The sky is always falling somewhere, and right now it’s crashing down on the world of admissions. At least that’s how some of the field’s long-term observers describe the impact of looming demographic changes on college enrollments.
In short, the number of high-school graduates is expected to decline gradually until 2015, when the growing Hispanic and Asian populations will start pushing it to new highs, according to estimates from the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education. Although this is not news to anyone in admissions, the implications of this shift continue to spark discussion–and worry–among those who recruit and evaluate college applicants.
A new white paper, “The End of Higher Education Enrollment as We Know It,” offers a glimpse of future enrollment challenges. It was written by Greg Perfetto, vice president for research and development at Admissions Lab (formerly 422 Group), a higher-education consulting firm. Mr. Perfetto, a former associate provost for institutional research at Vanderbilt University, writes that the numbers of affluent, “second generation” high-school graduates will very likely decline in most parts of the country: “The well-prepared, affluent college student that has helped fuel the expansion of higher education over the past 20 years will not disappear but will not spur additional growth either.”
As a result, Mr. Perfetto predicts that even colleges in states with expected enrollment increases will face new challenges; that tomorrow’s students will be more “employment oriented” than before; and that near-term financial considerations (as opposed to the perceived long-term value of an education) will probably shape colleges choices more than they do today.
What does this mean for recruitment? For one thing, the traditional “funnel” model will change, if it hasn’t already. Filling that funnel with an ever-larger number of prospects, and then bombarding them with communications, will not work as well as it did in the past, Mr. Perfetto concludes: “The future college prospect … will have a very different orientation toward technology, information, and, most of all, creditability.”
In case you missed it the first time around, I recommend reading my colleague Elyse Ashburn’s excellent overview of how admissions offices are bracing for demographic changes.
10 Responses to The End of Admissions as We Know It?
jarnold - July 23, 2010 at 4:57 pm
Eric’s comment that “the sky is always falling somewhere” seems particularly relevant here since both the new white paper and previous Chronicle article that are referenced point to an impending “perfect storm” for college admission offices. This storm is, of course, being fueled by the combination of dramatic demographic change, a stagnant economy, and significant reductions in enrollment budgets across the country. Hopefully, colleges have retained what was learned during a similar crisis in the late 1980′s, namely that less expensive, more accessible programming focused on short-term benefits (less-debt, more earnings) will carry them through. This approach has spurred the growth of community colleges across the nation and positioned them as viable competitors across a range of higher ed market segments. I wonder if the same can be said of many four-year institutions, even after controlling for selectivity and mission…
joshtabin - July 23, 2010 at 5:29 pm
This points to how important a clear business model focused on this changing demographic will be for an institution in order to compete in this new market dynamic. Look at a school like Miami Dade College and their ability enroll more Hispanic students and the second-most black students than any college or university in the United States; their ability to accomplish that is not just a factor of their geography but rather something infused into the school’s culture from the college president down.It will be interesting to follow how some of the more stalwart institutions adapt to the coming landscape.
arthist030 - July 28, 2010 at 10:26 am
They need to make Freeman Hrabowski the Secretary of Higher Education, because without drastic measures, current levels of (under)achievement by growing numbers of black and Hispanic students spell disaster.
arrive2__net - July 29, 2010 at 3:14 pm
In many colleges a large percentage of students who start drop out before they get their degree. If more students can be induced to finish their degree, they could make up for some of the losses in population size. Making more effort to understand the reasons for dropping out, and reaching out to these students could help the college keep their student population up. Bernard SchusterArrive2.net
der_gadfly - August 6, 2010 at 10:16 am
Many of the elite schools will continue to see high numbers of applications, but they fail to realize that High School Guidance Counselors are telling their juniors and seniors to apply to 10 and even 12 schools. Back in the day, I recall applying to only 3 schools. My own kids applied to only 4 or 5, and I had to tell the HSGCs to back off the pressure and let us handle our decisions.So if all these bright, reasonably well-off kids apply to 10 schools each, they will still only attend 1. Since the schools rarely if ever share common lists or demand to know the complete list of where their applicants have applied, they have no idea if the applications are even valid: does that student REALLY wish to attend or is it just a ‘shot in the dark’?@arrive2_net:Yes, precisely. Since noone has been able to produce a functional (never mind reliable) prediction model, the problem will simply continue. Some commentators suggest that socio-economics play a role, other discuss socialization, and yet admissions folks talk about the holistic and therefore theoretically unquantifiable approach. A great deal has been written about student motivation, and more on ‘meeting the expectations’ of the students, which has resulted in the viral spread of fancy services, expensive facilities, ad infinitum.Talk to me about dropouts and I will tell you that my observations point to the first decision to accept the enrollment invitation (acceptance letter). If there is a good fit, then the student will be more likely to persist. If there is not a good fit, the student will withdraw or drop out completely. Accepting this premise, the problem lies not with the institutions, but with the decision-making abilities of the students: they are the key factor in education that has been mishandled by all.
