Professional?

Most of those employed in higher education and student affairs work refer to themselves as professionals. And most have prepared by pursuing graduate degrees that include philosophical grounding, a codified body of research and theory, standards, ethics, and of course, advanced education and credentialing. These attributes are often assumed but not articulated as defining what it means to be professional.

The initiative by the Trump administration to define certain fields as professional and excluding others ignores the criteria of what it means to be professional. Instead, the initiative is designed to control who has access to loans to complete higher levels of graduate and professional education. Specifically, students in graduate programs classified as "professional" will have double the access to student loans than those falling outside the definition. The proposed changes are under a 30-day review, which will surely include the assertion that capping loans "will not only limit opportunities for socioeconomic mobility, but also cause workforce shortages in high-demand, high-cost careers such as nursing, physical therapy and audiology as well as high-demand, low-return careers such as social work and education." One critique focused on the training of physician assistants, who due to the intensity of their preparation, cannot work while studying. Inability to seek loan assistance for PA professional training would seriously impact building a critical element of the work force in the health sector.

While the issue of cost of graduate preparation is important, it will be interesting to see if assertions about what is professional will include conversation about what is required of those who have worked hard to obtain degrees and who adhere to professional standards that improve the quality and outcome of their work. The Trump administration is full of appointees whose backgrounds and expertise may not conform to common professional standards. Is that perhaps a contributing factor to their defining "professional" based on what financial assistance is available rather than to the competence they bring to their work?

Trauma and renewal?

My career-long and post-working observations of higher education have left me with lingering questions of how higher education should respond to the trauma of falling enrollment, declining budgets, public skepticism, and attacks by Trump administration leaders. As Secretary McMahon persists in downsizing (and potentially eliminating) the Education Department, officials either decry the carnage or scramble to find a way to preserve essential commitments without the Department's infrastuctural help. Questions of how diversity of enrollment can be supported if realigned in the Department of Labor or how educationally purposeful international education can be maintained in the Department of State are vexing to say the least. Educators who are invested in these issues will no doubt strive to hold the ground of their values and commitments.

Rachel Toor, Inside Higher Education contributor and co-founder of The Sandbox, asked the central question in her recent essay "Is Higher Ed Broken?" Relying on observation from professional conferences, campus visits, and conversations with college presidents, Toor explains that change is resisted from above (oversight Boards) and below (mid-management, faculty, and staff). She describes the dilemma of all the in-between in saying, "Meanwhile, most of us are stuck in the messy middle, trying to do everything everywhere all at once. Research, workforce training, student life, athletics, DEI, study abroad, mental health - missions layered like geological strata. The result? Silos, identity crisis, bloat and burnout."

Trump has advocated and incrementally implemented a "Shut it down" strategy for the Education Department. His demonizing of education in general has accelerated concerns about whether or not pursuing higher education has sufficient return on investment to justify the effort and money. While there have been herculean efforts to respond to the barrage of policies and administrative changes, the dizzying pace has been exhausting for most higher education leaders. Secretary McMahon defended changing assignment of its responsibilities to other federal agencies as experimental, which could later be confirmed by legislative sanction at a later date. Trump claims that moving Education Department functions makes way for states to take more responsibility while McMahon claims that the federal funding shutdown confirmed that ED is irrelevant. Dismantling the Education Department isn't new to the GOP, which routinely results in resistance such as Senator Warren's push to investigate what is happening. It's important to remember that the plan to shut it down was all in the Project 2025 plan of the Heritage Foundation.

It is unlikely that Rachel Toor's insights will raise sufficient awareness to bring change but the major point she makes is that the middle of the higher education industry have to mobilize to address systemic issues that most are reluctant to face. Especially when it comes to faculty, flexible hours and negligible accountability are privileges that are difficult to uproot. Robert Reich's book, Coming Up Short, ends with a poignant description of the joys of faculty life. As I suggest in this review, with the privileges of faculty life comes the responsibility of legacy - something that shows you gave your best effort in your life's work. And the best effort now has to include saving our higher education institutions, small and large, public and private, struggling or privileged.

Credit ratings for higher education institutions project a challenging future. Specifically, Fitch reported that "'the value proposition for a higher education degree' amid declining job-placement rates and rising concerns about affordability" will lead to "consolidation across the sector, from mergers and closures to restructuring and more."

