2025-26 Enrollment predictions

Even in the face of massive turmoil across U.S. higher education as a result of Trump administration criticism, funding cuts, and executive orders, early indications are that applications are up for 2025-26. The 4% rise may partially be the result of increasing use of the common application. However, the increasing number of applications from underrepresented populations and lower socioeconomic backgrounds continues the trend of diversification seen in 2024-25.  The 2025-26 applications for underrepresented students rose 12% which contributed to a surprising 5% increase in prospective domestic students versus a proportional 1% decline in international students. A counter-indication is that, although underrepresented student applications increased, fewer have been admitted. As fewer selective colleges report racial make-up it will be increasingly difficult to track diversity in enrollment.

The Spring 2025 enrollment increases, primarily in graduate and certificate programs, also raised hopes of strong Fall 2025 figures. Some colleges are boasting 2025-26 enrollment increases as a result of special programs that both retain and attract students. The Trump-supported funding of higher education would reduce borrowing limits, which will hit graduate programs in particular. Larger institutions such as NYU and USC have more graduate students than undergrads and these programs are very expensive. Reduction in borrowing will most certainly cause prospective students to hesitate to accept admission offers. As the summer of 2025 unfolded, financial aid packaging became precarious and the yield tool of tuition discounting rose to new levels. Higher education funding cuts being considered by Congress are likely influenced by the entanglement of personal and representational biases of policy makers.

From 2002-2022 aspiration to seek college degrees declined. Speculation of the cause varies but certainly cost and public attacks of higher education that have contributed to 70% of Americans believing that higher education is headed in the wrong direction are contributing factors. The decline among first-generation students fell by almost 50% compared to students in general.

Trump cut funding that assists migrant students, disrupting programs already underway to assist them. The DOJ is targeting undocumented student services at the University of Nevada at Reno. At the state level, Kentucky discontinued its commitment to in-state tuition for undocumented students. These moves are direct contradictions to Trump and McMahon's advocacy for career and technical training, which are often the preferred programs for migrant and undocumented students.

The decline of international student enrollment as a result of Trump administration threats might be offset by strong continuing interest to study in the U.S.A. The 2024-25 international enrollment was down 11% with more students being deported across all types of institutions, numbering 50+ by April 7, 2025. The projected enrollment of internationals was down by 19% by October of 2025. Visas revocations for international students included more than 1,500 by April, 2025, and 6,000 by August 20, 2025. Trump's edict to limit the duration of international study visas was almost immediately activated by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS); the move will most directly impact graduate students whose term of study varies so significantly. Higher education institutions and organizations opposed the Duration of Status changes. The increased peril that international students endure from Trump's rhetoric and executive orders is causing some international students to hesitate in their considerations of studying in the U.S. With this uncertainty, coming to the U.S. may not be worth the risk.

Although many of Trump's strategies to single out international students have been undone in law suits, every time one strategy is prohibited the Trump team comes up with more ways to restrict international enrollment and relations. Trump's relentless attacks represent a financial risk for many institutions that rely on international students' tuition to offset declining domestic students. Even a 10% drop in international students would result in billions of lost revenue and, while large publics enroll the majority, regional and small colleges will suffer the most for a decline in international students. F-1 and J-1 visa approvals have declined which predicts declining international student enrollment and the potential loss of international students represents the greatest financial risk to small, private, and religiously affiliated colleges but large institutions are at risk as well. For example, ASU with almost 18,000 international students, expects a 18% drop in 2025-26 numbers. The combination of slow review of visa approvals coupled with denials is causing some international students to defer enrollment to 2026 and many are stuck in a holding pattern. Regardless of the challenges, prospects from countries banned for travel still hope to study in the U.S.A. 

In a bizarre reversal of sentiment, Trump declared in November 2025 that U.S. institutions would be crazy to not continue the current level of international student enrollment. His rationale - colleges would go broke without the revenue from international students! In the face of so many obstacles that Trump's administration has created, how would you maintain consistent international student enrollment?

International student advisors are scrambling to respond to fears about Trump's reversal on visas, especially targeting those from Muslim countries. A law suit challenging Trump deportation of international students for expressing pro-Palestinian views was allowed to proceed and a federal judge ordered the release of 2 international students held by ICE officials. Offering help is compromised by the fact that ICE officials are bypassing universities, including tracking international students' social media to identify those deemed a "risk" to U.S. security. University officials are challenged by the need to balance the possibility of retaliation from Trump officials as they seek to support international students by resisting visa revocations.

