Higher Ed’s Top 10 Developments of 2023

’Tis the season for top 10 lists, and I’d like to offer mine: the top 10 higher ed developments of 2023.

It’s been quite a year. Colleges became flash points for protests over affirmative action, abortion rights, free speech and hate speech, affordability, equity, policing, sexual harassment and assault, unionization, and the Israel-Hamas war, provoking, arguably, the most divisive and contentious campus conflicts since Vietnam.

Let me begin with a few higher ed news tidbits.

Program cutbacks. What do Bradley College in Illinois, Columbia College in Missouri, McGill University, Vermont State University, SUNY Potsdam, West Virginia University and the University of Wisconsin’s Parkside and Platteview campuses hold in common? All have placed academic programs on the chopping block and are eliminating faculty positions. No developments of 2023 better illustrate higher ed’s increasing stratification than the less prestigious, less well-resourced institutions being forced to cut back.

Most Popular Stories

Most Popular

The collapse of the online program managers. This past year, Wiley and Pearson dropped their OPM business, as bad press, mounting concern about revenue-sharing business models, an uncertain regulatory environment and weakening enrollment ended years of meteoric growth. 2U, which paid $750 million for Trilogy and $800 million for edX, according to recent figures, has a market capitalization of $82 million and a stock worth a dollar a share. What we witnessed is an increasingly crowded and competitive market for online graduate programs coupled with a concerted campaign by the federal government to curtail predatory recruitment and marketing practices.

The dog that didn’t bark. Perhaps you’ve heard of Axim Collaborative, the nonprofit created by Harvard and MIT out of the proceeds of the sale of edX. According to a press release, it would devote its first efforts to “improving degree and credential completion rates and post-graduation employment outcomes for systemically underserved students.” The last Google News reference to the collaborative appeared five months ago: “Harvard, Axim Partner with UNCF to Build Digital Platform for Historically Black Colleges and Universities.” Once lauded as higher ed’s next big thing, MOOCs and the big MOOC platforms, like Coursera and edX, FutureLearn and NovoEd, are far from dead, but any sense that they’ll revolutionize postsecondary education has faded. Pressures to monetize led universities to shed “open” courses available for free for various paid credentials—like nondegree certificates, professional certifications and MicroMasters. Meanwhile, some providers shifted from a direct-to-consumer model to a business-to-business model and corporate training or, apparently in the case of Axim, into a delivery mechanism for online programming. At the same time, the most radical dream, of cMOOCs creating massive communities of inquiry and solver communities, alas, melted away.

The accelerating demise of for-profit higher education. “Sayonara, For-Profit Colleges” reads the headline of a recent Wall Street Journal editorial, as new gainful-employment regulations from the Education Department threaten for-profit higher education’s financial viability. The rules, which restrict access to federal financial aid for for-profit career and technical programs that result in high debt and low earnings, may well mark the death knell for the for-profits, many of which have sought to become nonprofits or service providers to a nominally nonprofit university.

The flight toward “quality.” During a decade when enrollment at community colleges and many regional comprehensive universities slumped (by 4 percent between 2010 and 2021), enrollment at 78 flagship campuses rose (over the same period) by more than 12 percent. Growth was especially high at the Universities of Alabama, Arkansas, Connecticut, Mississippi, Nevada, Reno, Rhode Island, South Carolina and South Dakota and at UC Berkeley.

A significant rebound in the number of international students. Despite a significant decline in the number of students from China, international enrollments now surpass pre-pandemic levels thanks to a surge in enrollment from India and countries in Africa.

Seamless transfer. In the realm of transfer, 2023 witnessed one step backward, the demise of the Interstate Transfer Passport, but also some steps forward, perhaps most notably CUNY’s Transfer Explorer. T-Rex is one of a set of tools that help students learn how the credits for courses they have taken and are currently taking will satisfy requirements across CUNY. This tool is likely to be expanded to a far wider range of institutions nationwide. Meanwhile, pressure to facilitate transfer has intensified, with a number of innovations taking root—including creating a shared set of gen ed requirements, articulation agreements that identify community college courses that automatically apply to specific majors and guaranteed admission to a four-year institution.

