the American Association of Colleges and Universities, including the flagship periodical Liberal Education. Kathryn has an MA in English from the University of Virginia, where she also earned a BA with a double major in English and physics.

Dr. Zack Mabel

About the Host

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#changinghighered #thechangeleader #higheredpodcast

View Details

The liberal arts are currently under fire in higher education, with Marymount University in Virginia recently eliminating nine such undergraduate degrees. But should most colleges and universities follow suit, it would harm democracy in America, according to Jeff Scheuer, author of Inside the Liberal Arts: Critical Thinking and Citizenship.

“There’s no way a democracy can function based on people who only have technical knowledge and no citizenship skills.”

In this podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton talks with Jeffrey Scheuer about what role the liberal arts should play in relation to STEM and vocational education, how liberal arts help graduates become better citizens, what courses fall within the jurisdiction of the liberal arts, and why the liberal arts are and should remain engrained in the American identity.

Highlights

Inside the Liberal Arts identifies the three main areas of citizenship: economic, civic, and cultural. Without the liberal arts, the cultural and civic aspects of citizenship would be lost.
Citizenship is any transaction between the individual and society that includes both give and take.
The civic domain includes voting, serving on juries, signing petitions, and anything performed in the civic arena that provides input. The cultural domain consists of the arts and religious and sports institutions because they are all part of the public arena.
The Liberal Arts isn't limited to the humanities. The social sciences, including economics and the natural sciences, especially when dealing with technology and climate change, are part of the liberal arts. Law courses should also be prerequisites since everyone is affected by and lives under the law and, therefore, should gain a sense of what the law entails.
Businesses are looking for liberal arts graduates, not necessarily people who studied business. Similarly, editors are looking for liberal arts majors, not journalism majors, because they have broader educations.
Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin, who founded the precursor to the University of Pennsylvania, believed that higher education was more than just a pre-professional exercise.
The US became a superpower in the last 170 years since the Civil War, with primarily a liberal arts model of higher education.
Another book that complements Inside the Liberal Arts is After the Ivory Tower Falls by Will Bunch, which is a history of the lost vision of the GI Bill.

#LiberalArts #ChangingHigherEd #HigherEdPodcast

Read the transcript online →

About Our Podcast Guest

Jeffrey Scheuer

Acclaimed author and freelance writer Jeffrey Scheuer is an information ecosystem expert. Top press professionals and elite educators have sought Scheuer's insight on media, politics, and — most recently — higher education. He's on a mission to illuminate for society what it means to think critically and live as an educated citizen in a thriving democracy. His new book "Inside the Liberal Arts: Critical Thinking and Citizenship" is the only book to systematically relate the liberal arts to thinking rationally and critically. In under 200 pages, "Inside the Liberal Arts" outlines the history, conceptual core, and critical democratic role of liberal education. Scheuer takes liberal arts educators, students, media, and consumers through an exploration of the role of higher education in democracy.

Scheuer writes mainly about politics, media, history, and education. His first book, The Sound Bite Society (1999) was named a Choice “Outstanding Academic Title.” He is also the author of The Big Picture: Why Democracies Need Journalistic Excellence (2007). He has published essays, articles, reviews and commentary in The New York Times, The Washington Post, and some two dozen other daily newspapers, and has also published in Dissent, The Fletcher Forum of World Affairs, Gettysburg Review, Potomac Review, Wilson Quarterly, Nieman Reports, Philosophy Now, Private Pilot, and elsewhere.

He lives in pre-Civil War houses that he renovated in New York and West Tisbury, MA.

About the Host

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Villanova University is creating career-ready graduates despite the current negative perception of higher ed that is partly fueled by students having difficulties finding jobs upon graduation. Part of this comes from approximately 94% of Villanova students being accepted into internships. Anyone can see these successes for themselves since the private Roman Catholic research institution shares what their alumni are actually saying and experiencing online.

In his latest podcast episode, Dr. Drumm McNaughton talks with Associate Vice Provost for Career and Professional Development Kevin Grubb about how Villanova keeps student outcomes transparent, how transparency helps attract and retain students, how to involve the entire university system in this practice, how career skills are built into Villanova’s educational experience, and how Villanova’s internship program works and why it’s so successful.

Podcast Highlights

The University Learning Goals page on the Villanova website contains searchable student career outcome information from the past five years that can be sorted by college and major. This data updates annually from surveys where graduates share their career experiences upon graduating.
In addition to asking if graduates have a job, where they work, and what their salary is, the surveys ask how successful graduates feel in their first job, if their current job will help them achieve their goals, if the Villanova experience prepared them for their career, to rate Villanova’s professional development (PD), and what Villanova could do differently.
The University Learning Goals page helps the recruitment process by showing prospective students and their families what and how successful some career pathways are. Retention is improved since the results motivate and help students feel like they belong.
Everything that goes on or informs the University Learning Goals page is shared with the admissions team to help with recruitment. The career and PD team also presents career outcomes and experiences to inform other departments of its findings and to get feedback from them. In addition, the career and PD team asks what other departments are hearing from students and how the career and PD team can help if they have questions. This culture is also instilled at the faculty level.
Some Villanova schools and colleges offer a required class on career and PD. This includes first-years writing a resume, keeping in mind research opportunities, part-time jobs, or internships they might apply for in the future. These resumes are individually reviewed and spark a conversation between students, staff, and faculty. In addition, students are asked what they did during each experience, what skills they gained, what they liked, and what they didn’t like. This leads to more in-depth conversations on what’s important to them and what they want to do next.
Students participate in mock interviews. This includes preparing for asynchronous interviews where students complete a pre-recorded asynchronous interview.
Villanova also provides networking opportunities with employers, alums, and professionals within industries students are interested in. These are completed in low-stress environments where jobs or internships aren’t on the line.
Villanova also has a subscription to LinkedIn Learning, so undergraduate and graduate students can quickly upskill at no cost.
Internships are not required for most Villanova programs, but between 91-94% of students who apply intern once during their enrollment. About half of these students intern twice or more. Villanova typically encourages employers to pay interns.

#StudentServices #JobReady #HigherEd

Read the transcript →

About Our Podcast Guest

Kevin Grubb

Kevin Grubb is an internationally and nationally recognized expert on career services delivery in higher education. Kevin serves as Villanova University’s Associate Vice Provost for Career & Professional Development and has held multiple roles within Villanova’s Career Center over the last 13 years. In his current position, Kevin is responsible for the strategic direction of the University's career and professional development functions, leading cross-university task forces and spearheading institutional projects to enhance college-to-career success. Kevin’s expertise focuses on community-driven approaches to career education, a high-tech, high-touch approach, and prioritizes equitable access to career services, especially for those historically excluded from higher education.

Kevin’s expertise has been acknowledged by several organizations whose mission is to provide innovative career services and education about college student engagement. He has been named the “Rising Star” twice in his career, first in 2014 by the American College Personnel Association and second in 2015 by the National Association of Colleges & Employers (NACE). Kevin has also been invited to share insights about career development and outcomes by organizations such as LinkedIn and Strada Education Network. Additionally, he has held several leadership positions for non-profit organizations such as the NACE, the BIG EAST Conference Career Consortium, and Campus Philly.

About the Host

Dr. Drumm McNaughton is a consultant to higher education institutions and CEO of The Change Leader consulting firm. Drumm's focus is in the areas of governance, accreditation, strategy, change management, and mergers. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website at changinghighered.com.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Higher ed can be better positioned to meet, enroll, retain, and help future generations of students successfully maneuver the ever-changing business world by embracing micro-credentials appropriately and programmatically.

Micro-credentials are also money-making opportunities for colleges and universities that can help address deficits and fund other pursuits. Additionally, with digital credential platforms such as Credly reporting the issuance of industry and workforce credentials being up 83% since the pandemic, now is the time for higher ed presidents and decision-makers to begin thinking about micro-credentials seriously.

In his latest podcast episode, Dr. Drumm McNaughton discusses how higher ed can benefit from micro-credentialing and where to start with Matt Frank, director of technology evangelism and product marketing at Salesforce apps provider Blackthorn.io. In addition to breaking down what a micro-credential is, Matt discusses how micro-credentials meet where today’s and future generations are, how to identify the worth of micro-credentials, and the importance of perception when adopting micro-credentials that might not be aligned with what your institution is known for.

Highlights

Micro-credentials are non-diploma programs that give learners practical knowledge and skills while providing progressive value as an individual in the labor market. They can be sponsored by associations, professional organizations, public and private industry partnerships, and even traditional universities.
Micro-credentials enable learners to acquire specific skills or knowledge efficiently that professional organizations can use to retain or rescale employees. Micro-credentials can align with new technologies and help describe a partnership between, for example, a university and an industry at large. They allow students to take the learning journey they want and to design and manage what services they can provide through technology.
Higher ed and employers can trust micro-credentials backed by professional organizations like the American Medical Association or the American Psychological Association that create standards of professionalism for their industries. But conversely, micro-credentials should be questioned if they come from an organization without industry trust or buy-in or that is purely motivated by profit.
If the micro-credential is part of a public-private partnership, look at where their partnership started. The more time that was taken to incorporate the multiple voices of the university community and design the program, gives more value to the micro-credential. A program designed with the university's deans, faculty, and community engagement managers is also more valuable. It should have been a collaborative process without one body or another having the power to veto the final product. Also, question the value of a micreocredential if an external private organization dictated how to design it for the university.
It’s worth the experimentation for a school to invest in at least a small part of a micro-credentialing program that they feel speaks to their strengths. Institutions that consider the external reviews from publications like the Chronicle of Higher Education that identify what specific colleges or universities are known for as opposed to what the institution feels they're known for can become more self-aware and invest in the areas where they see their core strength.

Read the transcript →

About Our Podcast Guest

Matthew Frank, a Denver resident and avid music enthusiast, has one goal: to empower organizations with apps that delight and, simply put, ‘just work.’

After years of working for nonprofits and in higher education, Matthew became frustrated with the many disconnected legacy services that dominated those industries and fell backward into the world of SaaS technology. This led him to the Salesforce ecosystem, where he worked for multiple award-winning ISV partners focused on nonprofits, NGOs, associations, and higher ed.

After working in the US ecosystem, Matthew moved to the UK, where he continued to serve NGOs & EDUs in EMEA and ANZ before returning to the US in 2020. He is currently with Blackthorn.io, an award-winning Salesforce.org Partner that has seen exponential growth and success since its founding in 2015.

About the Host

Dr. Drumm McNaughton, host and consultant to higher ed institutions. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#changinghighered #thechangeleader #higheredpodcast

View Details

College and university leaders can recover from the drop in international enrollment brought on by the pandemic and federal policies by establishing cost-effective overseas branch campuses in the Middle East and other areas. Although many other countries compete in this market, an increasing number of international students who can’t travel to the US would like to attend the same prestigious institutions at home.

In his latest podcast episode, Dr. Drumm McNaughton talks with Dr. Olgun Cicek about how higher ed presidents and boards can provide their services abroad quicker, easier, and more effectively at minimum cost and effort. In addition, Cicek discusses how successful branch campuses must function, what to consider when choosing the right location and creating curricula, how much language plays a factor in the decision–making process, why cultural sensitivity training is crucial for faculty and administrative staff, and why to avoid online learning except for certifications and micro-credentials.

Highlights

Colleges and universities must ensure that their international branch campuses provide the same quality of services beyond the institution’s name, including the faculty, curriculum, qualifications, credentials, and reputation. These branches must receive two layers of accreditation, one that matches the U.S. campus and a second that aligns with the country where the branch is located. In addition, these branches must gain approval from the local authorities there.
After choosing the city to build the branch campus, student accessibility must be considered. The campus should also be in an area that seamlessly facilitates collaborations with various community organizations for research and development, internships, industry partnerships, and speaker events.
If the campus is located in an area where English is not a major language, an environment must be created where international students can feel comfortable communicating with each other and with fluent faculty and staff. Since locals appreciate it when foreigners know at least a few words, students and faculty should take extra courses or certifications before arriving. Language courses for international students and faculty members should also be available at branch campuses so faculty, staff, and students can truly interact with and understand the local culture and context.
Faculty and staff must adhere to local cultural sensitivities, rules, and expectations of the people. There are usually orientations for international faculty members and administrative staff to become familiarized with the local contacts, culture, and sensitivities. This includes understanding and appreciating spoken and nonverbal language, such as gestures and body language. Therefore, everything that a faculty or administrator plans to share with students should be screened and carefully chosen. There have been instances where branches have had to fire faculty mid-semester for offending students.
Gaining full awareness of cultural sensitivities on subjects, including gender, can impact curricula. Examples in textbooks, syllabi, notes, speeches, and recorded videos must be vetted. Some cultures also prefer not to be filmed, which can complicate online learning and collaboration.
Certain countries, including the Middle East and Türkiye, don’t recommend, accept, recognize, or respect online learning. So online degrees should be avoided at all costs. Moreover, students who receive online degrees don’t get the same opportunities as those who receive a traditional education. Online certificates and micro-credentials are possible, however. Part of the problem is that online education doesn’t fit into the European Qualifications Framework and won’t gain official recognition.

Read the transcript →

About Our Podcast Guest

Dr. Olgun Cicek

After completing his postgraduate education at the University of Surrey in the UK, he worked as an Instructor at Dokuz Eylül University, Faculty of Business Administration, in 1992. He completed his PhD at the same university and received the title of Assistant Professorship in 1998.

In 2001, he moved abroad and worked in different countries for 21 years (N.Cyprus, Dubai, Singapore, Switzerland, Türkiye, UK, and USA) in public and private universities with various tasks and projects, assuming different roles ranging from Head of Department to Vice-Rector. During this time abroad, he received the title of Associate Professor in Dubai in 2005 and Full Professor in the TRNC in 2013. He also served as a Member of the Executive Board of the YODAK (Higher Education Planning, Evaluation, Accreditation, and Coordination Council) in N. Cyprus between 2014-2022.

Currently, he is an elected Board Member of INQAAHE (International Network for Quality Assurance Agencies in Higher Education), Vice President of CEENQA (Central and Eastern European Network of Quality Assurance Agencies in Higher Education), also Vice President of IQA (Association of Quality Assurance Agencies of the Islamic World). Additionally, he has been an elected member of the CHEA-CIQG (Council for Higher Education Accreditation) International Advisory Council in the USA since 2022 and Accreditation Committee member of the British Accreditation Council (BAC) in the UK since 2020.

He is an affiliate of ECA (European Consortium for Accreditation in Germany, He also serves as an Honorary President of ECLBS (European Council of Leading Business Schools), a reviewer/ evaluator for many institutional and program accreditation organizations in America, Europe, Middle East, and Far East (QAA, NVAO, AQAS, OCQAS, etc.), and an external evaluator and advisor for TKTA and IAAR. As of April 1st, 2022, after 21 years, he was reassigned to his previous position at Dokuz Eylül University as the International Relations Coordinator under the Rectorate. He has been appointed as an international advisor to THEQC since June 2022.

About the Host

Dr. Drumm McNaughton, host, and consultant to higher ed institutions. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#HigherEducation #TheChangeLeader #StudentEnrollment

View Details

Higher ed leaders looking to not only expand their student population to include underrepresented communities but to ensure they succeed can actually replicate a comprehensive program from the University of Cambridge’s Lucy Cavendish College in the UK. Part of the larger Cambridge system that once depended largely on legacy admissions from private schools for decades, Lucy Cavendish now admits 90% of its freshmen class from 180 public high schools across the country.

In this podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton draws from his knowledge of U.S. colleges and universities to learn about key processes and procedures from Lucy Cavendish College President Dr. Madeleine Atkins that can be emulated here in the States. Dr. Atkins discusses how the college identifies students who wouldn’t normally attend Lucy Cavendish, drives these students’ academic achievement and academic attainment, helps potential freshmen apply at top universities and prepare for mandatory entrance tests, and enrolls them in specialized orientation programs and more robust versions of the U.S.’s affinity groups that strengthen these students’ sense of belonging.

Highlights

Lucy Cavendish’s Academic Attainment Program first identifies high schools in socio-economic disadvantaged and minority ethnic communities that don't send pupils to the UK’s top universities.
Next, college team members work with those schools’ teachers and counselors to understand the backgrounds and lives of these students to learn how they can help these schools improve these students’ grades.
Because most of these students can’t access traditional higher ed outreach programs, the college provides free online workshops every fortnight with academic subject teachers who understand both the high school curriculum and university demands. Through this program, prospective students meet like-minded peers with similar backgrounds, creating a sense of belonging.
Roundabout Now, a boot camp program similar to U.S. affinity groups, provides career guidance and helps identify which universities and courses resonate with students’ ambitions. In the summer, students create the most competitive college application that will attract the top universities.
In addition to learning how to submit critical documents, these summer boot camps help students prepare for tests that some top universities require before the interview process. Staff and faculty discuss these interviews and what interviewers are looking for, and they perform practice interviews.
In addition to typical orientation, Bridging Week, a pre-orientation program designed to assist these students, reinforces the idea that they are working at the level their top university requires and provides group teaching sessions where students write essays or solve problem sheets and receive feedback. Bridging Week also provides additional networking opportunities and helps communicate where certain places are on campus so they can feel empowered to make their university work for them.

Read the Podcast Transcript →

About Our Podcast Guest Dr. Madeleine Atkins

Madeleine’s background includes reading Law and History as an undergraduate at Cambridge, teaching in a large comprehensive school in Huntingdon, and completing a Ph.D. and post-doctoral research contracts at the University of Nottingham.

Following various senior positions at Newcastle University, including Pro-Vice-Chancellor, she was Vice-Chancellor of Coventry University between 2004 and 2013. Madeleine then joined the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) as its Chief Executive in January 2014, retaining that post until March 2018.

About Our Podcast Host

Dr. Drumm McNaughton, host and consultant to higher ed institutions. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

§ LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/

§ Twitter: @thechangeldr

§ Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#changinghighered #thechangeleader #higheredpodcast

View Details

Presidents and other higher ed leaders that want their institution to grow and sustain that growth can easily replicate Southeastern University (SEU)’s success.

SEU grew from 2,200 to over 10,000 students and expanded to more than 200 campuses worldwide despite having no president for two years, resulting in a drop in enrollment that almost bankrupted the university.

In this podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with SEU’s president, Dr. Kent Ingle, about how using “Framework Leadership,” a holistic systems thinking and innovative approach to leadership, saved, stabilized, and helped his university grow over the last 12 years.

Dr. Ingle discusses the importance of appreciative inquiry and the sigmoid curve’s positive effect on organizational growth and health, how to align an entire system, and what steps he took to cut the cost of degree programs by two-thirds and help students graduate debt-free.

Podcast Highlights

Framework leadership involves listening and learning everything that you can about a college or university to prepare the right vision so that everyone can excel and go to levels they've never been before. In his book Good to Great, Author Jim Collins writes on organizational leadership, saying, “You can never know the potential of an organization until you know the potential of the people.”
Appreciative inquiry involves asking questions like “Where would you like the college or university to be in the next five years.” These questions avoid identifying with what’s wrong with an institution and create a desire to dream and focus on what the future could look like while setting the pace for achieving the institution’s mission and vision. Appreciative inquiry also differentiates the college or university by celebrating the people’s uniqueness, experiences, gifts, talents, and abilities. This will allow an institution to do what others can’t.
Campuswide alignment creates an environment that fosters a sense of flow, avoids the need for managing, and allows institutions to change and adapt more quickly. To develop strong alignment, build a team of people with diverse gifts, viewpoints, abilities, temperaments, and backgrounds. Breakthroughs depend on creativity, intuitiveness, and relentless questioning of assumptions. A diverse team united by a common person will naturally align the focus on the organization’s long-term mission.
Take the time to celebrate people who achieve what the institution needs. This creates continual energy and excitement to reach new milestones.
The visionary framework that helped SEU address enrollment, systems development, governance, and cultural issues features three components: Principles that will help lead to change, principles that create values like what the organization should look like, and the actual strategy to accomplish growth. SEU’s framing system involves listening, auditing the context, clarifying the goals, and aligning the vision. Avoid a top-down approach to this system since involving everyone in the process will lead to them full-heartedly supporting the mission and change.
The sigmoid curve represents organizational growth and health, from the birth of an organization to the climb of growth. The climb leads to challenges, and working through them creates “a new curve.” Institutions need to create a new curve to avoid the mistake of failing to stop to reflect on where they are. Unfortunately, many institutions don’t stop and reflect since they are growing. But failing to create a new curve even at the height of great success can lead to plateauing and decline.
Every year, SEU’s leadership team or cabinet has “a new curve retreat.” Participating VPs have already worked with their downline and gone through the framing process where they have listened. Participants discuss what they hear and learn, the context, clarification, alignment process, and what’s next. The group always focuses on creating new curves for curriculum development, co-curricular, and experiential education to remain healthy and strong, thus avoiding plateauing and declining.
To increase accessibility and affordability, SEU never takes a cookie-cutter approach with its more than 200 campuses nationwide. Instead, they address each campus’ unique educational needs, allowing SEU to cut the cost of degree programs by two-thirds and help students graduate debt-free.

Read the podcast transcript →

About Our Podcast Guest Dr. Kent Ingle serves as the 15th president of Southeastern University in Lakeland, Florida. Before becoming SEU’s president in 2011, Dr. Ingle held leadership positions in higher education and the nonprofit sector. He is an expert in leading turnaround organizations and led teams through transformational change in Los Angeles, Chicago, and Seattle.

Prior to entering professional ministry, Dr. Ingle spent 10 years as a television sports anchor for NBC and CBS. He covered many professional sports teams and interviewed several notable athletes in the professional sports world, including Michael Jordan, Magic Johnson, Kareem Abdul-Jabbar, Pete Rose, Muhammad Ali, and Carl Lewis.

During his tenure, SEU’s enrollment has grown from approximately 2,400 students to over 10,000 students. Under his leadership, the university has been recognized by The Chronicle of Higher Education as the fourth fastest-growing private nonprofit master’s institution in the nation.

Dr. Ingle has pioneered an innovative education model, through which over 200 partner site campuses have been added to the SEU Network, offering students affordable and accessible education where they are.

Dr. Ingle is the author of several books and the creator of the Framework Leadership podcast. He is also a frequent columnist for Fox News and Newsmax. He has appeared on a number of national news programs, including Fox & Friends, CBSN and CNN.

About Our Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton, consultant to higher ed institutions and CEO of The Chang Leader consulting firm. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #LeadershipFramework #HigherEdGrowth #HigherEducation

View Details

College and university leaders who understand and implement the customer lifecycle model into their processes and procedures can boost enrollment numbers at their institutions despite the ongoing trend in higher education.

In his latest podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton explores how higher ed leaders can follow the seven steps of this particular business model with Modern Campus’ Senior Director of Strategic Insights Amrit Ahluwalia, who also serves as editor-in-chief of The EvoLLLution, an online newspaper focused on nontraditional higher education and transforming the post-secondary marketplace. Drawing from his experience of working with more than 2,500 leaders at various colleges and universities across the US., Amrit discusses the most effective ways in which schools can engage with students and alumni and how to define specific tactics and priorities that will improve enrollment and retention.

Podcast Highlights

· The six stages of the customer lifecycle are attract, engage, convert, retain, loyalty, and nurture and grow. The “attract” phase makes people aware of your institution. “Engage” provides them with the information they need to make the right buying decision for them. “Convert” gets them from prospect to customer. “Retain” keeps that individual through their buying process. “Loyalty” represents when you build and foster a relationship with that individual. “Nurture and grow” expands the nature of your relationship with that individual beyond what you have today.

· “Attract” is about how the customer is looking for a solution to solve a problem. So, the institution has an opportunity to position itself as a solution provider. This comes down to identifying your communication strategy and rating the effectiveness of your website design, for example, how easy it is to find the right thing at the right time on the website to move forward. Your SEO strategy has to be dialed in, and the program mix has to be right for the learners you're trying to serve. This requires understanding who your learners are, what they like about the institution, and what needs to change. These are the core ways that you can define your target audience. Higher ed has spent too long trying to be Harvard that there's a fair number of institutions that have lost sight of what makes them unique, interesting, special, and valuable.

· At “engage,” your prospective customers have been on your website and are starting to sift through it to find materials that meet their needs. The majority of students enroll in a post-secondary program because they have specific career outcomes in mind. How are you communicating those career outcomes from a program page perspective? Provide possible salaries that students can earn in their area and tee up relationships with employers. That kind of messaging and visibility will make a massive impact on the students likely to continue onto the next step, which is “convert.”

· At “convert,” the individual decides they’ll go through the registration process. There are things that this student must do to adequately apply for the program. Have your enrollment management department and applications department go through an exercise to define every single step. For every single question that you ask these students, ask yourself at every stage, “Is this a piece of information we need? Or is this a piece of information we already have?” If you're coming from the noncredit or continuing ed world, simplify. How simple can or should you make it? How easy are you making it for that individual to provide exactly the information they need to share and no more? How easy are you making it for them to pay? Are you accepting multiple payment types? Are you legally allowed to take credit card payments?

· At “retention,” you assume that the individual has completed the credential that they enrolled for. The involvement of faculty in the enrollment and retention process is critical. Most of the time, when alumni think back about their college experience, they remember the relationship that they had with a professor or multiple professors. But higher ed has unfortunately created an environment that does not necessarily reward faculty for their capacity to develop and maintain relationships with students. Some schools have, like Arizona State, with its vertical research track, vertical teaching track, and continuing education lifelong learning track. Create a situation where faculty members who are oriented to teaching and want that to be their profession can do that and can be rewarded for it.

· “Loyalty” is executed on the back of retention. Loyalty is the exemplification of the relationship you've developed with the individual by their tendency to make another purchase. In higher ed, the metrics for this are whether the individual returned for a post-baccalaureate certificate, enrolled in a professional certification workshop, came back for some kind of upskilling rescaling program, and meaningfully reengaged with the institution. “Loyalty” should not be based on fundraising. The higher ed fundraising model is broken since it essentially involves asking graduates to donate because they graduated. Higher ed needs to treat students like consumers and base their relationship with them on teaching and learning. Facilitate greater access to ongoing learning for alumni in the execution of that enrollment.

· To “nurture” and “grow,” higher ed needs to address the complexity of their back ends. Everyone has their own systems running, and it's very difficult for information to pass from system to system. Alumni who want to reenroll at their alma mater for ongoing education should not have to go through another 30-step registration process. Start by creating tighter relationships between continuing education, the main campus, and alumni relations. Create consistent and high-quality credentialing frameworks that clearly define what a badge is, what a competency is, what a micro-credential is, and what a certificate is. Then make the information that transfers between all these various systems seamless to create a more streamlined experience for students.

About Our Podcast Guest

Amrit Ahluwalia is the Editor in Chief of The EvoLLLution, the online newspaper developed by Modern Campus to create a conversation hub focused on non-traditional higher education and the transforming postsecondary marketplace. Ahluwalia was part of the team that conceived of and launched The EvoLLLution. The EvoLLLution, which launched in January 2012, serves over 2,000 contributors and attracts approximately 60,000 monthly visitors. The site publishes articles and interviews by some of the industry’s leading thinkers at every level—from presidents and provosts to deans and directors to educators and students to employers and government officials and everyone in between—from across the United States and around the world. Ahluwalia works personally with every contributor at The EvoLLLution to produce the content that has supported the site’s rise to becoming the top resource for non-traditional higher education. He also serves as Senior Director for Content at Modern Campus, ensuring thought leadership assets align with industry trends. He regularly speaks on topics related to the changing higher education environment at conferences across Canada and the United States, and advises college and university leaders to help frame the strategic visions for their institutions. Ahluwalia earned his BA (Honors) in Political Studies from Queen’s University and his MA in International Politics from McMaster University. He lives in London, Ontario.

Read the Podcast Transcript

About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton, host and consultant to higher ed institutions. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

● LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/

● Twitter: @thechangeldr

● Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #studentlifecycle #highereducation #studentenrollment

View Details

A recent Dear Colleague letter that addresses the Department of Education’s upcoming expansion of a third-party service regulation will likely impact nearly all higher ed institutions that contract with a vendor to use their services and programs. The original rule was designed to monitor contracted companies that provide colleges and universities with services to manage various aspects of Federal Student Aid.

In his latest podcast episode, Dr. Drumm McNaughton discusses the recent Dear Colleague letter and the upcoming regulation expansion with Michael Goldstein, Managing Director of Tyton Partners’ Center for Higher Education Transformation. Mike talks about:

Why the Department penned the letter and what it says.
What the Department’s position is on the regulation it’s expanding.
What colleges and universities will likely be impacted by the implementation of this expanded rule.
How it will likely affect the working relationship between institutions and third-party servicers.
How higher ed has been reacting to the letter.
What will likely happen as a result.

Podcast Highlights * The Dear Colleague says that the Department of Education will have the authority to look at the contracts and economic relationships between institutions and enterprises that provide them with services, including online program managers. This will require them to deliver detailed information about their finances to the Department. Based on laws and regulations, the Department will also be immune from any type of congressional review and from being challenged in the courts. * The Department believes it’s responsible for ensuring that the Federal financial aid monies is being properly used, and thus are examining transactions between institutions and these enterprises. But it has grabbed hold of a third-party service or regulation, which was intended for entities that actually put their fingers on the federal money. * The Department of Education was prompted to publish the Dear Colleague letter because the GAO, the Inspector General, and various congressional oversight committees have said the Department doesn’t fully understand this relationship between institutions and the enterprises that provide them with third-party services. * The Department issued this Dear Colleague letter on February 28. It initially gave higher ed two weeks to comment on it, but the comment period was extended to March 30. The Department also moved back the implementation date from May 1 to September 1. * The Department also published an announcement saying that it is going to initiate a Negotiated Rulemaking process that will include a comprehensive review of multiple regulations, including regulations that involve the oversight of entities that are providing services to institutions. The Department will initiate this over the next six to eight months, starting in late spring. These regulations will likely not go into effect until July 1, 2024, at the earliest. * Negotiated Rulemaking enables the Department to implement regulations, whereas a Dear Colleague letter is an opinion that can be rescinded the day after it was issued and by the next administration. The Department is likely attempting a regulatory proceeding because, if there is a change, it will have effectively changed the rules. And by the time there is another administration, it will have triggered a process that cannot easily be reversed if the Department has promulgated a rule, even though it has not necessarily gone into effect. * With a few minor exceptions, every higher ed organization, including those usually at odds with each other, like the American Council on Education and the US Chamber of Commerce, have united by saying that the Dear Colleague position is wrong. * More than just institutions that use third-party or online services will be affected. Essentially everything short of janitorial services will or may fall under these rules, including LMS or any online program delivery software that is “rented” by an institution. This will also likely prevent institutions and those entities that work with institutions from actually being able to work together. * The Department has likely self-sabotaged itself by essentially saying that companies that are normally subject to the foreign exclusion regulation no longer have to comply since the Department does not have that authority.

#DearColleague #HigherEducation #HigherEdPodcast

About the Podcast Guest Mike Goldstein Mike Goldstein has a long history of close engagement with higher education. He was the founding Director of New York City Urban Corps, the nation’s first large-scale student intern program designed to support access for less affluent students through the use of the Federal Work Study Program. He went on to lead a Ford Foundation-supported effort to establish similar programs in cities across the U.S. He returned to New York City government as Assistant City Administrator and Director of University Relations. From there, Mike joined the then-new University of Illinois Chicago campus as Associate Vice Chancellor for Urban Affairs and Associate Professor of Urban Sciences. In 1978 Mike joined the Washington, DC law firm of Dow Lohnes to establish a new legal practice focusing broadly on issues confronting higher education.

By 2014 when his firm merged with the global law firm Cooley LLP, the higher education practice he headed was the largest and one of the highest regarded in the country. Mike has been a pioneer in the development of alternative mechanisms and institutional structures for the delivery of high-quality postsecondary education, including helping to accomplish substantial regulatory reforms that made telecommunicated and then online learning broadly available. He is the recipient of the WCET Richard Jonsen Award, CAEL’s Morris Keeton Ward, the President’s Medal from Excelsior College, and USDLA’s Distance Learning Hall of Fame Award, as well as an honorary Doctor of Humane Letters from Fielding Graduate University for his contributions to the field of adult learning. He is a graduate of Cornell University and New York University School of Law, and was a Loeb Fellow at Harvard’s Graduate School of Design. He and his spouse Jinny, an education and media consultant and former head of education for the Public Broadcasting Service, live in Washington, DC.

Read the podcast transcript →

About the Podcast Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton, host and consultant to higher ed institutions. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links * LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ * Twitter: @thechangeldr * Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

In stark contrast to prevailing trends in higher education, colleges and universities have or are boosting their enrollment, retention, and graduation rates by improving their students’ sense of belonging, student support services, student-faculty relationships, and career readiness programs.

In this podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton explores how higher ed leaders can follow these actionable steps with CEO Elliot Felix of Brightspot Strategy, a consultancy focusing on attracting and retaining students. Elliot shares these impressive findings based on his experiences with the 110 schools he’s partnered with over the last 12 years. These experiences and national research studies revealed that students who feel like they belong on campus are about 40% more likely to continue after their freshmen year. Additionally, students who had an encouraging mentor or participated in an internship are twice as likely to find meaningful, engaging work after graduation. They believe that college is worth the cost.

#HigherEdEnrollment #StudentSupport #HigherEdPodcast

Podcast Highlights * To understand the importance of a student’s sense of belonging, higher ed leaders are encouraged to read Dr. Terrell Strayhorn’s book College Students’ Sense of Belonging. This book posits that if students feel they matter, are cared for, and are a part of something, their experiences will reinforce their experiences positively. * Higher ed can instill a sense of belonging in students through spaces. Take a multifaceted approach by creating identity and affinity centers for underserved communities such as LGBTQ+, first-gen, student veterans, and parents. Also important are common spaces like student unions, libraries, and their events and programs, like student support organizations, and peer-to-peer relationships and service delivery. * Colleges and universities already offer student support, but students and parents either aren’t aware of them, aren’t comfortable using them, or these programs are offered at the wrong time. Higher ed institutions need to find ways to integrate this support and make it more visible, accessible, and normalized. * Connect career readiness opportunities to coursework. Notable examples include Johns Hopkins’ Imagine Center, where career planning, life design, academic planning, and academic advising are all integrated into one place. At CUNY, Guttman Community College’s “Ethnographies of Work” class has students shadow employees. Tulane, Stanford, and ASU also have offerings in life design. * Provide digital and in-person support in an integrated, coordinated way through one-stop shops, for example. Create spaces that connect separated programs and services.

Download the transcript PDF →

Our Podcast Guest: Elliot Felix Elliot Felix is an author, speaker, teacher, father, and consultant to more than a hundred colleges and universities. He uses his background in design to make college work for all students by improving the spaces they learn and live in, the support services they rely on, and the technology they use.

Over the last 20 years, he has spoken at SxSW Edu, taught courses on innovation, and worked with top universities like Carnegie Mellon, MIT, NYU, NC State, and the University of Virginia. Brightspot Strategy, the education consulting company he founded in 2011, was acquired by Buro Happold in 2020 and has improved the experience of more than 1,000,000 students.

You can find his work in Fast Company, Forbes, and The Chronicle of Higher Education. His book How to Get the Most Out of College was published in January 2022 by Alinea Learning. He lives in Minneapolis with his son Theo, daughter Nora, and wife Liz.

Link to Transcript

About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton, host and consultant to higher ed institutions. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Rural-serving institutions (RSIs) face many more unique challenges than most urban schools and persist, comprising more than 25% of all U.S. colleges and universities. Although inherently different, every higher ed institution can learn from the innovative best practices RSIs have been forced to adopt to help positively impact their enrollment and more.

To understand what RSIs can teach higher ed as a whole, Dr. Drumm McNaughton discusses the misconceptions and essential roles these institutions have in their communities with Executive Director Dr. Andrew Koricich of the Alliance for Research on Regional Colleges, a research collaborative and resource hub that has completed the insurmountable task of defining what rural-serving institutions are.

Andrew explains how RSIs’ unique experiences can help:

Identify the role higher ed should adopt instead of becoming a for-profit organization.
The types of prospective students higher ed needs to target.
How board members should be appointed.
Why higher ed must avoid pursuing growth for the sake of growth.
How to subset rising costs with remote learning and course selection.
The type of mindset that boards should look for when appointing a president or chancellor.

#HigherEducation #RuralServingInstitutions #HigherEdPodcast

Podcast Highlights * RSIs are their communities’ primary or only post-secondary education access point and are their most critical employer by launching businesses and consuming most of their goods and services. Therefore, RSIs are tied to their community’s focused industry and must remain targeted. * Public RSIs are more dependent on state appropriations but receive fewer appropriations per student because state funding metrics focus on enrollment growth, which is more constrained. In addition, RSIs receive fewer donations and competitive federal grants because reviewers from federal agencies don't understand them. * Systems or legislatures usually choose to close or merge RSIs because they carry less political weight and serve fewer students even though fewer people are in their community. * These structural deficits realize that higher ed appoints board members incorrectly. Appointing too many alumni members complicates the board’s ability to view the institution objectively. Meanwhile, political appointees only view their schools as political tools. Boards must also have more financial oversight by alerting presidents or chancellors to financial problems before they reach the legislature. * Higher ed needs to move away from the mentality of getting the maximum return possible since many RSIs usually can’t meet these conditions because they enroll fewer students. * RSIs’ mission of providing more accessibility to underserved students proves that higher ed needs to rethink which students they should serve, like underrepresented minorities and adults who never started post-secondary education or who started but dropped out. * Higher ed cannot adopt the mentality of bigger is better since RSIs are at the mercy of the rise and fall of their populations. Instead, higher ed needs to identify what’s sustainable for each institution rather than penalizing RSIs for something out of their control. * To help reduce costs, a significant role of boards and administrators includes identifying what programs are no longer by realizing if they align with local industries, for example. But they must stay proactive and transparent. Also, don’t fully disregard liberal arts education since students still need a well-rounded education. * Boards can’t be proactive if they appoint presidents who view their institution as a stepping stone. Instead, appoint presidents who value their mission, their students, and what they’re capable of.

Visit our website to read the full transcript of this podcast

About Our Podcast Guest Dr. Andrew Koricich Dr. Andrew Koricich is the Executive Director of the Alliance for Research on Regional Colleges (ARRC) and an Associate Professor of Higher Education at Appalachian State University. Influenced by his experiences growing up in a rural Pennsylvania town, Dr. Koricich’s research interests focus primarily on rural issues in postsecondary education, with a particular emphasis on rural-serving postsecondary institutions and the communities they serve. His work has been published in numerous journal articles, book chapters, and research reports and featured in a range of media outlets, including Politico, The Chronicle of Higher Education, Inside Higher Ed, and The Daily Yonder. Dr. Koricich and his team have received generous funding from The Joyce Foundation, Lumina Foundation, and Ascendium Education Group. He recently led a project to develop a data-driven metric for identifying rural-serving institutions (RSIs), and he has been invited to speak by a number of organizations, including the American Association of State Colleges & Universities, National Scholarship Providers Association, and the Oregon Community College Association.

Dr. Koricich earned a Ph.D. in Higher Education and a B.S. in Information Sciences & Technology from Pennsylvania State University, and an M.B.A. from Johns Hopkins University. Before joining the faculty at ASU, he was a faculty member at Texas Tech, and prior to working in academia, Dr. Koricich spent several years as a software development manager at a large insurance company prior to his career in academia.

About Our Podcast Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton, host, and consultant to higher ed institutions. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Aside from the obvious importance of wanting to improve diversity and inclusiveness in higher ed, the benefits that businesses experience after promoting or hiring more women into leadership positions and the data that proves the positive impact female faculty have on teaching and learning should be enough to convince college and university leaders on how women can transform their campuses for the better.

Businesses note a boost in problem-solving, improved business decisions, and impressive risk aversion with more female representation and leadership. Meanwhile, studies show that women in the classroom positively impact young female students without negatively affecting their male counterparts. However, only about 33% of women are full-tenured professors in higher ed, a 2020 American Association of University Professors study found. Meanwhile, the number of female faculty, senior faculty, and administrators constantly fails to reflect the steady rise of female students over the past 25 years.

To understand these trends, Dr. Drumm McNaughton discusses the benefits of women and minority leadership in higher ed with CEO Elissa Sangster of the Forté Foundation, a nonprofit that helps women thrive as leaders and that has increased the percentage of women in MBA programs at universities from 25% to 42%.

Elissa tackles the benefits of leadership and thought diversity, transforming boards to attract more diverse leadership and students, the steps to build a more supportive atmosphere for women and minorities in leadership positions, how to attain 50/50 representation in the classroom, and best practices higher ed can emulate to support women and minority leadership.

Podcast Highlights

Diversifying the board will attract more women and people of color and help address or even ask the right questions that need answers. To diversify, change recruiting locations if those places have only produced the same type of applicants. Ensure to include other sources for that talent. Look for professionals with different opinions and are comfortable pushing back. Recruit more than one member from each demographic, so they have power, feel they can push back, and that the institution wants genuine change.
To reach 50/50 representation in faculty, ensure that the language in job descriptions reflects words and meanings that appeal to both men and women. Tamper down on traditionally interesting language to men versus women, especially aggressive or competitive speech. Many websites provide tips on how to make a gender-neutral job description, and various organizations provide advice or consulting.
Look at preexisting candidate support systems. For women tenure-track faculty, use language like “We know this is when you have many things going on in your life. Therefore, we will give you access to additional teaching assistants or graduate assistants while you're writing your research.”
Department chairs or leadership team members who sponsor faculty must physically go into the classroom and be that representative and voice for women and minority faculty. When they're not there to defend themselves, defend their research and the extra work they do as a faculty member. Create formal sponsor relationships for these candidates.
Develop a promotion plan that includes professional development tailored for women and minorities. Research how previous faculty members have performed to identify if underrepresented faculty members are succeeding and achieving at the same rate as others. If not, identify their roadblocks and listen to these faculty members.
Allow women and minorities to enroll in professional development and executive education courses taught across campus. Create gender equity groups where men and women talk about what implicit bias feels and looks like and how it plays out in their personal and professional lives.
Study classrooms and ask how faculty are diversifying the conversation, representing speakers and their stories when they share their business experiences, thinking about whom they call on or if they call on those who look or think like them, considering different or contrary opinions, and asking for opinions from students who rarely participate.

Our Podcast Guest

Elissa Sangster serves as CEO of Forté and brings to the role extensive knowledge of issues affecting women's abilities to seek, prepare for and attain business leadership positions, drawn from her prior experience as Assistant Dean and Director of the MBA Program at the McCombs School of Business at the University of Texas at Austin. There she oversaw all activities related to the full-time McCombs MBA program, including marketing, admissions, student services, and alumni relations. Before McCombs, Elissa was Assistant Director of the MBA Program at Texas A&M University’s Mays School of Business.

Elissa currently serves as Treasurer and Board Member for the Thirty Percent Coalition. She is the past Chair of the Graduate Management Admission Council (GMAC) Annual Industry Conference and formerly served as Chair of MBA Student Services Professionals (MBA SSP). Elissa sits on the board of Forté as an ex-officio member. She enjoys reading, running, cooking, and Aggie football. She lives in San Antonio with her husband, Jeremy, and their daughter, Anna Leigh. Elissa received her MBA and her B.A. in English from Texas A&M University.

Elissa Sangster on LinkedIn

→ Download the podcast transcript

About the Host

Dr. Drumm McNaughton, host, and consultant to higher ed institutions. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #DEIinHigherEd #WomeninHigherEd #HigherEducation

View Details

With the endless stories about ChatGPT in the news and theories on it could negatively affect teaching and learning in higher ed, artificial intelligence (AI) and machine learning (ML) are becoming increasingly topical among college and university leaders. However, few headlines highlight how machine learning and AI can benefit Higher Ed.

To help higher ed decision-makers avoid getting too caught up in the negative hype, Dr. Drumm McNaughton discusses these technologies with Michael Feldstein, chief accountability officer at e-Literate. Michael shares easy-to-understand analogies to explain how and why AI functions the way it does, the problems AI can solve in higher ed, the importance of not having AI replace but augment human workers in district processes, and the benefits and shortcomings of tools such as ChatGPT.

Podcast Highlights * Combining functions like Google’s “type-ahead” algorithm and plagiarism detectors can produce tools that will effectively evaluate whether students paraphrase well. * Software that analyzes multiple patterns of student answers with well-written questions and learning objects can catch systemic errors easily missed by faculty and staff. For example, it can identify mistakes students make by learning whether they are progressing toward competency or where they might get stuck. It can also determine if there's a problem with a particular part of the course design where students are having difficulties. * Combining AI technologies that can more quickly identify students who might be in danger of dropping out because they’ve been missing class with data that the average person might miss. For example, if these students work two jobs and commute to campus, AI can help discover new patterns. * Chatbots are helping higher ed find students who need help in a way that might prevent them from getting what they need. For questions that require a human to answer, chatbots direct the students to humans who can help them. This ensures that student support professionals respond to students who need them instead of those who need a quick answer. * Sophisticated statistical analysis can improve chatbot functionalities by measuring specific parameters, like how much it matters that students receive quick responses or the kinds of reactions that chatbots can more successfully help students achieve their goals or make more effective actions than others. This leads to automating this insight to refine itself. * When recording interactions with students, higher ed needs to ensure it explicitly encodes the information for the machine and human to learn since there are human contexts that software doesn’t understand. * Higher ed leaders should avoid wasting the potential of their ultimate knowledge workers by having them conduct many menial tasks that software can perform. However, they also shouldn’t feel shackled to their legacy technology and realize that newer solutions can suggest better approaches than their current use.

About Our Guest Michael Feldstein has been an educator and a student of educational technology for over 30 years. He currently serves as chief accountability officer at e-Literate, providing strategic consulting about technology-enabled education to leaders at universities, EdTech companies, and non-profit organizations. He also writes and manages its popular group weblog on educational technology.

Before e-Literate, he provided strategic planning and product management consulting for universities, among other groups, as a partner at MindWires Consulting. He has also held the positions of MindTap’s senior program manager at Cengage Learning and principal product strategy manager for Academic Enterprise Solutions (formerly Academic Enterprise Initiative, or AEI) at Oracle Corporation.

Michael was also an assistant director at the SUNY Learning Network, where he oversaw blended learning faculty development and was part of the leadership team for the LMS platform migration efforts. Before SUNY, he was co-founder and CEO of a company that provided e-learning and knowledge management products and services to Fortune 500 corporations, with an emphasis on software simulations.

Michael has been a member of the Sakai Foundation’s Board of Directors, a participant in the IMS, and a member of eLearn Magazine’s Editorial Advisory Board. He is a frequently invited speaker on various e-learning-related topics, including e-learning usability, the future of the LMS, ePortfolios, and edu-patents for organizations ranging from the eLearning Guild to the Postsecondary Electronic Standards Council. In addition, he has been interviewed as an e-learning expert by various media outlets, including The Chronicle of Higher Education, the Associated Press, and U.S. News & World Report.

Link to Transcript

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #AIinHigherEd #ChatGPT #MachineLearning

View Details

Institutional accreditation is in dire need of change, even though it provides institutions with more external recognition, improves the likelihood of gaining more resources, and boosts the respect of staff and faculty. And with an increasingly high number of professional accrediting bodies now touching and impacting many colleges and universities, now is the time for higher ed leaders to strive to support and understand how accreditation can improve overall to strengthen post-secondary education even more.

In the second and final episode of this two-part series, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Ralph Wolff, the founder and former president of the Quality Assurance Commons for Higher and Postsecondary Education, and former president of WASC, the Accrediting Commission for Senior Colleges and Universities of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges, on several issues. These include

· What conversations should accreditors have with institutions,

· Should accreditors focus on licensure,

· What the Department of Education needs to hold accreditors accountable for, and why,

· What analyses should accreditors perform and make more transparent,

· Why accreditation should look at how effectively higher ed prepares graduates for licensed professions,

· Where public members of commissions can play a more critical role in accreditation processes, and

· The polarization of higher ed and boards.

Podcast Highlights

· Accreditation should lead conversations on the quality of adaptability, teamwork, the ability to work with new technology, and traversing multiple careers in one's lifetime. In addition, accreditation should pay more attention to licensing certification issues, performance, and employer satisfaction, and ensure students are prepared for more than one job by receiving repeated mentoring, internships, and counseling.

· Accreditation should evaluate how adjunct faculty are deployed and how they are supported and trained when assessing student learning employability skills.

· A traditional faculty senate model that is separate from and often antagonistic to the administration can be a barrier to change. The Chamber of Commerce is working on creating an alternative model to get employers to sidestep higher education.

· Accreditors are not held accountable for internal effectiveness because the Higher Education Act doesn’t fully allow the Department of Education to make any substantial judgments on the efficacy of accreditors. However, accreditors are membership organizations, and the membership elects their Commission. Thus, accreditors should be held accountable by their Commission and their members.

· None of the former regional accreditors have been able to maintain relationships with those associated with K-12 schools following the Department’s governance changes.

· There’s a lack of transparency. For example, no compilation or analysis of institutions on probation exists. Higher ed needs more capacity and analysis of accreditors’ work so accreditors can learn from one another.

· Public members of the commissions can play a much more critical role in identifying if accreditation deals effectively enough with essential policy issues such as the $1.7 trillion in student debt, rising costs, the attrition rate, and the inadequate preparation of so-called inadequate preparation for jobs. In addition, public members on all accrediting boards should know what the public demands on accreditation.

· There likely won’t be room for the seven former regional accreditors in 15 or 20 years. Mergers will likely occur as a result.

→ View the podcast transcript

About Our Podcast Guest

Ralph A. Wolff is the founder and former president of The Quality Assurance Commons for Higher and Postsecondary Education, created in 2016 to ensure that graduates of academic and postsecondary programs have the requisite Essential Employability Qualities (EEQs) needed for the dynamically changing workforce. The QA Commons ran a national pilot and then worked with state higher education systems in Kentucky and Connecticut and individual institutions to improve employability outcomes. It also developed a successful faculty fellows program in Kentucky to build faculty advocates for connecting to workforce needs.

Previously, Wolff served as president of the Accrediting Commission for Senior Colleges and Universities of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) from 1996-2013. WASC served over 1 million students at over 175 institutions in California, Hawaii, the Pacific Islands, and numerous international locations. He was a leading voice for innovation in accreditation and focused on learning outcomes, equity, and transparency in creating a national leader in accreditation.

He is a former member of the National Advisory Committee on Institutional Quality and Integrity (NACIQI), which reviews accrediting agencies for federal recognition, and is a founding member of the University Quality Assurance Institutional Board (UQAIB) in Dubai. He also is a Fellow of the World Academy of Art and Science and a trustee of the World University Consortium.

He has served on multiple university boards and consults widely on innovation, quality assurance, accreditation reform, and how new technology platforms can transform student outcomes.

Wolff holds a JD degree with honors from George Washington University and a BA degree from Tufts University. He has recently moved to Sedona, AZ.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

● LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/

● Twitter: @thechangeldr

● Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #InstitutionalAccreditation #HigherEdAccreditation #AccreditationConsultant

View Details

Now more than ever, accreditation is essential in higher education. An increasingly high number of professional accrediting bodies touch and impact colleges and universities to the point where accreditors have the potential to lead or even stifle change in higher ed. This is especially true given that accreditation is the gatekeeper for over $150 billion in federal financial aid.

In the first of this two-part series, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Ralph Wolff, the founder and former president of the Quality Assurance Commons for Higher and Postsecondary Education, and former president of WASC, the Accrediting Commission for Senior Colleges and Universities of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges, about how and why accreditors should help higher ed identify what is good enough for them and to improve their transparency of throughput, academic quality, and academic rigor. They also discuss accreditors’ stances on DEI, the politicization of critical race theory, and the professionalization of college sports.

Podcast Highlights * DEI is multi-dimensional, and the political elements of critical race theory are important to discuss, not just to legislate. Accreditors are addressing these issues, but they could be doing even more. * Up until recently, the federal rule required that institutions publish an aggregate rate of outcomes after four and six years. Now they are producing programmatic data and grouping disciplines together. * Accreditors are beginning to look more at outcomes. Still, they need to push higher ed to be more transparent with specific outcomes, such as the percentage of students who have graduated with particular majors and their salaries one, three, and five years later. * The University of Texas System’s UT SEEK, Georgia State, the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce, and Third Way are pioneers in publishing the outcomes that students care about. * Accreditation needs to get higher ed to take more responsibility for defining what is good enough for them, e.g., grade-point averages, competency-based learning, and retention and completion. During accreditation, outcomes between majors and two- and four-year programs, for example, should be separated. * Higher ed needs to address its integrity issue with the special treatment that student-athletes generally receive. It also needs to clearly define what student-athlete learning outcomes should be and the effectiveness of the general education curriculum for student-athletes.

→ Read the Podcast Transcript

Our Podcast Guest - Ralph A. Wolff Ralph A. Wolff is the founder and former president of The Quality Assurance Commons for Higher and Postsecondary Education, created in 2016 to ensure that graduates of academic and postsecondary programs have the requisite Essential Employability Qualities (EEQs) needed for the dynamically changing workforce. The QA Commons ran a national pilot and then worked with state higher education systems in Kentucky and Connecticut and individual institutions to improve employability outcomes. It also developed a successful faculty fellows program in Kentucky to build faculty advocates for connecting to workforce needs.

Previously, Wolff served as president of the Accrediting Commission for Senior Colleges and Universities of the Western Association of Schools and Colleges (WASC) from 1996-2013. WASC served over 1 million students at more than 175 institutions in California, Hawaii, the Pacific Islands, and numerous international locations. He was a leading voice for innovation in accreditation and focused on learning outcomes, equity, and transparency in creating a national leader in accreditation.

He has served on multiple university boards and consults widely on innovation, quality assurance, accreditation reform, and how new technology platforms can transform student outcomes.

Wolff holds a JD degree with honors from George Washington University and a BA from Tufts University. He has recently moved to Sedona, AZ.

About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton, host, and consultant to higher ed institutions. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #HigherEducation #HigherEdAccreditation #TheChangeLeader

View Details

In today's multi-generational and borderless world, study abroad programs are critical for introducing students to the world outside their university and even their country. They make up an integral part of the curriculum and the student undergraduate experience, and generally, students look back with very fond memories of their time abroad on their colleagues with whom they experienced these trips.

Unfortunately, despite all the “glamour shots” and publicity surrounding these trips, there is a dark side. You typically don’t hear about the deaths that occur because universities have not properly vented the vendors for these programs. Or the risks that students can be exposed to because a low-cost vendor or the tour guide takes students on a dangerous mountain road because their previously scheduled train didn’t run on time. But these happen, and when they do, they expose both the students and the University to unnecessary risk.

To learn more about study abroad programs, Dr. Drumm McNaughton spoke with Robyn Symon, producer of Emmy Award-winning documentaries and biopics on such notable celebrities as Robin Williams and Michael Jackon, Robyn has spent over 20 years documenting events in the lives of people, and her latest project, Trip of a Lifetime, focuses on the study abroad industry and how we can keep our students safe during these important programs.

Podcast Highlights

Inquire as to how your programs have been vetted for safety. Risk management is important, even with the study abroad programs.
Do not assume that other countries have the same safety regulations that we do in the US. Don’t shortchange culture because there will always be resistance that could jeopardize it.
Do not throw the baby out with the bathwater. These programs are very important for students’ education, growth, and maturity, but they need to be vetted properly from A-Z to ensure the safety of all participants and the liability to the University.

Guest Bio

Robyn Symon is a two-time Emmy award-winning Writer/Producer/Director/Editor.

Robyn joined PBS in 1991 after four years as a TV News Reporter in Texas. At PBS, Robyn produced documentaries, public affairs programs, and TV series, including “Florida!” which also ran for six seasons on The Travel Channel, the PBS Pledge Special, “Boleros: Unforgettable Love Song” featuring top Latin musical stars and the series “Voices of Vision,” hosted by NPR’s Scott Simon focusing on the work of non-profit organizations throughout the world. She has produced national TV specials on Robin Williams and Michael Jackson and an investigative program on the opioid epidemic.

Robyn debuted in the indie film arena in 2007, producing, directing, and editing the feature documentary “Transformation: The Life & Legacy of Werner Erhard,” about the controversial pioneer of the self-help industry streaming on Netflix. Since then, Robyn has written, produced, and directed documentaries, including “Hedy & Yumi: Crossing the Bridge,” about a holocaust couple turned relationship experts, “Behind the Blue Veil,” a documentary film about the nomadic Tuaregs caught in the middle the War on Terror and “Do No Harm” about the silent epidemic of suicide and burnout among medical students and physicians.

In addition to two Emmys, Robyn has been honored with numerous national awards for writing and producing, including 3 Telly awards, 2 NABJ awards, and honors by both the Associated Press and United Press International.

Link to Transcript

About the Host

Dr. Drumm McNaughton is the host of Changing Higher Ed and a consultant to higher ed institutions. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #RobynSymon #HigherEducation #StudyAbroadPrograms #ChangingHigherEd

View Details

In this podcast, Dr. Drumm McNaughton speaks with Dr. Steve Katsouros of Come to Believe Foundation and Network, which works with colleges and universities to replicate a successful DEI, enrollment, and graduation model. Dr. Katsouros was the founder of Arrupe College, a two-year institution that is part of Loyola University Chicago.

Arrupe has an amazing track record for completion and having students graduate with little or no debt. Fifty percent (50%) of students complete their degree in two years/ nearly 70% in three years, and 90% of graduates incur no debt. More promising, more than 70% of students complete their Bachelor's degrees in five years or less. Compare this to the national average, where 13% of students in two-year colleges complete their Associate's degree in two years, and 13% of students who start at two-year colleges complete their Bachelor's degrees in six years.

Steve discusses Arrupe's credit-bearing remedial classes, the rigorous application process, the Fellows Program that connects freshmen with sophomores in and outside of class, the roles of its graduate support coordinator, financial aid officer, and employer relations officer that help students succeed, and more.

Arrupe's model can be applied to any 2- or 4-year institution.

Podcast Highlights * 50% of students at Arrupe College complete their degree in two years, 90% incur no debt and more than 70% complete their Bachelor's degrees in five years or less. * Arrupe's model attracts first-generation, Pell-eligible, and undocumented students and helps them flourish in a post-secondary ed environment and beyond. * Upon launching the model at Arrupe, over 50% of its donors had never given to its larger university, Loyola University Chicago, before. Most of these donors consisted of the many relationships that Arrupe made with local businesses through its model. One donor gave $100 million to Loyola University Chicago for all Pell and first-generation students from low-wealth backgrounds. * For higher ed institutions that want to adopt Arrupe's model, Come to Believe helps university leaders perform a feasibility study to make sure they have bandwidth and consensus for the program and helps them prepare for presenting their proposals to their boards. The application season for the next cohort is open until the end of March.

→ View the podcast transcript More About Our Podcast Guest A member of the United States East Province of the Society of Jesus, Steve Katsouros, S.J., is the president and CEO of the Come to Believe Foundation and Network in New York City. Before Come to Believe, Fr. Katsouros served as the founding dean and executive director of Arrupe College at Loyola University Chicago. Arrupe is a two-year college that continues the Jesuit tradition of offering a rigorous liberal arts education to a diverse population, many of whom are the first in their family to pursue higher education. Fr. Katsouros served as Arrupe's academic and administrative leader from 2014 until 2020.

In Paul Tough's study of higher education, The Most Important Years: How College Can Make or Break You (2019), the author observed Arrupe College "may be doing a more impressive job of keeping its students enrolled and on track for success than any other institution I visited."

Prior to his assignment at Arrupe, Fr. Katsouros served as the director of the Institute for Catholic Educational Leadership (ICEL) and associate dean of the School of Education at the University of San Francisco. From 2002-2011, Fr. Katsouros was president of Loyola, a coed Jesuit high school on Manhattan's Upper East Side; during his years at Loyola, the endowment and annual giving tripled, capital gifts were raised to refurbish the physical plant, and faculty and staff salaries increased to market competitiveness.

The success of Arrupe College and its students inspired Fr. Katsouros to lead Come to Believe, a network, and foundation created to replicate and scale the Arrupe model nationally. Based in Manhattan, with teams working in Chicago and New York, Come to Believe provides advisory services to universities with the capacity to launch and sustain successful two-year colleges for high-potential students from low-wealth backgrounds. Come to Believe guides university leaders through the process of implementation and launch of new colleges and provides research-based best practices and problem-solving techniques.

Fr. Katsouros earned his doctorate from Columbia University Teachers College in organizational leadership; his research interests are leadership, governance, and institutional performance. He was ordained in 1998.

Guest Links * Come to Believe Network * Steve Katsouros Bio * Arrupe College of Loyola University Chicago

About Our Podcast Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton is the host of Changing Higher Ed Podcast and a consultant to higher ed institutions. To learn more about his services and other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm's website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader's Social Media Links * LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ * Twitter: @thechangeldr * Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #HigherEdEnrollment #CometoBelieve #HighEredPodcast

View Details

Higher education is currently forcing many adult learners to jump through hoops to complete their degrees. Although many of these nontraditional students can be successful, colleges and universities should still meet adult learners where they are, as higher ed faces dwindling enrollment and a workforce that is relying less on employees with four-year degrees.

Higher ed institutions can start the process of change themselves, but much of the work still requires support from Congress. To help understand how the gap between both entities can be bridged, Dr. Drumm McNaughton spoke with Julie Peller, who uses her past experience at the House of Representatives and Department of Education to serve as executive director of Higher Learning Advocates (HLA), which supports and advances policy changes to increase postsecondary access and success.

"As we go into the new Congress, in the new year, we are really focusing on this Widen the Path campaign. How can we bring partners together? How can we lift up voices of both learners, institutions, and community members who are doing this and bring that story to Washington so that we can make change?" - Julie Peller

Podcast Highlights

Identify who’s still on and off campus and why. Those who are no longer on campus most likely left for financial reasons, for example.
Think about creating programs like the ones that President Dr. Russell Lowery-Hart of Amarillo College did to support students in the classroom and those who have dropped out. Many of these programs are only possible through policy changes, but in the meantime, higher ed can still create a more welcoming environment and ensure certain services are available.
Forge connections and partnerships with preexisting community services. This involves sharing the data of low-income and eligible students to connect them with the right supportive services.
Think about employees from employer partners as potential students. Institutions are encouraged to adopt credentials or certificates that facilitate lifelong learning for students who take breaks in their education. Not everyone wants an associate’s, bachelor’s, master’s, or doctorate degree.

→ Podcast Transcript PDF of "Widen the Path: Policy Changes to Increase Access to Higher Ed"

About the Guest

Julie Peller - Executive Director at Higher Learning Advocates

Julie Peller is Executive Director of Higher Learning Advocates (HLA), a bipartisan nonprofit organization whose mission is to shift federal policy to accelerate responsiveness to support the success of today’s postsecondary students. She brings a deep background in federal postsecondary education policy, federal budgeting, and professional management. Prior to joining HLA, Julie was Lumina Foundation’s first director of federal policy where she led the development and advancement of the foundation’s federal policy agenda and established the foundation’s Washington, DC office.

Julie also brings significant federal legislative policy experience to HLA. She served as a senior policy advisor and the deputy staff director for the U.S. House of Representatives’ Committee on Education and Labor. On Capitol Hill, she was intimately involved with significant changes to the Higher Education Act, federal student aid programs, and other major higher education issues such as college cost reduction. Before working in Congress, Julie was a Presidential Management Fellow, where she served at the Department of Education as a budget analyst for a variety of K-12 programs.

Julie received her master’s degree in public policy from Georgetown University and earned a bachelor’s degree in political science and public policy from The George Washington University. She currently lives in Maryland with her husband and two young sons.

About the Host

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #ChangingHigherEd #HigherEducation #WidenthePath

View Details

Successfully reinventing a college or university into a truly innovative school after cutting a major portion of programs sounds near impossible, but the experiences at National Louis University (NLU), a four-campus private institution in Chicago, proves that presidents and other decision-makers can achieve the same without having to rebuild trust in faculty and staff.

NLU is also the poster child of a university that successfully shakes the status quo. It provides no-cost tuition and grant-covered programs, supports an unprecedented student-first culture that promotes continuous change and accessibility, and has adopted a data-informed mentality to facilitate equity.

To learn more about NLU’s unique journey, Dr. Drumm McNaughton spoke with Nivine Megahed, Ph.D., National Louis University’s 11th president who has spent more than 20 years making higher education more accessible for students of all backgrounds.

Podcast Highlights * Stop accepting existing norms. It’s important to rethink the higher ed business model. * Culture always trumps strategy. Don’t shortchange culture because there will always be resistance that could jeopardize it. * Embrace data to inform decisions.

You can read the show transcript here: https://changinghighered.com/include-all-stakeholders-for-successful-higher-ed-transformation About Our Guest Dr. Megahed is the 11th president of National Louis University, bringing more than 20 years of experience in making higher education more accessible for students of all backgrounds to one of the Chicago area’s oldest and most innovative nonprofit universities. Her current strategic priorities at National Louis include creating the modern urban university focused on affordable, accessible, quality education that promotes student success, veterans’ education, new frontiers in digital education, and education across the lifespan.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #changinghighered #thechangeleader #HigherEdTransformation

View Details

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Lucie Lapovsky of Lapovsky Consulting about higher education finances, including how low enrollment is forcing smaller, non-elite colleges and universities to shift cost functionality, drop majors, consolidate, reset their tuition, price-match the competition, embrace online learning and micro-credentials and retain students.

Podcast Highlights * Operating online provides campuses with great economies of scale, such as increased amounts of sharing between different institutions. * The low-cost college coalition Rise helps schools increase the number of available majors. * Although most mergers benefit larger institutions, some acquisitions complement both schools, including smaller campuses, like when the specialized school Willamette University acquired the Portland College of Art and Design to strengthen its weak fine arts program. * For a successful merger, presidents need to find a school that can offer some value to their institution by expanding their economies of scale. Merging can allow schools to eliminate costly programs since there will likely be an overlap in offerings. * Resetting tuition can combat the false impression that higher ed is expensive since the average discount rate at private four-year schools is 54% to 55%. As a result, these institutions are offering financial aid at much lower levels. * The University of Maine price matches the tuition of any other school in New England that a prospective student has been accepted into. Others offer prospective students admission to their institution before they even apply. * More students believe online learning is reputable and fewer view living on campus as a requirement. There is also an increased demand for lifelong learning and early college options. * Some schools are combating data that suggests that nearly 40% of students don’t graduate because of mental health issues by outsourcing services. But many of them choose not to get reimbursed since this could prevent students from seeking help.

To read the full show summary, visit: https://changinghighered.com/navigating-higher-ed-economic-challenges-insights-for-presidents-of-higher-learning/

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton is a consultant for higher education institutions. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links * LinkedIn:https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ * Twitter: @thechangeldr * Email:podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords:#ChangingHigherEdPodcast #TheChangeLeader #HigherEdFinance

View Details

Podcast Summary Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews CFO Tom Netting of TEN Government Strategies about the Biden administration’s student loan forgiveness plan, the Omnibus Appropriations Bill, delays in upcoming regulations, and the effects that changes in Congress will have on higher education.

Podcast Highlights * Chief Justice Amy Coney Barrett reviewed and dismissed two of the six filed suits against Biden’s Student Debt Cancellation Plan * Two other pieces of litigation will receive oral arguments from the Supreme Court by February 28, 2023 * Presidents should encourage all current borrowers to ensure their student aid data is timely and accurate at studentaid.gov * FSA departments announced that cohort default rates for fiscal year ’19 decreased for all institutions * The Fiscal Year 2023 Omnibus Appropriations bill gives roughly $79.8 billion to education and includes a $500 increase in the maximum Federal Pell Grant * The Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) is pending publication until April 2023

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com/washington-update-student-debt-omnibus-regulatory-changes

Resources

Dr. Drumm McNaughton is a consultant for higher ed institutions. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’sSocial Media Links

LinkedIn:https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email:podcast@changinghighered.com

#WashingtonUpdate #HigherEducation #HigherEdNews

View Details

Dr. Drumm McNaughton, CEO and Higher Education Consultant at The Change Leader and Deb Maue, Senior Vice President for Enrollment and Marketing at Aurora University, discuss what has happened in 2022 and predict trends in higher education for 2023.

Read the summary at https://changinghighered.com/2023-higher-education-predictions-2022-year-in-review

View Details

Dr. Drumm McNaughton, in conversation with Danny King, co-founder and CEO of the global digital credentialing platform Accredible, about this new—and now mainstream—technology that is transforming the hiring industry and higher ed’s approach to credentialing.

Podcast Highlights

In the last decade or so, digital credentialing has become mainstream, with most organizations around the world—including many universities—using it.
Institutions, as well as individual students, would benefit if higher ed leaders focus on making their students look their very best by promoting them through information shared with employers or other universities.
As universities increasingly maintain relationships with their graduates over many years, digital credentialing through university-branded certificate wallets could help both the institution and its graduates make better decisions and strengthen the institutional brand.

To read the full show notes, visit: https://changinghighered.com/digital-credentialing-helps-higher-ed-add-layers-of-value-to-stakeholders

#HigherEducation #DigitalCredentialing #Accredible

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton, Higher Education Transformation expert. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton, in conversation with Dr. Nathan Long, President at Saybrook University, about how Saybrook has managed to more than double enrollment over the course of eight years.

Podcast Highlights

To connect with prospective students, update the university’s mission every four to five years using data obtained from market research.
Allocating a high percentage of the overall budget to marketing can not only increase but diversify enrollment.
The benefits of and ways to include and support faculty in recruitment initiatives.
Best practices for introducing new programs to the institution.

To read the full show notes, visit: https://changinghighered.com/continuous-enrollment-growth-success-strategies-for-a-small-university

Resources

Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton is a consultant for higher education institutions.

To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email:podcast@changinghighered.com

#EnrollmentGrowth #HigherEd #TheChangeLeader

View Details

In the conclusion of this two-part series, Dr. Drumm McNaughton and Dr. Belle Wheelan, president of the Southern Association of Colleges Commission on Colleges, discuss the tsunami of issues facing higher ed and accreditation today, including several hot-button issues, how she responds to criticisms of accreditation, recent SACSCOC standards, and what’s ahead for accreditation.

Podcast Highlights

Student learning outcomes continue to be “a big deal.”
The desire for micro-credentialing by sources outside accredited colleges and universities is stronger than ever, and how—and even if—to proceed is still up in the air.
In its current mid-cycle, SACSCOC is focusing on reviewing existing standards, shared governance, and DEI matters, and these will probably continue to be focus areas in coming years.

To read the full show notes, visit: https://changinghighered.com/an-assessment-of-higher-ed-accreditation-and-sacscoc-part-2

#HigherEdAccreditation #HigherEducation #SACSCOC

Resources

Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton is a Higher Education Consultant. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

In the first of this two-part interview, Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Belle Wheelan, president of the Southern Association of Colleges Commission on Colleges (SACSCOC), about the tsunami of issues facing higher ed and accreditation today, including three recent examples of undue political influence on governing boards.

Podcast Highlights

The current misunderstanding of accreditation likely stems from the larger issue of the overall decline of public support for higher ed in general.
Governing boards—for both public and private institutions—have become increasingly politicized, but there are ways for presidents to address this.
Recent case studies from Kentucky, South Carolina, and Florida underscore the negative impacts of undue political influence in higher ed.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com/president-of-sacscoc-higher-ed-accreditation

#HigherEducation #HigherEdAccreditation #HigherEducationGovernance

Resources

Dr. Drumm McNaughton, Higher Education Board Governance expert. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Host, Dr. Drumm McNaughton is joined by Dr. Jana Mathews in discussion about the changing role of faculty in student mental health – how helicopter parents, social media, and the pandemic lockdowns shaped today’s undergraduate students, along with three tips for faculty as they navigate this unprecedented landscape, and how Higher Ed Administration can support Faculty in this transformational role.

Podcast Highlights

It’s important to remember that incoming college students are still maturing physically and intellectually, and they are not yet full-fledged adults.
Faculty increasingly are put in the difficult position of being asked to engage with students and help them work through hard—and time-consuming—personal problems.
Institutions often send mixed messages to faculty: to provide a holistic experience that helps students become critical thinkers and well-rounded citizens, and also to maintain strict personal and professional boundaries.

To read the full show notes, visit: https://changinghighered.com/understanding-and-supporting-the-changing-role-of-faculty-in-student-mental-health

#SharedGovernance #StudentMentalHealth #HigherEdFaculty

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton, Higher Education Board Governance expert. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Larry Large, long-time higher education administrator, president of LD Large Consulting, and president emeritus of Oglethorpe University about the most important disruptions facing higher ed today and how higher leaders can respond.

Podcast Highlights

The world of higher education has changed over the past thirty years in ways that affect virtually all areas of operation: demographics, student and institutional costs, governance, and more.
Higher ed leaders must understand how these changes affect their institutions and educate all stakeholders—including the media—about the situation and how it’s being handled.
A focus on innovation and succession planning will be critical as academia navigates these uncharted waters.

To read the full show notes, visit: https://changinghighered.com/top-6-disruptions-for-higher-ed-institutions/

#changinghighered #highereddisruption #higheredtransformation

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Chris Kuberski, president of Highland Community College in Illinois, about her tremendous strides in the last three years to overhaul the organizational culture at her institution in order to provide an exceptional student experience through exceptional faculty and staff experiences.

Podcast Highlights

Want to offer an exceptional student experience? First, do the hard—but lasting—work of uprooting the negative aspects of the institution’s culture and reframing the positive aspects in ways that give faculty and staff a voice and a reason to shine.
The CEO is in a unique position to set and enforce clear expectations. After all, what you permit, you promote.
Changing an organization’s culture can take several years, but there is a clear process for bringing faculty, staff, and administrators on board for the long term.

To read the full show notes, visit: https://changinghighered.com/culture-the-secret-sauce-for-higher-ed-performance

#HigherEdCulture #thechangeleader #highereducationperformance

Resources

Dr. Drumm McNaughton is a Higher Education Consultant with a focus on transformation. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews John A. White, a long-time leader in academia who most recently served as Chancellor of the University of Arkansas, about current trends in higher ed governance and governing boards that likely will erode operational efficiencies—and how a focus on alignment can help leaders succeed.

Podcast Highlights

The insertion of former politicians into higher ed executive roles has made an already highly politicized culture even more political and divisive.
The responsibilities of governing boards have grown in recent years, even though many trustees are ill-prepared when they assume their roles. A constant focus on bringing board members into alignment with the organization’s central goals can mitigate difficulties.
Diversity on governing boards is as important as it is elsewhere in the institution. This includes making sure that trustees bring skill sets that complement the institution’s needs.

To read the full show notes, visit: https://changinghighered.com/alignment-issues-in-higher-ed-governance-governing-boards

#changinghighered #thechangeleader #highereducationgovernance

Resources

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Jeff Spear, Principal at CFO Colleague, about the situation in higher education finance and how leaders can rethink finance in the face of current challenges.

Podcast Highlights

While the GI Bill and other government programs have achieved a great deal, the result has been discounts and tuition increases that render the price tag of a college education virtually meaningless—and unsustainable.
The first step to addressing the many financial and other challenges facing higher education today is to acknowledge that “reality is your friend.”
Declining enrollments have hit smaller and nonselective institutions hardest, but by asking some critical questions about your institution’s market position, leaders can determine which programs deserve special emphasis.

To read the full show notes, visit: https://changinghighered.com/higher-ed-finance-adopting-a-new-mindset-to-stand-out-and-succeed/

#HigherEducation #TheChangeLeader #HigherEdFinance

Resources

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Daniel Aguilar, a higher ed consultant in social justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion issues, on reframing higher ed’s fragmented approach to diversity on campuses to better meet the needs of individual students while also boosting the university’s return on investment.

Podcast Highlights

Social justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion – JEDI is not mere buzzwords that help institutions fulfill their missions—they are foundational processes that directly impact an institution’s bottom line if integrated through the campus culture.
Furthermore, the integration of social justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion into the cultural framework would enhance the institution’s mission of teaching and learning.
This integration could be achieved, at least in part, by identifying and incorporating student stories throughout the academic and leadership preparation framework.

#ChangingHigherEd #JEDI #HigherEdROI

To read the full "How JEDI Can Improve Higher Education ROI" show notes, visit: https://changinghighered.com/how-jedi-can-improve-higher-education-roi/

Resources

Dr. Drumm McNaughton, Higher Education consultant. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Phil Hill, a top expert on educational technology and online project management, to discuss the current—disrupted—state of the industry and the answers college and university presidents must come up with to survive the existential questions facing institutions today.

Podcast Highlights

Unlike their predecessor MOOCs, OPMs are here to stay.
Now mainstream throughout higher education, OPMs are disrupting business as usual in several areas, including accreditation and regulation, institutional governance and marketing, and risk management.
Case studies like 2U and Zovia can provide higher ed leaders with valuable lessons for navigating the OPM waters.
To survive—much less, to thrive—as the OPM competition continues to soar, institutions need to take a hard look at their core competencies and strengths that could make them stand out and attract students.

To read the full show notes, visit: https://changinghighered.com/higher-ed-opm-marketplace-transformation/

#HigherEdTransformation #HigherEdOPM #HigherEducation

Resources

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Podcast Highlights

Unlike their predecessor MOOCs, OPMs are here to stay.
Now mainstream throughout higher education, OPMs are disrupting business as usual in several areas, including accreditation and regulation, institutional governance and marketing, and risk management.
Case studies like 2U and Zovia can provide higher ed leaders with valuable lessons for navigating the OPM waters.
To survive—much less, to thrive—as the OPM competition continues to soar, institutions need to take a hard look at their core competencies and strengths that could make them stand out and attract students.

To read the full show notes, visit: https://changinghighered.com/higher-ed-opm-marketplace-transformation/

#HigherEdTransformation #HigherEdOPM #HigherEducation

Resources

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Ryan Craig, a Forbes journalist, author, Managing Director at Achieve Partners, and leader in the movement to establish an apprenticeship system for training and hiring employees.

McNaughton and Craig discuss why traditional higher education will decline unless dramatic transformation is made to create workforce readiness.

Podcast Highlights

The gap between the traditional four-year degree and current workplace demands will continue to grow unless a drastic transformation is made.
Alternative pathways to credentialing, such as apprenticeships, will increasingly supplement—and even surpass—higher ed’s role of providing social and economic mobility.
Major employers no longer list having a college degree among their required skills in job positions.

To read the full show notes, visit: https://changinghighered.com/transform-higher-ed-to-create-workforce-readiness

#StudentWorkforceReadiness #TheChangeLeader #HigherEdTransformation

Resources

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

McNaughton and Craig discuss why traditional higher education will decline unless dramatic transformation is made to create workforce readiness.

Podcast Highlights

The gap between the traditional four-year degree and current workplace demands will continue to grow unless a drastic transformation is made.
Alternative pathways to credentialing, such as apprenticeships, will increasingly supplement—and even surpass—higher ed’s role of providing social and economic mobility.
Major employers no longer list having a college degree among their required skills in job positions.

To read the full show notes, visit: https://changinghighered.com/transform-higher-ed-to-create-workforce-readiness

#StudentWorkforceReadiness #TheChangeLeader #HigherEdTransformation

Resources

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Ami Moyal, president of Israel’s Afeka College of Engineering, about how he used the skills and insights from his years as CEO of a high-tech company to transform Afeka’s curriculum and processes to better meet current and future industry demands with the implementation of a continuous improvement culture.

Podcast Highlights

Change must start from the inside, by convincing faculty and other stakeholders that “good enough” is not sustainable.
Internal transformation must be guided by feedback from external partners and stakeholders, such as industry.
Change does not happen in just a year or two, it is an ongoing process. A president must create a climate where innovation is rewarded and failure is accepted.

To read the full show notes, visit:

https://changinghighered.com/continuous-improvement-model-for-higher-ed/

#HigherEdChangeManagement #HigherEducation #HigherEdPodcast

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton, a leading expert on change management in higher education, To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Podcast Highlights

Change must start from the inside, by convincing faculty and other stakeholders that “good enough” is not sustainable.
Internal transformation must be guided by feedback from external partners and stakeholders, such as industry.
Change does not happen in just a year or two, it is an ongoing process. A president must create a climate where innovation is rewarded and failure is accepted.

To read the full show notes, visit:

https://changinghighered.com/continuous-improvement-model-for-higher-ed/

#HigherEdChangeManagement #HigherEducation #HigherEdPodcast

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Richard "Dick" Chait, a distinguished Fulbright Scholar and one of the top higher education management and governance experts, about the evolving roles, responsibilities, and key traits of effective board members and trustees.

Podcast Highlights

Governance in higher education has changed over time, and governance structures must continue to evolve for institutions to thrive.
Significant differences exist between public and private governance structures, and each sector faces separate challenges.
There has been a significant transfer of ideas from the corporate world into higher education, and trustees who migrate from large corporate entities should re-think their instincts and assumptions.

To read the full show notes, visit: https://changinghighered.com/governance-challenges-in-higher-education/

#changinghighered #thechangeleader #highereducationgovernance

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Amy Privette Perko, CEO of the Knight Commission on Intercollegiate Athletics, about the educational model of collegiate sports and the changing face of the NCAA.

