Enrollments – Cliff After Cliff After ???
Today’s Tuesday Reading is by Jack Wolfe, MOR Associates Executive Coach and Senior Consultant. Jack may be reached at [email protected].
I hope you love numbers as much as I do. Let me offer some, all in the pursuit of an understanding of Higher Education’s future enrollment and revenue streams and the impact that might have—enjoy!
The background, mostly in numbers
In 2008, the United States Fertility Rate (the average number of children born to a woman in her fertile years) was 2.055, very close to our replacement rate of 2.100. By 2014, it was down 10% to 1.855; by 2023, it was down to 1.784, a 13% decrease. Why? In 2008-2010, the “Great Recession,” fewer children were born in those “iffy” economic times due to questions of faith in the future and the perceived need for dual incomes to support a family adequately. Those fears/needs have persisted since and appear to be continuing.
All of you are “smart cookies” (I bet you haven’t heard that term in a while, if ever). You can see that the number of graduating 18-year-olds will decline from 2026 to 2044 as those future high school (HS) graduates are determined largely via the birth rates noted through 2023, except for the modest immigration of young adults. To translate that into numbers, recent Chronicle of Higher Education summaries of HS graduates predict a peak of 3.5M in 2025-6 and as much as a 15% decline after that – all of you have heard the term “Demographic Cliff,” and this is what that is.
Another perspective is to think of three successive cliffs
The first cliff has already occurred. Despite a growing pool of HS graduates, undergraduate (UG) college enrollment peaked in 2010 at 18.1 Million students; by 2023, it was 15.1 Million students, a drop of 17%. Included in that drop was a significant change in the percentage of HS graduates going on to a two- or four-year college. In 2010, 69% of those grads chose to attend college; by 2023, only 62% were making that choice.
The second cliff reflects our earlier discussion of “the” demographic cliff—a peak of 3.5 Million HS graduates in 2025-2026 and a decline of as much as 15% over the next 18 years.
The third cliff reflects the Census Bureau’s 2024 revision of its previous 2017 forecasts for 18-year-olds. In 2017, the Bureau forecasted the 18-year-old population in 2045 to be 4.5M (Wow!); its new forecast for 2045 is now 3.6M, a 20% drop. They say we will not see 4.0M 18-year-olds again this century.
A few other statistical notes before we draw conclusions
(1) As of 2019, the population under 18 became majority-minority, with 54% of its members classified as BIPOC. Our total US population will hit majority-minority around 2042-44, dependent upon immigration. Assuming that is directly reflected in our college populations, that change will properly cause cultural changes in many colleges.
(2) There are BIG regional differences in these population declines—the Northeast, Mid-Atlantic, and Midwest may experience declines in the 20% range, the Southwest and South 10% or less, and the Mountain and West regions somewhere between those extremes.
(3) “College Men” are becoming fewer and scarcer. In 2011, men constituted 47% of the four-year college population; in 2023, that number was 42%, and some measures show it lower. In absolute numbers, that’s at least 1.0M fewer men in the ~15M UG college enrollment mix, essentially all in four-year schools. The male/female mix is largely unchanged in two-year schools, primarily community colleges.
What this could mean for Higher Education
(1) In 2012-13 in the United States there were:
- 4,726 non-profit colleges and universities, including:
- 3,026 four-year institutions
- 1,700 two-year institutions
In 2020-21, there were:
- 3,931 non-profit colleges and universities, including:
- 2,637 four-year institutions
- 1,294 two-year institutions
This was roughly a 15% drop in total in only eight years. A few years ago, mid-pandemic, Ernst and Young looked at 2,000 colleges and universities and concluded 800 were too small to be sustainable, many being smaller rural institutions – and 20% of all those schools were running deficits. Across the nation, close to 40% of all colleges and universities have 1,000 students or less. A measure of one’s staying power is one’s balance sheet including one’s endowment. Across the US, the median endowment was only $216M in 2023. That means we have nearly 2,000 schools with less than a $216M endowment. The Economist states, with some regularity: “Consolidation of Higher Education is overdue” – are they essentially correct?
(2) The top 100-150 “most selective” schools are unlikely to be troubled by any of what’s written above or below—their product and credentialing are in such demand that they are impervious to market declines. However, 3,800 other colleges and universities could, and likely will, be impacted—planning now for this market change is clearly in order for them.