The Supreme Court prohibition on the use of race-based affirmative action in college admissions. Selective campuses have responded in certain common ways: by reaffirming their commitment to diversity, by adopting admissions policies that take into consideration family income and obstacles and disadvantages that applicants have overcome, and by increasing outreach and recruitment in previously underrepresented schools. Few, so far, have followed the lead of Bard’s Early Colleges, which seek to improve the transition from high school to college and increase access to and success in higher education by offering high school–age students, particularly those from low-income and historically underrepresented communities, a tuition-free college program of study in the liberal arts and sciences.

Colleges in danger of closing. “Battered by high costs and enrollment declines,” about 170 small nonprofit colleges and universities are at risk of closure, the highest number in 15 years, according to Bloomberg News. These campuses meet three or more risk factors: very high acceptance rates, a low yield on admission, falling enrollment, rising institution aid and persistent operating losses. In 2008, 1 percent of small schools had three signals of financial stress. In 2021, the figure was 18 percent. Among those institutions: Albion, Allegheny, Assumption, Bard College at Simon Rock, Beloit, Bethune-Cookman, Canisius, College of Wooster, DePauw, Earlham, Goucher, Hamline, Hampden-Sydney, Hiram, Lawrence, Lincoln, Muhlenberg, Ohio Wesleyan, Pacific Lutheran, Reed, Russell Sage, St. Edwards, Sarah Lawrence, SUNY Geneseo, Valparaiso, West Virginia State, Western Connecticut State, Western Oregon and Willamette. Note: Many of those colleges provided comments to Bloomberg. Fitch Ratings predicts 20 to 25 schools will close annually, double the rate this past decade.

---

Here’s my list of the top 10 developments of the past year that will shape higher education’s future.

10. The alarming state of K-12 education. Chronic absenteeism; pandemic-fueled learning loss;, a historic decline in math and reading scores; a long-term retreat from sustained, serious reading; and a deepening divide in educational attainment across lines of class, ethnicity, gender and race mean that many high school graduates are ill prepared for college. Even as high school GPAs have risen, ACT and SAT scores have declined, while the latest PISA study shows that all English-speaking countries outperform the United States. In the latest PISA assessment of educational competence in OECD countries, the U.S. ranks 25th in reading, 38th in math and 25th in science. Especially worrisome is the retreat, in a number of “progressive” school districts, from advanced instruction in math, supposedly in the name of equity.
11. Populist challenges to higher education. From the right came the so-called war on woke, which took its most dramatic and controversial form in Florida. The state adopted legislation that would prohibit instruction that makes students feel “guilt, anguish or other psychological distress” based on their race, color, national origin or gender because of actions “committed in the past”; mandate periodic post-tenure review; broadened the hiring and firing powers of trustees; instruct universities to regularly change accrediting agencies; eliminate diversity, equity and inclusion offices; restrict the teaching of systemic racism and white privilege in gen ed courses; ban the use of TikTok on school-owned devices; prohibit university employees from accepting gifts from “foreign countries of concern”; require people to use public restrooms aligned with their sex assigned at birth; forbid political litmus tests in hiring and promotion; and overhaul the board and curriculum of New College of Florida, a small public liberal arts college.

While Florida came to symbolize the war on woke, many other red states also took aim at diversity, equity and inclusion programs and identity-informed faculty hiring. According to The Chronicle of Higher Education’s DEI Legislation Tracker, last updated in July, some 40 bills were introduced in 22 states to bar colleges from hiring diversity, equity and inclusion staff; ban mandatory diversity training; prohibit the use of diversity statements in hiring and promotion; disallow race-based scholarships; and forbid the use of race, sex, color, ethnicity or national origin in admissions or employment.

The populist challenge to elite higher education wasn’t confined to Republicans. It was also apparent in proposals to increase taxes on endowments, end college tax exemptions, bar wealthy universities from the federal student loan program and redistribute federal grants away from elite institutions.