Podcast Highlights

Two concurrent – but not directly connected – sets of major changes relating to the NCAA were made public in June and July of 2021, marking a period of transformational change in collegiate sports.
The Supreme Court published its decision upholding a previous ruling against the NCAA, which bars the NCAA from placing any restrictions on educational benefits for student-athletes.
Within a matter of days of the Supreme Court’s ruling, the NCAA acted on a decision reached by its board of directors to lift previous restrictions on student-athletes eligibility to receive compensation for the use of their name, image, and likeness (NIL).
Taken together, the recent changes portend that a sea change is imminent in collegiate athletics.

To read the full show notes, visit: https://changinghighered.com/the-changing-face-of-collegiate-athletics-ncaa-knight-commission-and-title-ix

#changinghighered #thechangeleader #higheredpodcast

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton is an international consultant for higher education institutions and host of The Change Leader Podcast. To find out more about his services, visit his firm’s website at:https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Rick Beyer, Executive Chairman at Core Education Services, PBC, about new and innovative ways that smaller colleges and universities can leverage shared services and affiliations to survive and prosper in the future.

Podcast Highlights

The COVID-19 pandemic has compounded previously existing and systemic problems in higher education, which will require transformational changes.
While large universities’ economies of scale offer protections against declining enrollments and other issues – at least for now – smaller institutions that are already struggling to survive must act now.
As the higher education industry enters what Beyer calls the “consolidation era,” there will be more mergers of necessity and strategic mergers among colleges, as well as the emergence of new affiliations with shared services organizations.

To read the full show notes, visit: https://changinghighered.com/success-strategies-struggling-small-medium-sized-colleges-universities/

#HigherEdPodcast #HigherEdConsultant #HigherEdStrategicPlanning

Resources

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

In this episode of the podcast, two-time former president of the University of South Carolina, Harris Pastides, shares his experiences and beliefs about what it takes to lead an institution of higher education in the 21st century. Throughout his remarkable career, Pastides has led with a student-centered approach, a willingness to show his own humanity, and a commitment to making himself accessible and available to students and faculty alike. His leadership style transcends the skill sets that once defined a qualified, capable university president. By leaning into his own authenticity instead of following any kind of conventional playbook, he has cultivated meaningful relationships with thousands of students based on trust, compassion, openness, and shared values.

Podcast Highlights

As a first-generation student, Pastides’ formative experiences broadened his perspective and led to a core belief in the fundamental sameness of human beings. His focus on the shared humanity among all individuals has been a hallmark of his student-centered leadership style.
In times of tragedy, there is no playbook for how to lead. In the aftermath of a tragic incident on campus, Pastides responded with authentic humanity and compassion first, connecting deeply with a grieving campus community before spearheading initiatives and campaigns to protect all students and campus residents.
Skills like financial management and strategic planning, while important, are not the only key qualifiers for leadership in higher education. Leaders of today and tomorrow must show their integrity and values to build trust-based relationships with their constituents over time.
Pastides’ human-centered, student-first approach to leadership has enabled the University of South Carolina to become number one among honors colleges in the United States, as well as the top-ranking institution in student freshmen experience.

#HigherEdLeadership #HigherEdPodcast #TheChangeLeader

To read the full show notes, visit: https://changinghighered.com/21st-century-leadership-in-higher-education-insights-for-success/

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides leadership consulting for higher ed institutions. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

In this episode, Brandon Busteed explores the dramatic and positive shift taking place in people's perceptions of education technology and online learning. A recent poll showed that Americans have increasingly positive opinions about the quality of online education, with 47% saying that online learning is just as good as in-person education. Even more impressively, a growing percentage – 8%, up from 3% just one year ago – believes that the quality of online education is even better than in-person modalities.

Podcast Highlights

55% of Americans say that online education is just as good or better than traditional in-person education.
The COVID-19 pandemic forced educators to transition to online modalities faster than they would have otherwise, which has improved both the quality and accessibility of higher education.
Positive opinions about the quality of online education are not restricted to students; these views were consistent across all groups.
The transition to virtual learning environments benefits many students who learn differently, including those who are shy, reluctant to engage in classroom discussions, or need to review materials more than once to absorb new information.
While leaders may perceive online education as a threat to their institutions, there is more opportunity than risk, and online education may enable institutions to deliver on their value propositions better than before.

To read the full show notes, visit: https://changinghighered.com/changing-perceptions-quality-of-online-education

#OnlineEducation #HigherEd #HigherEdConsulting #BrandonBusteed

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton, Consultant for higher ed institutions. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

In this episode, Drumm McNaughton and Mike Goldstein, Managing Partner at Tyton Partners, discuss the emerging trend among colleges and universities to engage in very different kinds of partnerships than what we have seen in the past.

As many schools struggle to generate sufficient revenue, mergers and acquisitions are becoming more common, especially among smaller schools. Goldstein explains how taking a wider and more creative approach when considering potential partners may enable dissimilar institutions and organizations to complement and enhance one another.

Institutions of higher education can benefit from looking beyond traditional models of what works to find new possibilities for synergistic transactions in the form of mergers, acquisitions, and partnerships.

Podcast Highlights

Mergers between similar institutions may be hindered if those similarities include problems that created the need for a partnership in the first place.
Schools may benefit most from partnering with different types of institutions whose strengths enhance and complement their own.
While a small school may fear losing its identity by merging with a larger institution, leaders should remain focused on the primary goal of remaining operational to continue serving their students.
Examples of creative mergers and partnerships between dissimilar institutions demonstrate how thinking outside of the box can lead to better outcomes.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com/opportunities-higher-ed-partnerships-mergers/

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton is an international consultant for higher ed institutions. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #HigherEdPartnershipsandMergers #changinghighered #thechangeleader

View Details

In this podcast, Dr. June Parks, a licensed psychologist specializing in childhood trauma, discusses how the youth mental health crisis, has been exacerbated and accelerated by the pandemic. Parks explains why mental health challenges on college campuses affect all members of the community, how generational differences impact individuals’ capacity to speak up about their own issues, and why mental health should be a primary concern for leaders in higher education.

Podcast Highlights

Student mental health issues directly impact persistence, and academic performance, and ripple throughout communities of higher education.
Generational differences affect the willingness and ability of individuals to discuss mental health issues and may inhibit younger and older generations from relating to such issues – despite the possibility that they may have shared similar experiences.
Leaders and board members of institutions must implement robust systems to support the mental wellness of students and adults on campus. Providing flexibility for faculty, staff, and other members of the campus community is one of many ways leaders can offer help.
In addition to stressors that have long persisted in higher education, such as financial anxiety and the pressure to succeed, students today face unique challenges related to technology, the climate crisis, deep divisions within their communities, and numerous impacts of the global pandemic.

To read the full show notes of this podcast, visit: https://changinghighered.com/mental-health-matters-colleges-universities/

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton is a consultant to Higher Education Institutions and CEO of The Change Leader, a Higher Education Consulting Firm dedicated to helping institutions of higher learning succeed. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #HigherEducation #StudentMentalHealth #HigherEdPodcast

View Details

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Artem Gulish and Katherine Peltier Campbell, colleagues at Georgetown University, and co-authors of a recent report The Uncertain Pathway from Youth to a Good Job. In this podcast, they discuss the hurdles young adults face transitioning from school to a good job. Younger generations are taking longer to land good jobs than previous generations. In this conversation, Gulish and Campbell discuss the causal factors and hurdles for young people and consider the additional disparities created by race, class, and gender.

Podcast Highlights

Graduating students take longer than previous generations to get what Gulish and Campbell define as “a good job,” which enables them to pay back student loan debt and generate wealth over time.
The causal factors that prevent young adults from getting good jobs until their 30s include the rising costs of higher education, disparities in access to valuable work experience while in school, and a division between career counseling and student mentorship at many institutions.
Differences in gender, race, socio-economic status, and other factors cause some groups to find good jobs earlier than others. The onus is on institutions of higher education to fill the gaps that perpetuate inequality.

To read the full show notes, visit: https://changinghighered.com/hurdles-landing-a-good-job-for-americas-youth/

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton is a consultant for higher ed institutions and CEO of The Change Leader Higher Education Consulting firm. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

#HigherEducation #HigherEdConsulting #ChangingHigherEd

View Details

Podcast Summary

In this episode, Drumm McNaughton and Tom Netting unpack the complex and sweeping proposed changes that have been released by the Department of Education over the course of June and July of this year. This important discussion covers the recently proposed changes to Title IX in addition to the Department’s notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) regarding borrower defense to repayment (BDR), public service loan forgiveness (PSLF), and other critical issues left over from Neg Reg 2022.

Podcast Highlights

As Title IX hits its 50th anniversary, the Biden administration is working hard to fortify protections for vulnerable students, including alleged victims of all types of sex-based discrimination and abuse.
Netting discusses the implications of newly proposed changes to several key issues related to student loan debt, which were not resolved during Neg Reg.
Taken together, all the proposed changes emanating from Washington indicate that the Biden administration is heavily focused on protecting vulnerable students and making student borrowers whole.
Many issues discussed during Neg Reg remain unresolved, and more notices of proposed rulemaking are expected soon.

Visit our website to read the complete podcast show notes.

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton is a Higher Education consultant providing strategic and transformational consulting services for higher ed institutions. To find out more, visit his firm’s website.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

- LinkedIn: Drumm McNaughton
- LinkedIn: The Change Leader
- Twitter: @thechangeldr
- Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Marvin Krislov, president of Pace University. Marvin is one of the few presidents still teaching classes, and his recent article discusses why compassion, community, and kindness are perfectly aligned with the goal of student success.

Podcast Highlights

All students at Pace University take a course called UNV 101, which eases them into the college experience by teaching ways to manage stress and other fundamental skills.
The university strongly aligns itself with its mission of student success by not only offering resources for overall wellness but continuously working to make those resources known through strong advising and peer mentorship.
The compassionate approach taken by Krislov has proved itself to be effective, and student graduation and persistence rates at Pace are on the rise.

Visit our website to read the complete podcast show notes.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: Drumm McNaughton
LinkedIn: The Change Leader
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Podcast Summary

In this podcast, Tom Netting and Drumm McNaughton discuss the issues debated in this year’s Negotiated Rulemaking Process (NegReg) in depth.

Netting provides his take on the major successes, implications of non-consensus, and other outcomes. In addition, they discuss other current legislation affecting higher education and upcoming changes to Title IX.

Podcast Highlights

During the process of Neg Reg 2022, 16 total issue papers were discussed. A total of six issues achieved consensus among both committees.
Each issue contained extensive detail and included implications for many types of institutions, which created friction and led to a failure to achieve consensus on several hot-button issues.
Key beneficial changes were achieved on behalf of incarcerated students and on other fronts, some of which were expected to succeed, and others that came as a surprise.

Visit our website to read the complete podcast show notes for:

Washington Update: Neg Reg 2022 Implications for Higher Education Policy | Changing Higher Ed 111 with Guest Tom Netting

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: Drumm McNaughton
LinkedIn: The Change Leader
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Allison Jegla and Richard Light, co-authors of a new book that offers no-cost to low-cost suggestions that just about anyone in higher education can use to improve their institutions. The book, Becoming Great Universities: Small Steps for Sustainable Excellence takes an optimistic approach to making big changes through small actions.

Podcast Highlights

While others dove into new skills or hobbies during the COVID-19 pandemic, Allison retreated to her childhood home in Michigan. Richard sat at home in Cambridge, and the two co-authored the new book, Becoming Great Universities: Small Steps for Sustainable Excellence.
With enrollment rates falling and the enrollment cliff coming, colleges and universities must innovate to stay viable. The suggestions provided by Jegla and Light offer small steps to change for the better.
Jegla and Light created the book to present a forward-thinking approach based on a shared love of higher education. The suggestions offered in their book are intended for colleges and universities of all sizes, not just those with lots of money and other resources.

To read the full show notes for this podcast visit: "Becoming Great Universities: Insights from the Authors" on our website.

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton is a consultant for higher ed institutions. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, Changing Higher Ed.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

Dr. Drumm McNaughton on LinkedIn
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #changinghighered #thechangeleader #higheredpodcast

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Martha Larson, Energy Manager at Minnesota’s Carleton College, about how colleges and universities can reduce their operating costs through the use of green technologies.

Podcast Highlights

Martha Larson explains that higher education institutions have a responsibility to act as role models by changing carbon-intense behaviors and modernizing energy technologies.
Starting with a small study, Carleton College chose to fully transition from natural gas to renewable sources of energy including wind and geothermal. Their success has shown significant economic benefits to going green, both expected and unexpected.
The steps taken by Carleton College over the past two decades offer a replicable model for other schools to follow, with an emphasis on a two-pronged approach of reducing energy demand and decarbonizing the energy supply.

To read this podcast's show notes and related content, visit Carleton College Sustainability Model Reduced Operating Costs on The Change Leader's website.

About the Host

Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides strategic planning and change management services that enable higher education institutions to drive innovation and reduce their operational expenditures. To find out more about his consulting services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his consulting firm’s website.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

Dr. Drumm McNaughton on LinkedIn
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Podcast Summary Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Michael Petrilli, president of the Thomas B. Fordham Institute, about his new article discussing the downturn in college enrollment rates – and why that trend might be a good thing.

Podcast Highlights

Over the course of the global pandemic in the past two years, nearly one million students that might have enrolled in higher graduation under normal circumstances have failed to matriculate to post-secondary educational institutions.
With nearly one million college students dropping out every year before the pandemic, many of those students who aren’t attending college due to the pandemic may have ultimately dropped out anyway.
Far too many students are enrolling in college without the academic and non-cognitive skills they need to earn a degree. Higher education institutions and community colleges are partly responsible for high college dropout rates and must implement admissions standards that align with successful student outcomes.

To read the full show notes, visit "Rethinking the Enrollment Decline in Higher Ed" on our website.

Resources

Dr. Drumm McNaughton is an international consultant for higher ed institutions. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit The Change Leader's website.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: Dr. Drumm McNaughton
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #higheredpodcast #enrollmentdecline #thechangeleader #changinghighered

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Paul Alexander, president of Trinity Bible College and Graduate School, about Trinity's turnaround, which is a roadmap for a higher education institution turnaround.

Podcast Highlights

Build coalitions. Make sure relationships are preeminent. Everything happens out of those bonds.
Make sure you craft the narrative, know how to share it and ensure that others come along with you. Do they know the mission statement?
Make sure board holds itself accountable, understands what it means to be a fiduciary and leads with integrity. Broaden the base, diversify.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com/engineering-a-higher-ed-turnaround/

About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton is a Higher Education Consultant, CEO of The Change Leader Consulting Firm, and an international leader in transformational change for Higher Education.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Podcast Summary Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Ashley Finley, Vice President of Research and Senior Advisor to the President for the American Association of Colleges and Universities (AAC&U), where they talk about the study "On the Same Page? Administrator and Faculty Views on What Shapes College Learning and Student Success."

Podcast Highlights

There's a difference between what faculty are teaching and what employers feel are the most valuable skills they need.
Despite broad consensus on the importance of mindsets, most campus administrations regard the intentional development of these outcomes to be within the purview of student affairs rather than as part of the curriculum. Higher education should focus on moving mindsets into the curriculum.
Some of the best campus practices include: increasing transparency for all stakeholders, establishing equity goals, elevating the importance of civic skills and global learning, and moving mindsets into the formal curriculum.

You can read the full show notes on the Changing Higher Ed Podcast - Shaping College Curriculum for Student Workforce Success webpage.

Resources

Dr. Drumm McNaughton. consultant for higher ed institutions and CEO of The Change Leader. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, Changing Higher Ed.

View Details

Podcast Summary. Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Gerry Czarnecki, the recently retired chairman and longtime board member of National University System, about the changing role of the boards of trustees in higher education.

Podcast Highlights

Boards can no longer be rubber stamps. They need to ask difficult questions and analyze institutional data to help the institution make appropriate changes so it can survive and thrive.
In creating an integration or merger between institutions, view decisions based on the most important factors: the students, the employees, and the institutional mission.
Leaders need to spend time creating a Plan A and a Plan B. Plan A goes into effect when things are running smoothly. However, Plan B offers a way to move forward if something unexpected emerges and upends Plan A.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com/board-evolution-catalyst-for-transformational-change-in-higher-ed/

About the Host Dr. Drumm McNaughton is a Higher Education Consultant, CEO of The Change Leader Consulting Firm, and an international leader in transformational change for Higher Education.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Tom O’Reilly, president of Pine Manor College, about the College’s efforts to change course financially and, once the pandemic emerged, to merge with Boston College in a way that honors their tradition of serving first-generation students.

Podcast Highlights

Leaders need to spend time creating a Plan A and a Plan B. Plan A goes into effect when things are running smoothly. However, Plan B offers a way to move forward if something unexpected emerges and upends Plan A.
In creating an integration or merger between institutions, view decisions based on the most important factors: the students, the employees, and the institutional mission.
Look for ways to create meaningful support for first-generation students. These students’ families don’t understand higher education so additional support in relation to financial aid, academic support, and student capability are important. These types of support can be even more meaningful in helping these students succeed if programs are developed that extend into the students’ K-12 experience and continued through the first two years after college graduation.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com/innovation-in-integration-pine-manor-boston-college/

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides governance consulting; strategic planning, implementation, and change management consulting, and accreditation consulting for higher ed institutions. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Jim Bouse, Cirector for Enrollment Technology at the University of Oregon and former board chair of AACRAO, about using a holistic approach to enrollment management, especially in light of the enrollment cliff and the pandemic.

Podcast Highlights

Higher education is dealing with an accelerated rate of change because of the enrollment cliff and the pandemic. Therefore, it’s important for institutions to be clear about their purpose.
Parents and students today are asking hard questions about the value of higher education. Is the cost worth it? How indebted will they be? Will a degree prepare students to be successful in a rapidly changing world?
Strategic enrollment management requires a holistic approach where efforts are aligned across the institution. This creates a synergy that enables the institution to understand its mission, the type of student they are recruiting, the programs that it is offering, and the quality of the educational experience.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com/holistic-approach-to-student-enrollment/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Michael Horowitz, founding president of TCS Education System, about the system’s expansion into healthcare and its use of technology to support student success.

Podcast Highlights

TCS has created its biggest project to date, the Kansas Health Science Center and its connected Kansas College of Osteopathic Medicine (KCOM). This effort is designed to prepare medical professionals to work in rural areas. The program will combine traditional medical training with technology, including telemedicine, in an innovative curriculum.
TCS believes in radical cooperation. The system’s universities and colleges work together to create classes and programs.
TCS plans to use AI in novel ways. For example, they will use this technology to analyze what the success factors are for learning and completing a program. AI also can help identify students who are facing other challenges, such as financial distress or issues with childcare, so TCS staff can help the student navigate these issues.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com/tcs-education-system-growth-and-sustainability/https://changinghighered.com

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton and Deb Maue, Senior Vice President for Enrollment and Marketing at Aurora University, discuss what has happened in 2021 and predict trends in higher education for 2022.

Podcast Highlights

Higher education’s challenges in relation to enrollment cliff and funding were put on hold because of the federal stimulus funding. However, these still remain looming issues for higher education in the future.
Many higher education institutions returned to traditional classroom offerings in 2021, although they continued to find ways to incorporate online learning as part of their offerings.
Moving into 2022, institutions will increasingly need to find ways to innovate. However, accreditors and faculty members may impede progress in this area.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com/higher-ed-2022-predictions-2021-year-in-review/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Stephen Standifird, President at Bradley University, about how the university’s turnaround mentality is transforming its programs, financial reporting, governance, and leadership.

Podcast Highlights

By being customer-centric and asking prospective students what they want, higher education leaders can begin to redesign programs that attract enrollment.
The university hired a CFO that doesn’t have any higher education experience. This has proven beneficial because she brings a different perspective that helps the institution eliminate outdated processes and decisions.
Bradley is encouraging innovation by changing decision-making processes. For example, the program review process beings with the president, provost, and CFO. In other ways, other processes are involving the deans more intentionally in the decision-making process.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com/successful-turnaround-strategies-higher-ed-sustainability

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Dan Greenstein, chancellor of Pennsylvania's State System of Higher Education, about the system’s change efforts to proactively deal with student enrollment declines and financial issues.

Podcast Highlights

Strategically integrating institutions can allow higher education systems to address declining enrollments and revenues through consolidating efforts. This approach also allows the institution to offer a wider set of programs, which otherwise would be cut due to budget declines.
Transparency is important in any change effort so that various stakeholders can weigh in and offer their ideas.
Data is critical to chart the way forward to ground the change process in reality, instead of uninformed opinions.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com/stakeholders-shaping-new-ma-model-higher-ed/

Resources

Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides governance consulting; strategic planning, implementation, and change management consulting, and accreditation consulting for higher ed institutions. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Mark Lombardi, president at Maryville University, about the institution’s culture of innovation.

Podcast Highlights

Innovation in higher education involves starting with the end in mind, i.e., identifying the end point and ending date, and then allowing people to innovate with a focus on bringing the desired outcome into being.
This approach requires changing the definition of failure so that it becomes a learning opportunity as opposed to a terrible outcome that people are penalized for.
Creating this type of innovative culture requires letting go of 20th century processes that have become antiquated, such as consensus and seniority.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com/business-approach-higher-ed-strategic-planning-data-analytics

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #changinghighered #thechangeleader #higheredpodcast

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Russell Lowery-Hart, president at Amarillo College, about how to successfully transform a higher education institution to meet the needs of today’s students in a way that that results in improved persistence and graduation rates.

Podcast Highlights

To successfully navigate the current environmental chaos, higher education institutions need to get a real handle on the students, who are often very different from the traditional students that attended college previously.
Using this information can then inform the creation of structures and processes that truly meet students needs, instead of being based on tradition.
COVID has provided a gut-check for many higher education leaders as to the challenges and barriers facing students. By acknowledging these, colleges and universities can create better structures and processes to support these students so that they can be successful.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com/improve-persistence-and-graduation-rates

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Tom Netting, CEO at TEN Government Strategies, about the current issues being discussed by federal policymakers in Washington.

Podcast Highlights

The U.S. Congress is considering several packages. However, the names and vehicle for passage continue to change to get buy-in politically.
Two Neg Regs are on the horizon in relation to student loans and institutional accountability. Higher education leaders should keep these on their radar screen.
Title IX changes are currently being discussed in the Office of Civil Rights. The office is currently reviewing comments that were submitted about Title IX.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com/washington-update-new-guidance-for-higher-ed-on-the-build-back-better-initiative

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides strategic planning, implementation, and change management consulting for higher ed institutions. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Michael B. Poliakoff, president of the American Council of Trustees and Alumni (ACTA), and Dr. Armand Alacbay, ACTA’s vice president of trustee and government affairs, about the organization’s new report, “The Cost of Excess,” which analyzes the reasons and impacts behind the continual rising cost of higher education.

Podcast Highlights

Higher education trustees need to ask probing questions and request meaningful data to help institutions make good decisions that are central to their mission of graduating students.
For example, ACTA’s report found no statistical correlation between student services and improved graduation rates. This is important because institutions spent $112 billion in this student services alone during the timeframe studied.
The report also found that the percent of increased instructional spending at public institutions was twice as effective in improving graduation rates as increasing administrative spending.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com

Resources

Dr. Drumm McNaughton does strategic planning and change management for higher ed institutions. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Roger Hughes, President at Doane University, about the knowledge, qualities and skills that higher education leaders need to have.

Podcast Highlights

Higher education leaders can come from a variety of backgrounds, including coaching. Leadership knowledge and skills can be transferred between different types of jobs.
It’s important to grow leaders. This can happen through creating an environment where the leadership team learns principle-based leadership that reflects the president’s values.
Leaders can be driven by ego or principles. The former makes leaders feel like they are indispensable; however, this philosophy can make it different for decisions to be made when the leader is not on campus. The principle-based leadership model not only solves this issue, but also helps grow a cadre of leaders at different levels of the organization.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com/how-to-build-great-leaders-in-higher-education/

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides leadership coaching and capacity-building consulting for higher ed institutions. To find out more about his higher education consulting services and read other insights for higher ed leaders, visit his firm’s website at https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Melik Khoury, president of Unity College, about the institution’s out-of-the-box thinking that is creating a new business model for higher education.

Podcast Highlights

Higher education is built on a traditional system that was developed by elite institutions. However, the model isn’t sustainable for educating a broader group of students.
Colleges and universities should look at their missions and their policies to see if these are still valid—and whether they may be holding the institution back in some ways.
Innovation doesn’t need to look the same across the institution’s campus. Different departments can focus on building innovative programs that meet the specific needs of a group of students. Through taking ownership of these programs, leadership gets built throughout the institution.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com/innovating-the-higher-ed-business-model/

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides business and strategic planning consulting for higher ed institutions. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Matt Scogin, president at Hope College, about the institution’s Hope Forward program.

Podcast Highlights

Higher education leaders can look at innovation through creating new financial models that are not based on tuition.
The Hope Forward model is designed to increase access to higher education while also not saddling students with significant student debt after they graduate.
This approach, which is based on student gratitude and generosity, will link students to the college through donations and interactions throughout their lifetime.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com/hope-forward-enabling-free-tuition-for-college/

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides strategic planning, implementation, for higher ed institutions. To find out more about his services and read other thought leadership pieces, visit his firm’s website, https://changinghighered.com/.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Jaime Casap, a consultant and Google’s former education evangelist, about how higher education needs to create a new model that will help students embrace lifelong learning and succeed in the emerging economy.

Podcast Highlights

Students who come from low-socioeconomic circumstances, immigrant families or are the first in their family to attend college often don’t have a good understanding of the educational opportunities that are available to them.
A new model of education should help students define who they are and what they’re passionate about, and then expose them to different disciplines and experts from around the world.
Students and higher education institutions both need to embrace the concept of lifelong learning. Therefore, the finite four-year education should no longer be the norm. Instead, educational opportunities should be created to meet the person’s various needs throughout both a career and life.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Kim Hadley, CFO at John Brown University, about lessons from pandemic that can help transform higher ed institutions.

Podcast Highlights

Developing collaborations with other higher education institutions can help a university develop new programs without assuming significant fixed costs.
Innovative technology, such as owl cameras, can solve immediate issues caused by the pandemic, but also can have long-term benefits.
The pandemic underscores the need for risk planning and education about the institution’s finances. While these scenarios may not come to pass, this process does help higher education leaders and boards of trustees build their own and institutional capacity, as well as trust among institutional stakeholders

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com/higher-ed-innovation-pandemic/

The Change Leader’s Media Links

Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Mark Roosevelt, president of St. John’s College, about the college’s decision to do a tuition reset.

Podcast Highlights

In general, the higher education industry wants to communicate that it has something valuable to offer. However, setting the price tag to be beyond the means of almost every family that wants to enroll a student sends the wrong message.
Consider starting a philanthropic campaign with alumni support. This approach taps into alumni’s understanding that college affordability is a problem for their families. They often want to contribute to defray the costs.
Have a strategic communication plan that transparently and sincerely communicates the tuition reset to recent graduates, current students, and prospective students. Each will have a different take and it’s important to have authentic conversations with them about why decisions have been made.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com/the-wisdom-of-a-tuition-reset-at-st-johns-college

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides governance consulting; strategic planning, implementation, and change management consulting, and accreditation consulting for higher ed institutions.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Cynthia Jackson-Hammond, CEO of the Council for Higher Education Accreditation, about accreditation’s role as higher education institutions continue to institute change in response to economic and societal turbulence.

Podcast Highlights

CHEA is a non-governmental organization that is focused on academic quality, quality assurance, transparency to the public, and ensuring that institutions and their programs are following their mission.
Even with the rise in OPMs, colleges and universities are ultimately responsible for providing guidance in the curriculum design, which is part of the university’s role of self-regulating of its programs.
Diversity, equity, and inclusion continue to be important in higher education, but accreditors are looking for evidence of DEI, such as faculty inclusion, retraining of faculty in teaching methods, or campus enrollment practices.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com/prepare-for-changes-in-higher-ed-accreditation/

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides governance consulting; strategic planning, implementation, and change management consulting, and accreditation consulting for higher ed institutions.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Tony Huffman, President and Founder of Perdia Education, about how technology is evolving to help higher education identify, recruit, enroll and serve adult students.

Podcast Highlights

With the enrollment cliff rapidly approaching, adult students need to increasingly become the focal point of higher education recruitment efforts. These students need a different approach to education than traditional students.
Technology is important in not only providing online classes, but also in recruiting and enrolling adult students. These students want to be able to access information when and how they want to in their busy lives.
Many of higher education’s programs and enrollment strategies were developed 25 years ago so they were designed to serve a different generation of students. It’s important for higher education to take the time and invest the resources in updating these components.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com/grow-your-institution-with-online-student-enrollment

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides governance consulting; strategic planning, implementation, and change management consulting, and accreditation consulting for higher ed institutions.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Sponsor: Perdia Education

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Danielle Wilken, the new president at the University of Bridgeport, about the changing plans that have allowed the university to survive through a partnership with Goodwin University.

Podcast Highlights

Change efforts are not set in stone, so expect things to evolve. This happened with University of Bridgeport, which was slated to be consumed by three area universities. However, when one university withdrew from the deal, the University of Bridgeport got a new lease on life through working with Goodwin University.
These types of partnerships create the opportunity to leverage best practices and efficiencies.
Transparency is critical when going through major change. This transparency needs to extend to faculty and staff, students, former students, community members, accreditors, and policymakers.

Click here to read the full show notes.

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides governance consulting; strategic planning, implementation, and change management consulting, and accreditation consulting for higher ed institutions.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Philomena Mantella, President at Grand Valley University, about creating an REP4, an innovation effort using design thinking to improve education.

Podcast Highlights

REP4 is an alliance of six higher education institutions that are committed to innovation.
This effort flips the innovation model through putting prospective and current students in the driver’s seat in identifying changes that are needed at the college or university.
REP4 allows ideas to emerge and be prototyped at a variety of institutions, which share the information on the implementation and data to improve learning and refine the efforts.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides governance consulting; strategic planning, implementation, and change management consulting, and accreditation consulting for higher ed institutions.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Vickie Schray, EVP and chief external affairs officer at Zovio, about the role of innovation in helping higher education navigate the current turbulent environment.

Podcast Highlights

Innovation will be critical in helping colleges and universities survive. This innovation can be through creating partnerships that leverage and build capacity.
Higher education’s work needs to focus on student needs and ensuring they are prepared for the workforce. Innovative approaches to this include creating credentials and considering students as long-term customers who will need to be re-skilled and upskilled.
Higher education needs to consider the needs of contemporary students who have not traditionally been their focus. This involves creating programs and instructional models that support their needs and prepare them for high-demand jobs at high wages.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com/

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides governance consulting; strategic planning, implementation, and change management consulting, and accreditation consulting for higher ed institutions.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Sponsor: Perdia Education

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Mike Goldstein, managing director and co-creator of the Center for Higher Education Transformation at Tyton Partners, about how the pandemic has accelerated change in higher education and some of the trends that are emerging.

Podcast Highlights

Higher education is experienced a burst of rapid acceleration that is in line with the evolutionary theory describing punctuated equilibrium. These types of acceleration are caused by a cataclysmic event, which in this case is the COVID-19 pandemic.
Many institutions that were forced to adopt online learning because of the pandemic are now looking to create a hybrid model that merges the best of online and in-person instruction.
This acceleration also may change the way that higher education uses outsourcing. In some cases, institutions are starting to build internal capacity in relation to OPMs. In other instances, institutions are considering outsourcing core academic functions.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides governance consulting; strategic planning, implementation, and change management consulting, and accreditation consulting for higher ed institutions.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Sponsor: Perdia Education

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Anthony Wutoh, provost at Howard University, about how partnerships with industry and academic institutions can encourage innovation that benefits students, faculty, and the higher education institution.

Podcast Highlights

Partnerships with industry can offer many benefits, including industry expertise to assist with course and curriculum review, access to state-of-the-art technology, industry speakers and mentors, internships and other opportunities for students and faculty to grow.
These types of partnerships also provide the industry partner with assurances that the higher education courses are preparing students to enter the workforce. These collaborations also create a pipeline that can lead to jobs for graduates.
Higher education leaders need to consider institutional mission before creating a partnership. Is the proposal aligned with where the college or university wants to go? Does the partner share a similar mission and values? Starting with this alignment can help the partnership grow more smoothly and lead to faster successes.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides accreditation, governance, and strategy and change management consulting for higher ed institutions.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Sponsor: Perdia Education

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Tom Netting, CEO at TEN Government Strategies, about policy changes emerging from Washington, D.C. as the Biden Administration and Congress move forward to deal with the pandemic.

Podcast Highlights

Significant federal funding is expected to continue to come to higher education institutions and students. College and university presidents need to be very mindful about how they use this funding. It is important to use these funds to create a new institutional future instead of trying to return to the previous “normal.”
The Department of Education’s top two officials have been approved by the Senate. However, several key positions remained unfilled. These vacancies will slow the Biden Administration’s educational efforts.
Negotiated regulation processes will begin in several areas. One involves Title IX, which will include virtual hearings. The Biden Administration’s proposal would reverse the Trump Administration’s stance in this area. Additionally, another NegReg will focus on Title IV in relation to student loans. Both NegReg processes bear watching since they could have major consequences for higher education institutions.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides strategy and change management consulting for higher ed institutions.

Guests Social Media Links:

Tom Netting LinkedIn – https://www.linkedin.com/in/tom-netting-9214755/
Tom Netting Twitter - @t_netting

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Sponsor: Perdia Education

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Ken Knueven, senior program director at the Charles Koch Foundation, about the various disruptors facing higher education and and what grantmakers are looking for in higher education transformation initiatives.

Podcast Highlights

Higher education is facing financial issues caused by a variety of disruptors. The pandemic accelerated these issues, forcing higher education leaders and institutions to consider radical and transformational change.
Many employers are questioning the value of a college education. They are increasingly emphasizing—and in some cases, creating—certificate and other credentialing programs.
Individualized education, access, affordability and enabling technology are increasingly critical components of the emerging higher education model.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides strategy and change management consulting for higher ed institutions.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Sponsor: Perdia Education

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Ashley Finley, vice president of research and senior advisor to the president for the AAC&U, about how the workforce is changing and how higher education can play a part in this transformation.

Podcast Highlights

Employers consistently are looking for employees who have the competencies and skills created through a liberal education.
Employers consistently rate individual skills such as drive and work ethic, ability to work independently, self-motivation, persistence and a sense of workplace belonging at the same level as teamwork, communications, critical thinking, and analysis.
Generational differences emerge among industry leaders. Respondents under the age of 40 especially value civic engagement, global education, and diversity, and are looking for graduates who display this knowledge and skill set.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides strategy and change management consulting for higher ed institutions.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Sponsor: Perdia Education

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Dave Haney, the interim president of Hiram College, about the ongoing transformation of the college to serve the needs of students and key stakeholders in its region.

Podcast Highlights

Targeted marketing allows institutions to share their story with prospective students who would be a good fit. This increasingly is important as students are focused on social media instead of network television or billboards.
Focus on person-centered design and creating a holistic system. This enables institutions to create programs that students want and then develop an operational system that puts the students first and closes gaps between online, traditional undergraduate and graduate courses.
Be involved in workforce and development efforts in the region to align college programs, courses, and offerings to help students gain the skills needed to be employed in the region.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides strategy and change management consulting for higher ed institutions.

The Change Leader’s Links

Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Sponsor: Perdia Education

View Details

Podcast Overview

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Brian Kelly, Director of the Cybersecurity Program at Educause, about cyber risk management, and the increasing importance of including cybersecurity and cyber-hygiene in higher education’s enterprise risk management program.

Podcast Highlights

Disruptions in cybersecurity are becoming more common as higher education institutions increasingly see their technology systems being hacked. Ransomware attacks against colleges and universities doubled over the past year.
As part of the enterprise risk management process, leaders need to consider potential cybersecurity issues. While ransomware is in the news, other worrisome issues such as research security, foreign influence from larger nation-state actors, and evolving threats that have not yet entered the higher education ecosystem, need to be considered.
Research security also is critical. This entails securing both research and intellectual property.
Third-party risk management also is important. Leaders need to know what data is being provided to these third parties and contractually how that third-party will use that information.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides strategy and risk management consulting for higher ed institutions.

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Sponsor: Perdia Education

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Billy Hawkins, president of Talladega College, about how the pandemic has changed higher ed institutions and HBCUs in particular.

Podcast Highlights

When a crisis hits, prioritize students. Make strategic decisions and adaptions to keep students safe.
By focusing on serving students during these difficult times through improving services and enhancing safety, higher education institutions can increase enrollments.
The pandemic has taught higher education administrators and faculty to adapt. This ability to move with the flow and make changes needs to continue, even when the pandemic eases.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides strategy and change management consulting for higher ed institutions.

Links to Articles, Apps, or Websites Mentioned during the Interview

Talladega College

Guest Social Media Links

Billy Hawkins on LinkedIn

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links

Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Sponsor: Perdia Education

View Details

Podcast Summary

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Paul Friga, associate professor of strategy at the Kenan-Flagler Business School at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and co-founder of ABC Insights, about how higher education leaders can strategically move their institutions forward as the pandemic eases.

Podcast Highlights

Higher education leaders have an opportunity to use the American Rescue Plan funding to move their institution forward in creating a new model.
The pandemic has forced institutions to adopt efficiencies, many of which should continue to be used in the “new normal.”
Leaders should use the American Rescue Plan funding to strategically invest in student services, efficient operations, and growth. These investments can help the institution move forward more successfully.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides strategy and change management consulting for higher ed institutions.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview

Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges

Guest Social Media Links

Paul Friga on LinkedIn

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Sponsor: Perdia Education

View Details

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Meredith Woo, president of Sweet Briar College, about the Sweet Briar Miracle, the college’s transformation using change management principles.

Podcast Highlights

Sweet Briar College faced a major uphill climb after alumnae successfully pushed back the board of trustees’ decision to close the institution.
The college had to find ways to address and change perceived challenges, including declining interest in a liberal arts education, waning enrollment by women in women’s colleges, and the institution’s location in a rural Virginia setting.
The college’s leaders started their change initiative with major overhauls of the academic program, financial decision-making and budget.
The second phase of this initiative involves creating a strong focus on women’s leadership that is integrated into the liberal arts curriculum and sustainability.
The college grew enrollment by 42% after announcing the changes, and continues its growth to this day.

To see full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides crisis management and transformation consulting services for higher ed institutions.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Sweet Briar College

Guest Social Media Links:

Meredith Woo on LinkedIn

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Sponsor: Perdia Education

View Details

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Rob Hartman, CFO at Columbia International University, about how the pandemic has changed higher ed institutions and CIU, and in many ways, for the better.

Podcast Highlights

A crisis or change effort can have unexpected positive outcomes. In the case of CIU, these outcomes include increased enrollment, endowment, and employee productivity.
During a change effort, create a committee with membership that spans the campus and can work through consensus. This effort can develop a powerful plan for change while also building engagement and support among institutional stakeholders.
During times of change, leaders will emerge when using creative problem-solving. This was evidenced by CIU’s students who volunteered to deliver meals to their quarantined classmates.

To read the full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides strategy and change management consulting for higher ed institutions.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Columbia International University

Guest Social Media Links:

Rob Hartman on LinkedIn

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Sponsor: Perdia Education

View Details

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Ted Mitchell, president of the American Council on Education, and former undersecretary of education for the Obama Administration, about what to expect from the Biden Administration and higher education policies.

Sample Show Notes

The Trump Administration and the Biden Administration both have tried to provide financial support to COVID relief to higher education. Funding is coming directly to higher education and is being allocated to states, who then provide support to state colleges and universities.
The question becomes whether the amount of federal relief is enough to help institutions who have tenuous finances. Some believe that the funding that is really needed by colleges and universities is approximately $100 billion. Many institutions are faced with mounting costs related to moving instruction online, thinning out and/or closing residence halls, increasing COVID testing, and providing PPEs to faculty, staff, and students. Many institutions also do not have students on campus, so those sources of revenue have dried up.
Higher education CFOs are expressing concerns about how to pay for these increasing costs in the future.
Higher education still faces an enrollment cliff based on the downward trend in the number of 18-year-olds. However, it is important to note that only about half of these individuals opt to attend college. There are several strategies that colleges can use to try to bolster the enrollment, including deepening the college-going rate among high school graduates, increasing college retention rates, and reach out to non-traditional college dropouts who have attended college but have not completed their degrees.
Neg Reg, HEA, Title IX and gainful employment are expected to be topics for discussion among federal policymakers.

Resources Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides strategy and change management consulting for higher ed institutions.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

American Council on Education

Guest Social Media Links:

Ted Mitchell on LinkedIn

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Sponsor: Perdia Education

To see full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com

Keywords: #changinghighered #thechangeleader

View Details

Dr. Drumm McNaughton interviews Dr. Frank Rojas, COO at Los Angeles Pacific University, about myLAPU, an initiative that put their curriculum on students' smartphones.

Sample Show Notes

Three-fourths of students in online programs want to use their mobile devices to engage in coursework. However, only 13% have done so, which indicates a significant demand.
MyLAPU was launched as a human-centered design project to remove the need for students to be connected to the internet via desktop or laptop to do their classwork. This new approach created a platform so the university can meet students both where they are at and when they are online so they can complete their coursework.
LAPU began the design process with market research to understand what students wanted and needed, as well as how they interfaced and interacted with their learning environment.
The project also assessed how to use mobile technology in a meaningful way to meet students’ needs through utilizing good methodology and leveraging andragogy research on how adults learn.

Resources

Dr. Drumm McNaughton provides distance and online education consulting for higher ed institutions.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Los Angeles Pacific University

Guest Social Media Links:

Frank Rojas on LinkedIn
Twitter: @LapacificU

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Sponsor: Perdia Education

To see full show notes, visit https://changinghighered.com

View Details

Student loan debt is impacting millennials’ a pressing topic as students graduate from higher education having significant debt. This podcast will feature Steve Ferguson and Jay Patel, who have developed a new way for students to pay off their debt in significantly less time than that currently takes.

Drowning in Debt

The cost of education has gone up in real dollars as per inflation, due to multiple reasons, such as Prop 13 and state budget cuts to higher education. At the same time, the cost to students has increased significantly, as state funding to education has dropped and students are required to pay.

Traditionally, people paid for an education out-of-pocket and from savings. However, the amount that students and families have to pay has gone up significantly more because there is less state government contribution.

Title IV came into existence in 1965, and student loans came into play in the 1980s. These loans filled a gap and helped more people go to school. However, colleges and universities significantly increased the cost of tuition as federal funding for loans became available. This led to the advent of the current debt-load issue where student debt is now $1.7 trillion. This is the largest amount owed by society collectively behind mortgages.

Over the years, the Department of Education has increased the amount of borrowing available to students. That money is mostly used to pay for tuition, but it also can be used to cover other expenses, such as the cost of housing. Starting around 2008-09, many private lenders such as Wells Fargo, CitiBank and Bank of America got out of the student loan business, causing the federal government to increasingly fill that gap.

Since then, the student debt issue has skyrocketed. The nation is at $1.7 trillion in outstanding debt and 45 million borrowers in the U.S. have some Title IV debt. The average debt is over $37,000, and it is crippling for individuals to come out of college with this level of debt load.

According to recent numbers, there are 60,000 borrowers who are over 62 years of age who have a combined total debt of $18.5 billion owed to the federal government. That is over $300,000 per borrower. This group is close to qualifying for Social Security while having a large outstanding student loan.

Another significant threat to the nation’s economy is the debt load for the 25-34 year-old age group, which currently stands at about $90 billion. There are 310,000 borrowers who owe roughly $300,000 per borrower. These significant debt loads can potentially impact the ability for individuals to start families, buy houses and cars, etc.

While many of these individuals who have these debts used these funds to earn a graduate degree, undergraduates also are coming out of school with $30,000-$40,000 in debt. These smaller amounts also impact individuals’ ability to buy a house and start a family.

Innovation in Student Debt Repayment

There hasn’t been a lot of innovation in student loan repayment previously. Many suggest that loans can be paid in a decade, but in reality that time period extends to 20-30 years.

SLR 67 is a new type of investment vehicle that is used to pay for education. This savings and investment program uses a different strategy that came out of conversations with more than 800 stakeholders, including individuals, brokers, dealers and universities.

This investment vehicle is designed for students and their families to repay their current or future loan faster. The SLR 67 has an interactive broker so when the student or family opens an account, they receive an automated investment strategy management plan over a specified time period. They can select a one-time investment or recurring investment. This gives individuals flexibility based on their income. The contribution program builds the principal to pay off the student loan.

Using two basic financial principles—time/value/money and compounded interest—to accelerate what is put toward the principal. This program also is going to be marketed to employers to consider as a match for their employees. This could significantly increase the amount of money that could go into this product to help pay off student loan debt. This could be an employee retention tool, especially if it becomes tax-deductible for employers.

The product has been launched and an account can be created and quickly funded so the automated strategy will take over. The company is focusing initially on the higher earner who has high debt but will expand the product’s scope in the future.

Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Ferguson and Patel suggested three takeaways for higher education leaders:

From a university standpoint, institutions are measured on their repayment rates. They have an obligation to monitor their repayment rates to ensure that they don’t come under a 30% cohort default rate. This is a real issue for smaller institutions because just a few borrowers can affect the institution’s cohort default rate. The college or university also has a social and moral obligation to provide information to help students repay their debts since the institution was the one that profited.
Employers also benefit from the students who enter their workforce. Therefore, employers can step up and help their employees figure out creative ways to repay the student loans through creating a match program.
This financial tool brings innovation to a part of society that hasn’t had much. This tool is trying to help all parties, whether they are large borrowers or individuals who have smaller student loans.

Bullet Points

The cost of higher education has increased significantly over the years due to multiple reasons, which has led to larger student debt.
Traditionally, people paid for higher education out-of-pocket and from savings. Title IV loans didn’t come into play until the 1970s. There was a significant increase in the cost of tuition as these federal funds became available.
Over the years, the Department of Education has increased the amount of borrowing available to students. That money is mostly used to pay for tuition, but it also is available for students to cover for other expenses, such as the cost of housing. As private lenders dropped out of this market, the federal government stepped in and took over a larger share.
Title IV filled a gap and helped more people go to school, but also led to this debt-load issue where Title IV debts are now $1.7 trillion. This is the largest amount owed by society collectively other than mortgages.
The nation is at $1.7 trillion in outstanding debt and 46 million borrowers in the U.S. have some Title IV debt.
There are 60,000 borrowers over the age of 62 who have a combined total debt of $18.5 billion owed to the federal government. That is over $300,000 per borrower.
The debt load for the age group comprising 25-34-year-olds is about $90 billion. There are 310,000 borrowers who owe roughly $300,000 per borrower. These are significant debt loads that can potentially impact the ability for families to start, people to buy houses and cars, etc.
While many individuals who have large student loan debts used these funds to earn a graduate degree, undergraduates also are coming out of school with $30,000-$40,000 in debt.
There hasn’t been a lot of innovation in student loan repayment previously. Many suggest that loans can be paid in a decade, but in reality that time period extends to 20-30 years.
SLR67 is a new type of investment vehicle that is designed to pay for higher education or student loan debt that uses an interactive broker. When the student or family opens an account, they receive an automated investment strategy management plan over a specified time period.
Using two basic financial principles—time/value/money and compounded interest—this financial tool accelerates what is put toward the principal.
This program is starting with the wealthier graduates—doctors and lawyers—who have larger student debt, but will eventually be offered to graduates with smaller student loan debt burden.

Guests Social Media Links:

LinkedIn Steve Ferguson: https://www.linkedin.com/in/stevefergs/
LinkedIn Jay Patel: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jayk-patel-4232712/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #studentdebt #university #highereducation #education

View Details

The COVID psychological impact on Higher Ed institutions is the topic of this Changing Higher Ed Podcast with host, Dr. Drumm Mc Naughton and guest, Dr. Tom Marrs. Under discussion is crisis recovery for higher education institutions that will continue to remain challenging as the fallout from the pandemic, including increasing economic issues, continue to emerge. Dr. Tom Marrs, is a licensed psychologist and assistant director for client engagement at the Center for Executive Education at Texas A&M University’s Mays Business School.

A Rapidly Changing Stream of Challenges

Higher education institutions are dealing with the psychological impact of COVID and the multiple challenges, many of which have never been faced before. During this pandemic, many faculty and employees are returning to work exhibiting signs similar to post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD). Employees may have contracted the coronavirus and may be dealing with its implications; they also may have lost loved ones, friends and work colleagues.

Additionally, the metaphorical higher education “ship” is trying to right itself in a world that has changed significantly. The challenge of crisis recovery for higher education institutions becomes how to adapt to this emerging new paradigm.

The pandemic and the resulting economic issues are causing a pivot in many organizations’ business model. This can lead to a purgatory where organizations have to figure out how much money to invest in changing infrastructure while not knowing how much of this will be moot once “business as usual” returns (if it ever does). This situation can result in organization leaders experiencing significant stress that can make decision-making difficult.

Every day, solutions emerge for some COVID-related problems while new problems emerge. For example, there is now the reality of the vaccine on the horizon, but that brings up a quandary related to the large section of the population that doesn’t want to get the vaccine because they don’t trust it. There also are issues with distributions and logistics as well as timelines to be followed in administering the vaccine.

Understanding and Coping with High Stress Events

Many are describing the stress-induced issues in the general population as being PTSD. While PTSD is well-known as a buzzword, most individuals do not understand what it is, especially since the term is used frequently in social media and by news agencies.

In the present circumstances, individuals are facing some element of struggle to function socially, interpersonally, developmentally, educationally, occupationally and physically. Many are lumping these experiences under the term PTSD as a way to give everyone a common language about what an individual is witnessing or experiencing. Many individuals use this term because it is known and there is a set of assumptions about what it means. People want to use this term to describe how severe their symptoms feel because these symptoms are stress-related and lead to a profound reaction. However, this applies a clinical pathology to something that is non-clinical and is instead better explained as a human reaction to a very stressful situation.

One needs to look at the primary populations – the military and police – as examples of populations who experience PTSD. The current reaction by faculty and staff look very similar to that at this point. However, in the military, very few soldiers get PTSD given the number who experience severe trauma. That’s because the military prepares soldiers for what battle will look like during boot camp and gives them the strategies and tools in order to deal with these stresses psychologically. We don’t have that type of training with the general population so people are not prepared for the current situation and the resulting stresses.

Extended Levels of Stress

The real impact on people’s mental and psychological health and mental well-being is yet to be seen because one of the key components to diagnosing someone with a stress disorder is cessation of the thing that is causing the stress. An accurate diagnosis cannot be made if the stressor is continuing.

Society now has to deal with other emerging issues. While COVID may go away thanks to the vaccine, there is a new intense stressor on economic conditions. We haven’t seen all of the impact of this situation economically and the health symptoms that will emerge because of it. This means our way of life is changing profoundly, which is going to lead to more stress.

The first thing that needs to happen is for the dust to settle once the immediate risk for COVID begins to subside. People will have a natural tendency to try to return to homeostasis once the stress alleviates. When this happens, most people return to normal functioning within 3-6 months, but they don’t feel that is possible when they are in the middle of severe stress events such as we’re experiencing with COVID.

Many people may be suffering from an adjustment disorder, which is a very high-functioning level of PTSD that comes from being exposed to a novel situation that is highly stressful and out of the ordinary. The situation overloads individuals psychologically and they start showing signs of PTSD. This is very similar to what is being seen during the pandemic.

Managing the Psychological Impact on Higher Ed Employees and Faculty Returning to Campus

The question becomes how to prepare these individuals to return to some sense of normalcy when they return to campus. That happens naturally as people regain their sea legs once they determine they can do things the way they used to or they find a new normal that will eventually feel safe. Most people will eventually find a new sense of security and safety in the new normal.

However, there will be a group of people who will continue to struggle because they can’t get overcome their adjustment disorder. This may emerge in older faculty and employees who are more set in their ways; for example, individuals may exhibit these symptoms because they can have difficulty pivoting to a virtual environment and to the new order of things.

An Unequal Psychological Impact – Finances

The COVID psychological impact on Higher Ed employees is exacerbated by the resulting economic impacts to staff who are in lower compensation brackets and may be taking a larger financial hit. It’s important for higher education leaders to be aware of this because these impacts can cause individuals to develop a palpable fear reaction that can be seen in the workplace. This leads to behavioral issues that have to be dealt with in the workplace, especially because individuals are worried about losing their jobs in the present economic climate.

Higher education leaders can make a difference through helping individuals deal with these stress and fear reactions. Higher education leaders should not pathologize behavior, especially when there already is a performance baseline. Personnel issues will continue, regardless of the pandemic. There will continue to be good and poor employees, based on the differences in performance.

Leaders have a choice if issues have emerged. These issues can be treated as a sudden onset of performance issues or can be looked at as if the employee has PTSD and needs to be referred to the employee assistance program. Leaders also can consider that these behaviors may be signs of adjustment disorder or extreme stress over a long duration of time.

Under these circumstances, leaders need to take a different approach that is focused on getting the best from the team. Therefore, it’s important to cut employees a little slack and talk to them about what they need. Leaders also need to normalize the situation and become empathetic.

Additionally, leaders need to be careful about the language they use in communicating to faculty and staff (even through emails). The language that is used can help employees to be okay with the situation and to feel the leader’s empathy.

Leadership Self-Care

The psychological impact on higher ed employees means leadership must step up their game while managing their own stress and trauma. When people are under stress, they look to people in power and who they respect for direction. Therefore, it’s important for leaders to take care of themselves—and set the example for others.

Leaders also can get fixated on specific issues or topics so they are continually ruminating. Leaders need to understand that it is completely normal to have difficulty making decisions when under a lot of stress.

They also need to be careful about not pathologizing the current situation for themselves through saying it is terrible and awful, or that they have PTSD because the body will respond to what the individual thinks.

The human body is very adaptive based on stress levels. By shutting down, the body helps lower the stress levels. This can show up as depression, where individuals don’t want to go out and do things that previously were pleasurable, such as attending social situations. Sleeping patterns can change, which can range from getting no sleep to always sleeping, and even having nightmares.

Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders and Boards

Marrs suggested several takeaways for higher education leaders:

Leaders need to help people to not pathologize their situation through being careful about the language they use. During times of stress, change, flux and uncertainty, we should increase the flow of information instead of decreasing it. Stay in touch and keep communicating, be positive and use intentional language to help people feel okay and normal.
Leaders should not make decisions based on assumptions that things will go back to normal or the world is ending. Instead, take the approach that this is a severe but temporary condition. While terrible and life-altering, this situation is temporary.
Don’t overlook opportunities to temporarily increase support services for employees in order to get the most return for investment. This could be increasing funding for programs that provide financial assistance for employees, creating more sessions at employee assistance program or increasing daycare services on campus.

Bullet Points

The pandemic’s psychological impact on Higher Ed institutions has created a ripple effect of both solutions and emerging problems that have resulted in prolonged high stress levels among individuals.
Some organizations are in purgatory as leaders have to figure out how much money to invest in changing infrastructure while not knowing how much of this will be moot once “business as usual” returns. This can result in organizational leaders experiencing significant stress that can make decision-making difficult.
While PTSD is well-known as a buzzword, most individuals do not understand what it is. It can be triggered by sudden traumatic events such as waking up during surgery or anaphylactic shock. However, in general these events do not include a life-threatening illness or debilitating medical condition such as COVID.
The real impact on people’s mental and psychological health and mental well-being will not emerge until cessation of the thing that is causing the stress, which in this case is the pandemic.
Many individuals may be experiencing an adjustment disorder, which overloads individuals psychologically and leads to signs of PTSD. While most will recover from this disorder once the stress drops, many older faculty and employees may struggle with it post-COVID because they have difficulty pivoting to a new environment.
The deteriorating economic conditions is emerging as a new stressor. This may have a profound and continued effect on employees.
Staff who are in lower compensation brackets may be taking a larger financial hit due to the current economic situation. Higher education leaders need to be aware of these situations.
Individuals may develop a palpable fear reaction that can be seen in the workplace. This leads to behavioral issues that have to be dealt with in the workplace, especially because individuals are worried about losing their jobs in the present economic climate.
Higher education leaders should not pathologize behavior, especially when there already is a performance baseline related to that employee.
If issues emerge, they can be treated as a sudden onset of performance issues, a case of PTSD where the employee needs to be referred to the employee assistance program, or signs of adjustment disorder or extreme stress that developed over the pandemic’s long duration of time.
Leaders need to cut employees a little slack and talk to them about what they need. Leaders also need to normalize the situation and become empathetic, especially in their spoken and written communication.
Leaders also need to take care of themselves, which sets the example for others. This includes understanding that it is completely normal to have difficulty making decisions when under duress and through not pathologizing the current situation because the body will respond to what the individual thinks.
The human body is very adaptive based on stress levels. By shutting down, it helps lower the stress levels. This can show up as depression and changes in sleeping patterns.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Texas A&M University’s Center for Executive Development
Tom Marrs, PhD

Guests Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/tom-marrs-42b30a31/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://thechangeleader.com
Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #crisesrecovery #higheredemployees #university #highereducation #educatio

View Details

Crisis recovery for higher education institutions remains at the top of the to-do list entering 2021. The coronavirus pandemic continues to change the nation’s higher education landscape, which includes 1700 private non-profit colleges. This podcast will feature Barbara Mistick, the president of National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities.

Higher Ed’s Crisis Recovery Continues

The pandemic has been very personal and many individuals believe that they are in it alone. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports the number of jobs across the higher education sector that have been lost is approximately 500,000, and that about 150,000 of those jobs will not come back after the pandemic. Therefore, this is a significant period of change and adjustment across higher education. Many of these individuals who are affected are dealing with a significant amount of isolation.

Higher education didn’t have much warning that the pandemic was coming. When the pandemic first started to emerge, the primary concern was how to bring students who were participating in study-abroad programs home. There wasn’t a sense that the pandemic was going to be a permanent or semi-permanent situation; instead, the general feeling was that it was going to last only a short period of time.

This crisis recovery in higher education has continued for a long period of time, which is difficult. These crisis situations tap into leaders’ training and extraordinary good sense in being able to look after a community. Everyone has had to respond differently, depending on their sector and community.

People are being asked to rally their energy and do the work for a sustained period of time, which they can do only if there is an inspirational leader who is providing guidance. There is a point where the fatigue factor weighs in, which is starting to happen.

Pandemics can last for several years as nations see hot spots continually popping up and higher infection rates emerge in certain places. However, because there also is the prospect of the vaccine on the horizon, people see an end point. BUT …. it hasn’t arrived yet, and this leaves leaders having to navigate a crisis situation for an extended period of time.

In the fall, faculty were already burned out. They already had faced swapping out courses, moving rapidly back to online education and rapidly changing plans for the semester. This led to increased stress, which ultimately can result in burnout. This uncertainty leaves people looking to the senior leadership team for a response.

Higher education leaders’ optimistic nature also may have worked against them, since this approach suggested that the chaos from the pandemic would end quickly. The end isn’t in sight so everyone across the institution has felt a level of uncertainty.

Lack of Political Leadership

This situation was compounded by the lack of a national political response, which forced each state to respond on their own, resulting in each state identifying different actions and behaviors based on what was happening in that state. Higher education was challenged because of the number of residential college and institutions that have a student body that comes from others states and nations. This made the question of quarantining much more complicated.

While faculty and staff were frustrated with higher education leadership during the pandemic, the college or university president often was frustrated with the political leadership, which made decisions that affected institutions without including higher education leaders in those discussions.

Pandemic-Induced Whiplash

With ever-changing state guidance and ever-evolving issues related to the pandemic, many institutions had to change from in-person to hybrid instruction to online learning within a semester. This proved very challenging for faculty and students because they wanted some level of certainty. This felt like whiplash for many higher education stakeholders.

Some institutions did a good job of adapting to the changing environment due to the pandemic. At the global level, institutions were very flexible—which is not a term commonly associated with higher education.

Institutions, to their credit, also put students first by focusing on student safety. This included bringing students back from international trips as well as back to campus, and making changes to academic calendars.

Institutions also focused on preparations and change management. Some institutions planned their efforts using four different scenarios through looking at delivery systems and calendaring options. No matter the method that leaders were looking at, the guide star remained consistent – ensuring that students were able to continue their education, that it would be a good experience, and that students would be safe.

Support from Surprising Places

Institutions also became much more mission-focused on the well-being of students. The pandemic offered the opportunity for Congress and higher education to find common ground on how to help students through a very difficult time. Seeing the institutions’ commitment, Congress included higher education funding in the CARES Act, which provided money for students through colleges and universities. This seemingly reversed Congress’s declining support for higher education, as evidenced through the decreased funding to the Pell Grant program.

Faculty also came on board to make the changes to help institutions survive. Higher education often gets tied up on things that are perceived by the faculty to be not going well. However, when the chips were down, the best of the Academy emerged. Faculty focused on helping students to get through the semester while student life staff worked on different and creative ways to help students be successful.

The pandemic also highlighted the gaps related to access to broadband and technology. Students in rural, urban and lower socio-economic areas had had difficulty accessing the internet while some tried to complete their assignments on their phones because they didn’t have computers or tablets. To address this, Congress passed a package right before the end of 2020 that will help address these issues, which will help communities as well as higher education.

Moving Forward

Private higher education institutions are doing things that other institutions should be doing but affordability and accessibility are issues. There are vast areas of the nation that don’t have access to education; policymakers and higher education leaders need to make sure that education becomes available in these areas. Students need to be able to go from high school to college and then earn their college degree.

There are many markers to support this. The unemployment rate is much lower for college graduates when compared to high school graduates. In the pandemic, the employment rate is close to 9%; this rate is almost three-fold higher for those who have only a high school degree.

Therefore, it’s important to make college accessible. This will require looking at financial aid, which includes increasing the Pell Grant. This effort, which would have the potential to help public and private institutions, may see support from the incoming Biden Administration.

The best thing is recognizing diversity in the higher education ecosystem. Maintaining both public and private institutions is critical because students have different learning styles; some do better at smaller institutions while others are prepared to attend larger institutions. Many individuals also go between the public and private sector for their undergraduate and graduate degrees.

Private institutions have their place in educating society – they enroll about 20% of all students in the nation, but award 30% of the degrees. There’s an effectiveness ratio that is higher at private institutions as compared to public institutions.

Preparing the Workforce

The pandemic has exacerbated the haves and have-nots in our nation. Many are unemployed while others are still employed and safely working from their homes. After the pandemic ends, states will need people who are educated and ready to step into the workforce.

States have various educational attainment goals based on the industries in each state. Most states have set a goal for a certain level of college attainment, but the number of students who have attained that are much lower than the percentage that the state needs. States are looking at the needs of the workforce, the level of skills and training that are required, and how many people can meet those skills requirements. If a state can’t maintain that, the state can’t be competitive in trying to recruit new employers and industries.

Moving Forward

In order to recover from the pandemic, higher education is going to need to pull together. They need to turn out graduates who are prepared for the workforce. One concern during the pandemic is the lower number of low-income students who are applying to college. This is problematic across the ecosystem since it will impact institutions for a period of time.

Congress’s financial support is not even close to the needs of the sector. The recently-passed stimulus allocates $23 billion to higher education; however, this is only 15-16% of what higher education needed.

There also are new COVID testing requirements on campus as well as efforts to increase social distancing. Still, students want to be back on campus and in classrooms, which leads to significant tension.

Therefore, it’s important to find ways to support higher education during this pandemic so when this period is over, these institutions can be stronger.

Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders and Boards

Mistick suggested several takeaways for higher education leaders:

Given the times that we’re in, it’s important to figure out how to be resilient. Additionally, institutions can bounce forward. There are silver linings in the pandemic, including Congress’s increased support, so we need to do a good job of advocating for this sector.
Take a look at what students want from their college experience. Many want the residential option because this is the growing-up aspect of going to college.
Institutions understand they are part of the community and are trying to provide support during the pandemic.

Bullet Points

This is a significant transition period for higher education. The Bureau of Labor Statistics reports the number of jobs across the higher education sector that have been lost is approximately 500,000. The bureau projects that about 150,000 of those jobs will not come back after the pandemic.
The extent of the pandemic was not expected. This has tested leaders’ skills and the resilience of the faculty, staff and students.
The lack of a national political response forced each state to respond. This resulted in each state identifying different actions and behaviors based on what happened in that state. Higher education then faced additional challenges, including a number of residential college and institutions that have a student body that comes from others states and nations. This made the question of quarantining much more complicated.
Many colleges and universities faced institutional whiplash as they had to move courses online, move students back home and change semesters. However, faculty and staff proved remarkably adaptable—and opted to put students’ needs first in the process. This resulted in numerous scenario planning exercises.
The pandemic offered the opportunity for Congress and higher education to find common ground on how to help students get through a very difficult time in the nation’s history. Seeing this commitment, Congress included higher education in the CARES Act, which provided money for students through higher education institutions.
Maintaining both public and private institutions is critical because students have different learning styles; some do better at smaller institutions while others are prepared to attend larger institutions. Private institutions have an important place in this ecosystem.
The pandemic has exacerbated the haves (those who are employed) and have-nots (the unemployed) in our nation. After the pandemic ends, states will need people who are educated and ready to step into the workforce.
Increased Congressional funding is needed to support higher education. There is a strong possibility that the incoming Biden Administration will support increasing the Pell Grant program. Other funding is needed as well to recover from the pandemic.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities

Guests Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/barbarakmistick/
Twitter: @BarbaraMistick

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #university #highereducation #education

View Details

Higher education change management was critical in 2020 as college and university leaders dealt with crises brought on by COVID, and will remain so for 2021. This podcast features Dr. Drumm McNaughton and Deb Maue, and looks back at 2020 and predicts what 2021 has in store for higher ed.

Overcoming 2020’s Challenges through Change Management The year 2020 was completely unpredictable with crises such as the pandemic emerging seemingly overnight. The nation and higher education have not recovered from what has happened—and it will be a long time before that recovery happens.

However, significant good also came out of this year. For example, many people—such as Dr. Russell Lowery-Hart, the president of Amarillo College—stepped up in showing what it means to be a servant leader. This meant getting out on the frontlines, helping to test individuals for COVID, using a mask, demonstrating behaviors to protect everyone, and being very present for the students. These leaders also embraced transparency and strategic communications.

Institutions also were able to turn on a dime as the pandemic emerged. Faculty at many colleges and universities converted their entire course load to online over a span of only a few weeks. It was incredible to see the speed that people willingly adapted and how institutions worked to get ready for people to return to campus.

The pandemic also forced institutions to really figure out what their mission is—educating students. Dr. Billy Hawkins, the president of Talladega College, checked in regularly with students. This was noticed by both students and parents. Dr. Hawkins continues to meet monthly with student leaders to find out what is going on. These kinds of communications make the college experience so important for students.

Academic prioritization also came to the forefront. A great template for this process was led by Dr. Lori Varlotta when she was at Hiram College. They cut a number of programs that were not benefitting the students or the university. What made this effort unique is that Dr. Varlotta raised funds to provide a salary and benefits for a full year for faculty who were in programs that were terminated. This humane approach offers guidance for other institutions as they move forward in prioritizing academic programs in the wake of the pandemic and economic fall-out.

Student needs also increased and many institutions stepped up to provide support. Amarillo College again was in the spotlight as it put in new counseling services for students and doing campus visits online. Additionally, some institutions raised and earmarked financial support to help students who were struggling financially.

Employee needs also increased. Dr. Tom Marrs of Texas A&M University pointed out how employees are burning out due to the prolonged stress. Many employees have contracted COVID and also seen loved ones and friends struggle with it—and in some cases lose their lives. With no relief in sight for most of the year, the continued stress took a toll, which also impacted people’s ability to perform their jobs. That’s where employee assistance programs and other efforts focused on supporting staff have become even more meaningful. The pandemic has helped underscore the importance of humanity and thinking of others before oneself.

2020’s Student Enrollment Challenges The nation and the world have never experienced a pandemic like this for over a century. The death rate is huge—the daily death rate exceeds that of 9/11. This is fundamentally changing everything on our planet and in our nation.

Enrollment was the top challenge facing higher education. College enrollment fell 2.5% from Fall 2019 to Fall 2020, which was almost twice the rate of decline. This represented almost 500,000 students. There were 327,000 fewer first-time students this fall, which was unprecedented. International student enrollment was down 43%. Public institutions experienced a 4% decline in enrollment while privates remained flat—and would have been lower if the graduate enrollments hadn’t helped boost them back up. Community colleges’ enrollment fell over 13%. Transfer students dropped.

There were some bright lights, enrollment-wise. For-profits increased enrollments over 5% while graduates were up 3.6%.

Community colleges were hit harder than expected. The challenge may be because prospective students often are from lower socioeconomic households who are looking for ways to get into a four-year institution. With the transfer rates between community colleges and four-year institutions being down, it could be possible that the drop in community college enrollments may be due to demographic and financial issues.

Finances also are an issue. Moody’s is predicting that the net tuition revenue will decline in about 75% of private schools and 60% of publics. That’s a huge decline in revenues. Private universities have room and board as about 40% of their revenues, which makes it challenging. The publics faced major issues after the Great Recession when the cost didn’t change, but the state government allocations dropped; the tuition burden fell more on students than on states.

Student costs and tuition continue to go up. There currently is $1.7 trillion in student debt. This is unsustainable. However, some institutions are trying to find sustainable financial models. For example, Southern New Hampshire University just set a limit to their annual tuition at $10,000 a year for on-line and $15,000 for face-to-face. Many students are transferring to online education because costs are less. This will challenge institutions to find ways to compete.

Black Lives Matter and Societal Issues Higher education had to deal with four major issues this year: COVID, Black Lives Matter, climate change and the economy. Each of these issues on their own would be huge; together, they created a perfect storm. This is forcing higher education—and everyone else—to wake up. Long-time higher education leader Dr. Gordon Gee said, “The pandemic has accelerated needed change in higher education by a decade or more.”

Black Lives Matter affected higher education in a major way through giving this type of activism a renewed sense of urgency. Protests emerged and grew, especially around the election. Both faculty and students were demanding more emphasis and attention be given to these types of issues, especially in regards to police. Some institutions said they were not going to have police on campus any more. Many buildings are being renamed and statutes are coming down. The superintendent of Virginia Military Institute resigned after racist accusations that were going on at that school.

Higher Education Policy Changes Major issues happened with Title IX at the federal level. The Department of Education changed many of the rules on adjudication. Many of these decisions are going to be set aside under the Biden Administration.

Distance education also was a significant change point. Higher education had to embrace distance education due to the pandemic. With the Negotiated Rulemaking from 2019 that just went into effect, there’s a significant number of changes to the rules. In some cases, decisions--such as substantive interaction—are good; in this case, that’s going to give rise to institutions similar to Western Governor’s where they are doing competency-based education. It’s not going to be the faculty member being the “sage on the stage” as much. Instead, there will be flipped classrooms and students being more in charge of their learning. Faculty interactions need to be good, but they only need to be once a week.

Mergers and closures will continue. There was a big one this year as University of Arizona acquired Ashford University. This consolidation helps the University of Arizona expand its online programs. Additionally, some colleges face sudden closures based on financial crises.

Last Year’s Predictions One of last year’s predictions involved the restructuring of the NCAA. The issues that are currently happening in regards to football exposed the NCAA’s inner workings, especially in that some conferences have significantly more power than others. The NCAA will face changes. For example, the current case before the Supreme Court may lead to athlete compensation when their image is used. This will make the rich universities richer because students will want to play at colleges and universities where they can get more publicity.

Another prediction from last year was that fundraising would change. This proved to be true, although because of COVID not in the way that was predicted. Fundraising also changed based on Black Lives Matter, especially in relation to naming buildings. There will be more due diligence.

Mergers and closures were also predicted. While this also has happened, it hasn’t happened at quite the rate that was predicted. A lot of that has to do with the CARES Act, which infused critical funds into higher education.

Another prediction was that higher education would develop partnerships with businesses to increase opportunities for employees to gain credentials. This is now starting but it isn’t at the degree originally predicted because of COVID.

Looking Forward - Predictions for 2021 Enrollment declines will continue due to the enrollment cliff and the economic downturn caused by the pandemic. This also is part of the finances because of the COVID pandemic. Enrollments may be down the same amount or more than this year as foreshadowed by the decline in applications and FAFSA filings. Finances combined with the enrollment cliff are coming into play. The positive note is that graduate education and degree completion is moving up, which is balancing the loss of enrollment. Institutions need to be positioned properly and understand their mission and the programs that speak to their ideal student.

Traditional students will be moving to online universities in larger numbers. Universities with strong online presences, such as Western Governor’s University, University of Arizona, and Southern New Hampshire University are doing well—and will gobble up other programs or create alliances with MOOCs to keep costs down. This also is forcing many institutions to reconsider online education options for their traditional undergraduate students, who now are demanding this option. Non-traditional students also are making up more of the online enrollment; this group needs the flexibility that online education offers.

With the Biden Administration taking office, education is going to come back to being in more in the forefront. President Trump and Secretary Betsy DeVos focused on choice; this will be curtailed in the new administration. The new Secretary of Education has a strong educational background from Connecticut, which should be very good for public institutions. If there is a new CARES Act, more money should be steered toward higher education. Free college is a great idea for individuals in certain income levels but this may not happen. The forgiveness of debt is far more realistic. The question becomes how much to forgive and what is fair. Also, having Dr. Jill Biden in the White House will be significant; she will have a big influence on education. Also, hopefully there will be less politicization of education in the future because people realize that education is the awakening of people’s minds.

Mergers and acquisitions will continue to come forward. While many institutions have survived the pandemic to this point, many have been bled deeply. These institutions may not be able to survive; in fact, 75% of CFOs in higher education are expressing concerns.

The game changer for next year will be the vaccine. The go-go years leading up to the Great Recession are gone. Higher education needs to do a better job of partnering with businesses and employers about what they need.

Additionally, the purpose of higher education is for the greater good and to develop life-long learners. So while higher education does need to prepare students for their first jobs, it also needs to instill the understanding of the need for life-long learning.

Bullet Points * 2020 was completely unpredictable. It will take a lengthy period of time before the nation and higher education return to normal. * Higher education had to deal with four major issues this year: COVID, Black Lives Matter, climate change and the economy. Each of these issues on their own would be huge; together, they created a perfect storm. * Servant leaders emerged on the frontlines, helping to test individuals for COVID, using a mask, demonstrating behaviors to protect everyone, being very present for the students, and embracing transparency and strategic communications. * Institutions turned on a dime as the pandemic emerged. Faculty converted their entire course load to online over a span of only a few weeks while other employees worked to make campuses safe for people to return. * The pandemic forced institutions to really focus on what their mission is—educating students. * Academic prioritization also came to the forefront as institutions tried to determine how to move forward during the pandemic and the ensuing economic downturn. The challenge is to create a process that treats employees and faculty who are laid-off humanely. * Student needs also increased and many institutions stepped up to provide support through counseling and finances. * Employees also needed support so many institutions utilized counseling, employee assistance programs and financial support programs to provide assistance. * Enrollment was the top challenge facing higher education with declines in most areas. * The pandemic may cause up to 20% of higher institutions to close or be acquired due to financial issues. * Finances also are an issue. Moody’s is predicting that the net tuition revenue will decline in about 75% of private schools and 60% of publics. * Student costs and tuition continue to go up, and there currently is $1.7 trillion in student debt. This is unsustainable. Institutions are starting to develop new models that are more affordable for students. * Black Lives Matter brought activism back to campus. This movement forced institutions to look closely at policies, procedures and practices. It also forced institutions to do due diligence before accepting major gifts with naming rights. * Title IX shifted to protect the accused, but this probably will shift again once the Biden Administration comes into office. * A significant number of changes to the rules about distance education just went into effect due to the negotiated rulemaking process in 2019. In some cases, decisions--such as substantive interaction—are good. * Mergers are starting to happen. Some allow institutions to increase their reach, such as into the distance education market. Some institutions are also facing a financial cliff that can lead to sudden closure. * The NCAA will continue to face changes. For example, the current Supreme Court case may lead to athlete compensation when their image is used. * While mergers and closures were predicted last year, the rate didn’t match what was predicted. This has to do with the CARES Act, which provided a lifeline to struggling institutions. * Another prediction was increased partnerships with businesses to increase opportunities for employees to gain credentials. This is now starting but it isn’t at the degree because of COVID. * Another prediction that was impacted by COVID was that higher education would develop partnerships with businesses to increase opportunities for employees to gain credentials. This is now starting to emerge.

Predictions for 2021 * Enrollment drops will continue, due to the combination of the enrollment cliff and students’ and families’ financial issues due to COVID. The positive note is that graduate education and degree completion is moving up, which helps to balance the loss of undergrad enrollment. Institutions need to be positioned properly and understand their mission and the programs that speak to their ideal student. * Traditional students will be moving to online universities in larger numbers. Universities with strong online presences will continue to find ways to increase their market share. Other institutions will focus on creating or bringing more programs online. * Education will move back to the forefront in the Biden Administration, especially having a Dr (Jill Biden) in the White House. * Mergers and acquisitions will continue to emerge as many institutions have been financially bled to death during the pandemic. * The COVID vaccine will be the game change. With that said, higher education needs to develop partnerships with businesses and also stress the concept of life-long learning in current students.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

National Student Clearinghouse Research Center

Guests Social Media Links:

Guest Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/deborahmaue/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-change-leader/about/
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #change management #governance #university #highereducation #education

View Details

Strategic board leadership is an emerging paradigm of university governance that can help higher education institutions navigate the multiple challenges. This podcast will feature Henry Stoever, president of AGB.

Changing Paradigm of University Governance Typically, higher education boards are made up of individuals who are appointed as trustees because they have made significant philanthropic contributions, either to the institution or, in the case of public universities, to a political party candidate who then appoints the individual once elected. This approach is shifting as boards and institutional leadership teams begin to develop strategic partnerships.

In the strategic board leadership approach, both individual trustees as well as the entire board need to learn how to work in strategic partnerships with higher education presidents and the institution’s leadership team. This approach shifts the focus so that the board and its members become a built-in consulting team for the higher education president and cabinet. Additionally, the board no longer serves as a rubber stamp for the institution’s proposed strategies and initiatives; instead, trustees need to proactively engage as thought partners.

In the current environment, both student success and long-term institutional vitality are part of the crisis recovery for higher education institutions due to the pandemic and the resulting online and hybrid learning environments. These issues have increased the importance of strategic board leadership in order to create well-informed, more holistic strategies for both student success and long-term institutional vitality.

Strategic thought partnerships between presidents and boards are becoming increasingly important as the pressure mounts on higher education presidents due to the pandemic. These individuals are on call 24/7 and can face unrest at any time. At the same time, the roles and expectations of board members have never been more challenging. By working together, presidents and boards can leverage their work for the institutional and student good.

Trustee Recruitment Strategy This approach changes the way higher education governing boards are recruited. Previously, the primary driver for board member selection has been philanthropic (or political donation) capacity and relationships.

In this new paradigm, philanthropy remains important, but selection of board members also must be based on other attributes, including their knowledge of key areas such as academic affairs, finance, marketing, strategy and risk, operations, legal, regulatory and international experience. Boards should be proactively identifying these necessary skills through using a skill set matrix. This matrix builds and informs the composition of the board through analyzing individual board members’ skills and those that are needed on the board, and balancing them against individual trustees’ terms. This approach ensures that appropriate trustees are seated who can oversee the creation of the strategy for the institution’s future, instead of focusing on the institutional past.

Evolution of Board Governance Over the past year, boards have been forced to change how they work. They have been required to meet much more frequently as institutions face a myriad of challenges due to the pandemic and social unrest.

Boards also have had to lean in from an oversight perspective. This requires working in partnership with the higher education leadership, but not doing the work of the management team.

Boards must listen to all key stakeholders, both on and off campus, while also listening to and working with the institution’s leadership team to ask insightful and probing questions. Trustees are being asked to consider alternatives and also to analyze both the intended and unintended implications of potential strategic directions.

The mnemonic NIFO (nose in – fingers out), or in other words, not micromanaging is critical in today’s higher education governance environment. The board’s role is to listen and ask the difficult questions of administration. Making suggestions in a limited way is acceptable (and encouraged), but there is a fine line between oversight and suggestions vs. micromanagement. Unfortunately, the difference between oversight and suggestions versus micromanagement is not cut and dry – it varies among boards and administrations.

One of the ways that boards can be in touch with stakeholders is through establishing board committees that have both board members and key stakeholders on them. This enables board members to gain deeper insight into what is going on in the college or university, as well as giving institutional stakeholders a direct opportunity to interact directly with the board.

Institutional members must be clear that this is NOT an invitation or process to short-circuit or make an “end run” around the university president. Issues that are brought to the committee must be “blessed” by the president. One way to get this right is to have the president as an ex-officio member of all committees of the board, and this does not preclude the committee from going into executive session if there is an issue that must be discussed without the president in attendance.

Shared governance also needs to be embraced more by higher education boards. This approach, which involves sitting down and interacting with faculty, administration, staff and alumni, has strong implications in higher education. A lack of shared governance and/or ignoring key stakeholders’ inputs can result in faculty or other groups sending a vote of no confidence about the administration or board, which sends a negative signal about the institution to the broader institutional community.

Justice, diversity, equity and inclusion also have been highlighted in recent months. While much work has been done at the administrative level, most boards have not leveraged these values into strategic policies and decisions. From an optics perspective, student enrollment has become much more diverse; however, faculty and board composition have not evolved to align with their customers, and board must take a proactive approach to DEI, especially in relation to representation on the board.

