The “weird” attack on higher education

Listen Here:

In a season filled with political one-uppmanship, the word “weird” has become a catch phrase for all things suspicious or “dodgie,” effectively putting a spotlight on views outside the mainstream. The highly politicized attacks on higher education might well fit into this same category, considering the fact that the many criticisms against colleges and universities are, indeed, bizarre and unsupported by the majority.

While the most aggressive denunciations of higher ed are catnip for the media and burrow into the public consciousness, many of these criticisms come from a vocal minority. Even some of the most politically charged topics, where one might suspect the arguments to have persuaded a larger share of the public, aren’t producing these outcomes. Consider the aggressive anti-DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) stance that has gripped the attention of the media and the public: despite the buzz, banning programs that help students feel they belong on campus is incredibly unpopular. Only 27% of Americans, and less than half of Republicans, oppose DEI initiatives in colleges, according to a 2023 YouGov poll. The same goes for controlling what subjects students can learn in college, another pervasive yet unpopular battle cry. Only 33% support government regulation of public college professors’ classroom speech, according to a separate YouGov poll.

The reality is that most of our friends and neighbors still want their kids to go to college, where they hope they’ll grow personally and intellectually, finding a sense of identity, agency and purpose that sets them up to flourish throughout their lives. It’s time to embrace the fact that, despite its flaws and the genuine need for improvement (particularly in affordability), college remains a positive force for young people and society at large.

Also, in the realm of the “weird” is the notion that college exists solely for skills training and job placement, an idea that doesn’t align with the wants of students, their families, or employers. According to Pew Research Center, 73% of college graduates with two- or four-year degrees found their degree very or somewhat useful for both personal and intellectual growth. Additionally, 90% of employed adults emphasized the importance of interpersonal skills such as patience, compassion and getting along with people to their work – attributes cultivated by a well-rounded college experience that includes mentorships, teamwork, and applying what is learned in the classroom to real world problems. Monster’s Future of Work report highlights that employers value dependability, teamwork, flexibility, and problem-solving – skills often honed through a well-rounded education.

To reassert the value of the college experience and restore public trust, we must provide the type of higher education experience that people want.

Just as the idea that higher education should simply deliver skills is out of step with the American public, so too is the belief that college is no longer worth it. Polling shows that 75% of people believe there is a good return on investment in a college degree, and nearly 70% say a close family member needs at least an associate’s degree for financial security. In a 2024 Gallup-Lumina poll, 94% of adults said at least one type of postsecondary credential is “extremely valuable ” or “very valuable.” Moreover, research shows that higher education is linked to improved health and wellbeing, including reduced risk of heart disease, high blood pressure, diabetes, anxiety, and depression. College graduates exercise more, drink less, and are more likely to seek preventive healthcare. They report higher levels of self-esteem and job satisfaction than high school graduates who do not go on to earn higher education degrees.

But just as the data show we cannot believe all of the anti-higher education rhetoric, we must not ignore that people are upset with the sector, and for valid reasons. We must address the affordability issue, a major driver of the anger and frustration directed at colleges and universities. And we must work harder to make a stronger case for the value of higher education on human development, workforce development, and society overall that can be embraced by Americans of all viewpoints. Forty-five percent of Americans believe colleges and universities have an overall negative impact on the country – this in spite of the data showing that college graduates are more likely to vote, volunteer, donate to charities, join community organizations, and participate in educational activities with their children than non-degree holders.

Rather, to reassert the value of the college experience and restore public trust, we must provide the type of higher education experience that people want: one that fosters personal and intellectual growth, offers a transformational experience, and lays the foundation for a lifetime of flourishing.

Dana Humphrey is the Associate Director of the Coalition for Transformational Education. The Coalition for Transformational Education is a group of leaders in higher education dedicated to evidence-based, learner-centered education that lays the foundation for wellbeing and work engagement throughout life. Through assessment, collaboration, and best practice-sharing with our member institutions, we strive to inspire the academy to prioritize lifelong wellbeing.

Dr. Estevan Garcia is at the Table

Given his background, Dr. Estevan Garcia might be considered an unusual member of a college president’s cabinet. But as Dartmouth’s new Chief Health and Wellness Officer, the physician and public health expert works directly with President Sian Beilock on an issue she has made a well-publicized priority in her first year in office – protecting the mental health of students, faculty and staff. Garcia, who is a pediatrician specializing in emergency medicine, came to Dartmouth from the Massachusetts Department of Public Health where he helped led the effort to address the behavioral health crisis in emergency departments during the pandemic.