8. Campus presidents on the hot seat. It’s not just Harvard’s Claudine Gay, MIT’s Sally Kornbluth and Elizabeth Magill, formerly of Penn, who faced intense criticism. So, too, did many other presidents. Among those who faced votes of no confidence include Arizona’s Robert C. Robbins, Rutgers’s Jonathan Holloway and West Virginia’s E. Gordon Gee, as well as at Bellarmine, Jackson State, Webster and West Texas A&M Universities. Others who resigned or announced their resignations while under fire include Hamline’s Fayneese Miller and Texas A&M’s Katherine Banks. Michigan State’s Dr. Samuel Stanley Jr. resigned in late 2022.

Why the turmoil, terminations and turnover in high-profile college presidencies? The reasons vary: enrollment declines, feuds with faculty or regents or donors, strapped finances, labor strife, Title IX controversies or scandal—athletic, academic, financial and sexual—often played a role.

But increasingly, especially at public universities, the answer is politics. Not just state-level politics, such as run-ins with legislators or governors, but politics at the campus level, as various stakeholders and constituencies expect a campus president to respond to their wishes.

As many outside higher ed may not realize, the modern university president has little authority and far less power (in many case) than an influential dean of business, engineering or law or a prominent, publicly visible faculty member. As most academics know full well, the main job of most modern presidents is fundraising and lobbying.

In terms of policy, the buck doesn’t even stop at the presidential suite, as presidents are at the mercy of boards, politicians, donors, faculty and even the public. The kinds of bullishness and vision associated with Lawrence Summers (as short and tumultuous as his tenure was) or Michael Crow may well be a thing of the past.

7. The AI revolution. Will artificial intelligence make campuses more efficient, driving rapid analysis of data, serving as tutors or advisers, substituting chat bots for staff, and preventing financial fraud? Or will AI become a robotic crutch and a substitute for critical thinking and deep learning interfering with students’ learning and their ability to master essential skills? AI poses real challenges that campuses have only begun to wrestle with. Which uses of machine learning are OK? To generate a bibliography? To answer a question or write an entire essay? The impact of the new technology remains to be seen.
8. Upheavals in college sports. Many of the top challenges facing college sports came to a head in 2023.

• Equity in women’s and men’s sports, Title IX compliance, and disparities in facilities, budgets, coaching and administrative positions.
• Transgender students’ participation in women’s athletics.
• Athlete compensation.
• The health and safety of athletes, especially in contact sports.
• The future of the NCAA.
• Ensuring student athletes receive a meaningful education.
• Conference realignment fueled by broadcasting deals.
• Playoff expansion.

The biggest issue, which lies at the roots of all those challenges, involves athletic programs’ financial sustainability. College athletics has a fragile financial model that relies heavily on football and men’s basketball and on donor and sponsorship deals (and, for the biggest programs, on broadcasting rights). Any decline in revenue from these sources will have a cascading effect on the entire athletics department, at a time when the costs of scholarships, facilities maintenance and upgrades, travel expenses, and salaries for coaches and staff are rising.

5. The Hyperpoliticization of higher education. College campuses have had to navigate a treacherous political environment. In an increasingly polarized society, institutions are struggling to balance free speech with the need for a respectful, inclusive campus environment. Political and legal debates over affirmative action, admission criteria and the war in Gaza are riling campuses. With rising student debt levels, political debates over student loan policies and forgiveness programs are deeply contentious, as are Title IX regulations and policies regarding sexual assault and harassment on campus.

One important consequence of campus politicization is diminishing staff–student trust, which is most pronounced at the elite universities but visible almost everywhere. There’s a sense of fatigue. There’s a sense of outrage (less about students’ political beliefs and more about behavior). The Israel-Hamas situation may send even more of those who work in student life and related areas out of the door. Or you might also just see folks not going the extra mile—as well, they are here to nurture and support these brilliant young minds, but there’s a limit.

Yes, there is a lot of coddling and hand-holding, but we’re also seeing more seasoned and excellent administrators being far more vocal, upset and looking for the exits. That too might pass … but rebuilding administrator-student trust is going to be a years-long project.

4. Government’s expanding role in higher education. Since World War II, the state and federal governments have played a crucial role in higher education: setting tuition and providing funding at public institutions; allocating financial aid; providing research grants; formulating policies dealing with privacy, gender equity and online learning; and establishing accreditation standards. But this past year, governments’ roles increased, as the Biden administration sought to use executive action to forgive and restructure student loans, to regulate for-profit institutions, and to restrict colleges from withholding student transcripts. Meanwhile, the Supreme Court ruled affirmative action in admissions unconstitutional.