Strategic relationships require listening and hearing differences of opinion. Unrest is becoming more common, so boards and administration need to be prepared to establish justice and equity. The pandemic has extended the levels of inequity since the historically marginalized communities have been disproportionately weighted by the impacts of the pandemic. Boards also need to engage in building strategic crisis communications playbooks to be prepared when this societal unrest comes to campus.

Continuing Fiduciary Duties Trustees still have a responsibility to ensure that students receive a quality education and the institution remains sustainable. Trustees’ fiduciary duties of care, loyalty and obedience are the same for higher education boards as they are for corporate boards. Boards also need to be involved in the strategic planning for the institution, but should not micromanage. Instead, they should focus on ensuring that planning is done holistically and there are sufficient risk mitigation processes in place.

More and more, people are looking for work-force education, but at the same time, institutions need to be creating lifelong learners and collaborative participants in society. However, boards and institutions often don’t know who the institution’s customers are.

While the main focus needs to remain on students, there also is a difference between customer and consumer. In higher education, the person paying the bill—often the parent—is the customer. Students are the consumers since they absorb the content.

Three Recommendations for Higher Education Boards and Leaders Stoever suggested several takeaways for higher education leaders:

Strategic transformation is critically important because higher education won’t be the same once the pandemic is over. Both the general population and the number of traditional students are declining so the demand for higher education may decline. Therefore, boards need to be thinking strategically about transformation.
Justice, diversity, equity and inclusion need to be part of every conversation, board agenda and strategy.
Board membership should not viewed as an honorific position. Instead, board members need to be actively engaged and contributing their talents and time to further the higher education institution’s mission during this pandemic.

Bullet Points * Higher education boards frequently are made up of individuals who are appointed as trustees because they have made significant philanthropic contributions. However, this approach is shifting. * The selection of board members should be based on individual attributes, including specific knowledge of key areas, such as finance, marketing, strategy, legal, regulatory and international experience. Boards are proactively identifying these necessary skills through using a skill set matrix. * Both individual trustees as well as the entire board need to learn how to work in strategic partnerships with higher education presidents and the institution’s leadership team. Christian institutions are moving from primarily preparing pastors and missionaries to preparing professionals. * Strategic board leadership can create well-informed, more holistic strategies for both student success and long-term institutional vitality. * Boards have to lean in from an oversight perspective, which requires working in partnership with the higher education leadership, but not doing the work of the management team. * Shared governance and listening to differences are important. This approach involves the board sitting down and interacting with faculty, administration, staff and alumni, which has significant implications in higher education. * Justice, diversity, equity and inclusion are important for the board to consider. This needs to involve creating board policies as well as the composition of the board. * Trustees continue to have a fiduciary responsibility to ensure that students receive a quality education and the institution remains sustainable. These responsibilities include care, loyalty and obedience.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview * Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges

Guests Social Media Links * LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/henrystoever/ * Twitter: @henrystoever

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links * Website: https://staging9.changinghighered.com * LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/ * Twitter: @thechangeldr * Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords #governance #university #highereducation #education

View Details

The results of the U.S. presidential election suggest that there will be a significant transformation in the way the nation is governed, even though the political divide in government will continue. This should have significant repercussions for education. Mike Goldstein, a distinguished higher education consultant and attorney, offers his insights on how the presidential election will alter the course of higher education.

Changing Directions

President-elect Joe Biden’s plan for higher education promises to strengthen college as a reliable path to the middle class. While Republicans and Democrats will probably agree with this in general principle, they may differ on what is intended and how to go about accomplishing this lofty goal.

There are two components of this: one where agreement may be found, and one where there will be disagreement. The first is the general acceptance that education—and especially higher education--has to be faster, better and less expensive. However, the second, that higher education needs to be more accessible to people of color, first-generation college students, and those from lower-income backgrounds, although less than generally accepted, is becoming more and more recognized as important. To do so means more than reducing the cost of education; it means doing more not just to admit these students, but to help them get their education and earn the credential that will lead to a better life.

The credential / degree also has to be meaningful for employers. This will not only cause changes to higher education programs, but also require alterations to counseling, admissions, and tutoring to help students through the program. Additionally, the traditional disconnect continues between what is taught in higher education and what is needed in the workforce by employers.

Faculty overwhelmingly believe they are preparing students for the workforce. However, only about 40% of employers believe that students are prepared for jobs when they graduate. That disconnect has been in existence for a while. Stakeholders are beginning to realize that this gap was created because higher education and the business community were not communicating about what is needed, how to make what is needed become part of the curriculum, and the role that business should play in working with higher education to ensure that students are ready and successful in the workforce. The incoming administration plans to address these issues through providing paid internships, degree-related on-the-job training, pathways, and sequences of courses that support specific areas of study.

Talent Supply Chain

One could argue that a course should be a set of stackable credentials while a degree should be a pile of stackable credentials that add up to the set of competencies that also equate a degree of some sort. The degree is actually the aggregation of a set of marketable competencies. This was the premise behind Western Governors’ University.

That’s where we are now heading. In the Biden Administration, expect to see the leaders in the Department of Education, the Department of Commerce and the Department of Labor working in conjunction with one another to develop these kinds of programs.

There needs to be a consensus about what higher education is trying to do – both its purpose and how it gets accomplished. This includes accessibility, affordability, improving student aid programs, and reducing debt burden on all students, and a recognition that today’s student isn’t the same as it has been in the past. Another critical problem is that at the current cost, the debt burden that hits middle class students. The president-elect’s plan for higher education probably will address this issue.

Expanding Access

President-elect Biden’s platform has several components to expand access. This includes making enrollment in community colleges or similar training organizations debt-free. This would include reduced tuition along with state and/or federal grants. The president-elect’s proposal calls for 75% federal funding, which will depend on receiving Congressional support. The premise of free two-year education to get an associate’s degree is important for the country’s future.

He also places a high priority on supporting minority-serving institutions that serve Blacks, Hispanics and Native Americans. HBCUs are important institutions because they provide an exceptional service, and students get a high-quality education in an extremely supportive environment. These institutions also influence other minority-serving institutions.

Many state and city colleges were founded on the basis of providing access to education to everyone, including the City of New York institutions which were founded and gave free tuition to students. We’ve lost that for reasons that were not in control of the educators, but now there is a movement to return to the notion that education for all beyond high school should be affordable.

Additionally, it’s important that people who enroll in college be able to complete their education. The average student is no longer 18; now the average student is an adult who has responsibilities for children, aging parents and work. This requires counseling, childcare and other types of support, all of which requires additional funding.

Title IX Changes

Many changes to Title IX are projected to be rolled back. The Trump Administration got it partly right on Title IX because there was an imbalance in protections. Institutions lacked appropriate guidance on how to deal with abuse and discrimination.

The problem was that the Department of Education flipped it in the opposite direction. There is a balance to be struck—one has to protect the rights of individuals who suffer from sexual misconduct, abuse or discrimination while also ensuring that the process is fair. Institutions are currently badly equipped in having the necessary human resources to support the process.

The incoming administration will focus on coming up with a balanced system that gives institutions the tools to properly administrator the law and these programs. The regulations are designed to flesh out what is a legal obligation. This administration will be much more sensitive to ensuring the protection of the person who has suffered while also ensuring that the process is fair and expeditious.

Jurisdiction is still questionable. There is a limit as to how much authority an institution should exercise over its population. The question that needs to be asked is what the responsibility would be for an employer whose employee engages in this type of conduct outside of the workplace. This should be handled in a similar manner in a university. If a student who engages in misconduct off campus, this should be a civil issue. If the misconduct is morally repugnant, the institution should be in its rights to dismiss the student. However, institutions should not be held responsible for every student all times. If students are off campus and not under responsibility of the institution when they engage in bad conduct, the enforcement becomes a slippery slope.

Predatory For-Profit Institutions

It is anticipated that the Biden Administration will be more active in pursuing predatory for-profit colleges. The critical word is “predatory”; any institution that acts inappropriately, misrepresents what it is doing, or fails to properly safeguard the use of federal funds or provide the educational service it promises should suffer the consequences.

Unfortunately, the posterchild for this type of conduct has been for-profit institutions, and nearly all of the worst offenders are no longer with us. For the most part, for-profit colleges play an important role in training students in areas such as cosmetology, welding, etc., and there is a place for those in higher education.

The emphasis should be that every institution, including for-profit colleges, behave properly and work within the rules. Where they do not, students should be protected from harm. If a school suddenly folds, the students should have recourse. The rules should be applied evenly and enforced in relation to recruitment, finances, etc. When they do not, the government should ensure that students can take appropriate action. However, the Trump Administration walked away from enforcement.

Additional Financial Areas

The 90/10 rule (at least 10% of tuition needs to be derived from non-federal student aid sources) has many proposals currently being brought forward. This rule is indicative of the socio-economic class of students being served; however, it may not be a good indicator to use to determine the quality of education.

A critical issue will be CARES Act 3. There currently needs to be a large infusion of funds awarded to the states and higher education institutions. This funding is needed to sustain these institutions through the transition from the Trump Administration to the Biden Administration, which may stretch out for a year. A number of private colleges were in a weakened state going into the pandemic and now they are teetering on the brink. The federal government needs to protect these institutions, which otherwise would cause great disruption to higher education.

Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders and Boards

Goldstein suggested several takeaways for higher education leaders and boards:

Think faster, better and cheaper. How can you improve the quality of education and the way it’s delivered? Also, find a way to reduce the cost of education while providing other sources of support.
Make the system fairer and more accessible. Education needs to meet the needs of a changing population of students and need to figure out ways to help these various students, whether they are coalminers or immigrants.
We need to go back to the idea that seeking higher education is a public good.

Bullet Points

The presidential election will change the course of higher education policy.
Higher education needs to transform to be faster, better and less expensive.
There needs to be increasing acceptance that higher education needs to be more accessible to people of color, first-generation college students, and those from lower-income backgrounds.
Higher education credentials need to be meaningful for employers. To make this happen will changes to higher education programs, but also require alterations to counseling, admissions, and tutoring to help students as they make their way through the program.
A course should be a set of micro-credentials while a degree should be a pile of stackable certificates that add up to the set of competencies that also equate a degree of some sort. The degree is actually the aggregation of a set of marketable competencies / credentials.
There needs to be a consensus of what higher education is trying to do. This includes accessibility, affordability, improving student aid programs, and reducing debt burden on all students.
The president-elect’s platform includes making enrollment in community colleges or similar training organizations debt-free. This would include reduced tuition along with state and/or federal grants.
The incoming administration also places a high priority on supporting minority-serving institutions that serve Blacks, Hispanics and Native Americans.
It’s important that people who enroll in college be able to complete their education. The average student is no longer 18-24; now the average student is an adult who has responsibilities for children, aging parents and work. They need different types of support to help them earn a degree.
The incoming administration will focus on developing a balanced system that gives institutions the tools to properly administrator Title IX. This administration also will be much more sensitive to ensuring the protection of the person who has suffered while also ensuring that the process is fair and expeditious.
It is anticipated that the Biden Administration will be more active in pursuing predatory colleges and universities that act inappropriately, misrepresent what they are doing, or fail to properly safeguard the use of federal funds or provide the educational service promised.
A critical issue moving forward will be the passage of CARES Act 3. There needs to be a large infusion of funds awarded to the states and higher education institutions. This funding is needed to sustain higher education institutions through the transition from the Trump Administration to the Biden Administration, which may stretch out for a year.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Tyton Partners
Center for Higher Education Transformation

Guests Social Media Links:

Bio: https://tytonpartners.com/about/
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/michaelbgoldstein/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

With the various factors (the pandemic, the recent election, social unrest, etc.) roiling the nation, reputation management and crisis management have never been more important in higher education.

Over the past six months, most institutions have managed to pivot their operations to deal with the pandemic. However, there probably will be more mergers in the future due to enrollment declines this year along with the upcoming enrollment cliff. Additionally, the speed of change that has been accelerated by the pandemic and social unrest also means that universities and colleges have to remain aware of their image to survive.

This podcast features Bill Coletti, the CEO of Kith. His company has worked with a number of institutions, including large universities who faced outcries due to sexual harassment challenges as well as institutions that are undertaking mergers.

Four A’s of Reputation Management

There are four A’s of reputation management, which describe a process that institutional leaders can use:

Before going on a reputation management journey, you need to be self-aware and aware of what matters to your most important (and influential) stakeholders – that is, the needs of those who matter the most to you. For example, is sexual harassment a real issue or is it governance or gender issues?
Ask important stakeholders for their opinions to learn what they are thinking. This allows you to tap into both internal and external courts of public opinion.
You can’t go on a reputation management journey unless you have buy-in from the board, the president, or the institution’s shared governance model.
Having completed the first three A’s, the final A--taking action--is designed to move the levers of reputation.

The goal in these situations is to move fast, but don’t break things. Higher education institutions are large complex organizations, and must be mindfully changed. This approach is aligned with Warren Buffett’s philosophy instead of Mark Zuckerberg’s model at Facebook. However, this approach doesn’t mean paralysis by analysis; instead, it encourages leaders to take a thoughtful perspective.

Types of Risks

Higher education institutions face a number of different risks that could be previously categorized as:

Strategic risk, which involves things that the institution plans to do, such as opening a new campus or go online. This risk is created through a superior strategic objective and is designed to grow the enterprise.
Preventable risk, which an institution should have zero tolerance for. This includes sexual harassment by a faculty to a student, crime and violence on campus, and racism.
External risks, which are outside the institution’s control. While the institution can put procedures in place, it cannot control these situations, like when an active shooter brings a gun on campus.

However, there also is a whole new construct emerging, i.e., social risk, which are risks that directly impact populations and groups. While higher education is acutely aware of strategic, preventable and external risks, social risks are a new frontier that may cause colleges and universities to stumble. Therefore, presidents and boards need to think about this next frontier of risks instead of the “3 F’s”: facility, football and faculty.

Through awareness and assessment, institutions can determine where they stand on issues such as “Black Lives Matter,” whether that’s the formal group or the concept. LBGT issues also may reemerge soon given the recent election.

Preparing for a Crisis

To successfully navigate these social risks, higher education institutions will need to make thoughtful decisions based on values. These conversations should happen sooner while things are calm rather than later when the institution is in the middle of a crisis.

Leadership is critical – there is no on-the-job training for large crisis events. Instead, these situations often become soul-baring moments when the core nature of institutional leaders is revealed. The remedy is to be very clear about what the leader and the institution stand for, and maintain a high level of EQ.

The key differentiator in these moments is speed – how fast are you able to respond to fill the vacuum. The challenge is that, thanks to smartphones, everyone has a camera and audio recorder readily available so everyone becomes a reporter. The equation to get fast is: Clear Mission and Values + Clear Chain of Command = Speed.

Leaders should regularly practice scenarios and conduct crisis simulations to exercise the team in preparing to meet reputational challenges. Leaders need to accept that faculty are going to weigh in during a crisis. Simulations allow the leadership team to model what a situation will look like, predict what faculty and others may say, and then determine potential next moves and responses. If leaders have done the work to identify who matters most and are always communicating and engaging with these individuals, they shouldn’t face surprises.

While it is a good strategy to have a policy of only one institutional spokesperson in a time of crisis, people’s definition of “crisis” will differ. Most people can embrace the policy when there are external events, such as an active shooter, weather event, natural disaster, etc. However, crises of our own making make, e.g., a vote of no confidence in the president / board, etc., this policy hard to enforce. Everyone will have an opinion and can’t wait to express it to the media.

Who serves as the spokesperson should depend on the situation. At the end of the day, the president is responsible for the functioing of the institution and represents the institution as the CEO. While this person is the first line of defense, an institution can use others, such as a provost or dean or the board chair. Using a lesser level in the chair of command rings fence the crisis but keep the president, who is the institution’s most important spokesperson, on the sideline.

Four Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Coletti suggested four takeaways for higher education leaders:

Recognize that speed is imperative.
Consider what the institution stands for (e.g., mission and values, what does the institution really believe in) as well as what the leader believes in. How will these permeate the organization?
Identify a chain of command. Who are the critical decision-makers when the time comes? How does this chain of command respect the individuals working in the C-suite, the institution’s shared governance model and policymakers?
Pull out The Chronicle of Higher Education or The Wall Street Journal to find examples of crises. Begin to regularly ask, “If this happened to us, what would we do?”

Bullet Points

The four A’s--awareness, assessment, authority, and action--should guide an institution’s reputation management efforts.
Three common types of risk include strategic risk (what the institution plans to do), preventable risk (areas such as racism or violence on campus that should never be condoned), and external risk (situations that the institution has no control over).
Social risks are a new frontier that may cause colleges and universities to stumble in maintaining a reputation. These risks can include responses to Black Lives Matter or working with LBGT populations.
To successfully navigate these social risks, higher education institutions will need to make thoughtful decisions based on values.
These crisis situations often become soul-baring moments when the core nature of institutional leaders is revealed. Leaders need to be very clear about their values as well as what the institution stand for. Leaders also need to maintain a high level of EQ in these situations.
The equation to get fast is: Clear Mission and Values + Clear Chain of Command = Speed.
Leaders should regularly practice using scenarios and crisis simulations to prepare the team to meet reputational challenges. This enables everyone to understand their role in a crisis and also to anticipate what may happen so they can consider an appropriate response.
The choice of spokesperson will depend on the situation. However, at the end of the day, the institution’s president is the CEO and often will serve in this role.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Kith

Guests Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/billcoletti/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/bcoletti

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

As higher education institutions deal with the fallout caused by the coronavirus pandemic, they also are facing a critical challenge in maintaining student enrollment. Many leaders were already worried about the enrollment cliff, but the pandemic has accelerated this issue. Many students are changing their initial decision about college through not applying, deferring admission or transferring to a regional institution closer to home.

This podcast will look at the pandemic, student enrollment and the ripple effect that this can have on an institution. Today’s guests are Bill Conley and Bob Massa, co-founders of Enrollment Intelligence NOW.

Falling Enrollments

The pandemic has caused colleges and universities to lose student enrollment at a time they where they were bracing for the enrollment cliff of 2025. A year ago, more than half of four-year colleges and universities had not met their enrollment goal. COVID-19 has put a sharp punctuation mark on a trend that was growing over the last several years in many sectors of higher education, especially small four-year liberal arts colleges that are highly dependent on a regional enrollment in areas where high school graduation rates are declining and will continue to decline precipitously.

The fall enrollment numbers are sobering. Overall higher education enrollment is down 2.5%. However, some institutions and subgroups of students are experiencing steeper declines. Private college enrollment dropped by approximately 4% and community college enrollment also is down.

The only institutions that have done reasonably well during this time are the regional public institutions. However, these institutions’ enrollment still have dropped, but not as significantly as other types of colleges and universities.

International student enrollment dipped by 11%; this is not surprising due to the difficulty in enter the United States and COVID travel restrictions. Domestic students are attending institution that are closer to home. A not-insignificant number of students have deferred their admission to next school year.

These enrollment drops also will have a significant effect on public institutions, which will face the additional burden of receiving decreased state funding due to the pandemic’s impact.

A Steeper Enrollment Cliff

Dr. Nathan Grawe, the Carlton College economics professor who wrote “Demographics and the Demand for Higher Education,” pointed to the Great Recession of 2008-2009 when fertility rates dropped significantly. He also projected a discouraging picture of high school graduation rates in 2030; this will be much worse when the decline in fertility is factored in.

Now facing the uncertainties of a pandemic, families are postponing childbearing. This would mean the next wave of students won’t reach college until 2040, which could result in higher education having an even rougher ride.

These projections have significant ramifications for higher education leaders. There is a tendency by university presidents, provosts and enrollment managers to focus on making decisions based on the “here and now” and what is right in front of them. However with the enrollment cliff rapidly approaching, decisions made right now will have institutional ramifications decades into the future.

Therefore, it’s important for higher education leaders to look toward the future to strategically consider the impact that current decisions will have. Leaders face a real tension between making the current decisions that are designed “to keep the lights on” and making sure those decisions don’t inhibit longer-term opportunities and excellence.

What happens in this environment can affect stakeholders’ sense of trust. In the current environment shaped by the pandemic, many higher education decisions are being made in a more efficient manner that is often seen in the corporate sector; this decision-making style is foreign to higher education and their shared governance models.

To be successful, current higher education leaders need to balance rapid decision-making that is focused on the here-and-now with consideration on how to build and maintain trust within the college or university across the institution’s governance structure, which includes faculty, staff, Board of Trustees. This involves blending two often contradictory styles and considering tradeoffs when necessary.

Taking the Long View

In the early 2000s, a well-respected president from a top liberal arts college made the decision to hold tuition constant for a year, thanks to the institution’s large endowment and healthy budget. In retrospect, the president believes this was one of the worst decisions he made because it had a multiplying effect on the institution’s bottom line so that the college was handcuffed and couldn’t to what it needed to do for its mission.

This should be a cautionary tale for higher education leaders. Today, colleges are rushing to discount tuition for online learning. However, leaders should reconsider this decision because not only does it set institutions up for less revenue than they need in this current economic situation, but also sets up an expectation among constituents (parents and students) that they should always look for a lower price.

While there is a strong need for cost containment in higher education, price and cost are two different things. Price is what institutions charge; while this is related to cost, it’s not the same thing. Rarely does the price charged for an education cover the full cost of providing that education. The rest is made up by endowment earnings, gifts, state funding, federal aid, etc.

Governance and Trust

An increasing number of presidents are announcing their retirement, resignation or return to the faculty. There is some speculation that many presidents may have planned to announce these decisions back in March, but delayed the announcement due to the pandemic.

There also are a growing number of challenges in the decision-making arena, including faculty votes of no-confidence. Are these no-confidence votes related to a president’s decision-making in regards to COVID-19? Or are faculty cherry-picking grievances based on past decisions?

Moving forward, presidents, provosts and board do need to be held accountable. With that said, there needs to be an understanding that they have a complex job and it’s become more so in the current situation. However, some faculty distrust decisions that are made when they are not present.

What is a University’s Primary Mission? Educating Students

Colleges and universities exist to educate students, not to employ faculty and staff. Many decisions currently being made are about how to keep student demand in place in order to maintain enrollment. College and university faculty need to understand that ultimately the institution exists for the students. If the institution doesn’t have students, it doesn’t have revenue; if there is no revenue, there is no mission.

Currently, stakeholders need to come together around a common idea of the institution’s guiding principle. This group of stakeholders also needs to include student and parents, many of whom felt blindsided by this year by university decisions to open, not open and quarantine.

Not all of the institution’s constituents will be in favor of every decision. Leaders need to convey that they are listening and cognizant of the concerns that faculty, staff and parents have. This is why transparency is important in decision-making.

Enrollment Management

It’s important to remember what enrollment management entails because there have a number of cynical perspectives, such as it’s about net-tuition revenue. While it is, the best way for the institution to maintain and enhance net tuition revenue is not just recruiting first-time freshmen and qualified transfers, but also retaining the students that the institution worked so hard to recruit in the first place. This involves taking into account recruitment, admissions, financial aid, retention rates, graduation rates and giving rates among alumni.

Analyzing each point on this continuum is the best way for institutions to manage the current stresses. People have to over-perform in all of these ways, which is well illustrated by Peter Drucker’s quote, “The best way to plan for the future is to plan the future.” Creating trust in relation to higher education governance is about planning the future through using students as the focus.

Breaking Down Siloes

People in colleges and universities are very good at building silos. In contrast, an enrollment management system should be good at breaking down siloes and checking on students in relation to retention. In doing so during these times, it’s important to integrate both the counseling center and the career center staff in these efforts to ensure that each student’s individual needs are being meet at this time.

It’s important that the appropriate resources be made available to take care of students in relation to enrollment management, counseling and career services. However, counseling centers are currently understaffed and having difficulty dealing with mental health issues coming up in the pandemic and the significant increase in number of students who are seeking counseling on campus.

Even though institutions are in a retention period because revenue has taken a big hit, expenses have increased significantly (especially in relation to COVID), and cuts and furloughs are happening. That sets the stage for the dynamics between enrollment management and the business office. The business/finance office views this as spending money (or too much money) that the institution doesn’t have.

However, spending to provide appropriate services such as enrollment management, counseling and career services is actually an investment in current (and future) students. These services ultimately are a benefit financially to the institution since they help maintain a steady enrollment of students. Therefore, it’s important to consider whether requests from these areas are an investment or truly a spend.

Four Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Conley and Massa suggested four takeaways for higher education leaders:

Leaders need to stand with confidence but given all the unknowns, it’s a folly being certain. Leaders need to tell people the truth–both good and bad—and lay out the options with confidence and compassion.
Make certain that the decisions made today also take the future into account. This requires careful thought and mapping out potential implications that a particular decision can have on the future.
Presidents need to communicate to enrollment management leaders and admissions deans that they need to stay connected by the external world, including K-12 education. Don’t get consumed by internal issues. This approach goes to building trust and credibility among the external-facing public.
Consider the difference between investment and expenditure. Do not expect the staff to produce if they don’t have the resources. With that said, staff do need to be held accountable, optimize their work and row in the same direction.

Bullet Points

Higher education enrollments have declined in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic. These drops will be especially difficult for institutions that depend on state funding for a significant part of their budget.
Higher education already was facing an enrollment cliff. The pandemic may extend this issue since parents may delay having children until the pandemic and economy stabilize, which will have implications through 2040.
Higher education leaders need to consider both the short-term impact of decisions as well as the long-term ramifications. What looks good in the short-term (keeping the lights on) could have serious negative implications for the institution years down the road.
Building trust among stakeholders is critically important right now. This is important because many leaders have been forced to use a more corporate decision-making model based on the rapidly emerging issues in the pandemic, which is counter to how higher education has traditionally operated. This change has resulted in some votes of no confidence emerging among faculty members across the nation.
Price and cost are two different things. Price is what institutions charge; while this is related to cost, it’s not the same thing. Rarely does the price charged for an education cover the full cost of providing that education. Therefore, it’s important to think twice about cutting the cost of tuition since parents and students will come to expect a lower price in the future.
College and university faculty need to understand that ultimately the institution exists for the students. If the institution doesn’t have students, it doesn’t have revenue; if there is no revenue, there is no mission.
Enrollment management takes into account recruitment, admissions, financial aid, retention rates, graduation rates and giving rates among alumni. Analyzing each point on this continuum is the best way for institutions to manage the current stresses.
Appropriate resources need to be made available to take care of students in relation to enrollment management, counseling and career services. These services ultimately are a benefit financially to the institution and an investment since they help maintain a steady enrollment of students.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Enrollment Intelligence NOW

Guests Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/enrollment-intelligence-now/
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/william-conley-5688a637/
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/bobmassa/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://thechangeleader.com
Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #HigherEducation #EnrollmentCliff #University #COVID #Education

View Details

COVID has accelerated the higher education model’s day of reckoning so it has come faster than anyone ever expected. Colleges and universities have been facing this day of reckoning for at least five years; leaders knew that change was coming and many were focused on strategic thinking about these impending changes.

However, the pandemic has forced the entire higher education business model (which includes financing, delivery systems, and who manages and controls what) to transform. Institutions have had to come to terms with the realization that they cannot continue to operate as they previously have been functioning.

This episode, which focuses on the future of higher education, features Gerry Czarnecki, who served on the National University System board for nearly three decades. He now is the system’s trustee emeritus.

COVID and the Day of Reckoning

The higher education community currently consists of a wide variety of institutions including the Ivy League schools, community colleges, Tier 1 research universities and for-profit institutions. Moving forward, these institutions will have to figure out who their primary customer truly is—and that may cause the creation of smaller higher education communities. The institutions also will be separated by their own organizational nature and characteristics regarding their mission as well as their available financial resources.

Higher education leaders don’t know where the industry will end up. The whole higher education community may fracture to become multiple communities. If this happens, the various higher education sub-communities won’t know each other well.

For example, R1 institutions shouldn’t see themselves as the same as National University, which is an adult-learning organization with less than half of 1% of its students enrolling as first-time freshmen. The students at National University and the other institutions that are part of the system are, on average, 35 years of age and primarily working adults. Additionally, National and its sister institutions are entirely focused on creating a learning experience for students who are more adult.

This is very different from R1 institutions, so describing a first-tier R1 institution as “an institution of higher education” is in many ways a misnomer.

There is no comparison between R1 institutions and other institutions who are completely focused on educating students. These two institutions have virtually nothing in common, other than they are both called “university.”

Evolving Business Models

The R1 institutional business model, which depends primarily on research grants and endowments, is not as challenged, except at the undergraduate learning experience. The research institutions weren’t ready for the current situation caused by the pandemic. These universities were using the legacy model of in-classroom experience on campus for their undergraduate programs, but due to the pandemic, all of a sudden, students couldn’t be on campus and in classrooms. These institutions didn’t have the technology or the operating systems in place. These institutions are essentially using Zoom to teach virtual classes and Zoom is not a learning management system.

Institutions at the other end are totally into higher education. These institutions primary are tuition and room and board-driven for their budgets. At National University, research grants are less than 1%. At the system level, research money is an exception rather than a rule. The system’s institutions also have a modest endowment, but primarily revenues come from tuition. This is a dramatically different business model.

There are a massive number of institutions who are in the middle and will be redefining themselves over the next few years instead of the upcoming decade. Those “middle” colleges and universities—which are trying to combine the model of research/academic pursuit of new knowledge as well as the model of teaching students—are the ones that have a business model that will be the most challenged. They don’t have the grant money to subsidize their activities or the heavy endowment numbers to subsidize students. They face increasing pressure in trying to continue their enrollment strategy (which is being challenged by the pandemic and the upcoming enrollment cliff). They also face cost pressures to be competitive in the marketplace. This is making it more difficult to provide the same learning experience that they are used to providing.

Size of enrollment and endowment will be key deciders as to whether an institution survives. In the National System of institutions (which is a non-profit organization), there are a variety of institutions, both in size and focus. One of the institutions that was the smallest no longer exists now and its programs have transferred to other system institutions – the system could not figure out how to make the economics work to keep this small university alive, so it has been closed.

Embracing Online Education

All institutions will need to find other—and better—ways than Zoom to teach courses online because this desire for online learning will not go away after the pandemic is over. This move wasn’t expected to happen this quickly and presents a huge challenge. This change also presents a major cost curve, which will challenge the institutions in the middle.

The pandemic has forced an acceleration for online education. National University had a strategic plan of where it wanted to go—to become a completely asynchronous online university. COVID did the institution a favor because it forced faster movement than the system could have done on its own without facing stakeholder repercussions.

National was founded an in-person institution, but by a couple of years ago, it had transitioned to a point where half of its classes were in-person and the other half online. The pandemic has accelerated this transition by 3-5 years and the system’s institutions are now totally online as of today, and all but one institution in the system has transitioned to asynchronous online education. As a result, the system is liquidating real estate, including selling the university’s system’s headquarters, and getting out of leases, as classrooms are no longer needed.

Increasing Board Accountability

Corporate America has gone through a massive transformation in relation to its boards. However, this transformation has not been completed. These boards are far more fiduciary, independent and focused on their role on strategy, governance and oversight than they were two decades ago. CEOs have accountability to boards.

That transformation has not yet happened in higher education, and while this change is beginning to emerge, higher education boards are far behind corporate boards in completing this transition. This has a lot to do with the fact that these institutions and systems utilize volunteers as board members. It is hard to ask volunteers to spend the time and do the amount of work that is necessary. In comparison, many corporate board members are paid to serve on boards.

Thus, the higher education president or chancellor tends to be the key player in the institution’s decision-making processes. However, tension builds when the enterprise is at risk and trustees start asking whether the institution is going to make it. Furthermore, non-profit boards still have the same fiduciary duties as their corporate counterparts – they can be held legally liable and professionally responsible for mistakes.

Ultimately, this period of change will not be an easy transformation for higher education boards. Trustees need to know that they are going to have to spend more time doing this work, especially during this pandemic, and accreditors will need to relent in their unwillingness to allow institutions to pay trustees..

Three Recommendations for Higher Education Trustees

Czarnecki suggested several takeaways for higher education trustees:

Make sure you completely understand the educational model that exists at your enterprise, as well as what higher education is. How does the organization operate? Understand the rules as well as shared governance. Be well informed and educated about what is going on.
Trustees’ top responsibility is making sure the right leader (president or chancellor) is in place to run the institution.
Board members need to be actively engaged in deciding the strategic focus of the enterprise. Don’t delegate this to the CEO.

Bullet Points

The changes created by the pandemic—which are accelerating the change that already was underway—may cause higher education community to split into groups based on their mission and the students they serve.
Institutions are going to end up differentiating. For example, research institutions are focused on learning, knowledge advancement and education. The faculty is learning and advancing knowledge, and then teaching students. In comparison, other institutions are focused solely on teaching students.
These differences have implications for business models. Research institutions primarily are financed through research grants and endowments, but the pandemic has brought forward issues related to undergraduate education. These universities have focused on a legacy model that focuses on on-campus classroom experience. However, they have not done well with the transition to online education in the wake of the pandemic. They primarily have focused on using Zoom for classes; this needs to change in the future if they plan to appeal to students.
Colleges and universities that are trying to combine the model of research/academic pursuit of new knowledge as well as the model of teaching students are the ones that have a business model that will be most challenged. They don’t have the grant money to subsidize their activities or a large endowment to subsidize students. They will face increasing pressure to maintain their enrollment strategy and cost pressures to be competitive in the marketplace.
The size of enrollment and endowment will be key deciders as to whether an institution survives.
The pandemic has forced an acceleration for online education. All institutions will need to find other—and better—ways than Zoom to teach courses online because this desire for online learning will not go away after the pandemic is over.
Higher education is far behind corporate boards in focusing on accountability and transparency. This has a lot to do with the fact that these institutions and systems utilize volunteers as board members.
Because the work of trustees has not been brought up-to-date, the higher education president or chancellor tends to be the key player in the institution’s decision-making processes. However, when the enterprise is at risk (as it is in this pandemic), tension builds and trustees start asking whether the institution is going to make it. They also have to realize that they have a fiduciary responsibility when serving on the board.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

National University System: https://nu.edu
Department of Education: https://www.ed.gov/

Guests Social Media Links:

Gerry Czarnecki Twitter: https://twitter.com/gerryczarnecki?lang=en
Gerry Czarnecki Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/theczar/
Gerry Czarnecki website: http://gerryczarnecki.com/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://thechangeleader.com
Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

The implementation of some of the latest higher education regulations is in limbo, thanks to the coronavirus pandemic. However, higher education institutions need to keep an eye on how decisions to move to online or digital courses will be governed by other regulations that are still in place. In addition, leaders need to analyze how the hiatus of some regulations could lead to unexpected impacts for an institution.

This podcast’s guest is Dr. Russ Poulin, the executive director of WICHE Cooperative for Educational Technologies (WCET).

Substantive Interactions

All NegReg guidance has been published, including the latest one on online education. This regulation includes the definition of distance education, which officially will go into effect July 2021 but can be implemented earlier by individual institutions.

For years, there was not a clear definition that delineated the difference between distance education and correspondence education. Now the big difference is that some definitions, including regular substantive interaction, are being developed. These definitions must be general enough to cover the wide variety in higher education institutions.

Substantive interactions previously were defined as having conversations that were relative to the subject. For example, if the content focused on Shakespeare, the conversations that went along with the content should not be about what happened in the basketball game. Now, the definition has changed to include a number of different activities, such as instruction, feedback on the instruction, assessments on instruction, etc.

Higher education leaders need to start reviewing this new definition to ensure that their courses--whether distance education, correspondence education or other types of distance offerings--are in alignment. Otherwise, the institution’s federal financial aid could be placed at risk if an institution offers too many distance education courses that do not have regular substantive interactions.

Competency-Based Education

The definition also begins to bring in competency-based education, which includes regular predictable interactions and the ability for the faculty member to assist the student when the student needs it as opposed to a fixed schedule. The Department of Education is saying this should happen once a week for a standard course; however, this timeframe should be adjusted if an institution is offering a shorter course.

The NegReg calls for regular interactions as part of a competency-based course, but this may cause issues for CBE institutions in figuring out how to do this. In competency-based education, the interaction is triggered by the student; however, the regulation puts the onus for this type of regular interaction on the faculty. This regulation also serves as an aid in starting to signal when interactions need to happen for computer-assisted, adaptive classes.

COVID’s Influence

Some of the NegReg implementation was thrown into turmoil as the COVID pandemic swept the nation. There has been a lot of forgiveness among federal officials, accreditors and most states in terms of these rules.

However, not every rule has waivers. For example, institutions need to understand that the accessibility rules are now in effect and need to be followed.

In addition, as more courses are digitized and offered online in some format, institutions need to know which rules are in place and which are not. The Department of Education set aside a number of regulations in spring term and then extended those until the end of the fall term (or end of the crisis). With that, there are serious challenges if institutions aren’t thinking about assessments. Institutions may have an extended gap in assessment data, which could prove to be a huge challenge.

Online courses need to deepen from the original emergency conversions (which many institutions were forced to do in March) to become rich learning opportunities for students that include meaningful assessments. However, many institutions are struggling with assessments. Some institutions had to increase proctoring for high-stake tests in the wake of the pandemic. This led to pedagogical discussions about assessments and cheating. By spreading the assessments out and diversifying the types of assessments, there is better demonstration of learning while also cutting down student cheating.

Additionally, online opens the door to using different artifacts--such as videos or simulations--that can help get the content across. However, the creation of these artifacts needs more thought and planning.

WCET developed a policy playbook to help institutions convert courses to online or other modalities. This came out of the “Every Learner Everywhere” which was funded by the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation. As institutions transition traditional courses to become online courses, the rules change. Institutions need to be aware of these rules since they differ in a digital context as opposed to in a face-to-face course. The playbook has an important addendum noting that the time for forgiveness for waivers will not last forever. Accreditors soon will be asking hard questions that institutions need to be prepared to answer.

Elections

The presidential candidates have major differences in their platforms related to higher education. It’s important to consider these when voting.

If reelected, President Trump and his administration may not have huge plans for traditional higher education. However, they are very interested in career-focused education and expanding federal financial aid beyond traditional institutions to include providers who offer short-term paths to careers.

If Joe Biden is elected, some of the decisions made by the Trump Administration—such as Title IX, distance education and other NegReg regulations--probably will be reversed. There also could be a consumer-protection focus.

Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Dr. Poulin suggested several takeaways for higher education leaders:

When an institution moves from face-to-face courses to digital courses, this transition also triggers other changes. Presidents need to make sure that someone on the university’s staff is paying attention to compliance. While there is some forgiveness now, that won’t go on forever.
If Biden is elected, there will be changes in regulations so institutions need to remain flexible.
Honor the campus heroes who helped institutions transition to a digital format. What started as a sprint around spring break has turned into a marathon.

Bullet Points

A new regulation that defines distance education officially will go into effect July 2021 but can be implemented earlier by individual institutions. This regulation broadens the area of substantive interactions to include a number of different activities, such as instruction, feedback on the instruction, assessments on instruction, etc. Higher education leaders need to review this new definition to ensure that their courses--whether distance education, correspondence education or other types of distance offerings--are in alignment. Otherwise, federal financial aid could be placed at risk.
Increased substantive interactions also need to be part of competency-based education. This should include regular predictable interactions and the ability for the faculty member to assist the student when the student needs it as opposed to a fixed schedule.
Some of the NegReg implementation was thrown into turmoil by the COVID pandemic, leading to a lot of forgiveness among federal officials, accreditors and most states in terms of these rules.
Not every rule has waivers. As more courses are digitized and offered online in some format, institutions need to know which rules are in place and which are not.
Assessments are deepening and broadening beyond a single exam. This conversation needs to continue since the implementation does have NegReg implications.
WCET has developed a policy playbook to help institutions convert courses to online or other modalities and identify which regulations need to be addressed.
The presidential election may have ramifications for higher education and the NegReg implementation.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education
WICHE Cooperative for Educational Technology

Guests Social Media Links:

WICHE Twitter: @wicheEDU
WCET Twitter: @wcet_info
Russ Poulin LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/russellpoulin/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://thechangeleader.com
Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #Education #HigherEducation #University #DistanceLearning

View Details

The coronavirus pandemic’s tumultuous reach continues to upend higher education. This podcast looks at the disruption that has happened in the areas of scholarship, financial aid and fundraising.

The podcast’s guests are Keith Brown and Alania Cater. Brown is the assistant director for special awards part in the University of Wisconsin-Madison’s Office of Student Financial Aid. He manages and maintains the UW-Madison scholarship management system. Cater is the director of product management at Blackbaud.

Supporting Students in a Crisis

COVID has changed the scholarship process in higher education. The biggest change has been a shift to supporting emergency funding or grants. This includes CARE grants, external funding that the university is helping to raise that is earmarked to support students during this time, or departmental funds that are being shifted around to help fund students.

Additionally, institutions are having to identify how to support students virtually. Universities are no longer able in many instances to advise students about the scholarship process in person or to hold outreach events about campus scholarships. Institutions are having to find new ways to adjust, and many are relying on Zoom and Microsoft Teams for online meetings.

Revising Scholarship Processes

The process of awarding scholarships also has moved into the virtual realm with reviewers, applicants and administrators. Some larger scholarships that require in-person interviews have moved these conversations to a virtual setting. Many institutions and applicants have had primarily positive feedback on this new process, leading many to believe that the virtual interviews may be here to stay.

One interesting byproduct of the online transition is that administrators are now spending more time with reviewers than in the past, but this includes their doing more hand-holding, as well as logging into systems and confirming that the work can be done online. While this seems simple, it can be complicated.

Additionally, the scholarship review process is being affected in some cases because of multiple people are working from home. Reviewers are dealing with conflicting priorities (such as children at home or caregiving) while some applicants are having difficulty getting everything in on time due to conflicts. This has required institutions to extend deadlines, especially during the spring semester when the pandemic first hit. This extension allowed the institutions to compensate for what was happening in the world, and created enough time to process and review applications while the university was focused on moving students off campus and moving all classes online.

Universities like to have clean processes with breaks between the close of a cycle and the beginning of another one. However, the pandemic has made that impossible. Institutions have had to become flexible in working with incoming students. Admission deadlines had to be pushed back. Students had to weigh the decision of whether to come to campus in the fall or defer enrollment for a year. That led to a lot of shuffling in the scholarship realm. This made Fall 2020 an unprecedented time for many university admissions offices and for the awarding of scholarships.

Another challenge was students’ access to technology at home. The University of Wisconsin-Madison’s Office of Financial Aid tried to meet students where they are. This involved scheduling a lot of virtual meetings and fielding a lot of calls through the online phone service. The number of emails also have increased significantly. The campus also tried to be flexible to allow in-person visits when safely possible.

Making Changes

Blackbaud has seen an increase in demand for online scholarship application processes. While many institutions did not had this new process ready when the coronavirus struck, administrators and staff now understand that the scholarship application process needs to be online so more institutions are transitioning away from a reliance on paper applications. Institutions now believe this is a change that needed to occur and the pandemic offered the impetus.

As a silver lining, institutions who have moved their processes online also have identified money that was going unawarded. Previously, many departments working with scholarships were having difficulty tracking all of the various donor wishes, all of the funds and where they are being allocated and to whom, and which funds were not being used. With the increasing cost of education as well as the current environment caused by the pandemic, it’s a shame not to utilize all available scholarships and financial aid.

Taking CARES

Many institutions received a large influx of funds from the CARES Act, and the University of Wisconsin-Madison worked as quickly as it could across campus to use these funds. Additionally, while the CARES funding was coming down the pipeline, UW-M worked with its foundation to raise emergency funds and scholarship funds for students. The institution tried not to wait and instead focused on getting those funds out as quickly as possible. By July, UW-M had awarded close to $10 million.

However, their efforts didn’t stop there. The university also tried to award funding to students who were not eligible for CARES Act funding. To do this involved shuffling funding across campus to support international students and undocumented students who were caught up in the crisis. Knowing that both the regulations and policies are changing, institutional leaders tried to not let these changes stop the decision-making process and tried to remain agile in supporting students.

Flexibility also is being seen as foundations are going back to donors to discuss revising awarding requirements. A number of donors previously have stipulated that their scholarship funds could only support certain types of recipients, but fundraising officials are now working with donors to make those stipulations more flexible to deal with issues impacting students and families due to COVID-19, including altering education requirements for merit-based scholarships and SAT requirements.

While these conversations allow the university to gain more flexibility in using these funds, they also offer an opportunity to touch base with donors. This helps institutions continue to foster these important relationships.

Changing How Scholarships Are Awarded

The change in the use of SAT/ACT scores is changing institutional scholarship evaluation processes. This year, UW-M is making the scores optional and students must self-report these scores.

This also is having an impact on how the institution is using Blackbaud to bring consistency around scholarship processes across campus. This will result in greater reliance on admissions data, information on admissions applications and integration of other systems to look at benchmarks. Ultimately, this effort will lead to a more holistic review instead of a strong reliance on test scores.

This change also sends a signal to high school students that they need to apply themselves throughout their academic career instead of relying on getting a high SAT score. In fact, studies have found that a high SAT score is not a predictor of success in college. There are better indicators, such as a higher GPA in high school or a resume that shows work outside of school that highlights fortitude and responsibility.

Next Generation of Scholarships and Donations

The biggest change is the approach to fundraising. Whereas most of the funds being awarded are endowed scholarships, there may be a move to creating more scholarships that are need-based and focused on supporting students who are in crisis. In the future, scholarships also may be more general in regards to award criteria. State schools also are anxiously watching for the budgetary guidance in relation to state budgets and how it will change in the upcoming academic year.

While most fundraising continues to come from major donors (and should continue going forward), there is a shift to more peer-to-peer fundraising, more outreach fundraising and more engagement across a broader constituent base. In addition, there are efforts to engage more donors at a lower donation amount. This is important in fundraising in relation to emergency fundraising and students in need; this differs from endowed funds and annual campaigns.

Moving into the spring term, agility is going to be key to deal with issues created by the pandemic as well as the changing environment that relies on technology.

Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Brown suggested three takeaways for higher education leaders:

Create clear and consistent messaging at the micro-level (the scholarship office) and from the campus. It’s important to provide clear guidance to students and their families.
Meet students where they are. This includes providing support that they can access on their phones and other types of technology.
Money is needed to support students who are caught in crisis because of the pandemic as well as student employees. Fundraising efforts and financial aid/scholarship work are critical.

Cater offered the following points:

University presidents should listen to and talk to the students.
Technology investment is going to be key for future success. It’s important to have a connected campus.
Money to make these upgrades is critical.

Recommendations for Students

Brown suggested two takeaways for students:

Ask for help from the financial and student support perspective. Students have to stay informed on a lot of changing information; much of that could be falling through the cracks so it’s important to ask for help proactively.
Persistence is key. It’s a challenging year emotionally and financially, as well as academically.

Cater added the following points:

There is a lot more money that is available than most students think. Don’t forget to ask for help.
When overwhelmed, seek assistance. If a student needs to drop their course load to deal with the pandemic-related issues but is afraid that it will affect the financial aid package, it’s important to ask for guidance and support. Institutions are being flexible.

Bullet Points

The scholarship process in higher education is shifting to supporting emergency funding or grants. This includes CARE grants, external funding that is earmarked to support students during this time, or departmental funds that are being shifted around to help fund students.
Institutions are moving the scholarship review and selection processes. This is helping increase efficiencies and also allowing institutions to identify pots of money that have not been being awarded.
The pandemic has created numerous opportunities, including the influx of CARES Act funds. In addition, institutions are raising more funds and also having conversations with donors about revising criteria for selection to allow scholarships to be used for students who are in crisis.
Many institutions are making SAT/ACT scores optional. This will result in greater reliance on admissions data, information on admissions applications and integration of other systems to look at benchmarks. It’s also sending a message to the applicant that it’s more important to have a strong high school GPA or a stellar resume that showcases work responsibilities.
While most funding is coming from major donors, other philanthropic trends are emerging, including a shift to peer-to-peer fundraising, outreach fundraising and engagement across a broader constituent base. In addition, institutions are increasingly trying to engage more donors at a lower donation amount.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

University of Wisconsin-Madison
Keith Brown
Blackbaud
Alania Cater

Guests Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/alaniacater/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://thechangeleader.com
Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #Education #University #HigherEducation #Fundraising

View Details

As higher education institutions face the multitude of challenges created by the COVID-19 pandemic, many are also dealing with the challenges that go with a transition in leadership. The pandemic also has influenced these transitions, including the search process.

This podcast features Dana Cohick, who is the president of RPA Inc. Executive Search, a firm that specializes in higher education presidential searches.

Speeding Up

COVID has had a significant impact on the demands of higher education executives. In the past, higher education turned to shared governance to bring everyone at the table, giving everyone a voice and buy-in.

However, the pandemic changed the way that higher education responded since critical decisions needed to be made in a much more rapid rate. Starting in March, colleges and universities had to turn on a dime, something that they previously didn’t have to do. Students were sent home and institutions had to immediately shift classes to online education. This showed higher education leaders and faculty that the institution can turn on a dime and make quick decisions to meet both known and unknown challenges.

Now, as they move forward, higher education leaders face the question of how they will handle issues when the decision tempo changes from reactive to proactive. Can an institution move quickly while still embracing shared governance, and if so, how? That’s a big question—and one of the big transformations that is emerging because of the pandemic.

Traits of Higher Education Presidents

Several traits have always been important in presidencies, including creating a strategic vision and bringing people together around it while also having passion and a drive to be successful in the university president role. The pandemic has reinforced the need for these traits since the president’s job has expanded to 24/7. Presidents need to have a passion for the institution’s mission and student success.

The executive recruitment process can be used to identify candidates who not only have the requisite skills and experiences, but also the passion for what they do. It is critical that the values of the institution and the successful candidate be in alignment, and as such, the executive recruitment must take into account the institution’s values and culture. However, those values are not always aligned with the advertised values that are listed on the institution’s website.

Finding a candidate who will agree to come to an institution and stay for a period of time requires good communication and transparency during the search process. To achieve transparency requires understanding what an institution is about. As the first part of its multi-step process, RPA Inc. goes to campuses and meets with multiple stakeholder groups, including the board of trustees, the senior cabinet, alumni, faculty, staff and students. While differences will emerge, the firm looks for the trends that continuously are brought up through the day’s conversations, because these are the values that are being lived at the institution and should be used to recruit candidates.

An Evolving Process

Institutions and candidates should understand that an executive search is a journey, not a destination. The search process evolves during its span, which normally lasts about five months. The search committee may change directions as they see candidate who bring skills, experiences and backgrounds that they hadn’t seen in the past.

Communication and transparency are part of a back-and-forth model that includes learning about both the institution and candidates in a holistic way. In its executive search, RPA Inc.’s model involves a process that uses multiple stages that include talking about what has driven a candidate and his/her values, and how the institution’s presidency would fit into that value structure. Is this the right opportunity?

It’s important to find a candidate who aligns with the institution’s mission and values, but who also understands how to take the institution to the next level. The selected candidate needs to be forward thinking and forward leaning, especially during this pandemic.

Learning from the Pandemic

When institutions are able to begin to make decisions proactively, there’s going to be an opportunity for higher education to reflect on what was learned during the pandemic. This learning can help launch institutions forward as they transition out of this challenging time.

Contemplating the “new normal” is important. Some institution will go back to their 2019 model and education. Others will continue with hybrid and on-line models. Students—especially non-traditional students--will continue to desire the latter formats because of ease of accessibility.

Differing Needs

Not every president is a change agent, nor does every institution need a change agent. Institution challenges and needs vary. What is important moving forward is for each higher education institution to identify how to become the best version of itself and how to best exemplify its mission to serve students. Every institution is unique, and a search needs to find the individual who fits the mold of where an institution can go and wants to go, but who also can push a little and challenge perceptions.

Historically, higher education administrators have come through the faculty. However, a change is emerging in that institutions increasingly are willing to see non-traditional candidates in the pool. Because of that, RPA Inc. writes its advertisement to reflect the qualities that the search committee believes it is seeking, but also to be open and inclusive because the pool needs to include individuals from enrollment management, finance, administration and student affairs as well as candidates who come from industry.

Institutions are the ones who need to make the decision about which candidate is best to lead through the opportunities and challenges ahead. In the process, the conversations about qualifications often shift so that candidates with broader backgrounds emerge. The selection committees often become really excited about what these candidates can bring to the table.

There’s an increasing openness to consider candidates who don’t have traditional backgrounds in the Academy. That includes individuals who come from different divisions in higher education or those who come from industry and business.

The challenge that candidates who have a background in business and industry face is being able to help a committee understand that the candidate understands the differences in how higher education moves as compared to industry/business. Coming into a college or university and treating it like a business is not going to work at many higher education institutions. However, if these candidates can offer an understanding of efficiencies while embracing a shared governance model, which sets higher education apart, they can be successful.

Composition of Search Committees

Search committees should be made up of a cross-section of higher education stakeholders. The greatest success that these committees can have is realizing that they are designed to bring different perspectives and opinions to the table. The greatest opportunities involve listening to individuals who are from other areas and hearing those different perspectives. The biggest challenge for search committees is when people come in with preconceived notion and aren’t open to listening and having their thoughts challenged and even changed.

To be successful, these committees need to embrace both the need to listen to each other but also to speak up. However, some searches—especially those that don’t have a consultant guiding them—can result in one or two or three voices become the primary voices coming out from the 16 members. The best search committees invite everyone’s opinion and every member feels comfortable offering an opinion. Open communications are meaningful so that members are talking with each other, instead of at each other.

Characteristics of a Successful Search

The biggest requirement / characteristic of a successful search is transparency – both being open and honest about the opportunities in front of the university, but also being open and honest about the challenges of the position and those that the institution is facing. Some committees are hesitant to share these challenges because they are afraid of scaring away candidates.

The reality is that candidates don’t come to higher education because of the paycheck. They come to higher education because they have a passion for students, a mission and a desire to be part of solving problems. Institutions want candidate who are excited about being part of a conversation about challenges and moving past them.

Hiding the institution’s challenges is the best way to ensure an unsuccessful search. That’s not a way to get someone to stay, since they will show up at the institution and find out about challenges that no one ever mentioned. Therefore, it’s important during the search to systematically provide more and more information in a transparent way as the candidate pool narrows.

Three Recommendations for Search Committees and Teams

Cohick offered three recommendations for search committees and teams:

Understanding that searches are journeys and not destinations. Members need to be open to learning and evolving their thoughts and opinions as the search unfolds.
While it’s important to identify skills, qualifications and experiences, also look for candidates who are passionate about the institution’s mission and student success. Seek candidates who align with that mission, but who also can help the institution move forward.
Listen to one another and speak up. If you’ve been invited to be on a search committee and you end up sitting there quietly, you’re missing an opportunity to have a really big impact on an institution.

Three Recommendations for a Prospective President

Cohick also offered three recommendations for candidates:

There will always be a need for candidates who can facilitate the creation of a vision and strategy and who can also bring people together around that vision and strategy. However, passion is critical right now in the presidency.
Those approaching a presidency for the first time should talk to the recruitment firm about what the institution generally needs but also should try to gain an understanding of the complex nature of the presidency.
By understanding the institution’s complexity and gauging it in relation to any experience gaps, it’s important to not shy away from these gaps. Instead, lean into them and talk about knowledge in areas where actual experience is lacking. This helps the committee understand that the candidate knows what the presidency is all about.

Bullet Points

The pandemic has caused higher education to move from its traditional slow and methodical change process grounded in the concept of getting everyone’s opinions through shared governance to a faster change process based on responding external factors. The ability of colleges and universities to make this speedy change has surprised many in higher education and now offers the opportunity for a new paradigm that meshes both approaches to emerge. Current and future higher education leaders will be primary drivers in helping to create that new paradigm.
Great higher education presidents have many traits: the ability to create a strategic vision and engage people in that vision; a passion for education; and a drive to succeed in the higher education presidential role. The pandemic has expanded the presidency, reinforcing the need for those traits. In addition, the president needs to have a reenergized passion for the institution’s mission and student success in order to navigate these challenging times.
The values of a president and the institution need to be in alignment. Therefore, it’s important during a presidential search to identify the institution’s core values, which may differ from what is listed on its website.
A presidential search process, which evolves during its lifespan, requires transparency and communication to be successful. This allows both the institution and the candidate to determine if this relationship would be the right fit.
The successful candidate needs to be able to understand the institution’s vision but also have an idea of how to guide the college or university to evolve and grow. This is especially important as the world creates a “new normal” in the wake of the pandemic.
Historically, presidents have come from faculty. However, search committees are increasingly open to considering candidates who have backgrounds in various departments in higher education (such as finance or student enrollment) or who come from business and industry.
Candidates who come from business/industry need to able to articulate that they understand the difference between business/industry and higher education. They can talk about their ability to bring efficiency, but they need to understand why the shared governance model is such an importance facet of higher education.
A search committee should be committed to openness and transparency. In addition, the members should be willing to voice their opinion and also to listen to other viewpoints. The challenge is that some search committees end up giving preference to the vocal voices of a small minority of members. This approach doesn’t ultimately create a successful search process.
Searches need to share both the institutional opportunities and challenges with candidates. This transparency creates a more realistic picture that can guide the selection process and ensure that the right candidate is hired.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

RPA Inc. Executive Search and Consulting

Guests Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/danacohick/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://thechangeleader.com
Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

The coronavirus pandemic has tested higher education leaders in unprecedented ways—and has upended the glacial pace of change at many institutions. The pandemic also is bringing changes in leadership. Many presidents are retiring or have said they will stay on for one more year to help the institution to move through this. This turnover means that many institutions have (or will have) new presidents who just took over as the pandemic started or are starting to assume their leadership roles during this pandemic.

This podcast’s guest is Dr. Sam Horn, the new president of The Master’s University and Seminary. His move into the presidency, originally scheduled for the start of June, was accelerated by the coronavirus pandemic.

Time Warp

COVID-19 has created a time warp. While this period is disconcerting, Dr. Horn also feels like this has been an interesting and exhilarating time that has energized the institution.

Master’s is in the coronavirus-hot zone in Los Angeles County. The restrictions in California are extremely pervasive and invasive so most colleges—especially those in LA County—are suffering. The economic hit that has come because of the pandemic has been crippling. It also has been compounded by the lack of federal and state guidance and the lack of timely information throughout the summer, which made it difficult for higher ed institutions, who are scrambling and playing catch-up because of it.

Still, the pandemic has given the still-new president and his team the impetus to help the institution move forward. Since taking over, Dr. Horn has led the institution’s team in planning and execution with the goal of helping the institution evolve over the next 2-3 years. For the immediate future, Master’s is focused on solidifying enrollment gains; establishing a solid strategy to identify and reconnect with the institution’s base; determining where the new markets are; and strategizing how to deliver education to constituents that is affordable, accessible and highly useful.

A New Presidency in the Time of COVID

Previously, most believed that the first 100 days of a presidency should be spent as an observer. This involves speaking into things, asking many questions and meeting key stakeholders. Over his three-decade career, Dr. Horn has embraced Peter Drucker’s saying, “Culture eats strategy for breakfast every time.” He believes that until a leader knows and understands the culture of the institution, all strategy will be hindered. Current employees don’t know how a new leader operates so until people come to know the new leader’s values and can trust that those values are more than words, it’s hard to get their commitment to implementing the strategy. Additionally, until the new leader knows the culture, it’s impossible to identify which strategies to implement.

Dr. Horn initially accepted the presidency in early February and was to start on June 1, thus giving him and the institutional stakeholders a period to get to know each other. He planned to ease into the role, and then when he began in June, he would begin a slow on-boarding process.

The pandemic has changed that.

When COVID hit, Master’s leadership transition plan had to be aborted, as the institution faced quick decisions that would have long-term impact on its functioning for years to come. The board felt that Dr. Horn needed to be leading this decision-making process. This accelerated the onboarding process, which became a “pedal to the metal” approach based on necessity.

COVID accelerated so many things just as the institution faced a number of major challenges that could not be ignored without harm. Dr. Horn said everyone on the team understood that the first 100-day waiting period needed to be put aside. He noted that everyone understood this change in plans was board- and COVID-driven, and everyone bought into the need for the presidency to be started in a different way than was planned.

The Challenges

Dr. Horn described a handful of challenges threatening The Master’s University and Seminary right after the pandemic started. He and the leadership team decided it was important to identify the values that would guide the institution’s decision-making process. As a Christian liberal arts university, The Master’s University’s leadership agreed on three critical values: do justly; love mercy; and walk humbly.

These challenges were:

Closing the campus, which was Dr. Horn’s first decision. The institution extended spring break before the California governor decided to shut down the state. That opened up a number of questions -- Would people who were bound to the college campus be unable to leave? Did it mean if they were out of state, they couldn’t come back? Dr. Horn said the institution made the difficult but right decision to close, which was done several days before the stay-at-home order came down from the state. He credits many institutional leaders and faculty members with helping the institution pivot on a dime.
Refunding room and board fees. Because Master’s is small and has tight margins, refunding money was a difficult budgetary decision. However, Dr. Horn said the institution went back to the values driving decision-making and decided to refund the money. Interestingly, on the last day of the fiscal year, the university’s CFO came to Dr. Horn and said, “You’re not going to believe this.” The institution finished almost $1 million in the black.
The institution had seen declining enrollment for many years—and anticipated that COVID would accelerate that trend. Dr. Horn got the enrollment teams from the institution and the seminary together to work on the issue. This approach led to a 6% increase across the board and Master’s had the highest new student numbers that they’ve had in a decade.
The institution was facing issues with accreditation. However, with the assistance of Dr. Drumm McNaughton, the university’s accreditation and governance consultant, they had a strong accreditation visit and anticipate a good report in the coming weeks.

Tactical and Strategic Approaches

Noting that much of his career has been spent in higher education management at the cabinet or vice president level, Dr. Horn has learned that only addressing immediate challenges created by COVID (such as focusing only on the reopening plan) would mean missing incredible opportunities to look at the institution’s context and situation within higher education.

He pointed out that there are many contexts within higher education, which include:

Community college or university
University instruction focused on professional training, liberal arts or a mix
Categories within private, independent universities, including one called Christian universities

Master’s is in a small subset of Christian liberal arts universities. Leaders of institutions who fall into this subset have known for a while that massive changes have been coming to this niche. COVID has accelerated these changes so leaders are forced to consider how to navigate the various tidal waves coming at the institution, whether it’s the pandemic’s crises, demographics, the birth dearth, the broken financial aid model or changes in where potential students live. Basically, Dr. Horn noted, the higher education model has become unsustainable.

COVID has forced presidents and senior leaders to think beyond the moment, because higher education is not going back to what previously existed. The present ways of operating are unsupportable; too much has been uncovered.

Additionally, there are too many factors that have come together in the population’s mind based on what they’ve heard from the news media, e.g., higher education is now facing the greatest challenge to its credibility in the eyes of the public. For decades, the public has bought into the idea that the path to the future requires a four-year degree. Now the public’s mind has changed.

Institutional leaders must come to realize that the true end users of higher education’s degree programs are the employers who hire graduates – that higher ed is part of the “talent supply chain.” The employers also are saying that the higher education system is broken because it is not training students to succeed in the workforce. Because higher education is not producing graduates who are ready to step into the jobs that are available, employers are moving to other options, such as credentialing.

The only way forward for higher education is forward. That means coming up with new ways to do business, especially at smaller institutions.

Three Recommendations for New Higher Education Leaders

Dr. Horn suggested three takeaways for new higher education leaders:

Be positive. In a culture of fear, fear can set the agenda. Someone has to help people rise above the fears and show the way forward.
Be proactive. Get ahead of the curve.
Be prepared and be informed, both in higher education and out of higher education. Dr. Horn recommends three books – “Pivot: A Vision for the New University” by Joanne Soliday and Mark Lombardi, “Surviving to Thriving” by Joanne Soliday and “There is Life After College” by Jeffery Selingo.

Bullet Points

The pandemic has created an unprecedented wave of change in higher education. It’s important for higher education leaders and their teams to think strategically about their next moves.
The pandemic also has changed the induction process for many new higher education presidents. They no longer have the luxury of spending months assessing the situation. Now they need to be able to create strategic movement.
Many new leaders find that they are facing significant issues as they start their presidency. In Dr. Horn’s case, these issues included the campus’s closure in March as the pandemic moved through, refunds and the effect on the institution’s budget, enrollment, and accreditation.
Leaders have the opportunity to think more strategically at this point thanks to COVID. Instead of focusing only on smaller decisions (such as closing the campus), institutions need to think about what they need to be in the future. This conversation is made even more important because of declining credibility among both the general public and business leaders. It’s important for higher education leaders to now envision a new way to do business.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

The Master’s University and Seminary
Sam Horn Bio
Pivot: A Vision for the New University
Surviving to Thriving
There is Life After College
Talent Supply Chain

Guests Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/sam-horn-961bba110/
Twitter: @DrSamHorn

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://thechangeleader.com
Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Surviving To Thriving: A Planning Framework for Leaders of Private Colleges & Universities

There Is Life After College: What Parents and Students Should Know About Navigating School to Prepare for the Jobs of Tomorrow

View Details

Stress from the pandemic as well as other major societal issues is taking its toll on higher education institutions. The effects can be seen across college and university campuses as students, staff, faculty and leaders try to deal with rapidly changing circumstances. While students have access to counseling services, many higher education employees are feeling intense stress levels – and their job performance is suffering.

This podcast, which focuses on employee stress levels and what leaders can do, features Dr. Tom Marrs, a clinical psychologist and assistant director for client engagement for the Center for Executive Development at Texas A&M University’s Mays Business School.

A Continual Accumulation

Rather than adapting to change, people are finding that their stress levels continue to get higher as the pandemic continues. They are having difficulty dealing with so many challenges at one time; these challenges include isolation and problems that come with that, fear of illness and death from the pandemic, financial stress, political unrest, social discord, the overall lack of resources, and increased work demands. These various emerging and pressing issues are creating a bottleneck of stressors.

Additionally, people are getting tired from dealing with the continued stress, especially stress from unknowns. If something is stressful but there is a known end (as seen in a natural disaster such as a hurricane or wildfire), you know that you’ll be able to recover in the near future, even though going through the situation will be stressful. The pandemic, however, is so open-ended that people can’t see the light at the end of the tunnel. This makes it increasingly difficult to function since humans have a low tolerance for ambiguity, which also leads to stress.

The confluence of all of these stressors at the same time is especially challenging. Colleges and universities are dealing with so many situations that couldn’t be predicted. Administrators are having to make hard decisions that have an effect on students, staff and faculty.

Additionally, so many institutions have a large influence on the quality of the economy in their community. Higher education’s financial impact is wide-ranging and includes tourism, research, an area’s economic development and student expenditures. Therefore, making decisions to send students home, such as what happened in the spring, have far-reaching ramifications that can lead to increased stress.

Survival Mode

Stress consists of physical, psychological and/or emotional demands that are placed on an organism. People have a set amount of bandwidth to use to deal with demands; however, if the stress of the demands being faced exceeds that bandwidth, the individual locks up and shuts down.

Individuals often go into survival mode when facing extreme stress. Maslow’s Hierarchy showed that people become very task-focused when under stress, leaving no room for higher order thinking and envisioning the big picture of where we’re going. Instead, individuals’ focus gets myopic, narrowing to issues relating to survival as well as those they can control.

The problem is that being in survival mode over a long period of time leads to burn out. The Yerkes-Dodson Human Performance Curve shows that people don’t perform well when they have no stress and also when they are under extreme stress. It’s only when people are in the sweet spot in the middle that they do their best work.

Currently, we’re fully in the far tail of the curve, which is marked by continual high stress. The repercussions can be seen in workplace behavior, employee performance and decision-making.

While people have a compensatory mechanism that can handle stress, they can only compensate up to a point, and once a certain threshold is reached, people start to de-compensate through burnout and stress behaviors. This can result in a low tolerance for frustration, even in minor situations – they can develop a hair trigger and become more rigid and on edge. They look for potential threats in the environment and develop a tall antennae that is sensitive to perceived slights. If someone is perceived as causing problems, that person is labelled as a trouble maker. There also can be increased forgetfulness, which is a direct result of being stressed.

Leaders’ Next Step

Not surprisingly, leaders are reporting having to deal with more difficult behaviors in the workplace, more infighting among teams, as well as more problems between the leader and team members. These behaviors are predictable.

The real challenge is determining what can be done about the situation.

Higher education leaders are primarily focused right now on the students. Fortunately, students have access to the student counseling center, and this generation is utilizing campus counseling services more often than previous generations. A report published about 15 years ago noted this increase is a result of the destigmatizing of mental health issues. Dr. Marrs pointed out that he has seen studies showing a 300% increase in utilization in college student counseling centers over the years.

But … what are leaders doing to help the faculty and staff?

As a first step, leaders need to consider every option that is available to help employees lower stress levels. The challenge becomes how to financially make these resources available when budgets are being drastically reduced.

Dr. Marrs encourages leaders to use empathy when assessing how faculty and staff are functioning in the workplace. Leaders should be aware of their own as well as everyone’s stress levels and monitor their own expectations for performance. As people come under more stress, those closest to them bear the brunt of their anxiety and fear. Therefore, if an administrator is stressed, his or her emotions will roll downhill as part of the decision-making process. This leads to increased demands on the team while the administrator may not have any understanding of the increased stress that the team is under and how the team is functioning.

One challenge facing higher education is that many college and university employees have not had a chance to release their stress. For example, most have not taken vacations since the Christmas holidays. On top of that, many employees are facing other issues such as on-going child care issues or their own health issues, issues that have further increased their stress levels.

Gauging Ourselves

Higher education leaders are not immune to the increased stress—and the resultant behaviors are having an impact on how some administrators lead their institutions.

Dr. Marrs believes leaders need to focus on increasing their levels of understanding and empathy, but this requires the administrators to be self-aware. Administrators need to develop grace in working with people during these difficult times.

Leaders need to apply emotional intelligence to themselves to be able to lead during the current chaos. Most MBA programs in the United States now teach emotional intelligence because it brings tangible results; it is no longer considered a soft skill. Emotional intelligence becomes critical during times of extreme stress and uncertainty.

Leaders also need to pay attention to where the institution and employees are, e.g., they need to identify when they are being reactive to situations. Having a high level of self-awareness, an awareness of others, and then being able to control our own reactions to both unfolding situations and others, will make more of a difference in the current environment than anything else we can do. And the best part is that these approaches are all free.

A Pandemic of Burn-out

People need to talk about and face the stigma related to burn-out. Many are experiencing burn-out, which is very predictable because of the large quantity of change present in our society. Humans are not wired to handle this much change this quickly.

We have had to change so many things and learn and adopt many new processes, such as moving immediately to online learning. Leaders need to recognize that people are doing the best that they can in these situations. Leaders need to monitor their own expectations and cut employees some slack.

Leaders also need to consider simplifying what they are doing in leading their teams. In order to try to maintain a sense of normalcy, many will try to find things they can do to feel they are still in control. This could mean that a leader might decide to roll out a new program or operating procedure. It might make the leader feel better temporarily, but will add to the already-high stress level of his or her team.

Research shows that when people are physically tired, they tend to make good decisions but those decisions are made more slowly. However, when faced with extreme stress, people make terrible decisions with a great deal of speed. Leaders need to consider this before reorganizing departments or rolling out new programs in the current environment.

The high level of stress across the college campus is difficult to deal with. When focusing exclusively on the needs of students, leaders often ignore the needs of their team--as well as their own needs. Having this much stress opens the door to bad behaviors. Leaders need to understand how to recognize these bad behaviors and identify the appropriate actions to take in these stressful times. This is where emotional intelligence comes in and why it’s important to consider what we’re reacting to.

Working from home also has become especially difficult. All employees—but especially members of Millennials and Gen Z—are experiencing a lack of boundaries separating work life and home life. Employees don’t know how to unplug and are often working during their “off” time. Therefore, it’s important for leaders to honor team members’ days off by not sending an email or text with something to do when they return to work. More often than not, the employee will respond that day, even though it’s their day off. This means they won’t experience the full break they need to reset and recharge.

Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Dr. Marrs suggested three takeaways for higher education leaders:

Take care of yourself. You are of no use to anyone if you are stressed out. You will be making decisions based on fear.
Have empathy for others. Be aware of your own emotional intelligence. Monitor the engagement and burnout of people who work for you. Give them time off or find other ways to compensate to help them regain their balance.
This is not a time to make unnecessary decisions that result in change. When in doubt, consult with others. Have a sounding board.

Bullet Points

Higher education institutions are facing huge amounts of stress in the current environment. These stressors include the pandemic, race relations, financial issues, the upcoming election cycle, and the institution’s own challenges of making changes.
While much—if not all--of the focus has been on helping students through these current issues, many faculty, staff and administrators are struggling with handling the current high rates of stress.
Being in survival mode over a long period of time leads to burn out. Once a certain threshold of stress is reached, people start to de-compensate through experiencing burnout and exhibiting stress behaviors, such as frustration, rigidity, being on edge, and having a hair trigger. They start looking for potential threats in the environment and become overly sensitive to what they perceive as slights.
Leaders need to use empathy when assessing how faculty and staff are functioning in the workplace. They also should be aware of their own as well as everyone’s stress levels and monitor their own expectations for performance.
A leader’s emotional intelligence is critical during the current chaos.
The current situation is not the time to start a new program, process or initiative. It’s far better to simplify than to add complexity.
It’s important to talk about and remove the stigma around burn-out.
When faced with extreme stress, people make terrible decisions with a great deal of speed.
Leaders need to focus on controlling their own reactions to both unfolding situations and others. This will make more of a difference in the current environment than anything else.
Employees have difficulty setting boundaries separating work life and home life. Therefore, it’s important for leaders to honor their team’s off-time and not text or email them with future to-do’s that might derail their recuperation time.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Texas A&M University’s Center for Executive Development
Tom Marrs, PhD

Guests Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/tom-marrs-42b30a31/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://thechangeleader.com
Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

The coronavirus pandemic and the previous Negotiated Rulemaking from Spring 2019 are driving new changes in the current and future regulatory process regarding higher education. Federal policymakers continue to extend guidance and develop new regulations in response to the pandemic. In addition, several new guidelines are coming on line that will affect higher education in areas including Title IX and online learning/innovation.

This guidance is coming during a time of chaotic change. A new Moody report also reported that the pandemic has sped up the normally glacial rate of change of higher education. This change normally would have taken 5-10 years period, but it now has been accelerated.

TEN Government Strategies CEO Tom Netting, a regular guest on this podcast, provides an update on the latest coming out of Washington, D.C. and how these will impact institutions and students.

COVID Guidance Extended

Several important decisions came out of the U.S. Department of Education recently that will help institutions and students. In one of these decisions, the Department extended the opportunity for students to delay repayment of student loans as well as the 0% interest rate.

The Department also offered additional guidance and extension of areas that were included in the CARES Act, including satisfactory academic progress, the Return of Title 4 Funds Policy, and audits and reports back to the department. The guidance was extended through the end of the calendar year or--if the pandemic has not been resolved--to a period after Dec. 31, 2020 when the emergency declaration is lifted.

This guidance includes:

Extends the leave of absence for students through the end of the year; this also can be extended if the pandemic hasn’t ended by then. During the pandemic, many of these leaves of absence have been used by students for experiential programs. These students had to be placed on a leave of absence because the internship/externship/clinic or other experiential learning opportunity was needed to complete their program. Without this, they couldn’t sit for their certification exams or complete the programs that had hands-on requirements. This guidance protects the students’ interest and allows them to complete their programs.
Extends institutional audits and reports—specifically fiscal and financial aid reports and fiscal audits, where auditors couldn’t complete the work with institutions—for a six-month period.
Extends the ability for institutions to protect students so they do not have to return federal funds provided through Return of Title 4 Funds. These funds were earmarked to help students who faced financial disruption due to COVID-19. These guidelines hold even if the students withdraw from the university or college, as long as their withdrawal is due to COVID-19.

The Department also gave some relief to institutions in relation to the academic calendar. For the purpose of the pandemic, the policymakers have loosened some of the guidance that originally required the traditional academic year to be strict rigid semester. This decision will help institutions utilize innovative schedules that allow students to take online courses over a shorter span of time (instead of an entire semester) while also getting the necessary clock hours. This change also helps institutions with the new standard regarding substantive interactions between the instructors

Online Education, Distance Education and Innovation

The Department also just did a soft release of a new piece of guidance around distance education, online education and innovation. This is the last of three pieces of guidance in this area, which the Department had developed during the past two years as part of the Negotiated Rulemaking from 2019.

This recent package built on prior information as well as current conditions. For example, the definitions or “regular” and “substantive” interaction were modified to help synchronous and asynchronous learning in the clock hour institutional environment. Other sets of circumstances were also addressed in these regulations, which are scheduled to take effect in July 1, 2021. (Any regulation that is Title 4-driven must be introduced on or before November 1 of the preceding year to go into effect July 1 of the subsequent year.)

Because this guidance had consensus approval and the Department has taken its time in bringing the guidance forward, the secretary and the Department have the authority to allow institutions to implement these regulations—which includes competency-based education and online education—the early, if they so choose. Netting believes some institutions will take advantage of that option.

Some of the shifts involve competency-based education, direct assessment and stackable credentials. A new Moody’s report indicated that non-degree certificate programs are growing at a 10% rate, even at major colleges and universities. This indicates a new opportunity for students to utilize online education to supplement their bricks-and-mortar experience as they work toward a two-year and/or four-year degree. These regulations also offer certificate/diploma options to fulfill basic requirements while also allowing these options to be stackable as students pursue a four-year degree or go on to earn a master’s degree.

There is a shift away from the Carnegie Method of assessment as institutions increasingly focus on using actual student assessment as is used in competency-based education. This change is on a dynamic level in real time. This round of negotiated rulemaking addressed this by encouraging a focus on skill sets that students need to develop instead of seat time. This guidance also encourages institutions to focus on the actual progression and assimilation of the education that students receive.

The guidance also asks institutions to look at prior learning experience and give credit for prior mastery before entering the education system. This especially is relevant to veterans who have skill sets in vocations or disciplines that are degree-based.

Title IX

New Title IX regulations go into effect in September that will increase the focus on the rights of the accused. One of the areas that is addressed include cross-examination by the accused or his/her representative of the victim.

Some of the changes in these regulations are contentious and many on Capitol Hill are expressing concerns. However, institutions will need to follow the published final regulations that include hearing processes.

These regulations also change how institutions do investigations and hearings. However, the new requirements also benefit higher education institutions by limiting the number of employees at the institutional level who have to report and track these allegations; this number had become unwieldy at many institutions. Now institutions will offer more directed circumstances for the accused and victim to follow.

Institutions are working diligently to move forward with these regulations. The Department should be providing additional guidance soon to help students and institutions implement these new regulations. Netting also expects to see some FAQs that will help guide development of policies, procedures and implementation at the institutional level.

On the Horizon

First and foremost, the Department probably will be coming out with additional guidance on the Higher Education Emergency Relief Fund, which was part of the CARES Act. Half of those funds were earmarked for students while the other half went to institutions. The department has done a good job in providing guidance for students, and additional guidance should be coming out for institutions on how they can use these funds, especially in relation to payroll, as well as reporting requirements. Some clarification has been offered through FAQs, but additional guidance is needed. Netting anticipates this guidance will come out around Labor Day.

Congress and the White House continue to negotiate a number of proposals related to COVID-19. There has been down time due to the national conventions, but Netting believes discussions will ramp up soon concerning the next stimulus package. The Republicans have two bills out—a skinny bill and a regular bill, both called the HEALS Act—while the Democrats have the HEROS Act. President Trump also has items that he wants to place in a bill.

Some of the major contentious issues involve liability for the employer and employees as well as funding for state and local communities. Netting believes that the next bill will primarily focus on elementary/secondary education whereas higher education had the greater part of the CARES Act. However, Netting believes that higher education will still get some funding.

Netting pointed to key nuances that are beginning to emerge:

The Senate Republican bill (which may have Democratic support) would make a retroactive change to the CARES Act in relation to payroll and lost revenue, which will help with guidance for institutions on how they can utilize these funds. From the student’s perspective, the bill would expand the use of funding given to students to include tuition and fees.
There also will be technical corrections to help all institutions in regards to financial responsibility as well as some of the regulatory requirements that institutions need to fulfill on a regular basis, such as composite scores. All institutions are hurting right now and will need some relief in assessing their fiscal positioning going into the next year or two.

Bullet Points

Several extensions have come out recently, including repayment of student loans, student leave of absence, reporting deadlines for fiscal and financial aid reports and fiscal audits, and Return of Title 4 Funds.
The Department also provided relief on the educational calendar to allow institutions to have flexibility due to the pandemic.
The Department’s soft release of a new piece of guidance around distance education, online education and innovation addresses modifying “regular” and “substantive,” changing synchronous and asynchronous learning, and addressing competency-based education, direct assessment and stackable credentials.
Assessment also is shifting to encourage a focus on skill sets instead of seat time. In addition, institutions can consider the student’s previous experiences in relation to awarding credit for specific skills.
Title IX guidelines have been published and focus on the rights of the accused. These regulations change how institutions do investigations and hearings.
The Department will be coming out with additional guidance on the Higher Education Emergency Relief Fund, which was part of the CARES Act. This guidance should come out around Labor Day.
Both political parties are focused on creating a new bill related to the pandemic. Some of the major contentious issues involve liability for the employer and employees as well as funding for state and local communities. Netting anticipates the next bill will primarily focus on elementary/secondary education; however, higher education still should see some funding.
These bills also may provide additional guidance for how higher education institutions and students can use funding from the CARES Act, as well as technical corrections to help guide financial responsibility and the regulatory requirements that institutions need to fulfill on a regular basis, such as composite scores.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

2019 Negotiated Rulemaking process
Department of Education

Guests Social Media Links:

Tom Netting LinkedIn – https://www.linkedin.com/in/tom-netting-9214755/
Tom Netting Twitter - @t_netting

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://thechangeleader.com
Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Creative partnerships, and mergers and acquisitions are helping colleges and universities get out of financial crises while also serving students’ needs. One example of this type of partnership involves three higher education institutions -- Goodwin University, Sacred Heart and Paier College of Art—that are working with the University of Bridgeport to create a partnership. The University of Bridgeport, which has experienced financial difficulties, decided to pursue alternative ways of operating.