eyeswideopen - August 6, 2010 at 11:15 am
Can someone give me a definition for “creditability”, I am not familiar with the use of that word. I could mean the “ability to assume debt” or the “ability of the institution to help students accrue credits”. I want to be in the loop on this one.
jesor - August 6, 2010 at 12:45 pm
arrive2 and gadfly. you both make a couple of broad assumptions taht are unfortunately not accurate. According to yesterday’s Chronicle article, the rates of spending on those fancy services as a percentage of higher education costs as a whole have held steady within less than a percentage point for most sectors. Additionally, the initial drop-out rates are deceiving. Many of those drop-outs re-enroll or simply transfer to other institutions. The artifically high college drop-out rate is an artifact of the way the federal government requires data to be reported. For example, if a student skips a quarter during the main school year, they’re classified as a drop-out. If a student transfers into a more prestigious program or a program that the school doesn’t offer they’re classified as a drop-out. If a student graduates from a two-year school and then enters a four year school and completes their BA in just two additional years, they don’t count as a success at the 4 year school. If a student attends half time and takes 7 years to graduate, they count against the graduation rate of the school as a failure. There are all sorts of data reporting problems that have served the consulting industry well in drumming up business. Just be careful to actually have data to back up your assumptions.
honore - August 6, 2010 at 4:14 pm
Eric, As usual a very timely topic. But as also as usual H/E will continue to step over the dead canaries until they are piled so high across their office entrances that they’ll have to call the janitorial crew to come with a bulldozer and haz-mat masks.A former student services colleague of mine in Admissions interviewed this past Spring & Summer at several Ivy, West Coast Ivy look-a-likes and Midwestern R-1s, including a Vet School.He shared that during the course of his interviews he asked questions of the Search Committees that focused and tangentially referred to the very eminent dramatic demographic shift and what the Admissions offices were doing or wanting to do to re-tool their approach to student recruitment at all levels (undergrad, grad, professional).He said the silence was consistently deafening in the interview room as the S/C members just looked at each other as if he had grown horns and a tail right before their eyes. This fellow has 20 years of formidable admissions, financial aid, student advising expertise and very commendable management experience as well and could address the new American demographic from many angles without a map.Not surprisingly, he didn’t even get a 2nd interview and when he checked who DID get the job, without exception it was a lesser experienced applicant with not even half of his resume, who certainly and very probably didn’t possess the institutional or informational insight to ask about the rotting canaries in the room.What’s that saying about getting what you pay for? You also get the mediocre and lacklustre administration that cowardice and sloth bring to hiring decision.
gperfetto - August 9, 2010 at 3:48 pm
Sorry Eyeswideopen – it’s kind of like credibility – only spelled differently
gperfetto - August 9, 2010 at 3:53 pm
On a more serious note, I think that many colleges are continuing to recruit the last generation in terms of tone, message and method. But colleges that can evolve and recruit the upcoming generation through their preferred modalities (for example social media channels), and speak to their unique interests and expectations, will be better positioned to break through the noise. Such colleges – application numbers aside – will in the end be more successful at actually enrolling students, at the expense of those who do not make the leap. As der_gadfly suggests above, simply increasing the number of schools where prospects apply does not increase the number of students available to enroll – it just changes the enrollment value of an application.Back to the “creditability” – I am very concerned about the recent and rapid growth in the debt load relative to revenue and endowment at many colleges. The “Viability Ratio” (expendable net assets to capital-related debt) has shrunk considerably at many prominent institutions over the past several years. The assets of these “well endowed” colleges have taken a serious hit, while debt loads have continued to rise. Much like homeowners borrowing against their house to continue living beyond their means, many colleges have funded large increases in faculty (and their salaries), made new investments in student amenities, and undertaken a rapid expansion of facilities mainly by borrowing against their assets. This trend has been most pronounced among private, more selective, colleges who have relied on what appeared upon large and apparently endlessly growing endowments to continually raise the stakes in their competition for more and better applicants. But the debt burden will eventually need to be paid down, during what is shaping up to be a time of stagnate or at least slowly growing endowments and stable if not shrinking enrollments. The matter is further complicated by the fact that colleges’ ability to raise revenue through larger tuition increases may also be reaching a limit. Already, the sticker price at many private colleges, even those perhaps thought of as less selective, is approaching, and in some cases exceeding, the median family income in the US (about $52,000). I find it interesting, and a bit scary, that the three primary supports underpinning the expansion of higher education (enrollments, endowments and pricing) are all under pressure simultaneously. The only remaining apparent source of financial support is public or government funding and, while it has been declining relatively for the past several decades, an increase in public funding may soon be required to bailout and economically over-extended higher education system. Sound familiar?I have been working on a follow-up report to the paper on chainging demographics that focuses on the changing economics of higher ed. Unfortunately, I have found little public discussion or data concerning the increased use of debt financing by colleges, or the long-term implications for sustaining growth in higher education. Eric, how about the Chronicle taking a look at changes in the debt-to-equity ratios of the US News top 30 – say over the past decade – as part of a future article? I believe this is all public information, if not actually readily available or prominently featured on each college’s web site.