But there are tons of brilliant people in academia – can we innovate our way through this? Let me suggest at least four options to consider, and you all can add many more
(1) As you saw above, declining markets will likely force consolidation – thus, we need to ask where markets are growing. You know the answer: markets are growing internationally! In 2022, the total international market was about 250M students; in 2050, that market is predicted to be close to 600M, with the most significant growth in the Middle East and Africa. However, a cost model that differs from what we have today is needed. Today, we attract just about 1.1M international students to the US yearly, a tiny percentage of the 250M students available. Why? Because only the wealthiest of international families can afford $125K/year (tuition, room, board, and living expenses) for a residential education here. We need a low-cost product, most likely remote (or remote plus a little residential), to attract middle-income international families to us – I’ll bet academia can design a good one!
(2) Speaking of cost, many US families find our products too expensive. Why don’t we have a three-year bachelor’s degree (at 75% of current costs, plus an extra year of work life)? Think of all the empty classrooms, dorms, and other college facilities present every summer. Think of all the underemployed PhDs vying for semi-permanent adjunct positions. To me, the need and resources are there. Is there the will to change?
(3) Very few schools have great remote products, but some do – ASU, SNHU, NYU, etc. Most of our medium to larger schools have the instructional design, teaching skills, and resources to create such products. Wouldn’t it be wonderful if they could provide low-cost, high-impact teaching remotely? I hear many parents wonder how they can afford to educate their children – could this be a part of a primarily remote, maybe part residential, option that is affordable to many?
(4) Are there things universities can do to become more cost-efficient? Do we need dorms with such superb accommodations? Do we need premier athletic facilities? Do we need growth in administrative/professional staffing in higher education? Per Forbes, between 1976 and 2018, student growth was 78%, faculty growth was 92%, and administrative and other professionals grew by 308%. I fully recognize how hard people in academia work, but there are limits to the costs that parents and new markets can bear.
There you have it – a declining market for most schools except the most selective; some likely consolidation to occur; several “smart” growth opportunities, and the internal intellectual resources to deal with them – is this not far more than just an opportunity to survive, but an opportunity to thrive? Yes, but, it requires strong strategic thinking and planning and the will to do things differently – from what I know of working in higher education for 15 years plus, it can be done. I hope you all move forward to do just that!
Which best describes your institutions’ approach to the enrollment cliffs?
Last week we considered leadership toolsets and asked where you would benefit from putting focus:
- 30% said taking an inventory of your current leadership tools used
- 29% said finding new sources for leadership tools to use
- 28% said being intentional about using shared tools with others
- 13% said building a practice of adding new tools to the leadership toolbox on a more regular basis
For a majority of us – 58% – when we think about our leadership toolset, we focus on the tools we already have, making sure we know them, and are more intentional about using them. This suggests for many of us that much of what we feel we need to be an effective leader is that which we already possess – it is the intentional work of using it in the right context. However, a good portion of us – 42% – also focused on adding new tools. Of this cohort focused on new tools, roughly two of every three of us focus strategically on the sources of leadership tools while one third focus more tactically on the tool regardless of source. Our leadership toolbox needs regular attention on multiple dimensions – inventory of what we have, the practice of using it, and exploring new tools that may further serve us.