Dr. Mark Scheinberg is president of Goodwin University. He describes how this partnership formed and the challenges that institutions are facing.

Making a Difficult Decision

Frequently, universities are so deeply committed and enthusiastic that they often are too optimistic when experiencing financial difficulties. This leads to unrealistic projections. Board members will try to figure out how to raise more money or find ways to make up for a shortfall, but, having the best of intentions, these trustees run the institution off a cliff. By the time they realize that the institution is not going to make it, the situation has progressed to the point where the institution can’t make payroll at the end of the month.

There are meaningful things that can be done, but because these things can “hurt,” leaders and boards often opt to “kick the can down the road” instead.

The University of Bridgeport didn’t do that. After experiencing a number of years filled with financial hardship hits, and while the institution still had an endowment and its facilities, its leadership realized the university’s future was in doubt and they decided to look outside of the institution to see if there were any meaningful partnerships that could be developed. Rather than continuing to operate until running the institution into the ground, administration and the board believed a partnership of this type could save the core of the university—the students and faculty.

Taking a Proactive Stance

When an institution starts from scratch as Goodwin did two decades ago, leaders don’t have a lot of legacy to teach them what to do next. At the same time, this lack of legacy frees institutional leaders to try new approaches.

When the college was founded, Dr. Scheinberg told faculty and staff that they needed to think deeply about the reasons for their organizational decisions, instead of making arbitrary choices. Otherwise, the college would run in ways that were not efficient, responsible, or business-like.

For example, Goodwin primarily serves nontraditional students between the ages of 28-40, and its academic calendar has three semester each year. Approximately 85% of those students work, so most are enrolled at the 50-75% level. By running three semesters, these students can move through the academic program faster than they could a full-time “traditional” program that runs primarily on two semesters. Dr. Scheinberg believes this is a smarter system that supports Goodwin’s students.

Additionally, this system allows faculty members who are associate professors or higher to be given a contract, which in time becomes a long-term contract. University leaders use the contract to address issues that would have been part of tenure, which as a system doesn’t make sense in the current world. Not having a tenure system in place enables the institution to change operations on a dime, allowing it to be nimble.

The Partnership

Most colleges that are having financial difficulties are relatively small. From an economic model, a college with an enrollment of under 1,000 students is difficult to operate because there isn’t economies of scale.

These smaller higher education institutions are struggling and often need to close or be part of a merger or acquisition. Dr. Scheinberg pointed to Goodwin’s assistance to struggling Lincoln College of New England. Goodwin absorbed Lincoln College’s 400 students and helped them finish their studies on time. Creating these types of efforts becomes a skill unto itself, e.g., working with accreditors, etc.

The University of Bridgeport offers a different tale. Ten years ago, University of Bridgeport enrolled 10,000 students, but more recently its enrollment dropped to 4,500 students. No higher education institution by itself could absorb this number of students. However, a every consortium of schools could, hence the partnership with Sacred Heart and Paier.

Every merger/acquisition and alliance/partnership is different, and requires the collaborating institutions to be sensitive to the situation. This certainly was the case with this partnership. For example, The University of Bridgeport plays a pivotal part in the City of Bridgeport. Because of this, the consortia members decided to continue holding the absorbed programs at the University of Bridgeport campus.

So instead of pulling programs out of Bridgeport and then dispersing them to the three partnering universities, the consortia partners will be using buildings on the University of Bridgeport campus to offer classes related to the schools that they are taking over. Paier College of Art is taking over the art and design programs. Sacred Heart University is assuming the engineering programs, the counseling program, a chiropractic school and the school of education. Goodwin, whose has a focus in health care, is taking over a physician’s assistant school, nursing school, dental hygiene school, and the school of business.

This logical division does not include the University of Bridgeport’s school of arts and sciences. Those classes are being assigned to partnering institutions based on where they make the most sense. For example, chemistry and physics courses feed engineering degree programs whereas biosciences courses feed the health sciences degree programs.

Reallocating Resources

The institutional partners also realized that they had this opportunity to focus their money on teaching instead of the back-room operations that constitute significant institutional expenses. They wondered why they would need three separate security forces, three food service departments and three housing departments. Now the institutions are pooling these areas through a shared service agreement, which is reducing the operating costs in these areas through the partnership and shared services.

Dr. Scheinberg also sees promising possibilities for the three universities as well as other partners that show up. For example, the three partners are trying to make it easy for students to take courses at the other two partner institutions that can easily transfer to the third partner. This means that if a student needs to take a course in the spring semester before he/she graduates and their home institution isn’t offering that course, it is much more likely that one of the other partners is offering the course. It also allows an institution to offer more advanced courses that normally would attract only a few students at one institution, but could have a full class through offering it among the partnering institutions.

Governance Issues

The University of Bridgeport will eventually be absorbed by the other institutions. However, because it still has money and knew where it was headed, it will continue to operate as all the pieces are put into place. The board governance remains intact for the upcoming school year.

One of the key pieces of any kind of agreement like this must be gaining approval from accreditors. The partners have been in touch with the university’s various accreditors so they can take their time analyzing, accepting and approving the movement of the programs to a new sponsor. Each accreditor handles this transfer differently; some have processes in place while others have not anticipated this scenario. In the latter case, some of these accreditation changes may take a year or more. Therefore, the programs need to remain at the University of Bridgeport until the accreditor’s approval is received.

Each partnering institution is separately accredited so they have to have their own governance. They need to be clearly demarcated due to accreditation. Each of the partnering institutions are independent and have their own campuses and enrollments.

Administrators, faculty and staff in this partnership have some anxiety as this partnership moves forward. There is a high degree of ambiguity, which isn’t initially comfortable for everybody. The partners are having to feel things through as they go forward and make decisions. There will be rubs and the partners will make it work.

Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Dr. Scheinberg suggested several takeaways for higher education leaders:

Take a cold-eyed view if there is financial difficulties and be proactive in taking action. Don’t proceed with a hope and a prayer if the budget is blown. Don’t wait to be surprised.
In these situations, no one is happy. Students and faculty at the institution being taken over are upset and they don’t know where to place their emotions. The receiving institution often is the target of the students’ and faculty members’ ire.
It is critical to focus on transparency. Be visible and available during these times to help people understand what is going on and also what has not been decided yet.

Bullet Points

Leaders and board members of higher education institutions need to take a realistic look at finances and make a tough choice in relation to whether to remain open or consider a different path, whether that’s a merger, acquisition or closure.
Institutions need to look at decisions in ways that leave behind legacy. Therefore, decisions need to be based on having thought through decisions thoroughly instead of basing them on what has always been or what is expedient.
Smaller institutions tend to struggle economically, especially with the COVID crisis. Therefore, these institutions often are in need of assistance and are ripe for these type of partnerships and/or acquisition.
Partnerships can creatively offer solutions for institutions that are struggling.
Partnering institutions can create these partnerships in ways that create economic benefits in operational areas such as residence services, food service, custodial services, HR, and security services. This allows institutions to focus their financial sources more on teaching and learning.
In some partnerships, the partners need to remain independent. In addition, they need to take into account the economic benefit that the struggling institution offers to a community. Through doing this, the partnership can create a win-win-win situation for everyone involved.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Goodwin University
Sacred Heart University
Paier College of Art
University of Bridgeport

Guests Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mark-scheinberg-256ab0123/
Bio: https://www.goodwin.edu/administration/presidents-welcome

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://thechangeleader.com
Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Christian colleges and universities face unique challenges, even without coronavirus, economic issues and racial unrest. One of the guiding lights in helping navigate those challenges is the Association for Biblical Higher Education, which serves as an accreditor and also offers a number of services.

After long-time president Dr. Ralph Enlow retired, ABHE selected Dr. Philip Dearborn to fill the position. He previously served as provost of Lancaster Bible College and multiple other positions.

Navigating Turbulent Waters

Dr. Dearborn, who assumed his new role during the midst of unprecedented times on July 1, is not sure what the new “normal” will look like. Dr. Dearborn put together eight goals for his first 100 days to give to ABHE’s board. He is a self-described optimist, and believes that the pandemic actually has created great opportunities, so the challenge becomes navigating through the turbulent waters to find these silver linings.

While the circumstances around higher education have changed, ABHE’s purpose, vision and mission has not. Dr. Dearborn noted that ABHE must be nimble enough to find ways to move forward while supporting its members as they move forward.

To achieve that, ABHE is starting a new strategic planning process focused on identifying the needs of Christian higher education institutions. This process will enable the association to better meet the needs of its constituency, while also broadening the services ABHE offers, especially in relation to developing leaders.

ABHE also is trying to modernize its facilities so it can provide top-of-the-line services. For example, the Association is creating a state-of-the-art Zoom room that will provide cutting-edge technology to deliver quality programs.

Transforming a Lagging Industry

COVID and the resultant economic issues have accelerated the changes that have been coming in higher education. Similar to Dr. Gordon Gee, President of West Virginia University, Dr. Dearborn estimates that the acceleration process has sped up by a decade, which will be challenging for higher education leaders to make since colleges and universities often lag behind in adopting change.

He pointed to a number of colleges where faculty and staff stepped up during the early stages of the pandemic to help deal with the rapid challenges. However, to expect these individuals to continue to do that work for a sustained period of time is unrealistic. Additionally, much of higher education’s lag is caused by an organizational culture that primarily supports the needs of faculty instead of students, especially in places where there is unionization.

Higher education starts the upcoming fall term with a great amount of uncertainty. Fall enrollments are still up in the air and won’t become clear until later in August and even September. Most institutions can no longer make a five-year plan. Instead, planning efforts are narrowing down to cover a month (or less) at a time.

Dr. Dearborn believes that the changes that the pandemic brought during the spring semester will ripple through higher education and it will take more time for the sector to find its direction and understand what the ultimate impact is. These waves will continue for a significant period in time and will, in all probability, extend past the identification and production of a vaccination.

It will take many years before the nation is “over” COVID-19. He pointed to one university president who said that his institution is trying to hold on through August 2021. At that point, that president believes there will be more clarity about what the future holds.

Scenario Planning

Because of these uncertain times, ABHE will delve deeply into scenario planning during its upcoming team retreat. Dr. Dearborn believes that the world will continue to face big issues that will have a significant effect on higher education as well as the greater society. Therefore, he believes that in order for ABHE to remain nimble, the staff need to have a shared language that helps them focus on scenario planning.

He also encourages higher education leaders to explore scenario planning. Dr. Dearborn advises picking a particular model and then starting to incorporate the scenario planning language into the institution’s daily work. Soon higher education leaders will be able to look at various scenarios in relation to some of the institution’s offerings.

In-person vs. Technology

ABHE shifted all of its meetings to Zoom. With that said, Dr. Dearborn believes there will be a place for both in-person meetings and technology after the pandemic ends.

He predicts that face-to-face meetings and conferences will have a resurgence once the pandemic is over. While a lot can be accomplished on Zoom, there’s something relationally important about face-to-face interactions, which are foundational to human lives. In comparison, Zoom is transactional.

Dr. Dearborn cautions that leaders need to look for ways beyond these types of meetings, going forward because leadership is much more than just about transactions. Furthermore, it is difficult to get participants fully engaged when there are more than five people involved in a Zoom meeting.

Expanding Services

ABHE, which is primarily an accreditor and offers academic quality assurance, also continues to try to broaden its offerings to include board governance, board consulting, board/administration training, and leadership development for C-Suite executives.

Dr. Dearborn believes ABHE needs to expand its offers to include faculty, who spend the most time with students. Furthermore, faculty need to shift their thinking and behaviors in order for higher education to remain sustainable in the wake of the many changes that are happening in the industry and across society.

The ABHE president believes the association can offer several important services to support faculty. These include:

Helping faculty members do better pedagogically in the classroom. This includes helping them understand how to teach critical thinking skills to students. He also wants to leverage technology to offer training, especially for faculty members.
Providing leadership training specifically designed for faculty. Dr. Dearborn equated faculty with being middle-managers, who need to have a unique skill set to be able to relate up, down and across the organization. However, faculty who are placed in chair positions often don’t flourish because while they are exceptionally smart, they didn’t have this skill set.

Changing Christian Education

Dr. Dearborn noted that there are definitely trends within general higher education that affect the Bible college movement. These trends include enrollment, job readiness, and emotional intelligence.

Bible colleges also have unique responsibilities. For example, Bible colleges have a mandate that comes specifically from the word of God, which is to fulfill the great commission. That mandate does not change during difficult times and serves as the common thread with the church at the center.

However, Dr. Dearborn has seen trends among Bible colleges. For example, at one point both Bible colleges and Christian education distanced themselves from the church. These colleges were focused on enrolling individuals and preparing them for the churches through a top-down process that indicated that the colleges knew what was best.

That paradigm has totally changed. Now, colleges need to reach out to pastors and ask them to identify the needs that churches are experiencing. Higher education leaders also need to understand that while students need to have a deep knowledge of the Bible, they also need to understand the business side of running a church.

The ABHE president also believes it’s time for Bible college leaders to have conversations with churches about what they need not only from a staffing perspective, but also from the church parishioners as the church fulfills its mission. Therefore, conversations about systemic changes that are currently happening are needed between church leaders and Bible colleges.

Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Dr. Dearborn suggested three takeaways for higher education leaders:

Keep students first. If you’re not focused on the needs of the students, your success rate will drop significant. Always consider the perspective of students when making decisions.
Always learn. Force yourself to expand your knowledge and get outside of your context. For example, go outside to a business context to learn so you can bring those perspectives into your higher education institution.
Don’t stop building genuine relationships. Don’t ever let these relationships be fake; build strong and long lasting relationships so you can lead effectively.

Bullet Points

The new “normal” probably will not emerge anytime soon. Higher education institutions won’t be able to do long-range planning for some time—and that could be several years from now.
Higher education traditionally has resisted change. Now with the pandemic and economic situation, higher education leaders are being forced to deal with issues that were thought to be a decade down the road.
A key piece to this adaptation is faculty. Faculty need to understand that higher education’s culture should be based on the needs of students, not their own.
Scenario planning can create a common language and then offer ways for leaders to consider what may happen in the short term, thus helping the organization remain nimble when issues emerge rapidly.
While all communications have been moved to Zoom and other platforms, nurturing face-to-face relationships will continue to be a priority, especially when the pandemic eases.
There are many opportunities to help faculty grow. These include helping them understand pedagogy, which will improve their teaching, and also offering leadership development so they can serve in management positions within a college.
While Christian education is facing many of the same issues that the overall higher education industry faces, Bible colleges will continue to be grounded in the word of God and the Bible’s mission.
Bible colleges do need to revise how they approach their world. Previously, many thought they created church leaders in a vacuum. Now it’s important for Bible colleges to reach out to churches to get their feedback on what is needed both for those in the pulpit as well as the parishioners. This includes knowledge that extends past the Bible; for example, future pastors need to understand how to run the church as a business.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Association for Biblical Higher Education

Guests Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: com/in/philipedearborn

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://thechangeleader.com
Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

After long-time president Dr. Ralph Enlow retired, ABHE selected Dr. Philip Dearborn to fill the position. He previously served as provost of Lancaster Bible College and multiple other positions.

Navigating Turbulent Waters

Transforming a Lagging Industry

Scenario Planning

In-person vs. Technology

ABHE shifted all of its meetings to Zoom. With that said, Dr. Dearborn believes there will be a place for both in-person meetings and technology after the pandemic ends.

Expanding Services

The ABHE president believes the association can offer several important services to support faculty. These include:

Helping faculty members do better pedagogically in the classroom. This includes helping them understand how to teach critical thinking skills to students. He also wants to leverage technology to offer training, especially for faculty members.
Providing leadership training specifically designed for faculty. Dr. Dearborn equated faculty with being middle-managers, who need to have a unique skill set to be able to relate up, down and across the organization. However, faculty who are placed in chair positions often don’t flourish because while they are exceptionally smart, they didn’t have this skill set.

Changing Christian Education

Dr. Dearborn noted that there are definitely trends within general higher education that affect the Bible college movement. These trends include enrollment, job readiness, and emotional intelligence.

Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Dr. Dearborn suggested three takeaways for higher education leaders:

Keep students first. If you’re not focused on the needs of the students, your success rate will drop significant. Always consider the perspective of students when making decisions.
Always learn. Force yourself to expand your knowledge and get outside of your context. For example, go outside to a business context to learn so you can bring those perspectives into your higher education institution.
Don’t stop building genuine relationships. Don’t ever let these relationships be fake; build strong and long lasting relationships so you can lead effectively.

Bullet Points

The new “normal” probably will not emerge anytime soon. Higher education institutions won’t be able to do long-range planning for some time—and that could be several years from now.
Higher education traditionally has resisted change. Now with the pandemic and economic situation, higher education leaders are being forced to deal with issues that were thought to be a decade down the road.
A key piece to this adaptation is faculty. Faculty need to understand that higher education’s culture should be based on the needs of students, not their own.
Scenario planning can create a common language and then offer ways for leaders to consider what may happen in the short term, thus helping the organization remain nimble when issues emerge rapidly.
While all communications have been moved to Zoom and other platforms, nurturing face-to-face relationships will continue to be a priority, especially when the pandemic eases.
There are many opportunities to help faculty grow. These include helping them understand pedagogy, which will improve their teaching, and also offering leadership development so they can serve in management positions within a college.
While Christian education is facing many of the same issues that the overall higher education industry faces, Bible colleges will continue to be grounded in the word of God and the Bible’s mission.
Bible colleges do need to revise how they approach their world. Previously, many thought they created church leaders in a vacuum. Now it’s important for Bible colleges to reach out to churches to get their feedback on what is needed both for those in the pulpit as well as the parishioners. This includes knowledge that extends past the Bible; for example, future pastors need to understand how to run the church as a business.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Association for Biblical Higher Education

Guests Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: com/in/philipedearborn

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://thechangeleader.com
Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Many higher ed institutions are struggling with finances due to COVID and other reasons, and some higher ed leaders are seriously contemplating a merger with or acquisition of or by another institution. These processes can be a win-win proposition, allowing for increased capacity, services and efficiencies for students.

One example of this process is Delaware State University, which is in the process of merging with Wesley College. This merger began earlier this year and is spearheaded by Dr. Tony Allen, who became Delaware State’s 12th president in January. He previously served as the institution’s provost.

But that isn’t the two story with Dr. Allen – his career spans both higher education and corporate. This broad career has benefited him significantly, as he brings his experience from outside of higher Ed to tackle some of its biggest challenges. For example, in this, his first year as Delaware State’s president, he has had to deal with COVID and moving to online education.

This merger/acquisition is the latest major issue that he is tackling. Dr. Allen believes that growing a very proud Black institution that has faced its challenges and focused on developing innovative programs is the most important thing he can focus on doing at this moment because these efforts will grow capacity and opportunity for students who are often underserved.

Merging with a Neighbor (or Anyone Else)

An advocate for both the State of Delaware and the University,, Dr. Allen has always believed in the institution’s possibilities. He said that Delaware State has an amazing story to tell but has not had enough storytellers. He wants people to know the institution’s rich history – and to grow it. The merger is part of the institutional strategy to make that happen.

Dr. Allen, who has participated in a higher education merger before, said that going through a merger is a very interesting process. Delaware State’s vision is to be the most diverse HBCU in America. The institution’s leaders would like to increase enrollment from the current number (5,000 students) to 10,000 students in the next 5-7 years. To accomplish that, the school needs not only more students, but also more physical infrastructure to attract those students and to make sure that the faculty and staff feel like Delaware State is a first-class institution. Thus, a merger is a very sound strategy by which to accomplish this.

Wesley College, which primarily serves minority students, is literally two miles from Delaware State University. The college’s campus has about 20 buildings on 50 acres of land near downtown Dover. In watching Wesley College’s decision-making processes related to the institution’s future, Delaware State leaders believed it was an interesting opportunity to approach their neighbors about the possibility of a merger. The college’s leaders were interested and are working with their Delaware State counterparts to make the merger happen. The merger agreement was recently signed.

One of the critical first pieces of any kind of merger is the due diligence of finding the correct partner. As you can see in the following paragraphs, Dr. Allen and his team have done their homework to make sure that Delaware State and Wesley are good partners for a merger.

Merger Due Diligence

Wesley and Delaware State share a similar student demographic. Delaware State has about 55% in-state students while Wesley has 57%. Both institutions serve minority students and their programs have many similarities and synergies, especially in the health sciences.

Wesley’s location and physical lay-out is exactly what Delaware State needs in Central Dover. Dr. Allen believes that once this merger is done, it will help the combined institutions rival sister institutions across the region and country.

From a purely financial place, Wesley is valued at approximately $34 million and has reasonably little debt. Through this merger, Delaware State leaders are creating a broader organization model that can support the institution moving forward.

Organizational Culture

Dr. Allen noted that cultural fit is key to the success of a merger. He believes it’s important to find the best of both institutions and then combining it to make the merger successful.

The next step in the Delaware State/Wesley merger involves combining the two organizational cultures. Dr. Allen said that Wesley has great brand equity in Dover and the State. While that brand equity is important, he wants to build capacity for Delaware State to expand its footprint more thoughtfully.

This requires getting to know the people on the other side of the table, and then sharing the hopes and aspirations from each institution’s perspective. Dr. Allen believes by sharing this information, parties can work together to build new and better structures and a strong organizational culture for the future.

Getting Governing Boards Buy-in

Dr. Allen noted that the Delaware State/Wesley contract was more of an acquisition than a merger of equals. During the negotiation process, Delaware State’s leaders were able to “sell” this deal to its trustees and some key stakeholders across the community. The university’s significant track record of graduating some of the finest students in the state, especially students of color, over the past 130 years, helped make the case. In addition, Delaware State has grown a serious research portfolio across a number of disciplines.

The addition of Wesley into the university’s portfolio will expand Delaware State exponentially. Therefore, making the case for why and why now was part of the pitch that Delaware State leaders made to the institution’s board, which includes two past governors, business leaders and alumni. As the institutional leaders made the case, board members and stakeholders asked good questions and helped the leaders get the right kind of feedback to ensure that this acquisition happened in the right way.

The two institutions have set up a timeline of one year in which to bring the organizations together, and during this year, they have built enough “tollbooth gates” along the way to be able to pause to see if the institution is meeting the goals effectively in each step along the way of this merger/acquisition. That’s why a year of transition is so critically important in this process.

Key Performance Metrics

Dr. Allen said there are contingencies in the acquisition agreement that must be met in order to get to “Legal Day One” in June 2021. These tollbooth gates include:

Securing enough private and government funding to manage the transition effectively.
- Receiving approval of the deal from the institution’s accreditation and regulatory bodies.
- Identifying core efficiencies in bigger contracts, such as IT and food services. Through this merger/acquisition, Dr. Allen believes that institutional leaders can negotiate some cost efficiencies.
- Creating a dedicated project management office that can help provide and manage a successful transition plan that will serve as a roadmap for the future.
- Maintaining a strong consulting team, including an independent consultant who helped with the due diligence process as well as additional consultants who provide national heft to the process. These individuals understand what needs to happen as well as the pitfalls that are lurking.

Focusing on Growth

Dr. Allen stated that the institution wants to have more students when the agreement’s effective date arrives, but also wants to be able to grow into its institutional “skin.” He noted that Delaware State’s student enrollment has grown 40% over the past decade whereas during that same period, colleges in the aggregate have seen declining enrollments. While Delaware State has been able to buck this trend, Dr. Allen noted that space restrictions have created issues with this growth that this merger will help alleviate.

In thinking about the right business model, the optimal student enrollment mix of residential vs. international vs. online as well as the right program mix, Dr. Allen noted that the acquisition of Wesley offers a very good opportunity to move a significant part of the residential mix of students and health services on the program side to that campus. Making these moves could build something very special.

Dr. Allen also noted that he and his staff have watched Wesley closely over many years and appreciated the quality of the institution’s programs. Wesley has faced many similar concerns that many private liberal colleges have faced this century and have been trying to find someone who could partner in a thoughtful way in order to preserve the students that are enrolled and also help the institution grow holistically.

Working on Organizational Redesign

Leaders are taking this year to evaluate different options of organization design and configuration to determine what would be best in moving forward and what would attract quality faculty and staff as well as students. Dr. Allen said a number of different configurations between the two institutions are being considered, including a Wesley campus at Delaware State University as well as a new Wesley College of Health and Behavioral Sciences at Delaware State University. This will expand Delaware State’s footprint across a wider region.

The real work begins now that the deal is signed. Dr. Allen has gone through this process as part of the acquired institution. He said that if you do it well, you’re taking the best of both institutions while also shedding things that beleaguered both institutions. Therefore, institutional leaders are being thoughtful about what they think is great about Wesley, where Delaware State can be more efficient and effective, and how to serve more students and give them more opportunities.

Creating a Merger

This was not the first time that Wesley had considered a merger – Wesley had considered several other partners, but those deals didn’t work out. Delaware State approached Wesley’s leaders with a deal that offered the best path forward for the institution. Additionally, this public-private partnership offers many additional benefits because it means Wesley will become a public institution.

Trying to find a merger partner can be difficult, but can succeed through identifying synergies. According to Dr. Allen, this is currently happening in his institution’s merger and that it’s important to be deliberate and realize that there are going to be surprises. He stressed the importance of having consultants who can help guide this process. He also believes that it is important to be thoughtful and really hopeful about creating a business model that can really change an institution and its service area.

Dr. Allen had a strategic vision when he assumed the presidency. His vision was helped because he grew up in Delaware and also served as the institution’s provost for two years before accepting the presidency. As he assumed the presidency, he contemplated the vision as well as what is right around the institution that can be amplified. Delaware State’s close proximity and regular collaboration to Wesley made this merger/acquisition make sense. Early reports indicate that stakeholders are seeing this effort favorably.

Communications

Communications are critical. The two institutions’ presidents are trying to answer questions in a uniform fashion. Both presidents meet regularly and coordinate communications, including the announcement of the merger/acquisition through a press release and press conference. They tried to articulate messages that would help individuals—students, faculty, staff and alumni—on both sides understand what this partnership would offer.

The next step is “standing and delivering in front of these audiences,” Dr. Allen said. This will encourage Wesley stakeholders to talk about their needs and anxieties and also communicate the opportunities that are being created for both institutions. Dr. Allen believes that leaders need to communicate messages multiple times and then follow through on any promises that are made.

Four Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Dr. Allen suggested several takeaways for higher education leaders:

* Leaders need to ensure that a decision about a merger/acquisition aligns with the institutional mission.

Be thoughtful about these decisions. While it may feel like it’s important to make the merger/acquisition happen immediately, Dr. Allen advises taking the time to do due diligence while also using the time to help bring two institutions meaningfully together.
Engage your board of directors. Think about the real value proposition that the institution being acquired brings to the decision. This is crucially important.
Always under-promise and over-deliver.

Bullet Points

 * A merger or acquisition can help institutions reach more students and provide more extensive programs.

Institutions who are interested in these types of actions need to consider fit. That includes proximity, campus facilities, student body, programs offered, institutional missions, and current financial status.
As part of this merger, institutions need to form a new culture that incorporates the hopes and dreams of both institutions. This requires getting to truly know individuals from the other institution and listening to their concerns and wishes.
Governing boards are obviously involved in this decision. These individuals can ask questions that can prompt due diligence that will help ensure the partnership is in the best interest of both organizations.
It is important to create a variety of metrics—including financial, programmatic, accreditation, efficiencies, etc.--to guide the merger process.
- The merger or acquisition offers an opportunity to create a different education model both in relation to how to serve students and programmatically. However, it’s wiser to take the necessary time to make the new configuration operational.
- A strategic vision and synergies are important in helping create a strong merger/acquisition.
- Outside consultants are critical in helping guide mergers and acquisitions.
- Regular communications from both institution’s leaders are important in announcing a merger/acquisition as well as helping stakeholders understand next steps as the effort moves forward.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

 * Delaware State University

Wesley College

Guests Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/tony-allen-b349736/
Twitter: @BelieveLiveLove
- Bio: https://www.desu.edu/about/administration/office-president/about-tony

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://thechangeleader.com
Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
- Twitter: @thechangeldr
- Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #Education #Mergers #University #HigherEducation

View Details

The world has become a place of open pain and suffering, as well as one in which people are more curious. People are asking questions about how we got here and where we are going next. While part of this is due to the coronavirus pandemic, another major part involves the explosion of long-simmering racial tensions.

University of San Francisco Vice Provost for Diversity Engagement and Community Outreach Dr. Mary Wardell-Ghirarduzzi’s work on diversity and strategy has focused on helping senior leaders in higher education build their own equity and inclusion capacities. She is focusing on helping people to understand how we as a nation got to this place.

Gaining Deeper Understanding

Leaders who work on organizational behavior need to understand how the nation reached this point in order to help everyone heal. That’s a complex question, but also simple at the same time.

Dr. Wardell-Ghirarduzzi said the simple answer is that the way that the United States was constructed as a country of people left a stain in regard to how the founding fathers went about it. We often glorify what one does; however, it’s equally important to focus on the “how” these efforts get done as an organization or a nation. The nascent nation of the United States was created on the backs of enslaved individuals and it was further expanded on the genocide of indigenous people who already were in North America. The combination of those two events—which have continued and can be seen in the nation today—informs the economic capital, the cultural capital and all of the social capitals that make the United States what it is today.

In developing the nation’s social institutions (including higher education, banking, housing and health care) that contribute to the idea of life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, leaders created legislation, laws and policies so as to develop these institutions. In that process, these leaders had to make decisions on how to participate in the nation and be part of the construction of these institutions some of which marginalized large groups of people. This marginalization extends to a variety of people from various nationalities, including those of Chinese and the Japanese origins.

Discordant National Policies

Unfortunately, our nation has been built in a way that has not been true to its founding ideals. Subsequent policy decisions have been in many ways a reenactment of what happened in 1619, when the first enslaved peoples of African descent came to the nascent colonies to help build the country.

Dr. Wardell-Ghirarduzzi pointed to the failure of Reconstruction after the Civil War. During this time, states had the ability to decide how they were going to treat individuals of color. Leaders ended up enacting policies that became the Jim Crow Laws, which were worse in some ways to people of Black descent than slavery had been.

Institutional Racism

Since the country was founded, its continued expansion has been done in ways that marginalized individuals through all of the nation’s institutions, such as colleges/universities, churches, banks and associations/groups. As one of the core social institutions in the United States, higher education has roots that mirror the history of other social institutions.

Understanding this is important because it is institutions that make up the fabric of society. Now, even in more recent institutions such as technology firms, there is hidden and unconscious—and sometimes conscious—forms of racism and bias. This goes beyond individualized forms of racism. Systemic organizational forms of racism have been part of the country since its early days, e.g., the Jim Crow laws.

Unconscious Bias

Everyone is guilty of unconscious bias. By focusing on this concept, it becomes a way to talk about the concept but not activity, and as such not engage in taking personal responsibility for one’s role in continuing the forms of institutional racism that exist today. These individuals take a pass on the realities of people who doing their part in relation to understanding and working through organizational bias.

Which brings us to our leaders, and included in that are University presidents.

That type of response, that focusing on the concept but not the activity of unconscious bias of which we are all guilty of, does not hold water for leaders who have responsibilities of duty and stewardship. Those individuals’ response to unconscious bias must be to understand the complexities of institutional racism and deal with it.

Unconscious bias shows up in the modern-day form in how we make decisions because we have biases that we are not aware of. However, just because we are not aware of the biases doesn’t mean that they are not felt by the very individuals who institutional leaders are seeking to serve. Because of this, people in leadership roles (and especially University presidents) have a much higher standard and a much higher responsibility to understand that they have unconscious biases and route them out and deal with them.

Our leaders today must be proactive in determining what they do not know or understand or identifying how their leadership approach is causing them to stumble in this regard. Dr. Wardell-Ghirarduzzi suggests that individuals need to learn to unlearn in order to relearn. You have to learn new things which is going to cause leaders to confront that they have to unlearn things that are problematic to leadership in the institution. Then through relearning, leaders can respond appropriately to the needs of their community today.

The First Step

Understanding that there is unconscious bias and then identifying the blind spots is the first step. Dr. Wardell-Ghirarduzzi likes to do an exercise when doing learning sessions. As part of those, she talks about micro-aggressions as a modern-day form of racism and how it shows up. Students, faculty and staff of color often mention this, so by highlighting this, she’s able to help all participants understand how micro-aggression works.

The real work for leaders is to do their own introspection on their own racial identity and how that informs the ways they address the issues they respond to. She cautions leaders that they will need to create space, especially during this current timeframe, to pause long enough to do the necessary discernment work. This involves higher education leaders understanding their own racial formation – how they came to think in the ways that they do (even if they do not think they are racist). For example, how did they understand race as a child? When was the first time I interacted with an African-American or Black person? What was my school like? Did I have Black children in my classroom? When was the first time that I had a Black teacher? What grade? Who taught me about race? What was the perspective of those individuals who raised me about race? Where was I raised? What zip code did I grow up in? How did my neighborhood influence my current ideas around race? Who did I marry? Who was on my wedding invitation list?

While these questions are seemingly insignificant, when examined in their entirety, they can create a story around an individual’s beliefs around racial formation. You can ask the same set of questions to people of color and have different responses.

The diversity of today’s college campuses means that students have very different perspectives and a different reality and understanding of the complexity of race in how they experience racism in their residential life as well as their time involved in the university’s classrooms and activities. Having people in leadership roles who have gaps in that experience which are too far from the students, faculty and staff with whom they work means they need more understanding. By and large, many higher ed leaders need to do this in-depth self-assessment work, especially since they tend to be predominantly white and male.

Even though there has been progress in adding more leaders of color as well as female leaders, more work needs to be done to reflect the diversity on campus. There’s an ocean between the leader’s lived experiences and diverse experiences of those on campus. This means that there is a significant learning curve for many smart people.

Based on her own experience, Dr. Wardell-Ghirarduzzi believes racial illiteracy exists among the American university presidency right now so they are not quite equipped to respond to the issues and needs that are on institution’s doorsteps. That gap is where she and others are trying to sound the alarm and also to point out the need for diverse representation in leadership.

Next Steps

Higher education leaders need to continue to try and understand the root problem and the root causes of racism in America. One way to do this is to become students of the Black experience in the United States and develop a deeper understanding of this experience. This will enable them to be able to talk about these issues with some sense of urgency and command. Students, faculty and staff expect them to have command of the knowledge of racial justice. Dr. Wardell-Ghirarduzzi believes leaders need to be put the same amount of energy and attention to this learning as they are having to put into the financial crisis.

Leaders also need to evaluate their inner circle or cabinet. This includes evaluating whether these individuals are living out the mission and statements that the institution says is so important to them. Have these individuals expressed their commitment to the demands of equity and inclusion by ensuring that they have diversity in their own teams? That not only includes people who do diversity work, but also extends to business/finance, marketing/communications, development, and academic affairs. If their cabinet currently is and remains overwhelmingly white, then these individuals are not leading in the moment.

Working with Faculty and Students

Leaders also need to work with faculty and students on campus to look at ways to become an anti-racist campuses. What assets are already in place? Who can help lead the campus in this work? Which alumni can help lead the campus in this work? How can the institution pull together an anti-racist brain trust that can be an advisor to the president and leadership? Which curriculum and practices need to be looked at in relation to becoming anti-racist?

Begin at the Individual Level

Dr. Wardell-Ghirarduzzi believes that this effort begins with the individual. People are looking for guidance and modelling, and want individuals who have their fingers on the pulse and can help lead the institution to where it needs to be through communication and action.

Higher education leaders can transform by coming to an understanding of their own background and the gaps they have, and then begin working earnestly with a sense of urgency around responding to areas that need to be addressed through additional leaders. They need to understand that what’s holding them back is also impacting those who are working under their leadership. This, in turn, is holding the university back.

Students and younger staff and faculty have a higher expectation of leaders in relation to this area of understanding racial injustice. These two generations believe that leaders have had enough time to figure this out and educate themselves.

This means that higher education leaders can no longer hide behind their ignorance. They face a significant cost if they write, speak or do something on the campus that is based on this ignorance.

Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Dr. Wardell-Ghirarduzzi suggested several takeaways for higher education leaders:

Leaders need to look at how COVID has exposed the racial inequities in all of our lives. These inequities extend beyond health outcomes and economic outcomes to encompass social equity. Leaders need to focus on racial equity, including using the terms “race,” “racial” and “racism” in their spoken and written language.
As leaders find ways to navigate disruption due to the pandemic, they cannot put race on the back burner and focus only on the economic situation. We are in a health crisis, an economic crisis and a racial crisis. While leaders may be tempted to put aside the racial issue, they need to look at everything that is happening right now through a racial equity lens.
Make commitments to bring diversity in relation to race and gender to the cabinet. This will help the institution understand these various perspectives, which will be critically helpful in moving forward.

Bullet Points

The nation has been built in a way that has not been true to its founding ideals. The United States was constructed on the backs of slaves and these inequities have been formalized by how the founding fathers took action.
The laws and policies have continued to be racially biased, especially after the Civil War when Jim Crow Laws were passed in Southern states.
This history of national racism has led to organizational racism that is now part of the nation’s institutions, including higher education.
Most people have unconscious bias. While they will talk about it at the conceptual level, many people will not assume their own personal responsibility and culpability in continuing the many forms of institutional racism that exist today.
Leaders who have responsibilities of duty and stewardship need to identify and work through their unconscious bias to understand the complexities of institutional racism. They need to be proactive in determining what they do not know or understand or identifying how their leadership approach is causing them to stumble in this regard. They need to learn to unlearn patterns so that they can relearn new ways of working in this area.
Understanding that racial bias exists and then identifying personal blind spots is the first step in deepening one’s work in this area.
Many higher education leaders face a significant learning curve because they are racial illiterate right now. Thus, they are not equipped to respond to the issues and needs that are on institution’s doorsteps.
Higher education leaders need to become students of the Black experience and make this a priority at the same level that the economic situation or the healthcare crisis currently is.
Higher education leaders also need to evaluate their cabinets and begin to find ways to diversify by race, gender and thought.
Leaders also need to work with faculty and students to look at ways to become an anti-racist campuses.
Higher education leaders are being held to a higher standard in relation to racial issues now. If they don’t deepen their learning, identify how to take appropriate steps to make their campus inclusive, and communicate clearly and effectively on these matters, they will have to pay a steep price.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Twice as Good, Leadership and Power for Women of Color

Guests Social Media Links:

Mary Wardell Ghirarduzzi LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mary-j-wardell-ghirarduzzi-2012873/
Mary Wardell Ghirarduzzi Twitter: https://twitter.com/drmjwardell
Mary Wardell Ghirarduzzi Website: https://www.usfca.edu/provost/vice-provost-diversity-engagement-and-community-outreach

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://thechangeleader.com
Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #Education #HigherEducation #University #BlackLivesMatter #Diversity

View Details

Federal policymakers are trying to figure out their next steps in relation to higher education in the wake of the pandemic. In addition, these policymakers are continuing in developing and implementing regulations. TEN Government Strategies CEO Tom Netting, a regular guest on this podcast, provides an update on new regulations that are coming on line as well as recent and proposed federal legislation, including the CARES Act, which provides short-term financial and policy guidance.

Federal Regulations

Even as the nation focuses on the coronavirus pandemic, the regulatory environment remains omnipresent. The U.S. Department of Education is focusing on developing a number of new regulations while also overseeing the implementation of regulations.

A number of these rules were deliberated as Neg Reg 2019 and other negotiated rulemaking processes during the past few years and then published in final form on or before Nov. 1, 2019. They officially went into effect on July 1 of the award year due to the master calendar requirement and legislative/statutory requirements.

The Trump Administration has worked on a series of changes and revisions to regulations through the Neg Reg process. These include revisions / overturn rules from the Obama Administration – e.g., Gainful Employment and the Borrower Defense to Repayment rules – as well as the results of recent negotiations about accreditation that blur (remove) the differences between regional and national accreditation, state authorization, teacher/TEACH grants and faith-based education.

Distance Education

There also have been significant changes concerning state authorization and how distance education is being delivered, which is at the forefront of everybody’s mind right now because of the pandemic. In fact, the U.S. Department of Education revised their guidance for distance / online education, including loosening a number of regulations through the end of the fall term.

Some of those revisions deal with long-standing issues related to assuring the quality of online education that were already in discussion prior to the pandemic. One of the key focus areas was regular and substantive interaction between the deliverer (the institution and the academician) and the student. (This came into play in a major way with the Department’s lawsuit against Western Governor’s University that was later withdrawn.)

Policymakers want to ensure that both sides of the learning equation are doing their just part. As part of the negotiations, the department offered more description around what regular and substantive interactions look like, which will provide greater guidance for institutions.

Another major change involved the ways that institutions accounted for their online populations. Online education allows significant blurring about the locations where students are recruited. The regulation changes modify the concept of boundaries while also addressing reciprocity agreements through NC-SARA, which includes all of the United States with the exception of the District of Columbia and California. These changes mean that if an institution is compliant with NC-SARA, it is most likely compliant with another state’s regulations. That becomes important because it ensures that students are protected, no matter the state where they reside, because the underpinnings of the institution’s online education are sound.

This blurring continued with the removal of the distinction between regional and national accreditation. With online education allows students to attend institutions outside of their specific geographic regions the construct of focusing on regional accreditation versus accreditation is becoming moot. It is now focusing on protecting students, many of whom may live in another state or another part of the world. Additionally, this allows accreditors to be more flexible in working with the institutions they recognize to identify and implement better assessments of the quality of their respective missions. There also still needs to be programmatic accreditation to look at certification and licensure levels.

Transparency

The new disclosure requirement also requires all institutions to expressly and publicly state what their transfer and credit policies are. This regulation will allow consumers to have a better understanding while also shedding light on past limitations that have prohibitive to the students

Netting also believes this requirement will also encourage institutions to adopt new and innovative assessment modalities, thus allowing students and their parents to better evaluate the portability of education prior to enrolling in the institution.

The new regulations also require institutions to put critical information on their websites, such as transfer of credit, placement rates, retention rates and student services. This information must be easily assessable and the requirements specify critical details, such as font sizes. This will change areas required in accreditation as well as the consumer’s understanding of cost-benefit of high education.

The Department is also revamping a number of areas, including NextGen, the next generation of federal financial aid. They have totally revised StudentAid.gov, the student/consumer-facing side that provides students with more information and how to make their decisions prior to making their college choices. Additionally, the Department is offering more opportunities for students to interact with the loan servicers to enable more financial literacy education for students. This will help students understand more about their loan and how it differs from a grant. The department is now starting to work on the backend portion of NextGen, which involves the delivery of financial aid.

CARES Act

The pandemic’s pressing issues and the resulting the CARES Act and have meant that many higher education issues and discussions have been moved to the side. With that said, many policymakers and higher education leaders are dealing with both, thus having to “walk and chew gum at the same time.”

The CARES Act spread $14 billion across the higher education community with significant stipulations. These included that the funds must be used in relation to the national emergency created by the pandemic and were to be delivered to individual students as well as the institution so it could move to distance education. As part of this, institutions had to develop a plan of delivery of funding to the students who were most disrupted and most in need, such as those on federal Pell Grants. Conversations are on-going in relation to DACA students, who did not receive any of these initial funds.

Congress also allowed institutions to use any remaining money to the institution to support students. However, a number of institutions didn’t receive as much of an allotment as they needed; these institutions—primarily state colleges and universities, community colleges and others--would have preferred to have funding based on total enrollment and total population, as opposed to the priority being the need-based populations.

Additionally, loan-payment relief was given to students through the end of the year. This eliminates all negative consequences in relation to eligibility and repayment.

Discussions about a Next Stimulus

Congress began discussions in June about the next round of stimulus funding, although the political parties have differences on where to target the funding.

While the Republicans want these funds to go toward healthcare, education and job retraining / advancement, they believe a significant portion of the funding should be used to help people safely transition to education or jobs / employment. This would involve testing individuals for COVID prior to returning to work as well as fair distributions of vaccinations once they are available.

The Democrats are looking at providing money for state colleges, state universities, community colleges and other institutions, as well as using an equation that focuses on the total population served (as opposed to need-based funding). The House Democrats voted in a major stimulus package called the HERO Act that would provide significant directed funds to higher education and elementary and secondary education. Sen. Patti Murray (D) also introduced the Coronavirus Childcare Corrections and Educational Relief Act (CCCERA), which would provide significant funding for all sectors of higher education. One of the key differences between the House Democrat version and the Senate Democrat version is the House bill does not include private or proprietary institutions while the Senate bill includes for-profit institutions. Additionally, the Senate version counts individuals who were taking only online education, regardless of institution.

The major sticking point to passage of another stimulus package is liability. Republicans believe there should be liability protection included in the bill, and that those protections should extend to employers and institutions.

The future challenge, however, is that these various stimulus packages will eventually create a societal financial burden that will weigh down the individuals who are currently students who will benefit from these packages.

Three Areas for Higher Education Leaders to Watch

Netting encouraged higher education leaders to watch for these three upcoming issues:

Another set of regulations take effect in mid-August. These are very contentious regulations that are tied to Title IX. Those who support these new regulations believe there is a more equitable approach in relation to both the victims and the accused. However, victim rights advocates see these guidelines in the opposite light. Look for additional guidance from the Department of Education on how these guidelines will come forward.
The Department also will be providing additional guidance on the CARES Act, even though the funds have been delivered and expended. There are continued questions as to how far institutions can go in using these funds. There’s also a question about lost revenue, especially for Title 3, Title 5 and Title 7 institutions.
The next round of CARES Act may be coming soon. Congress may try to finish this legislation before the August recess. This legislation probably will include liability issues as well as funding for students and institutions. Netting said he is working with federal legislators and their staff to try to clean up issues that emerged in relation to the previous CARES Act, such as financial responsibility and student leaves of absence that resulted from their inability to do internships, etc., that are consequences of the pandemic.

Bullet Points

A number of new regulations started July 1. These include revisions to rules set during the Obama Administration--the gainful employment rule and the borrower defense to repayment rule—as well as recent negotiations about accreditation, state authorization, teacher/teach grants and faith-based education
State authorization and distance education also are changing. These changes focus on ensuring the quality of online education (which has been increasingly important in the wake of the pandemic) and flexibility of boundaries that allow students to attend online programs from institutions in other regions or states.
The new disclosure requirement requires all institutions to expressly and publicly state what their transfer and credit policies are. The new regulations require institutions to put critical information on their websites, such as transfer of credit, placement rates, retention rates and student services.
The Department is revamping a number of areas, including NextGen, which is the next generation of federal financial aid. This revision will encourage more transparency in relation to student loans and also focus on providing more financial literacy education.
The CARES Act spread $14 billion across the entire higher education community to be used in relation to the national emergency created by the pandemic. These funds were earmarked to support individual students as well as the institution so it could move to distance education. However, a number of institutions didn’t receive as much of an allotment as they needed; these institutions would have preferred the use of a different funding equation that was based on total enrollment and total population.
Loan payment relief through the CARES Act eliminates all negative consequences in relation to eligibility and repayment.
Congress began on-going discussions in June about the next round of stimulus funding, although the political parties have differences on where to focus the funding. However, the major sticking point is liability protection, which the Republicans support.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Lamar Alexander
Patti Murray
Congressman Bobby Scott
Virginia Foxx
2019 Negotiated Rulemaking process
Department of Education

Guests Social Media Links:

Tom Netting LinkedIn – https://www.linkedin.com/in/tom-netting-9214755/
Tom Netting Twitter - @t_netting

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://thechangeleader.com
Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #Education #University #HigherEducation

View Details

Higher education institutions are still reeling from dealing with the coronavirus pandemic during the spring term. However, now they are faced with the challenge of making critical decisions that also offer flexibility moving into the fall semester. Beloit College already is far ahead on this path.

This edition of the podcast will feature Dr. Eric Boynton, Beloit College’s provost and dean of the college. He was instrumental in helping lead the development of a unique plan for moving forward.

Creating a Task Force

In March as the pandemic emerged in the United States, Beloit started creating a COVID-19 task force that included individuals from across the institution that were going to be affected. The institution’s COVID task force, which was led by Dr. Boynton, included the chief technology officer, the chief operations officer, the chief health/wellness staff member, the dean of students, the assistant to the president, and the vice president of enrollment. The president purposefully was not a member of this task force because the efforts were going to be primarily focused on the curriculum; however the president’s assistant served as his representative and they met regularly to discuss the task force’s efforts. This approach also gave the president time to focus on the broad picture.

The task force met daily for a number of weeks. Dr. Boynton talked about the need to be fluid at this time since the situation was changing so quickly. Dr. Boynton said he initially didn’t deal well with these rapid and unplanned changes. He was in his first year serving as provost and was immersed in creating pedagogical innovations that would demonstrate the distinctiveness of the college’s education. This focus put him in a completely offensive posture until COVID hit, which immediately threw him into a defensive posture. He found that he was in a fog during the spring semester and could not see the horizon in relation to planning.

Rapid Transition to Online

Beloit’s first action was to extend spring break for a week and buy some time to see if they could bring students back to campus. However, it quickly became clear that this would not be possible so the institution moved to having classes fully online after the two-week spring break.

Like most small liberal arts institutions, Beloit had very few online courses before. There were blended courses, which depended on the professor and his/her aptitude in relation to using the technology. There also were a few faculty members who offered online summer courses.

Dr. Boynton described the spring semester as a glorious experiment in getting faculty who never thought about teaching online to embrace that instructional necessity. It was a way that Beloit and other small liberal arts institutions were able to shine, as faculty could think differently about these offerings. He believes these newly developed and innovative options will continue in the upcoming years and it will make education better.

Innovating for Fall Term

When Dr. Boynton and the university president decided to start thinking about the fall semester early in the pandemic, they kept their focus on what could be done to maximize possibilities while also minimizing disruptions. For example, Dr. Boynton found that students and faculty had trouble juggling four online courses simultaneously. He noted that many online institutions offer eight week sessions in which students take two courses at a time.

Dr. Boynton and the president began to consider moving to a block plan in the fall. In this initially considered plan, the semester would be carved up into quarters so that there would be 3-1/2 week courses. This started feeling controllable, as opposed to the triage environment that the administration and faculty were working in during the spring semester.

The provost met with several key staff members about the idea of the block plan. Some could easily see the potential offered by the proposal’s maximum flexibility while others needed more time to ponder it. This led to other discussions, which resulted in the idea to split the semester in half, thus allowing students to take two courses during a seven-and-half week period.

Interestingly, this new plan echoed a proposal that Beloit leaders and faculty had developed five years before Dr. Boynton’s arrival at Beloit – a plan that wasn’t enacted because it was considered too radical at the time.

Developing the Schedule

Students were are the forefront of Beloit’s thinking – they didn’t want to register students for the full semester and then have to come back with a new schedule and redo registration. To rapidly create a new schedule that would be done in time for registration (which was scheduled to occur shortly thereafter), the task force—with full faculty support—focused on strategically putting together the fall semester’s schedule. Instead of turning the schedule over to the department chairs and faculty members, two well-respected faculty members massaged the newly configured schedule, keeping an eye on what courses needed to be delivered in-person (such as lab courses) as well as other considerations, such as when to offer appealing entry courses to first-year students. Once this was completed, department heads and faculty then had a chance to review the schedule; almost everyone ended up agreeing with what had been proposed.

Positive Implications

This new structure will have implications post-COVID. With this schedule, the institution now has the flexibility to teach face-to-face or to move online if the pandemic worsens. Dr. Boynton also believes the schedule will morph in upcoming years, but still will offer the flexibility to meet students’ and faculty’s needs through hybrid instruction in the future.

One of the unintended (but good) consequences of this new structure is that only morning and afternoon classes are offered. This means that students will only be passing each other twice a day in the classes. These two blocks simplify and clarify how students move in and out of the classroom space.

Beloit will evaluate how this plan works to determine how to move forward after the pandemic is over. Noting that at Beloit this is ultimately a faculty decision, Dr. Boynton said the institution will pay attention to how students and faculty experience this set-up. He believes it could open up the possibility of outside-the-classroom participation during the semester while also simplifying the schedule. Dr. Boynton also believes that even if it does not become the way that future classes are structured, this approach will be adopted by more and more faculty.

Growing Interest

Many other institutions have become interested in Beloit’s new campus schedule. Twelve small liberal arts colleges have adopted Beloit’s revised schedule. In doing so, they’ve had to blow up their previously planned schedule and reregister students.

Beloit plans to host a conference for institutions who are moving to this type of schedule. This will be an opportunity to learn from each other what is working and what is not.

Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Dr. Boynton suggested three takeaways for higher education leaders:

Find ways to marry agility with ideas of weight and substance. Also identify ways to use your academic training in interesting ways in the world.
Constant communication and transparency, as well as stories, laughter and anecdotes, are critical in working with faculty and building consensus.
Go into conversations with a sense of the direction where you want to end up. Encourage meeting participants to offer their viewpoints so you can triangulate and figure out how to bring people together on a common direction.

Bullet Points

Identify a task force that includes key stakeholders from across campus. The participation of the president may not be mandatory, but make sure she/he sends a trusted representative to participate.
In times of crisis, flexibility is key. However, realize that everything is fluctuating so that leaders may not be able to instantly get a good fix on the horizon to gauge next steps.
Consider radical change the opportunity to have a glorious experiment. Use this as a way to get faculty and others to find ways to embrace the new normal and innovate.
In times of crisis, consider focusing on maximizing possibilities while minimizing disruptions. This can create break-through thinking.
Get feedback from across the campus as you develop these new ideas. Also look for different ways to get the work done, such as involving a few trusted faculty members in developing the schedule.
Look for unintended possibilities, such as how Benoit’s new schedule will limit student interaction (and thus limit the opportunities for COVID to spread).
Evaluate new efforts to see what modifications need to be made or if they should continue. However, even if the new options don’t continue, some faculty may choose to adopt some of the elements in their own work.
Create networks with other institutions during crisis in order to learn from each other about what works and what doesn’t.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Beloit College
Eric Boynton

Guests Social Media Links:

Twitter: @Beloit_College

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://thechangeleader.com
Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #HigherEducation #Education #University #Coronavirus

View Details

The current coronavirus pandemic puts an intense spotlight on leadership, both at the administrative and board levels. While boards and leaders have found ways to work effectively in dealing with the immediacy of closing the campus as the pandemic began, now they have to find ways to work together to create a learning environment that engages students while also taking proper precautions to keep students, faculty and staff safe on campus.

Resuming the Dance

Many institutional leaders have been bracing themselves due to the pandemic, but Dr. Gordon Gee, president of West Virginia University, is not one of them. Instead of being focused on the WVU’s survival during the coronavirus pandemic, he is figuring out how to help the institution thrive by using what is being learned from this situation. He believes that to do so will require reducing costs while increasing quality. Additionally, institutions need to be increasingly student-centric.

Higher education institutions are now coming out of the shutdown and entering into the dance of how to open up. West Virginia recently announced that its campus will reopen, but everyone will be required to be tested, wear masks, and social distance. This decision will require a major configuration of classrooms. The university also plans to move to a hybrid flex model in which some courses will be taught in-person while others will be offered only online.

The protocols required to do this are extensive and dramatic, but critically important so that institutions can help parents feel comfortable sending their children to the college or university. In addition, faculty, staff and students need to feel like they’re being well taken care of.

Acceleration Due to COVID

Dr. Gee believes that COVID-19 is one of the long-term issues that institutions are going to have to deal with. He believes that institutional leaders need to figure out how to deal with reality and ensure that that reality becomes a way of life in a positive way.

The acceleration / change that started a decade ago and has exponentially sped up over the past 10 months is clear. Much of this is due to technology advances, and during the pandemic, Dr. Gee has found more relevant uses of technology. As an example, he has found technology has improved his efficiency, although he has not yet determined if his effectiveness has gone up.

Dr. Gee believes that technology will remain an integral part of higher education, especially since the younger generations easily use technology. To that end, higher education leaders and faculty have to embrace a different dynamic that has emerged due to wide-spread use of technology in the pandemic. That means that higher education leaders and faculty need to find ways to embrace technology – and to learn how to lead using technology.

Changing Approach to Governance

Higher education governance has changed in the past two decades, as highlighted by Dr. Gee’s tenure as president at multiple universities. In his initial presidency, West Virginia University had a system governance board with a board of regents and local advisory boards. The University of Colorado had elected regents while Ohio State had a board appointed by the governor. Brown had 61 members on its board, Vanderbilt had 41 members and Ohio State had 17-18 members. Now Dr. Gee is back at West Virginia, which has 17 members of its Board of Governors.

He learned in each situation that dynamics among board members and leaders are very important. It’s important not to let factions on the board develop.

Dr. Gee noted that many of his colleagues have a view that you bring the board in, take them for a good meal and to a football game, and then get them out of town. He sees things differently. He wants the board members to be his partners so he communicates as much and as often as necessary to achieve that. He noted that with the West Virginia board, he tries to communicate in a number of different ways on an on-going basis.

Boards have become much more engaged in the minutia of universities. Dr. Gee believes the line between (micro)management and governance has gotten very murky, causing a major challenge for both the board and the university. How leaders deal with that requires an immense number of conversations with the board and making certain that the board understands the president’s views.

Dr. Gee believes there are higher education institutions have to deal with numerous levels of bureaucracy. The first is at the federal government level while the second is state government. The third is at the board level, which can involve the board asking higher education staff to deal with pet projects and issues.

In the age of the coronavirus, the relationships with boards have become very intense and many presidents’ positions also are very tenuous. At this point, Dr. Gee said, university presidents’ heads are sitting lightly on their shoulders because there is a lot of oversight and second-guessing. Boards are also more externally oriented and more business oriented while the university’s internal constituencies tend to be in an academic bubble where they are much more political and less realistic in many ways. To balance that, the president needs to find a middle ground that looks at the external world’s concerns about the university’s struggles as well as funding issues, as well as the internal constituencies’ “Cinderella” approach.

Difference in Institutional Boards

There are fundamental differences that also exist among boards at private and public higher education institutions. Boards of private institutions may meet 2-3 times a year. At these institutions, the executive committee—made up of the chair, vice chair, and vice chair of finance, etc. – meet more often. Boards of private colleges and universities also tend to be cheerleaders, funders and those who have made an extraordinary contribution of time, talent and treasure to the institution.

In comparison, boards of public colleges and universities often are very intense. They may meet monthly or every other month. These members are often politically appointed and come with a political agenda, whether that is the governor’s or their own, if they are elected. This means that higher education leaders have to deal with circumstances beyond their control, but are present in the boardroom with the trustees.

Dysfunctional boards are the worst thing in the world because they are about infighting and who has access to power. The challenge for presidents in these situations is how to determine who to talk to in order to get a straight answer.

Higher education leaders need to always have a pole star and then be able to convince people about why their vision for the institution is the correct one. This campaign should extend to the board, the faculty, the students and the staff. This requires decision-making that continually is rebalancing, based on conversations.

Dr. Gee believes that institutional presidents need to understand how to work with the 1-2 board members who think they have all the answers. This requires “cajoling” these board members as well as not becoming submissive to what they are doing. At the same time, it’s important that board leaders be willing to discipline fellow board members who move outside of the lines of good board behaviors. This requires a yin/yang relationship between the board chair and the university president so that the board remains firmly planted in the middle of the road.

The university president and the board chair should be linked at the hip. They must trust each other implicitly and share their views openly. A strong relationship helps create the level of intimacy that allows these two to work together to make the university a better place as well as keep the governance function operating at an optimum level.

Dr. Gee believes the optimal-size board is between 15-20 members, which allows for diverse views while also being small enough so that the board is not an army. West Virginia’s board includes two faculty members, one staff member and one student as regular members of the board. He believes these individuals’ views need to be part of the overall board conversation. He also tells them that they don’t come with a constituent representation; instead, they come with a point of view but they should not lobby for their particular group. Having a student representative on the board is especially important because that individual brings the current perspective of what it’s like to be in college today.

Dr. Gee also noted that he would like to get rid of what he calls “the rear-view mirror” of everyone involved in the institution, especially those who graduated from the institution. He believes this would help change the discussions about how to manage the institution so that they are looking forward instead of backward. This is especially important in today’s world, where individuals will either be architects of change or change’s victims.

He also noted that many ideas from corporate board governance are moving into university and college boards, as the two share many commonalities. In fact, many elements of corporate governance are moving into higher education, which is important because universities and colleges are complex organizations and can use improved governance processes.

The learning curve for a higher education board member is steep. Therefore, Dr. Gee believes that a trustee’s term should not be too short; however, he also believes the term should not be too long. He likes West Virginia’s system in which trustees are appointed for a four-year term and then can be reappointed for another four-year term. He noted that Ohio State had nine-year terms, which can be appropriate so that trustees can get acclimated to the culture, the contrary nature of universities, and the possibilities of the institution, as well as the daily happenings.

Dr. Gee said the trustees should not try to simplify a higher education institution because that gets in the way of governance. However, he does believe that the bureaucracy should be simplified as well as what the institution does. “Simple makes complexity work,” he said. “Complexity does not make complexity work.”

He also thinks that corporate boards can learn from the dynamic interactions of university boards. He also stressed that the chief academic officer tells the higher education institution what it is going to do; the chief financial officer then must make sure the money is available to make this vision a reality.

Dr. Gee thinks higher education institutions must have a long view. The “education bubble” started in Bologna in 1200 AD and continues through today. However, he thinks the American corporation does not share the kind of long view that the Japanese, Chinese or other cultures have. Instead, U.S. companies’ drive for profits hurts the issue of culture and opportunity for corporations.

Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Dr. Gee suggested three takeaways for higher education leaders in working with boards:

Love them.
Communicate with them.
Never surprise them. Never let them learn something through the regular media or social media that you should have told them.

Bullet Points

Higher education institutions need to focus on thriving instead of just surviving the pandemic. To achieve this requires a cohesive and collaborative effort between the administrative leaders and the Board.
The pandemic has accelerated change. A large part of this change involves the use of technology, which will remain a critical part of higher education moving forward. The question remains unanswered regarding whether the adoption of technology will lead to increases in both efficiency and effectiveness.
The composition and structure of boards have changed over the years.
Boards are not one-size-fits-all; they differ from institution to institution. Additionally, there are differences in how boards function in public vs. private higher education institutions.
Board members should be considered partners in the running of a college or university.
Academic and board leaders should strive not to let factions form.
Boards increasingly have gotten involved in the organizational minutia. Therefore, it’s incumbent on the president to find ways to communicate with the board to help them understand and adopt his viewpoint for the institution.
Higher education leaders need to have a pole star that they use as a guidepost for their work at the institution. They need to find ways to communicate that vision to board members as well as internal stakeholders.
The board chairman and the university president need to be on the same page in the sense that they have built trust and opened respectful communications so they can work together. This can help the board and administration work more seamlessly for the betterment of the institution.
Board membership can (and should) include a faculty member, staff member and student. These members can prove to be advantageous because they bring a different perspective to discussions.
Avoid always looking in the “rear view mirror” when making decisions. Instead, focus on the vision of where you want the institution to go in the future – and encourage board members to do so as well.
Specific length of terms as well as term limits can be helpful. Terms need to be long enough so that the member has enough time to go through the steep learning curve about the complexity of the institution and then can provide meaningful input on decisions. However, serving too long can dampen the trustee’s decision-making abilities.
Trustees should not try to simplify higher education’s inherent complexity.
Higher education and corporate boards are becoming more similar. With that said, corporate boards can learn from higher education boards to place the human equation over profit.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

West Virginia University

Guests Social Media Links:

E. Gordon Gee
Twitter: @gordongee

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://thechangeleader.com
Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #Education #HigherEducation #University

View Details

The COVID-19 pandemic has put even more pressure on institutions that serve underrepresented populations. One such institution is Amarillo College in Amarillo, TX. This community college is redefining its efforts to reach and engage its student body, many of whom are non-traditional and underrepresented students.

Dr. Russell Lowery-Hart is the college’s president. A product of the area, he previously served as a faculty member and associate provost of academic affairs at nearby West Texas A&M University (WTAM) before moving to Amarillo College as vice president of academics. He assumed the college’s presidency in 2014.

Focus on Educational Attainment

While serving as WTAM’s associate provost, Dr. Lowery-Hart was part of a community study on educational attainment in the Amarillo community. The data suggested that the community would be at-risk if the educational path for the majority of students did not fundamentally change. The institution that would be most critical in changing that trajectory was Amarillo College, the area’s community college.

With that in mind, Dr. Lowery-Hart applied for the position of Amarillo’ College’s vice president for academic when the position came open. He wanted to make this move because he understood that the college was going to be the epicenter in changing the community’s economic future.

Dr. Lowery-Hart considers himself an academic at heart so he looks at issues from a faculty perspective. When he came to Amarillo College, he initially looked at the institutional success rates, which were low. Wanting to understand what was happening in the classroom, Dr. Lowery-Hart assumed what the answers behind why students were failing so profoundly centered on academics. While that was partially true, students also told him that the biggest barriers to their academic success had nothing to do with what was going on in the classroom; instead, the biggest barriers were child care, health care, transportation, housing, food, utility payments, legal services and mental health support.

That understanding of the students’ situation changed Dr. Lowery-Hart as a person as well as a professional. He realized that the college’s infrastructure and support services needed to change dramatically in order to prepare students for workforce demands as well as transferring to universities.

Changing Perceptions about Students

Hearing students’ stories highlighted the fact that higher education is often built around a history that doesn’t necessarily reflect the reality of students that are in the community and on campuses. Institutions often are committed to perpetuating the wrong thinking that they need to serve the students that used attend instead of the student that is here now.

Conversations with students also taught Dr. Lowery-Hart that higher education administrators and faculty need to fall in love with the current students, instead of the students that the institution wishes it has or used to have. This means listening to, acknowledging and seeing students for who they are, and using their voices to shape the institution’s work. Higher education needs to provide a familial context in order to learn profoundly – students don’t care how much faculty and administrators know until they know how much they care.

To that end, Amarillo College held a professional development training as part of a poverty certification. Administrators, faculty and staff learned that while students who have nuclear family are enrolled in some form or fashion, generational poverty has changed how many students see themselves, their world and their own advocacy. Dr. Lowery-Hart said that most institutions are set up to support people like those already in higher education instead of supporting students who come from poverty.

Generational poverty teaches passivity and that hard work isn’t rewarded because people who live in poverty have done the hard work without seeing it pay off. This realization caused Amarillo College to rethink its bureaucracy, messaging and support systems. It also caused the institution to embrace the concept of love, with the idea that love through education can help someone emerge from generational poverty.

Because of this work, Amarillo College used its student enrollment data created a composite student, which they have named Maria. Maria is 27 years old, a Hispanic female who has real financial need. She is working two part-time jobs and raising a child while going to college.

This type of student is common in most community colleges and at many universities. Dr. Lowery-Hart noted that the institution needs to design itself around “Maria’s” needs while at the same time being cognizant of keeping male students on a successful pathway.

Improving Student Services

Amarillo College already had numerous innovative student services in place before the pandemic. Dr. Lowery-Hart said that life barriers need to be removed to help students embrace the learning. Providing systems of support have fundamentally altered students’ outcomes.

Some of these structures are unique. For example, Dr. Lowery-Hart has hired four social workers to bring robust community support to the college and to case-manage students through their classes and into success while ensuring they have the resources they need to graduate. Amarillo College also expanded the number of available counselors because so many students grew up in generational poverty and are struggling with trauma that many cannot understand. Additionally, there is academic support, through required tutoring, coaching and mentoring.

The system that Amarillo College put in place, which was instrumental in increasing the college’s completion rate from 19% five years ago to 52% currently, includes:

Social workers, who are structurally connecting students to support;
Required tutoring in classes to help students improve their learning;
A mentor or coach, to help students connect with resources and navigate the bureaucracy ; and
A counseling center to provide emotional support.

Additionally, the poverty training also helped faculty understand their role on the frontline because they have the most robust relationship with these students. Because faculty serve as the glue to help the students get to the proper services when they need it, the college created an early alert system in the faculty’s grade book so they can alert appropriate support staff that they have a student who needs specific assistance.

The training also helped faculty members change their paradigm. Faculty were seeing students who were not coming to class and/or sleeping in class as not being successful. The faculty had been internalizing these situation, thinking that they were not able to engage their students. What the poverty training helped highlight is that faculty cannot assume they automatically understand what the student’s behavior means. Instead, faculty need to ask. For example, students who were sleeping in class were working the night shift at the meat-packing plant in the community. Students who were late to class were delayed by unreliable public transit.

This understanding freed faculty to see that they weren’t the center of student disengagement, but that they could be the center of supporting students in a more effective learning environment. By giving faculty resources and a few key pieces of information, the college has created an important support system for students.

In the Aftermath of COVID

The COVID pandemic highlighted the fact that many students don’t have technology resources, a danger which will disparately affect these students by moving everything online. Therefore, Amarillo College focuses on tech-supported learning, as opposed to online learning. Online learning creates fear for many students because they think they don’t have the skills or ability. Tech-support focuses on the learning instead of being online (although that is there). Additionally, more counseling, tutoring and advising sessions are available through tech-supported learning, although the way these are accessed are different.

Amarillo College also had a subset of students who did not have access to technology at home. Dr. Lowery-Hart believed it was important to keep one of the school’s largest computer labs open with every safety protocol imaginable so that these students could access it during the pandemic. The college also moved to the lab’s circle desk and, wearing a mask, Dr. Lowery-Hart pitched in personally by taking students’ temperatures and asking them all the protocol questions. He then connected students to a group of employees who could help students get online or help them access tutoring or advising.

Most students didn’t know it was him doing this as his lower face, including his beard, were covered.

Dr. Lowery-Hart stated that being on the frontlines at this time was important as the president of the institution. He also believed strongly that the college needed to keep those services available because otherwise students would fail or drop out, and the college would never get them back. He also noted that once students realized that the president was the person helping them in the computer lab, they had a stronger understanding of the institution’s commitment to them.

Lessons from the Pandemic

One of the biggest lessons involved the counseling center. Robust counseling services were available prior to COVID, but half of these appointments were cancelled. The college found that moving these appointments to a Google Meets environment resulted in fewer cancellations, while also being able to counsel students more profoundly.

The same thing is happening with advising. Moving forward, Dr. Lowery-Hart believes that much of the advising and counseling services will be offered through an online platform because the college is seeing more students.

The college also is seeing more need as well as more trauma, and is working with Heal the City, a free area clinic, in a partnership. That way, college counselors can connect students to a psychologist who can assist them until they can get more robust psychological intervention.

Post-COVID, the college will try to use these new tools that have emerged during the pandemic to serve more students. The counseling and advising centers will remain in a remote environment moving forward because students are accessing these more freely and are being served more effectively.

Changes in Academics

In the breakneck transition to a remote learning environment online, students have given the college a lot of grace, but by the time the fall semester comes around, that grace period ends and the college needs to be experts at it. Faculty are really embracing professional development opportunities that are being offered and incentivized by the college in relation to doing a better job in creating a remote learning environment. When the college comes back in session in the fall term in whatever form, faculty will be extremely effective in whatever modality of learning is used. COVID has expatiated that transformation.

The institution also is assessing which classes are best suited for a remote environment and which should be taught in a hybrid or face-to-face environment. These decisions now can be made using data instead of instructor- or student-comfort level.

Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Dr. Lowery-Hart suggested several takeaways for higher education leaders:

Develop the composite of who your student is, not who you think she is. Make your typical student the center of your re-imagination of your institution in a post-COVID world.
Use a secret shopper process. Dr. Lowery-Hart each year identifies a handful of students and pays them to be a secret shopper so they can report back on their experiences using school processes. These shoppers help him understand the student experience beyond typical survey data. Each year, the focus is different. In the past, these have included the onboarding process, the tutoring process, the learning experiences and the advising process.
You have to understand what your students need on the front line and what your employees on the front line need from you.

Bullet Points

Community and local commuter colleges may be the linchpin in helping communities maintain economic viability in the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Higher education leaders need to ask students about the barriers to learning they are facing, rather than relying solely on conjecture or past history.
The institution’s administrators, faculty and staff need to fall in love with the students who are at the institution, instead of focusing on a different type of student who are not in attendance. A composite student that is based on enrollment data can help leaders, faculty and staff have a template of what students are facing and the assistance they need.
Generational poverty is a major factor facing many students. Therefore, it is important for leaders, faculty and students to get a better understanding of what this means for students and how to develop meaningful services that will help these students succeed.
Support systems can include social workers, counseling, tutoring and advising. These systems need to be built with student need and usage in mind.
Faculty are the frontline staff members with students, and they need to have a strong understanding of generational poverty and what services are available so they can make appropriate referrals to support students.
Generational poverty also may mean that students are intimidated by online learning. Therefore, tech-supported learning that provides additional assistance may be the best way to go.
Some students may not have access to technology to be able to do online learning. Therefore, the college needs to look for innovative ways to make these technology available so that students can succeed.
The pandemic has increased the need for many services. In addition, many students are facing increased trauma. Consider forming a partnership with a community organization in order to provide necessary resources to support students.
Higher education needs to continue to improve its online course offerings through professional development.
In the wake of the pandemic, it’s important for institutions to use data to determine which courses are best taught online, which need to be hybrid and which work best as face-to-face courses.
Institutional leaders need to be the face of the institution in times of crisis. By interacting regularly with students, leaders can help underscore how much the institution cares about each student’s issues and success.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Amarillo College
Russell Lowery-Hart

Guests Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/russellloweryhart/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/loweryhart?lang=en

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://thechangeleader.com
Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #Education #University #BlackLivesMatter #HigherEducation

View Details

Many higher education institutions are struggling with survival. While many leaders are beginning to consider closing the institution, there are other options available. Some of the most commonly talked about are mergers and acquisitions. However, forming or becoming part of a consortiums can offer important support that can help an institution survive and even thrive.

One example of a consortium is TCS Education System, a non-profit system of higher education institutions. TCS stands for The Community Solution in higher education. Dr. Michael Horowitz, president of the TCS Education System, is the guest on today’s podcast.

TCS’s Background

When Dr. Michael Horowitz founded TCS, he was president of The Chicago School of Professional Psychology. Near the start of his tenure, the institution had about 200 students and was one enrollment cycle from closing. Through concentrated effort, the institution then grew to 2,000 students.

Dr. Horowitz realized during this growth process that the institution needed to allocate the responsibility for certain resources—the business side of higher education--to a bigger and broader community. The areas he wanted to delegate were that didn’t directly affect students, teaching or learning. He also believed that the lives of faculty and students would be enriched through creating a bigger community of like-minded institutions. That led to the creation of TCS.

After doing initial research, Dr. Horowitz and some colleagues created a formal system in 2009 that had a common commitment to student success and community impact. This system was designed to support small- and medium-sized colleges, and enabled them to work together to do more of the work that didn’t involve students in order to lower costs, create better systems and alleviate pressure on people. This freed up energy and creativity for the colleges that they could focus on teaching and learning.

Looking at his own institution’s strengths (psychology and behavioral science), Dr. Horowitz tried to invite institutions that offered logical and complimentary fields—business, health care, medicine, nursing and law. By 2010, two institutions – Pacific Oaks College and Children’s School and Santa Barbara and Ventura Colleges of Law – joined this new system. Today, TCS has six colleges involved and is in discussions with at least one college at any specific time about joining.

Services Provided

In today’s turbulent environment, higher education leaders should step back and think through every business element that isn’t directly tied to teaching and learning. That’s where organizations like TCS can help – by providing expertise in areas such as accounting, payments, student finance, and the back office of enrollment – things that do not directly involve teaching and academics.

TCS offers these types of services. For example, in a regular college, admissions teams spend an inordinate amount of time on computers processing applications. TCS handles that part of the work so that the admissions team can spend more of its time interacting directly with prospective students.

Additionally, TCS handles negotiations for the major health care insurance contracts and retirement plans. The nonprofit has a marketing team whose only clients are the system’s six colleges in the system as well as a technology team to handle technology systems on campuses. A TCS team also facilitates the logistics for global engagement and partnerships.

This thoughtful delegation allows institutional leaders and faculty to focus on student success as well as those things that shouldn’t be centralized, such as fundraising and community relations. Therefore, a consortium such as TCS allows institutional leaders to spend their limited time focusing on these important issues instead of the details of a healthcare plan.

Dr. Horowitz also noted that there are other existing models of shared services in other industries that higher education can learn from. For example, Zingerman’s Deli offers a model that includes a number of food companies as well as a consulting arm, Zing Train.

The Secret Sauce: Community

TCS’s model is unique in that institutions are part of a formally governed system. Dr. Horowitz describes the “secret sauce” as the creation of community and goodwill that is not a top-down mandate.

For example, there is an academic assembly in which faculty from participating institutions come together to share best practices. They talk about how to share curriculum and courses as well as how to share dual degrees. No one tells them they have to do this; instead, they feed off the excitement of being with colleagues from across the country.

Additionally, TCS brings consortium institutions’ board members together annually, whether at a TCS-sponsored event or another conference. This gives board members from different institutions a chance to come together to discuss what is working and how they are handling different issues in relation to finance and innovation while also creating a level of community.

This community also offers support beyond these meetings. For example, one member institution has board members from other institutions providing valuable input on issues related to starting a new medical school.

A Different Model

TCS is not the type of vendor that is trying to create a profit through shared services. In fact, TCS’s assets remain at and belong to the college and the institution has seen its financial strength grow by being part of TCS. When the TCS IT or marketing team works with a college, the team feels very much part of that college’s mission.

Dr. Horowitz also noted that TCS partner instutions will never have a key position go down – if one college in the consortium loses a leader, other colleges offer to share leaders to cover the gap until a new person is hired. This creates a family, team and community environment that feels unprecedented 10 years after its founding.

Dr. Horowitz supports consortia arrangements, because higher education is lacking in the spirit of this type of cooperation. He sees higher education as a team spirit. Consortiums tend to get limited because leaders are taking energy to make a choice, such as sharing the parking lot, library or purchasing function. However, the real benefits are seen when institutions opt in to a model in which they are sharing the whole decision-making process, while in tandem with each college has its own operating board.

Differentiating Responsibilities

The college’s board is responsible for and critical to the operation of each institution. The role of the system’s board is to maintain the overall health, resources and alignment of the entire system. These are two separate and distinct functions and roles. The system’s board never takes up business that is the college’s board. Instead, TCS’s role is to facilitate the mission and strategic plan for each college.

For example, one college wanted to purchase its campus. The role of the system in this situation is to assist and provide the financial acumen to do that. Then its responsibility extends to getting the best arrangement at the lowest terms for the college. However, the system board is not responsible for deciding whether the institution should take this action.

A Neglected Model

Many institutions seem to want to close or merge rather than join a system such as TCS’s. Dr. Horowitz believes that many institutions have a misplaced idea that their autonomy and identity are based on doing all activities (including the ones that TCS offers). They also may suffer from embarrassment about mistakes they’ve made and why they might be in dire-straights.

Once boards get comfortable after joining, they see that they can look at what’s happening in other colleges within the system and learn from best practices. That creates a higher level of performance for boards and leadership.

Dr. Horowitz also points to the proof of the model’s power. TCS’s members have grown academically in terms of their accreditation review and their scope and impact. Today they all have more employees—faculty and student-facing employees as opposed to accountants--as compared to when they joined the system. These institutions also have better facilities and technology and are developing new programs, modalities and outreach opportunities.

Dr. Horowitz doesn’t believe that TCS should be the only non-profit model of this sort in higher education. A number of institutions, especially those that are religious institutions that have a common faith or order, could easily form this type of system.

In the Wake of the Pandemic

This type of model probably will come to the forefront in the post-coronavirus era since many institutions will find that they are not able to afford the backend functions. Institutions can share these types of services through working together.

The sense of community also pays off in other ways in relation to surviving the pandemic. TCS has convened its member presidents as a group to discuss the best response to COVID. They also looked at policies and plans in relation to re-opening campuses.

The TCS internal group also is discussing the best way to spend federal funding offered in the wake of the pandemic. Part of these funds will go to students while part will be spent institutionally.

Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Dr. Horowitz suggested three takeaways for higher education leaders:

Adaptability is the most important thing and this crisis is amplifying that. The most effect leaders in higher education have accepted that change is a constant. Be willing to break conventional wisdom and come up with your own model and response.
Leaders need to place more attention on financial health. This extends beyond balancing of the budget. Leaders need to look at institutional aspirations for distance education, new programs and additional student services to determine whether the institution has the capacity to do it. If not, leaders should be looking at other models for operating, such as an acquisition, merger or consortium.
Keep your core mission in mind at all times. Are your students successful in terms of retention, graduation, and are they prepared for their future careers? Do they look back and say that they are happy that they spent time pursuing higher education?