Threat to the primary program that supports students and scholars' international experience, the Fulbright program, resulted in its board resigning over political interference. Adding more chaos, Trump proposed raising the H-1B visa fee to $100,000 per person, accusing higher education and employers of abusing it. Florida's Governor DeSantis pulled the plug on all H-1B visas in state institutions to signal support of Trump's action. H-1B visa status is a significant incentive for international students to study in the U.S.A. and is an important driver of research and quality across sectors. The AAUP filed a law suit to challenge the H-1B visa fee increase and ACE, with 31 co-signers, joined in opposing the visa changes. Indian students, the largest group in U.S. higher education, are starting to look elsewhere. The U.K. immediately considered streamlining its visa process to take make it easier for scientists who are discouraged by Trump's move. Charting the H-1B visas in 2025 shows that higher education accounts for 5.5% with science and technology sector employers accounting for the vast majority of those issued.

Due to the potential of not being able to return to the U.S. from their home country if they left for the summer, some institutions encouraged international students to stay and provided assistance such as housing and work. Franklin University in Switzerland is offering an alternative for international students who are struggling with, or have been denied, returning to study in the U.S. Franklin, a member of the 44 institution consortium of Council of Independent Colleges, will offer temporary study until the students can return to their U.S. campus. Studying at a branch campus may become an increasingly attractive option as international students seek to complete their degrees.

As we saw institutions positioned themselves to yield the best class possible for 2024-25, Harvard and other elite institutions have begun to commit to tuition free for students with family incomes under certain levels. That strategy appears to have been another way to support a diversity focus based on income, which incidentally captures prospects of diverse cultural backgrounds. However, Harvard's enrollment of students from diverse and international backgrounds declined. Tuition-guarantee programs began emerging at other institutions such as Carnegie Mellon, Wake Forest, Reed, Emory, Macalester, and more. Another form of tuition-guarantee is Whitworth College's slashed sticker price that abandoned the "discounting" awards that so many institutions used. Critics say that discounting contributed to skepticism about the quality. Dartmouth saw a decline in its applications after returning to a policy of requiring testing of its applicants. Illinois adopted a direct admission policy for all public institutions except the University of Illinois and University of Illinois at Chicago in order to increase accessibility. A potentially complicating factor for Illinois' institutions is the imposition of a ban on consideration of race and sex in hiring, tenure, and financial aid statewide. The increase in U.S. students to study at U.K. institutions could present a threat to enrollment and to the eventual loss of talent.

Some institutions, including Harvard's decision to curtail graduate admissions, are rebalancing enrollment. Graduate programs can be expensive due to intensity of faculty engagement and the reduction in research funding at the federal level make it challenging to financially support graduates.

A key to opening the doors to higher education is connecting students to opportunity, particularly among those of first-generation background. The Student Voice study of students' awareness of costs indicated that only 27% reported a full understanding. Especially for students with less economic means, even small added expenses have the chance of derailing their retention and degree completion. Increased cost transparency now could help institutions avoid policy regulation later.

Where early enrollment figures will take U.S. higher education in 2025-26 will be critical to budgets but could also bring volatility in campus climate. Fortunately, fall 2025 enrollment was up a modest 2% primarily buoyed by short-term enrollment programs. Trump's tariffs will push a wide array of financial levers that require ongoing adjustments. Trump's executive action requiring all higher education to provide admissions data will likely uncover many questions adding to the chaos. Providing support to all students in the face of chaotic challenges and changes is an area where many campuses, such as American University, may begin to focus. Early indications are that the politics of a campus and sense of belonging are important in prospects' decisions, which is especially important among California's recently immigrated students. Trump administration dismantling of DEI programs and initiatives, threats to international students that their study visas could be cancelled, and changes to Pell grants for students with financial need are destined to result in opposition. LGBTQ+ students in Texas expressed concern as a result of the elimination of DEI programs and supports. The other issue that education leaders will need to confront is concern of hiring managers that over half of current graduates are not prepared to know how to conduct themselves in the workforce.

Warnings that the enrollment cliff is more extreme than most institutions realize, preparedness of applicants looms as a big question. If the pool of applicants is less prepared, elite institutions will dip deeper into their pools thereby syphoning off students who would otherwise have attended less prestigious institutions.

Who stands up to oppose is the big question since diversity in peer-to-peer interaction is central to preparing for the multi-cultural environment of the 21st century. As a result of the diminishing focus on transition programs for underrepresented students, where support will be found is up in the air. Considering the risk for students from diverse backgrounds, it will be interesting to see if white students engage as allies in support of their classroom peers. As students of all backgrounds take stock of what's happening, campus administrators will have to thread the needle of Trump-era controls versus student support and freedom of expression. Some institutions are beginning to focus on collaboration across campus by pulling committees together that are agile and comprehensive in addressing student success.

Student Affairs NOW started the Current Campus Context podcasts series to help student affairs educators navigate the complicated array of issues ahead. Suggestions in the 2nd episode included advising students as they attempt to discern and express opposition and relating campus issues to broader political eras and movements. Judiciary branch responses to campus issues is essential and, thus far, legal challenges have been successful in blocking the most egregious violations of separation of powers conventions and caselaw.