The states, in turn, have adopted very different approaches to higher education, with some

• Increasing funding while others have made cuts.
• Freezing or capping tuition while others have allowed significant tuition hikes.
• Expanding early-college/dual-degree programs and emphasizing community colleges as pathways to a degree or vocational training.
• Introducing performance-based funding, linked to graduation rates or job placement statistics.

3. Efforts to end colleges’ “monopoly on opportunity.” Efforts to promote college alternatives that would provide cheaper, faster pathways into the workforce mounted. These included apprenticeships, certificate and certification programs, short-term skills academies and boot camps and fully online job-aligned degree programs. Pressure to end higher ed’s monopoly on opportunity intensified, as at least 16 states eliminated a four-year degree requirement for most state jobs. Meanwhile, pressure for faster, cheaper alternative pathways into the workforce—including apprenticeships and certificate programs—mounted. At the same time came other efforts to reduce college costs and accelerate time to degree, including an expansion of early college/dual degree programs (which make up a growing share of community college enrollments) and accreditor approval of the first 90-hour bachelor’s degrees.
4. Declining public trust in higher ed. Public confidence in the value of higher education was severely shaken in 2023. According to a recent Gallup Poll, American confidence in higher ed fell to a historic low, down to just 36 percent, compared to 57 percent in 2015 and 48 percent in 2018. The decline could even be seen among Democrats and those with a postgraduate degree.

Contributing to the loss of confidence is a perception that college is excessively expensive, overly politicized and poorly aligned with the job market. There’s also a recognition that a college degree’s income and wealth premium has declined.

To be sure, most adults would still advise a friend or relative to pursue a bachelor’s degree. A substantial majority also believes that a college education contributes to personal growth, helps graduates get a good job and form a personal and professional network and has a positive influence on graduates’ thinking. But a substantial majority express doubt that college attendance is leveling the playing field for success in society or is doing an effective job in developing a skilled workforce or well-informed citizenry.

1. Higher ed as a social, economic and political dividing line. In 2023, it became clear that the fundamental rift in American society was not socioeconomic class, in any simple sense, or geography or gender, but educational attainment. As the sociologist Musa al-Gharbi has shown, a growing gap in cultural and political values and outlook had emerged—over criminal justice, gender, immigration, race and sexuality—especially between those highly educated professionals in knowledge industries and the creative economy, in K-12 education, the academy (especially in the humanities and softer social sciences) and social services, the arts and the entertainment sector, journalism and publishing, and advocacy organizations, foundations and the nonprofit world and those who had not attended college.

Many of the top higher ed stories of 2023 focused on symbols rather than substance. My hope is that in the coming year, attention will pivot to student success and a renewed commitment to educational quality, learning and postgraduation employment outcomes and return on investment. I also hope that those of us in the academy will do more to promote greater equity across institutions, recognizing that currently there is an inverse relationship between institutional resources and student needs.

In a recent conversation, George Mehaffy, who for many years served as vice president for academic leadership and change for the American Association of State Colleges and Universities and is, to my mind, among the most incisive and intelligent observers of higher ed, made a point that needs to be underscored: student success is first and foremost an academic challenge.

Bringing more students to a bright future will require:

• Enhanced and timely academic and nonacademic advising and learning support.
• Learning experiences that are more engaging, experiential, immersive and inquiry-driven and more coherent, intentionally designed curricular pathways better aligned with students’ career goals.
• Schedules and delivery modes better suited for students’ complicated lives.
• Reducing barriers to transfer.

Higher education remains the best solution to the deepest divides in American society, including persistent disparities in economic opportunity and social mobility and a population that increasingly inhabits ideological, political, class and racial bubbles. That will require development of more equitable, effective and efficient pathways to opportunity and an education that ensures that all graduates achieve the civic, cultural, historical, mathematical, statistical, scientific and technological literacies that contemporary society requires.

None of this is beyond our capabilities, but it will require us to reprioritize and place students’ cognitive, moral, social and skills development first.

Let me end this long column by wishing you and yours a joyful, healthful, truly delightful holiday season and a new year filled with all that is good.