It is now Garcia’s job to lead Beilock’s health and wellbeing agenda, most specifically through the implementation of the school’s comprehensive strategic mental health plan called the “Commitment to Care.”  The origins of the plan predate Garcia’s arrival and was informed by a collaboration with the Jed Foundation, a non-profit organization dedicated to protecting emotional health and preventing suicide in young people. Beginning in 2020, the Dartmouth community lost several students, including by suicide, as the pandemic eclipsed college life.

Dr. Estevan Garcia

Four years later, the Jed Foundation featured Dartmouth as a success story in its impact report and Garcia is now focused on the longer term outcome data that will provide a more precise evaluation of their recent work.  He views the plan as a pathway to a wellness culture at Dartmouth that prioritizes self-care, community care and mental health innovation. With an increased staff and budget behind him, Garcia is addressing a number of wellbeing issues often associated with elite institutions, particularly ones like Dartmouth, located in remote areas with less community resources.  These include the stress of perfectionism among high-performing students and the lingering lack of belonging many students feel, particularly those with mental health issues and/or those with diverse identities. As the fall semester brings new and familiar challenges to students’ wellbeing, Dr. Garcia is ready and at the table.

LW: What was the thinking behind having a new position in this area reporting directly to President Beilock?

EG: I think her vision for the role was to elevate student mental health and wellness as a high priority but also to bring under one umbrella campus-wide health and wellbeing. Part of my portfolio is faculty and staff health and wellness so it was important to President Beilock to have that direct communication on all of the activities in this area across campus.

LW: How has your background in public health prepared you and/or motivated you to take on the position of Chief Health and Wellness officer at a college? 

EG: What brought me to this work came from what I saw in emergency departments during, and predating COVID, with adolescents and young adults in crisis. To me, that was really shocking.  When I started in the Department of Public Health {in Massachusetts} I partnered with the Mass Department of Mental Health through the community behavioral health programs, providing options that would divert the mental health crisis from emergency departments when appropriate.  I spent those two years heavily involved in the work we were doing to create an actual road map for behavioral health in Massachusetts. 

My background is in emergency medicine.  I useasthma as an example of the way we look at illness in the emergency department.  You would come to the emergency department after you had gone through your asthma action plan – “I’m a green, I’m a yellow, I’m a red,” — here’s how I step up my care so by the time you came to us, you had exhausted your plan.  Westarted to view behavioral health in the same way.  “I’m at home fighting with my parents, or “I’m depressed, I can’t leave my room” or “I’m in crisis, potentially I’m suicidal” – all of those scenarios have varying degrees of illness and severity.  Ifwe treated them all as emergencies, we would be failing our patientsand our ability to manage true crisis and emergencies.

LW: Do you have a similar strategy around health and wellbeing that you are utilizing at Dartmouth?

EG: When I first came here, it was important to explain to my colleagues what we mean by health and wellness because not everyone understands this. One of the things I did was develop a pyramid that shows the different degrees of mental health needs. The base of the pyramid is the 70% of the students we have here – very successful, high achieving – experiencing the stress that comes with that.  There’s another 20 to 25% who could use some clinical support.  The final piece at the top of the pyramid is the group of students who were most clinically concerning, potentially suicidal, and these are the student we need to act quickly to support and get into the appropriatesetting. 

The goal of this kind of structure is to understand that much of what we do is at the base – that 70% of our students need easy access to services and almost no barriers to the many wellness activities we should be providing across campus. The idea is that college is the right timeto experiment with wellness and to build your portfolio of activities and support strategieswhen you are successful – when you are at the base – so you can manage the challenges that will come your way.  You will be more prepared when you fail a test, or break up with your girlfriend, or have other challenges– all the things that challenge yourequilibrium andcould push you into crisis.

“College is the right timeto experiment with wellness and to build your portfolio of activities and support strategies when you are successful –- so you can manage the challenges that will come your way.”  

For the 20 to 25% in the middle, we have clinical  supports that help themmanage their illness, while also providing access to wellness activities.  With the smaller group, my job is to really help identify them as their situation evolves and get them the support that they need, and this can be a protective setting in a hospital if that’s necessary.  And it is really important that we don’t make them feel that they are alone.  You have to care enough about the students that require services outside of the college to partner with them – to give them time away, with support, and then bring them back with the appropriate accommodations. This is how I see my job.

LW: What have been some of your early priorities?

EG: President Beilock has recently completedher first year as presidentbut was very involved in the creation of the strategic plan for mental health and wellness before that. I would say the majority ofmy work since I came to Dartmouthhas been to implement that plan.  It has multipledeliverables and my job was to take that on and run with it, delivering on health and wellness as a priority for the president and for the campus.

