CHE: Advice from enrollment strategist

[Wahoo Redux]

From the CHE:

Small College Enrollment Playbook

The pandemic's impact has also emphasized the line between "haves" and "have-nots". Data from the National Student Clearinghouse indicates that while private non-profit institutions declined only 0.7 percent in their enrollment for the fall of 2021, that number is skewed by the most selective institutions, which grew by 4.3 percent. Enrollments at less-selective colleges shrunk by 1.8 percent to 2.5 percent in all other categories.

I had one staff member who would go to her admitted students' soccer games and theater performances to let them know she cared about them as a person. Another counselor on my team was so in tune with her students that they (and their parents) would text her at all times of day. Remember students' birthdays. Remember what is going on in their lives and ask about it.

[Ruralguy]

Most small colleges want more and more from their faculty for less and less (no raises, no merit increases, same amount of awards given to a bigger faculty, etc.).

Mine wants a high touch environment for sure.  I  can't say I am big  on birthdays, but I notice if students are absent and ask what's up. I ask advisees fairly detailed question about their interest and futures....or at least as far as they know. Ok, I can handle that. But they also want us to serve on more committees, show up to more events, and, yes, publish more and get more grants/fellowships/residencies (field dependent). Also, if a faculty member goes on sabbatical or just resigns or whatever, there's no guarantee of temporary, let alone long term replacement.

[Hibush]

I think we all have a pretty clear idea of the hallmarks of the have-nots whose enrolment will continue to shrink. The author of the article starts by saying he began his career at one that check serveral of those boxes (private 800-student Catholic college in rural New Hampshire).

I wonder how that setup is intended to make us think about the nature of advice that he'll provide. What did it say to you? (I was't motivated to look past the paywall, even though I can.)

[dismalist]

I think we all have a pretty clear idea of the hallmarks of the have-nots whose enrolment will continue to shrink. The author of the article starts by saying he began his career at one that check serveral of those boxes (private 800-student Catholic college in rural New Hampshire).

I wonder how that setup is intended to make us think about the nature of advice that he'll provide. What did it say to you? (I was't motivated to look past the paywall, even though I can.)

Absolutely nothing. There's no content, perhaps aside from "be nice to kids when they check out your campus". Bunch 'a words.

[Wahoo Redux]

I think we all have a pretty clear idea of the hallmarks of the have-nots whose enrolment will continue to shrink. The author of the article starts by saying he began his career at one that check serveral of those boxes (private 800-student Catholic college in rural New Hampshire).

I wonder how that setup is intended to make us think about the nature of advice that he'll provide. What did it say to you? (I was't motivated to look past the paywall, even though I can.)

Absolutely nothing. There's no content, perhaps aside from "be nice to kids when they check out your campus". Bunch 'a words.

It said to me, "Blur the boundaries.  Be a surrogate helicopter parent.  Or die."

[Hibush]

I think we all have a pretty clear idea of the hallmarks of the have-nots whose enrolment will continue to shrink. The author of the article starts by saying he began his career at one that check serveral of those boxes (private 800-student Catholic college in rural New Hampshire).

I wonder how that setup is intended to make us think about the nature of advice that he'll provide. What did it say to you? (I was't motivated to look past the paywall, even though I can.)

Absolutely nothing. There's no content, perhaps aside from "be nice to kids when they check out your campus". Bunch 'a words.

It said to me, "Blur the boundaries.  Be a surrogate helicopter parent.  Or die."

Well put. That concise restatement makes it clear that the latter is the wiser option.

[mleok]

I think we all have a pretty clear idea of the hallmarks of the have-nots whose enrolment will continue to shrink. The author of the article starts by saying he began his career at one that check serveral of those boxes (private 800-student Catholic college in rural New Hampshire).

I wonder how that setup is intended to make us think about the nature of advice that he'll provide. What did it say to you? (I was't motivated to look past the paywall, even though I can.)

Absolutely nothing. There's no content, perhaps aside from "be nice to kids when they check out your campus". Bunch 'a words.

It said to me, "Blur the boundaries.  Be a surrogate helicopter parent.  Or die."

Yes, I think that's an accurate assessment, appeal to helicopter parents by letting them know that your institution will stick their noses where it doesn't belong on their behalf.

[downer]

I know some predict the adjunct army will shrivel and die with the declining enrollments, and nearly all classes will be taught be FT faculty.

I don't know what will happen, but that seems unlikely to me. I suspect more and more colleges will resort to the adjunct army as a way of cutting costs.

No adjunct PT faculty are going to do any of the stuff that is being descibred here.

I recently had a student explicitly say in an email "I know you don't care about me, but I have been going through a lot of problems."

[dismalist]

I know some predict the adjunct army will shrivel and die with the declining enrollments, and nearly all classes will be taught be FT faculty.

I don't know what will happen, but that seems unlikely to me. I suspect more and more colleges will resort to the adjunct army as a way of cutting costs.