I bemoan the loss of higher education as I experienced it during my working career. However, in order to survive the trauma of what is underway, faculty, student affairs and other staff, will all have to consider models that will renew and protect the commitments of enriched and deeper learning, preparation for engaged citizenship, and preparation for an ever-changing world of work. And the number of our institutions will decline, look different, and abandon privileges that are no longer fiscally feasible.

2026-27 Enrollment Predictions

The data is beginning to emerge on enrollment for 2026-27. The early applications on Common App show increases from underrepresented groups and a decline of international applications. Selective institutions are experiencing the smallest increases. "International students applying dropped 9 percent compared to this point last year, driven by a 14 percent drop in applicants from India." The erratic policies and pronouncements of the Trump administration have created uncertainty that international students must consider when they apply to study abroad.

The irony of the decline in enrollment at non-selective and community colleges is that they are lower cost and they are typically not subject to the political scrutiny that more prominent and elite colleges face. If cost and public perception are so important, how is it that some data show relative stability in the ranks of more expensive and selective institutions? Cost transparency is important and it should be coupled with the growing realization among students and families that increased return on investment comes when students attend more visible and elite colleges. Having suffered precipitous decline over the last several years, two-thirds of Americans say that attending college is not "worth the cost because people often graduate without specific job sklls and with a large amount of debt to pay off."

To even the competition, institutions could expand the return on investment from improving just economic opportunity to ongoing financial support while in college, belonging, and ultimately to employment opportunity. Oh, and by the way, offering paid internship opportunities might be a big draw because it enriches students' experience while contributing to covering the cost of attendance. Paid internships can also help reduce regional brain drain as demonstrated the Virginia Economic Development Partnerships.

Resisting the Trump Compact - What happened?

Growing competition for international students

The "Big 4" destinations for international students used to be pretty definitive - United States, United Kingdom, Australia, and Canada. The number is expanding and now includes 14 different countries and Canada may be slipping faster than the other 3 of the big 4. Affordability is a key issue, especially among Chinese students who are looking for educational opportunity as China's economy and job opportunity for young people declines. Other important factors include "linguistic familiarity, geographical proximity and - arguably - better employment and internship opportunities."

Eight-five percent of U.S. educators blame the decline in U.S. international enrollment on Trump administration visa restrictions and government regulations. While U.S. enrollment struggles the international numbers are up in Asia and Europe.

Chinese students fueled graduate program enrollment in particular, which underwrote and supported domestic graduate students at U.S. institutions. The Chinese enrollment "grew from around 62,000 to over 317,000" from 2005 to 2019. As of 2025, more Chinese students studied in countries outside the "Big 4" than any of their individual enrollments. If the international higher education espoused purpose was to increase access, competition from Asia and the Middle East is an indication that it worked. In numerous cases the founders of new institutions that are now competing with the "Big 4" were educated in U.S. institutions. They went back to their home countries as founders of new institutions and educational partnerships.

For those committed to wholistic education and student affairs programs, the challenge is that sometimes internationals who studied in the U.S. didn't actually engage fully. Out of class engagement in U.S. institutions varies greatly by students' country origin and campus environment, an issue seldom addressed through intentional initiatives. Roberts & Ammigan (2014) assembled expert authors who contributed chapters advising education leaders on how to do a better job and perhaps it's time to take a deeper dive into how international students experience their days in the U.S. A brief introduction to Supporting International Students in U.S. Higher Education introduces this theory and practice informed resource.

The current decrease in undergraduate and graduate international students, largely fueled by uncertainties inflicted by the Trump administration, extends into next year with 2026-27 Common Apps down. Higher education leaders are pushing for higher education to be exempt from the new $100,000 H1-B visas in order to improve the prospects for post-graduate training that is a significant motivator for international students. More broadly, hostile immigration policies and enforcement are creating uncertainty among all international students who would have previously liked to study in the U.S.

In a bizarre reversal of sentiment, Trump declared on Fox news that higher education should continue enrolling international students. His rationale - the financial gain they bring to budgets - nothing about the quality of the learning environment or knowledge diplomacy! Trump's changing stance, and contradiction of his appointees, cause international applicants to wonder where the US stands. The sad reality is that international students deserve to be treated as more than an financial commodity. Of particular note are J-1 and OPT visas, which are a highly valued for international students that granting of which can be unpredictable or exploitive.