Part of those deliverables involved new permanent staffpositions – across ourstudent health and wellness divisions.  It was really a huge investment by the college and we had to make sure those were the right positions and we were utilizing them in the right way.  

The Dartmouth community has faced several challenges since I arrived.  I think it is helpful to have a clinician at the table.  Health and wellness staff arenot enforcers, but supporters.  We arevery much there to support students, and help them engage in tough conversations. I think partnering with students has been one of the strongest game changers for me personally. I worked with them before as patients but now they are really partners to me in the work we are doing around health and wellness.

LW: What was the history behind the Commitment to Care plan?

EG: When Covid started, we (in reference to Dartmouth) were doing the best we could, but clearly it was very isolating on this campus and colleges across the country. It was not your normal college experience by far here and of course everywhere.  Beginningin 2020, we had several student deaths including bysuicide, and it was clear they needed to address what was happening.  In the summer of 2021, they brought the Jed Foundation in and that led to a major mental health review –  campus visits, survey data, all of that.  Additionally, the provost at the time set up a steering committee to work on an all-Dartmouth strategic plan on health and wellbeing from May 2023 to September 2023, that was the foundation of the Commitment to Care. It was across all campuses – undergrad, grad schools, professional schools. 

What makes it unique is that it is very stakeholder-driven, very student-driven and the result is this multi-year, campus-wide engagement with actual deliverables. What I found interesting when I first came to campus, folks would introduce themselves – students, staff, faculty – and they would say “I was on the committee for mental health” or “I was on the committee for health promotion.”

LW: What are the elements of the plan?  

There are five pillars to the plan which drive the many activities and initiatives that we are working on.  (From materials): Center wellbeing in all we do both inside and outside of academics; Create an inclusive community to foster mental health and well-being for students with diverse lived experiences; Equip students with the resources and skills to navigate both success and failure with strength and confidence; Proactively address mental illness to aid students in reaching their goals; Invest in innovative applications of evidence-based approaches to respond to changing environments and needs.

It is a very broad approach involving all aspects of the college.  Regarding the second pillar, we pride ourselves on attracting first generation students and students with diverse lived experiences, and it is important for us to center those lived experiences in what happens on campus, particularly here in rural New Hampshire. This includes how we address mental health and wellness and creating a sense of belonging.

President Beilock was clear that focusing on wellbeing is critical to a successfulacademic career. One of the key pillars for us is helping students navigate success and failure, this is number three.  There is an understanding that our students are incredibly driven. They are gifted and they are used to being at the top. They are not used to failure. But failure is part of succeeding and it is how you pick yourself up and move forward that is important.  We call it normalizing life.

Regarding wellness services, we have made significant gains here.  One of the first things I did was to move wellness to be a separate divisionwith a director reporting to me.  Our health services are really top notch and I wanted wellness to be on equal footing.  Additionally, we are arural community sometimes makingrecruitment difficult.  To better meet the needs of our students, we needed to find ways of extending and diversifying our services.  We partnered with a tele therapycompany, that gives us 24/7 behavioral health support for students and that made a big difference in accessibility when our team was not in the office.  We have several hundred students who have engaged with the service.  We have unlimited access to 30 minutes therapy slots any time of day or night and will beexpanding that to 50 minutes for those who need it.

The addition of the tele service didn’t lower our need for in-person services but it enabled other students to access therapy who might have been uncomfortable doing so before.  We know that a quarter of our students utilize our mental health services and that is similar across our student groups.  That is a significant point since historically, underrepresented students seek help less frequently. 

And the other piece – which I think is one of the harder ones – is thinking about data analysis and evidence-based approaches to make sure that what we are doing is impactful. This is really important because as we are delivering on a lot of these initiatives, we need to know what is helpful and not helpful and then redirect our time, energy and resources accordingly.

LW: You have said that some of your work is inside as well as outside the classroom.  What has been your experience there?

EG: There are a few tracks to this work, one involving academic policies and calendars that students have said would be meaningful to them in terms of reducing their stress levels over academics.  There’s also some interesting things faculty are doing in their classrooms by integrating mindfulness techniques in their academic disciplines including physiology and languages.   These are just some of the ways we are partnering with academic leadership, and I will say it does make a difference now that we are at the table.

Where Did All the Good Times Go?

Listen Here:

They are familiar culprits: smartphones, social media, the decline of in-person social connection that began before, bloomed during, and held firm after the COVID-19 pandemic. A growing reserve of data and reporting raises the alarm about Gen Z’s age of discontent, always coming to the same conclusion: it doesn’t look good for the digital generation. As panic descends over what the Surgeon General has labeled a mental health emergency and, more recently, a loneliness epidemic, few accounts of Gen Z’s state of mind manage to foreground what I suspect is at the root of my generation’s distress: the shrinking of three-dimensional life, and with it, the loss of risk, adventure, and thrill.