Bullet Points

Many struggling higher education institutions are considering closing, mergers or acquisitions. However, joining a consortia can provide life-saving support both financially and programmatically.
Institutions should consider creating or joining a consortium that has institutions with similar sizes, missions or approaches.
Consortia can provide support in business functions (accounting and contracts), human resources functions (health insurance and retirement plans), admissions (inputting applications), marketing, technology, and international partnerships.
Most institutions want to remain independent and aren’t used to collaborating. However, a consortia provides an opportunity to work as a team in a collaborative environment.
Consortia remove some of the more mundane tasks from leaders’ agendas so they have time to focus on students, faculty, teaching, learning, fundraising and other more critical responsibilities.
Consortia also can provide a sense of community where board members, leaders and faculty members can interact with other members to learn about what is happening across the system, identify best practices, and find additional ways to work together and support each other.
The system’s board and the college’s board are responsible for different areas. The system would look at feasibility, capacity and contractual issues whereas the college’s board would be responsible for making the campus-level decision.
This approach makes sense in terms of dealing with the financial challenges of the pandemic. It also gives leaders a forum to share ideas for re-opening and moving forward in the “new normal.”

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

TCS Education System

Guests Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drmichaelhorowitz/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://thechangeleader.com
Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords: #Education #HigherEd #University

View Details

The coronavirus pandemic has accelerated the changes already facing higher education. These issues include financial, structural and enrollment. Mike Goldstein, one of the top higher education attorneys in the country, offers his insights on how higher education leaders can navigating these challenges.

Fall-out from Remote Learning

Goldstein sees many implications for higher education that started during the pandemic. One long-term implication involves the necessity to move from some form of face-to-face instruction to remote learning because of the pandemic.

He felt it was important to distinguish between online learning and remote learning. Zoom uses the Internet but it is not online learning. What Zoom does is take face-to-face synchronous interaction and moves it to remote synchronous interaction. This is essentially the same thing and this approach works in a lot of settings. In comparison, he defines online learning as involving more advanced platforms and different kinds of platforms.

This change is important in relation to student enrollment and retention. Higher education leaders are concerned that enrollments will drop between 20-40 percent in September; the latter would be cataclysmic for most institutions. Goldstein believes online learning is part of the problem because students have been catapulted from sitting in class to sitting in front of a screen with a lot of other distractions. Their reaction is, “That’s not what I expected.”

Institutions need to find ways around those perceptions in a way that can keep students engaged and enrolled, while also getting past this immediate emergency. For example, the University of Cambridge just announced that they are discontinuing their large live lectures, which are going to instead be offered online. However, their small classes – known as tutorials, which have characterized Cambridge for the past 300 years – will continue face-to-face but with social distancing. That is the ultimate hybrid system because it’s the tutorial that is the hallmark of the nature of a Cambridge or Oxford education. These institutions are preserving that hallmark, but turning to technology to bring the easiest thing to present online – a face on a screen.

Goldstein is a trustee of two low-residency institutions. In these, small tutorial groups work independently either electronically or personally, and then gather together for short periods of time during the year. These sessions also can switch to an online environment very easily. Enrollment has gone up in these institutions since the pandemic hit.

Financial Changes

Goldstein believes the short-term problem that institutions are facing involves weathering this storm and enabling themselves to make necessary changes and have the resources to do that. The bulk of institutions are going to have to figure out how to deal with the financial hurdles association with this situation. Institutions that are already near the margin – which includes a significant portion of smaller private colleges—are in particularly difficult straits. If a small college loses 10 percent of its enrollment, its ability to operate is going to be severely damaged.

A Possible Remedy

Many are talking about the reorganization under Chapter 11 of the Bankruptcy Act; however, this is not available to institutions of higher education in the United States, even though it’s available to every other business. The reason for that is the Higher Education Act, which states that institutions that declare bankruptcy immediately lose access to federal student loans and grants, and that loss is permanent. Basically this serves as a death penalty.

Many now recognize that businesses that go through Chapter 11 reorganizations often come out the other side stronger than when they started. This organization involves restructuring overhanging debt and contracts, while also making their business model more efficient. This is a standard way that businesses work in the United States.

Higher education is a business, even if it is a non-profit.

One thing that is promising is that the urgency created by COVID-19 is now forcing policymakers in the Congress and U.S. Department to seriously consider taking steps to change this situation. This would allow higher education institutions to use Chapter 11 reorganization to climb out of the hole that the pandemic made deeper.

Short-term Decisions

Goldstein believes the short term decision-making process for higher education institutions involves several characteristics. The first complex decision is whether to reopen or stay online. California State will remain online for the fall semester, while others will reopen with social distancing. For a commuter campus, it’s easier to hold class on campus, but transportation becomes an issue if students have to rely on public transit. The residential institutions that have dormitories with occupancy of 2-3 students in a room or 3-5 students to an apartment will also face difficult economic challenges if they to drop that occupancy to one student to a room or two students to an apartment.

However, Goldstein feels the real challenge that leaders face is how to structure the institution so that people will want to come back and feel it’s safe to return to campus. That is the hard question. This comes down safety and priorities. The college experience, which includes the social environment and social interaction, goes beyond the classroom.

Adult learners will be less affected and more likely to adapt to an online environment. However, traditional college-age students have different expectations of college and are interested in the campus experience. Moving forward in the wake of this pandemic, leaders may find it more challenging to appeal to these students.

In fact, some students and their families are bringing lawsuits that suggest the quality of education has diminished in the post-pandemic higher education environment. They also argue that they are paying for the college experience in its totality and that’s not what they are getting. They believe that they shouldn’t be paying high tuition (or any tuition, in some cases) if they are going to be forced to experience less.

While there is legal protection for institutions moving to online education in the spring, the issue becomes hazier in the fall. Goldstein expects legal challenges if institutions decide to charge exactly the same amount if students aren’t going to be living on campus and won’t have the same campus experience. However, he is not sure if this argument will stand since there are many institutions that charge the same price for online and on-campus education. Some would suggest that the educational program between these two is comparable. The institutions also will argue that students are paying per-credit hour (the cost of classes and the credential being earned). However, students and families may note that while the online and on-campus educational program may be comparable, campus life factored into their enrollment decision. He is not sure how these cases will evolve.

The relationships that a student builds while earning their degree also is part of the deal, and this also may be an issue. The social interactions, connections, decisions and maturation that happen in college are important. Institutions need to figure out how to create those connections without the same level of physical interactions.

The Costs for these Changes

Goldstein believes there will be a wholesale change in how higher education is done. For a lot of institutions, affordability will be a grave issue. Institutions are going to have to look at alternative ways of financing their operations. They may be dipping into their reserves or endowments. Institutions will be declaring financial exigency and changing their faculty financial structures.

There also will need to be more governmental support of both private and public higher education because in almost every case, tuition is the primary budgetary source for the institution at this point. States and the federal government will need to step up to prevent a wholesale loss of educational opportunity.

Policymakers will also have to reckon with past decisions in relation to higher education. The nation has made a paradigm shift away from education’s role as supporting the public good. While the GI Bill and Student Aid programs focused on grants and low-cost loans increased higher education’s access and availability initially, policy decisions made over the years migrated to expensive student loans with the idea that the student would pay it off over his or her lifetime. As higher education became more expensive, these loans became more burdensome.

However, if we are going to sustain the availability of higher education, we’re going to have to put more money in. Simply subsidizing student tuition will not be sufficient due to the changes in enrollment and costs, which are going to imperil the institution’s ability to survive.

Before the current crisis, there were estimates that between 20-40 percent of private institutions would not be around a decade now. Goldstein thinks the high end initially was excessively pessimistic. Now, the risk and the likelihood of failure of private higher education is high. He foresees a number of institutions merging or creating partnerships or affiliations with other institutions, including public and private institutions. Public universities have started absorbing private institutions that can’t sustain themselves.

He also foresees belt tightening in public universities. Some smaller campuses may close, hopefully for only the short term. This decisions is difficult due to student access. Additionally, these institutions are often the economic engines for their communities. If they go away, the impact on their community could be very significant.

The Silver Lining

One of the ironies of higher education is the student aid system. Higher education has been counter cyclical in that if people can’t find work, they’re more likely to go back to school to improve their education.

If students go back to school and get a student loan, that loan also will include the cost of living. Students can pay for rent, food, car loans and their electric bill, although they will still have debt. The question is whether the government will do something to make this loan less burdensome.

The people who are most likely to go back to school are adult learners, which may be the silver lining of this pandemic. These adult learners also will often want quality online education instead of the campus experience. That may help institutions survive the issues brought on by this pandemic.

Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Goldstein suggested several takeaways for higher education leaders:

Don’t give up.
Be imaginative. Work collaboratively across the institution to make it both safe and attractive.
Look at every possible option educationally and financially. Think the unthinkable, other than closing. Think of the opportunities to keep the institution alive, whether through restructuring, merger, transition to different program, using a different faculty model or reaching out to a different type of student.

Bullet Points

Many students are not enamored with how online education is being offered in the wake of the pandemic. Identify new models online learning to use in your favor. For example, Cambridge is moving its large lectures online, but keeping its signature smaller groups face-to-face and socially distant.
Policymakers are beginning to consider opening the Chapter 11 bankruptcy reorganization to higher education. This would enable some institutions to survive their current financial situations.
There are many short-term decisions that need to be made. At the top of the list is whether to remain online or to bring students back to campus. While this is a complex decision, the real issue is whether students want to come back to campus and whether they feel safe returning.
Adult learners are more interested in the online environment. This may prove a blessing since many of these individuals may enroll in order to retool their careers after being laid off in the recession.
Some families of traditional experience are starting to bring lawsuits if they are charged the same tuition rates but don’t get the same college experience. Institutions need to consider how to create this experience in this new environment.
Federal and state governments are going to need to provide more financial support for higher education institutions if they are to survive.
Many institutions also are going to need to consider merging or creating partnerships or alliances to survive this situation.
In some university systems, some smaller campuses may be closed. Hopefully this will be a short-term decision since these campuses provide access for students and serve as an economic driver for their community.
Student loans may actually help students return to college in this current situation because they cover the student’s daily expenses. However, there is an issue of debt and repayment, which needs to be addressed by the federal government.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Department of Education: https://www.ed.gov/

Guests Social Media Links:

Mike Goldstein Bio: https://www.cooley.com/people/mike-goldstein
Mike Goldstein LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/michaelbgoldstein/
Cooley LLP: https://www.cooley.com/
Cooley’s Higher Ed Newsletter: https://ed.cooley.com/2019/04/17/surprise-accreditation-and-innovation-neg-reg-reaches-consensus/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://thechangeleader.com
Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Higher education leaders are in a difficult position as they navigate the coronavirus pandemic. They have had to make the difficult decision in closing campuses during the spring semester, and now they need to focus on bringing students back safely in the fall semester and moving forward in the “new normal.”

Dr. Billy Hawkins has successfully led several higher education institutions through transformational change. During his 13-year tenure as president of Talladega College, the college has undergone a transformation and quadrupled its enrollment. The institution is listed among Princeton Review’s best colleges in the Southwest and U.S. News and World Report’s most innovative colleges. He is currently the chair of the 37 presidents of the United Negro College Fund (UNCF).

Working Collaboratively

Leading during this time requires collaboration instead of isolation. For instance, Dr. Hawkins uses his role as UNCF presidents’ chair to interact with the presidents who serve on the organization’s advisory board through Zoom calls and meeting. These meetings and calls allow the presidents to collaborate and work through the many challenges that their institutions are facing.

Closing the Campus

Talladega College and similar institutions had to make the difficult decision to send students home in mid-March. In making the decision, Hawkins reviewed what other institutions were doing across the nation. He then sat down with his leadership team to analyze this information. Using this data, Talladega College’s leadership made the decision to shut down on-campus instruction during spring break so that students wouldn’t return from other parts of the nation and inadvertently infect members of the university’s community. This closure also meant that Talladega’s faculty had to convert their classes to an online platform.

One of the major challenges that Talladega College faced was helping students through this difficult time. Some students were international students who couldn’t travel home; other students’ hometowns were hotspots for the coronavirus.

Talladega College approached this uniquely and with compassion, telling students that they could remain on campus if they didn’t feel they could return home. Those who stayed were given jobs on campus working in the physical plant. In addition, the institution was able to tap into a campus emergency fund to help international students return home if they were able to do so.

Many students also faced challenges because of lack of technology and Internet connectivity. For those who remained on campus, Talladega College set up technology in the library so students could easily take classes online.

In addition, the institution reached out to the community, continuing a long partnership. There are two major education institutions in the city, Talladega College and Alabama Institute for the Deaf and Blind. The two presidents often talk, and AIDB’s president serves on Talladega College’s board. In addition, the city council and community businesses have been very supportive of the college during the pandemic.

CARES Act

Talladega College received approximately $4 million from the CARES Act and the PPP loan program. The institution is using the 50/50 part to support students through a grant application process. Students were asked to log into the institution’s portal to complete the application form. This gave Talladega College a current address where the student was residing as well as hard data in terms of where they are residing at the present time. Once the school received that information, the business office cut a $500 check for each student. Hawkins sent a letter with the check that acknowledged Congress, the U.S. Department of Education and the UNCF, which provided key leadership in the CARES Act’s passage.

If students didn’t access that website portal, the institution did not send a check; this gave the college a better accounting of the funds.

This is the first of two checks. Talladega College will send out a second check in early July, which Hawkins believes will help with student retention. Furthermore, by allocating these funds in two distributions, the institution is encouraging students to use the amount on what they truly need in their daily life.

Creating a Family Atmosphere

Dr. Hawkins believes that the institution’s leaders, faculty and staff have to connect with the students to be able to help them – and reminds employees that the students are their customers. If they treat these customers right, they’ll keep buying their “product.”

The college’s small enrollment allows Dr. Hawkins and the faculty to get to know every student personally. He wants students to be able to walk up and have a conversation with him. He also hosts students at the president’s residence.

The family atmosphere on campus is important – and can be been seen in the college’s various activities. For example, Talladega College has 400 band members (even without a football team) and is striving to be the largest band among HBCUs. The band has participated in the Inaugural Parade, been the lead band in key Mardi Gras’ parades, and performed half-time shows with the New Orleans Saints football team and two senior bowls.

Student Retention

Dr. Hawkins and faculty members continue to check on students, and many are ready to return to campus. He said that the institution needs to show they care about the students, which also convinces their parents that they have taken the appropriate measures to ensure everyone’s safety.

The retention office also is actively working to stay in touch with students. The office is doing weekly podcasts and also reaching out to students on a weekly basis. They are having regular chats and there are chat groups with faculty participation that are specific to groups, such as the band. There also is an e-blast that goes out regularly.

The institution recently opened a new dorm, and has taken advantate of students being away to renovate the older dorms so that they are more comparable to the new dormitory. Talladega will be distributing information on renovations of the dormitories in the near future. This will create a “wow” factor for students because the campus leaders are listening to student feedback.

Dr. Hawkins and his cabinet also meet with student leaders every month. The vice presidents and the director of the physical plant are allowed only to sit and listen, as Dr. Hawkins wants them to hear how students feel about what’s going on around campus. After the meeting, the administrators discuss how to fix a specific issue, if it is indeed a problem.

Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Dr. Hawkins suggested several takeaways for higher education leaders:

Prepare for students’ return to campus. Make the campus a safe environment; this is what parents want to hear. For instance, Talladega College has ordered 6,000 masks and plans to have hand sanitizer and rubber gloves available across campus. Also, screen companies that want to provide these items carefully since many just began selling these items during the pandemic.
Connect to the students. Know how they are feeling about being away from campus and find ways to celebrate their return. Dr. Hawkins likes to create unique t-shirts to celebrate college milestones as a way to send positive energy. For example, he is considering holding a barbecue at the start of the school year.
Communicate the continued importance of on-campus education across the nation. The current focus is online, but we need to make sure that the importance of on-campus education is not forgotten.

Bullet Points

Seek out a group of presidents to discuss critical decisions during the pandemic.
Maintain the focus on students during this time. Ensure their safety and also find ways to support them as they face challenges.
Seek the community’s support during this time. They can offer a variety of resources to your institution.
Look for innovative ways to support students that also can help boost retention. One example is Talladega College’s decision to split up student payments from the CARE Act. The second payment which will be distributed in July, will help reinforce the school’s commitment to the students – and serve as a prompt to reenroll.
Create a family atmosphere on campus. This includes getting to know students personally and encouraging faculty and staff to see the students as their customers.
Find ways to strengthen the bonds with students to encourage them to return in the fall. These can include podcasts, chat rooms, email blasts and information about what is happening on campus, such as renovations.
Meeting regularly with student leaders. Invite your cabinet to sit in and listen. Take the students’ feedback from these meetings and address these issues, when appropriate.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Talladega College

Guest’s Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/dr-billy-hawkins-96211921/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://thechangeleader.com
Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Keywords - #Education #University #HIgherEducation

View Details

Higher education will need to increasingly focus on innovation in both how it operates and how it educates students in the wake of the coronavirus pandemic and the resultant recession. So what does that look like? This podcast focuses on taking innovation to the next level.

Julie Lenzer serves as the University of Maryland’s chief innovation officer. As an entrepreneur, she worked extensively in the private sector, including owning Applied Creative Technologies, which handled data analytics and collection for food manufacturing companies. Lenzer also worked in the Obama Administration as the Director of the Office of Innovation and Entrepreneurship, which was housed within the U.S. Department of Commerce’s Economic Development Administration.

She has been in academia for 3 years where her focus is on creative problem-solving and making things happen. Lenzer fosters and supports UMD’s innovation, entrepreneurship, and technology commercialization enterprise, including the development of the UMD’s Research Park, the Discovery District, and the Greater College Park initiative. She also promotes and facilitates university-wide collaboration to launch startup ventures based upon University intellectual property.

Sparking Innovation

The coronavirus pandemic is forcing higher education institutions to embrace innovation at an extremely fast pace. Everything that institutions (especially those that are not purely online) thrive on—sense of community, students on campus, research labs—is being rethought during the pandemic.

Higher education also has been forced to embrace changes on numerous fronts during this pandemic, including managing team members who are working remotely. Lenzer believes this approach to work will continue, which will be good for employees and the university because of greater organizational and personal efficiencies. Additionally, this remote-working approach is good for the environment.

The pandemic also is offering higher education the opportunity to infuse students with the mindset of “How can we….?” Through that problem-solving, entrepreneurial mindset, creativity is being enhanced.

Going forward, institutions will need to encourage broader connections in order to spark innovation. Many institutions tend to be siloed, although progressive institutions have started to figure out that they need to have greater connections across campus. To achieve this level of connection, we recommend finding ways to connect individuals across disciplines and functions since innovation comes from differences in thought and perspectives.

This approach to creating innovation also should be adopted to connect students who have different majors and interests. For example, the University of Maryland just created an immersive Design Media major, which is a collaboration between the art and the computer science departments. The creative mindset and liberal arts education are not going away; in fact, this approach is becoming more important in the STEM-focused world because it is proving to be the differentiator.

In another example of this type of cross-pollination, the University of Maryland offers a program called Quest that brings business students and technical students together to work in diverse teams focused on problems faced in industry. This type of program exposes students to real-world issues and requires them to be innovative through applying the knowledge they gained in class to create a solution.

At many institutions across the nation, faculty members and students offer their knowledge and skills in the fight against the coronavirus. For example, one University of Maryland incubator, TechPort, brought in engineers from a nearby U.S. Navy base. These engineers used 3-D printers to create facemasks, developed frames for facemasks and created a large device to sterilize PPEs. One person took a breast pump and redirected it to be a ventilator.

Fostering Creativity

Fostering creativity is based on allowing and even encouraging failure, which is often difficult in higher education which focuses on pass/fail grades. One of the key concepts in this requires embracing the concept of measured failure, i.e., when someone tries something and then is positively acknowledged for the effort and thought process that was underlying the measured failure.

However, this approach can be a conundrum between the current version of higher education and the need for developing and encouraging creative problem-solving people. A good example of this was Thomas Edison, who failed numerous times before he created the light bulb.

Institutions shouldn’t look down on people because they failed. In fact, the University of Maryland actually celebrates spectacular failures and now hold a conference where people talk about where they’ve failed, but more importantly what they’ve learned from it and how they changed what they were doing and improved on what they are attempting. That is the tool that is going to help students the most in their future careers because everyone will be focused on challenges and improvements.

The next level of academics

The cross-disciplinary approach is critical to prepare students for the world they will enter. Students increasingly can create their own majors and craft their own paths based on their interests and skills. While this is not a new concept, many institutions do not do this. It’s also an institutional mindshift away from “I know what’s best for you” to instead embracing a more personalized education.

Higher education needs to find ways to expose students to new ideas and unlock something—a skill or interest-- in them that they didn’t realize they had. The institution should support these students in this inquiry but not hand them everything as they go forward. It’s also important to connect students with individuals with similar viewpoints and interests as well as with others who think differently. Students’ own exploration through their classwork as well as their interactions with a variety of classmates will offer more important insights and learnings that ultimately will be more useful to them. This model also means that higher education institutions aren’t driving the students’ academic progress as much as they have in the past; instead, the institution’s role is more about unlocking, supporting, connecting and encouraging potential.

Online education also is creating innovation through allowing students to make higher education their own. For instance, students who are not morning people don’t have to take 8 a.m. classes, which provides real efficiencies. Institutions need to consider the blend of synchronous and asynchronous delivery in relation to how the faculty develops curriculum, delivers knowledge, and provides students with opportunities to apply what they have learned. Students need to learn how to think, find meaningful resources, problem-solve, break down barriers and go around obstacles. The focus needs to be on creating adaptable, resilient, persistent, resourceful citizens. And higher education needs to see themselves as part of the talent-supply pipeline.

Higher education faculty and leaders also are determining is that some of the instructional methods and techniques that work in the classroom don’t translate to online education. This means that faculty members are having to learn to teach in different ways that go beyond their standard Powerpoint and lectures. As higher education moves forward toward totally on-line or hybrid models, faculty will need to explore other ways to more effectively engage students. Lenzer believes this will be critical because the “new normal” will require colleges and universities to make better use of technology going forward.

Additionally, institutions need to consider an individualized approach to learning. While this can be very difficult when a class has 100 or more students, this approach still can offer significant benefits to students. Furthermore, adopting this student-centered approach to learning can differentiate the institution in potential students’ minds, serving as a major enticement to enrolling.

This approach may be an easier transition for younger faculty, who have a different perspective. While the traditional “tenure” approach offers faculty the chance to explore new worlds in research, there needs to be accountability in relation to students and what they want from their college experience.

Change Agent

Lenzer was brought in to the University of Maryland as an outlier on purpose because flexibility is becoming increasingly more important because the world is changing so rapidly. Higher education needs to keep up, because some studies show that what students learn in their freshmen year could be obsolete by their senior year.

Lenzer believes her role is to continually ask, “Help me understand why we do it this way.” She finds that most of the time, people don’t know. While people need to be cautious about crossing a legal line and a moral/ethical line, they also tend to be worried about the policy and accreditation lines. However, these last two lines can be changed. With that said, it’s critical to speed up the system to make these changes to reflect the continuous change in a rapidly evolving society.

Institutions should also find quick leading indicators for success. Data is a really powerful resource that institutions need to leverage, especially in relation to students and their successes. Tracking data from alumni also can provide important information to inform higher education programs.

Innovation becomes more important in a crisis. During these times, institutions are forced to be less risk-adverse as far as trying new things. Faculty and researchers like to wait to have all the data and be right; however, in these times you can’t be right. You need to focus on being close.

Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Lenzer suggested several takeaways for higher education leaders:

Engage students to help them develop an entrepreneurial mindset that encourages them to take ownership of their own destiny.
The siloed approach in higher education isn’t helpful. Higher education needs to break down those siloes – whether created by schools/colleges, discipline or function – to more effectively drive institutional goals and innovation. True innovation comes from diversity of thought and discipline. Therefore, try to bring individuals together who have different backgrounds, ethnicities, experiences and disciplines. This will drive innovation among faculty and students, and also will help attract a new generation of talented faculty and students as well.
The traditional university culture of “let’s build a building” no longer works in the age of coronavirus. It also doesn’t work for economic development if that’s part of the institution’s mission. Instead, focus on what is happening inside the building – the people, programs, community and culture.

Bullet Points

The coronavirus pandemic is causing extreme change for higher education institutions. The parts of university life – a sense of community, students, research labs—have been negated for the moment due to the pandemic. This also is offering a sense of innovation to emerge.
Broader connections among faculty and students that span the breadth and depth of the higher education institution can lead to the high level of innovation that can take the institution to the next level.
Creativity is fostered through creating a culture that allows for failure. People need to be celebrated for trying and talking about the lessons they have learned to refine their projects. Institutions can also highlight these efforts through conferences and other outlets.
To foster this level of innovation and creativity, students should be encouraged to build their own majors through combining their own interests and skills. Faculty members should move into a role that encourages, opens doors and unlocks a student’s potential.
Online education offers an opportunity to individualize instruction for students. This will be challenging for faculty members who are set in their ways.
Higher education leaders need to continually ask, “Why is this done this way?” in order to spark innovation. Many people will reply that it’s due to legal or moral/ethical groups. However, others will say it’s a policy or accreditation issue, without noting that these can be changed. It’s important for higher education to speed up in making these types of changes in order to stay relevant in these rapidly changing times.
Higher education also needs to be better about tracking data. This can include student data as well as alumni data.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

University of Maryland

Guests Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/julielenzer/
Twitter: @ChiefMuse
Personal website: https://www.julielenzer.com/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Raising Money for Universities during COVID with Scott Roberts and Tim Hill | Changing Higher Ed 043

Higher education fundraising is even more critical as colleges and universities navigate the unexpected and unpredictable financial situation caused by the current COVID-19 pandemic. During a time marked by physical separation, institutions and their development offices need to find creative ways to stay in touch with donors and potential donors while also having compassion and empathy for what these individuals are facing during the pandemic.

Scott Roberts is the president of the UConn Foundation, which serves the University of Connecticut. Tim Hill works for Blackbaud, an EdTech company that supports advancement and alumni development across the higher education campus.

Hill and Roberts are not sure when higher education will be back to normal. UConn is beginning to plan for reopening, but hasn’t set a date to reopen. Roberts noted that there is a lot of work to be done to make this happen. Hill is optimistic that if institutions which follow the CDC guidelines and take appropriate steps, students can be welcomed back to a new normal in the fall.

Internal and External Challenges

Foundations are facing various layers of challenges involving internal and external situations. The internal challenges include budgetary concerns due to the economic downturn created by the pandemic. Most foundations depend on investment earnings to pay for staff and events. In addition, there’s anxiety among foundation staff regarding uncertainty about their roles; for example, if they work in event management, what happens to their position if the foundation can no longer host events? And how can they pivot to virtual events?

There also are challenges among front-line fundraisers in relation to their metrics and goals. What happens if they cannot meet with potential donors? How are they able to raise money? UConn has changed their back-of-house software in how they track constituent interactions, expanding the categories to include virtual meetings along with phone calls, emails and face-to-face meetings.

These challenges extend to donors, alumni and stakeholders. How does the institution continue to be optimistic about the institution’s work while also being compassionate and empathetic about what the individual is dealing with, whether that’s a professional or financial reversal or a loved one whose health has been affected in the pandemic?

Role of Technology in Pandemic-Era Fundraising

Any technology company that is working in higher education fundraising should consider itself a practitioner in all things advancement because the company’s team gives counsel and helps on the technology side. Additionally, they need to ensure that their technology platforms are scalable, have a high level of up-time and feature extensive functionality.

During this period, it’s key that customers get the resources they need. These include the individuals responsible for the advancement services as well as those who run the technology for these departments. Blackbaud is trying to offer technology that helps development officers stay in closer touch with their constituents, incorporates intelligent analytics to segment their market, and gives them access to additional resources from other partners and industry experts.

Staying on Message

Many similarities exist between the foundations and the universities in how they reach out to constituents. There’s currently a heavy emphasis on social media, in addition to emails and other types of communication.

Stakeholders want to hear that their alma mater is making a difference for students, faculty, alumni, other constituents and the state. Constant communication is important; this is not a time to be quiet. This is a time to connect with constituents more than ever before.

Internal and external meetings also have been shifting online. The development staff is hosting virtual happy hours with staff in the evenings just to have face-time with one another. In one of these events, the university president joined and toasted everyone, thanking them for their efforts.

Additionally, many institutions are starting to hold more virtual events. This could include an online panel discussion involving the leaders of the institution. For example, the CEO of UConn Health has presented a virtual talk about health-related initiatives and ways that people can remain safe during this time. The Foundation also is featuring UConn’s coaches because top constituents are interested in the institution’s athletic programs and learning about recruits.

There also are a lot of unique ways to utilize technology to stay connected during this time. For example, Roberts has gone on a virtual walk with a major donor. These novel experiences make people feel connected.

Hill said the industry—customers as well as technology companies--has been using virtual meetings for a number of years. Having said that, the personal connection is important in times like these because people are hungrier for interaction, and the person-to-person touch makes a huge difference. He noted that major gift officers who are reaching out to donors are asking them how they are doing in their lives and what’s happening before getting into official messaging. This creates that one-to-one connection that means a lot to the donor and breaks down barriers.

Social Media

The UConn Foundation has done research on social media and also tracks stories that people are interested in. Part of this is designed to ensure that the Foundation can stay in front of constituents with relevant stories.

Additionally, development officers and development-related industries tend to get most of their content from LinkedIn. Sharing stories that have impact locally, at the state-level and nationally resonate with readers. With that said, Hill noted that in order to reach alumni, foundations should use all social media channels because they are important avenues for people who are hungry for stories.

Blackbaud’s global marketing team uses a variety of technology platforms to broadcast content through omni-channels that provides one post with similar messaging across multiple channels. These campaigns are focused on areas such as student scholarships and awards, thought-leadership around best practices in advancement or analytics to target. Hill noted that his company also measures engagement with these posts. Great content is only as important as whether it’s read and by whom.

UConn also uses multiple channels to get information out. They have an in-house marketing/ communications team and partner with the university’s marketing/communications team to push stories out that will be inspirational to constituents.

Shifting Foci

In the wake of the pandemic, UConn Foundation has focused on two funding priorities. The first is relief efforts related to the pandemic, whether that’s supporting UConn Health or research that is trying to help solve this global issues. The second is creating a student emergency fund to help students who are experiencing financial distress due to the pandemic.

Hill said there is a pressing need across multiple fronts in any university—no matter the size or mission—that spans the students, staff, faculty and administration. He complimented how institutions are making the extra effort to support their students. These emergency funds have gained a lot of support from alumni and other donors.

There’s also a lot of uncertainty among students about how they are going to pay for the fall semester. Hill noted that scholarships will be important because it directly impacts the student’s life.

Restricted vs. Unrestricted Gifts

Roberts said 90-95 percent of UConn Foundation’s donor gifts are restricted. He said as long as these gifts align with the university’s purpose, this type of gift is fine. Most donors want to support something that they are passionate about. If their donation is to support a student emergency fund, that gift allows the university enough flexibility to determine which student needs it and for what purpose. This still meets the donor’s desire of helping students.

In any situation, the foundation shouldn’t identify the priorities for the university. Instead, the foundation should listen to the university to hear the priorities and then implement all efforts to help the university raise funds to support the implementation of those priorities.

Hill says that Blackbaud’s support of their clients hasn’t changed. The company already has made a tremendous investment in its infrastructure, which includes cloud software, coupled with software that can be housed on local campuses. Other foundations’ work is hosted through hosting systems. The company also has focused primarily on the security of its systems since the company handles the actual transactions of those gifts.

The company also has tried to provide customers with examples of best practices and thought leadership around what the foundations are doing on a daily basis. Additionally, the company tries to get resources to customers in a digestible way in partnership with these other organizations.

Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Three takeaways from Roberts:

Be sensitive and empathetic about what people are going through. Don’t make assumptions.
Be optimistic and positive. Be encouraging and inspirational in telling the institution’s story about what’s going on.
Don’t be afraid to offer people an opportunity to help.

Three takeaways from Hill:

Stay focused on the institutional mission and give constituents a reminder of the mission and the impact the institution is having.
People are hungry for communications and content. Ask people about what is happening in their life before talking about the institutional needs.
Take time to take care of yourself and your team. Ask team members how they are doing with the issues and challenges they are facing.

Bullet Points

Higher education institutions have not reached the new normal yet. However, through following the CDC guidelines and doing their own planning, institutions can begin to move forward past this crisis.
Foundations are facing a number of internal issues. These include declining endowments due to the recession, concerns by staff members about their jobs and changing metrics in relation to engaging with donors.
Foundations need to be optimistic about the institution’s future while also being empathetic about the donor’s situation, which may involve financial loss or health issues related to the pandemic.
Many institutions are turning to technology to remain engaged with donors. These can range from meetings, presentations by institutional leaders or athletic coaches, or doing walking tours with potential donors.
Technology companies that support fundraising efforts can play an important role through identifying best practices, serving as thought-leaders, and providing cutting-edge technology. Additionally, these companies need to be continually upgrading security since they often are part of a gift’s transaction.
Social media can offer institutions and fundraisers a way to share stories and campaigns with a variety of donors across multiple channels. These stories should highlight what the institution is doing during the pandemic, including how it’s helping the campus community, the state, the nation and the world.
Foundations are focusing on several funding priorities. The first is support for efforts to protect individuals’ health and stem the pandemic. The second is an emergency student relief fund to help students who are having financial issues during the pandemic. Scholarship support also will be important going into the fall semester since many students may not otherwise be able to financially afford college.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

University of Connecticut
UConn Foundation
Scott Roberts
Blackbaud
Tim Hill

Guests Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/robertsunlv/detail/contact-info/
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/timothyhill/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://thechangeleader.com
Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

This podcast explores fundraising in the time of COVID-19. Contrary to what many would think, the current situation could be an important time to visit with donors.

During his 24 years of professional fundraising, Martin Leifeld and his teams raised a staggering $500 million dollars. He served as vice chancellor of advancement for the University of Missouri-St. Louis for a decade. While there, he led a dramatic increase in fundraising, averaging $26.4 million per year. In 2018 Martin was named Outstanding Fundraising Executive by the Association of Fundraising Professionals St. Louis Regional Chapter. He is now president of Five Minutes with Martin as well as an author and speaker.

Fundraising during Turmoil

Leifeld joined UMSL in 2008, just as the Great Recession emerged. At the time, the institution was in the middle of a seven-year fundraising campaign. Leifeld described this time as overwhelming and phenomenally complex, resulting in a number of entities suspending fundraising campaigns while others decided to delay the launch of their campaigns.

In trying to determine what to do, Leifeld read an article quoting Robert Sharpe, a nonprofit consultant, who reported that a number of organizations raised more funds during the Great Depression than before that time. Leifeld decided to move forward to engage with donors and prospects. During that fiscal year, UMSL raised 54% more than the previous year, which was 54% more than any year in the institution’s history.

Leifeld advises institutional leaders to not stop what you’re doing, but don’t ignore the current context. It’s important to stay focused on the basics--that higher education has a mission that is important to humanity and the advancement of the world.

Build Relationships

Relationships that are built during times of crisis may take more time, but they also tend to be more authentic. Leifeld noted that each person has relationships with themselves and with others, as well as many potential relationships with individuals we do not know. These relationships are the basis of life and do not change when there’s a crisis.

When we take a long view of a relationship, we are thinking of the lifetime of the relationship which transcends this moment. Even if someone’s investments take a hit, their value system remains the same. In fact, one’s values tend to crystalize during times of crisis because it’s time to re-clarify what matters most. Philanthropic motivations are fundamental and deeper than what’s happening in the market.

Additionally, relationships often become more precious during times of turmoil. That’s because people consider what they value most.

Taking an Active Interest – and Listening

There are always opportunities in difficult times to learn, grow and change. Our current situation is an opportunity to engage more deeply in our relationships, which can include fundraising. Fundamentally, though, these interactions need to begin with asking how the other person is doing. What are their circumstances? How are their family and their relationships? How is their business? Do they know someone being affected by this current crisis?

You then listen. And people want to be heard. At this junction with COVID-19, we have people confined to their homes. They are worried about today and tomorrow. They are fearful, anxious, restless, bored and starved for human interaction.

Fundraising is about building long-term relationships. When we have moments that are hard and we listen closely, people will disclose things they wouldn’t normally share. This deepens trust, which is the oil of relationships. If you want to raise more funds from donors, developing trust within the relationship is critical – and listening to retain the information that another shares is at the heart.

Leifeld encourages leaders to listening to understand and then focus on retaining that information, which is how we can manage this complex world respectfully. This kind of care translates into access beyond the checkbook -- to the individual agreeing to participate in calls and influence others, as well as philanthropy and increasing donations over time.

Those who raise larger gifts for organizations rely on face-to-face interactions. However, it’s hard to do that now. Leifeld encourages using video calls to interact with donors. This gives the eye-to-eye, face-to-face contact that allows everyone to see physical gestures that aren’t seen on telephone calls.

Be Sensitive

Institutions, however, must be sensitive to the fact that people feel like they have fewer resources right now. Higher education development leaders have to be willing to work with them. For example, Leifeld offering a different time frame and structure for the gift. People are willing to be flexible if higher education leaders are flexible.

Leaders also can and should talk with prospective donors about what the institution represents. There are a variety of areas within a university that will be of interest to a donor. Leaders can think in this context about what areas would align best with the donor’s interests. For example, student emergency funding, student counseling, community services and technology are popular right now.

Use the Time Wisely

This also is an educational moment for fundraisers. Leifeld encourages fundraisers to go to websites, on conference calls and find other avenues to learn more or identify unique ideas. This also is a time to support others, through giving knowledge and encouragement to others. It’s also an opportunity for fundraisers to review themselves and their own values, using questions like, “Have I been spending my time on the right things?”

Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Leifeld suggested three takeaways for higher education leaders:

Don’t stop communicating. Find out how people are doing. Educate them about your circumstances. Ask them for their insight and advice.
Think about the relationship long-term. You’re building for the future.
Talk about resources with sensitivity. Use context, but also listen first to see how the potential funder.

Bullet Points

While it seems contrary to popular opinion, fundraising can be effective in times of an economic downturn.
Higher education leaders need to focus on building relationships with donors that stand the test of time. Relationships that offer sustenance during times of crisis are highly valued.
These relationships currently need to focus on listening and retaining the information that is offered. Build trust in the relationship.
Since face-to-face interactions aren’t possible currently, use technology such as Zoom to foster and nourish relationships.
Be sensitive that many individuals are experiencing a financial downturn at this moment. However, they may be willing to discuss a donation if the timeframe and options of how to fund a gift are different
Leaders can talk about institutional areas that have current needs that might align with the donor’s interests. This could be student emergency fund, student counseling, technology or community services.
Leaders should also use this time to build their own knowledge, gain new ideas and also explore their own values.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Changing Higher Ed Podcast with Martin Leifeld

Guests Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/martin-leifeld-07826111

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://thechangeleader.com
Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

The current pandemic is offering a wealth of learning for higher education. By taking that approach, institutions can better position themselves to survive through the challenges that will continue to ripple through the nation.

This podcast features Rob Hartman, who is the chief financial officer of Columbia International University (CIU) in Columbia, S.C.

Taking a Learning Perspective

There are so many lessons that can be learned during this time period, even though many institutional leaders are rightfully stressed about the pandemic and its fallout. Therefore, taking a learning approach can be really helpful during this crisis. This pandemic is forcing people into doing things that they had previously resisted. Now that they’re getting their feet wet, they are realizing that these changes aren’t so bad.

Hartman also noted that this is a time when if we’re not paying attention, the current situation could sink our institutional ship. However, if we are paying attention, we can learn how to do business more efficiently through using the technology that is available.

Financial Challenges

The pandemic and its aftermath potentially will have a huge impact on an institution’s finances. Loss of donor funds and the drop in the institution’s endowment are the biggest hit that Hartman is seeing at this moment. For example, Hartman’s institution was anticipating several large donations from major funders. However, the market decline led these donors to withdraw their gifts. While these donors probably will return because they are loyal to Columbia, they currently need to focus on their own interests since they have lost millions of dollars.

Columbia’s operations have not been adversely affected at this point. When the pandemic hit, the institution responded quickly to move everything to online learning in order to keep day-to-day operations going. At this point, the university’s payables are down since athletic events are not taking place so Columbia is not leasing buses, purchasing fuel or incurring hotel costs. This has led to some short-term savings.

Columbia also has made refunds in relation to room and board. However, these refunds haven’t had a major impact on the institution’s finances.

Hartman said the institution also has sought federal funding to help cover some costs. He pointed to the Department of Education, which has stepped up to help with some of the institution’s financial issues. In addition, Columbia secured a Small Business loan that is forgivable if used for payroll. That will help the institution continue to operate through summer.

Looking Forward

This pandemic is accelerating higher education’s movement into a future that was still projected to be many years away, forcing higher education’s hand. Many institutions are taking a hard look at how to survive the current situation while also determining how to move forward. Hartman said that if this situation hadn’t happened, in his experience, higher education would have remained much the same.

Recessions tend to be either demand side or supply side, but rarely are they both.

This downturn is an anomaly in that it is both. The demand side has been shut off. The federal stimulus will help in this area. However, there are still concerns about the supply side, which will have far-reaching consequences on higher education, including institutional closures as well as ways higher education can reinvent itself into different forms.

Projections need to be done for the summer and fall semesters at this point, realizing that there is a big unknown -- how long the pandemic will last. Therefore, Hartman is regularly asking the university’s recruiting and advertising departments about what they’re seeing in relation to fall enrollment. He noted that there is good news in that the admissions team has stepped up to do creative recruitment events virtually. The viewership for some of these events have been vastly higher than an in-person tour.

At this point Columbia’s enrollment numbers for fall seem to be holding steady and match the institutional goals. However, if the pandemic goes on for another 4-6 weeks, the concern becomes whether people will have the financial resources to pay for their education.

Hartman hopes institutions learn lessons moving forward that include providing a less-expensive education to students, which will resulting in savings for both the student and the university. He also believes that while some students still want the full college experience, other students–especially the Gen Z, who are technologically inclined—will embrace online education more than earlier generations. They want to stay at home to watch a lecture, hear a speech or do a test, instead of attending school 100 miles away.

After dealing with immediate financial needs through seeking financial support from the Small Business Administration, institutions need to think creatively. The admissions staff need to reach out in a more personal way by conducting phone calls or creating virtual visits. Also, higher education leaders, faculty and staff need to maximize their contacts to recruit prospective.

Institutions also will learn to do things less expensively after this pandemic through relying on technology to hold meetings or to attend webinars. Hartman noted that his institution’s next meeting of the Board of Trustees will be held via Zoom. This decision is far-less expensive, because it saves the cost of airline travel, hotels, etc. Other meetings and trainings – including Board trainings and president’s cabinet meetings – also have been moved to virtual platforms. While it’s not totally the same as meeting face-to-face, Hartman sees the value in these types of meetings and believes that the quality comes close to matching an in-person meeting.

If the Current Situation Continues

If the pandemic and recession do not go away and people do not go back to work in the next 3-6 weeks, Hartman believes there will be serious problems in higher education, manufacturing and the service industry. Continuation of the current circumstances also may provoke the need to discuss undergoing a merger or acquisition. A merger may make sense if there’s a good cultural fit and the financing can be arranged to have a buy-out or to relieve debt. A merger offers a workable way to preserve the institutional culture and keep an institution going.

Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Hartman suggested several takeaways for higher education leaders:

Don’t let fear force your decision-making. You need to think strategically. Knee-jerk decisions done in absence of strategic thinking will lead to unintended consequences.
Don’t forget to think about where the institution will be three months from now. We’re currently caught up in the whirlwind of the moment, but we need to be thinking about scenarios in relation to fall enrollment and then identify budget decisions that may need to be made. You need to have prepared 2-4 budgets so you can transition into the leaner budget if the institution doesn’t meet its enrollment goals.
Don’t despair. Always look for the lessons in a crisis. What can we learn? How can we implement this learning to become better? Some of the results that come out of this pandemic will be a good thing. Ultimately, the most important thing to focus on is taking care of people.

Bullet Points

The pandemic is an opportunity to learn as individuals and as organizations. By taking this approach, leaders can lower the stress level related to this situation.
While there are some financial challenges currently emerging in relation to donor gifts and the endowment, the present situation also includes cost savings, such as cancellation of all travel for athletic teams. Institutions also are tapping federal sources of funding, including through the U.S. Department of Education and the U.S. Small Business Administration.
While focused on the day-to-day, leaders also need to take a longer view. Of special note are fall enrollment numbers. Institutions need to be creative about connecting with prospective students through available technology.
Institutions also need to continue exploring less-expensive options, such as technologies like Zoom, for after the pandemic is over. Previous face-to-face meetings such as board meetings, board trainings and president’s cabinet meetings can effectively be done virtually using these types of technologies.
If the current situation is prolonged, some institutions may need to start considering mergers or acquisitions.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Columbia International University

Guests Social Media Links:

Rob Hartman’s blog: http://rdhartman.blogspot.com/
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rob-hartman-11682313/
Twitter: @robertdhartman

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://thechangeleader.com
Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Dr. Cathy Trower offers insights in the board’s role during a major crisis, such as the current pandemic. She discusses the importance of a partnership between the president and board chair as well as the communication channels that need to be created in a time of crisis.

The president of Trower & Trower has more than two decades of experiencing providing governance consulting to colleges and universities as well as other nonprofits. She combines her knowledge of governance and strategic thinking along with the skill of building high-performance teams.

Taking a Different Role

Higher education boards are facing significant challenges created by the current pandemic. First and foremost, boards need to remain extremely focused during a time of crisis. They need to realize that some items that are less of a priority during this crisis need to be tabled. Instead, board members should focus on the priorities of the institution’s president in the current moment. Additionally, boards need to focus their efforts on backstopping the president.

The partnership between the board and the president is even more critical in a crisis. The president needs to be communicating very clearly, primarily through the board chair. Boards are not meeting together often at this point, so it is critical that the chair and the executive committee, if there is one, take responsibility for opening and maintaining clear lines of communications and responses with the full board.

Essential Focus Areas

The key areas that boards and presidents need to address during this crisis are:

Maintain clear and regular communications. Candor is needed so that surprises are minimized.
- We recommend scheduling a weekly meeting at the very least between the president and the board chair during this crisis. However, the frequency can vary based on the type of institution and the partnership. In general, consistent and clear communication about what’s happening on the ground and what’s needed is of great importance during this time.
Ensureimmediate needs are met. Early in the pandemic, the initial pressing issues involved moving courses online and making sure that students, faculty and staff were able to continue to handle their responsibilities in a safe manner. Now institutions need to focus on ensuring that faculty, students and families are getting what they need.
Discuss the institution’s financial situation. Boards and the president need to have discussions about the current financial situation as well as projections for the fall term. Higher education institutions are currently trying to secure early enrollment commitments. However, students and families are not sure about enrolling in the fall just yet. Some institutions are trying to use Zoom and other technology to build bonds with prospective students in place of the in-person campus visits. Trust also needs to be built now between higher education faculty and staff in conversations with students to help them build a relationship with the institution.

Finding Innovative Ways to Govern

Some boards have established a coronavirus taskforce that includes the president or his/her designee, some board members, some senior staff and potentially some faculty. These task forces are charged with considering what the institution should be thinking about currently and ways that faculty, board members and community members can be mobilized to provide assistance, i.e., risk and scenario planning.

In addition, boards also should look at their committee structures because work is available for various committees that are part of the regular governance structure. They need to think strategically about the committee’s work. For example, compliance/risk, finance, and academics/student life committees should be looking at the same areas using different lenses. Therefore, creating a cross-committee task force can ensure a common conversation that puts everyone on the same page, which can help to push out topics/discussions to the appropriate committee(s).

While the executive committee offers a great starting point for this type of work, we also recommend expanding involvement beyond this group of individuals. Trower recommends creating a subset of the committee and then adding some faculty in order to get their input. Students also could be involved.

This type of taskforce should be tasked with thinking about big picture issues. For example, what is going to happen in the summer and fall in relation to staff? How is the institution going to ensure equity? How can the board ensure that minimal lay-offs happen? How can the institution take care of employees through all of this?

Accelerated Change

Higher education has traditionally been very slow to change. It will be interesting to see which institutions can make faster and better shifts related to what is coming up because of the pandemic. Online education is only part of it.

Additionally, there are so many financially fragile institutions who were struggling prior to the pandemic, and it will accelerate many institution’s financial difficulties, requiring more institutions to merge and close. Higher education has always looked at a merger or acquisition as a failure on the part of the acquiree, and some institutions will choose to close instead of be part of a merger.

This perspective needs to change and leaders need to think about what’s best for the students.

Finding the Silver Lining

The board or its task force should also look at the hidden benefits created by this current situation, such as the creation of innovative partnerships with other organizations, galvanizing the faculty to be part of the solution, and thinking about staffing in different ways.

Additionally, the work of the board should be considered in new ways, e.g., is the board serving as an advocate for the institution among stakeholders and within the community.

Alumni involvement also is needed in this time. Institutions that have been proactive in alumni engagement are more likely to reap the benefits—whether that’s financial or support--during this downturn. However, institutions that have neglected their alumni may not fare well.

This will be a moment when many alumni will make a choice whether to give to support their alma mater or not, and they want to hear a strong message from the president and board chair about what’s happening in the institution, what the plans are for the future, and how the institution is going to use this current situation to make itself better, stronger and more nimble.

Strategic Thinking

Agility is important. The board needs to be nimble and push the institution to be more nimble. This requires getting board clients to think forward instead of looking backwards. If the board can embrace a forward-looking approach instead of only considering last year’s data and today’s crisis de jour, this will position the board to be more adaptive. This, in turn, carries over to the institution. The boards that are more poised to be able to deal with metaphorical whitewater rapids and headwinds are going to do better in this current situation.

Boards also can build out a risk / scenario planning map that looks at the likelihood of crisis events and projects the impact on the institution. Institutions that have these types of planning are able to quickly put the coronavirus into their calculations and determine what needs to be done. As boards shift items around in the plan, the institutional focus becomes clearer.

The task force along with the president also should triage everything that is going on. They determine what situations are critical in nature and what can be pushed out to a later date.

Learning from What Happened

At the end of the crisis, there needs to be an evaluation process to allow the board and the institution to learn from what happened. This often requires venturing into uncharted territory. While uncomfortable, this is at the heart of dealing with adaptive challenges. This approach requires taking steps, learning from them, and then doing course corrections without beating oneself up when something doesn’t work.

Boards also need to evaluate the holes in the expertise of their members that were uncovered during this crisis. Varied types of expertise need to be a planned part of selection to the board so that there is a diversity of abilities and knowledge. If the board doesn’t have a specific area of expertise that is needed during this current black swan event, it’s important to reach out to the task force or the alumni to find someone who does.

Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders and Boards

Dr. Trower suggested three takeaways for higher education leaders and board members:

Listen to the institution’s president and be there if the president needs you. There needs to be regular and clear communication between the president and the board chair.
Focus on what needs to be communicated to the rest of the board. Board members want to be involved and can start reaching out directly to the president. However, this is not the time to do this. Therefore, it’s up to the board president to create a clear communication channel that allows board members to get regular updates.
Determine how to galvanize the talent available to be of the most helpful and create the most value.

Bullet Points

 * In a crisis, the partnership between the board chair and the president is critical. These two individuals need to communicate regularly and clearly about what is happening.

The board chair needs to be the primary contact for the rest of the board about what is happening. Board members should not be contacting the president at this time.
Institutional boards and presidents need currently need to be focusing on how to help students, faculty and staff have what they need.
The board and the president needs to analyze the institutional financial situation. They need to consider that fall enrollment commitments may not come in until this situation settles.
This crisis offers innovative ways to govern. For example, a task force can help the institution think through the various angles related to coronavirus, including financial implications, academic/student life and risk management.
- This crisis is going to require boards and institutions to be more agile. That is going to be a major change for higher education.
- Many institutions that are financially struggling may have to consider closing or merging. They need to keep the students at the forefront of this decision.
- Alumni involvement is critical at this time. Alumni who have been involved can help the institution survive this crisis.
- Strategic planning and risk planning are critical and can help the institution focus on what’s important.
- Boards and presidents need to spend time after this crisis is over to learn from what happened and how it was handled. This will help the institution be better able to adapt in future crisis situations.
Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:
Trower & Trower

Guests Social Media Links:

 * LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/cathy-trower-a84b5413/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://thechangeleader.com
Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
- Twitter: @thechangeldr
- Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Christian higher education is facing numerous challenges. The Association for Biblical Higher Education (ABHE) conducted a study in collaboration with the Barna Group in 2017 that focused on the marketplace, the dynamics facing member institutions as well as the perceptions of Christian higher education. The study identified a number of actions that Christian higher education institutions need to do to remain or become sustainable.

ABHE recently has made board governance a priority. The association received a substantial grant last year and is in the process of enrolling board leadership cohorts from 48 institutions to take them through a rigorous board training and certification process. The first cohort is almost finished and Dr. Enlow hopes this training will be transformational for institutions.

Radical Demographic Shifts

The United States is seeing significant demographic changes in terms of race and ethnicity. It is anticipated that the current White majority will be well less than a majority in the United States in 10-15 years. The African American population will remain around 12 percent of the population while the Asian population will double from 3 percent to 6 percent. The biggest growth will be in the Hispanic population, which will be the largest of the pluralities.

Additionally, with the coming enrollment cliff, Christian institutions will need to shift to focus on recruiting older students instead of the traditional 18-year-old students.

A Shift in the Christian Landscape

It used to be a fairly accurate to say that the United States was a Christian nation since about 75 percent of citizens would have responded that they were a Christian on a survey. Researchers like Pew and Gallup have more or less clarified that when people answer those questions, they fall into one of three primary categories of Christians:

Convictional Christians, who are defined by their convictional belief and behaviors, especially in their regular church attendance;
Casual Christians, who attend church on special occasions (primarily Christmas and Easter); and
Cultural Christians, who are individuals who would identify themselves on a survey as Christian because they don’t identify with another religion.

These three groups traditionally have been evenly divided at 25 percent apiece. However, now there is erosion in the numbers of casual Christians and cultural Christians. Many of these individuals have moved their affiliation to the group known as the “nones” (people who don’t identify with any religious affiliation). With that said, there is no erosion in individuals’ interest in spirituality; in fact, some would argue that interest in spirituality has increased.

Additionally, the convictional Christian group is not eroding. This group has remained steadily at 25 percent and even grown a little bit over the past 25-30 years.

In recent history, the convictional, casual and cultural Christians aligned from the standpoint of cultural and political coalitions as a voting block. Now, there’s a divergence between convictional Christians and the rest of Americans, thus politically and culturally marginalizing the convictional Christians. Furthermore, a coalition has emerged that includes the casual Christians, the cultural Christians and the nones; this group tends to be an ideological affinity group.

Paradigm Shift in Christian Education

There are two issues behind higher education’s and, in particular, Christian higher education’s reluctance to change. The first is the widely held perspective that education is inherently formational; it’s life in community. So education is not just about transmission of knowledge, but instead is transformational. The prevalent idea was the only way to achieve this transformation was through the traditional classroom; this is the mindset that has dominated Christian education.

The other issues is the startup costs to master online delivery platforms. The cost is both in equipment and professional development, and the $$$ isn’t small.

With that said, Dr. Enlow believes that because of the demographic realities and the perceptions of stakeholders about the purpose of higher education, it is critical for higher education to diversify its learning modalities. Colleges that are reluctant or refusing to diversify their delivery modalities will have a very narrow bandwidth in terms of who they will be able to serve. Colleges will have to think about students and parents “hacking education,” i.e., looking for the simplest, shortest, most convenient way to meet their goals instead of completing a traditional higher education curriculum. The schools that understand that and can diversify their delivery modalities to be seamless will be those that will be most effective.

In the sector of church ministry leadership preparation, historically individuals were prepared through experiencing a calling, attending school, getting credentialed and serving. That is no longer the case. The pattern now is serving in a church, and out of that service comes a sense of calling. From there comes a sense of needing education through attending school or training. People then consider credentialing, but this isn’t a requirement. Credentialing now tends to be more of a competency than a licensing level. This pattern is being seen in the mega-churches in which they are growing their own staff, who serve in the church. Out of that sense of serving emerges a reciprocated sense of calling. At this point, the desire training that is tailored to the situation emerges.

Dr. Enlow stressed that Christian schools must stop seeing this paradigm shift as a threat and instead embrace it as an opportunity. While it is a threat to the conventional model of full-time schooling, it’s also a vehicle to Christian colleges’ and universities’ mission.

Additionally, Christian higher education’s business model has been based on residential education. When Dr. Enlow was working in a higher educational institution setting, the only positive cash flow in the institution was from student housing so the business model was heavily predicated on residential student enrollment. The old model also assumed the need for a lot of subsidy. The typical college, at best, had 70 percent of a student’s education funded by tuition and fees while the remaining 30 percent was covered by gifts or loans.

That business model does not work anymore. Christian institutions need to come up with a business model that funds what is needed based on different assumptions of enrollment patterns, etc. In some ways, overhead is lower in these new opportunity areas. Additionally, there doesn’t have be these huge subsidies if these new modalities are done right.

Changing Focus

Christian colleges and universities in general are seeing a change in focus. These institutions have traditionally prepared students for church occupations, such as pastors and missionaries; Bible studies are a crucial part in the preparation of these individuals.

However, many Christian colleges are now preparing individuals for ministerial occupations as well as marketplace helping professions. Because of this change in mission, the requirement to have Biblical and theological understanding at a high level would not be the same for a student who wants to be a public school teacher. Instead, students now are majoring in a subject such as business and then minoring in Bible.

Changing Nature of Liberal Arts

Many Christian institutions are liberal arts colleges. The initial concept for liberal arts institutions was that they would offer academic rigor, critical thinking skills, and intellectual fodder to prepare students to function highly and contribute significantly in a variety of situations. However, there has been a growing perception among the public that liberal arts institutions are not adequately preparing students for their first job or career.

This, however, is not the case. In reality, since World War II, higher education has become more and more focused on preparing individuals for jobs and careers with less emphasis on pure liberal arts. Christian colleges always have been pragmatic because of their small size. In fact, they may be considered even more professional colleges than the historical blue-blood liberal arts colleges. The majority of Christian institutions that would be historically identified as liberal arts institutions have students who are are enrolled in professional degree programs such as business, teacher education and sociology.

Two Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Dr. Enlow suggested several takeaways for higher education leaders:

Ensure sustainability. Dr. Enlow believes that to be sustainable over the next 10 years, Christian higher education institutions need to get out of Title IV dependency. Related to that, leaders need to really monitor discounting. They also need to focus on differentiation by showcasing the institution’s unique selling proposition and ensuring its delivery. Finally, institutions need to diversify delivery modalities. These do not need to be silos – online vs. in-person delivery offerings, so you can only do one or the other. These need to be totally integrated, diversified delivery modalities.
Focus on the governing board. These boards need to be high-functioning through becoming more agile and better informed. Every stakeholder is going to need to have an exceedingly well defined, mission-driven, brand promise and selling proposition. Both the board and the administration are going to need a high-level of convergent fiscal understanding of margin and contingency.

Bullet Points

Christian higher education faces major challenges through changing demographics such as race and ethnicity as well as the changing nature of students (from traditional 18-year-olds to older students).
There is a shift in how individuals define themselves in relation to Christianity – convictional Christians, casual Christians and cultural Christians. These changing percentages will have deep cultural and political implications as well as a major effect on Christian institutions.
The changing nature of how higher education is offered – from traditional classrooms to online education or a blend of traditional education and online education – will alter how Christian colleges and universities operate. Another factor will be the certification process. This will require Christian colleges and universities to develop a different business model in order to survive.
Christian institutions are moving from primarily preparing pastors and missionaries to preparing professionals. This requires adapting how Biblical studies are offered.
Christian institutions that are liberal arts institutions need to continue to showcase their work in preparing students for professions and careers. Public perception is that students graduating from these schools are not prepared for the workforce when, in fact, most graduates actually earn a professional degree that prepares them for working in business, education and other professions.
Higher education leaders need to consider sustainability in moving forward. This needs to include differentiating their institution, finding sustainable ways to fund education and embracing different learning modalities.
Christian institutional governing boards must be high-performing, agile and better informed in relation to a well-defined mission, sustainable finances and other governance issues.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Association for Biblical Higher Education

Guests Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ralph-enlow-2057145/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://thechangeleader.com
Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Higher education already was facing major challenges, but an unprecedented black swan event – the COVID-19 pandemic—is testing the resiliency of colleges and universities across the country. Long-time education leader Dr. E. Gordon Gee offers the wisdom he has gained from serving as a university president for 40 years. Dr. Gee believes that serving in this role is one of the most important callings in this nation.

Dr. Gee has led five institutions (West Virginia University, University of Colorado, The Ohio State University, Brown University and Vanderbilt University), and served twice as president of The Ohio State University and West Virginia University. He’s had 24 individuals who have worked for him who are currently serving as university presidents.

Navigating Turbulent Waters

Dr. Gee has not seen anything like what higher education is currently experiencing. While he went through the stock market crash of 1987-88 while at the University of Colorado and led other institutions during several recessions and meltdowns, he believes the COVID-19 pandemic offers a different type of challenge because this is a national issue that affects everyone at the human level.

This pandemic has effectively shut down the entire nation and its commerce. While that is unsustainable over the long haul, this shutdown also shows a sense of spirit and commitment that will bring us together. Dr. Gee believes that we have lived in a toxic world in which we yell at each other instead of having conversations. He suggests that social distancing may bring people together because we’ll realize there’s more to life than the daily commerce of being ornery.

Learning on the Job

Dr. Gee states that there is no playbook for being a university president, that each university is different and each institution changes over time. One of the mistakes that some presidents make is that when they assume a presidency for a second time, they believe they know what they’re stepping into. That is an incorrect assumption. Dr. Gee noted that during both of his second presidencies, he had to de-learn the institution in order to relearn them. That proved to be a real challenge.

In addition, leaders are playing in a field (the pandemic) where they don’t have previous knowledge. Education in general is the fuel that runs the nation’s democracy and will continue to be an important part of the country’s future. However, education will be dramatically different after the pandemic and that new model is still emerging.

Dr. Gee stated that faculty and colleagues who were Luddites have shifted to being online over a two-week period, and they are discovering that they can be effective and engaged, and are doing many wonderful things. He points out that opportunities do abound when individuals are forced to do something outside their comfort zone.

Finding the Institutional Calling

While this is a global black swan event, this also is a situation where we can use our ingenuity, inspiration and creativity to move to what’s next. Dr. Gee encourages higher education leaders to lead their institutions in such a way that adds to the national conversation and the value of higher education, in particular.

Dr. Gee believes that each institution needs to find its individual calling, its own unique mission and differentiation. He cautions that ratings and rankings such as those in U.S. News and World Report have caused institutions to lose what is unique about them, which leads to institutional mediocrity. He believes higher education institutions need to return to their respective roots, whether that’s public, private, religious or some other mission/focus. Institutions have their own unique character and culture that evolves so leaders have to figure out the culture in order to change it.

Dr. Gee also believes that identifying the institutional soul is important. This allows colleges and universities to attract the best and brightest both in terms of students and faculty who align with this viewpoint.

He also higher education has lost that focus in many ways, and that institutions need to stop being ivory towers and instead become helping hands.

Responding tothe COVID-19 Pandemic

West Virginia University has had a wide-ranging response to the pandemic. The institution has numerous hospitals so they are the major health provider in the state. The university immediately told students not to come back to campus and moved classes online.

Dr. Gee also worked closely with state government to come up with the state’s response. In addition, the university’s vice president for health sciences is the state’s Coronavirus czar and is overseeing the state’s response. Dr. Gee believes that the university is playing a major leadership role due to the institution’s academic offerings as well as its hospitals.

Dr. Gee also is focused on helping the university move forward organizationally. He meets every Monday morning with the communications and recruitment teams to come up with plans. He also sends out regular “Gee-Mails” but he also does small vignettes, calls graduating and new students, and offers ideas (such as reading lists) to share with interested stakeholders.

During this time, he believes that institutions need to be proactive in recruiting and retaining students, faculty and staff, even though the financial implications are going to be immense. This recruitment and retention needs to be based on the institution’s uniqueness.

Increased Pressure to Differentiate

The response to the COVID-19 pandemic is accelerating the changes in higher education by a decade or more. Dr. Gee believes this will require higher education to think about differentiation more deeply. He has found that institutions historically have moved into a common amalgamation in which they all want to look like each other instead of differentiating themselves. He believes that successful universities and colleges in the future will have figured out how to set themselves apart.

He also is concerned that land grant institutions have drifted toward being like every other higher education institutions. Dr. Gee pointed out that President Abraham Lincoln established these institutions to create comity and community in order to overcome daily cycles that exist in the lives of individuals. He believes Lincoln would be very disappointed in some of today’s land grant institutions.

Dr. Gee points out that in West Virginia, which is a small state with every imaginable problem, the university has the opportunity to create solutions. He believes West Virginia University’s calling is to make 1.8 million West Virginians feel valued and that they have an opportunity in life.

Moving Forward

Pointing out that large universities have a number of moving parts, Dr. Gee noted that any time there is complexity, it makes it difficult for people to determine which way to go. He believes in strategic action (instead of strategic planning) and taking advantage of what happens in the moment.

Dr. Gee noted that when people reach the top of the mountain, they tend to want to slide down the other side to get to normal as they previously defined it. However, we won’t be going back to the “previous” normal; instead, we’ll be in a “new normal” that will emerge out of the current situation.

He suggested that leaders can be architects of this moment or they can be victims. He believes that leaders and institutions should learn, reinvent themselves, and move on in ways that weren’t being considered 1-2 months earlier.

Dr. Gee also emphasized that the ability to take advantage of the change, to aggressively differentiate oneself, and continue to look to the horizon has not diminished. He said that those who look only to the moment are going to be increasingly irrelevant and mediocre; these institutions may not survive. However, if institutions use the wisdom of the moment and make tough decisions, they have a better chance of survival.

Reinventing Higher Education

Dr. Gee and his team are taking a careful look at their recruitment and retention of faculty, staff, and students. They also are looking carefully at the programs being offered and he anticipates that West Virginia University will move to a hybrid approach that includes online and in-person instruction.

However, Dr. Gee said the most important thing that West Virginia University is doing is focusing on its culture. Higher education institutions have very bright faculty, staff, and students, but also can have toxic cultures that can cause stakeholders to migrate into their silos as well as departments and colleges to aggressively compete with each other. Dr. Gee believes this configuration of the academy is antithetical to change.

To combat this, West Virginia University is moving to a more horizontal instead of a vertical approach. This involves moving across the institution so that the intellectual breadth draws on all the strengths of the university instead of being limited by departmental and college boundaries. He also advocates or the creation of centers, institutes, and working groups.

Dr. Gee believes that institutions that are wise enough to say that “the emperor has no clothes” and then move on to a new configuration that is more aggressively modern and agile will be the ones that will make a difference in the world. This change effort involves taking the institution and rearranging it based on ideas and how we think, as opposed to how the institution was structured when it started 100 years ago.

He is a great believer in a one-university model in which everyone is connected by the intellectual ideas, research opportunities, and teaching that allow individuals to connect in much different ways. He also believes that disciplines should be integrated. For example, neuroscience and biostatistics should not be isolated; they should be part of the human wellness program that incorporates all of the institutional assets.

Dr. Gee also said that higher education needs to get rid of the old reward and recognition structure. He advocates for individuals being recognized and rewarding for doing individual work. For example, some faculty will be able to write the great American novel while others are great teachers. Each should be able to shine in the areas where they excel versus the old model of 40 percent research, 40 percent teaching, and 20 percent service. This will greatly change how universities move forward.

Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Dr. Gee suggested three takeaways for higher education leaders:

Make certain you are constantly informing and communicating and probing the campus. Commit to creating a culture of understanding and community.
- Use this black swan moment to learn about your institutional strengths and weaknesses. Think about what to sustain and what is not sustainable. Make the tough choices.
- Differentiate your institution. Identify what is unique and why you are there. What will make your institution one of the future and not of the past?

Bullet Points

The COVID-19 pandemic is a black-swan event that will cause immense change in higher education, and accelerate needed changes by 10 or more years.
To be successful, higher education leaders need to learn on the job. This pandemic offer a new opportunity to do just that.
- The pandemic provides an important opportunity for institutions to begin to differentiate themselves.
- COVID-19 offers an opportunity for higher education to forego the ivory tower image and instead offer a hand of support.
- Institutions of higher education need to be proactive in recruiting and retaining faculty, staff, and students during the pandemic.
- Colleges and universities need to use this time to differentiate themselves. Highlighting those unique capacities can be the difference in surviving this current global crisis.
- Moving forward, institutions need to rethink the higher education model and culture. There needs to be more of a horizontal focus so that colleges and departments no longer dictate what happens within an institution. Instead, colleges and universities can bring together the best minds across campus as well as celebrate and reward each individual faculty member’s creative gifts.
Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:
West Virginia University

Guests Social Media Links:

Dr. E. Gordon Gee
Twitter: @gordongee

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:
Website: https://thechangeleader.com
Website: https://changinghighered.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
- Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Higher education traditionally does not move quickly when it comes to innovation. However, the current situation with the COVID-19 pandemic is forcing higher education institutions to do just that.

Which is where the University Innovation Alliance (UIA) comes in. UIA, which is led by Dr. Bridget Burns, is a group of 11 universities that are committed to innovating together, scaling up what works and then sharing their efforts. These institutions are Oregon State University, University of California Riverside, Arizona State University, University of Texas at Austin, University of Kansas, Iowa State University, Purdue University, Michigan State University, Ohio State University, Georgia State University and University of Central Florida.

Stemming the Crisis

Up until now, UIA’s focus has been on closing the achievement gap, producing more high-quality degrees and fundamentally changing the higher education sector. Now in the midst of the COVID-19 pandemic, UIA has shifted to identifying and sharing best practices for the rapidly changing higher education landscape.

For example, higher education institutions need to address the pressing challenges facing the most vulnerable students in real time. Students are hungry, homeless, displaced and dealing with extra circumstances that weren’t anticipated. One institution had to spend an additional $5 million in a one-week period to provide transportation and to purchase housing, WIFI hot-spots and laptops for students who were being displaced. In addition, institutions are facing major unanticipated costs due to transitioning to online education.

To facilitate this, Dr. Burns is currently focused on connecting institutions that are innovating in real-time during this crisis and then sharing their learning. Each institution is advancing in their work to address the challenges, while also being dependent on navigating their state’s policies and the community context. These challenges will continue to evolve and she is focused on helping institutions move more quickly through them.

Stemming the Crisis

Dr. Burns noted that the world is in a different place that it was at the beginning of the semester and communication has increased. Fortunately, there are individuals – such as former Tulane University President Scott Cowen, who led the institution in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina—who have been involved in major crisis situations and can provide counsel. These individuals help remind leaders about how to transition from day-to-day responsibilities and leading transformational efforts to what Burns describes as “rowing in high seas with a squall.” This is a completely different type of leadership, and involves a fundamentally different skill set.

Institutions also are facing additional challenges to decision-making as higher education leaders need to work with state leaders, community leaders, university system leaders and accreditors to navigate this situation. Campus leaders must make brave and bold decisions; they often are also being deluged with negative feedback from online trolls once information is shared.

Higher education leaders currently need to be focused on the daily issues they are facing. The situation caused by the COVID-19 pandemic is going to affect different populations, such as vulnerable low-income, first-generation students, in different ways. For example, students who came out s as LBGTQ and were kicked out of their homes; low-income, first-generation students who may be food-insecure or housing-insecure; international students who cannot return to their home countries – these are complicated situations that must be dealt with individually.

Funders who have available resources need to get these money to higher education leaders, who are already identifying how to best use the money to support students, faculty and staff during this crisis.

Crisis-fueled Student-Centered Innovation

There is also a broader psychic stress in dealing with a layer-upon-layer challenge such as higher ed faces. Dr. Burns stressed that during this crisis the UIA members are focusing on a student-centered approach, which is not how higher education traditionally has operated. This crisis will change the processes, structures, and how institutions work to focus around the needs of students, as opposed to faculty and administrators.

There also will be innovation in the chaos and crisis – the “silver lining” if you will. Millions of faculty members have had to transition their style to online learning, thus learning how to evolve teaching and assets into this new paradigm. In another unexpected benefit, Dr. Burns believes people will be very grateful to be in school because it will offer a healthy and productive distraction.

Virtual Opportunities

We have long lived in an increasingly virtual world. However, higher education leaders now must learn how to take care of people through a virtual workplace. Campus administrators are used to face-to-face interactions, but now must learn how to manage teams and spot trends from a distance. All university employees are having to rearrange life to be able to work at home.

Additionally, many people are getting laid off. Dr. Burns said she expects some institutions to begin unveiling opportunities for individuals who are being forced to change careers to retool. While it’s too late to start a new term, she suggests that institutions should investigate smaller modules that can serve these potential students, e.g., micro credentials and perhaps stackable certificates. These offer real opportunity, and accreditors will need to flow with this. However, there still needs to be vigilance because some institutions do prey on individuals in these situations. She recommends that potential students only consider attending accredited institutions.

3 Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Dr. Burns suggested takeaways for higher education leaders who are dealing with the COVID-19 crisis:

Your instincts are solid. You are making good decisions to help students, faculty, and staff make it through this.
You do not need to lead perfectly right now. It’s important to show your humanity. People will follow a leader who is also experiencing the effects of this crisis.
Take care of yourself. Leaders are older and shouldn’t put themselves at risk.

Bullet Points

The COVID-19 pandemic offers an opportunity for rapid innovation in higher education.
The most important thing to do currently is take care of the needs of students. This will differ by student group. Be sure to focus on a student-centered approach.
Higher education leaders are making good decisions in a time of crisis, even though they are receiving blowback from some.
Some decisions have to be slowed due to the need to get feedback from state policymakers, community members, university system leaders and accreditors.
Learn from other leaders who have been through similar trial-by-fire situations.
This pandemic will speed up higher education’s use of online education and will lead to innovative teaching models.
Higher education leaders also will have to learn to manage a virtual office. This again can lead to innovative practices.
There also is an emerging opportunity to create modules to serve individuals who have been laid off during the COVID-19 pandemic. These individuals will want to retool their professional abilities.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

The University Innovation Alliance
Bridget Burns

Guests Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/bridgetfburns/
Twitter: @BBurnsEDU

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

Website: https://thechangeleader.com
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Palo Alto University (PAU) has faced several crises over the past few years that ended up serving the institution well in dealing the COVID-19 pandemic. Dr. Risa Dickson, the university’s interim vice president for academic affairs, said the institution is committed to putting the students first, followed by the faculty in order to move through this crisis. The institution is located in Santa Clara County, which was one of the first places in the nation where the virus emerged.

Getting Ahead of the Curve

Like many private non-profit higher ed institutions, Palo Alto University had no formal risk planning or contingency plans in place to deal with a black swan event such as the COVID-19 crisis. However, several recent challenges prompted institutional leaders to start considering moving to online learning. After these situations happened, Dr. Dickson believed that another crisis would emerge so she and other key staff members were aware of the quasi-structure that had already been sketched out.

Palo Alto was fortunate to be ahead of the curve when the pandemic started to emerge, as its institutional leaders had anticipated what was coming and the need for moving classes online. The week before Palo Alto decided to go online, Dr. Dickson initially contacted the institution’s academic technology director to request a plan for going online, including a budget. Thus, institutional leaders knew early on what the plan looked like, what resources would be needed, and what would be needed to be done to prepare faculty and students to move online for the remainder of the quarter. They were able to address the big issues (e.g., enough Zoom licenses) early on so now they could focus on different issues, such as finding bandwidth extenders.

The institution already had a number of classes online so some faculty were already well versed in the Zoom technology. On Saturday, March 7, the Palo Alto president called an emergency meeting where the decision was made to put all classes on-line over a three-week period. This led to a period of whip-saw changes due to feedback from external sources, but the institution continued moving forward.

An Immersive Lesson in Leadership

A crisis requires an institution to muster its resources very quickly. Palo Alto’s leaders had been through the two previous crises as a cabinet, but still were not totally prepared for how different this crisis was. While often leadership styles depend on the context of the crisis, the COVID-19 pandemic was a universal crisis that is affecting everyone’s professional AND personal lives, i.e., how they live day-to-day. In situations like this, emotions bleed over and anxiety as well as personalization impact relationships and how an institution can move forward / react to the crisis, especially since individuals deal with the fear, anxiety and panic very differently.

She described seeing two types of leadership styles coming forward. The first group encompasses individuals who are command-and-control leaders or crisis management leaders. These individuals want to know how to move forward, including plans and assignments.

The second group of leaders focus on ministering to people who are scared and anxious. This group wants to make sure that everyone is on the same page and that stakeholders felt they are being cared for emotionally and psychologically. This style of leadership often isn’t as pronounced during a crisis, but is becoming more evident in this pandemic.

The Palo Alto cabinet bumped into situations when both of these types of leaders emerged during the pandemic. Dr. Dickson has a more command-and-control style of leadership whereas the university’s president is much more relational; they were and do work in a complementary nature.

Dr. Dickson observed in the current situation that leaders who embrace command and control tend to get impatient with relational leaders. However, she realizes that the relational leaders are using their skill set to prepare people to come along on the journey through the crisis; this approach is equally as important and valid as the command-and-control approach. She said it was important to identify these types of relational leaders and use their skill set to hold town halls, talk to people and collect feedback to identify the language that needs to be used.

She pointed out that there is a much stronger human element in this crisis. She gave an example where faculty members are learning to teach online from home which in some cases (given that PAU is in the heart of Silicon Valley) is a one-bedroom apartment with a spouse and two children. These individuals are having trouble seeing how to go forward. They had anxiety about the quick pivot as well as doubts about how to accomplish this task for the next few months.

Strategic Communications

Dr. Dickson has become more attuned to the language being used in communication to stakeholders, i.e., if people are anxious, that comes through in their language. She noted that early on that PAU’s communications and messages were going out to the institution’s community often had language that could cause more anxiety and send the wrong image.

Dr. Dickson also became acutely aware during the pandemic that if faculty are anxious, those emotions come through in their communication to students. She started noting that the institution’s leaders, faculty and staff are “ethically obligated” to make sure that the language that comes through the institution is not unintentionally agitating people.

Strategic messaging in the proper order is very important. For example, if the communication is about an institutional decision, it needs to come from the institution first before a division puts out information about how to deal with the situation. This strategic use of communication helps faculty and students realize that there is an individual who is in control and who is guiding them.

Dr. Dickson also stated that if institutions send out too many messages, people stop reading them. Therefore, she recommends sending timely and informative messages so that people know if a message comes into their inbox, it’s worth taking the time to read. These messages need to be substantial, clear and clean so that stakeholders know that decisions are being made with their best interests at heart.

Prioritizing

Coordinating work in a crisis can be hard to do remotely. Dr. Dickson has started twice-a-week Zoom meeting with her immediate staff where they put everything on the table. She uses this opportunity to tell staff that this is something that they need to do, even if it’s something they normally do not do or there may be less coordination. She believes higher education leaders need to work with their teams to move things forward so people don’t feel alienated or hunker down blaming other people.

She finds that her team is working together really well, despite frustrations. In a time of crisis, she believes leaders can’t give too much positive feedback. Leaders also need to say verbally that it’s safe to check in. Agendas also are really important right now because people have a lot of noise in their head.

Dr. Dickson encourages individuals to share what’s going on personally for 30-seconds during these weekly meetings; however, she notes that at times individuals are not self-aware so leaders may need to rein in people’s comments without making the person feel shutdown.

Trust is important and needs to have been built before a crisis occurs where people’s anxiety and fear can get the best of them, causing them to attack each other. Strong leaders need to be able to intervene in these moments to say, “Stop! We’re not doing that right now!” They need to kindly call people out while also still acknowledging anxiety. Dr. Dickson said she is doing a lot of this with people she works with to make sure they’re not getting hung up on their own frustrations.

People also may conflate the check-in with the business that needs to get down. Dr. Dickson encourages people to stay in their lanes and focus on the task at hand at that time. Therefore, if the time is presently being dedicated to talking about an individual’s emotional state, the discussion does not need to veer into work-related discussions about challenges in setting meetings, etc.

Going Online

When PAU put together the protocol in anticipation of the possibility of going online, the leaders knew that the majority of the faculty were going to need significant training since they didn’t know how to teach online. The leaders tapped institutional experts to develop a resources guide and created mandatory training for faculty.

Many faculty had to learn how to meet course-learning outcomes in a new format in a way that wasn’t going to drain them. They also had to learn to teach in ways that didn’t rely on a three-hour Zoom class. The campus provided resources to help the faculty learn to do this in a humane and efficient way because they only had 1-2 days to get up-to-speed.

During a crisis, the institution needs to prioritize what it can tackle in a crisis. Dr. Dickson was committed to serving the students first and then the faculty. For example, students were worried that they would lose their work-study or jobs on campus. Dr. Dickson sent a list out of students who had financial aid, work study or campus jobs and asked supervisors to verify that those jobs could be done remotely. If those jobs couldn’t be done remotely, the campus committed to finding jobs for these students that could be performed online.

