The market for traditional-aged undergraduate enrollment is rough and about to get rougher as we go over the demographic cliff. The National Clearinghouse reports a 4.7% increase in undergraduate enrollment this year, but 18-year-old freshman enrollment lags at 3.4%. For this group of students, enrollment growth at four-year public institutions is modest (2.8%) and four-year private enrollment is anemic (.2%). Demographic decline is arriving just as public discourse on the value of higher education is further narrowing the pipeline of students.

Many institutions will not survive these difficult conditions. But your institution can beat the odds. Our research indicates that, now more than ever, your institution must deliver on student outcomes.  

In previous posts, we’ve introduced the concept of “value anemia,” the idea that many institutions aren’t delivering on outcomes for their students. For some institutions, this disease is terminal—just look at the outcomes of the private institutions that have closed in the last three years. On average, they retained fewer than two-thirds (64%) of first-year students and graduated fewer than half (48%) of students in six years.  

Other institutions suffer a chronic form of value anemia that may prove fatal in this declining market. Our previous post identified the segment of institutions that suffer the most from value anemia: private institutions that admit more than 80% of their students. These schools are often mission-driven and open enrollment—schools that can’t be as selective as they’d like to be given market conditions. 

Figure 1 shows the 25th percentile, median, and 75th percentile outcomes for what we call “least selective” private institutions. 

Figure 1.

As a whole, the least selective private segment suffers from lackluster student outcomes. The six-year graduation is only 58% for the segment. First-year earnings for graduates are $42,883 and debt at graduation represents 67% of first-year earnings.  

It’s tough to sell these outcomes for a median net price of more than $50,000. But there is a glimmer of good news. The 25th and 75th percentile data shows that some institutions are delivering strong outcomes for their students. Let’s look at two examples of schools that have beaten the odds. 

Example 1. Maryville University of Saint Louis: A Holistic Approach to Student Success  

Maryville University of Saint Louis (Maryville) is a small suburban campus enrolling more than 9,200 students, including 5,800 undergraduates. It serves some residential students (about 1,000) but has a much larger cohort of commuter students. The university brings in substantial numbers of transfer, online, and graduate students.  

Maryville has been named by the Chronicle of Higher Education as a top five fastest growing private institution for six consecutive years. Maryville has made substantial efforts to provide accessible education to all students, adding more than 60 online programs and technology support to help students keep costs low.  

Figure 2 shows how Maryville is leading the way based on six student outcomes metrics. 

Figure 2.

Maryville is stronger than the total segment on all six outcomes metrics:  

1. Net price is considerably lower than its peers ($44,766 vs. $52,377). 
2. First-year retention is 83% compared to the median of 74% for the segment.  
3. The six-year graduation rate is 67% compared to 58% for the segment.  
4. First-year earnings are especially strong ($63,561 vs. $42,882).  
5. Debt is below average ($22,000).  
6. Debt as a percentage of first-year earnings is 35% compared to 56% for the segment.  

The institution has also increased first-time, full-time degree and certificate-seeking enrollment 27% between 2019 and 2022. How has it managed to do this? 

The school’s website says that it has focused on innovation, personalization, and holistic success for all enrolled students (see Figure 3). 

Figure 3.

https://www.maryville.edu/student-experience/succeed/ 

Maryville offers undergraduates the opportunity to design their own pathways to success. It does this in several ways. First and foremost, every student has a personal life coach—not an “academic” coach, or a “success” coach, but a “life” coach. The coaching model is also presented as the core guiding experience for every student: it’s not for some students, it’s for all. A coach will certainly help with academic and career questions, but coaches are also presented as the nurturing “ask-me-any-question-at-any-time” guide to encourage the student’s self-discovery, growth, and accomplishments. 

Maryville also presents itself as a technology-forward institution. Named an Apple distinguished campus, it not only has smart classrooms and faculty trained in learning technology, but it imbues technology into the daily work of school. These efforts include an initiative called “Digital World,” which integrates technology into personalized learning. Every student receives an iPad that contains all their textbooks, collaborative, creative tools, and more. The goal of “Digital World” is to foster mobility, digital literacy, productivity, collaboration, and community that drives personalized learning. 

Ultimately, Maryville is focused on career outcomes. It reports a 98% career outcomes rate (the NACE standard rate inclusive of employment, graduate school, and the military). And, 87% of first-year graduates are employed full time with 8% enrolled in graduate schools.  

Example 2. Loyola University Maryland: Ready for Life and Career   

Loyola University Maryland (Loyola Maryland) is a Catholic, Jesuit institution located in Baltimore, Maryland. It enrolls about 5,100 students, 4,000 of whom are undergraduates. More than three-quarters of students live on campus and most students are from out of state. There is a different mission, there are different students, and there’s a different value proposition at work here compared to Maryville.  

Figure 4 shows Loyola Maryland’s performance on six outcomes for students. Within its context, Loyola Maryland also performs well on four of the six outcomes. 

Figure 4.

Loyola Maryland is stronger than the total segment on four of six outcomes metrics:

1. First-year retention is 85% compared to the median of 74% for the segment.
2. The six-year graduation rate is 79% compared to 58% for the segment.
3. Loyola Maryland drives good first-year earnings ($54,123) coupled with slightly higher debt ($27,000).
4. Debt as a percentage of first-year earnings is 50% compared to 56% for the segment. The institution has also increased first-time, full-time degree and certificate-seeking enrollment 18% between 2019 and 2022. But this is a high net-cost institution.  

Loyola focuses its messaging to traditional undergraduates on the concept of being “Loyola Ready” (Figure 5). 

Figure 5.

“Loyola Ready” is a brand concept launched in 2020. It contextualizes and elevates career and life readiness into the Jesuit mission of the school and strong alumni community. Elements of the brand include intellectual curiosity, mentorship, and guidance that ultimately lead to student readiness for career and for “everything.” 

And it appears not to be just marketing spin. Behind this brand concept is Loyola’s distinctive first-year experience, “Messina.” In this program, students choose two academic interests for two linked first-year seminars. Students are assigned to a support team comprised of 16 first-year students and two faculty members representing their areas of interest; one of these faculty members is also their first-year adviser. All students in the support group attend the same first-year seminars. They will also live in proximity. The team meets weekly to work through the transition to college and gather socially on and off campus.  

Loyola Maryland has focused on creating bonds that help students identify friends and mentors that can help them as they continue through their college experiences. 

The Bottom Line 

At Eduventures’ 2024 Summit, we highlighted five paradigm shifts that undergraduate-serving institutions should consider to survive the demographic cliff. The institutions we’ve highlighted above are moving on these paradigm shifts: 

• Put up the big tent. Expand the definition of the kinds of students that belong in college. 
• Low-cost professional programs belong in the tent. You can’t expand that definition if you don’t offer the programs that students want at a price they can afford. 
• Move from selection to success. Make big investments in improving student success – it is far more important than choosing students. 
• Move from advising to coaching. Advisers are important, but students need much more. A coach can help students maximize performance to reach their desired outcomes. 
• Move from reputation to outcomes. Don’t focus on your institutional reputation, focus on your students’ eventual successes. Students’ rising tides will lift your institution’s boat. 

Not every shift applies to every institution, but Maryville and Loyola Maryland are making efforts in many of the areas we’ve highlighted. Both institutions recognize that institutions that fail their students will fail themselves. Both institutions are beating the odds. And the virtuous cycle of strong student outcomes and strong enrollment is rolling along.