- November 2024 (2)
- October 2024 (5)
- September 2024 (4)
- August 2024 (4)
- July 2024 (5)
- June 2024 (4)
- May 2024 (4)
- April 2024 (5)
- March 2024 (4)
- February 2024 (4)
- January 2024 (5)
- December 2023 (3)
- November 2023 (4)
- October 2023 (5)
- September 2023 (4)
- August 2023 (4)
- July 2023 (4)
- June 2023 (4)
- May 2023 (5)
- April 2023 (4)
- March 2023 (1)
- January 2023 (4)
- December 2022 (3)
- November 2022 (5)
- October 2022 (4)
- September 2022 (4)
- August 2022 (5)
- July 2022 (4)
- June 2022 (4)
- May 2022 (5)
- April 2022 (4)
- March 2022 (5)
- February 2022 (4)
- January 2022 (4)
- December 2021 (3)
- November 2021 (4)
- October 2021 (3)
- September 2021 (4)
- August 2021 (4)
- July 2021 (4)
- June 2021 (5)
- May 2021 (4)
- April 2021 (4)
- March 2021 (5)
- February 2021 (4)
- January 2021 (4)
- December 2020 (4)
- November 2020 (4)
- October 2020 (6)
- September 2020 (5)
- August 2020 (4)
- July 2020 (7)
- June 2020 (7)
- May 2020 (5)
- April 2020 (4)
- March 2020 (5)
- February 2020 (4)
- January 2020 (4)
- December 2019 (2)
- November 2019 (4)
- October 2019 (4)
- September 2019 (3)
- August 2019 (3)
- July 2019 (2)
- June 2019 (4)
- May 2019 (3)
- April 2019 (5)
- March 2019 (4)
- February 2019 (3)
- January 2019 (5)
- December 2018 (2)
- November 2018 (4)
- October 2018 (5)
- September 2018 (3)
- August 2018 (3)
- July 2018 (4)
- June 2018 (4)
- May 2018 (5)
- April 2018 (4)
- March 2018 (5)
- February 2018 (5)
- January 2018 (3)
- December 2017 (3)
- November 2017 (4)
- October 2017 (5)
- September 2017 (3)
- August 2017 (5)
- July 2017 (3)
- June 2017 (8)
- May 2017 (5)
- April 2017 (4)
- March 2017 (4)
- February 2017 (4)
- January 2017 (4)
- December 2016 (2)
- November 2016 (7)
- October 2016 (5)
- September 2016 (8)
- August 2016 (5)
- July 2016 (4)
- June 2016 (12)
- May 2016 (5)
- April 2016 (4)
- March 2016 (7)
- February 2016 (4)
- January 2016 (10)
- December 2015 (4)
- November 2015 (6)
- October 2015 (4)
- September 2015 (7)
- August 2015 (5)
- July 2015 (6)
- June 2015 (12)
- May 2015 (4)
- April 2015 (6)
- March 2015 (10)
- February 2015 (4)
- January 2015 (4)
- December 2014 (3)
- November 2014 (5)
- October 2014 (4)
- September 2014 (6)
- August 2014 (4)
- July 2014 (4)
- June 2014 (4)
- May 2014 (5)
- April 2014 (5)
- March 2014 (5)
- February 2014 (4)
- January 2014 (5)
- December 2013 (5)
- November 2013 (5)
- October 2013 (10)
- September 2013 (4)
- August 2013 (5)
- July 2013 (8)
- June 2013 (6)
- May 2013 (4)
- April 2013 (5)
- March 2013 (4)
- February 2013 (4)
- January 2013 (5)
- December 2012 (3)
- November 2012 (4)
- October 2012 (5)
- September 2012 (4)
- August 2012 (4)
- July 2012 (5)
- June 2012 (4)
- May 2012 (5)
- April 2012 (4)
- March 2012 (4)
- February 2012 (4)
- January 2012 (4)
- December 2011 (3)
- November 2011 (5)
- October 2011 (4)
- September 2011 (4)
- August 2011 (4)
- July 2011 (4)
- June 2011 (5)
- May 2011 (5)
- April 2011 (3)
- March 2011 (4)
- February 2011 (4)
- January 2011 (4)
- December 2010 (3)
- November 2010 (4)
- October 2010 (4)
- September 2010 (3)
- August 2010 (5)
- July 2010 (4)
- June 2010 (5)
- May 2010 (4)
- April 2010 (3)
- March 2010 (2)
- February 2010 (4)
- January 2010 (4)
- December 2009 (4)
- November 2009 (4)
- October 2009 (4)
- September 2009 (4)
- August 2009 (3)
- July 2009 (3)
- June 2009 (3)
- May 2009 (4)
- April 2009 (4)
- March 2009 (2)
- February 2009 (3)
- January 2009 (3)
- December 2008 (3)
- November 2008 (3)
- October 2008 (3)
- August 2008 (3)
- July 2008 (4)
- May 2008 (2)
- April 2008 (2)
- March 2008 (2)
- February 2008 (1)
- January 2008 (1)
- December 2007 (3)
- November 2007 (3)
- October 2007 (3)
- September 2007 (1)
- August 2007 (2)
- July 2007 (4)
- June 2007 (2)
- May 2007 (3)
- April 2007 (1)
- March 2007 (2)
- February 2007 (2)
- January 2007 (3)
- December 2006 (1)
- November 2006 (1)
- October 2006 (1)
- September 2006 (3)
- August 2006 (1)
- June 2006 (2)
- April 2006 (1)
- March 2006 (1)
- February 2006 (1)
- January 2006 (1)
- December 2005 (1)
- November 2005 (2)
- October 2005 (1)
- August 2005 (1)
- July 2005 (1)
- April 2005 (2)
- March 2005 (4)
- February 2005 (2)
- December 2004 (1)