Identity Crisis: How Higher Ed Can Look Inward Critically
Written by Nicholas Scibetta
Originally published in University Business.
The recent Gallup/Lumina Foundation poll, The State of Higher Education 2024, underscores Americans’ growing lack of confidence in higher education. When Gallup first measured confidence in higher education in 2015, those who said they had a great deal or quite a lot of confidence were at 57%. The current survey clocks this at 36%.
For all the focus that institutions have placed on conveying the long-term value of a degree and its success as a vehicle for social mobility (all true), the messaging is simply not resonating broadly.
Overall, Americans are not feeling positive about the future of higher education, with 31% saying it is headed in the right direction and 68% saying it is moving in the wrong direction. The poll also found that almost one-third of respondents say college is too expensive, while 37% “[…] are critical of higher education for not teaching relevant skills, for college degrees not meaning much, or for graduates not being able to find employment.” Those are tough stats to read.
Four immediate and tough questions come to mind at the outset of this approach:
How much active listening is higher education doing, not only to its supporters but with equal measure and openness to its critics?
Are institutions meeting people where they are and engaging in the difficult discussions, as opposed to fostering a perception that they are simply telling people what they “should think” about higher education?
Is there an appetite and willingness among senior leaders and advocacy groups to critically question the current approach to addressing existing views about the overall value of higher education?
How integrated are the university teams focused on addressing the current situation? Is communications and marketing working with government affairs, advancement, admissions and marketing communications teams from all the schools and colleges on campus? While the functions are distinct, there is always stakeholder overlap.
Traditionally, the aforementioned teams have been disconnected and siloed. This often results in fractured messaging and missed opportunities to jointly amplify a university’s accomplishments and societal contributions. Ultimately, this leads to untapped potential to drive meaningful brand reputation and awareness among stakeholders. Combatting this outcome requires the teams to work in a unified way when developing and executing an overarching strategic approach, message architecture, content creation and media relations strategy to actively engage diverse stakeholders.
When assessing the communications and marketing function in particular, one of the first questions must be: Is there connectivity and partnership across an institution’s various communications and marketing teams? If so, how? If not, why? And what needs to be done about either or both?
Once connectivity is understood and addressed and a true partnership is developed, universities will have a much more cohesive strategy and stronger bulwark to push against the continued erosion of goodwill and confidence in higher education.
To end on a more positive note, “nearly all adults without a college degree say at least one type of credential is ‘extremely’ or ‘very’ valuable,” and 59% of adults not currently enrolled in a degree program “have considered enrolling in additional education in the past two years, an increase of 15 percentage points from the 44% who said the same in 2021.” The underlying value of higher education is evident. However, there is still a significant and sustained amount of reputation work to be done to get perceptions moving back in the right direction.
#crisis #highereducation #highered #communications #issuesplanning