Forty-two percent of Gen Z suffers from depression and feelings of hopelessness, a rate almost twice as high as that of American adults over 25 (23%). On the climate crisis, 56% believe humanity is doomed. Since 2010, anxiety among American college students has increased by 134%, depression by 106%, bipolar disorder by 57%, and anorexia by 100%. In a 2023 poll of college students, 39% said they had experienced loneliness the previous day, ranking it above sadness (36%). 

As our parents’ generations had fewer children and nurtured them longer, we were raised to be risk-averse. Emergency room visits for accidental injuries—falling off a bike, breaking an arm, spraining an ankle on the soccer field—have declined significantly among children and teenagers born in the early aughts. That sounds like a good thing—fewer broken arms means kids are safer, right? But while accidental, play-related injuries have gone down, emergency room visits for self-harm have increased 188% for adolescent girls and 48% for boys since 2010. We are not safer; not with ourselves.

As Gen Z grows up, our adulthood shows signs of developmental delays. We go on fewer dates and have less sex. We are getting our driver’s licenses later or not at all; we are living with our parents longer. We drink less and go to fewer parties than past generations. Our abstinence from risk is not a reflection of strict moral influences or time redirected to other, “safer” ways of interacting with the three-dimensional world—far from it, we are less likely than past generations to engage in hobbies, play and watch sports, or work after-school jobs. We are, quite simply, doing less than any generation before us. 

Chart: Zach RauschSource: Monitoring the Future Get the data Embed Download image

Social psychologist and author of The Anxious Generation Jonathan Haidt argues that our increasingly two-dimensional lives are the result of “the end of play-based childhood” and its replacement with “phone-based childhood.” During a recent talk in London, Haidt asked audience members of the Gen X and Baby Boomer generations to think back to their childhoods. He asked them to remember the things they did with friends, the adventures they had, and then imagine removing 70% of those encounters – remove hobbies, then risks, thrills, and adventures where you might have gotten hurt—imagine 80% of that gone, he said. Now imagine growing up with what’s left. That is the extent to which Haidt believes smartphones gutted Gen Z’s childhood and adolescence. Our lives are now smaller, hollowed out, contained within digital software. 

“The fact that risk-taking activities like drinking are going down is a broader sign that young adults and adolescents are engaging with the world far less,” says Dr. Jessie Borelli, a clinical psychologist and professor at the University of California, Irvine. “Becoming an adult involves risk. Making mistakes, including through risk-taking behaviors, is practicing being an adult.” 

Moreover, she says, “Getting together in person is effortful. You have to endure a certain amount of discomfort, whether it’s the cost of leaving the house, encountering traffic, or the time it takes to put on different clothes.” 

We are not safer; not with ourselves.

For a subset of the population who grew up on social media and spent some of their most formative developmental years taking classes and interacting with peers only online, any effort at real-life interpersonal connection carries inherent risk — embarrassment, rejection, heartbreak, abandonment. When we weigh the decision of whether to engage effortfully with the world or just stay home, it’s no wonder we gravitate toward the option that involves less risk.

What that cost-benefit analysis is missing, however, is the fact that loneliness and isolation have profound consequences for not just our emotional wellbeing, but our long-term physical and cognitive health. “Social isolation and loneliness increase a person’s risk of heart disease, obesity, diabetes, Alzheimer’s, dementia, depression, anxiety, suicidality, and premature death,” says Shannon Vyvijal, the Communications and Programming Coordinator for the Foundation for Social Connection. The upside, Vyvijal says, is that “social connection is really both a remedy and a preventative measure. In addition to making us healthier, it makes our communities safer. Socially connected communities have lower rates of gun violence and drug deaths. It makes communities more prosperous and helps local GDP. It leads more people to volunteer in their communities. It helps us become more civically engaged. We begin to trust institutions and one another again.”

Gen Z knows it’s lonely. “Loneliness is a discrepancy between how connected we are, and how connected we want to be,” Vyvijal says. “If, like many members of Gen Z report, you are someone who wants to date and hasn’t yet, or you are on dating apps and not satisfied with the level of connection they provide, that discrepancy is contributing to loneliness.” The disconnect between having and wanting connection often sets in motion a self-fulfilling prophecy, with the stigma of social undesirability increasing a person’s tendency to retreat from others. “The lonely brain continues to self-isolate,” she explains. 

They—we—are not content to live in a purgatory of risk-averse, adventureless post-post-adolescence.