3 Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Dr. Dickson suggested takeaways for higher education leaders:

There is a very important place for both a command-and-control, military-type leader and a relational style of leader in this type of crisis. It is important to identify who is good at each type of leadership styles and what roles these individuals should play in navigating the crisis.
Clarity of roles is important. People need to stay in their lanes but also know where they need to hand things across to someone else. For example, academic technology is in Dr. Dickson’s area of responsibility while technology is part of facilities. They had to learn how to work together to make sure that everything is being taken care of.
People must have a lot of grace with each other. So many individuals are facing a new paradigm of work and everyone needs to give others a break by understanding that everyone is under pressure. You also need to honor your own self-care as well as others’ need for space for personal self-care and to take care of their families and loved ones. Otherwise, this will lead to anxiety and high levels of stress.

Bullet Points

As soon as a crisis begins to emerge, begin taking action steps to develop a plan of action and budget. If possible, tap into previous institutional experiences that might offer some previous lessons that can be updated and adopted.
In the COVID-19 pandemic, two different types of leaders are emerging. The first is command-and-control leaders, who want to think about plans and next steps to accomplish goals. The second group are relational leaders, who help stakeholders come to terms about what is happening. There is a place for both types of leaders in an institution. Identify who these people are and then find the best use of their leadership talents.
Communication needs to be very strategic. Be concise, clear and thorough. Make sure that institutional messages come out before departmental messages that offer steps for implementation. Be very cognizant about the language being used, which can cause increased anxiety and stress.
Remind faculty and staff that they are “ethically obligated” to be clear and kind in their communication. The way they communicate can bring additional stress to students and other stakeholders.
Working remotely can be a challenge. Schedule regular meetings and have an agenda. Offer time for individuals to share what’s going on personally, but be willing to rein them back in kindly. Don’t mix personal time with business time; keep both separate in a meeting.
Encourage individuals to stay in their lane while working on their assignments. With that said, find ways to effectively collaborate across areas when needed.
Prioritize what’s important. Dr. Dickson committed to putting students first and faculty next in her decision-making.
Help faculty be prepared to teach online. Also understand that there may be personal issues that challenge their ability to do so effectively. Help them work through these challenges.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Palo Alto University

Guests Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/risadickson/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Crises offer many common lessons once they are over. That’s the case now as higher education faces the latest crises, the COVID19 pandemic.

This episode of Changing Higher Ed features Dr. Scott Cowen, the former president of Tulane University. Dr. Cowen, who is now a faculty member, as shares his insights of surviving a crisis, which in his case was Hurricane Katrina.

He believes that out of every disaster, we have an obligation to make something better. He encourages institutions to chronicle what they are learning so it could help inform future crises.

The Differences and Similarities between Coronavirus and Katrina

Whereas the coronavirus is affecting the US and the globe, Hurricane Katrina affected a very specific region of the United States. About two weeks after the storm, Tulane leaders were able to determine the physical damage that was done to the institution and to New Orleans. Then plans were developed to remediate and renew the university as well as the city. That took many years to complete. In Tulane’s case, this recovery took seven years to get back to normal in terms of damage to both the physical plant, enrollment and the institutional reputation.

In the case of the COVID19, the effect and the impact continue to unfold every day. No one knows the duration or how bad it’s going to be. It also is kicking off a meltdown in the stock market.

There are similarities between these two crises. There is no playbook for what’s happening. People are feeling very anxious and very scared. They don’t know what the future holds. Now college campuses are closing and dispersing their faculty, staff and students.

Four Key Areas to Focus on

If the COVID19 crisis goes 3-4 months, there will be impacts, especially if the market remains on a decline. Dr. Cowen believes that institutions could return to normal operations in the Fall. There will still be a lot to do because it will have significant impact on finances.

Dr. Cowen suggests doing the following planning steps:

Make plans for the safety and welfare of students, faculty and students. By and large, institutions are doing a good job in this area.
Focus on what you can and can’t control. What institutions currently can control is the closure of campuses and putting everything online. However, there is a lot that is currently out of our control. Therefore, it is important to start doing scenario planning and developing work streams focused on when the institution potentially could reopen or what the financial impact will be. Look at three-month, five-month and nine-month projections for reopening.
Communicate like crazy. When people are anxious and nervous, they want information. There needs to be a rhythm to communication. Give stakeholders a realistic view of what’s happening right now, what is being worked on, and a sense of realistic hope. This common message, which requires a very well-planned communications plan for all stakeholders, needs to come from the president and board chair.
- Constantly monitor chat rooms online. This is a fruitful site to see what is on stakeholders’ minds and then address these in communications.

Communicate with People’s Hearts

The president and board chair should be focused on calming everyone’s fears. Fortunately, technology allows this to happen instantaneously. There is video, messaging and electronic town hall meetings.

Dr. Cowen also encourages university presidents to stop using a teleprompter. Scripted content loses the speaker’s authenticity, which is important right now because people want to feel that you’re in this too. Instead, use talking points and be open to making mistakes, something which makes your human in the eyes of listeners.

Make sure you have your facts and data right. One of the worst things you can do is “shoot from the hip” and get your facts wrong. Know what is actually happening. It’s also OK to admit that you don’t have all the answers, but also describe what you are doing to get all those answers. Provide stakeholders a timeline in which you anticipate to have those answers.

**Scenario Planning**

After Hurricane Katrina, everybody went back to the risk enterprise programs to look at scenarios. They became more focused on developing scenarios that included weather-related issues or an active shooter. However, Dr. Cowen believes that most institutions did not project a scenario of a pandemic, even though a lot has been written over the past 15 years about this type of scenario, and in fact, many if not most do not do risk planning. Now that it has happened, institutions are having to lead on the fly.

Student Recruitment Moving Forward

Student recruitment also will be an area of concern. Many institutions are pushing back deadlines due to the pandemic. After Katrina, about 85 percent of Tulane’s undergraduate and graduate students returned to campus in January 2006. This was higher than institutional leaders had believed would happen.

However, Tulane did not anticipate what would happen the following Fall. They normally had an entering class of 1,600, but instead, they had an entering class of 860. It took the institution six years to rebuild that population, taking a tremendous toll on Tulane’s budget and everything that the university did.

Dr. Cowen does not believe this will be as severe an issue now, but it will be an issue. Some students may decide to attend an institution closer to their home instead of going away. Given the meltdown of the stock market, some may opt out of attending the expensive private school, while others may opt to take a gap year to make sure that the aftereffects of the COVID19 pandemic have settled out. Therefore, this may have an effect on yield rates going into the fall.

Finances Issues Moving Forward

Additionally, many colleges and universities were on the cusp financially before COVID19 hit, and this situation could accelerate their demise. He encourages institutional leaders in these situations to do serious thinking about the future, including pursuing mergers or being acquired. Additionally, these leaders need to reach out to other institutions about taking care of current students. For example, Tulane restructured after Katrina and cut down its number of departments. Tulane leaders reached out to other institutions that had those departments and asked them to give consideration to Tulane students if they applied to the other institution. This proved to work out for the Tulane students who were impacted.

Finding Informal Advisors

Dr. Cowen and his team also created an informal board and cabinet to get feedback in fall 2005 once they realized the institution could not reopen as it had previously been. The Tulane formal board was very helpful in doing scenario planning around issues.

He also asked five university presidents from across the nation to work with him in developing a renewal plan in fall 2005. This group helped him to develop an objective long-term picture and key issues while he was dealing with life-and-death situations, helping him focus to develop the renewal plan. Additionally, the Higher Education Association of America was very helpful because they encouraged other universities to take Tulane’s students.

Dr. Cowen encouraged institutional leaders to embrace “plagiarism,” i.e., borrow from what other institutions are doing and saying, to get through this situation and to identify solutions that are working. Then these solutions can be implemented across the nation.

Moving to Online Education

One positive impact of the current situation is the need to move to online education. Everybody needs to learn how to do online courses. This could lead to additional opportunities to expand reach, lower the cost of education and appeal to additional populations. This also will get faculty more experienced in online and open up new opportunities.

Faculty also can use technology to meet with students online. Dr. Cowen meets with his students via Zoom without any agenda to keep students connected with Tulane. Having faculty do this beyond the scope of the course and during the closure will help with student retention as well as the institutional reputation. That relationship is critical right now.

**4** **Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders**

Dr. Cowen suggested takeaways for higher education leaders:

Ensure the health and welfare of students and faculty.
Make sure you focus on what you control and do serious scenario planning for those things you can’t control.
Have a robust communication plan that addresses all of the institution’s stakeholders. This plan needs to have a rhythm to it to help people deal with stress and anxiety.
- Follow chat rooms on the Internet to hear what stakeholders are saying and doing so you can address that in future messaging.

Bullet Points

There are many lessons from previous crises. Learn from situations such as Tulane’s response after Hurricane Katrina.
Focus on present-day matters such as student and faculty safety, but also begin scenario planning using different time frames.
Communicate extensively and with a rhythm. Avoid teleprompters and speak from the heart. Make sure that you have your facts correct but also be willing to say that you don’t know and how you are trying to determine an answer. Constantly review online comments and chatrooms to see what stakeholders are saying about your institution so you can address these in subsequent communications.
- Look at your financial situation and begin to reach out to potential partners who may be able to provide support to your institution and/or merger candidates.
- Find informal advisors who can help you get a big-picture long-term view, even though you are focused on the day-to-day issues of managing the COVID19 pandemic.
- Find ways to reach out to students during this time. Encourage faculty to stay engaged using technology so that relationships remain strong. This could translate into improved retention for the fall 2020 semester.
- Look for silver linings, such as the emergence of more online learning opportunities.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

 * Winnebagos on Wednesdays: How Visionary Vision Can Transform Higher Education

Scott Cowen: http://www.scottcowen.com/

Guests Social Media Links:

Twitter: https://twitter.com/TulaneScott

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

 * LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/

Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

This episode addresses the upcoming enrollment cliff that institutions of higher education are facing. Bill Conley is vice president for enrollment at Bucknell University, which is in an enviable position with a 30-percent admittance rate and a strong alumni base. The institution offers nationally recognized programs in arts, science, engineering and management.

Conley, who began his career in admissions in 1980, wrote the article, The Great Enrollment Crash, published in The Chronicle of Higher Education. He will retire in June and begin consulting in enrollment management.

A Seismic Change

Since 1980, there have been periodic declines in high school graduation rates, lingering recessions, and short-term economic and demographic impacts that affected higher education enrollment. However, colleges and universities were always able to adapt and adjust to these.

However, that changed with the Great Recession of 2008 and 2009. Some colleges lost as much as 50 percent of their endowments during those years. In addition, families lost jobs and income and took huge hits in relation to their wealth, especially in home equity. This led to the decline in population growth.

The Birth Dirth in the Midwest and the Northeast, when combined with the decline in high school graduation levels projected to culminate in 2030, has precipitated this structural reality. Conley said this situation is turning into a true trough instead of a rough decline.

Conley pointed to demographics not being in higher education’s favor, especially in the Northeast and Midwest. In the Northeast and Midwest, higher education is looking at a declining pool of qualified traditional students, with an expected 20 percent decline in the number of high school graduates in 2030. The projected growth areas in the Southeast and Southwest will not be sufficient to replace this decline. Additionally, the students in these growth areas are more likely to be first-generation, lower-income college attendees.

Conley also pointed to two other factors that are part of this equation. Firstly, college students by and large attend institutions located with 100 miles of home. Secondly, the cost of higher education is increasingly out of reach for most families.

Becoming a Commodity

Several institutions have done a “tuition reset” during the past decade. To the consumer, it looked as if these institutions had reduced their tuition by 35-50 percent. At the same time, the model eliminated the institution’s responsibility for providing financial aid. Very few of these models have worked on a sustained basis.

Conley hypothesized that in these cases, many consumers’ opinion is that institutions that charge less are worth less. Additionally, everyone wants to feel like they are getting a deal, whether through receiving a scholarship or a cut price on tuition (e.g., think J.C. Penney). Thus, higher education increasingly is being viewed as a commodity.

Unsustainable Finances

Part of the current dilemma has been caused by state policymakers. Conley pointed to the states’ decisions to create tax cuts and reduce spending on higher education. He noted that in 2005, Rutgers University received 81 percent of its budget from the state; now, only 16 percent of this institution’s budget comes from the state. That difference must be covered through tuition hikes. This is resulting in public universities–especially flagships—recruiting prospective students from across its state border to enroll out-of-state students who will pay out-of-state tuition. This reduces the space for in-state residents in university classes.

Since 2000, the tuition to attend the average public institution has increased by 60 percent. The tuition at private institutions has increased by 45 percent. The discount rate in 2007 was about 38 cents of each dollar being repurposed as financial aid. It’s now over 50 percent.

However, some of the schools that are contemplating or undertaking closures or mergers are above 70 percent. This percentage is unsustainable because an institution only has 30 cents left to invest or cover institutional costs. Nearing this point should be a warning signal to the institution that they are running out of time to enroll students at a price point that will sustain a thriving university.

The Court of Public Opinion

The public continues to be concerned about whether they can trust higher education. People ask about return on investment and whether the student will be prepared for careers. Varsity Blues didn’t help the situation.

Institutions need to look closely at mission, money and majors to be able to successfully navigate the headwind to move forward.

Mission: Many institutions have a mission statement that was created when they were founded and may have been tweaked a little bit with empty language in the ensuing years. Conley recommended a rigorous review and assessment of the mission to determine whether it needs to be updated in a compelling manner. This updated version could help the institution be viewed as a distinctive, differentiated place.

Money includes focusing on identifying the potential group of students. For example, schools may need to change their focus to recruiting post-traditional learners as their service area no longer has a significant group of prospective students between the ages of 18-22. This will require institutions to realign their offerings to the emerging demand.

Majors: While considering himself a strong proponent of liberal arts education, Conley believes that liberal arts colleges need to undergo a significant re-imagination of their curriculum to prepare students for having 5-10 careers during their lifetime. Conley suggests that the focus needs to shift to competencies that can be developed in both liberal arts and preprofessional environments. Higher education needs to reimagine how English, history and political science are relevant in ensuring graduates are job-ready. This is being reflected across the higher education landscape; Tulsa University announced that it was closing down significant majors in arts and humanities, and instead shifting more toward STEM education.

Metrics and Measurement

Metrics and measurement will continue to play a critical role in guiding institutions on the emerging path. For example, Bucknell has a powerful student success intelligence model that helps measure when a student is struggling academically and/or socially. This allows Bucknell administration, faculty and staff to be attentive to every student.

Conley also pointed out that identifying metrics that measure what matters will become increasingly important. Additionally, Retention is going to be as important as recruitment.

Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Conley suggested three takeaways for higher education leaders:

Recruitment efforts need to be measured (metrics) and effective.
Retention efforts need to be state-of-the-art. These efforts can (and should) include leveraging technology and reimagining priorities.
- Examine your curriculum and its long-term relevancy for the smaller group of traditional students who will be attending college over the next 20-30 years.

Bullet Points

The current demographic changes that are forecast are ones that are going to cause seismic shifts in the higher education landscape.
Higher education needs to reimagine itself so it doesn’t become a commodity.
A major issue is many institution’s financial models, which are unsustainable due to the combination of budget cuts, less state funding and growing discount rates.
- Higher education also is facing backlash in public opinion due to situations such as Varsity Blue. Therefore, it’s imperative that higher education institutions make every effort to rebuild trust and goodwill.
- Institutions need to reconsider their missions, money and majors in order to remain viable.
- Metrics and measurement needs to be valued. It’s important to establish what metrics are the most meaningful. For example, retention will be as important as recruitment in coming years.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

The Great Enrollment Crash

Guests Social Media Links:
LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/william-conley-5688a637/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
- Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Dr. Philip Rous is provost and senior vice president for academic affairs of University of Maryland Baltimore County. He has been at UMBC for 29 years, both as a faculty member and administrator. He tries to facilitate the community as a whole to grow and expand.

Founded in 1966, UMBC is a relatively young public research university that is building a new model of a modern university. The campus, which currently has 14,000 students, emphasizes a liberal arts foundation at the undergraduate level, and science, engineering, information technology, human services and public policy at the graduate level.

Weighing in onShared Responsibility

Dr. Rous prefers the term “shared responsibility” instead of shared governance, believing that this term recognizes that universities cannot function without some degree of shared responsibilities. This ranges from the faculty taking primary responsibly for curriculum and program design while administration takes responsibility for some aspects of the budget. However, everyone on the campus shares in the responsibility, which is derived from a set of shared values.

This reframing opens up the conversation and also reveals solutions that are encountered with shared governance. Individuals also are able to think more deeply about values as well as to consider the values that different stakeholders share.

Dr. Rous feels that taking this approach helps governance move forward through a weighted decision-making process, i.e., that while decisions are shared, they are differently weighted based on the type of decision. For example, faculty’ voices are given more weight in making decisions in certain specific areas such as curriculum and programs, while administration carries more weight regarding decisions in other areas such as parking lots, budgets, and the like. There also are some areas where there is sufficient overlap in decision-making, requiring faculty and administration to work together.

Shared Values

Founding shared responsibility on shared values helps guide stakeholders when making sticky decisions. These shared values quickly become evident across campus. For example, Dr. Rous typically meets with teams from other universities after they have visited UMBC. These teams often ask him how he was able to get everyone to tell the same stories on campus. Dr. Rous responds that this is a characteristic of the institution, even though the institution doesn’t have a values statement. He credits these common values to the institution’s relatively young age and that the individuals who are part of UMBC’s founding and growth were very intentional in emphasizing the values that they felt were important. This carries through to current times; for example, when hiring for a position, the university seeks and hires only individuals who share both the institutional values and strong expertise.

A Faculty Flow to Leadership

Many of the individuals who move into UMBC’s top leadership positions, including provost and deans, also have been active in shared governance on the faculty side before taking on these roles. For example, Dr. Rous is a former president of the university’s faculty senate. The former dean of arts, humanities and social sciences also was a UMBC’s faculty senate president while the current dean and the associate provost also served in that role with the faculty senate at other institutions.

Because of this pipeline, Dr. Rous believes the people who are moving into these leadership positions understand the responsibilities, share the institutional values, and want to make a difference. They often see part of their career spent serving in administration and supporting the institution as a whole.

Leadership Development

Early in the institution’s history, there was no formal leadership development training. However, the early leaders realize that leadership development was really needed on the campus and began to develop avenues to support emerging leaders. Dr. Rous believes that one of the fundamental responsibilities of a leader is to nurture the next generation of leaders.

There now is a formal training available for individuals who are incoming department chairs. The institution now taps national organizations’ training, such as the American Council on Education Fellows Program through hosting its fellows on campus and nominating UMBC faculty who have leadership potential to serve as fellows for a year. Many of these individuals have moved into leadership positions or are capable of doing so, thus creating a leadership pipeline.

Transparency

Sharing information also is important to good shared governance. At UMBC, the shared governance heads (e.g., president of the faculty senate) serve on the president’s council with all the deans and vice presidents. Their inclusion helps advance the shared governance heads’ understanding of how the university works and how top administrators interact in relation to complicated issues.

Communication also is important. Dr. Rous believes there can never be enough communication and transparency, especially in complex institutions such as colleges and universities. Often, when there is a disagreement, it arises because one stakeholder doesn’t have a piece of information that the other one does. Dr. Rous noted that as a faculty member, he didn’t fully understand many of the key decisions made by the administration. He began to learn to take into account the complexity of these decisions once he served as faculty senate president.

Faculty members who are involved in research and teaching shouldn’t be expected to understand the ins and outs of the budget – this isn’t what the institution is asking the faculty member to do. With shared governance, it’s important to provide enough transparency and information to faculty members to help them understand the various aspects of a decision.

**3 Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders**

Dr. Rous suggested three take-aways for university presidents:

Institutions must have a common set of shared values and have stakeholders realize there are these shared values, especially during moments of disagreement.
Trust is vital and must be earned. Trust doesn’t come automatically. It comes through developing the trust by demonstrating it continuously through doing what you say it will do and listening. Trust goes both ways among leadership and faculty. Sometimes it takes time to develop trust.
There must be respect for shared governance. The administrators need to make sure that what they say or do is in alignment with shared governance. It’s also important for administrators to personally demonstrate their own commitment to shared governance and protect it at the institution, even though it may take more time to make a decision.

Bullet Points
Shared responsibility provides another way of thinking about shared governance.
Weighting decision-making responsibility can help smooth out discord.
Having shared institutional values can give a point of reference when various stakeholders make decisions.
Open communication and transparency are crucial to foster shared governance and shared responsibility.
- Faculty leaders should be developed for institutional administration positions. These individuals have experience at the faculty level as well as in faculty leadership. Those perspectives will help them navigate the challenges faced at the institutional level.
- Faculty as well as faculty leaders need to be provided with a wide range of information to help them fully understand complex issues. They often do not have complete information so they may have a limited perspective and be making (or resisting) decisions from an uninformed place.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

President Speaks: Shared governance key to becoming an “empowered university”
University of Maryland – Baltimore County (UMBC)
- Bio of Dr. Philip Rous

Guests Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/philip-rous-1804a325/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
- Twitter: @thechangeldr
- Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

In the summer of 2011, conversations began with the Governor’s office about potential mergers. Toward the end of the year an announcement was made that four mergers would occur. This resulted in eight institutions being merged into four. The most complex merger involved Georgia Health Sciences University and Augusta State University, which created one larger and more comprehensive institution than either had been separately.

The University System of Georgia has had waves of mergers. Therefore much of the planning for the merger that resulted in Augusta University was done by the board and the administrative level of the University System of Georgia.

Dr. Ricardo Azziz was instrumental in implementing that merger. Azziz continues to analyze the process that was used to create this complex merger. He co-authored a 2017 report for the TIA Institute and a book, Strategic Mergers and Higher Education, published by John Hopkins Press.

Higher Ed Mergers: A Leadership Challenge

Higher education mergers tend to be tenuous for multiple reasons, the biggest reason being that most mergers are not planned in advance – few institutions take the time to proactively consider the aspects of mergers and appoint appropriately experienced leaders. Additionally, most institutions don’t have access to consultants with this expertise. Azziz believes that many higher education leaders who guide a merger are not anxious to be part of another merger.

At the time of the Augusta merger, there was little information available about how to execute a merger between universities. Institutional leaders had no roadmap – only theoretical research about completing mergers had been published at the time, so leaders were in some ways flying by the seat of their pants. One thing that helped was that the University of Georgia system hired a consultant to help with the accreditation of those mergers, as it took something off the already overflowing plates of the merger team.

Higher education leaders who are leading mergers make every effort to network with those who have guided these types of organizational change and/or use an experienced consultant to guide the process. This will help leaders access the many tools needed to be successful.

Seven Essential Elements

There are seven essential elements that need to be in place for a successful merger:

Supportive and understanding board
The right kind of institutional leaders
A vision that encompasses and drives the merger so the university community sees itself as part of the merger
A sense of urgency so people understand why this needs to happen
A communication plan
A robust project management system
Resources

Most institutions wait too long to begin the merger process. These institutions may be facing a number of serious challenges, including budgetary issues and/or declining enrollment.

The University of Georgia System leadership and state leadership took a proactive approach before the eight institutions were seriously in trouble and had reached a point of no return. However, the system officials had difficulty injecting a new vision or a sense of urgency because much of the data regarding the institutional selections was kept at the system level.

Reasons for Mergers

There can be many reasons for mergers; first and foremost should be to preserve a tradition or programs for students. Therefore, it is important to bring a focus of what’s best for students and how best to develop a higher quality education, experiences and training for students. This is the right focus that creates both a sense of urgency and focus.

Emphasizing financial gain as the primary factor in creating a merger is the wrong approach to creating a sense of urgency because a merger is going to cost money. In fact, there will be additional costs in finances and personnel since the mergers need their own staffing and finances beyond what is available in the two institutions that are merging.

Success vs. Failure

Success is not an exact term when talking about mergers, but the bottom line should be about the students. If leaders keep the students and the quality of their education, experiences, and programs at the forefront of the vision of the merger, it becomes easier to see how the creation of a larger institution can offer more programs for students as well as more sustainable programs than what each smaller institution could provide.

Failures of mergers can mean different things. These failures can include the institutions remaining apart because the administrations never fully combined. Even in cases such as these, whereas some institutions fail at merging, they use the experience to rejuvenate because they are forced to examine themselves carefully.

Strategic Planning

Mergers are usually discounted (or not even considered) as part of an institution’s strategic plan, but they should be. The American Quality Foundation and Ernst and Young published a study several years ago that looked across a number of different organizations in the U.S., Canada and Japan. The researchers analyzed what would create positive growth from a market capital perspective. There were three common findings which align with Azziz’s experiences in mergers:

Strategy with good implementation
Business process improvement that is focused on the customer
Depth and breadth of leadership management practices.

When building their institution’s strategic plan, it is important leaders and governing boards consider all options, including mergers, acquisitions and strategic alliances, in their planning process. This allows these concepts to be part of the lexicon and planning.

Transformational Change

Many mergers are coming as a result of revolutionary change in the higher education sector, such as some institutions offering free on-line courses or a life-long learning process that is cumulative. Higher education also is under significant pressure with societal changes, including technology, the need and ability of individuals to regularly expand their knowledge base as well as rapidly changing demographics.

Unfortunately, higher education as a whole tends to be more comfortable with incremental change, and its leaders must expand their understanding and in fact embrace transformational change in the form of a merger.

Azziz believes that higher education leaders must now adopt a more proactive and transformational leadership approach to ensure that future students get the best quality of education (which may not – and probably will not -- be the same type of education as they receive today). For example, the current generation of students are hesitant to seek higher degrees immediately – they want to go into the workforce and because they know they will be experiencing a number of jobs during their career, they know they need to take a continuous life-long learning approach to adapt and develop skills and knowledge that haven’t been developed yet. To successfully meet this challenge, higher education will have to adapt by creating different badging and certificate processes, using wider technology and embracing a more diverse range of learning materials.

Higher education needs to respond more decisively and planfully in what is happening in the external environment, which is revolutionary. Meeting these challenges requires a visionary governing board and leaders. However, these boards often don’t embrace their strategic responsibilities in relation to the schools they lead – the experience of most boards and higher education institutions is one of times when change wasn’t as radical. In addition, board members often come from different industries and may not understand what is happening in higher education and don’t take the time to educate themselves.

Clear Communication

One of the critical things in mergers is communications. It is important to have a comprehensive communications strategy with concise messages that allows all members of the leadership chain involved in the mergers to deliver the same messages consistently. You cannot over-communicate, but conflicting messages and wordings are extremely problematic, especially because in academics, words matter.

Project Management

Project management is essential for a successful merger. Like dominos, a merger needs to have the individual pieces fall in the right direction at the right time to be successful – there can be severe implications for the institution if something is not done in a timely manner.

Azziz was fortunate to have an experienced internal project management team who understood the complexity of the transaction, including having the numerous groups from accreditors to financial institutions involved. This comprehensive approach helped smooth the merger process. He recommended that smaller institutions hire an external project management team if an institution does not have one in-house.

Resources

Mergers require additional resources, both financial and personnel, beyond the needs of operating the two separate institutions that will be merging. In the case of Augusta, they merged a health sciences institution with a liberal arts / masters institution. The health sciences center had resources that could be diverted to fund the merger, whereas the liberal arts institution had less resources to dedicate.

Culture

The culture of a university campus is special and recognized. It also can be very difficult to cultivate when doing a merger.

It takes a long time for a new culture to develop. Leaders need to remember to preserve the original culture so that everyone feels engaged while also creating a new culture that reflects the merger. These two perspectives do not have to be contradictory.

Additionally, leaders need to realize that academic cultures in larger institutions tend to be heterogeneous; the culture in the college of engineering differs from the business school, which differs from the college of liberal arts. Leaders should not try to force the creation of a homogeneous institutional culture that has artificial parameters.

3 Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Azziz suggested three take-aways for university presidents:

Consider mergers and acquisitions as part of the strategic planning process’s environmental scanning. This doesn’t mean that they have to merge or acquire. However, they will have taken the idea of the merger into consideration.
Understand that the external environment is changing in a very rapid pace. Taking an approach that only focuses on incremental change will no longer work.

Bullet Points

Most institutional leaders do not have experience in leading mergers, nor are there a plethora of consultants who can assist in a merger.
There are seven elements that are critical in leading a successful merger: Supportive and understanding board; the right kind of institutional leaders; a vision that encompasses and drives the merger so the university community sees itself as part of the merger; a sense of urgency so people understand why this needs to happen; a communications plan; a robust project management system; and resources.
Mergers should be undertaken for improving student education, programs and experiences. The primary drivers should not be financial.
The possibility of a merger should be considered in the environmental scanning portion of a strategic planning process. This enable institutional leaders to begin to think proactively about this process instead of reactively when it is forced onto them by top leaders or external factors.
Institutional leaders need to adopt a transformational change mentality, which differs greatly from the incremental change that has traditionally been taken in higher education.
Leaders also need to be aware of and take into account the revolutionary changes that are impacting the higher education sector.
Clear, concise and consistent communication is key in the merger process. All leaders need to be on the same page and use the same wording.
A project management team – whether internal or external – are invaluable since this team will consider the various complexities of a merger.
Additional personnel and financial resources are needed in a merger. These are beyond what each merging institution brings to the table.
Creating a vital common culture is critical in a merger. However, it’s important to maintain the previous institutional culture for a period of time as well as not attempt to create a homogenous institutional culture that doesn’t fit every college / department.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Ricardo Azziz
Strategic Mergers in Higher Education

Guests Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ricardo-azziz-0a8b0396/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Dr. Lori Varlotta is president of Hiram College, a small liberal arts college with approximately 1,000 students in the traditional college and 200 in the adult program. She is the campus’ 22nd president, the first female to serve in that role.

Hiram recently completed a major organizational redesign that followed closely on the heels of a very inclusive strategic planning process. The strategic plan had two overarching goals – to grow enrollment and to increase the campus’s financial sustainability. However, to achieve those two goals, the plan called for several action items, one of which was an academic prioritization process.

An Inclusive Approach

The strategic planning process was a year-long process that included approximately half of the institution’s 80 faculty and 100 staff. When it came time to do the academic prioritization process, Varlotta and her team invited all faculty to the table to participate, as well as student government, staff assembly, the Board of Trustees and the administration.

During both the strategic planning and the academic prioritization processes, the institution’s mantra was that the outcomes would be shaped by the hands of many so everyone could see their fingerprints on the end product. This approach helped with getting stakeholder buy-in. Varlotta noted that the means by which these were accomplished, i.e., the transparency and inclusiveness that were front and center, were as important as the ends in moving through these processes.

Action Steps

The steps in the implementation process, which were led by the college’s chief academic dean, Dr. Judy Muyskens, included:

The dean worked with faculty to identify the intellectual framework that would guide the academic reprioritization process. Muyskens worked with faculty to review the types of metrics from the Delaware Study. This benchmarking study provides suggested metrics that help administrators and faculty members do an analysis of departmental costs, instructional costs, scholarly activity, etc.
A timeline for the academic reprioritization process was created. This timeline projected when the administration would seek approval from the Board of Trustees and then worked backwards to set up key deadlines. This helped ensure that stakeholders were not surprised by how the planning process was proceeding.
While there was a data-driven process with benchmarks and milestones, the administration clearly communicated that they would not be beholden to the process. The administrators wanted to make the process iterative and allow for changes and mid-course adjustments. If there needed to be more time for discussions –or an acceleration of the process—administrators wanted to embrace having that latitude.
A Strategic Academic Team was created. This ad-hoc committee of five faculty members, each from separate programs, was appointed jointly by the dean and the chair of the Faculty Senate. This group represented various stakeholders across campus in relation to the academic background, diverse populations and research backgrounds. The individuals also had to agree to put the needs of the campus before any departmental needs. The SAT, which met weekly and also worked with the entire faculty, were charged with working with the academic dean on the self-assessment and developing the criteria that programs would be evaluated by. They then helped prioritize the college’s programs. This ranking included programs that the college needed to add or grow, programs that the college needed to keep in place, and programs that the college needed to reduce or cut.

This was very emotional and difficult work. Later in the process, the administrators were criticized for not having this committee elected by the faculty as a whole; however, the chair and the dean both felt that the need for diversity among committee members was more important when making the selection of who to serve.

Develop criteria for the prioritization. Through a collective and inclusive process, the SAT identified criteria to guide the prioritization process. These criteria, which were endorsed by the faculty as a whole, included:
- departmental connection to the college’s mission;
- the level of departmental faculty work and faculty productivity as defined in large part by metrics laid out in the Delaware Study;
- faculty had to demonstrate that they were helping bring institutional priorities to fruition;
- the departments had to show a track record of securing external resources through gifts, grants or regional acclaim; and
- student interest and workforce demand.

These were agreed upon by all before prioritization took place.

Significant research went into identifying institutional priorities and criteria. The administrators and SAT were guided by the research of Dr. Robert Dickenson, who authored a seminal work on academic prioritization. In addition, Varlotta was able to tap into her network of other presidents who are members of the Council of Independent Colleges to identify those who went through processes like the one at Hiram College. She also talked to several consultants that she had worked with in the past to provide a reality check about the criteria being used.
Criteria and related prompts were disseminated to every faculty member. The SAT and administrators sent the criteria out and asked faculty to join with their departmental colleagues to address the prompts and then post the responses on a faculty portal. This offered a significant level of transparency for all faculty members, administrators and student government.
Data analysis took place in Spring 2018. The SAT was charged with reviewing the data while the Academic Program Committee, which was charged with the college’s shared governance, shared the task. These two committees separately downloaded the information from the portal, analyzed the information and prioritized the programs, majors, minors and programs of distinction.
Creating a faculty committee designed to focus on innovation. A third group, brought to Dr. Varlotta by two senior faculty members, was stood up to focus on innovations, i.e., what kinds of priorities needed to be added to keep the college forward-looking. Recommendations included overhauling the first-year experience and reorganizing all of the departments into 4-5 interdisciplinary schools, which created more collegiality among students and faculty.

Making the Hard Decisions

The SAT worked for 2-3 months prioritizing the programs. The hardest decisions were focused on which programs, majors or minors would be reduced or cut. They also identified which programs should remain at the same level and which programs should grow through the addition of faculty members or resources. These were data-driven decisions which included fact-checking against the CFO’s metrics and doing one-on-one interviews.

These recommendations were forwarded to Dr. Varlotta in May 2018. At the same time, the shared governance committee brought a list, which paralleled the SAT’s recommendations. That confirmed that the work had been thorough, rational and practical.

All of these recommendations were forwarded back to the faculty as a whole to review and make commentary. This commentary was part of the package that Dr. Varlotta brought to the Board of Trustees. She supported both sets of recommendations in entirety. In addition, the Board, which includes 38 trustees, voted on each recommendation separately and gave each their unanimous approval.

The Cuts

As part of this process, the college decided to end its religious studies program, downgrade five majors into minors and eliminate six faculty positions. Dr. Varlotta and the college’s vice president of development worked together to raise funds to give each of the affected faculty members a full-year buy-out and full-year benefits.

Hiccups and Challenges

Dr. Varlotta said it was important to have a sound rationale when forming specific committees prior to doing an academic prioritization process. Transparency was critically important. In addition, leaders needed to translate the rhetoric into reality. For example, Dr. Varlotta held 100 different meetings with various stakeholders while the vice presidents held 80 additional meetings during the spring semester.

3 Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Dr. Varlotta suggested three take-aways for university presidents:

If an institution embarks on an academic prioritization process, it can’t just be about cuts and reduction. There also needs to be opportunities for growth and augmentation. Institutions with financial issues must grow while making reductions at the same time. “You cannot cut your way to growth.”
There is an enormous amount of training that needs to take place to help faculty members become data-driven in order to translate the rhetoric into reality. Faculty members are extraordinary intelligent and know their disciplines well, but often don’t have the understanding of how to use organizational data to make evidence-based institutional decisions.
A public timeline needs to be created to ensure that stakeholders know what’s coming next.

Bullet Points

During both the strategic planning process and the academic prioritization process, Varlotta and her team invited stakeholders from across the campus to be involved.
Administrators need to identify the intellectual framework that will guide the academic reprioritization process. This should be done in concert with faculty members and should include metrics that will guide decision-making.
It’s important to set up and publicize a timeline that allows all stakeholders to understand the decision-making process.
An iterative process that allows for changes and mid-course adjustments will help keep stakeholder buy-in strong.
A small committee of faculty members who represent the span of the institution and its diverse interests should be involved in the academic prioritization process. This group can serve as an intermediary with other faculty members and also can provide critical leadership in helping make difficult decisions. In addition, this group needs to agree to put the institution’s well-being above departmental needs.
Institutional priorities were identified, based on research.
Agreed-upon metrics were identified that gauged departmental connection to the college’s mission, faculty work/productivity, faculty’s ability to bring institution priorities to fruition, departmental external fundraising, student interest and workforce demand.
All faculty and departments were asked to respond to the criteria through specifically written prompts. These responses were then reviewed and analyzed by the SAT committee.
A separate innovation committee was created through faculty suggestion. This committee focused on offering ideas of where the institution should move in the future.
The SAT committee took 2-3 months to review faculty and departmental feedback in order to prioritize programs. They also worked with the CFO to look at budgetary issues. Ultimately, the committee made recommendations to the president and dean of which programs, majors and minors to eliminate/downgrade as well as which to remain the same or expand.
The shared governance committee also did their own analysis and came up with similar recommendations.
These recommendations went to the Board of Trustees, which considered each recommendation separately and gave separate votes.
President Varlotta and the college’s development officer worked to secure funds to provide a generous severance package to each faculty member whose position was eliminated in the academic prioritization process.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Delaware Study
Judith Muyskens

Guests Social Media Links:

Lori Varlotta

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Episode Summary

The Change Leader CEO and President Drumm McNaughton and Aurora University Vice President for Marketing and Communications Deb Maue share their insights during the second annual wrap-up of happenings in higher education. This show notes offers a follow-up on the pair’s predictions for 2019 as well as insights on what to prepare for in 2020.

Mergers, Consolidates and Closures

2018 Prediction for 2019: There would be an acceleration of mergers, consolidations and closures in higher education.

What happened: This proved to be true. In November 2019, Education Dive reported that from 2014-2018, there were 1,234 colleges and universities that closed, including 129 non-profits, 11 publics and 1,094 for-profits. It shows that higher education is in a mature or declining market and will continue to experience headwinds in the future.

The most surprising example of this was University of Alaska, where the governor initially wanted to cut $80 million from the budget, but dropped the amount to $40 million. This level of cuts is unheard of and it had to do with campaign promises. The university system was looking at consolidating three campuses into one, but geographically, this made no sense. System leaders also are looking at programmatic and faculty cuts. This will have far-reaching consequences, and may put the institution’s accreditation into jeopardy.

However, several mergers made strategic sense. For example, National University System acquired Northcentral University, which is fully online with masters and doctoral programs. This merger allows the system to provide more programs for its students.

Another example is Arkansas System, which absorbed Henderson State, a private non-profit. This opportunity to share services helps Henderson financially; in addition, its brand equity will increase by being part of the system.

In both cases, these institutions moved quickly instead of waiting. They viewed the opportunity to merge as a strategic decision instead of being forced into making the move as a last resort.

Neg Reg 2019

2018 Prediction for 2019: The Neg Reg 2019 process would begin a transformation of higher education and its business model.

What happened: This process proved to be groundbreaking in many ways. For instance, the Neg Reg negotiators came to consensus on every topic, which is unheard of. The Department of Education did put forward a number of ambitious goals and participants pushed back on a number of them before coming to consensus.

The negotiators put the items under consideration into three buckets – accreditation agencies, innovation (including distance education and CBE), and teach grants and religious schools.

The Department published the rules on accreditation agencies on November 1 in the Federal Register so these rules will go into effect July 1. Some of the critical things include

Accreditors are no longer delineated as regional or national and they now can compete against each other.
Accreditors also can now reach out beyond the state or region they initially were restricted to and work with institutions in other parts of the nation. Student transfers should become much easier because of these changes.

However, the innovation bucket was not finalized. People are anticipating that new guidance will come out for discussion shortly because the Department of Education just ended its Competency-based Education (CBE) experiment. However, because this guidance wasn’t published by November 1, these changes won’t go into effect on July 1, 2020. If President Trump is not re-elected, these changes will be up for reconsideration.

A major issue for this bucket is how to measure learning. Right now, accreditors and institutions primarily measure learning by credit hours. However, this isn’t truly a good measure of learning. Competency-based education looks at the knowledge and skills that a student acquires (or has coming into a program). Moving toward this way of measuring learning would be a major shift for higher education, especially for distance education.

There also is talk coming out of Washington, D.C. about how to engage the business community more to identify the proficiencies that students need. This could also be put in the innovation bucket,

The future of the third bucket -- TEACH grants and guidance for religious colleges and universities – is still unclear.

Online Education

2018 Prediction for 2019: Online education will continue to grow in the next 2-3 years, spurred by consolidations and strategic alliances with online providers.

What happened: This happened over the last year with the increase of online students; however, the rate of increase slowed. Western Governors and Southern New Hampshire University both topped 100,000 students and Grand Canyon University topped 90,000. However, there also have been major drops, including Phoenix (which was at 490,000 students at the beginning of the decade but now has about 90,000, a significantly lower enrollment).

The most interesting thing is online program management (OPM). Bridgepoint Education continues to expand into this market as is Grand Canyon. Then there is Online Degree, which is turning the OPM marketing on its head. This company, which is growing, is attracting college dropouts to earn their GE requirements for free.

Additionally, the movement from for-profit to non-profit is in a disarray. Grand Canyon illustrates this, having received approval for non-profit status by the IRS. However, the institution will still be treated as a for-profit by the Department of Education for the purposes of receiving federal funding.

Universities that got into online education thought they would draw students nationally. However, online is now becoming hyper-local outside of the big players. The student base for online is the same as the prospective student base who would attend classes in person. This makes the marketing to these students easier.

The number of post-traditional students is decreasing. Whether this will continue will be based on the economy. If it sours, people will go back to school to distinguish themselves.

On a positive note, Moody changed its outlook from negative to neutral because they’ve seen some growth in some sectors. However, the demographic changes are beginning to be felt and will culminate in The Cliff in 2025. Additionally, 1 in 3 higher ed CFOs believe that the sector is in trouble, and they are the ones that know what is going on the best.

Tenure and promotion

2018 Prediction for 2019: Changing faculty tenure and promotion policies as a result of universities needing to cull programs that are not financially viable.

What happened: This is still emerging. We believe that faculty are not getting tenured as quickly, especially at private institutions. Additionally, tenure doesn’t mean lifetime employment anywhere given that low-performing programs will be cut, putting faculty at risk for losing jobs. One way this may play out is through alliances that may allow faculty to be shared between institutions.

Market Research

2018 Prediction for 2019: Market research will increasingly have a place in higher education as they focus on identifying where students are coming from.

What happened: We agreed that this hasn’t come true. Deb noted that there are some institutions that are doing a solid job in doing market research using statistical methods and other research methods to position the institution. However, there are still “haves” (which are big institutions) and “have-nots” based on funding being available to do this type of research.

Cost Containment

2018 Prediction for 2019: Cost containment will accelerate, especially in private schools. This will find its way to the C suite where there will be a reduction of presidential salaries, especially in private universities.

What happened: There wasn’t a reduction in salaries, but cost containment is becoming more evident. One-third of CFOs are concerned about their finances. Student debt exceeds $1.5 trillion, the highest ever. Low income students must work 15+ hours a week to afford their education. The discounting rate is commonly at 60 percent. Higher education enrollments are under 18 million, the first time since the Great Recession.

However, institutions can’t cut their way to grow; instead, it’s important – and CFOs are increasingly trying to find ways -- to put money into areas that will give a good return on the investment. These include market research and proactive boards to steer the institution.

Additionally, faculty and staff are starting to understand that higher education is a business and there is a relationship between revenues and expenses. Presidents are being more transparent about budgets as a way to education the institutional stakeholders.

2018 Prediction for 2019: We will start to see more interesting ways for education to be funded. Part of this will come from the NegReg process. More cities, state and companies will invest in their employees’ future.

What happened: While there hasn’t been much movement on this, we note that the movement in the OPM markets, as well as the changing accreditation process. There has been growth but not as far as funding of education. This is part of the reason why there have been so many mergers and closures – institutions still are too reliant on tuition for their budgets.

Higher education is beginning to partner with businesses to provide stackable and micro credentials for employees. However faculty buy-in is needed because they will be responsible for providing the content.

2019 Surprises

We also note a number of things that happened in 2019 that surprised us. These included:

Varsity Blues. This represents the worst in higher education and U.S. society when people with money can buy dishonesty at universities.
Admissions lawsuits. The federal judge upheld Harvard’s use of affirmative action in its admission decisions, but it’s going to be appealed. There’s a similar lawsuit against UNC from the same group.
Title IX. Three undergraduate women from Yale filed a class action lawsuit against Yale and its fraternities alleging that the fraternities control the campus social scene in a biased manner against women and fostering a culture of sexual harassment runs rampant.
Lawsuits about false marketing. Career Education Corporation settled a five-year lawsuit brought by 49 state attorney generals over its marketing. A similar lawsuit happened to Phoenix, which is now considered to have a toxic brand. These lawsuits taint the for-profit education sector.
Title IX. New guidance, which is at OPM, is coming out that changes the criteria from preponderance of evidence instead of clear and convincing evidence, the same as what is required in civil suits. This process had over 100,000 comments on this and will have major landmines.

Predictions for 2020

Changes are coming in how fundraising is done at major institutions. Donor relations are changing in that people are returning donations and unnaming buildings. Institutions are going to be far more wary of accepting donations without doing significant background checks.
There will be an acceleration of closures and mergers. There were big ones in 2019, such as Purdue with Kaplan and Strayer with Capella. There will be more closures in private non-profits. There is an overabundance in the market and a correction.
Rising costs and discount rates of 60 percent or more will be common.
Institutions will increase their partnerships with businesses to develop curriculum and credentials tailored to the businesses.
Free tuition will not be the norm. Otherwise, taxes will need to be increased.
More lawsuits about free speech, admissions policies and sexual assault will be filed.
The Title IX rollout will be a mess.
NCAA will need to look at restructuring, such as paying Division I athletes. This has other ramifications. For instance, this decision would give student-athletes the status of employees, which then gives them disability. That has additional cost ramifications for institutions.
NegReg 2019 will turn into NegReg 2020 and things won’t be rolled out in a timely basis. If there is a new president, there could be significant rollbacks in the guidelines.
There will not be any resolution in credit hours vs. competency-based education in relation to learning. The Department of Education will punt this issue to the accreditors.
With the changes to the NACAC regulations, there will be decreased ability to predict the size of incoming fall class. May 1 will be less of a critical date in knowing what the fall enrollment will be and the recruiting cycle will change.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Guests Social Media Links:

Guest Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/deborahmaue/
https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-change-leader/about/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Episode Summary

Dr. Russ Poulin served on the subcommittee on the recent federal Negotiated Rulemaking (Neg Reg) negotiations where he had the opportunity to provide input on recommendations that were voted on by the full committee. He was recently promoted to be the Executive Director of WCET.

In this podcast, he discusses some of the decisions that came out of the Neg Reg and were published.

Tying Federal Financial Aid to State Service

Neg Reg 2019 solidified the state authorization that ties federal financial aid to the institution that has the approval of the state where it is serving students. Some institutions were hesitating in complying with state authorization and were waiting for this tie to federal financial aid. Now, these institutions need to get those approvals in the states where they serve students.

One of the ways to get the necessary approval is through reciprocity provided by the National Council of State Authorization Reciprocity Agreement (NC-SARA). In addition, there is a new controversial definition of reciprocity. Previously, there was language that made it seem like a state could enforce any rule that it wanted to as part of reciprocity. However, it isn’t reciprocity if everyone is enforcing the previous rules.

An institution that is a member or participant in NC-SARA is now further down the road in being compliant in this area. This should bode well for institutions in most states.

However, there currently is little protection offered California students who are taking classes at out-of-state non-profit or public institutions at a distance. California does have a complaint process, but provides little else in protection for these students.

Changes in Accreditation

The Neg Reg strengthened the triad of federal, state and accreditation bodies. One of the changes lead removes any differentiation between regional and national accreditors. Instead, there will be just institutional accrediting bodies. The impact of this decision is still to be determined , but one outcome of this change could potentially remedy the situation in which a regional university will not accept transfer credits from a nationally accredited university.

In addition, regionals can now accredit any institution in any state. It will be interesting to see how the accrediting bodies react to this change, as well as how the department will do as far as oversight or pushing this policy forward.

Distance Education

There is a slight change in the definition of student identity in distance education. The idea all along has been that the institution needed to ensure that the student who registers for a course is the one who is taking the assessments. Previously, institutions used specific passwords, face-to-face proctoring or other types of electronic monitoring. The change requires the accreditors to work with the institutions to see what is really working and what evidence shows that it’s working.

While discussed in the Neg Reg negotiations, defining “substantial interaction” did not come out in the published package. However, this issue has led to additional discussions. The definition of distance education that was last updated in 1992 offered a specific definition of regular and substantive interaction. As time has passed, this definition has become outdated and needs to be redefined in a functional way for institutions to know what to do. Much of this was sparked because of competency-based education, which is based on when the student achieves a competency on their own timeline (instead of on a set schedule).

Continued discussions agree that there should be interaction, but the initial definition only mentioned the faculty member; that is only one perspective so that doesn’t constitute interaction. There’s since been progress in updating and the proposed changes should come out for comment soon. This also will give accreditors the flexibility to allow for some innovation currently happening or that which will emerge in the future. Additionally, the accreditor gets leeway as long as student outcomes are being properly supported.

In addition, there have been discussions about substantial interaction and correspondence courses as well as content-based education vs. credit hour as a measure for learning. Interaction is important; however, the interaction needs to be considered in multiple ways between faculty, students and content. For example, Western Governor’s University has an unbundled faculty model which uses a faculty member doing assessment that is different from the faculty member doing the teaching.

Degrees with Licensure

The state authorization recommendations also address degree programs that lead to state licensure, such as nursing, psychology and teaching. In the past, the regulation said if institutions were doing this at a distance, students who live in other states must be notified about whether the program fulfills the licensure requirements in their home state.

That requirement has not been fully implemented until recently. The recent changes expanded this requirement to include face-to-face programs as well as distance programs. This is something that presidents will need to look at across their entire institution. Additionally, institutions are required to make three types of statements:

The institution knows that that the degree program that is offered meets the requirements of a state.
The institution knows that the degree program does not meet the requirements of a state.
The institution was unable to make a determination.

Accreditation bodies also will have to look at how new or current programs meet the requirements of other states.

Still Needing Work

Areas including TEACH Act, religious-affiliated institutions, distance education, competency-based education and federal financial aid are being reconsidered and rebundled into two packages. The packaging around these areas will be determined on languaging and whether the issue fits with other parts of law. These new packages will be released for comments soon.

Three Takeaways:

Poulin suggested three take-aways for higher education leaders:

There are substantive changes around accreditation. Accreditors are going to have to figure these out and institutions should be watching.
State authorization is tied to federal aid.
The expansion of state licensure will have significant implications. Watch how this unfolds.

Bullet Points

Neg Reg 2019 solidified the state authorization that ties federal financial aid to the institution that has the approval of the state where it is serving students. Institutions can get the necessary approval through reciprocity provided by the National Council of State Authorization Reciprocity Agreement (NC-SARA).
The Neg Reg, which strengthened the triad of federal, state and accreditation bodies, removes differentiation between regional and national accreditors. Instead, there will be just institutional accrediting bodies.
A change in relation to distance learning requires the accreditors to work with the institutions to see what is really working and what evidence shows that it’s working in relation to ensuring that the students who take class are the ones who are being assessed for their work.
Additionally, discussions about distance learning are ongoing in relation to regular and substantive interaction. These discussions are designed to bring the definition into alignment with current distance learning practice and where technology is allowing learning to go.
Institutions that offer degree programs that lead to state licensure, such as nursing, psychology and teaching must let students who participate at a distance from another state know that the program is in alignment with their home state’s licensure requirements.
Areas including TEACH Act, religious-affiliated institutions, distance education, competency-based education and federal financial aid are being reconsidered and rebundled into two packages that will be discussed in future Neg Reg discussions.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Negotiated Rulemaking 2019
Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education
WICHE Cooperative for Educational Technology

Guest Social Media Links:

WICHE Twitter: @wicheEDU
WCET Twitter: @wcet_info
Russ Poulin LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/russellpoulin/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

TRACS Annual Meeting Learnings | Changing Higher Ed 028

Episode Summary

The Transnational Association of Christian Colleges and Schools (TRACS), an accreditation body for Christian institutions of higher education, works with approximately 100 institutions. Founded in 1979, the organization is a voluntary non-profit self-governing body that promotes the welfare, interests and development of higher education institutions who have a distinctly Christian purpose. The TRACS Annual Meeting provides opportunities for networking and learning about best and emerging practices among the members.

This podcast features the following individuals who attended the recent TRACS Conference:

Ann Rill, Chief Academic Officer at Veritas Baptist College.
Bryan McCabe, Academic Dean at Bakke Graduate University
Steve Hase, Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer at Southern Evangelical Seminary

Key Learnings from Dr. Ann Rill

Veritas Baptist College started as a Bible institute in the 1980s. In the 1990s, the institution became a full-fledged college and received accreditation in 2011. In 2004, Veritas started implementing distance education through video-conferencing while also having some physical sites where classes could be held. The institution’s work expanded to the point where 17 churches along the East Coast offered Veritas’ courses on-site.

During that time, institutional leaders realized that additional flexibility was needed in delivering the courses so each course was videotaped and sent out to students. Eventually, Veritas changed its model to utilize Adobe Connect and eventually Zoom. Over time, all of students were drawn to on-line courses through asynchronous lectures so the university ended on-site classes. Veritas now professionally records most faculty lectures.

As Veritas moved into online education, faculty were concerned about how they would mentor students and prepare young people with ministry. Faculty now believe online education actually offers more opportunity to mentor because the lectures are prerecorded, thus freeing up their time throughout the week to meet with students either face-to-face or via online meetings.

Rill said she appreciated the feeling of community available through attending TRACS events and tries to use these meetings to network and develop relationships with other institutions and their leaders. She believes that these relationships have been very beneficial to Veritas over the years.

In discussing the most recent conference, Rill highlighted sessions focused on mentoring, which is a real challenge for online institutions like Veritas. Noting that 51 percent of Veritas’ student body is made up of transfer students, she cited one session that focused specifically on mentoring transfer students. Rill noted that this type of approach is important because only approximately 40 percent of all transfer students attending non-profit schools complete their academic program.

Rill said that Veritas representatives who attended the TRACS conference have started using what they learned to develop new mentoring outreach efforts. For example, Veritas CFO is part of a group that will mentor students on financial planning and how to avoid taking out student loans.

Rill also pointed to the need to remove barriers, such as discounting the quality of academic courses taken at other institutions, which hamper students from transferring. Although most institutions want to maintain a high academic standard (and often think that their own academic standard is the gold standard), the fact is that many students will be transferring throughout their academic careers. This makes sense – Millennials and Gen Z’ers are projected to have an average of nine different careers during their lifetime; thus, it is not surprising that they would follow this pattern of regular change in their academic studies. Wise institutional leaders will find ways to help these students transfer their previously earned credit hours, which increasingly will be important as the population of potential students nationally continues and even accelerates its decline.

Rill did note that Veritas’ transfer policies are slightly different in relation to undergraduate and graduate programs. Veritas is more open to receiving undergraduate credit from schools that may not be accredited but that have appropriately degreed faculty members and are offering a valid program. She pointed out that accreditation is relatively new in Christian colleges and institutional leaders have been slow to embrace accreditation because they want to make sure that the accreditor’s worldview is in line with the Christian institution. Therefore, students who started their degrees many years ago may not have undergraduate degrees or credits from accredited colleges, so Veritas tries to do its best to accommodate these students without losing any integrity.

At the graduate level, Veritas does accept qualified students, even if their degrees do not come from an institution that is accredited. However, as part of their admissions review, Veritas officials may identify academic deficiencies in the student’s background that would affect their graduate studies. The institution may ask the student to take some additional undergraduate courses to close these gaps. Rill also noted that Veritas does hold a high standard when considering requests to transfer graduate courses. In addition, Veritas has a policy that graduate students need to complete at least 25 percent of their program at Veritas to earn their graduate degree.

Key Learnings from Dr. Bryan McCabe

Bakke Graduate University’s main headquarters are in Dallas, but the university’s students live across the word with 30 percent residing in North America. The university offers an Executive MBA program and a Master’s degree in Transformational Leadership as well as doctoral degrees in Transformational Leadership and Ministry.

The university serves business leaders, political leaders, Christian pastors and missionaries. These individuals take classes together, which brings diverse viewpoints to the classroom. In addition, BGU’s faculty are located around the world. Most classes are offered on-line. However, BGU also has an innovative program in which students can attend week-long immersive on-site classes that look at Christian work and issues in a specific city. The institution also has a Board of Regents (which is different that its Board of Trustees) comprised of individuals located across the world that serves as a resource network for coaching and mentoring BGU’s students.

McCabe said he appreciated the opportunity to network with the conference’s diverse participants. His biggest takeaway from the TRACS Conference was the need for each of the university’s initiatives to be tied to a visioning and strategic planning process that is aligned with all of the stakeholders within the university. The TRACS conference showcased the need to continually assess progress while also communicating to and involving individuals.

The university just went through the 10-year accreditation process with TRACS and received commendations for their work. However, there is room for fine-tuning and McCabe noted that attunement to a shared vision is a big challenge.

Key Learnings from Dr. Steve Hase

Southern Evangelical Seminary, which is 26 years old, offers educational programs through integrating classical philosophy and evangelical theology with apologetics. The Seminary is known for a full integration that helps Christians be prepared for a contemplative faith and have influence in their professional and community spheres.

Hase experienced three takeaways from the TRACS Conference:

The conference improved his own mindset through offering the opportunity to meet peers and learn about everyone’s challenges and successes. He realized that he’s not alone when undertaking these efforts.
TRACS regularly pulls together numerous subject-area experts on topics, including strategic planning, building institutional leadership, a data-driven approach to admissions, reporting and measuring, and donor-centric fundraising.
Fellowship is a critical part of the TRACS Conference because it allows participants to interact with others who are mission-minded. These individuals are always willing to impart their experiences and wisdom.

TRACS leadership coaches individuals to help them become better leaders. In addition, the association creates workshops to help campus leaders do an accreditation self-study and to show ways that the institution can demonstrate it is meeting the accreditation requirements. These resources offer clarity and create templates that help institutions succeed. The conference also offered ideas to help the Board of Trustees understand their roles and be successful.

The seminary is considering beginning a capital campaign, but after attending TRACS, Hase realizes that institutional leaders need to figure out how to cultivate a culture of stewardship as well as sustainable donors. The TRACS conference also made him reevaluate whether the institution is ready for this campaign and whether the need exists to sharpen the strategic plan. He now believes he needs to make sure that the Board and the senior leadership are on the same page before reaching out to raise external capital.

Bullet Points

TRACS conferences offer opportunities to network and develop relationships with leaders from other institutions. These events also provide opportunities to learn from others, both informally and formally.
TRACS offers support to members who are going through the accreditation process. In addition, the association’s conferences and meetings create a network that helps members remain on the cutting edge of higher education.
Mentoring students – especially those who are transferring into the institution -- is important, especially since the available student population will decline soon. Look for innovative ways to involve leaders and faculty, such as creating mentoring opportunities around personal finance.
Additionally, institutions need to look at removing barriers in relation to transferring. This includes finding appropriate ways to accept course credits.
Strategic planning and visioning should be at the heart of the institution’s efforts. This process needs to be continually refined and involve regular participation by the institution’s diverse stakeholders.
Institutions can take an out-of-the-box approach through creating a network of key individuals around the world who can mentor students.
Think through capital campaigns carefully before starting these efforts. These campaigns need to be tied to the strategic plan and continually involve and update all stakeholders.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

TRACS
Veritas International University
Bakke Graduate University
Southern Evangelical Seminary

Guests Social Media Links:

Ann Rill
Bryan McCabe
Steve Hase

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

P27 – Washington Update with Tom Netting

Episode Summary

The Department of Education published final regulations that had achieved unprecedented consensus prior to the reporting deadline for the master calendar. However, two of the three regulations were not finalized in time for the publishing deadline and so will not go into effect on July 1, 2020 but at a later date.

The House Democrats completed their comprehensive proposal to reauthorize the Higher Education Act. However, this act is not assured of getting out of the House due to a significant price tag. Many are watching the Senate to see if negotiations between Senator Lamar Alexander and Senator Patty Murray will serve as the impetus for passage of this long-delayed update.

Department of Education Regulatory Activity

Neg Reg 2019

While the Neg Reg 2019 discussions led to consensus on three areas -- innovation, accreditation, and distance/online education -- only one, accreditation, made it through to completion by the Department of Education in time for publication in the Federal Register by Nov. 1. The other two packages did not make it to the public comment portion of the process.

The package dealing with accreditation and the roles of the various members of the triad (the federal government, the state-level department and the accrediting agency) made it through for publication, and most stakeholders believe the changes are good. They include:

Updating the process for reviewing accrediting bodies.
Giving accreditors more flexibility when looking at new programs within institutions to improve innovation vs. “hard and fast” rules.
Giving institutions and accreditors more latitude with distance education, as well as the state’s roles and delivery of online education
Redefining regular and substantive interaction to give people more access to education at times that are more productive for the individual (think Western Governors University).
Encouraging policymakers and accreditors to take institutional and programmatic differences into account during accreditation.
Offering new guidance on teach-out plans and the roles and responsibilities of accreditors, states and institutions with regard to these plans.
Protecting students’ access to their information and the processes involved when institutions close their doors at the institutional, state and accreditor level.

These improvements on innovation could accelerate students’ progress and get them into the workforce more quickly (which costs them less). The higher education community – primarily the publics and the private non-profits -- have been looking for these regulatory changes.

In comparison, the failure to publish the other two proposals (or even go out to the public for comment) was disappointing, even though there are legitimate reasons for this. Department officials said that general counsel and other staff found problematic issues in relation to the broader context when they took a hard look at the proposals. For example, department officials had concerns about how to measure competency-based education using the credit hour.

There were many areas that were not considered because they are divisive and fly in the face of regulatory and congressional personnel who are far more familiar with the old model (face-to-face/bricks and mortar). These areas require groups to look at issues from new perspectives, e.g., delivery, cost, accelerating students’ education to get them into the workforce quicker by taking into account a student’s previous experience (CBE), and work study and apprenticeships. This can be difficult for individuals who haven’t participated in programs outside of traditional delivery systems or in non-traditional work study opportunities that involve mentorships. For these policymakers, the proposed changes were seen to be jarring.

The changes to the consensus packages will require taking them back to the original participants in the process to attempt to regain consensus – potentially pushing this out to next year or even later because of the upcoming presidential election.

Title IX and Cleary Act Changes

Despite its inability to publish two consensus packages, the Department is getting closer to rolling out two additional regulatory packages – changes to Title IX and Cleary Act.

There has been considerable commentary and discussion on the Title IX package – over 150,000 comments. The public comments are about the victim’s rights, the adjudication process, and the investigation process in relation to the rights of both the accused and the accuser.

The Education Department has culled through the comments, and has sent the guidelines to OMB for its review, the final step before publishing it in the Federal Register (and making it official). OMB has scheduled meetings through mid-December with multiple interested parties.

The Department is looking to publish a final rule in the next few months. However, some House Democrats as well as Sens. Murray and Durbin have concerns about the proposed Title IX changes and are using those concerns to hold up reauthorization of the Higher Education Act.

Higher Education Act

Reauthorization of the Higher Education Authorization Act is moving forward in the House. The proposed legislation is designed, among other things, to protect minority-serving institutions, as Hispanic-serving institutions and other groups of institutions were facing the end of funding.

The House Democrats are proposing reauthorization with major changes. Some of the proposals that have attracted major attention include

Partnership programs between the state and federal governments that would lead to free community college education;
A significant revamping of the roles and responsibilities of the Department in relation to the direct loan program;
Significant changes in assessment; and
A review of financial need to broaden the ability for students to get financial assistance through Pell Grants.

The plan also would provide a greater amount of consumer information but also would consolidate that information under the Net Price Calculator and the College Scorecard that would be accessible to both consumers and legislators.

Another section of the proposal focuses on for-profit higher education, especially focusing on recent institutional closures. The Democrats are seeking to legislate gainful employment for all programs. There also are a number of areas focused on accountability of the for-profit higher education community, including establishing an oversight and enforcement entity to review for-profit institutions. The Pell Grants for short-term programs and incarcerated students would not be eligible to participate. The Ability to Benefit program that serves students who don’t have a high school diploma or GED who can show the ability to matriculate by completing six credit hours was modified to bring greater access.

The Democrats also looked at regulatory issues around Title IX and specifically prohibited the Secretary of Education from publishing any revisions to Title IX. This bill, which underwent a three-day mark-up, also has other changes, including reframing substance abuse into substance misuse.

The bill was voted out of committee with a straight party-line vote.

The next step is to take the bill to the House floor, but there is no guarantee that this bill will make it out of the House since there is a considerable price tag attached – some estimates are north of $400 million in new spending, and much of this money would go to institutions serving minority student populations. This leaves a number of moderate and fiscally conservative Democrats wondering whether they can support this legislation because of its price tag.

In the Senate, Sen. Alexander is looking to create a legislative vehicle that will burnish his policymaking legacy through passage of the Higher Education Act before his retirement from public office. He reached out to House Democrats with input on their bill in an attempt to make the proposal palatable to both Democrats and Republicans. These include FAFSA simplification, Pell Grants for short-term programs and Pell Grants for incarcerated individuals.

The House Democrat and the Alexander plans are being analyzed to determine if a compromise can be developed. Several individuals in Washington D.C. are working toward this, even though the nation is heading into an election year.

Three Takeaways for Higher Education Leaders:

Take a look at the changes in relation to the accreditation process. This is a divergence from the norm and many institutional leaders will approve of these changes. Being able to think outside of the box and outside of the rigid standards will encourage innovation both online and for bricks-and-mortar institutions.
Watch whether Sen. Alexander and Sen. Murray are able to get on the same page and get momentum in relation to a smaller bill, and whether this bill will be acceptable to the House.
Watch for Title IX regulations to come out at the end of the year. There is much that institutions were looking for, but there will be many new details to digest for implementation.

Bullet Points

Only one area – accreditation -- was published in November. Other regulations that achieved consensus were pulled down by Department of Education counsel and staff.
The accreditation changes provide for a more individualized approach that will take into account differences in institutions and programs within institutions.
Competency-based education and assessment were not published due to concerns raised by Department of Education legal counsel and staff. These areas will go back to discussions.
Title IX and Cleary Act continue to be a hot button issue. This area also is influencing House Democrats in their efforts to create a Higher Education Act.
The House will consider a proposal created by Democrats to reauthorize the Higher Education Act; however, the cost of this act may be too much to receive full House approval. Sen. Alexander is trying to find ways to make this proposal more palatable to Republicans and Democrats.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Lamar Alexander
Patti Murray
Congressman Bobby Scott
Virginia Foxx
2019 Negotiated Rulemaking process
Neg Reg list of participants
Department of Education

Guests Social Media Links:

Tom Netting LinkedIn – https://www.linkedin.com/in/tom-netting-9214755/
CSPEN LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/groups/6954716/
Tom Netting Twitter - @t_netting

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Assessment Ed 026 – Grant Aldrich

Episode Summary

This program focused on the future of online program management (OPM). When online education began to emerge, many higher education institutions didn’t have the wherewithal and talent to ramp up online programs so many companies started offering OPM services in program conception and creation. Over time, OPMs have expanded to include student recruitment, student retention and support. These additional services provided by an external company can actually be beneficial to colleges and universities because most higher education institutions don’t do these things very well.

However, the role of OPMs in higher education continues to spark controversy. For instance, the most recent negotiated rulemaking process at the federal level saw a push by OPMs and some for-profits to allow outside entities to develop and provide 100% of the curriculum, thus bypassing university faculty. However, that proposal did not pass.

A shifting model

Today, higher education institutions see OPMs as a necessary evil because the institutions don’t have in-house knowledge to offer these services. There is a growing sentiment that the price to hire an OPM is too high since these companies take a significant percentage of the tuition as part of their services. The contracts also are very lengthy and institutions face an increasingly competitive recruitment environment to find students to enroll in these programs. The combination of those issues are causing a sea-change in the market in which more services are becoming available and those services are becoming commoditized.

However, there currently is a gap in the market for an OPM that operates with a focus on the student’s best interest. While OPMs need to continue to serve universities and colleges ultimately it should be up to the students to decide the best academic fit.

New opportunities

Aldrich believes that a very dramatic shift will happen soon in how the OPM market is structured. This shift would be from a university-centric model to a student-centric model, which could require OPM providers to take a lower share of tuition rates. This model could include many facets, such as:

Offering free classes to students, thus eliminating the barrier of tuition.
Meeting the needs of non-traditional students who have jobs and families that they must juggle.
Creating an environment of support to enhance retention and other student needs.
Having a better understanding of students’ capacity, due to quality assessments built into the OPM.
Developing a better recruitment pipeline for universities and colleges.

When marketing to meet enrollment numbers, many higher education institutions will bring in students who aren’t ready for college or are not a great fit for that institution. Because of the incentive structure in which an agency is trying to fill as many seats as possible, it’s not in the institution’s best interest to look at student fit.

That’s a paradigm that needs to shift with online adult students. As higher education enrollment dramatically evolves from primarily service the traditional student who is enrolling directly after graduating high school to the adult learner, institutions will need to rethink their tactics, recruiting pipeline and advertising messages.

Furthermore many of the working adults in this current higher education demographic are choosing higher education alternatives in greater numbers. Their decision is being based on factors outside of cost so institutions need to start reflecting on what’s behind these choices.

A student-centric approach

The student-centric approach gives institutions a new paradigm to solve this issue. For example, Aldrich’s company, OnlineDegree.com, is designed as a bridge to higher education to help students successfully begin their degree program, thus encouraging student preparation, confidence, motivation and persistence. This approach also could help institutions recruit students at a lower cost.

To achieve this approach, Aldrich and his team have created a platform that offering a credit-bearing immersion program. A student can take foundational college-level courses and the company has worked out articulation agreements with a variety of institutions to earn credit for courses. OnlineDegree.com is completely free for the student.

Aldrich said the first part of the equation to create this approach is looking at the needs of working adults; they are cost-sensitive and busy with children and jobs. Enrolling in college and taking classes often can be a very scary and time-consuming endeavor; often these adults don’t know if they have the mental, emotional and physical capacity to do so.

Gaining traction

This novel approach, which is the next generation of OPM, tears down the barriers and helps students see if higher education is right for them. Students can evaluate their time-management skills to see if they have the acumen they have to be successful in a self-paced format. This approach also prepares them to enroll in an institution.

This approach has been working very well. In the first 30 days, over 1,000 students pre-enrolled without the company doing any marketing. Since then, there has been immense interest as the company gets traction in publications in Forbes and other publications. This indicates the company is figuring out how to remove the barriers for adults.

Institutions including large state universities, private universities and private non-profit institutions also are working with Aldrich’s company. In addition, the company is seeing good outcomes for students getting the support they need and helping them find good placements.

This approach also helps higher education institutions solve many of the problems they face. For example, Aldrich’s company is a bundled service provider that provides student recruitment, retention and support for students that use that platform. So all the barriers for institutions to work with Aldrich’s company have been removed.

By creating a platform built specifically to serve the student, the OPM also offers surprising benefits for the university. For instance, if the OPM provides really good coaching, students can determine the best pathway related to the program that they want to pursue. Additionally, a strong assessment system helps the OPM better understand the student’s academic capacity. This enables the OPM to help both the student and the higher education to determine whether they would be a good “fit” as the student continues his/her academic journey. Thus, a useful and well-targeted recruitment pipeline opens up between the OPM and the institution.

In addition, there’s no lengthy contract, no exclusivity, and the economics are far better than a traditional OPM provider.

Changing the market

Aldrich also foresees another shift in which institutions won’t work with one OPM company but instead develop relationships with many companies like his. That’s because there will be better economics by not avoiding exclusivity.

The combination of offering a degree at no cost to the student along with student advisement is the way forward, Aldrich believes. Community colleges are limited resource-wise in being able to provide this type of support to students. Traditional institutions also don’t offer the flexibility schedule-wise as well the support needed for non-traditional students who need to work or care for family.

This approach also should benefit faculty, who don’t want to teach these introductory general education courses. These faculty would rather work with more advanced students who have a passion for the subject matter. The work that Aldrich’s company and others do allows these courses to be offered at a far lower cost.

Initially, there has been some concern about whether institutions would push back. However, this student-centric approach is making the pie larger because this program is available. This is a much greater value for institutions.

Three Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders

Aldrich offered three recommendation for higher education leaders who are considering an OPM model:

Take an introspective and analytical approach to see if the institution should tackle this type of program internally or whether external help is needed.
If contracting with a company, make sure that the institution can work with OPM providers who are coming from a student-centered approach.
Embrace the student-centered programs who focus on non-traditional students.

Bullet Points

Many higher education institutions didn’t have the internal resources to be able to offer online education. They have increasingly turned companies that offer OPM services in program conception and creation. Over time, OPMs have expanded to include student recruitment, student retention and support.
A very dramatic shift will happen soon in how the OPM market is structured. This shift would be from a university-centric model to a student-centric model. This could include free tuition, strong student services and a recruitment pathway to universities.
These next generation of OPMs also can be enticing to the growing number of adult learners, who need flexibility, low costs and additional academic support.
A student-centric OPM model can help students successfully begin their degree program by helping them develop time-management and study skills, confidence, motivation and persistence.
In this new paradigm, higher education institutions won’t work with only one OPM company but instead develop relationships with many companies.
This approach also should benefit faculty, who don’t want to teach introductory general education courses and would rather focus on upper-level students who are focused on the subject area.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

https://www.onlinedegree.com/

Guests Social Media Links:

Grant Aldrich LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/grant-aldrich-56721b31/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com
Website: https://thechangeleader.com

View Details

Federal legislators and policymakers continue to try to work through policy and legislative changes that will have significant impacts on higher education. These include efforts by the U.S. Department of Education to alter rules developed during the Obama Administration. In addition, Congress continues to focus on trying to come up with a workable plan to update the Higher Education Act.

Regulatory Activity

The Department of Education has been attempting to make a number of revisions to rules created during the Obama Administration. Most recently, the Department made a seismic shift on gainful employment on June 28. The department soft-launched a final rule that overturns the 2009-2010 regulations as well as the 2014 regulations, including Subpart Q and R, and drops the mandated reporting requirements, student warnings for programs that were deemed failing and any further notification or follow-up of pending appeals with the department.

Because of the master calendar, the full rescission was to be effective on July 1, 2020; however, Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos used her authority to allow institutions to begin to follow this new rule after it was published in the Federal Register.

The Department did attempt to fill the void in accountability after rescinding the rules. The Department plans to make significant changes to the College Scorecard by adapting much of the previously required information and create additions that would address disclosures. This change would offer transparency by allowing students to see this information (although it doesn’t address programs that are performing at a “lesser than” level).

Some people have expressed frustrations and concerns about these changes but it’s good to remember that over the years, educational policymakers and stakeholders have learned a lot. Therefore, this approach to disclosure may be better than using a guillotine on institutions. Moving forward, policymakers and institutions can continue to learn more about improving institutional assessment using the three-legged stool: accreditation’s oversight of curriculum; state review of institutions based on their role and responsibilities; and the Department of Education’s focus on oversight and financial aid.

Additionally, more changes are expected on the regulatory side. The Borrower Defense to Repayment regulations have been approved to go forward, although they are expected to be subject to court challenges once published. They are now with the Office of Management and Budget and should be published in the near future.

In addition, three packages that were part of the most recent round of federal negotiation and rulemaking on accreditation and innovation were approved by consensus. The Department published a notice in May/June that the first of those packages was subject to notice of proposed rulemaking so that interested parties could review. That feedback was due by July 12. The other two packages still have to come out. Because there was consensus, these packages are on their way to final rule by Nov. 1.

However, there are three major areas where disagreements still continue. These areas includes institutional eligibility and accountability, Title IX/Cleary and loan repayment.

The concerns about Title IX/Cleary are at the forefront of the Senate HELP Committee’s discussion about reauthorization. These final rules probably won’t be agreeable to both parties. Democrats are concerned about protecting the interest of the victims while Republicans are focused on providing protection to the accused. Thus, the Senate committee is having difficulty finding a balance between offering protections to both parties. Upper-level legislative staff are currently in dialogue to try to find common ground.

Concerns also exist about loan repayment. These include the opportunity for public service loan forgiveness, other types of loan forgiveness and the reduction of overall repayment plans.

Higher Education Act

With a short timeline available in the legislative process before the election cycle takes over, it’s becoming less likely that the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act will take place. Sen. Alexander, Sen. Murray and staff continue to hold weekly meetings as well as have discussions with members of their respective parties to see if they can come up with a comprehensive bill.

There are pieces of reauthorization that everyone can come to terms with because they are much needed and in the best needs of students. These areas include student loan interest rates, financial literacy, loan repayment and simplification of the FAFSA.

Sen. Alexander is focused on his burnishing his legacy by trying to pass revisions to the Higher Education Act. The question becomes whether he will be able to negotiate a bill that Democrats agree with or will end up crafting one that is specific to the Republican agenda. He also may focus on developing smaller bills that are bipartisan in nature that move smaller chunks through the legislative process. Discussions already have begun about alternate plans in case a comprehensive bill is not agreed upon.

In the House, Chairman Scott has completed five bipartisan hearings that he and ranking member Fox agreed to. The committee will have one more hearing on apprenticeships. There remains a question about whether the House would take up the Higher Education Act in different forms, such as the piecemeal version mentioned earlier. Some insiders suggest that Chairman Scott is only interested in taking up a comprehensive bill.

As we enter the second half of 2019, there is a lot of movement going on in the Congress -- and no assurance as to how things will play out. Netting will be surprised if reauthorization is completed this year. The Democrats probably won’t have time to put together a comprehensive bill unless they simply use the AIM Higher Act. However, that act has major issues from a scoring perspective and would need to be trimmed to make it fiscally palatable to Republicans.

Trying to find middle ground going into an election year makes it tough. However, history shows that this type of collaborative effort can happen in an election year.

Higher education—especially in areas such as student cost, student debt and academics--has changed significantly since the last authorization in 2008. Therefore, college students and the higher education system deserve a more timely authorization process.

Recommendations for Higher Education Leaders:

Keep an eye on what is happening on the regulatory front. This could especially impact the functions of the financial aid office, human resources office and law enforcement office.
Take the opportunity to make comments about proposed rules. Higher education leaders’ comments need to come from a holistic institutional perspective.
Watch for a Senate bill to reauthorize the Higher Education Act moving forward between July and the end of September. If legislation doesn’t start moving in September, the chance that Congress will pass legislation will start dwindling as the election cycle approaches.
Review the College Scorecard and the proposals in relation to it for the upcoming changes.

Bullet Points

The U.S. Department of Education continues to revise and reverse rules created during the Obama Administration.
The most recent revision involves gainful employment. This revision drops the reporting requirements. The department plans to include some of these deleted reporting elements in the College Scorecard.
The Borrower Defense to Repayment regulations have been approved to go forward. These are now with the Office of Management and Budget and should be published in the near future.
Three packages that were part of the most recent round of federal negotiation and rulemaking on accreditation and innovation were able to achieve consensus.
Major disagreements still are evident in the rule-making process for institutional eligibility and accountability, Title IX/Cleary and loan repayment.
With the election cycle on the horizon, it’s becoming less likely that Congress will complete the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act. Therefore, there may be an effort to offer piecemeal solutions to areas where Republicans and Democrats can find common ground. These areas include student loan interest rates, financial literacy, loan repayment and simplification of the FAFSA.
Lamar Alexander
Patti Murray
Congressman Bobby Scott
Virginia Foxx
2019 Negotiated Rulemaking process
Neg Reg list of participants
Department of Education

Guests Social Media Links:

Tom Netting LinkedIn – https://www.linkedin.com/in/tom-netting-9214755/
CSPEN LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/groups/6954716/
Tom Netting Twitter - @t_netting

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Dr. Karen Haynes retired as president of Cal State San Marcos on June 30, 2019. She was the longest-seated president in the CSU system and the first woman to hold this role in history. Haynes began her presidency in 2004 when the institution had a student population of 7,000 and an alumni base of 13,000. Through her leadership, the campus grew to serve 17,000 students and now has approximately 45,000 alumni. More than 100 new academic programs were launched during her tenure, including the first engineering program in 2019. Haynes also has overseen the addition of 15 new buildings as well as the planning for the university’s Extended Learning Building, which opens in fall 2019 through a one-of-a-kind public-private partnership.

Establishing Bold Goals

Haynes believes that holding a university presidency offers the opportunity to work with faculty and the community to envision what a truly 21st-century university can look like. In her own case, she pointed to the richness of the San Diego region, the area’s diverse demographics (which include the military and 18 tribal communities) and the ongoing population growth as fuel that helped Cal State San Marco, which is 100 miles from the U.S.-Mexico border and the only higher education institution in this area, to evolve and prosper.

Haynes entered Cal State San Marcos’s presidency when the university was 13 years old. The fact that she was able to set what she described as “audacious” institutional goals and then go on to achieve them was due to a supportive faculty and community as well as having a legislature that was supportive of Cal State San Marcos’ efforts. These goals included:

Raising the educational attainment rate for the entire region.
Diversifying the student population to mirror the diversity of the region.
Changing the narrative so that Cal State San Marcos was no longer the best-kept secret in North County; instead, the institution connected through partnerships to different constituent groups and organizations who understood the institution’s value.