Are students flourishing?

There is not much question that higher education is experiencing a shake up in enrollment. My previous blog post on 2025-26 enrollment provides background with some ups and lots of downs for this year and years to come. The negativity that Trump and his appointees, particularly in the Education Department, have fostered has undermined confidence in U.S. higher education. However, most of the evidence is that students are still interested in pursuing degrees but the perceived return on investment varies by state and many other factors. Workforce placement of college graduates has declined but their salaries continued to be higher than non-college graduates. Although not clearly understood, the motivation to complete a degree is a combination of preparing for future work and the rest is about quality of life. The appeal for international students may be a bit more complex, primarily due to erratic changes in visa policies unfolding every day.

Even when the waters are rough, higher education faculty and staff know that they have to maintain focus on what's important - retention and graduation. I've been a fan of instruments such as the HERI First-Year Survey and the National Survey of Student Engagement. Having used both extensively to determine students' patterns of engagement, satisfaction, and achievement of goals, they provide longitudinal and comparative data that is extremely useful in determining how to improve students' experience. The Generation Lab findings show that most students at U.S. campuses believe they are valued and supported, which is key to satisfaction and retention. Unfortunately, the Student Voice Survey found that about a third of students are disengaged outside of class. This research helped by determining the motivations for student involvement and what approaches are attractive to them. Students of diverse cultural and first-generation backgrounds often feel less valued and included, which should be addressed from a strength and resilience lens rather than as a deficit.

While HERI, NSSE, and Student Voice are useful and results allow educators to look back and plan forward, the administration and results are from a time and place that is static. The University of Arizona created the New Student Information Form (NSIF) that allows staff "to respond to individuals' needs and create strategic initiatives within various departments and offices that ensure no student is left behind." Having access to "in the moment" information can then be used to target individual students or groups. The first 6 weeks at college are particularly important as students establish patterns of engagement, apathy, or disillusionment. Concerns such as affordability, making friends, getting a job, and navigating difficult political dynamics often trouble students. In general, each of these surveys support a "steady as she goes" focus for student affairs work. Some institutions are pushing even harder by creating incentives for student involvement. Lynn University and University of Kentucky provide financial rewards, recognizing that student involvement is often undermined by students' need to work.

Beyond these practical measures of participation and needs, another issue that is critical to study is if students are developing in ways that allow them to flourish. Are they developing in ways that will foster the good life that so many hope for as an outcome of the college experience? Harvard University has been studying flourishing and created the Flourishing survey that will be available for broader institutional use in the Spring of 2026. Part of the Human Flourishing Program, the higher education survey will be used to help institutions determine how and where to focus efforts to foster flourishing as a lifestyle commitment and as a quantifiable outcome of attending college.

Alignment of Islam and Dewey

As a result of my experience serving Qatar Foundation from 2007-14, I have often referenced my belief that the culture of the Middle East and Islam provide for extraordinary alignment with student affairs purpose and goals. Abdul Hafidz Zaid's "The essence of education in the perspective of John Dewey" is a compelling confirmation of my beliefs.

While Zaid's essay does not mention student affairs as a field, the elements of Dewey's philosophy that he cites are straight out of the "Student Personnel Point of View" (ACE, 1937). Zaid provides extraordinary support for education that honors experience, is holistic, and affirms all learners.

Higher education personnel, whether in academic or student affairs, will do well to reference Dewey's importance historically. In addition, Dewey's advice can draw institutions and faculty/staff together in some of the most important commitments any higher education organization can pursue.

The major impediment to drawing faculty and staff together is the competitive isolation that has emerged in Western higher education over the last 100 years. In some ways the hierarchical nature of our institutions seemed to make sense in the context of the Industrial Revolution's focus on productivity and quality. The problem is that applying these concepts led to increasingly complicated, large, and impersonal environments.

I recently blogged on two concepts that might offer an alternative to our current organization challenges. My longer post on Generous Leadership introduces the ideas of generosity and authentizotic culture, ideas that may help to improve academic environments. Take the link to look more deeply into these ideas.