...

Here is an IHE article from two years ago: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2019/11/27/federal-data-show-proportion-instructors-who-work-full-time-rising

The share of FT faculty is indeed rising, ever so slightly, not that you should notice. The source of the change in share seems to be the disappearance of for-profit colleges, and their adjunct jobs. However, within four-year public and private schools, the share of adjuncts is rising. In CC's the share of adjuncts is falling.

Given that for-profits can close only once, and that CC's are not expanding, we can guess that the share of adjuncts overall will rise.

[Durchlässigkeitsbeiwert]

Here is an IHE article from two years ago: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2019/11/27/federal-data-show-proportion-instructors-who-work-full-time-rising

It seems that a "proportion of instructors" is a flawed metric for describing the role of adjuncts overall. If two adjuncts teaching one class each are replaced by a single adjunct teaching three classes, the proportion of part-time instructors would fall, but their role in teaching would increase.
Ideally one need access to metric like "proportion of student·hours" taught by part-time faculty to understand their role.

[dismalist]

Here is an IHE article from two years ago: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2019/11/27/federal-data-show-proportion-instructors-who-work-full-time-rising

It seems that a "proportion of instructors" is a flawed metric for describing the role of adjuncts overall. If two adjuncts teaching one class each are replaced by a single adjunct teaching three classes, the proportion of part-time instructors would fall, but their role in teaching would increase.
Ideally one need access to metric like "proportion of student·hours" taught by part-time faculty to understand their role.

Why should they be? Provide evidence or assume the weather won't change! :-)

[Wahoo Redux]

Here is an IHE article from two years ago: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2019/11/27/federal-data-show-proportion-instructors-who-work-full-time-rising

It seems that a "proportion of instructors" is a flawed metric for describing the role of adjuncts overall. If two adjuncts teaching one class each are replaced by a single adjunct teaching three classes, the proportion of part-time instructors would fall, but their role in teaching would increase.
Ideally one need access to metric like "proportion of student·hours" taught by part-time faculty to understand their role.

What is happening at our school is that the admin is retrenching a number of FT faculty and many of the FT lecturers.  Although I suspect they will also cancel a number of classes if they are below their enrollment ceilings, this will mean that teaching responsibilities will be shifted so we have fewer FT faculty, fewer classes, and it looks like this will also mean the necessity for adjuncts is lessened.

The process is taking an insanely long time, however, and no one really knows. 

[Durchlässigkeitsbeiwert]

Here is an IHE article from two years ago: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2019/11/27/federal-data-show-proportion-instructors-who-work-full-time-rising

It seems that a "proportion of instructors" is a flawed metric for describing the role of adjuncts overall. If two adjuncts teaching one class each are replaced by a single adjunct teaching three classes, the proportion of part-time instructors would fall, but their role in teaching would increase.
Ideally one need access to metric like "proportion of student·hours" taught by part-time faculty to understand their role.

Why should they be? Provide evidence or assume the weather won't change! :-)

This is an IPCC domain.
Jokes aside, during analysis one claiming stationarity of other relevant parameters is normally required to prove it, not vice versa.
Specifically in this case, the flaw of such aggregated metric stems from the combination of two factors:
1) Role of different fields in academic employment is constantly changing (some majors are booming, some are withering)
2) Different majors have different typical "face" of part-time faculty in terms of the load
And this before further external factors are considered (e.g. good economy may leave less time for a professional to be a "single class adjunct")

[dismalist]

Here is an IHE article from two years ago: https://www.insidehighered.com/news/2019/11/27/federal-data-show-proportion-instructors-who-work-full-time-rising

It seems that a "proportion of instructors" is a flawed metric for describing the role of adjuncts overall. If two adjuncts teaching one class each are replaced by a single adjunct teaching three classes, the proportion of part-time instructors would fall, but their role in teaching would increase.
Ideally one need access to metric like "proportion of student·hours" taught by part-time faculty to understand their role.

Why should they be? Provide evidence or assume the weather won't change! :-)

This is an IPCC domain.
Jokes aside, during analysis one claiming stationarity of other relevant parameters is normally required to prove it, not vice versa.
Specifically in this case, the flaw of such aggregated metric stems from the combination of two factors:
1) Role of different fields in academic employment is constantly changing (some majors are booming, some are withering)
2) Different majors have different typical "face" of part-time faculty in terms of the load
And this before further external factors are considered (e.g. good economy may leave less time for a professional to be a "single class adjunct")

Yes, everything changes all the time. We can't say anything. Does the IPCC know this? :-)

[Durchlässigkeitsbeiwert]

Yes, everything changes all the time. We can't say anything. Does the IPCC know this? :-)

Just to say something we need to properly process the data before interpretation is made - that is how IPCC works.
Based on the 2021 Nobel [Memorial] Prize winners this is also how economists are analysing data nowadays too.