In addition to setting goals, the institution identified strategies to create, execute, annually measure, refine and revise these goals.

Increasing Educational Attainment

One example of how these goals made a difference was in relation to the institution’s education attainment rate. To begin to understand this rate, Haynes looked at the college-going rate of the area’s school districts. At that time, most school districts were not adequately preparing students to enroll in college following their graduation from high school. In addition, the majority (70%) of the students who were academically ready for college were white.

Realizing the gap that existed, Hayes worked with CSU San Marcos administrators and faculty to establish numerous bold goals. The institution also identified strategies to create, execute, annually measure, refine and revise these goals. The results of their work included:

A 50% increase in first-generation students attending Cal State San Marcos.
Graduating classes have grown to between 50-55 percent first-generation students.
The university grew from 7,000 students to 17,000 students during Haynes’ tenure.

Data-Driven Decision-Making

Ultimately, Cal State San Marcos’ decision to be data-driven to identify what practices worked and what was less successful put the institution ahead of the curve when the Cal State System started to focus on specific achievement gap. Haynes noted these sustained efforts resulted in Cal State San Marcos enjoying a 0 percent gap between majority and under-represented students from first year to second year, which often indicates whether a student will complete their degree and graduate from college.

Working with School Districts

Haynes noted that achieving these results required non-traditional thinking involving both the university as well as the school district. She pointed out that some Cal State San Marcos stakeholders (especially faculty) belived that working with school districts was outside of the university’s scope and mission. However, Haynes disagreed, saying that without creating these partnerships and helping teachers understand what students needed to start learning and by what grade, students would not be ready for college.

CSU San Marcos established multiple partnerships with local school districts, and as part of these partnerships, the university created guaranteed admission for K-12 students if they followed the pathway identified by the University.These efforts raised attainment rates and diversified Cal State San Marcos’ student population.

More importantly, these partnerships brought more students to the institution who were prepared for college work and didn’t need remediation. Faculty and other stakeholders worked with K-12 school districts, which ultimately saved CSU San Marcos money and faculty time.

Extensive Partnerships

Haynes formed a number of key relationships with North San Diego County communities and businesses in a strategic effort to reach out and operationalize the president’s initiatives.

For example, Cal State San Marcos created Chamber Champions that involved the city chambers and economic development companies from the 11 communities in the institution’s service area. Through this effort, 6-8 Cal State San Marcos administrators or faculty were involved with those chambers. These individuals were the university’s voice while also serving as a conduit for the businesses to express their feedback on workforce issues to the university. These connections increased Cal State San Marcos’ visibility in the county.

In addition, the university and each of its colleges had an advisory board that served as a sounding board in which to get stakeholders’ input. When she took over the presidency, Haynes inherited a small (10-member) council that wasn’t representative of the region’s sectors or demographics. She used this as a starting point, but also began to diversity and increase it to where it now has 40 members. These advisory boards give the institution input that helps it identify workforce issues as well as emerging areas where new programs are needed.

A great example of this is Cal State San Marcos’ new biotechnology and engineering programs.Haynes used this feedback to create these new programs as well as other degree and certificate programs.

There was an added benefit to these boards in that they also helped the university communicate its needs with the legislature and community, as well as developed its outreach efforts to Temecula.These efforts led to its creating an off-campus center in Riverside County, thus helping students who lived there and expanding CSU San Marcos’ footprint in the region.

Real World Experiences

Cal State San Marcos has developed and continues to develop programs that give students real-world experience prior to graduation. For instance, the school’s business school has implemented a program called Senior Experience, a required credit course, that requires its students to work in a team and to do a high-quality project with a local company during their senior year. This project gives students work experiences that are more extensive than an internship.Many students get job offers from the businesses that participate in these experiences. These projects also serve as good publicity about the quality of Cal State San Marcos programs.

Another business school program, the mentor program, involves MBA students, who are assigned a mentor that they can rely on. The program has grown and is drawing high-caliber mentors who love working with students.

Three Tips for New University Presidents

Three pieces of advice for new university presidents:

Start by actively listening. Whatever experience or vision you have that you can bring to the new job, you also need to hear the stories and aspirations of the people on campus. Otherwise, it will be difficult to get these individuals to follow and align with you.
Pace yourself. Everyone will want a piece of you. Within that pacing, the preponderance of time and focus needs to be internal to listen to these constituencies.
Take the position very seriously. University presidencies are important to complex organizations. However, don’t take yourself seriously. Be authentic and have fun.

Bullet Points

Higher education institutions can set “audacious” institutional goals if they have faculty and community support. To reach these goals requires the institution to identify strategies to create, execute, annually measure, refine and revise these goals.
Some goals require innovative partnerships to be successful. For instance, Cal State San Marcos formed a partnership with school districts to increase educational attainment. This effort enabled university representatives to educate K-12 administrators and faculty about college-level work and to increase high school students’ level of knowledge by graduation. This meant that Cal State San Marcos could forego the cost and time needed to remediate these students.
Cal State San Marcos created a number of innovative programs, including advisory programs and Chamber Champions. This latter outreach effort involved the city chambers and economic development companies from the 11 communities in the institution’s service area. This effort placed university administrators and faculty as representatives to the chambers so they could learn about industry needs and also communicate the university’s programs.
Cal State San Marcos is increasingly trying to provide more real-world opportunities to students prior to graduation. For instance, business students work in teams during their senior year to assist a business or organization on a project. This enables the students to get experience beyond their internship and often results in a job offer.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Cal State San Marcos
Guests Social Media Links:
Karen Haynes LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/karen-haynes-7465988/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Episode Summary

Facing declining enrollments due to changing demographics and societal factors, many higher education institutions are engaging in marketing practices that don’t make sense. Instead, institutions should consider embracing marketing strategies that are based on informal and formal market research. Developing these strategies should include reviewing current messages, crafting new messages, and reallocating resources from ineffective marketing efforts to promising pilot programs.

Changing the Paradigm

Higher education marketing departments get a bad rap because many don’t have marketing experience that corporations or other industries have. However, the majority of higher education’s marketing issues are not due to failures of the marketing department. Instead, these issues are due to the institution’s inability to identify the type of students who enroll, the reasons why they come to the institution and why are they successful.

Research tells us that most current students enroll in an institution within a 40-mile radius of their home so they can be a commuter student. An example of this is Aurora University outside of Chicago. Instead of thinking about how to market to more students from a wider geographic location to fill up dorms, Aurora realized it needed to meet the needs of commuter students who want to complete their degree program quickly at a very low price. The institution is trying to attract more of these types of students by offering top-quality programs attractive to commuter students. In addition, institutional leaders realize this approach may mean that some dorms may need to close.

Refining Marketing Efforts

Most institutions are trying to be “all things to all people” through casting a wide net for students, but this approach waters down the marketing message because the institution generally is not clear about what they offer--and do not offer—to prospective students.

Smart institutions are realizing that they have to stop this, and they are becoming more targeted in their marketing efforts. This leads to greater efficiency and more cost-effective marketing. They increasingly are able to recognize who their target market is and then use that information to attract those types of students.

These institutions look at the students who enroll and complete their degree programs in order to analyze several factors:

Who are these students?
What do they look like?
What do they want?
Why are they coming to the institution?
Why are they successful?

Institutions then can use this information to craft marketing messages to attract more of these types of students.

Market Research

Institutions that take a blanket marketing approach (instead of a targeted personalized marketing approach) create a tremendous amount of institutional waste. The vast majority of institutions don’t have a large budget for formal market research, and consequently, don’t do the positioning and differentiation that’s important in marketing. Fortunately, College Board and ACT have resources and data to identify where an institution’s students are coming from and how to reach those students.

Informal market research can be helpful too, especially through anecdotal information such as feedback from current students. Conversations such as these can provide rich data and are supplemented by having similar conversations with faculty, staff, and alumni, and will help institutions craft their messages on how they can differentiate themselves from competitors, as well as identify gaps in the university’s marketing materials.

Finding New Avenues

One area that is ripe for plucking is that many students do not have the realization that their career will require a lot of work on projects that have a messy start and require continual refinements until project completion. This has huge marketing implications. Institutions can highlight the number of students enrolled and educational outcomes, as well as the programs that help students be successful. This makes the degree worth it, thus offsetting questions about the value of a college degree, and can differentiate the institution from its competitors.

Furthermore, it’s important for higher education institutions to look at today’s markets to identify what students want and then develop plans for how to offer these types of programs. For example, the traditional MBA program in which people take time off from their jobs to pursue this graduate degree is no longer working for many people, and consequently, the number of traditional MBA programs is declining. Aurora University has developed a plus-one program in which students who have completed their undergraduate degree can complete an extra year of business coursework, including an internship, to earn an MBA, thus helping students become more marketable.

Some institutions (Cal State San Marcos) are offering undergrad seniors practical work experience through a serious work project (vs. a fluff internship). These experiences give college seniors a chance to earn course credit by working as part of a team on a real-world project for a local business or non-profit, and they gain direct experience in their major and makes them more attractive to employers.

Stacked credentials also make a lot of sense. In addition, some institutions are marketing credentials to businesses so that the businesses will pay for their employees to return to school. There’s a large market for higher education institutions to help businesses, which in turns balances higher education’s revenue streams. It also helps train people and creates a pipeline for high-demand jobs, such as coding and cybersecurity. However, because institutional accreditation can limit the flexibility in creating those types of mini-courses, it’s important to identify how to shift the higher education paradigm to become more nimble.

Three Tips for Higher Education Leaders

Three pieces of advice for higher education leaders:

Do market research. At the very least, talk to students and recent graduates, faculty, and staff to get a solid understanding of who you are.
Craft marketing messages to reach prospective students who want what you’re really offering.
Give your marketing department the freedom to stop doing some things that aren’t working. This will free up some dollars to pilot new marketing efforts that will help the institution personalize and target the right students.

Bullet Points

Higher education institutions need to do a better job of identifying who their ideal students are and then developing marketing strategies to reach those prospective students.
Casting a wide net for students is an inefficient and costly approach, especially during a time when enrollments are declining and funds are limited. Therefore, institutions should review marketing efforts to determine what truly works to increase enrollments (and what doesn’t work). This analysis can help institutions build efficiency by refocusing marketing efforts.
Market research is important. However, a formal market research effort – which can be costly – is not required. Informal marketing research can be conducted through having conversations with students, faculty, staff and graduates.
Creating new programs that meet prospective students’ needs can make marketing more efficient.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Aurora University
Senior Experience, Cal State San Marcos

Guests Social Media Links:

Deb Maue Twitter: https://twitter.com/debmaue
Deb Maue LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/deborahmaue/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

The latest Neg Reg (negotiated rulemaking) process examined the fundamental rules that guide higher education institutions’ interactions with the Department of Education with regards to student aid and related programs. The Department has used access to student aid to bring a lot of aspects of higher education under federal supervision.

The process, which ended in April 2019, focused on accreditation and innovation and will have wide-ranging implications on multiple areas that potentially affect student outcomes.

This Neg Reg represents a critical shift, one that bears watching, because of the competing tensions among federal oversight, institutions and accreditors, and the higher ed marketplace which is shifting toward a more dynamic, more open, learner-centered postsecondary system. This also will result in increased partnerships, including public-private partnerships.

Looking at Accreditation

When Higher Education Act was passed in the 1960s, Congress set up a three-legged stool to manage the process: (1) Congress would provide the money; (s) states would approve the institution; and (3) the institution would need to be accredited by an accrediting agency recognized by the Secretary of Education. While this initially sound s straight-forward, what emerged was a very extensive list of rules, especially when applied to the accreditors’ role in ensuring institutional quality so that they could participate in the federal loan programs.

Over the years, the accreditors have become in many ways subordinate to the Department in terms of how they go about doing their business.

The recent Neg Reg process focused on accreditation and innovation. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos and other Department officials argued that the rules should be changed to encourage innovation and competition among accreditation agencies, and this process led to major changes that could have profound implications for higher education institutions.

Surprisingly, the Neg Reg ended in consensus (agreement) among the various stakeholders / negotiating parties, e.g., colleges, accreditors, consumer groups, states. This is a critical conclusion, because when consensus is reached, the law requires that the rule that will be followed is based on the consensus – the Secretary does not have the discretion to change what was agreed upon.

This finding of consensus means that higher education is at an interesting inflection point in the relationship between the federal and accrediting agencies. Now, with having consensus, the accrediting agencies are setting policies, vs having them handed down by the Department. Previous examples where consensus was not reached include Title IX and Borrower Defense to Repayment, instances where negotiations proved to be contentious.

Encouraging Innovation

Many of the provisions that reached consensus (approval) are groundbreaking in many respects, including the strong emphasis on new programmatic approaches, which sends a strong message to accreditors. Instead of being penalized for thinking about the box, the new rules encourage finding faster, cheaper and better delivery of education.

In the early stages of discussions leading up to the Neg Reg session, Department of Education leaders floated some very aggressive ideas but made it clear that these ideas were opening positions to enable negotiators to think outside the box so as to find ways to make the accreditation process innovative. For example, department officials set a target and encouraged negotiations to reach that target. This was different than in previous Neg Reg efforts.

For instance, the Department proposed that an accredited institution that participates in federal student aid could contract out a program to an entity that is not accredited, with the approval of its accrediting agency. The process led to a decision to let the accrediting agency do a staff review of these types of proposals. This has two major effects – it simplifies the process and reduces the time from proposal to approval from months to a few weeks.

That is a dramatic change; to date, innovation has been inhibited by the significant review time it takes for accreditation to consider this type of request and make a decision, as well as the expense of going through the review process.

Additionally, this will open up more opportunities for relationships between academic institutions and non-accredited providers who provide a wide variety of academic services. This decision also makes it clear that rather than being exception, the relationship between higher ed institutions and OPMs / alternative providers should be considered “favored.” In many cases, these are more efficient, less expensive and substantially better ways of providing educational services than what are currently available in the institution.

This type of innovation isn’t necessarily bad for higher education. When MOOCs first appeared and changed the marketplace, the assumption was that these would radically change higher education. That death was greatly exaggerated, but it has created a substantial industry of companies that are using private capital to create quality educational experiences. This regulatory change will make it easier for institutions to pick and choose and make these products part of their educational program.

One note with this – the Department had proposed eliminating the 50% outsourcing limit, but the negotiators retained this limit for outsourcing courses if.

Innovations in Courses

These changes could make a difference in the scope and quality of courses. While a faculty-developed course relies on the developer’s expertise, it may not be as broad as it could be. Outside resources could help make course content more current than the faculty’s knowledge. Furthermore, it also lets faculty, department heads, program directors and deans be more creative about seeing what is available in the broader universe of educational services. The existing rule said that if a course was not created at the institution, it couldn’t be used; however, the new rules are encouraging faculty to realize that there is an enormous amount of services in the marketplace. This new reg gives institutional leaders and faculty the chance to identify and use the best services possible.

For example, StraighterLine, an educational program provider, focuses on lower-division undergraduate courses that make up core curriculum. These lower-division courses are a very expensive enterprise for a school to provide and more often than not, these courses have little innovation. StraighterLine provides innovative approaches to these courses, enabling adult learners to fulfill their general education requirements without going to the institution, allowing the institution to focus on their own programs that are innovative. This is a very critical development.

This new regulation also gives an institution the opportunity to pick and choose specific and complex programs that are outside of the institution’s core capability but still important to what they are doing. For example, Trilogy Education Services is collaborating with Harvard and other institutions to provide coding programs that many schools don’t necessarily want to provide or don’t have the capacity to provide on their own. If

Competency-based Education vs. Credit-Hour Education

The Neg Reg process made it very clear that the Department wants to move away from the credit hour as the benchmark for post secondary education. The credit hour was created in the 1920s for determining the hours of work by elementary and secondary teachers back when the first union agreements were being negotiated, and rightly or wrongly, was brought into use in higher education in 1965 through the Higher Education Act. The Neg Reg process is one among many that are encouraging discussions about alternate ways of measuring student outcomes. This would change the process from measuring “time in seat” to “what the student actually learned.” This is the idea behind competency-based education – what is the outcome of the education / what is the student learn. Many institutions are moving rapidly in this direction, including Western Governors and Southern New Hampshire.

This change also will require more emphasis on assessment to measure what competency the student has gained vs. what they know. This is the difference between memory and mastery. The credit hour measures memory whereas competency learning and direct assessment measure mastery, i.e., skill vs. what a student can do with that knowledge.

In terms of Bloom’s, credit hour measures the lower levels whereas competency and direct assessment measure the higher levels.

Defining Faculty Interaction

Substantive interaction with faculty was another important piece that came out of the Neg Reg. This was based on Western Governors University’s academic teams, which didn’t include traditional faculty. The Department’s Inspector General had ruled that faculty members need to be part of this interaction with students. However, Western Governors argued that the federal government was determining who made up faculty; instead, this decision should be left up to the university in collaboration with accreditors. In fact, the accreditor felt that the team approach to learning did include faculty because subject-matter experts were involved and helped guide students through the course process.

There was significant support for Western Governor’s approach, which will result in a very radical change by opening up innovative learning environments by stating that online education doesn’t need to replicate a traditional classroom. Instead, online learning should be allowed to create a learning environment and that people who are involved in the faculty-side of the ledger add to the learning process (vs. them actually being a faculty member). By leaving the defining of faculty up to the institution and their accreditors, this will be beneficial for student/learners.

Changes for States

Some people involved in the Neg Reg process expressed concern that the current administration has loosened regulations which will result in institutions that are bad actors will continue to get a free ride or less rules being imposed on them. However, some states are stepping in to fill what they see is the regulatory void as the federal government continues to deregulate and not enforce current regulations. What we are seeing is that the states are stepping in to fill the regulatory void, and that is totally appropriate – the only role that the federal government should have is the handing out of federal financial aid. In California, there is a reactive set of laws that have been proposed that will be restrictive on institutional innovation. This may result in a tug-of-war between states and the federal government.

While state attorneys general were left out of the Neg Reg process, the state education higher ed officials were in attendance. This allowed states’ voices to be heard.

The Department has been compelled by the courts to put into effect the state authorization rule created by the Obama administration and suspended by the Trump administration. States have moved from focusing on authorizing institutions individually for distance learning because of state-authorization reciprocity agreements (NC-SARA) but now are focused on professional licensure. A new regulation that is similar but different would go into effect July 1, 2020.

Three Tips for Higher Education Leaders

Three pieces of advice for higher education leaders:

Follow what is happening in Neg Reg and implementation closely. These rule changes go to the heart of the core academic functions. Presidents, provosts, deans, and programs chairs need to be aware of these changes.
Be aware of how accreditation agencies are responding to these changes.
Higher education is currently in a dynamic state. Leaders need to aware of how to accommodate new learners, new learning opportunities, new markets and new demands created by those markets, particularly from employers. The rules are changing in favor of those opportunities and institutions need to learn how to take advantage of them.

Bullet Points

Neg Reg is a critical shift to the higher ed landscape. First of all, it was adopted through consensus. In addition, it focuses on innovation, defining student learning and recasting the definition of faculty.
The new rules encourage finding faster, cheaper and better delivery of education. For instance, accreditors can now do a staff review when considering an institution’s request to use an outside entity to provide academic coursework support.
The new rules will encourage institutions to create agreements with preferred external partners for areas such as undergraduate core courses so they can concentrate their time and financial resources on innovative areas in a college or department.
These discussions continue to encourage institutions and accreditors to measure competencies instead of class hours. This will require more focus on meaningful assessments.
The Neg Reg also begins to redefine a faculty member. This is necessary based on online education, which in some cases uses a team to guide students. These team members are subject experts, even if they are not the faculty-of-record for the class.
Some states are concerned about the implications of Neg Reg. They also are looking at different areas such as professional licensure in relation to holding institutions accountable.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

DoE Neg Reg Background: https://www2.ed.gov/policy/highered/reg/hearulemaking/2018/index.html
Neg Reg Outcomes: https://www.newamerica.org/education-policy/reports/negotiated-rulemaking-2019/

Guests Social Media Links:

Mike Goldstein Bio: https://www.cooley.com/people/mike-goldstein
Mike Goldstein LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/michaelbgoldstein/
Cooley LLP: https://www.cooley.com/
Cooley’s Higher Ed Newsletter: https://ed.cooley.com/2019/04/17/surprise-accreditation-and-innovation-neg-reg-reaches-consensus/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Episode Summary

New market forces are leading to disruption in higher education and institutions. Not surprisingly, tremendous innovation in technology-enhanced education, including the ways that students are taught and learn, continues to emerge. Institutions like Drexel University are testing new models that allow them to individualize education and diversifying their portfolio of programs to fit employers’ expectation

Shifting Demographics

Institutions need to be watching the rapidly changing demographics. Serious shifts will be happening in the United States during the next five years. Institutions that are not taking these shifts into consideration in their planning processes will have a major shock. Many institutions are getting ready now through initiating new projects, models, and activities on campuses in order to navigate these changes while also taking advantage of these shifts.

For example, the book, Demographics and the Demand for Higher Education by Nathan Grawe, describes the impact that the 2008 economic crash had on the nation’s birthrates. The birthrates have not recovered over time. The greatest impact is in the Northeast as well as the Midwest. There also are pockets across the nation that will be impacted by this declining rate.

The timing for the major decline in student enrollment will be in 2025-2026. This is due to the declining birthrate as well as fewer high school graduates. Institutions will be competing for high performing students; however, there will be fewer of these students coming through K-12 education. Institutions will face a challenge to create a brand that will allow it to recruit nationally instead of just regionally.

Building a Brand

The brand of the institution is important because it can help students feel like they are getting a quality education. For example, Drexel has created a brand that offers both face-to-face educational opportunities to regional students and online education that serves students in all 50 states and 30 foreign countries. That flexibility has been important since 90 percent of Drexel students work can’t attend face-to-face campuses on a regular basis.

Many of these students, especially adult students, are seeking academic programs to enhance their credentials for a promotion, change jobs or careers. This population bases their enrollment decision on the quality of the program and the credentials that are offered as opposed to the institution’s location. These students are savvy researchers who will search online to find the credential they will need to leverage their career.

With thousands of institutions offering similar programs, it’s difficult to have visibility in this environment without very sophisticated search engine optimization teams, In addition, institutions are competing using the same word searches so institutions are driving up the cost of student acquisition for each other.

Personalized Approach

Drexel has worked diligently at personalization. This allows the institution to connect and build a relationship with the student that starts at the first contact where the prospect shows interest and continues through graduation. The technologies that are now available support personalization while creating efficiency and effectiveness, thus driving down personnel costs. Drexel believes that these technologies are an investment in the institution’s future.

Optimizing the Prospective Student Experience

Students have very high expectations and are willing to pay for their degree. However, they also expect to receive value for that investment through their experience at the institution. Therefore, institutions have to manage the student’s experience from beginning to end

There are a number of ways that Drexel is trying to address this. For example, the institution originally outsourced its call center but has since brought it back in-house in order to ensure that every touchpoint where prospective students interface with the institution reflects the institutional brand.

The institution also focuses on individualizing their approach to prospective students. They ask students how they want to receive messages. The institution also utilizes a system, which is based on student preference and allows counselors and advisors to communicate with the students. This system includes video-conferencing, chat, email or phone. There also is smart routing system that recognizes the prospective student when he/she calls and then automatically directs the candidate to the individual who specializes in that academic area (health care, business, etc.). While a call is being routed, multiple computer screens pop up so that the counselor has information regarding previous communications with that student, the student’s preferences of how to be contacted, and if that student spent time on specific web pages (such as how to finance an education).

Drexel is committed to using Artificial Intelligence (AI) to manage this flow, including routing and staffing decisions as to the counselors’ schedule. This analysis includes the number of calls that come in at certain periods of time and also which times candidates with specific academic interests call. In addition, AI is used for efficiency. This includes lead scoring, which analyzes each caller’s attributes to see which ones are most likely to be successful. Candidates who have specific characteristics that indicate they will be successful at Drexel are routed to the counselors first. Drexel then personalizes follow-up messages so students feel connected and create a sense of urgency to complete the application process.

Recommendations for how Drexel personalizes and improves its communication comes from the frontline staff. Drexel staff go out of their way to get feedback about each student’s experiences and then use this data to improve operations.

Successfully Competing

Competition will increase among higher education institutions. Many institutional leaders and boards are concerned about some of the new institutions that are coming into the online education marketplace, such as the Ivy League schools. These institutions have a known brand, are changing their pricing structure for online students, and have created a pathway for students to earn their way in.

To compete, institutions need to focus on creating value for students’ investment. This type of focus can also lead to a strong relationship to the student will return to the institution to earn certificates, advanced degrees or professional development. In addition, Drexel wants these students to become donors.

Therefore, institutions need to be very clear about their market niches and strategic in their investments. They need to figure out where students can find value and where the institution can serve at a national level. In addition, institutions that can adapt and create tailored programs that companies need will be successful in the future.

Innovations

Drexel has created a free website, Virtually Inspired, which focuses on innovation in technology-enhanced education. It covers a variety of technology as well as case studies.

The institution also created V Artifacts portfolio that is open-sourced. These resources are designed to help faculty create more robust online courses.

Bullet Points

Higher education will face major demographic shifts in the next five years. To survive, institutions need to take a strategic approach to their brand as well as the programs they offer.
Institutions need to focus on building their brand to set themselves apart from their competitors. This brand needs to take online students as well as traditional students into account.
A focus on personalization can help institutions create a relationship with students that starts with the first contact and then continues through graduation. This relationship can lead to additional opportunities to educate the student through certification programs, graduate programs, etc. as well as the cultivation of a potential donor.
Optimizing student engagement allows institutions to incorporate the student’s preferences, technology and data to refine interactions. This also leads to effectiveness (enrolling students who are a good match for the institution) and efficiency (such as staffing rates of counselors, better use of data to engage candidates, etc.)
Creating value, being strategic about market niches and developing tailored services can help institutions succeed in the future.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Demographics and the Demand for Higher Education by Nathan Grawe
Virtually Inspired

Guests Social Media Links:

Susan Aldridge Twitter: https://twitter.com/DrSusanAldridge
Susan Aldridge LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drsusanaldridge/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

Demographics and the Demand for Higher Education

View Details

Episode Summary

Assessment is critical for ensuring instruction is effective in helping students to learn. This data is even more important as the demographics of students and expectations of what higher education should accomplish change.

These instruments need to be part of a curriculum mapping process. In addition, meaningful assessments can be used to make instructional decisions in ways that are more student-centered.

Changing Views of Assessment

Many years ago, nationally accredited universities defined student learning through data such as retention rates and graduation rates, and used this information to measure institutional success and effectiveness. However, traditional (regionally) universities used completely different measures for these purposes. These differences created a conundrum r-- What is student learning? Does passing a class means that a student has achieved identified competencies or is proficient in the topic?

The role of assessments in classes is especially important due to the changing demographics of students as well as expectations of higher education institutions. Before, the majority of students were 18-years-old coming to college directly out of high school. Instead, 74% of college students are “non-traditional,” i.e., 24-70 years old, and are in the process of changing their career, looking for a job, or looking for a promotion and/or higher pay. These students are looking for something different from higher education that their predecessors where. Additionally, employers’ expectations of colleges and universities have changed; they are looking for graduates to be well prepared to jump into a job with the specific skills that they should need (instead of the job providing OJT).

Curriculum Mapping

Meaningful assessment ensures there is an alignment between the course catalog, the syllabus, the program learning outcomes, course learning objectives, and outcomes, and what is actually being taught (and more importantly, learned).

Assessments should be included in the curriculum mapping process when developing a course. This systemic approach identifies the programmatic competencies to be addressed in a class, the sequence in which they are going to be taught and how course learning objectives align to program learning objectives.

Meaningful assessment determines whether students are understanding key concepts and are able to successfully utilize new skills. Therefore, it’s important that the assessment is a valid instrument and that grading is consistent both among the students in one class as well as across classes on the same subject. A faculty-developed rubric that gauges the level of learning based on the student’s answers on the assessment is an important piece of this system.

Assessments in Face-to-Face and Online Education

Student outcomes should not differ between face-to-face classes and online classes; they should learn the exact same thing. The easiest way to achieve that is through the mapping process when a faculty member creates an artifact, which is an assignment that matches the learning outcome of the course.

Additionally, faculty should create quiz questions, exam questions or an essay that are tied to the course objective statement. This data offers proof that the quality of instruction and outcomes are exactly the same for students taking online courses and those taking face-to-face classes.

Competency-based Education vs. Credit-Hour Education

CBE and the credit hour were key topics that were discussed during the recent negotiated rulemaking sessions in Washington, D.C. The Department of Education has a specific definition of a credit and that every single credit needs to accounted for based on the Carnegie Unit, i.e., for every hour of lecture a student has two hours of homework; over a term, there should be 45 student hours of effort for one credit hour.

Competency-based education is controversial because it is a new way of learning that is not reliant on the Carnegie Unit, and because of that, student financial aid comes into question. The money paid for credit hour is the same as the money paid for competency-based education, so policymakers want to ensure that all students are learning the same information while making the same level of effort.

CBE considers what skills are necessary and then assesses if students have those skills, instead of the number of hours they need to take to gain those skills. This latter approach would be beneficial for students who want to become a nurse, dietician or physical therapist. However, another approach may be beneficial for students who are majoring in history, liberal arts or education.

Faculty and leaders need to consider whether the 45 hours per credit hour make sense in a particular program. This is one of the discussions at Neg Reg (no decision was made to move away from the Carnegie Unit measurement at this time).

In some ways, competency-based learning is easier to assess than traditional credit education because it involves a checklist, externship or a list of skills that students need to demonstrate that they understand and can do (vs an arbitrary time in/out of the classroom plus examinations plus signature assignments plus etc.).

Assessments as Part of Institutional Improvement

Colleges and universities that have a structured plan in which the curriculum, objectives, and outcomes have been clearly mapped can see that the courses fit into the institutional mission. In large institutions, this can be assessed by the institutional research (IR) department/function. However, the dean or program director can take on this role in smaller institutions using an ongoing process. This process entails (1) looking at what is being assessed during the first quarter; (2) reviewing syllabi, competencies, artifacts, and assessments in the second quarter; (3) gathering data in the third quarter; and (4) completing a report in the fourth quarter that goes to administration and the board.

Most institutions conduct annual program assessment and five-year program reviews to understand what’s being done and accomplished, how a program is performing and what improvements can be made. In addition, the results from the program review can be used as part of the institution’s annual planning processes.

However, many institutions invest much time and money into the institutional planning process, yet forget to use this information to inform campus decision-making. For example, there’s a problem if students who are enrolled in a nursing program are not able to pass the licensure exam. Having regular meaningful assessments allow faculty and leaders to identify where students are struggling, then make changes in the admissions process (such as requiring certain prerequisite skills), curriculum or budget (for updated equipment that matches what is available in businesses). Therefore, student learning assessment outcomes can also inform admissions, financial aid, enrollment management, staffing and even facilities.

Some accreditation bodies make assessment challenging. For example, WSCUC requires proof that the faculty were involved in the development of curricula and agreed to the important concepts. Once buy-in is achieved, items need to be mapped out to identify the competencies or skills that students need to learn in a course.

Institutions that use meaningful assessment to ensure that students are learning also see their endowments and enrollment numbers increase, attract the best faculty and save money because they focus their efforts on areas that really need it. This is true not only for top-tier institutions; even small- and medium-sized institutions can be successful through using this type of informed decision-making.

Three Tips for Higher Education Leaders

Three pieces of advice for higher education leaders:

Meet with the institutional research department. Leaders who have worked in business will have an advantage because they can help streamline the process and focus on improving learning outcomes.
Read the previous report to see what data has been used. This report can serve as a starting place for identifying gaps and places for improvement.
Walk around and talk to students and faculty. Find out if there is a general consensus that the students are learning and becoming prepared to be a productive part of society.

Bullet Points

Institutions differ in the way they measure student success, institutional success and institutional effectiveness.
Assessments are a critical part of the instructional process because they can ensure faculty remain on topic instead of veering onto tangents, the course’s objectives and outcomes are aligned with what is being taught, and students are learning and can apply new skills.
Faculty should consider the placement and type of assessment to be used during the curriculum mapping phase of course development. In addition, a rubric should be used to analyze the quality of learning displayed on an assessment.
Assessments can help ensure that instruction and learning are comparable in both face-to-face and online classes.
Competency-based education and credit-based education are under the microscope. Each form may require a different type of assessment to be used.
Assessments also can and should be part of institutional improvement. This data can be used beyond just instructional decisions; it also can inform admissions policy, financial decisions, hiring of staffing, professional development offerings, and facility updates.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Education Consulting Services

Guests Social Media Links:

Jamie Morley LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/jamie-morley-ph-d-998a273b/

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Episode Summary

Diversity, equity, and inclusion continue to be critical issues for higher education. Many of these issues are fanned by repercussions of historical events as well as unconscious biases based on unknown U.S. history and individuals tending to remain in monolithic groups. Institutions of higher education have a duty to make their campuses a model of inclusivity where every student, faculty member and staff member is wholeheartedly appreciated. To achieve this, higher education leaders need to find ways to surface their own unconscious biases, diversify campus leadership, create programs and structures to encourage diversity, identify ways to have accountability for these programs and create financial avenues to fund these efforts.

Taking this inclusive approach can revitalize organizations through creating a common understanding, developing a community that embraces differences and establishing new and meaningful outcomes. This can include: rethinking faculty diversity in relation to faculty recruitment, retention, tenure and promotion; revising ideas of the quality of scholarship, including the paradigm of publish or perish; and creating community-engaged scholarship.

Diversifying Higher Education Leaders

Many higher education institutions have become very comfortable (and even robotic) concerning the diversity narrative. This often is determined by the culture of the institution and its cultural artifacts.

However, the biggest driver of this narrative is the institution’s president, and how this individual embodies the ideas and promise of inclusivity. This idea extends past the individual’s DNA to include how they actually show up in their role. Students – especially undergraduates – can tell if a president is authentic and being honest in relation to diversity, equity, and inclusion. This is one of the greatest threats to higher education leaders right now; presidents and chancellors are realizing that they need to have the personal capacity to handle the struggles and opportunities that come with diversity. Therefore, it’s important to get more diversity in higher education leadership positions, as these individuals bring a very specific level of consciousness based on their lived experiences.

Gaining Momentum

When faced with successive leadership moments around an issue, a president can decide what he or she is going to stand for. Then, the president can work with vice presidents and deans to set a priority for these things to take place, thus putting together an institutional effort across the various areas. The president can create a structure and the associated environment where direct reports know that this is something that matters. Additionally, the president as chief executive officer of the institution can communicate the importance of these efforts.

The board also needs to be involved. Board members need to be diverse and have experience with diversity in their professional lives. These trustees need to be committed to the common good for both the institution and society. Without these types of board members, the president will have difficulty moving these issues forward.

Working with the board chair, the president can make the effort an institutional priority, including having initiative progress measured as part of the president’s performance review. This will help create accountability, which then can extend to the president’s direct reports, including the vice president of business and finance, chief operating officer, the provost office and student services.

Dealing with Unconscious Bias

Much of the United States’ public education system has done a poor job of teaching history that includes all cultures and identities for the last 30-40 years. Americans have a very narrow story of history, which is reinforced by a tendency for individuals to remain in a monolithic community. While many higher education professionals – including senior leaders -- are doing good work, they don’t know what they don’t know in areas of diversity, equity, and inclusion, and can get defensive because they aren’t aware of their unconscious biases.

Dealing Effectively with Discomfort

Higher education institutions haven’t developed their truth-telling capacity because of the lack of knowledge of history or because the campus environment is created and maintained by leaders who are part of the dominant culture who maintain the same degree of comfort and engagement. Without diversity among institutional leaders, an environment emerges in which conversations are limited by individuals’ lived experiences. When those in academic settings don’t have knowledge of something, they stumble or withdraw and move to the next thing. This can lead to defensiveness and debate. If the leader hasn’t built up the mental and emotional muscles to identify, carry and push through the discomfort of a challenging or difficult topic, opportunities will be continually missed.

Wholehearted Leadership

Valuing people wholeheartedly is a critical part of diversity, equity, and inclusion. Higher education leaders also are called to be appreciative and reflective to determine patterns of how they have left people behind historically.

Diversity is all about representation so that everyone feels good and is welcome on campus. Inclusion means that everyone has a part in it. Equity requires leaders to reconcile the ways in which departments, programs, and organizations operate. This includes identifying when the institution has not fulfilled its mission and identifying the gap between marketing and the actual lived experience.

Faculty, staff, and students know when they have a leader who is really in their corner and really is committed to these ideals. Equity asks these top leaders to address an identified priority through reconciling the institution and its mission as well as the ways it has not been fulfilled. This type of leadership makes a mark in the area of diversity and inclusion and also leaves a legacy.

Reconciling the Past

Colleges and universities – including leaders and faculty – need to do a better job telling the truth and reconciling their past in relation to diversity. For example, Georgetown University had to come to terms with its history where Jesuit priests sold 272 slaves to slave traders to secure the future of the university. In 2017, institutional leaders held a public ceremony in which they publicly apologized to the descendants of those slaves, some of whom were campus leaders or people who had been educated at Georgetown. This type of truth-telling leads to more respect, particularly from communities that previously have been marginalized.

By telling the truth, leaders can help the higher education community reconcile the past to make the community whole and then imagine a better future. The residual of not telling the truth is significant. Therefore, it’s important for anchor institutions like universities and colleges to continue to maintain our place and step even more boldly into the role of taking a moral positionality. Public institutions as well as faith-based schools can do this. The United States needs institutions such as colleges and universities to join with anchor institutions such as public libraries and other community-based institutions to provide leadership that is morally and principally based.

A New Framework for Expanding Leadership Pipeline

Utilizing a new frame for identifying aspiring leaders can break patterns that have led to the same types of leaders being placed repeatedly and historically in higher education’s leadership pipeline. Instead, institutions need to look at aspiring leaders’ cultural assets, cultural wealth and lived experiences to expand the leadership spectrum.

Three Tips for Higher Education Leaders

Higher education leaders should consider:

Being willing and open to engage with someone who will challenge their ideas around what diversity, equity and inclusion means. Leaders also need to seek out a confidential relationship devoted to helping them develop competencies based on performance indicators.
Having someone in their inner circle who will assist them campus-wide in doing this type of work.
Identifying sustained financial support for diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives. One option is to seek funds through the institution’s capital campaign.

Bullet Points

In today’s increasingly diverse world, it’s critical for higher education leaders to have the personal capacity to handle the struggles and opportunities that come with diversity. One way is through creating a more diverse group of leaders because these individuals will bring a specific level of consciousness based on their lived experiences to their positions.
Leaders can develop institutional efforts through engaging their leadership team, creating a structure and associated environment, and then communicating the message to the broader community.
Board members need to come from diverse backgrounds so they can bring their own lived experiences to the table. They need to work in partnership with institutional leaders to support institutional efforts. In addition, they need to demand accountability by making it part of the president or chancellor’s performance review. This, in turn, allows the president or chancellor to put accountability measures in place for the institution’s senior leaders.
U.S. public schools do not do a good job of teaching history. Thus, many well-intended individuals are not well informed about issues of diversity, equity, and inclusion. They can become defensive because they are not aware of their unconscious biases.
Higher education leaders need to build up the mental and emotional muscles to carry and push through the discomfort of a challenging or difficult topic. Otherwise, opportunities continually will be missed because individuals will default into defensiveness and debate.
Higher education leaders need to value people wholeheartedly as part of the institution’s diversity, equity and inclusion work. Higher education leaders also are called to be appreciative and reflective to determine patterns of how they (or their institution) may have left people behind historically. It’s important for leaders to tell the truth based on today’s morals and values, instead of using a historical lens.
Institutions need to find ways to identify, groom and hire diverse leaders. This can happen through valuing aspiring leaders’ cultural assets, cultural wealth and lived experience.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Twice as Good, Leadership and Power for Women of Color

Guests Social Media Links:

Mary Wardell Ghirarduzzi LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/mary-j-wardell-ghirarduzzi-2012873/
Mary Wardell Ghirarduzzi Twitter: https://twitter.com/drmjwardell
Mary Wardell Ghirarduzzi Website: https://www.usfca.edu/provost/vice-provost-diversity-engagement-and-community-outreach

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Higher education needs to do a better job of preparing future leaders, especially in terms of leadership development and succession planning. Some leaders, while academically very bright in their discipline, take on administrative roles with no knowledge of leadership or management. This can have severe ramifications for a department, college or university. Therefore, it’s important to identify and develop high potential leaders before the administrative job is open.

Higher education could learn many lessons from counterparts in business and other organizations. For example, General Electric, which emphasizes leadership development, in its heyday, placed more of their executives in CEO roles at other companies than any other organization in the U.S. (and possibly the world).

Identifying Aspiring Leaders

The first step to growing higher education leaders is identifying individuals who have potential. This can happen by watching how individuals interact and think during meetings and conversations.

The next step is having conversations with these potential leaders. During these conversations, the senior leader can begin to explore the idea of whether the individual is interested in considering a leadership role. If the answer is “yes,” the senior leader can then begin to find ways to help the aspiring leader prepare for future leadership roles.

Setting the Next Steps with Potential Leaders

Senior leaders can assist aspiring leaders as they start their leadership journey in numerous ways. These include:

Encourage faculty who are aspiring leaders to gain leadership skills through participating in specific programs such as a leadership academy for faculty members who have promise. Participation in this type of program could prepare aspiring leaders to become effective mid-level leaders, such as a department chair or associate dean. Even if the faculty member decides not to assume a leadership position, they will have a better understanding of the complexities of leadership.
Serve as a mentor or coach, or recommending other leaders who can serve in these capacities.
Assign an aspiring leader to serve as a special assistant to the president.
Nominate promising mid-level leaders such as deans for specific leadership programs and then eventually nominating them for presidencies.

Approaching a Potential Mentor

While seasoned leaders need to be on the look-out for aspiring leaders, many leaders don’t think about serving as mentors. Therefore, it’s important for aspiring leaders to proactively seek out mentors and request assistance, such as asking if they could shadow the leader or schedule periodic meetings.

Individuals from the Millennial Generation are more willing to reach out and ask a senior leader to serve as a mentor. They may meet a mentor at a conference or strike up a correspondence after reading an article that the mentor has written.

Many senior leaders state that their motivation for becoming a mentor is to “pay forward” the kindness of an earlier personal mentor. Many mentors say they were spotted early in their career by a leader who helped groom than for success. Mentoring doesn’t have to be onerous or even formal – it can include providing feedback to young faculty or undergraduate students. These types of relationships create benefits for both the mentor and the mentees.

While the senior leader’s schedule may not allow him or her to participate in time-intensive efforts such as shadowing, the leader may (and should) be open to having a conversation with an aspiring leader. This could open doors in the institution to help the aspiring leader grow.

Key Steps to Support Aspiring Leaders

Three critical steps that higher ed leaders can do to develop aspiring leaders:

Identify those individuals that have certain habits of mind and personality traits which indicate they have leadership potential.
Have a discussion with the individual about their leadership options.
Provide institutional opportunities for leadership development, whether through mentorships, coaching or specific training.

Bullet Points

Higher education leaders need to do a better job of identifying and nurturing the next generation of leaders.
The first step is identifying potential leaders. This can happen during meetings or conversations.
After the identification happens, the senior leader should be proactive in reaching out to that individual and schedule a time to talk with them to gauge his or her interest in assuming a leadership role in the future.
If the faculty member is interested in leadership, the senior leader can begin to suggest opportunities, such as a leadership development seminar, a mentor or a coach.
Aspiring leaders also need to be open to asking higher education leaders to serve as mentors. This could include having regular meetings together or the aspiring leader shadowing the senior leader.
Senior leaders can nominate aspiring leaders for roles that would allow them to use their growing leadership toolkit and eventually nominate them for positions such as department head or assistant dean.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Colleges That Change Lives
University of Richmond Office of the President
Guests Social Media Links:
Ronald Crutcher LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/ronald-a-crutcher-8160bb4a/
Ronald Crutcher Twitter: https://twitter.com/racrutcher

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

H. Robert Showers Esq. has had a long and storied career in law. Prior to founding Simms Showers LLP, he was a principal at Gammon & Grange in charge of the litigation department, and before that was with the U.S. Department of Justice where he was acting Deputy Assistant Attorney General, a federal prosecutor and Chief of the Civil Section in the US Attorney's Office, and was Founder and Executive Director of what is now the Child Exploitation and Obscenity Section (CEOS).

Episode Summary

For many years, sexual harassment complaints were filed away without any action taken. This approach exacerbated the issue. These complaints–whether true or false--need to be taken seriously and investigated.

Now with the emergence of the #MeToo Movement, institutions increasingly are seeing sexual harassment or sexual misconduct complaints filed by students, staff and faculty members. Therefore, institutional leaders need to be proactive in creating policies, procedures and training regarding these types of allegations.

Increasing Number of Sexual Harassment Cases Expected

Charges of sexual misconduct, particularly sexual harassment, are increasingly being taken seriously in the public eye. In the wake of the #MeToo movement with many high-profile offenders being found guilty of sexual harassment and sexual violence, higher education leaders need to be aware that their institutions have an increased risk of being caught up in the publicity of these types of allegations.

College students have a higher risk of experiencing sexual violence than any other crime. Studies indicate that 80 percent of female students who have suffered an attack do not report sexual violence to law enforcement; however, that number will change. More than 50 percent of the college sexual assaults are against freshmen students, which also triggers child abuse laws that require mandatory reporting and increased scrutiny.

These factors may lead to a tsunami of allegations that could swamp both secular and religious institutions of higher education. Therefore, all higher education leaders need to determine if their institution has appropriate policies, training, transparency and preventative measures in place in regards to sexual harassment.

The Effects of the Court of Public Opinion

The citizens who are selected to serve as jurors during trials are influenced by social and mainstream media. Previously, these jurors may have judged someone accused of sexual harassment or an institution that didn’t handle sexual harassment claims appropriately by saying that they were innocent until proven guilty. However, the #MeToo Movement has shifted the paradigm where many citizens are saying that these individuals and institutions are guilty until they prove themselves innocent.

Ramifications of Not Taking Action

Showers has worked on numerous cases in which a student lodged a sexual harassment complaint against a professor, who then gave the student the choice of remaining in the class or failing. The institution could have easily put the student in another class or allowed him/her to take another academic avenue to completing the course during the investigation. Instead, the leaders opted to have the student remain in the class with the alleged abuser.

In several instances where this type of situation occurred, the students were re-victimized because they had to continue to interact with the alleged abuser. This approach led to a public relations nightmare as well as having additional financial damages awarded to the plaintiff following a court case. In the Michigan State case, additional ramifications included a decline in freshman student applications due to safety concerns.

Changes to Title IX

The first of the changes narrows the definition of sexual assault. The old standard was “unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature,” and the new standard is “unwelcome sexual conduct; or unwelcome conduct on the basis of sex that is so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it effectively denies a person equal access to the recipient’s education program or activity.” The Ed Department justified this by saying it is in line with the Supreme Court guidance, but survivors’ advocates have come out forcefully and said that this new definition will put survivors’ education at risk.

The second major change is the standard by which sexual assault is adjudicated. Previously, the standard was that the assault was “likely to have happened.” However, the new guidance provides for a higher standard, i.e., “preponderance of evidence,” the same standard used in civil suits. This is lower than “beyond a reasonable doubt,” the standard used in criminal trials, but it still creates a higher burden on the victim to prove that the incident happened.

In its guidance, the Ed Dept stated that institutions can use either standard, but this potentially opens the institution up to lawsuits, e.g., institutions may face a lawsuit by the accused if they use the lower standard or the victim if the institution uses the higher standard.

The third major change has to do with holding universities responsible. Under the previous guidance, universities and colleges could be held responsible if they “knew about or reasonably should have known” about an incident. However, under the new guidelines, the institution must have “actual knowledge” of the incident in order to be held responsible; this requires the victim to make a formal complaint through official channels. Telling a professor or resident adviser isn’t sufficient – it must be reported to someone who can do something about it, such as a school official who is involved in enforcement.

Additionally, schools can only be held responsible for incidents that happen on school property or at school-sponsored events, not at private, off-campus residences. Thus, if a fraternity house is located off-campus and an assault takes place there (as was the allegation in the Judge Kavanaugh – Christine Blasey Ford incident), the institution cannot be held liable, even if they have knowledge that these events have taken place in the past.

Lastly, the accused will have the chance to cross-examine the victim under the new guidance, and many feel this will discourage victims from coming forward and reporting incidents.

A Robust Policy on Sexual Harassment

As we all know, the Department of Education released its new Title IX guidance in November, which provides guidance on sexual harassment. However, some universities and colleges – especially religious institutions – are not subject to these rules. Therefore, it’s important for these leaders to review their institutional policies to identify and close gaps that would make it easier for individuals to bring sexual assault and sexual harassment charges against the college or university.

A sexual harassment policy that will stand up to scrutiny includes:

A clear definition of sexual harassment
A statement that unambiguously says that this type of conduct is strictly prohibited
A clear description of how to lodge a complaint and the process for starting and completing an investigation
A prohibition of retaliation for reporting harassment
A confidentiality statement about complainants
An assurance that complaints are promptly investigated by objective professionals
A way to separate the alleged victim from the alleged perpetrator
A clear statement that makes clear that if the allegations are substantiated, a disciplinary action will follow and the investigation will be concluded
A training process that moves the policy into practice so that all employees and volunteers are on the same page

Training Employees and Volunteers

The training process for recognizing and dealing with sexual harassment and sexual assault should offer awareness so that employees and volunteers understand what is considered to be sexual harassment. This training should include:

The definition of what sexual harassment or sexual assault is, which involves unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature. For example, Title IX’s standard is unwelcome sexual conduct or unwelcome conduct on the basis of sex that is so severe, pervasive and objectively offensive that it effectively denies someone equal access to education.
- This is significantly different than the previous guidance from the Obama administration, which was “unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature.”
All allegations should be taken seriously.
The individual who brings the allegation needs to be reassured that their voice will be heard and the charges will be investigated without delay or bias.
The person who leads the investigation needs to be someone who is objective, thorough and timely.

Investigations

Institutional leaders need to decide how to maintain an objective investigation that’s unbiased. Many cases can be investigated internally. However, internal investigators may know the alleged abuser so the investigation may be tainted, regardless of what is discovered, because the decision will not be taken seriously.

In some cases an external investigation is needed. In these situations, Showers recommends that institutional leaders hire a law firm that is skilled in this area and is able to maintain appropriate protections for both the university and the victim. These types of cases provide tangible but objective results.

Sexual harassment claims are particularly difficult to investigate because oftentimes it’s a “he said, she said” situation without much (if any) corroborating evidence. These cases often have a lot of direct testimony where one person says that “This happened” and then the other person said, “No, it didn’t happen.” This is one reason why it’s important to retain an objective, unbiased and professional investigator who will keep confidentiality for both the alleged victims and perpetrators, as well as the university.

Most colleges have outside or internal legal counsel. These types of cases need to be run by counsel because their expertise can help guide the decision as to whether an internal or external investigation is needed. This is important because the stakes today are high financially as well as in regards to the institutional image. It’s important that colleges and universities get these investigations right the first time.

Additionally, historical sex abuse allegations, as illustrated by the Brett Kavanaugh case, are very, very complex to investigate. These cases, which happened years or decades ago, are especially difficult because memories fade, witnesses are lost and any tangible evidence is lost. Therefore, these cases provide even more reason to hire someone who understands and has done these cases before and who will be objective.

Changes to Title IX

The second major change is the standard by which sexual assault is adjudicated. Previously, the standard was that the assault was “likely to have happened.” However, the new guidance provides for a higher standard, i.e., “preponderance of evidence,” the same standard that is used in civil suits. This is lower than “beyond a reasonable doubt,” the standard which is used in criminal trials, but it still creates a higher burden on the victim to prove that the incident happened.

Lastly, the accused will have the chance to cross-examine the victim under the new guidance, and many feel this will discourage victims from coming forward and reporting incidents.

Bullet Points

The #MeToo Movement, the resulting cultural shift related to sexual harassment and data related to sexual harassment of students suggests that higher education institutions will increasingly be dealing with sexual harassment and sexual abuse issues.
Studies indicate that 80 percent of female students never report sexual violence to law enforcement. More than 50 percent of the college sexual assaults are against freshmen students, which triggers sexual harassment as well as child abuse laws that require mandatory reporting and increased scrutiny.
Citizens who are selected to serve as jurors during trials are influenced by social and mainstream media. The #MeToo Movement has shifted the paradigm in favor of the victim and institutions are getting caught in the whirlwind.
Higher education leaders need to review their institutional policies to identify and close gaps that would allow individuals to bring sexual assault and sexual harassment charges against the college of university.
Institutions also need a strong training program to help educate employees and volunteers about the university’s processes related to charges of sexual harassment. This training should include defining sexual harassment and sexual assault, identifying the investigation process and ensuring that the process will be objective and concluded in a timely manner.
Investigations need to be objective, thorough and done in a timely manner. Some cases can be investigated by internal team; however, these cases may be tainted by perception since some investigators may know the alleged perpetrator. External investigations offer an outside viewpoint that can be seen as neutral in high-profile cases. It’s important to have a law firm that can offer appropriate protections for the victim and alleged perpetrator as well as the university.
Higher education leaders should seek their institution’s internal or external counsel to get feedback on whether to create an internal or external investigation. This is important because of potential settlements as well as public relations fallout on specific cases.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Simms Showers LLP
Title IX Guidance

Guests Social Media Links:

H. Robert Showers LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/robert-showers-133a618/
Simms Showers LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/company/simms-showers-llp/about/
Twitter: https://twitter.com/simmsshowerslaw
Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/SimmsShowersLLP

The Change Leader’s Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Online education continues to grow. And with the constant developments in technology, the delivery systems are rapidly evolving. Therefore, institutional need to be thoughtful about which programs they offer online, who they contract with to offer these services, what types of systems and support structures they put into place and how they get faculty buy-in.

Background on WICHE and WCET

Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE) is a regional organization that was created in 1953 to facilitate resource sharing among higher education systems in western states and territories. WICHE’s members include New Mexico, Montana, Arizona, Utah, Oregon, Colorado, Wyoming, Idaho, Alaska, Washington, California, Nevada, Hawaii, North Dakota, South Dakota and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. WICHE analyzes student access, policy and research issues among these states.

One of WICHE’s key initiatives is the WICHE Cooperative for Educational Technologies (WCET), which is the leader in the policy, practice and advocacy of technology-enhanced learning in higher education. The group’s work concentrates on four focuses areas: institutional success, policy and regulation, student success and technology. WCET had a long history of working in distance education.

Growth of Online Learning

The U.S. Department of Education’s annual survey of fall enrollments over the past seven years shows that while higher education enrollment has been declining, distance education is growing. Currently, approximately 15 percent of students are taking all of their courses online. An additional 15 percent of students are taking at least one course online. Therefore, approximately one third of students are participating at some level in distance education.

This increase is driven by a number of factors:

Millennials and Gen Z are very comfortable with technology
K-12 schools are increasingly offering more online courses, especially with dual credit or concurrent enrollment courses that allow high school students to take college courses.
The educational market has shifted, thanks to for-profit higher education institutions.

An Increasingly Crowded Marketplace

Public and private institutions have joined for-profit institutions in growing their online presence. This has led to a crowded marketplace. For example, Western Governors University, which is entirely online, has over 100,000 students. Southern New Hampshire University, which has a large online component, is approaching 100,000 students. Arizona State University has grown its online presence and projections suggest about half of its enrollment will primarily be distance education within five years. These types of institutions are building a national presence instead of just serving as a regional institution.

Online Program Management

Online program management (OPM) allows an institution to outsource some operations to a company that focuses on these areas. Some of these operations could include getting programs online, instructional design or working with faculty to design online courses.

OPM can offer many benefits, such as providing assistance reaching populations that the higher education institution hasn’t marketed to before. However, issues can emerge. For instance, faculty, accreditors and regulators may have concerns about whether the higher education institution is just selling its name. Concerns about who controls content are also common. In some instances, the company has tried to expand the curriculum or to create a new one without faculty input. And some states have laws that do not allow higher education institutions to have certain types of OPM relationships. Therefore, it’s important that higher education leaders use OPM with caution and make sure that they have done due diligence before signing any agreement.

Faculty Buy-in

Most institutions have some faculty who need to be “coaxed” into teaching online. It’s an iterative process in terms of trying to bring people along. Often, naysayers need to see others succeed in online learning. One way to get buy-in is through educating faculty about the growing interest in online education, which can translate into hiring more faculty.

Open Educational Resources

The cost of textbooks continues to increase, causing another economic barrier for prospective students. However, there is a trend to create open textbooks that are available online for free or for a relatively low cost to students. These open educational resources (OER) are being created by a group of faculty working together. Because these texts are online, students have access once they enroll in the class or on the first day of class.

WCET has received a grant from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation to analyze open educational resources in relation to policies, faculty support, library usage, bookstore usage. The goal is to see how to expand adoption of these types of resources and find ways to make OER sustainable.

Adaptive Learning

Adaptive learning through the use of technology involves little tests or quizzes that gauge whether the student is understanding concepts. If a student is having issues, the software sends the student to a reminder section to help them understand the lesson better. In addition, the student may be sent to a tutor or the professor or may get additional support that will help with understanding. If a student is doing very well, the software allows the student to progress at his or her own pace and may allow them to skip some modules because they understand those concepts.

Adaptive learning is allowing some institutions to have improved learning outcomes because students get help on areas that they’re weak and are able to advance in other areas where they are strong.

Providing Support

Local centers for support offer a place where students can physically go and get help. This concept – which is similar to an Apple Store where people can get in-person, hands-on experience – is starting to be utilized by a variety of institutions, including the University of Phoenix, Georgia Tech and Southern New Hampshire.

Other institutions are finding ways to use technology to provide additional support. Embry-Riddle is a good example. The institution has gone from being almost exclusively face-to-face to now having approximately 50 percent of their students at a distance. The institution increasingly is using virtual reality to connect with students and provide assistance.

Learning Management Systems

A Learning Management System (LMS) keeps information utilized in an online course, such as the syllabus, resources, and videos. Companies such as Canvas are capturing a larger and larger share of the market in this area. However, some companies are also putting as much effort in creating side services so they are able to provide more support beyond just being an LMS.

These types of arrangements are helpful in times of a crisis such as the recent earthquakes in Alaska or fires in California that cause an institution to physically close. In these cases, online courses can continue all of the software and courses are maintained at another location.

Advice to Higher Education Leaders

Prior to creating an online learning presence, higher education leaders need to consider their goal, the institution’s mission and which programs would be best served in this type of learning environment. They also need to consider what already is in the marketplace and do a market analysis to see if they can differentiate their proposed online learning programs from their competitors. The third step is to create staff positions – such as a chief online officer or chief learning officer – who are responsible for overseeing online education and who will maintain a high level of quality. They also need to identify if they are going to use an external company or build the online program internally. Leaders then need to set goals related to the program and come up with appropriate strategies

View Details

Dr. Judy Kjelstrom is a pioneer in creating interdisciplinary programs that create well-rounded students who are well-equipped to thrive in today’s rapidly changing world. Kjelstrom, the director emerita of University of California Davis’ Biotechnology Program, now serves as the academic coordinator for the UC Davis Graduate School of Management. For her significant body of work, Kjelstrom was named the 2018 recipient of the James H. Meyer Award for Lifetime Achievement, which is the UC Davis Academic Federation’s highest honor.

Prior to joining UC Davis, Kjelstrom spent 12 years as a hospital clinical laboratory scientist, and brings both academic and industry experience to her work. She said that she wanted to do something impactful on translational medicine; however, that type of doctoral program was unavailable she went to school.

In her work with UC Davis’s Biotechnology Program, Kjelstrom saw her role as the captain of the ship and remains deeply appreciative of the team she led. She credits UC Davis’s visionary and collaborative atmosphere for allowing faculty and students to find ways to begin addressing big problems, such as infectious diseases, cancer and global warning. “This is 21st century science,” she said. “It’s big science and it’s team science.”

This type of team science requires complexity and collaboration between different disciplines; one individual cannot do it all anymore. Kjelstrom believes UC Davis’s work in the area of biotechnology provides a good example of how this collaboration can be accomplished since it encompasses engineering, cell biology, microbiology and business. “The visionaries at UC David said, ‘We need to create a special program that could be layered onto a student’s Ph.D. in which they have that deep and narrow expertise, but we need to add that second layer where they come together and fertilize,” she said.

The university’s Designated Emphasis in Biotechnology Program (DEB) was approved in 1997, but this sea change required significant work to get student and faculty buy-in. In 1999 Kjelstrom joined the DEB, where she worked with 10 students from a variety of disciplines. The DEB has grown exponentially. When Kjelstrom retired, the program had 240 students from 29 different disciplines.

She remembers having difficulty getting the students to sign up for extra work, even though they would receive a paid internship. The faculty also were reluctant to let their students go to do this extra work. Eventually, the faculty realized the benefits of the approach. “Little by little, we had buy-in from the student population and the professors,” Kjelstrom said, adding that an NIH grant helped fund this effort.

Kjelstrom – who serves on the executive board of the Powerhouse Science Center, the advisory committee of the US Davis Health Clinical Laboratory Science Training Program and is an alumni of Leadership California -- also built strong relationships with the biotech community. This led to conversations about the quality of UC Davis graduates. The company partners offered feedback that while the students’ technical skills were strong, they didn’t know anything about important areas such as patents, teamwork or collaborative communication. This helped her realize that the program needed to help students learn the wide skill set of social and emotional intelligence as well as leadership. This knowledge helps translate into students being able to take a leadership role in both their professional and personal lives.

UC Davis also empowered students to take leadership during their coursework. “I want to position my students to the point where if they’re (a company) looking for a strong woman leader or a man of color, they’re going to look at our students who come out of the DEB program because they are learning to do that right now,” Kjelstrom said. For example, one group of female students who were concerned about inequities in the workplace decided to form a group called Equity in STEM and Entrepreneurship (ESTEME). The group, which is designed to encourage diversity in biotechnology, brings guest panelists from major companies to talk about topics related to create diverse teams. These students also are responsible for all aspects of planning these events so they learn leadership and fundraising skills.

Kjelstrom encourages higher education institution leaders who want to replicate UC Davis’s success to get to know the stakeholders in their own area and develop partnerships that value the needs of both partners and that put students at the center. “It’s getting out of the ivory tower and getting out among the people,” said Kjelstrom. “Don’t use your Ph.D. title and go people-to-people, but ask them, ‘what is it that we need to be successful on both sides?’”

Bullet Points:

Today’s science is extremely complex and specialized. To be successful, you must find ways to break down barriers between faculty from different disciplines and encourage collaboration.
Reach out to stakeholders to find out how graduates are doing both in terms of technical skills as well as soft skills such as teamwork, communication, and leadership.
Encourage students to go the extra mile through specific focused work that will help them stretch and gain knowledge in areas outside of their discipline. In addition, give students the opportunity to take on real leadership roles during their time in school.

Guests Social Media Links:

Website: http://biotech.ucdavis.edu
Twitter: @JKjelstrom
Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/judith-kjelstrom-97b91b4/

Your Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

We find ourselves in a political climate where many say that college graduates are not ready to join the workforce. This is true in many respects, but the greater truth is that the majority of higher ed has lost its way when it comes to preparing students for life, something equally if not more important than being prepared to assume a position in the workforce.

Then there is Texas A&M. Like the service academies (e.g., West Point, Annapolis, etc.), Texas A&M takes a holistic approach to education – preparing students for life, not just for a job.

This holistic approach has resulted in Texas A&M’s undergraduate employment rate being second only to Penn State’s, and is tied for the most CEOs of Fortune 100 companies (four). These are testaments to the quality and talent its students bring to employers on day one after graduating. This is one reason for the well-known statement in Aggieland: “What do you call an Aggie five years after they graduate? Boss.”

Background and TAMU History

Founded in 1876, Texas A&M has had a tight alignment with the military. In fact, for its first 90 years, the school only admitted male students and they were required to serve in the Corps of Cadets. After graduation, these students went on to active duty in the military while others went into the workforce, often rising through the ranks to top leadership roles.

This laid the groundwork for the fundamental principles that continue to this day of preparing young men (and now women) to lead in the world. During this time, the university started empowering and enabling students to find self-solutions, identify problems and begin to identify means to solve an issue. That concept of a student-led, student-run process began at the infancy of Texas A&M.

Operationalizing Texas A&M’s Six Core Values

Texas A&M has six core values -- excellence, integrity, leadership, loyalty, respect and selfless service. These values, which not well-specified early on, have informed the university in many ways over the years. For instance, the Holocaust Museum Houston recently recognized Texas A&M for producing more than 20,000 Aggies who stepped forward to serve in World War II and made an incredible difference in the outcome of that war on a global scale. This ties back to the core value of selfless service.

Starting approximately 20 years ago, past Texas A&M presidents and staff began an exercise in which they looked back at the institution’s 100-plus-year history and then put the core values on paper. That exercise became the foundational pieces through which TAMU recruits students and how it communicates with former students

These core values are shared in recruitment materials and are prominently displayed across campus and permeate Texas A&M’s programs and culture. They are discussed in orientation and residence halls and during a variety of leadership training programs. By the end of their college experience, students can talk about the six core values with a very specific framework and how that led them to be able to achieve certain aspects of their undergraduate and graduate experience.

Texas A&M also embeds the core values as learning outcomes when developing and reviewing programs and courses. For example, when the university thinks about developing a new initiative, they don’t talk about a baseline. Instead, the conversation is about whether the program is excellent, is it right and is there integrity and what is the right thing to do. The conversation is not about what might be expedient or put the university in the best light, but what is the right thing to do for the students and building individual character.

Building the Next Generation of Leaders

Texas A&M takes this one step further by putting students (instead of faculty or staff) in charge of organizing groups and major events. The faculty and staff members serve in advisory roles instead of being in charge of the activity.

Texas A&M is very conscious and deliberate in focusing on the core values and encourages students to focus on their work ethic and the value of the work that brings the rewards. Instead of making assumptions about salary and title, the Aggies understand that they need to make appropriate progress to begin to get promotions, a process that starts with their roles at TAMU.

For example, students begin their “training” as underclassmen when they join a variety of organizations. Each year, they have the opportunity to move into leadership roles as they begin to narrow their focus. In these roles, they are responsible for operations, training, budgeting or marketing. This enables students to get real-time leadership experience while in school which translates into students being ready to take on significant roles early in their careers.

Texas A&M’s Enrollment Processes

Whereas many institutions of higher education are seeing enrollment declines and some are being forced to shutter their doors, Texas A&M, which articulates its core values and what being an Aggie is about in its recruitment materials, enrollment selection process is highly competitive (this year, over 50,000 applicants for 10,000 spaces) and it always has a wait list. The number of applications in 2018 were 20-25 percent higher than in 2016. (The 2017 applications were skewed by Hurricane Harvey.) The interest in attending the university is indicative of not only the quality of education, but also the experiences that students will have.

Legacy students are not an automatic admit, but at least 25 percent do come from families with Aggie ties. The legacy student typically has the desire to attend Texas A&M as well as the drive to make top grades and a strong work ethic. In one instance, Dr. Pugh could track the Aggie heritage of a recent Texas A&M Yell Leader back to his great-great-great-great grandfather who was the first student ever to enroll at Texas A&M.

Hiring Faculty Members and Staff

Texas A&M’s values also go out to how they hire faculty and staff. It looks for the qualities of the individual in relation to the quality of their knowledge, their ethics, and their integrity. The expectation is that these individuals will be leaders when they come to Texas A&M.

Faculty are expected to be outstanding researchers, which goes hand-in-hand with the core values, and faculty are expected to be part of the local and A&M community.

The Division of Student Affairs looks for candidates who align with the university’s core values so they can model those values and take a leadership role. These staff members understand the role of mentorship and are expected to adopt a facilitative, advising stance so that students learn how to take ownership and solve their own problems. The staff also models service leadership concepts and encourages reflection so that students learn from both their successes and their failures, and then are able to move forward.

Taking a Longer View

Texas A&M is in the process of envisioning what higher education will look like in 2030 and what Texas A&M needs to be proactive in creating that vision. They are involving faculty, staff and students in these discussions and finding ways to embrace these changes.

The Texas A&M Foundation has a capital campaign, Lead by Example, that includes three principles: transformational experiences for students, faculty and staff; discovery and innovation, to tackle the major problems in the world; and impact on the state, nation and world, to bring out the servant leadership. They want to encourage students to lead a life of value to commit to the betterment of the world.

Wrapping Up

Texas A&M offers an important example of how higher education can create an environment in which students learn not only their core discipline but also the softer skills of leadership. Texas A&M’s core values infuse everything they do, from recruitment brochures and signage to their coursework and how student activities are run. This type of approach offers a way to quiet naysayers who question the value of higher education as to whether institutions prepare their graduates to succeed in the work environment. This state university puts a premium on creating a life of value – and it shows in its current and former students, the faculty, staff and administration.

Bullet Points

Texas A&M offers an important example of how higher education can create an environment in which students learn not only their core discipline but also the softer skills of leadership.
Texas A&M’s core values infuse everything they do, from recruitment brochures and signage to their coursework and how student activities are run. This type of approach offers a way to quiet naysayers who question the value of higher education as to whether institutions prepare their graduates to succeed in the work environment.
The university puts a premium on creating a life of value – and it shows in its current and former students, the faculty, staff, and administration.
Texas A&M, like the service academies (e.g., West Point, Annapolis, etc.), takes a holistic approach to education – preparing students for life, not just for a job. This is one reason why their job placement rate for graduates is 2nd in the nation behind Penn State, and it is tied for the most CEOs of Fortune 100 companies (four). These are testaments to the quality and talent its students bring to employers on day one after graduating.
Texas A&M has six core values -- excellence, integrity, leadership, loyalty, respect and selfless service. These values, which not well-specified early on, have informed the university in many ways over the years. They are shared in recruitment materials and are prominently displayed across campus and permeate Texas A&M’s programs and culture. They are discussed in orientation and residence halls and during a variety of leadership training programs. By the end of their college experience, students can talk about the six core values with a very specific framework and how that led them to be able to achieve certain aspects of their undergraduate and graduate experience.
Texas A&M takes leadership development and core values one step further by putting students (instead of faculty or staff) in charge of organizing groups and major events. The faculty and staff members serve in advisory roles instead of being in charge of the activity.
Texas A&M is very conscious and deliberate in focusing on the core values and encourages students to focus on their work ethic and the value of the work that brings the rewards. Instead of making assumptions about salary and title, the Aggies understand that they need to make appropriate progress to begin to get promotions, a process that starts with their roles at TAMU.
Whereas many institutions of higher education are seeing enrollment declines and some are being forced to shutter their doors, Texas A&M, which articulates its core values and what being an Aggie is about in its recruitment materials, enrollment selection process is highly competitive and it always has a wait list. The number of applications in 2018 were 20-25 percent higher than in 2016 (50,000+ for 10,000 spaces). The 2017 applications were skewed by Hurricane Harvey. The interest in attending the university is indicative of not only the quality of education, but also the experiences that students will have.
Texas A&M’s values also go out to how they hire faculty and staff. It looks for the qualities of the individual in relation to the quality of their knowledge, their ethics and their integrity. The expectation is that these individuals will be leaders when they come to Texas A&M.
Texas A&M is in the process of envisioning what higher education will look like in 2030 and what Texas A&M needs to be proactive in creating that vision. They are involving faculty, staff and students in these discussions and finding ways to embrace these changes.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Texas A&M University
Undergraduate hiring
Fortune 100 CEOs from TAMU
TAMU’s Core Values
Dr. Dan Pugh

Guests Social Media Links:

Texas A&M Twitter: @TAMU ‏
Dan Pugh LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/daniel-pugh-a797663?lipi=urn%3Ali%3Apage%3Ad_flagship3_profile_view_base_contact_details%3BOOVdvvyLRMao8HbjpzpHiQ%3D%3D

Your Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Since seating the 116th Congress three weeks ago, there has been a lot going on in Washington. Tom Netting of CSPEN, the Central States Private Education Network, which represents schools nationwide to public policymakers in Washington and throughout the nation, joins us to give an update on what we can expect out of the 116th Congress with respect to higher education, the 2019 Negotiated Rulemaking process, and the Education Department reorganization.

The 116th Congress

Given a split Congress, we can expect some changes in higher ed, and perhaps this may be what is needed to move the Higher Education Act and other policies through.

Changing Players

The big news coming out of the Senate is that Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn) has announced this will be his last two years in Congress. He has led the Senate Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee since 2015, and he, along with Sen. Patti Murray (D-WA), ranking member of the Democratic party, have done a considerable amount of work in a bipartisan fashion.

The new chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee is Congressman Bobby Scott (D-VA). Rep. Scott has served in multiple roles on the committee, including chairman and ranking member, and is very familiar with the process and leadership of the committee. Rep. Virginia Foxx (R-NC), the former committee chair, will be the ranking member.

The good news is that similar to Alexander and Murray in the Senate, Scott, and Fox have good rapport and have worked in a bipartisan fashion, and we have four individuals who, despite their differences, can work together and have the opportunity to push things across the finish line.

Higher Education Act

Reauthorizing the Higher Education Act is one of those things which needs pushing. Reauthorization is should happen every 5 to 6 years, but has been delayed the last three times – it has been 11 years since the last reauthorization, and the previous two were in 2008 and 1998, 10 years apart.

Getting this to the finish line is critical. In the last 11 years, there have been a number of changes that require legislative action. For example, students need revisions to help support them in their access to higher education; institutions need help in bringing innovation and other aspects forward; and Congress and the Department and the community need the opportunity to bring necessary reforms to the table.

The HEA is one of the few remaining education issues on which Sen. Alexander has not put his stamp. Given he's a former Secretary of Education and former chancellor of the University of Tennessee, this is something very near and dear to his heart, and we expect this is high on his list of things to accomplish.

Negotiated Rule Making

The first session of the 2019 Negotiated Rulemaking process began last week with the Accreditation and Innovation (full) committee in session, and the three subcommittees met on Friday.

For those who are unfamiliar with the Neg Reg process as it is sometimes called, there is a full committee comprised of 16 primary and 16 alternate members representing the various constituencies in higher education, and three subcommittees focusing on faith-based entities, TEACH grants, and distance learning. A significant amount of the work will be done at the subcommittee level, who will report out to the full committee for approval/disapproval of the recommendations.

There are two significant differences between this and previous Neg Reg processes. First, the Department is using what they are calling consensus buckets in an attempt to gain consensus around individual issues or proposals so that if one set does contain full consensus, they can move that forward as a consensus proposal even if others do not. This is a distinct difference from the all or nothing proposals of the past negotiated rulemaking processes, and gives hope that negotiators might have a shot at completing a very ambitious agenda, or at least some pieces of it. The alternative is that for those areas which are not completed to consensus, the Department will issue its guidance which may be in opposition to many constituencies’ desires.

The other difference is who is permitted to speak at committee meetings. The Department attempted to limit discussion to the primary negotiator and allow the alternate only to speak if the primary was not in attendance, (in the past you had both the primary and alternate negotiator being able to speak as they saw fit), but there was pushback from the committee. Ultimately, the protocol was modified to provide for limited circumstances in which both the primary and the alternate would speak. This seemed to work out well in the full committee deliberations.

Committee Meetings Report

The full committee got off to a good (but late because of weather) start with discussions about accreditation and the agenda. There was some drama at the beginning – seating the state higher education executive officers (SHEEAs) and state attorneys general in the groups. It was ultimately decided that the SHEEAs would be seated on the full committee and states attorneys general will be seated as primary negotiator at a distance education and educational innovation subcommittee.

Some of the biggest issues that negotiators will be examining are credit hour and substantive interaction definitions and how those impact competency-based education and federal financial aid. Much of this work will be done at the subcommittee level, and it will be interesting to see how this plays out with the consensus buckets.

Schedule

The current schedule is that the full committee will meet the weeks of February 10 and March 25, and subcommittees will meet in the week prior to the full committee. The formal Neg Reg process will end on March 28 if all things remain on schedule, but that is predicated on getting all the work done that is necessary, as well as achieving consensus on one or more of the various consensus buckets.

We can expect to see interim reports coming out from CSPEN and the various news agencies that report on higher ed news following each of the sessions.

Final Report Out

Expect to see summaries for those items for which consensus was reached in early April, but for those areas that did not reach consensus, we will be left to speculate on where the conversations of the negotiations left off, where the department positioning was and what we might anticipate it to be as the process goes forward.

As is the case with previously negotiated rulemaking, the Department will have the months of April and May (and probably into June) to develop its notice of proposed rulemaking, and probably will publish it in the summer for comments. The final regulations should be published on or about November 1 of this year in order for them to become effective by July 1, 2020.

Giving Input to the Process

If someone wishes to give input, they can find the list of participants at the Department of Education's website. Also, if you would like to access the live YouTube and streaming videos of the of the negotiations as they take place, here is the link.

Department of Education Reorganization

The Department of Education recently announced a reorganization, much of which is linked to the Department’s notion of next-generation FSA (federal student financial aid). The Department is looking to first reform the delivery mechanism for federal student financial aid and the backend.

They have started building the new system infrastructure geared towards getting better and more accessible information to the individual borrowers and students. They intend to use platforms that utilize mobile devices, as well as the web and the Internet, to bring more information to the consumer in real time on everything from their past applications to their specific loan data.

The next step is how to deal with the responsibilities of the Department as it relates to the delivery of FSA. This includes the servicers and the collection activities on the far back end. There have been a couple of starts and stops with this that have resulted in the courts being involved to determine who should be involved and how they should be involved, but hopefully this will lead to a better way to do FSA.

As part of the reorg, they have filled 24+ vacancies. These are high- to mid-level individuals across the entire spectrum of the higher education, including elementary, secondary, office of civil rights, and others. Hopefully, filling these vacancies will allow the Department to provide more guidance and information in areas such as Borrower Defense to Repayment Regulations and Gainful Employment.

This reorg is not without some concern. There is downsizing going on at the same time, and many are concerned this is a signal to those that believe that the Department should be abolished. Additionally, there are those who view this as yet another way support both the Trump and the Republican agenda by putting people in place who favor some communities to the detriment of others, e.g. for-profit over community colleges or traditional higher education institutions.

Government Shutdown

The current Washington shut down has not affected the Department of Education too much as it was part of the Labor HHS appropriations bill previously passed by the Senate. However, there are a number of other agencies that affect the Department, e.g., the Federal Register – until guidance is published in the Federal Register, it cannot take effect. Thus, the Department may have completed the BDR guidance, but it cannot go into effect.

Cybersecurity

Cybersecurity is coming up on people’s radar again, not that it should have ever left. The issue was raised at the FSA conference in two presentations by Department of Ed personnel, who stressed that this area is ever-changing. Institutional leadership must be mindful of cybersecurity as it relates to protection of personal data and compliance. The Department is saying that they can help, so reach out to them.

Bullet Points: Drill down on key points of the interview:

Given a split Congress, we can expect some changes in higher ed, and perhaps this may be what is needed to move the Higher Education Act and other policies through.
Sen. Lamar Alexander (R-Tenn) has announced this will be his last two years in Congress. He chairs the Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee.
The new chairman of the House Education and Labor Committee is Congressman Bobby Scott (D-VA).
The good news is that similar to Alexander and Murray in the Senate, Scott and Fox have good rapport and have worked in a bipartisan fashion, and we have four individuals who, despite their differences, can work together and have the opportunity to push things across the finish line.
Reauthorization of the Higher Education Act is should happen every 5 to 6 years, but has been delayed the last three times – it has been 11 years since the last reauthorization, and the previous two were in 2008 and 1998, 10 years apart.
The first session of the 2019 Negotiated Rule Making process began last week with the Accreditation and Innovation (full) committee in session, and the three subcommittees, faith-based entities, TEACH grants, and distance learning, met on Friday.
Some of the biggest issues that negotiators will be examining are credit hour and substantive interaction definitions and how those impact competency-based education and federal financial aid.
The current Neg Reg schedule is that the full committee will meet the weeks of February 10 and March 25, and subcommittees will meet in the week prior to the full committee. The formal Neg Reg process will end on March 28 if all things remain on schedule. Expect to see summaries for those items for which consensus was reached in early April, but for those areas that did not reach consensus, we will be left to speculate on where the conversations of the negotiations left off, where the department positioning was and what we might anticipate it to be as the process goes forward.
If someone wishes to give input, they can find the list of participants at the Department of Education's website. Also, if you would like to access the live YouTube and streaming videos of the of the negotiations as they take place, here is the link.
The Department of Education recently announced a reorganization, much of which is linked to the Department’s notion of next-generation FSA (federal student financial aid).
As part of the reorg, they have filled 24+ vacancies. These are high- to mid-level individuals across the entire spectrum of the higher education, including elementary, secondary, office of civil rights, and others. Hopefully, filling these vacancies will allow the Department to provide more guidance and information in areas such as Borrower Defense to Repayment Regulations and Gainful Employment.
The current Washington shut down has not affected the Department of Education too much as it was part of the Labor HHS appropriations bill previously passed by the Senate. However, there are a number of other agencies that affect the Department, e.g., the Federal Register – until guidance is published in the Federal Register, it cannot take effect.
Cybersecurity is coming up on people’s radar again, not that it should have ever left. The issue was raised at the FSA conference in two presentations by Department of Ed personnel, who stressed that this area is ever-changing. Institutional leadership must be mindful of cybersecurity as it relates to protection of personal data and compliance. The Department is saying that they can help, so reach out to them.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Sen. Lamar Alexander
Sen. Patti Murray
Congressman Bobby Scott
Rep. Virginia Foxx
2019 Negotiated Rulemaking process
Neg Reg list of participants
Department of Education
Live streaming link

Guests Social Media Links:

Tom Netting LinkedIn – https://www.linkedin.com/in/tom-netting-9214755/

CSPEN LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/groups/6954716/

Tom Netting Twitter - @t_netting

Your Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/

Twitter: @thechangeldr

Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

In addition to enjoying the holidays, December is a good time to pause and take stock of the past year. This also is an opportune time to get out the crystal ball to contemplate what might happen in 2019.

2018: The Year in Review

There were a number of very nice gifts under the tree this year, but also a lot of lumps of coal. In 2018, we saw four big themes: marketplace dynamics; Washington follies; higher ed governance failures (which includes higher ed’s version of #MeToo); and the Harvard admissions lawsuit.

Marketplace Dynamics: The Maturing and Decline of Higher Ed Markets

In our previous blog and podcast on M&A activity in higher ed, we discussed the product life cycle and where higher ed stands in relation to this concept. To briefly recap, the product life cycle (PLC) is a marketing tool that is applied to products, but also is relevant when examining market segments or industries.

The PLC is made up of four stages:

The introduction stage, which is characterized by the organization building brand awareness;
The growth stage, which is characterized by strong growth as the organization builds brand preference and increases market share;
The maturity stage, which is characterized by diminishing growth as “competition” increases and competitors offer similar “products.” This results in the implementation of multiple marketing strategies, such as cutting prices, rethinking positioning and branding, and market consolidation; and
The decline stage, which is characterized by a decline in sales (which may be potentially significant). In many cases, the product (or organization) goes out of business or, as a last result, finds a buyer (leading to a merger or acquisition).

Higher ed finds itself straddling the stages of maturity and decline, which is characterized by decreasing enrollment, lack of differentiation in the higher ed marketplace, and an increase in market consolidation and/or college closings.

Which brings us to now.

Breaking Down the Numbers. Over the last few years (2016-2018), more than 100 colleges haves closed. Many can be directly attributed to the decertification of ACICS by the Obama administration. However, the more relevant reason for many of these closures is the lifecycle and current operating environment of higher education.

Over the past few years, 65 for-profits closed and seven merged with other institutions. Some of those mergers were huge (Purdue acquiring Kaplan, Strayer acquiring Capella, National University System acquiring Northcentral). In addition, 14 nonprofit universities closed and five merged while 36 public institutions merged or consolidated. This merger and acquisition activity makes perfect sense given that higher education is in the maturing to declining portions of the lifecycle.

Transfer Students and Reducing Costs. We’ve also seen community colleges assume more of a role in reducing the costs of higher ed, as well as in degree completion.

State (and other) colleges are beginning to put more emphasis on attracting transfer students. For example, Gov. Jerry Brown (D-Cal) is withholding $50 million from the University of California system until the system increases the acceptance and enrollment of transfer students while also meeting auditor requests to fix accounting issues. Brown’s decision was based on his commitment to a 2-to-1 ratio of freshmen to transfer students. However, several system’s institutions reported a ratio closer to 4-to-1.

Privates are also emphasizing outreach to transfer students due to the costs to both the institution and the students. Some privates are renting space at community college, thus giving students an easily available and direct track to a four-year degree. This makes a lot of sense, especially given the current high cost of private education (e.g., one California private is charging $55,000 a year for undergraduate programs, amounts we see at Ivy League schools). Thus, students find more affordable options by first attending a community college and then transferring to a public or private institution. This approach reduces the amount of student loans needed to complete a degree.

This type of approach is especially important with students who start college without a clear idea of what they want to study or their pathway to earning their degree and end up dropping out due to cost. This accounts for why we are seeing so many post-traditional students in higher education; they initially started college without understanding what they wanted to study and now are returning to complete their degrees. Having this community college low-cost option that transfers coursework to four-year colleges and university makes good sense because it minimizes the student’s time to completion and cost.

College Closures and Rejuvenation. We continue to see higher education closures. While higher education leaders may point to the resurrection of Sweet Briar, those types of reemergence are few and far between.

Sweet Briar was an interesting case. Although the school had a substantial endowment (unlike most schools), those funds were legally earmarked for specific things and could not be used for operating funds. This is an interesting (and possibly unique) situation and will make a great case study for future grad students who want to study the process of bringing a school back from the dead.

Department of Education and Washington

The second theme for 2018 is all about Washington, D.C. Frankly, there are so many things, it’s hard to know where to start.

ACICS. ACICS is (in)famous for its accreditation of Corinthian and ITT, both of which folded, leaving 100s of 1000s of students stranded. Not surprisingly, ACICS was decertified by the Obama administration in 2016. At its height, ACICS accredited 200+ universities, but in the time between 2016 (when ACICS lost its accreditation) and now, most of the institutions accredited by ACICS have moved to other accrediting bodies.

However, the Trump Administration has other ideas on accreditation. Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos reinstated ACICS’ accreditation authority this year in a process that had many missteps. However, the most egregious was that the department’s senior official who made the case for ACICS’ reinstatement is a former lobbyist who worked with for-profit universities, a clear conflict of interest.

In her justification for reinstatement, the former lobbyist, Diane Auer Jones, said the Department of Education determined that ACICS was in compliance on 19 of the 21 applicable criteria. Equally as important, she stated that ACICS was likely in compliance with these criteria when President Obama’s Education Secretary John King, Jr. removed ACICS’ accreditation certification. According to the Education Department, ACICS is still “out of compliance” with federal standards in the remaining two areas but has been given another 12 months to come back into compliance.

The carnage from ACICS’ original accreditation still continues. Just this month, the Education Corporation of America (ECA), which was once accredited by ACICS and oversaw Virginia College, shuttered its doors, leaving 20,000 students up a creek without a paddle. In fairness to ACICS, they removed Virginia College’s accreditation, but only after the college attempted to get accreditation from another accreditor and failed miserably.

Gainful Employment and Borrower Defense. Changes in gainful employment and borrower defense also emerged in 2018.

In relation to the former, the Education Department missed the filing deadline for the gainful employment rule so these changes cannot come into play until mid-2020. Furthermore, the Social Security Administration -- which provides the earnings data needed to calculate gainful employment -- decided not to renew the information-sharing agreement that expired in May. Because of this, the Education Department will not have the data they need to calculate earnings data. So, in essence, gainful employment is dead for now.

Borrower defense is another area on which Washington gets raspberries. Regulations put in place by the Obama administration protected students whose colleges (e.g., Corinthian and ITT) closed, leaving them with degrees that were considered worthless. However, the Ed Department under Secretary DeVos rejected the vast majority of the claims. It took Congressional pressure to turn the process around, and although the process has gotten better, it still not where it needs to be. I think we can expect to see some new regulations coming out of Washington over the next year in this area.

Title IX and Sexual Abuse. The Education Department put out their draft ruling on new Title IX guidance in November and, overall, colleges are not happy. The revisions make major changes to the standard that, in many cases, are as clear as mud and/or will discourage victims from coming forward.

New Title IX Guidance. The first of the changes narrows the definition of sexual assault. The old standard was “unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature,” and the new standard is “unwelcome sexual conduct; or unwelcome conduct on the basis of sex that is so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it effectively denies a person equal access to the recipient’s education program or activity.” The Ed Department justified this by saying it is in line with the Supreme Court guidance, but survivors’ advocates have come out forcefully and said that this new definition will put survivors’ education at risk.

The second major change is the standard by which sexual assault is adjudicated. Previously, the standard was that the assault was “likely to have happened.” However, the new guidance provides for a higher standard, i.e., “preponderance of evidence,” the same standard that is used in civil suits. This is lower than “beyond a reasonable doubt,” the standard which is used in criminal trials, but it still creates a higher burden on the victim to prove that the incident happened.

Lastly, the accused will have the chance to cross-examine the victim under the new guidance, and many feel this will discourage victims from coming forward and reporting incidents.

Whenever you get into sexual assault or similar types of accusations, the resolution process must be more than he said/she said. However, that is what it could come down to because of the cross-examination requirement. Many victims’ advocates and lawyers are concerned that we will revert to a previous time when a woman who accused a man of sexual assault would ultimately be the one on trial because of her dress or behaviors or whatever.

MSU and Sexual Assault / Harassment in Education. A subset of this area brings to light the #MeToo movement in higher ed, especially in the aftermath of the Supreme Court hearings with Justice Kavanaugh. It took a tremendous amount of courage for Christine Blasey Ford to bring up what happened to her after so many years and in such a public venue. Sadly, look at what ultimately happened – the good ol’ boys network derailed the investigation before it was able to go through to a conclusion.

We also are seeing the fallout from the Michigan State sexual assault case. MSU’s former president has been brought up on felony charges for lying to the police, and the institution’s undergraduate applications have fallen by almost 8.5 percent in the wake of the scandal. Not only is this situation tarnishing MSU’s reputation, it is hitting them in the pocketbook. And maybe that's what has to happen for people to change.

Higher Ed Governance Failures and the Role of the Board

We are seeing a failure in the governance process in many higher ed schools. Three cases fall into this area at the following institutions: Penn State, Michigan State, and the University of Maryland. We must ask ourselves in all these situations, “Where were the Board of Directors/Regents/Trustees?”

In the Penn State scandal, some Regents were brought up on criminal charges. We haven't seen that yet in the Michigan State scandal, but I believe we will. MSU’s interim president has not done a great job in reaching out to the victims – it has been pretty nasty in many respects, but one must ask where are their Board of Regents? Same with the University of Maryland football coach after the player died – the board directed the university president to retain the football coach, but the president refused (rightly so).

From all appearances, the majority of boards and Regents do not understand what their role is.

Regents at state schools generally are political appointees, and it is considered to be a feather in one’s cap to be appointed to a Board of Regents/Trustees for a state university. However, just because one is a political appointee to a board doesn’t remove their fiduciary duties as a board member. More training needs to be done to ensure Regents understand their duties as well as how governance has changed over the years.

This also goes for boards of private universities. The vast majority of these types of higher ed boards are made up of “friends of the president” or other large donors. This is especially egregious with many Christian colleges, whose boards are made up of religious affiliates or ecumenical personnel who have no experience sitting on the board of a multimillion-dollar organization and/or an understanding of higher ed.

Fallout from the Harvard Admissions Lawsuit

The Harvard lawsuit, in which a group of Asian Americans sued the university over its admissions policies, ultimately will impact a majority of higher ed institutions. Even though Harvard says that they are following the guidance from the Supreme Court, they get sued. Same with UCLA – they have been sued as well. Although a ruling is still forthcoming on the Harvard case, I think there will be ripple effects and we haven’t seen the end of this.

Predictions for 2019

While much of the crystal ball’s foretelling for 2019 is cloudy, there are some clear indications of what lies in the future.

An Acceleration of Consolidation and Closures

First, we will see an acceleration of consolidations and closures in higher ed. For example, just in the last couple weeks, Moody's Investors Service and Fitch ratings both have declared a negative outlook for the higher ed sector for 2019. This is huge.

We have a marketplace that is saturated. In these types of markets, smarter institutions focus on economies of scale (mergers), as well as positioning and differentiation (why is my university and/or degree different)? Carnegie Mellon and MIT have done this very well. This is one way to combat saturation, but not a lot of schools understand marketing positioning and differentiation.

Consolidation (mergers) occurs for one of three reasons.

Acquisition of a new technology;
Market expansion and/or growth; or
Eliminate competition and/or create market efficiencies.

Consolidation will continue to accelerate. One need not look any further than what is happening with Pennsylvania’s 21 state universities. These institutions are vying for a smaller number of students graduating from high school, so are closing multiple campuses and realigning programs to eliminate duplication. This impacts the towns in which they are located since they are the major employers, and any change they make in consolidating degrees and/or reorganizing the system affects jobs, creating a ripple effect.

Closures will also increase, but we think there will be far more consolidation rather than outright closings. The trend will continue toward the mega universities -- the merger of Strayer and Capella or Purdue and Kaplan -- or more shared services between universities. We will start to see far more of this with the privates as they struggle to survive.

The biggest challenge is going to be for the smaller universities that don’t have strong endowments. What are they going to do? Most of these universities rely solely on tuition and/or state and federal funding to keep their doors open. They have limited research dollars coming in as compared to the Tier 1/R1 institutions. Right now, the closure rate is below 1%, but it will accelerate.

The one wildcard in this is a potential recession, which could result in people going back to school to gain new skills and earn a different degree. Maybe that will help universities.

The other trend that we have not talked about is how many people are disparaging higher ed, saying a college degree is not worth the money that you pay for it. This is going to hurt higher ed and its ability to bring in more students. This too may lead to more mergers and closures.

Changing the Higher Ed Business Model

The business model for higher ed must change. We don’t see rapid transformational change in the next year. However, there will be many changes in the next five years that people will realize was part of a changing higher ed landscape as they look in the rearview mirror.

Neg Reg 2019 and its Implications. The upcoming negotiated rulemaking process by the Ed Department focusing on accreditation and innovation could be very impactful, especially with its focus on credit hours and online education.

Credit Hours. Moving away from credit hours as a measure of learning could be one of those breakthrough transformations that could spur the changing of higher ed’s business model.

Once the Ed Department makes these changes, we will begin to see more institutions using CBE and giving credit for previous learning and life experiences.

If you take a look at the three colleges that have done very well using these models (Western Governors who is the poster child for CBE, Capella, and Southern New Hampshire), they have seen tremendous growth while reducing the cost to students. This is a win-win and I think we’ll see more of this.

Online Education. Although online education is an area that is beginning to get saturated because of for-profits, we will see far more privates and state schools moving into this area, as well as continued consolidations with online providers (OPMs), such as Learning House. Because so many OPMs exist, some of the smaller colleges will be able to expand into this area at a reasonably low-cost investment, and more for-profits will be acquisition targets.

We will start seeing institutions embrace the opportunity to share online courses. This too will require changes from the Neg Reg process with respect to accreditation, but once these types of changes come out, we will start seeing sharing of courses and services as we have not seen in the education industry.

Negotiations with Faculty. We will begin to see higher ed leaders toughen their stance with faculty. Market saturation with institutions and programs has resulted in price discounting, sometimes at a rate of more than 60%. This is not sustainable.

According to Inside Higher Ed’s 2018 Annual Survey of Chief Business Officers (CFOs), 48% of respondents strongly agree or agree that their college tuition discount rate is unsustainable. This is up from 34% in 2017. Furthermore, two-thirds of CFOs at the privates say the same thing. This is huge.

Institutions must start cutting programs that are not “profitable,” but in doing this, they must deal with faculty. Unfortunately, faculty look at programmatic cuts through the lens of job security instead of what graduates need to be attractive in the job market. When faculty start to do this, there will be security and jobs for nearly all.

Faculty Promotion and Tenure. We will start seeing changes in how faculty are promoted and assessed. Currently, faculty are promoted and assessed by their publication records. Going forward, we’ll see less reliance on citations and publications and more on teaching.

Additionally, faculty hiring and tenure will change. We will start seeing a review of tenured faculty every 5 to 10 years, instead of having a job for life. I don’t see tenure going away anytime soon – it is too institutionalized – but employment for life will become a thing of the past in five years.

Knowing Who Your Customers Are and What They Need. Many higher ed leaders have locked themselves in the ivory tower for too long, and it's time they understood what students need to be taught and what industry needs to be successful.

Texas A&M is another really good example of this. They talk with stakeholder groups on a regular basis, including just completing a values survey. The institutional leaders currently are engaging in what they call Aggie 2030 to understand the future of higher education as a whole and where Texas A&M is going. This is the type of strategic planning that universities need to be doing with their alumni, stakeholders and the people who hire their graduates.

Student Enrollment and Impact on Marketing Research and Spending. Another trend involves students making enrollment decisions based on their own proximity to a college. This is important for universities to realize and understand. Unless you are a R1 or major university, your students are more than likely going to come from a limited geographical pool.

This has implications as to how and where you spend marketing dollars, but unfortunately, many institutions are wasting marketing dollars. As much as institutions would like to draw from a larger geographical area, institutions must put a greater emphasis on doing market research to understand where their students live and then spend the marketing dollars to get more students from that area. As the saying goes, fish where the fish are, because it's a waste of money otherwise.

Harvard Lawsuit and Admissions. The Harvard lawsuit has the potential going all the way to the Supreme Court, and who knows how that will be decided with the current makeup of the Court.

Cost Containment. We also will start to see far more cost containment as institutions no longer have the same level of disposable income. I think we will also start seeing the salaries of chief executives start to come down, especially as transparency hits the budgeting process.

Higher Ed Funding. Cities and states will begin to fund college for students. The City of Chicago recently announced a new program where students will receive scholarships to cover costs of associate degrees that will be set up through DePaul University. And in another example, Starbucks is funding college for their people. We will start to see more of this as an employee benefit, but also as a way for businesses to invest in and retain quality employees.

International Students. International students attending U.S. universities will continue to be an issue so long as the Trump administration continues to mess with immigration. This will continue to impact U.S. institutions as international students pay full tuition and universities use those funds to keep their bottom lines in the green.

This is especially true with Chinese students. Because of trade wars and increased emphasis on background checks, we will see fewer Chinese students enrolling in the nation’s higher education institutions.

HBCUs. I think the other one to look at HBCUs. I think there could be some really good things to come out of the HBCUs over the next few years. I've no idea what it is, but the crystal ball says to keep an eye on them.

Wrapping Up

So long as the Trump administration is in office, we will continue to see turbulence coming out of the Department of Education and the rest of the government. One thing is for sure: it will not be boring!

Merry Christmas / happy Hanukkah, and wishing all the very best for 2019.

Bullet Points

Looking Back – The Highlights from 2018
- Higher ed finds itself in the maturity to declining stages as characterized by declining enrollments, lack of differentiation in the higher ed marketplace, and an increase in market consolidation (M&A activity) and/or college closings.
- Over the last few years, 2016-2018, more than 100 colleges haves closed. Many can be directly attributed to ACICS being decertified by the Obama administration, but more relevant is where education is in the lifecycle and current operating environment.
- State (and other) colleges are beginning to put more of an emphasis on attracting transfer students.
- Privates are also getting into this space due to costs to both them and their students. Some privates are co-locating at community colleges, renting space from them, and this gives their students a direct track to a four-year degree.
- ACICS was decertified by the Obama administration in 2016, but Secretary DeVos reinstated its accreditation authority this year. There were many missteps with this whole process, but the most egregious of these was because of a conflict of interest (or appearance thereof) of the department senior official who made the case for ACICS’ reinstatement.
- Gainful employment is essentially dead for two reasons:
- - The Education Department missed the filing deadline for the gainful employment rule so the changes that they want to make to gainful employment cannot come into play until mid-2020.
  - Because of an inter-agency dispute over data sharing, the Ed Dept cannot get the data it needs to calculate gainful employment, thus essentially killing gainful employment.
- The Ed Department in November put out their draft ruling on new Title IX guidance. Overall, colleges and victims’ advocates are not happy with the changes. There are four major changes:
- - The narrowing of the definition of sexual assault.
  - Suggesting a higher standard for adjudication be used, i.e., “preponderance of evidence,” the same standard that is used in civil suits.
  - Lessening the culpability of institutions and narrowing the reporting requirements.
  - Giving the accused the right to cross-examine the victim.
- There is a failure in the governance process in many higher ed schools as exemplified by the Michigan State University sexual abuse scandal, and the death of a University of Maryland football player and the retaining of the football coach. More training needs to be done to ensure Regents understand their duties, and how governance has changed over the years.
Looking Forward – Predictions for 2019
- We will see an acceleration of mergers, consolidations and closures in higher ed.
- The 2019 Neg Reg process will begin a transformation of higher ed and its business model.
- Online education will continue its growth over the next 2-3 years. Much of this will be spurred by consolidation and strategic alliances with online providers.
- We will begin to see faculty promotion and tenure processes changing as a result of the need for universities to cull programs that are not financially viable.
- Market research will increasingly take root in higher ed, as institutions need to make smarter use of their marketing dollars by determining where their true prospective students are.
- Cost containment will continue to accelerate in higher ed, especially in privates where discounting has been the norm. This will find its way to the C suite and we will start to see a reduction of presidential salaries, especially at privates.
- We will start seeing more “interesting” ways for education to be funded. Part of this will come out of the Neg Reg process, but more city, state, and private entities will invest in their residents’ and employees’ futures.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Product Lifecycle: http://www.quickmba.com/marketing/product/lifecycle/
National University System: https://nu.edu
Department of Education: https://www.ed.gov/
Neg Reg 2019 Process: www2.ed.gov/policy/highered/reg/hearulemaking/2018/index.html

Your Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/

Twitter: @thechangeldr

Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

The higher ed sector has been relatively immune (or perhaps resistant?) to change since its inception, but in the past 10-15 years, and especially since the Great Recession, multiple things have changed, forcing changes on it. We now are seeing market forces unleashed, including consolidation, mergers/acquisitions, and closures as we’ve rarely seen before (and not in my lifetime).

Understanding Higher Ed’s Situation

To put what is happening in higher ed in perspective, we examine the higher ed marketplace through the lens of the product lifecycle (PLC). This is a tool marketing applies to products, but it also is relevant when examining market segments or industries.

The PLC is made up of four stages: introduction, growth, maturity, and decline.

The introduction stage is characterized by the organization building brand awareness;
The growth stage is characterized by strong growth, and the organization building brand preference and increasing market share;
The maturity stage is characterized by strong growth diminishing as “competition” rise and competitors offer similar “products.” This results in multiple possible marketing strategies including cutting prices, rethinking positioning and branding, and market consolidation; and
The decline stage is characterized by sales significantly declining or having declined. In many cases, the product (or business) goes out of business or, as a last result, finds an acquirer (merger or acquisition).

Higher ed finds itself in the maturity to declining stages as characterized by declining enrollments, lack of differentiation in the higher ed marketplace, and an increase in market consolidation (M&A activity) and/or college closings.

There are many reasons why higher ed finds itself in this situation.

First, higher ed enrollment has decreased for a myriad of factors, not the least of which is changing demographics, i.e., the numbers of the “traditional” college age student has decreased. Compounding this decrease, higher ed is becoming perceived as elitist, and many cannot afford its cost and/or the resultant student debt. In other words, institutions are competing for a shrinking pool of students, and it costs more for an education that some feel isn’t worth the money spent or debt incurred.

Second, there is an overabundance of education institutions – too many colleges and universities, and, with rare exceptions, they are offering the same types of programs, e.g., how many MBA programs do we need??? This has resulted in significant economic pressure on those small- to medium-sized colleges and universities who have a relatively small (or no) endowment. This pressure is compounded by cost curves that have been carved into stone over the last several decades.

This is played out by larger institutions undercutting smaller institutions on price. For example, the president of the University of Virginia recently announced that tuition will be free for families earning less than $80,000 a year, and if they earn less than $30,000 a year, they will get room and board. In another example, New York University is not charging their medical school students any tuition. Both of these institutions have large endowments to be able to do this, but how can the small- to mid-sized institutions compete?

Lastly, there is pressure for the nonprofit higher ed sector to figure out what to do about the out-of-favor for-profit institutions.

These three reasons, aside from the fact that there are market dynamics at play – there is more supply than demand – are driving many of the changes we’re seeing right now in higher ed.

Mature and Declining Markets Give Rise to M&A Activity

Some smaller colleges and universities under financial stress are looking for ways to solve their problems, and one way is merging with or being merged into another institution.

The for-profit sector is a great example of where there has been significant M&A activity, e.g., Purdue and Kaplan forming Purdue Global, Strayer acquiring Capella, etc., as for-profits figure out their future when nonprofits are clearly in favor (and for-profits are clearly out-of-favor). This not completely changed, even with the change in administration.

Mergers aren’t the only solution for this problem. Many for-profits are attempting the transition to nonprofit status, e.g., Grand Canyon University and University of Phoenix. However, this isn't always the easiest thing to do because of the regulatory permissions required from the Dept of Education and the institution’s accreditation body. Additionally, it doesn't solve their perception problems, at least immediately.

Multiple Reasons for M&A Activity

There are multiple reasons for increased M&A activity in the higher ed sector besides market forces at work, and we need to look at the reasons why M&A activity occurs. Basically, there are three main reasons:

New markets / customers
New technologies
Gain efficiencies in operations

National University System is a good example of this – they’re on a buying spree and for all the right reasons.

The National University System, a not-for-profit, currently has three nonprofit institutions under its umbrella: National University, the original mothership; JFK University in northern California, and the City University of Seattle, but over the past year, it has acquired Patten University for its technology and Northcentral University for its students and programs.

M&A for New Technologies. In its acquisition of Patten University, NU acquired one of the best LMS systems in the marketplace. The system, which was called University Now, has been renamed Flex Course, and NU has adapted it for their own use. As part of the acquisition, National also acquired Patten’s courses which were heavily competency-based. This is also a good advantage in that they have been able to teach out the Patten programs and integrate the learnings into their current undergraduate programs.

One thing that was critical in the acquisition was the ability to modify the LMS to ensure NU was able to continue to satisfy Title IV funding requirements which are driven by Carnegie units. Again, due diligence was critical in this respect. The technology was relatively new, and therefore it was easier to adapt it to satisfy Title IV funding requirements when doing CBE.

Ultimately, NU has great hopes that this acquisition will help them to transform the online learning experience at all its universities.

In other words, National did a great job in completing its due diligence.

M&A as a Growth Strategy. There are two ways that institution grow. One is through organic growth, i.e., you decide you will move into the online sector and you build your program from scratch. Many institutions have done this, and the most recent (and possibly the most famous) of these is the announced online undergraduate program at the University of Pennsylvania, the first of the Ivy League institutions to go online with a program.

The second strategy is acquisition, which is how the National University System is expanding their doctoral offerings. NU acquired Northcentral University (pending appropriate WSCUC and DOE approvals), an online for-profit university that offers mostly graduate education programs at the master and doctoral levels. This fills a gap that NU had at the doctoral level and adds to its ability to offer online and blended courses.

National is already predominantly online – 51 percent of its students are in synchronous or asynchronous online programs – but its acquisition of Northcentral was critical in three ways.

First, Northcentral is completely online and has 24 programs, the majority of which are doctoral, an area NU wanted to expand its offerings.
Second, the Northcentral faculty are high quality and located in nearly all of the 50 states. The model that they use is one-on-one similar to the Oxford Tutorial Model, which having your faculty are distributed across the country is an advantage when using this pedagogy.
Lastly, National acquires a pretty efficient OPM support back-office.

As far as the culture goes, NU expects they will get some real experience bringing the for-profit Northcentral University into the NU System and converting it to a not-for-profit.

National’s acquisitions have been very strategic in nature – they have looked at multiple opportunities and walked away from many. With these two, they’ve made good choices in line with their overall strategic plan and done the due diligence to ensure they are picking the right horse.

Remember that Culture Issue We Had…

Culture is critical when considering a merger. Years ago, when HP acquired Compaq, it was the culture differences that most impacted the success (or lack thereof) of the merger.

The Purdue Global situation is a good example of the challenges merger entities can face. Purdue “bought” Kaplan, i.e., Purdue got the franchise of the online courseware from the Kaplan organization, while Kaplan retained the back-office processing and support, and the OPM. Kaplan’s portion of the entity, still for-profit, is being paid for by the profits they're going to make, while the courses are offered through the not-for-profit Purdue Global.

Many consider the merger between Purdue, a Tier 1 research university with a very high reputation and traditional faculty, and Kaplan, a good institution in its own right but a for-profit online, a very gutsy move – especially when one considers the faculty culture aspects.

Why is there resistance to this change is relatively simple to understand. Culture.

The integration of cultures is never easy. Sometimes, when two cultures come together as Purdue and Kaplan are attempting to do, they merge like oil and water. And that's one of the most important things that folks doing mergers and acquisitions must think about – how the cultures align – because more than anything else, it is culture that can destroy a merger and eliminate the efficiencies that the merger is designed to take advantage of.

Take for instance the merger of Kaplan and Purdue. Kaplan, a for-profit, and Purdue, a R1 university, are very different cultures, especially when it comes to faculty. Regardless of the high quality of Kaplan, an institution which has stayed pretty much out of trouble in terms of the scrutiny of the for-profit community, Kaplan’s online degree programs themselves are a challenge to Purdue’s “in classroom” campus programs that a R1 institutions are experienced in providing.

Faculty, and especially traditional, research faculty, generally tend not to like a lot of change, nor are they wild about online education. And we can just imagine what a traditional, research faculty such as Purdue’s felt about merging with a for-profit online institution. From all reports, the faculty was furious when the merger was first announced – their “brand” was being diluted by this incorporated new global entity called Purdue Global that included a for-profit institution.

The merger has progressed, and faculty and administration appear to have come to a truce, at least for now. That said, Purdue is spending significantly to market Purdue Global – it is in almost every market with TV and radio ads – while trying to keep marketing positioning separate between Purdue and Purdue Global. It has yet to be seen as to whether they are able to keep their faculty happy about it or the branding separate, but that’s a whole different kettle of fish.

The Future of the For-Profit Sector

The for-profit sector is not going to disappear, as much as much of higher ed would like it to. However, there are market forces at play here too, and the for-profit sector may morph its way towards a higher concentration of those who survived to be distributors of OPM or programs.

An example of this is MOOCs. When you look at several of the MOOC organizations, e.g., Udacity, EDX, etc., these organizations are not just providing learning experiences, they are turning into distributors of traditional degree programs, including even graduate programs for R1 universities. This, plus being obvious merger targets, will continue the upheaval in this sector.

We believe that we will see more mergers and less of the organic growth from for-profits, including for-profits becoming part of nonprofits similar to what is happened with Purdue Global, as well as mergers to share back office services. One example of this is TCS Education System, who provides back-office services for a number of institutions. These types of mergers could have a major impact in the online space, especially for small to medium-sized institutions, as it is almost impossible for them to establish the infrastructure to do an effective job in online education – the only way for them to get and/or stay competitive in the online space is to “outsource” back-office functionality.

Federal Funding and Accreditation

There are also a number of changes in regulatory and accreditation factors between Obama and the Trump administrations that are impacting higher ed.

Federal Funding. In a recent talk given by Secretary DeVos, her current position is focused not on the change in the standards but rather more on making Title IV funds available for a broader variety of learning experiences. She conveyed a pretty strong feeling that we should not be committing all postsecondary education funding to what we now call hire traditional higher ed, but to improve the flow of federal funds to retraining programs.

Accreditation. There are not a lot of people who believe that we will move dramatically away from the kind of accreditation process we currently have for a myriad of reasons, despite the upcoming Neg Reg process which begins in early 2019 focusing on accreditation and innovation.

Big changes from in accreditation will need to include a willingness to think in competency-based terms. This will require a major shift away from the strict Carnegie method of determining learning, to more of a competency-based approach to assessing learning outcomes.

Simply put, it is much more important to know that people are learning and being able to demonstrate learning outcomes than it is to demonstrate how long they sat in a seat. However, changing this mindset will be very challenging as it has been this way for well over 100 years.

Additionally, those with marketing backgrounds know that accreditation is the university system's greatest barrier to entry. It is important that universities meet a quality level, but the current system requires institutions develop prima facie evidence of quality, and many potential competitors get frustrated before they get accredited. This could be one reason why the accreditation system as we currently know it does not (and will not) change.

Three Things University Presidents Should Consider Before Merger

If you are considering merging with another institution, there are three things you should consider.

First, culture. You must examine the cultures of the two organizations to ensure that they are mergeable, i.e., that the two cultures are not contrary to one another. There are clear differences between for-profit and not-for-profit cultures, and you must “test the water” and see just how much of a business the for-profit institution sees themselves as vs. it being a learning institution.

Second, regardless as to whether it is a for-profit or not-for-profit entity, does the acquired institution have the programs, faculty and administrative support that is consistent and that will integrate effectively with your own. This is critical but especially critical with respect to faculty. Faculty generates and own the content, and it is essential you have a group who can drive the learning experience for students. That's not something that you can import easily – you must make sure that it fits your own model about how it's going to work.

Thirdly, you have to look at the institution as a business. You (obviously) don’t want to take on something that is so broken that it cannot be fixed no matter how hard you try. For example, you have to ask yourself, are they hopelessly lost as a business model? Are their programs of interest to the marketplace?

One of the biggest challenges institutions are having today is pruning and culling their programs, and leaders must have the courage to look faculty in the eye and say, “by the way, that course is costing us lots of money, and you only have five people in it. We know you may like it, but we can't continue to teach a course that students don't want.” That can be a really tough academic decision, but one that must be made.

Wrapping Up

We believe that the disruption going on in higher ed has just started and that surviving and thriving in the higher ed space will take intense focus to fine tune the systems, processes, and cost structure if institutions are going to compete and survive.

Competition for the adult student has heated up dramatically. Whether we like it or not, this is not only because more traditional institutions have decided to get into the market, but also because multiple institutions are now competing on price, including those that have state subsidies federal subsidies, and/or have large endowments. This can make it very difficult for smaller institutions to compete against as it allows larger institutions to “give away” of their offerings.

Bullet Points:

The higher ed sector has been relatively immune (or perhaps resistant?) to change since its inception, but in the past 10-15 years, and especially since the Great Recession, multiple things have changed, forcing changes on it. We now are seeing market forces unleashed, including consolidation, mergers/acquisitions, and closures as we’ve rarely seen before (and not in my lifetime).
Higher ed finds itself in the maturity to declining stages of the product lifecycle as characterized by declining enrollments, lack of differentiation in the higher ed marketplace, and an increase in market consolidation (M&A activity) and/or college closings.
Some smaller colleges and universities under financial stress are looking for ways to solve their problems, and one way is merging with or being merged into another institution.
There are multiple reasons for increased M&A activity in the higher ed sector besides market forces at work, and we need to look at the reasons why M&A activity occurs. Basically, there are three main reasons: New markets/customers, new technologies, or gains in efficiencies in operations.
Culture is critical when considering a merger, but the integration of cultures is never easy.
We believe that we will see more mergers and less of the organic growth from for-profits, including for-profits becoming part of nonprofits.
The Ed Department under Secretary DeVos believes it should not be committing all postsecondary education funding to what we now call hire traditional higher ed, but to improve the flow of federal funds to retraining programs.
Big changes from in accreditation will need to include a willingness to think in competency-based terms. This will require a major shift away from the strict Carnegie method of determining learning, to more of a competency-based approach to assessing learning outcomes.
One reason why the accreditation system as we currently know it does not (and will not) change is that accreditation is the university system's greatest barrier to entry.
If you are considering merging with another institution, there are three things you should consider:
- Are the cultures mergeable? Does the acquired institution see themselves as a business vs. being a learning institution (or vice versa)?
- Does the acquired institution have the programs, faculty and administrative support that is consistent and that will integrate effectively with your own?
- Is the acquired institution in good financial situation, or is it so broken that it cannot be fixed no matter how hard you try? Are they hopelessly lost as a business model? Are their programs of interest to the marketplace?
The disruption going on in higher ed has just started, and that surviving and thriving in the higher ed space will take intense focus to fine tune the systems, processes, and cost structure if institutions are going to compete and survive.
Competition for the adult student has heated up dramatically.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Product Lifecycle: http://www.quickmba.com/marketing/product/lifecycle/
National University System: https://nu.edu
Department of Education: https://www.ed.gov/
WASC Senior College and University Commission: https://www.wscuc.org/

Guests Social Media Links:

Gerry Czarnecki Twitter: https://twitter.com/gerryczarnecki?lang=en
Gerry Czarnecki Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/theczar/
Gerry Czarnecki website: http://gerryczarnecki.com/

Your Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/
Twitter: @thechangeldr
Email: podcast@changinghighered.com and drumm@thechangeleader.com

View Details

Higher ed institutions are grappling with declining enrollment. The old ways of recruiting students that institutions used during the “go-go” years 15 years ago no longer work – there is far more competition for a shrinking pool of “traditional” students, student demographics have changed, and numerous other reasons. This has resulted in deep discounting of tuition, institutions investing in “climbing walls and lazy rivers” on campus, and other ways to attract prospective students. Yet, on average, only 11 percent of students accepted actually enroll at the college. In essence, (prospective) students control the enrollment process in most situations.

As the saying goes, “putting old wine in a new bottle doesn’t work,“ nor does enrolling students the “traditional” way of buying lists, etc. Higher ed must change their enrollment strategies – put new wine in new bottles – starting with understanding how to market in this new normal.

What’s Changed, and Why Marketing Is So Important Now

Over the past 10-15 years, three major changes occurred that changed higher education, and specifically higher ed enrollment. The first of these was student demographics – there are fewer students graduating from high school than there were even 10 years ago. Add to this a myriad of factors, including increasing income inequality, etc., and the result is fewer “traditional” students available as prospects.

The “go-go” years of the 2000s when nearly every higher ed institution in the country was seeing increasing enrollment and was patting itself on the back for a great job it was doing at marketing and recruiting was a false flag – institutions were merely riding a demographic wave. Those days are over, and we are seeing declining numbers of students graduating from high school.

The second major change was the Great Recession, which is still affecting enrollments. When the economy tanked in 2008, many parents saw their kid’s college savings disappear overnight for two reasons: their stock portfolio was wiped out and/or the home equity that they had planned to borrow against to pay for their children’s education was no longer there. This, coupled with the cuts at the state and federal levels for education, raised the cost to students of an education; we’re seeing this effects in the form of increased student loan debt.

In some ways, this is a double whammy – fewer traditional-age students, and then there are fewer among them who can pay full price or even a significant percentage of the price. This has led to significant tuition discounting as a way to attract more students. This discounting is analogous to what happens in a product lifecycle when a product moves from market maturity to decline; what is used to get people to buy is reducing prices.

Lastly, there is increased dissatisfaction and distrust with higher ed institutions and/or higher ed as an industry. People, and especially parents and students, increasingly are questioning the value of a college degree, whereas, in the past, it was a given that a college degree was going to pay off.

The Changing Marketing Game

The higher ed “marketing game” has changed significantly in the past 15 years. Yes, there are definitely fewer high school students considered to be the traditional students (18-24) going to college, both from a numbers and a percentage of the total students, but what has increased are the numbers of what are called “post-traditional” students, those students who are 24-70 years old, who do not study full-time during the day and are not in residence. This number has increased significantly and is now 73-74 percent of all college students.

There are multiple reasons for this, but they boil down to three basic reasons:

They need a degree to be able to get a job;
They want a degree to get up higher up the ladder where they are working, or
They want more money in their current job.

Which brings us to the current challenge that institutions are facing.

There are significant marketing challenges that institutions must overcome given that the majority of today’s students are post-traditional. For example, when attracting traditional, 17-year-old students, you know how and where to reach them: they are in high school, they will be signing up for the PSAT and SAT, and you can buy their names and send them communication materials directly.

However, with post-traditionals, students can be anywhere and it's a marketing challenge to figure out how to reach them. This has given rise to a new industry online for recruiting students, but most institutions are using these so they aren’t as effective as they used to be. Fortunately, the cost of advertising, specifically digital advertising, is decreasing, and it can be used to target much more narrowly.

What Is Positioning and Branding, and Why Is It Critical for Higher Ed

Positioning and branding are two of those things that if you ask 100 people for their definition, you get 100 different answers.

We define positioning as the space that your institution or your brand takes up in the minds of the external audience. It is what you represent to people who are thinking about going to college, their parents, or any of the other audiences that you deal with.

Positioning answers the question:

what is the one thing that unique, different and better about us
in the eyes of our customer
vs. the competition in the higher ed marketplace that
has them either hiring our graduates or wanting to attend our institution.

Branding is the strategy behind trying to reinforce and/or change that positioning in people's minds. It is the act of creating an intentional strategy behind what we stand for, i.e., the words and phrases that we want people to use when they talk about us and think about us.

What makes that statement critical is the emphasis on the “the one thing people remember.”

Marketers would love to have people remember 10 or 15 things about a brand because we as marketers know all the great things about the brand. However, institutions are very lucky if you get people to remember one thing, and so you must be very deliberate and tough on yourself and the and the people who are working on the brand strategy to say, “folks, we’ve got one thing and we need to figure out what that one thing is.”

Take for example Nike and their “Just Do It” campaigns. That is the one thing that you remember about Nike. Oklahoma and football. Texas A&M and the Corps of Cadets.

What is the one thing that your “customers” remember about your institution? And how do you know what that is?

All Established Universities Have A Brand

One of the critical things that university presidents must remember is that they already have a brand because any institution that's been around for a while has a reputation in people’s minds. Your university stands for something already – you are not starting from scratch.

Being already established is actually more difficult than starting from scratch because if you want to change the way that people perceive your brand, you have to first undo what they currently think and then create new positioning in their minds. That's one thing.

Second, your brand is and must be foundational to the strategic planning process every institution should go through in every five, six, eight, 10 years, but far too many institutions view those things as completely separate, i.e., the planning process on one side of the house, and developing the marketing and branding strategies on the other. That is a mistake.

Your brand is the promise that you're making to the world, and your strategic plan has to be focused on those things that we need to do to improve our institution. They are inextricably related and wholly dependent on one another.

The way people view brand should be this: “What are we doing and what are we not doing to deliver on the brand promise that we are making to people.”

I think if every institution going forward had an execution plan for their strategic plan with part of that being how are you going to market your institution, it would be part of part and parcel of your planning process.

How to Change Your Brand

Established institutions already have a brand, and that can be difficult to change. Your first step is to conduct market research external to your institution. Brand perception is not about what your faculty think, or what your university president thinks. Brand perception is what people external to the university think you stand for – your prospective students, their parents, people who hire your graduates and support your institution.

Most people have the perception that market research can be very expensive and take a long time and it can, but it doesn’t have to. There are both complex and simple ways research can be done. For example, many institutions who already have a good understanding of their brand successfully do online focus groups with parents and students and guidance counselors and even their alumni which is cost effective and can gather good information. For those institutions who are less sure of their brand, we recommend more in-depth surveys and interviews / focus groups. Either approach can work – it depends on how much do you already understand about your institution brand right, how much are you are you trying to change it, and what you need to learn.

Many institutions rely on what appears to be a simple way to do this market research, i.e., asking student applicants three basic questions: (1) how did you hear about us, (2) what did you hear about us, and (3) what attracted you to us. Unfortunately, this doesn’t necessarily work, because people have a hard time answering those questions.

Most brands have been around for a long time, so when people are asked about how they first heard about the institution or what they heard about it, they don't give you an answer that you can take to the rely on. For example, if you were asked when did you first hear about Starbucks, you would give me an answer that may or may not be correct, but the problem is I don't have any statistical reliability when or how you actually heard about it.

Marketing experts are students of people, i.e., their behavior and how they respond to particular questions. For example, with Americans, you can ask them a question and it is their nature that they want to be helpful so they give you an answer, but it is not necessarily a reliable answer. Hence, you must ask probing questions.

Instead, we recommend having one-on-one conversations with people in which the researcher asks more probing questions that dive more deeply into their answers so as to get a solid understanding of what people believe and why they believe it.

Red Flags that Suggest Your Branding is Tired

It’s important that you that you understand what the people what people think about the brand and whether it needs to be sharpened, and one of the flags that higher ed marketing people can use is enrollment. For example, if enrollment is declining, that could be a sign that a brand could be tired or that your value proposition is off, i.e., people don’t understand why they should spend the money to attend your institution, they don't know what they're going to get from it in terms of the education they are receiving or the career outcomes they'll get.

Besides declining enrollment, another flag is lack of alignment. Institutions must have their strategies, structures, and processes all working together, and branding is one of your strategies. As part of the structures, institutions must ensure they have the right kind of people in enrollment, that they are well trained, and can take care of the students. All of those things have to be in alignment.

Branding is not the only thing that would cause enrollment decline, but it is certainly something to consider. President should ask themselves what are we doing around brand strategy? When is the last time we did market research? When was the last time we sharpened our brand’s language? What is our value proposition? Unfortunately, most academics don’t understand these basic questions, which is why many institutions are turning to the business community to find their leadership.

Ensuring consistent and well-targeted brand language is critical to driving enrollment, especially when we take into account the number of generations who are currently going back to school. With the predominance of the post-traditional student, language becomes more critical. Not only do you need to figure out how to market to them, you need to understand where to market to them and what attracts them to your institution. Thus, your marketing equation is much more complex than it is with traditional students (18-24 years old).

For example, post-traditional students have busy lives. They have jobs and families; they are looking not only at what is the value of your education at your offering in terms of what's going do for them but also the convenience factor – where your institution is located and can they get there easily on evenings or do their degree via online education.

There are three key things that presidents must be aware of when it comes to marketing and branding.

Do market research on a regular basis. Institutions must understand what the external market thinks about them. This is probably the most critical.
Integrate branding in the strategic planning process.
Ensure that your marketing materials are consistent across the institution to ensure the institution speaks in one voice. Is the look and language consistent or inconsistent? Is the tone we are sending consistent? Starbucks is a great example of this, but there are great examples of excellent branding in higher ed that include Harvard, Carnegie Mellon, MIT, and UC Berkeley.

You cannot be all things to all people – you must know what your one thing is. You’re competing for mindshare, and there are so many different messages out there, what is the one thing you want to be known for.

Branding doesn't have to be hard. It doesn't have to be laborious. It doesn't have to be difficult – it can be very simple and straightforward. There are a lot of really good models out there for how to do and how to do branding, just start and you'll be amazed at how much you learn if you start with good market research, you'll be amazed at how much you learn and where it can take you.

Bullet Points:

Higher ed institutions are grappling with declining enrollment. The old ways of recruiting students that institutions used the “go-go” years 15 years ago no longer work.
Over the past 10-15 years, three major changes occurred that changed higher education, and specifically higher ed enrollment.
- Student demographics have changed.
- The Great Recession impacted college affordability in multiple ways.
- There is increased dissatisfaction in higher ed, analogous to people saying “where’s the beef.”
Residential programs are not attracting the same number of students as before.
Competition is growing, putting the “hammer” in the hands of the prospect.
You have to market where the prospective students are. With 70+ percent of all students today post-traditional, new marketing strategies are critical for higher ed institutions.
Positioning answers the question:
- what is the one thing that unique, different and better about us
- in the eyes of our customer
- vs. the competition in the higher ed marketplace that
- has them either hiring our graduates or wanting to attend our institution.
Branding is the strategy behind trying to reinforce and/or change that positioning in people's minds.
All established universities have a brand.
Brand perception is external to the institution, not internal.
Do market research on a regular basis. Institutions must understand what the external market thinks about them. This is probably the most critical thing institutions can do to ensure their brand is fresh.
Brand research doesn’t have to be expensive.
Integrate branding in the strategic planning process.
Ensure that your marketing materials are consistent across the institution to ensure the institution speaks in one voice.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

https://thechangeleader.com

Guests Social Media Links:

Guest Twitter: @thechangeldr

Guest Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/in/deborahmaue/

https://www.linkedin.com/company/the-change-leader/about/

Your Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/

Twitter: @thechangeldr

Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Carol Aslanian is a market researcher who helps colleges build strategies and new programming to increase enrollment by focusing on post-traditional students, those students who used to be called “adult students.”

Carol began her career in higher education research in the 1980s at the College Board. Her first project in the post-traditional student world was called Youth and Direction for a Learning Society that got hard data to help colleges grow the population of older students coming back to school at two-year and four-year colleges by talking to employers about their needs.

The Current Higher Ed Marketplace

The demographics of the “typical” college student has changed in the last 30-40 years. According to the College Board, 70 percent of all undergraduate students are made up of what now is called post-traditional students – students who do not study full-time during the day and are not in-residence. The remaining 30 percent are traditional students, those who study full time and are in-residence.

Of this 70 percent, 19-20 percent of students study full-time online, and the other 50 percent are individuals who do blended programs, i.e., some classes on campus.

The reason we are seeing a surge in post-traditional students, besides the demographics of the high school population being stagnant or decreasing in many areas throughout the United States, is that we now have a large number of students who began their degree but didn't finish. These students had less than two years of credit and dropped out, disenchanted with the college experience and/or the direction that they were going, and went into the workforce. They are now coming back to college 5-10 years later, knowing the career that they want and are focusing on that.

There are three primary reasons why post-traditionals come back to school. First, they need a job; second, they want more money; and third, they want a promotion; all of which need a college degree.

This is a marked change from 20 years ago, where the majority of students headed off to college and finished in four years. Now, those that go to college and finish in four-years make up less than 25% of the market.

The Evolution of The Current College and Distance / Online Education

In the 1980s and 1990s, many colleges and universities had special units called continuing ed, extension, adult and professional development, etc. These units specialized in educating working adults – the 25-year old population which worked full time during the week – by offering evening or weekend courses to enable them to start and/or complete their degrees. Although adult students were not the primary focus of universities, so long as these units brought in revenue, the institution was pleased as the revenue supported other areas.

Online education got its major start in the 1980s driven in large part by the University of Phoenix in 1989 and the advent of Blackboard in the late 1990s. Fast forward to 2010, higher ed adopted the concept that age no longer predicted the way people learn, which began tearing down the segregation of adult / post-traditional students from the traditional student.

Online education has grown astronomically over the past 20 years, to where 1 out of 5 undergraduates in this country study fully online. The most recent statistics from Eduventures say that in 2016, 16-17 percent of all undergraduate students are fully online, and that percentage increased to 19-20 percent in 2017. This is despite the for-profit sector losing market share over the past few years, primarily because:

many institutions in the public and the private sectors are entering the online marketplace;
post-traditional students prefer to learn with an institution located within 100 miles of where they live; and
the reputation of for-profit education has tanked.

One example of this is Central Michigan University. Central Michigan used to have “campuses” on the military bases as a convenience for their adult military students, but they now have a huge online presence which makes sense for the military adult student because of deployments.

What Post-Traditional Students Want

Post-traditional students’ thoughts around education differ from those of traditional 18-24-year-old students. They want programs that are

Convenient for them and fit into their lifestyle and their work hours. Post-traditionals typically choose institutions within 100 miles of where they live, and the majority within 40 miles. They do not want to give away their weekends as previous adult students did.
Time to completion is important. They want to finish their degree fast, three years or less, and are willing to forgo summers off or long breaks between terms.
Structure and compressed courses work well. Terms of 6-8 weeks are preferred, as are online and blended programs / courses.

According to the Babson Research Group, 54 percent of all students take blended programs. This makes perfect sense when viewed through the lens of research from Aslanian Market Research. These students typically say, “I'll get in there once a week, but please don't make me come in three times a week.”

Building Programs for the Post-Traditional Market

Market research is critical for understanding the potential for going after post-traditional students, as well as why current programs are not attracting the numbers that universities want or need.

Market research must answer five key questions:

How big is the market / how many post-traditional students are there in the local geographic area?
What do these students want in terms of programs?
How do they want these programs, i.e., what format and schedule?
What marketing channels must be used to attract them?
Who is your competition and how do you differentiate yourself?

Aslanian Market Research does its market analysis of the student population within a 100-150 mile radius of the institution, and talks with both prospective and current post-traditional students. They feel it is critical that you work on the basis of demand – those who have done it instead of those who want to do it. You must also study the competition, what previous research conducted by extension sites / divisions of continuing education says, and talk to the faculty and administration about their viewpoint. All these things are required to come up with a set of recommendations of how a college can attract the post-traditional population to the campus.

The majority of institutions do not understand marketing sufficiently. Consequently, they don’t spend what it takes to enroll this population. For example, most institutions give the traditional student incredible discounts on tuition – in some cases up to 50 percent – but are not giving the post-traditional student the same levels of discounts. Additionally, they are not investing in marketing to this demographic. Why not divert some of the money to the population that makes up 70-75 percent of the pool of eligible students?

Transitioning the Institution and Resistance to Change

Transitioning an institution for recruiting and educating post-traditional students requires change management, and change is not easy for most universities. A recent example of this had a university president on board with the proposed changes, but the provost was concerned because s/he knew that s/he must deal with academics to get them to change – which isn’t the easiest thing in the world.

The key to making this argument is having the data that supports the changes and answers the questions as to what the market is demanding, but equally important is having leadership that builds trust and a transparent process that includes collaboration. “People support what they help create."

Change depends mostly on the trust that employees have in their leadership.

There are four types of people you must deal with in change: early adapters who love change, the “wait-and-see” crowd, cynics who will never change (and will not give you a reason why), and skeptics. In the change process, skeptics are your best friend because they will tell you when something is not going to work and give you reasons why.

There are many pros and cons for faculty when it comes to online teaching. One professor from Florida Atlantic University stated that he liked online because there was more of an opportunity to have one-on-one time with students vs. being in a huge lecture room, but that teaching online was more time-consuming – students will reach out at 11 PM with a question about an assignment.

Competition for the Post-Traditional Student

The competition also can play a role in driving distance education. For example, other than Penn, none of the Ivy League schools are implementing distance education, but when Harvard and others begin looking at what Penn is doing, they may move in this direction. One way in which they may do this is by implementing distance certificate programs. In some ways, their certificate programs already cater to an international audience, and this is one way that they could move toward implementing distance education.

New Trends in Higher Education

One of the hot trends in the education marketplace is badges. Currently, the degree market makes up about 60 percent of students, the certificate market between 18-20 percent, and the remaining 20 percent take individual courses.

Although there has been talk about badges and competency-based programs for a long time, according to current market research, there is not a lot of call for badges and competency-based programs yet. The hype around badges is similar to what we saw a few years back around MOOCs.

Competency-based education may be different. For CBE to become more mainstream, it will require a change of perspective from the Department of Education. To wit, Western Governors is fighting massive fines from the Ed Dept because someone there said what they are doing was tantamount to a correspondence course vs. an actual academic institution. That has huge implications for CBE, and the jury is out on this one.

What the future will hold is not clear, but for now, badges and CBE are farther and fewer between and do not surface to any degree noticeable in current research.

Three Keys for University Presidents

Three key things university presidents must consider when establishing programs, growing, etc. over the next five years when it comes to the post-traditional population:

Pay more attention to and refocus your outreach and marketing (including marketing budget) toward the post-traditional student. Most institutions are placing their focus on and making their largest investment in the traditional enrollment of 18-year-olds coming directly from high school, whereas 70+ percent of the students are post-traditionals. Marketing dollars would be better spent on those post-traditional students who live within 100 miles of the institution. There are multiple advantages to this, including you can market more efficiently, and more quickly determine who is your competition.Additionally, post-traditionals generally are not asking for scholarships and grants.
Consider adding blended and online programs instead of new traditional programs – this is where the market is heading and people want, especially if most of your students come from with 100 miles. For those students, the blended structure works very nicely. Courses should be 6 to 8 weeks in length and run continuously throughout the year so students can accelerate their learning and finish as quickly as possible.
Post-traditional students are very cost conscious – tuition and fees are important to them. However, when those students who study at private institutions are asked the question “did you take the least expensive program,” 60% say no, which tells us that they also want convenience, acceleration, reputation, and content.

Aslanian Market Research has three new research reports that can be downloaded from their website dealing with the post-traditional undergraduate, graduate, and online markets. Their website is www.educationdynamics.com.

The Crystal Ball

Here’s what we expect over the next 5 to 10 years.

The overseas market is beginning to grow. The international market has been slow to catch on in regards to online learning, but it is beginning show little glimpses of interest as institutions begin to cater to minority populations, first-generation students, etc. The online and the blended concept will begin to work more internationally than it has in the past.
The resurrection of colleges doing business with businesses will grow. With online and blended programs that colleges and universities can tailor to companies, they can regain the business partnership market whereby they provide education training needs for nearby businesses, something that waned in the last 15-20 years. Two good examples of this are Amazon and Starbucks.
Mergers and acquisitions have started, e.g., National University, a nonprofit, acquiring Northcentral University, a for-profit institution; Purdue University and Kaplan; and Strayer acquiring Capella University. This is a normal market consolidation as online education grows, and we will see more of them.

Bullet Points

The demographics of the “typical” college student has changed in the last 30-40 years. According to the College Board, 70 percent of all undergraduate students are made up of what now is called post-traditional students – students who do not study full-time during the day and are not in-residence. The remaining 30 percent are traditional students, those who study full time and are in-residence.
Post-traditional students’ thoughts around education are different than those of the traditional 18-24-year-old student. They want programs that are
- Convenient for them and fit into their lifestyle and their work hours.
- Within 100 miles of where they live, and the majority within 40 miles. They do not want to give away their weekends as previous adult students did.
- Time to completion is important. They want to finish their degree fast, three years or less, and are willing to forgo having summers off or long breaks between terms.
- Structure and compressed courses work well for this population. Terms of 6-8 weeks are preferred, as is online and blended programs / courses.
Market research is critical for determining both the potential for going after post-traditional students, as well as understanding why current programs are not attracting the numbers that universities want or need.It must answer five questions:
- How big is the market / how many post-traditional students are there in the local geographic area?
- What do these students want in terms of programs?
- How do they want these programs, i.e., what format and schedule?
- What marketing channels must be used to attract them?
- Who is your competition and how do you differentiate yourself?
The majority of institutions do not understand marketing sufficiently. Consequently, they don’t spend what it takes to enroll this population.
Transitioning an institution to recruiting and educating post-traditional students requires change management, and change is not easy for most universities. The key to making this argument is having the data that supports the changes and answers the questions as to what the market is demanding, and faculty who trust leadership.
People support what they help create.
Three key things to consider wrt the post-traditional population:
- Pay more attention to and refocus your outreach and marketing (including marketing budget) toward the post-traditional student.
- Consider adding blended and online programs instead of new traditional programs.
- Post-traditional students are very cost conscious – tuition and fees are important to them, but they also want convenience, acceleration, reputation, and content.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Case Studies: https://www.educationdynamics.com/case-studies

Market Research: https://www.educationdynamics.com/e-books

Guests Social Media Links:

Education Dynamics website: https://www.educationdynamics.com/

Twitter:https://twitter.com/EdDynamics

Linkedin: https://www.linkedin.com/company/educationdynamics/

Drumm's Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/

Twitter: @thechangeldr

Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Dr. Dewey Clark is a very special university president. Unlike most of his contemporaries, his undergraduate degree is from the school he is now leading, and following graduation, was invited to work on staff in admissions which he did for nine years before going off for a 24-year career in business. This experience has conditioned his thinking about higher ed. He understands that a university or college must be run like a business, and he brings that mentality and work ethic to his job.

He also understands that college should be both an education and an experience and that the culture of any institution starts with the top. He takes this very seriously – interviewing EVERY person who is hired at North Carolina Wesleyan. Thus, he ensures all new people see and buy into his vision, one that a college is an amazing place where young people can go and develop in the way that he did.

Dr. Clark has been in the president role for 4 ½ years now and has put his imprimatur on the college. When he took over, enrollment was at 575, and it is more than doubled to over 1100. He did this by applying business principles to the college.

They first examined their market and positioning. Their previous approach was scattergun, attempting to recruit up and down the East Coast, but after doing market research, they found the majority of their alumni and current students were from Eastern North Carolina and Southeast Virginia – 75 percent – and the remaining 25 percent from 40 different foreign countries. They contracted their market area to Eastern North Carolina and Southeast Virginia, and it started paying immediate dividends.

Second, they examined their messaging and found their approach wasn’t effective, especially from a marketing dollars perspective. They swapped their marketing foci to doing radio and billboards in their target areas, which also paid dividends.

They also examined their enrollment processes to ensure that each potential student received the personal touch. This includes including Skype and telephone calls and emails, etc., and for the campus visit, they roll out the red carpet – everything is choreographed down to the littlest detail such as who they eat lunch with.

They knew that recruiting has changed in the past 35 years, from handwriting letters to prospective students with a lot of phone calls, to the 21st-century social media of Facebook and Instagram, but the personal touch is still important. Today’s students are technology driven, so you have to meet them where they are. Email is almost a thing of the past, except that you have to be aware that you are also recruiting the parents – the decision to attend is going to be made on the way home from the campus visit, and they need to feel good about the place their daughters and sons might be going.

In some ways, there are two or three different messages that need to go out – one to the students, one to the parents, and one to the business community. For example, students generally are not concerned about things like security, but their parents certainly are. Your business community, those who will be hiring your graduates, want to know that your curriculum is up to date and it is meeting their needs.

One of the areas of foci for the college is enhancing its career services area. NC Wesleyan starts helping students think about their career from the day they step foot on campus, e.g., what does your resume look like, are you prepared to do an interview, do you understand what a cover letter is or etiquette dinners, job fairs, etc. It has made a big difference as companies who are hiring their graduates are starting to take notice.

One of the things that make NC Wesleyan special is their freshman orientation, which they call Rock the Mount. They include three things that are not typical to a traditional orientation.

First, they bring in outside speakers to motivate the new students, including a graduate from 30 years ago who talks about the college from their perspective and how it prepared them for the world.
Second, the new freshmen line up and go through a tunnel where Dr. Clark shakes their hand with current students cheering them on. This makes it a very exciting time for them.
Lastly, they invite current students and vendors from the town to get students connected to their fellow students and community – this year they had well over 100 organizations there, including student organizations who participated. For many, this is their first time away from home, and NC Wesleyan helps them find their “new family” to help them through the process.

One of Dr. Clark’s biggest challenges was getting the town to embrace the college, and how he is done it through programs such as Rock the Mount has been ingenious. Through things like that, he has added over $110 million to the economy of the local town.

Dr. Clark leveraged his deep business background to change NC Wesleyan’s culture. Prior to coming back to Wesleyan, he worked at MBM, a food distribution company that grew from $100 million in annual revenues when he first started to a $7 billion company that was bought by Warren Buffett in 2012. His role was to put together the organization’s strategic plans and budgets, and he leveraged these skills to be successful in the presidency.

Dr. Clark is very numbers driven, very analytical, and his leadership style reflects this. This is not exclusive of people – Wesleyan is a high touch place – but he wants his key managers to be focused on numbers and try to improve them. For example, he will send out a picture of something that shows an improvement with a message “good quality” to celebrate the good things that they have done. Conversely, if there’s something that needs to be improved, he will write “bad quality” with the picture. He wants everyone to think that when they leave campus on a daily basis, they think “it is better than when we came here this morning.”

He believes strongly that if everybody has that mindset, they will become a very special place. And it is.

In the most recent US News and World Report that had regional rankings, North Carolina Wesleyan was ranked 37 in the Southeast. Three years ago they were 63.

There are three secrets to making this work.

First, the role of planning and the budgeting;
Second, creating a culture of continuous improvement
Lastly, Ensuring your hiring practices are in line with your culture.

You have to have a group of “game changers,” people who will go that extra mile to make sure that the college and everything it is working right.

Creating a sustainable institution is a challenge. You can’t cut your way to sustainability – you have to make money, because at the end of the day if you don’t make money you’re out of business.

You must quantify all the big decisions that you make, whether it is a new major or program or sport, and then you have to hold yourself accountable to make sure that you're hitting those targets. There frequently is a “growth curve” in introducing new programs, and there must be a path for them to get to a point where they are profitable. However, there are some things that will never be profitable, so you must look at the whole basket of what you're doing and determine if there is a value added to keep them.

This concept of sustainability is critical. For example, NC Wesleyan’s target from day one has been 100 new students a year and he’s averaged about 95 over the last three years. He understands that growth costs money, but it is easier to grow to become sustainable than to stay flat or decline.

You try to qualify as many things as can, but it's hard to quantify everything. For example, you can attempt to quantify culture through retention which isn’t the best metric (there may not be one), but you know it’s the right thing to do and so you do it. Another example is career services – providing these services to students is the right thing to do, but it is difficult to quantify.

The first hundred days of the president's tenure is critical – in some ways, new presidents feel like they are drinking water out of a fire hose and are torn in multiple directions. Some of the key things that new presidents must do include:

Carve out time for yourself and your family and who you are, simple things like reading a book or taking time for vacations or getting a good night sleep. You cannot do this job with the sprinter’s mentality – you must look at this as a marathon.
Celebrate successes. NC Wesleyan had lots of successes early on and sometimes they stopped celebrate and sometimes he pushed everybody to the next level when they should have stopped and celebrated. Celebrate every new milestone.
Have a list of what you want to improve and make it time bound. Every year at graduation, he tells his team to come up with a list of 100 things that they want to improve before the students come back in the fall, and they publish it and get it down.
Keep your list at 100 things, and include in that list what you doing for yourself personally, what you doing for yourself professionally, what you doing for the college.
Management by walking about still works, but know there is a fine line between micromanaging and not showing interest at all. People need to feel that you care about them.

Bullet Points: Drill down on key points of the interview:

College should be both an education and an experience
The culture of any institution starts with the top.
If you want to grow, you should start by examining your positioning and branding. Where are your markets? Where do your students come from? Who hires them? Market research is the key.
Market messaging must be current and go to where your prospective students are.
Students STILL want the personal touch in recruiting.
Higher ed has more than one customer. You must market to parents and businesses also.
Quantify as much as you can to get continuous improvement. There are some things that are difficult to quantify but do your best. You get what you measure.
Planning and budgeting are critical. A plan without a budget is a pipe dream.
Ensure your student orientation is special. This is the first time many of your students have been away from home, and finding their “new family” is critical for them.
Have game changers in every department – people who go the extra mile to make the college special.
You cannot cut your way to sustainability – you have to grow.
As a new president, ensure you carve time out for yourself and your family. It’s a marathon, not a sprint.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Dr. Dewey Clark

North Carolina Wesleyan College

Rock the Mount

The Change Leader

Guests Social Media Links:

North Carolina Wesleyan Twitter: https://twitter.com/ncwesleyan

Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/NorthCarolinaWesleyanCollege

YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/NCWesleyanCollege

Your Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/

Twitter: @thechangeldr

Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Jeri Prochaska and Tom Netting of CSPEN, the Central States Private Education Network, represent higher ed institutions nationwide to public policymakers in Washington and throughout the nation. CSPEN is focused on making sure that the education industry has all the information that’s coming out of Washington. They believe communication is the key, thus allowing the industry to advocate for itself.

Here’s their latest from what is going on in Washington.

Legislative Gridlock Over the HEA Results in Regulatory Guidance. In the absence of action from both houses of Congress, we are seeing the Trump administration pushing through political agendas through as regulation in lieu of statutory guidance, and they have been massive. This is no more evident than in the reauthorization of the Higher Education Act.

Under the law in 1955 reauthorization of the Higher Education Act is supposed to be reauthorized process to bring it up to current day every 5-6 years, but this latest renewal did not get as far as it should have. The House completed mark up but did not bring a bill to the floor, and the Senate didn’t get that far despite having multiple hearings. Given the legislative stalemate and partisanship in Congress, the HEA is not expected to come to a vote until 2019 or 2020.

Negotiated Rulemaking. Negotiated rulemaking is the process by which the Department has individuals from higher education and interested communities come together to discuss proposed changes to regulations. The negotiated rulemaking process for the borrower defense to repayment regulations, gainful employment regulations, and others areas have been going on, but the proposed rules have not yet come out.

The next round of negotiated rulemaking will take place in January – March 2019, focusing on “accreditation and innovation,” with subgroups focusing on online education, definition of credit hour, direct assessment, competency-based learning, and how all of those are delivered and how federal financial aid might be utilized in the delivery of all those different modalities. That process will conclude with the development of regulations that are proposed, probably mid-summer 2019 and published in final form by November 2019 with them going into effect July 1, 2020. To find out more, go to the Department of Education website. The deadline for application to participate is Nov 15.

Borrower Defense to Repaying (BDR). Many of the regulations including the borrower defense to repaying regulations and gainful employment, that were put in place by the Obama administration are being contemplated for revision or repeal by the Trump administration.

In instituting the borrower defense to repaying, the Obama administration took the fundamental premise that if a student was defrauded because of a school employing illegal or deceptive practices that encouraged them to take out student loans to attend that school, their student loan should be forgiven. The Trump administration challenged this, but the courts have ordered the administration to continue with this process until new regulations are put in place. Because of the timeframe, this will not happen until mid-2020.

Of the 32,601 applications received by the end of June, only 96 borrowers have actually had their debt canceled. Ninety-nine percent of the applications that have been processed were denied.

Two decisions were recently handed down by the courts along these lines. The first stated that student who didn't file an application is not eligible for relief, that only those who followed through on the opportunities afforded them by the Department can seek relief. Over 100,000 have done so.

The second decision stated that regulatory stays and a repeal of the delay in the implementation of those regulations the Trump administration has put into place are no longer valid – it was deemed to be arbitrary and capricious – the result is that those regulations that were scheduled to take effect in 2016 actually went into effect on October 12.

What we’re seeing is that the needed guidance in this transitional period is lacking, and the new administration needs to tell everyone how the regulations should be implemented while developing the new regulations that set asunder the interim guidance.

Gainful Employment. Similar to the borrower defense to repayment and final rules that we had hoped would be published in final form by November 1, the BDR court cases indicated that the Department would not meet their November 1 deadline for either borrower defense or gainful employment. That means that regulations that have been in effect and gone through two iterations of review under the Obama administration (2009 and 2012/14), are in place and will remain so while new regulatory proposals that would eliminate the loss of eligibility under certain criteria will be potentially repealed. Those regulations will not go into effect until July 2020.

There is some belief that under statutory authority and regulatory capability that the Secretary of Education might provide an opportunity for early implementation of some of the changes under the gainful employment rule, but we must wait and see what the Department publishes in their final regs which are likely to come out before the end of the year. Additionally, it is unknown whether schools will have the opportunity for early implementation and what that timeline might be as opposed to the normal implementation of July 2020.

Credit Hour. The higher education community has been waiting for their turn in line with the Department to focus on issues related to changes made by the Obama administration on how to calculate the number of hours of outside preparatory time and other facets of what goes in the determination of a credit hour. This has a significant impact on federal financial aid and online education. This will be taken up in the next round of negotiated rulemaking.

Bullet Points: Drill down on key points of the interview:

Expect the Higher Education Act to be renewed in 2019 or 2020
The courts are stepping in on the Borrower Defense To Repayment in multiple ways, blocking changes until 2020.
Negotiated rulemaking is proceeding slowly in the cases of BDR and Gainful Employment. Expect guidance to come out by the end of Nov 2018.
A new round of negotiated rulemaking will begin in Jan 2019, focusing on accreditation and innovation, with subcommittees on online education, a definition of credit hour, direct assessment, competency-based learning, and how all of those are delivered and how federal financial aid might be utilized in the delivery of all those different modalities.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

CSPEN

Hill Day

Change Management

Negotiated Rulemaking

Guests Social Media Links:

Jeri Prochaska LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/in/jeri-prochaska-537a9512/

Tom Netting LinkedIn – https://www.linkedin.com/in/tom-netting-9214755/

CSPEN LinkedIn - https://www.linkedin.com/groups/6954716/

Jeri Prochaska Twitter - @jeriprochaska

Tom Netting Twitter - @t_netting

Your Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/

Twitter: @thechangeldr

Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Dr. Scott Cowen is the personification of a proven crisis leader. When Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans in 2005, Scott was just six years into his tenure of 16 years at Tulane. Katrina’s devastation was massive – over $650 million in damages to the University alone. There was no playbook for what needed to happen – up to this point, no university had encountered such devastation – and the decisions that need to be made were made at the moment as all critical crisis management is done.

Scott made the decision to stay on campus and ride out the storm. In the aftermath, there were no telecommunications, no phones, no TVs – all you knew was what you could see in the local area. And it was bad. He was eventually evacuated via helicopter from on the Mississippi River, six days following the storm.

He didn’t realize the breadth of the destruction until he arrived in Houston. That evening, after seeing the destruction on television, his reaction was, “I don’t know what I can do. There is no one that I can call to give me guidance, there is no book I can take out of the library, there is no consultant that I can hire. I don’t know how I’m going to do it.”

The University was shuttered for the entire fall term and didn’t reopen until spring. But it came back stronger than it ever was.

Scott’s first actions were making a list of everything that needed to be done to rebuild the institution, minute by minute, day by day. Once they got the leadership team located in Houston, they operated the university out of a hotel suite.

The leadership that he learned while in the Army as an infantry officer was critical. It was not shared governance, it was command-and-control. That didn’t mean that he didn’t consult others – he had a team of people around him who he consulted and worked with, including faculty, but there wasn’t the time to do the usual broad consultation of stakeholder groups required under normal situations – things had to be done immediately and quickly move to the next thing.

Having the right people on the team was critical – people who could move quickly and make choices and decisions in the heat of the moment. There was (and always will always be) second-guessing, especially in the press, but decisions regardless of the challenges must be made based on the best information at the time and executed upon.

Scott stated that in a crisis, you’re doing two things simultaneously. First, you’re trying to survive, and second, recovering which requires transformation. Somewhere in there, you have to do put together a transformation plan to take you to that next level, and that takes a team. Scott had a group of five former presidents that advised him on the transformation plan and its implementation.

In a transformation, start with defining the objectives and what success looks like. For Tulane, it was three things: being financially viable; doing the things to maintain the quality, stature, and reputation of the institution; and discontinuing those things that don’t contribute to being an outstanding institution.

Scott stated that it wasn’t his doctoral degree or academic education that prepared Scott to be a leader, but the experiences in the military and that of an athlete that gave him the drive and skill set to be successful. The lessons he gained in the military, stayed with him his entire life.

There are three key things to leading in a crisis. The first of these is leadership, and especially the ability to make a decision without having all the facts (which is impossible) but relying on experience. The second is having an advisory team who can help you talk through the decisions that need to be made. The last of these is having a plan to execute on.

It is critical for a leader to understand what the situation, the reality of what is going on in a crisis. Having good information is critical, because, without good information, all the decisions that you make will be wrong.

In a crisis, hope is never a good strategy.

Transformation is all about rebuilding and making something better, and that is what Scott and his team set out to do. Transformation should always have as a component reimaging, creating something that is better, a reinvention. At a time of crisis, you have the opportunity to rethink the future. This can be done with the right leadership.

Your best leaders (1) understand reality; (2) are resilient / have high emotional intelligence and interpersonal skills that allow them to make principled decisions based on the facts at hand; and (3) are adaptable and can react to various conditions.

One of the key things that universities fail to do is develop good leaders. It’s not in the majority of curricula, nor is leadership development required throughout an institution. The reasons given for this are that “leaders are born,” or that leadership is “too squishy” to be in curricula. We know good leadership when we see it, and we know bad leadership even more quickly, and the consequences are severe.

Scott stated that the inclusion of a public service requirement into all undergraduate curricula was the most transformative action that he took coming out of Katrina, and it connected them more closely with community, but more importantly, it changed the student demographics of those came here – many students stated they wanted to go to Tulane because they wanted to be part of the greatest recovery that ever happened in the history of the United States. This had a very positive effect on the type of student that they got at Tulane, and improved recruitment, retention, and graduation rates.

(Outside of the military academies, Tulane is the only research university in the United States that integrates a public service requirement into its core curricula.)

The lessons of service that he gained in the military, stayed with him his entire life.

Three takeaways from his book Winnebagos on Wednesdays. First, there is a lot of innovation going on in higher Ed right now. It’s not really known because it’s going on at smaller colleges that are not “name brands,” but it’s happening, and it’s beginning to spread. Second, despite all the criticism of higher ed right now, the return on investment is as high today as it was years ago. Lastly, we need to rethink how we can increase social mobility in higher ed.

Key takeaways from the interview:

There is an opportunity to make things better coming out the other side of a crisis.
Three keys to leading in a crisis: (1) the ability to make a decision; (2) having a team who can talk through the decisions that need to be made; and (3) a plan to execute on.
Start with defining the objectives and what success looks like.
Ensure planning is meticulous and comprehensive. There are so many things that have to be done, and without planning, you miss critical things
Make lists of the various tasks you need to accomplish and update them as frequently as needed. This is your “project plan,” your guide to what has to be done.
Understand the reality of the situation. Having good information is critical, because, without good information, all the decisions that you make will be wrong.
Hope should never be a change strategy.
Crisis leadership is command-and-control, not shared governance. There isn’t the time to debate the course of action.
You never have all the information and you can’t wait for it. Make your decision as best you can and move on to the next one.
There will always be critics, but you have to do what you think is the right thing.
The inclusion of a service component in curricula can change student demographics for the better and can have a positive effect on recruitment, retention, and graduation rates.
Shared governance does not mean shared decision-making. Shared governance is advisory, but the buck stops with the president and the board of an institution.
There is a lot of innovation going on in higher ed right now – it’s not really known because it’s going on at smaller colleges that are not “name brands.”
Despite all the criticism of higher ed right now, the return on investment is as high today as it was years ago.
We need to rethink how we can increase social mobility in higher ed.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

Scott Cowen led Tulane through the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Now he has ideas on how to fix higher education.

Winnebagos on Wednesdays: How Visionary Vision Can Transform Higher Education

Shared Governance Does Not Mean Shared Decision Making

Good to Great

Scott Cowen: http://www.scottcowen.com/

Guests Social Media Links:

https://twitter.com/TulaneScott

Your Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/

Twitter: @thechangeldr

Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

The CFO of a higher ed institution is a strategic leadership position that requires a mixture of talents. Not only must they have a strong financial background, but they must also be able to look across the spectrum of the operations at an institution, and sometimes that includes security and financial aid. The role requires looking at an institution from a 30,000 foot perspective vs. a day-to-day task position which is how a controller should be looking at an organization, e.g., accounts balanced, etc.

One of the reasons that it is critical to have a CFO who can look at long-term impacts of finances, is that of deferred maintenance which currently has a $2 trillion price tag in higher ed. One of the great things that Columbia is doing under Hartman is upgrading plant equipment. This is where a good understanding of numbers and projecting in the future is critical – Columbia has come up with a creative way to trim down its $10 million deferred maintenance bill by swapping out all its plant equipment. Through the savings in utility costs plus the rebates which they have gotten, they have been able to replace their old equipment and the savings have paid for the new physical plant. Also, they have a written guarantee from their contractor that the savings realized from replacing their old equipment would pay for the new equipment.

Many institutions nowadays are including maintenance in the fundraising/development monies raised. Columbia is in the middle of a fundraising drive for $10 million for a new building, and in a major gift from one of their board members, they have included 15 years of maintenance costs for the building.

Over 70% of higher ed CFOs are reporting they have less faith in the sustainability of institutions, and institutions need to rethink how they’re doing things. An example of this is that academics are not changing, because they are not preparing their graduates to step into the job market.

One area of concern for faith-based institutions is the ability for their students to get federal financial aid. Given the current political challenges coming out of Washington, there is no telling what the new Higher Education Act will look like, which puts into question the ability of students to obtain federal financial aid to attend college at faith-based institutions. Some institutions are moving forward on their own with innovative solutions, e.g., Grove City College and Hillsdale College, but others need to follow suit.

Higher ed shared governance has morphed into something different than it was intended to be, i.e., many faculties believe that they should have a say in how a college is run. The intent of shared governance was that faculty were the experts in curriculum and research. However, the courses that they are developing do not meet the needs of the businesses who are hiring graduates, and so they should take input from other resources to ensure that graduates have the skills that are needed in today’s workplace.

Key Points:

Understand the difference between a CFO and a controller. Your CFO should have a strategic 30,000-foot level perspective and a strong operations background on top of financial acumen.
Look at creative ways to upgrade your plant equipment. There are companies out there who will give you a guarantee that the cost savings realized through replacing your equipment will pay for upgrading the equipment.
Include deferred maintenance costs in the gifts that donors give to your institution.
Faith-based (and all) institutions should aggressively pursue new avenues for assisting students to finance their education. There are a couple of institutions out there who are doing a great job of this, e.g., Grove City College and Hillsdale College.
Shared governance has gone too far in that faculty believe they should have a say in everything. When it comes to curriculum, they are the experts, but as far as how to run an institution, no.
Institutions must rethink how they are delivering education and creating an environment for learning. Graduates are coming out of University unprepared for their first jobs, and faculty should be consulting with businesses to ensure that the curricula they design meet future employers’ needs.

Links to Articles, Apps, or websites mentioned during the interview:

http://www.ciu.edu

http://www.gcc.edu/

https://www.hillsdale.edu/

Guests Social Media Links:

Rob Hartman’s blog: http://rdhartman.blogspot.com/

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/rob-hartman-11682313/

Twitter: https://twitter.com/robertdhartman

Your Social Media Links:

LinkedIn: https://www.linkedin.com/in/drdrumm/

Twitter: https://twitter.com/thechangeldr

Email: podcast@changinghighered.com

View Details

Everyone wants more revenues for their institutions, but no one wants to pay any more than their "fair share" in taxes. That’s where Dave Moja comes in.

Dave is a partner and Professional Practice Leader for Tax at the accounting firm Capin Crouse. His areas of expertise are tax and accounting; financial and UBIT consulting; and higher education metrics, reporting, and development of alternative revenue sources.

In this podcast, Dave talks with us about the latest coming out of DC wrt higher ed taxes and UBIT, as well as how to explore and go after what they call "revenue enhancement opportunities" - those alternative sources of revenues that institutions should pursue. It is through these new revenue sources that many institutions are using to make up the difference between tuition and the necessary operating expenses and build sustainability in higher ed institutions. He also touches on how to build stakeholder attunement to reduce and even eliminate resistance to change.

Changing Higher Ed: Recent Episodes

Dr. Drumm McNaughton