Even as hyper-individualism in work and school swells and spills over into life after-hours, Gen Z is begging for community. We are begging for risk. Signs of our accelerating desperation occupy every corner of the Zoomer internet. In the r/GenZ subreddit, an 18-year old appeals to their peers for advice on how to make friends; a 21-year-old college student laments her campus’s lack of community; a 19-year-old worries she’s a “loser” for having never gotten drunk or gone to a party.  On Facebook, young adults post friendship applications. A Gen Z woman complains of the death of clubbing in a TikTok video that amassed over 3.5 million views. A viral dating deep-dive from The Cut shows young women crying on camera while describing their longing for partnership. 

Not far behind, tech companies roll out solutions for Gen Z to cure our loneliness without looking up from our phones. Tinder backs a new “dating app for friends.” On Bumble BFF, users swipe right on pictures of prospective friends. Still lonely? Try downloading Replika, “THE chatbot for anyone who wants a friend with no judgment, drama, or social anxiety involved.” No risk, all reward.

But Gen Z is getting older, in spite of its delayed adulthood, and making the move toward real-world community as a form of generational healing. The tide of self-isolation appears to be turning as loneliness and boredom reach a fever pitch, with a growing number of young adults taking the matter offline and into their own hands. Running clubs, singles parties, book clubs, wine nights, and self-made social events are on the rise. A new trend emphasizes the importance of third places—communal spaces like public parks, libraries, and coffee shops where people can come together and fill the time between work and home. They are taking their hobbies offline. They are volunteering more. They are urging moral awakening over self reinvention. They—we—are not content to live in a purgatory of risk-averse, adventureless post-post-adolescence.

I can’t say I wish playground injuries on kids or hangovers on college students. I do hope, however, that we will return to a margin of risk where it’s OK to fall off your bike, get your heart broken, dance badly at a party—because that’s part of the deal of living in the three-dimensional world. If we watch from a safe distance, that world will keep outgrowing us.

Invented Here

Invented Here is a podcast series from LearningWell Radio and the Coalition for Transformational Education. In this episode, Dr. Angela Lindner joins LearningWell Radio co-host Dana Humphrey to discuss UF Quest, a Gen-Ed program at the University of Florida that aims to provide first-year students, particularly FTICs (first time in college), an opportunity to learn how to learn within an intimate, interactive classroom environment. 

Listen now on Spotify or Apple Podcasts.

The Case for Transformational Education

Higher education is currently under enormous scrutiny. Part of this scrutiny results from the challenge of balancing the traditional roles of college in helping students “find a job” and “find themselves.” Eliminating the conflict between these goals, and indeed underscoring their interdependence, offers an excellent opportunity for higher education to take steps toward restoring public trust. To take full advantage of this opportunity, we must work harder to deliver the real value of a college education: a transformative learning experience.

For generations, traditional age students have enjoyed the benefits of college’s unprecedented ability to offer intellectual discovery at the inflection point of their personal development. This exceptional combination comes with a shift in learning that distinguishes college from primary and secondary school experiences dominated by extrinsic motivation like deadlines, teacher approval, and grades. Higher education, when done well, sets the stage for life-long learning by introducing intrinsic motivation that goes beyond knowledge and skill, shaping attitudes, behaviors, and beliefs — or “mindset.” Colleges and universities’ ability to teach students how to learn, not what to learn, is fundamental to the personal and professional success of graduates, often including, ironically, higher education’s harshest critics. 

Experiences in college can lead not only to professional success, but to a greater sense of wellbeing long after graduation. Current evidence based on measures of life-long wellbeing developed at Gallup indicates that having emotionally supportive mentors, particularly faculty, correlates strongly with life-long wellbeing. Gallup alumni surveys additionally show that initiatives that increase students’ sense of agency, through experiential learning opportunities such as projects or internships, also correlate with wellbeing long after the college years. One particular program, Purposeful Work at Bates College, produced profound evidence that a sense of wellbeing is substantially enhanced in students who find career opportunities closely related to areas of study that develop a sense of purpose and meaning.

Higher education, when done well, sets the stage for life-long learning by introducing intrinsic motivation that goes beyond knowledge and skill, shaping attitudes, behaviors, and beliefs.

The challenge facing higher education is how to achieve a broader recognition of the need to strengthen students’ transition from extrinsic to intrinsic learning and encourage experiences like hands-on learning and mentorships correlated with wellbeing at a time when vocationalism and return on investment dominate the public narrative.  Barriers such as check-box general education curricula and faculty reward systems that disincentivize truly student-centered, innovative teaching exacerbate the problem as does the underlying issue of the cost of a college degree.  

Restoring the public’s esteem for higher education by promoting lifelong wellbeing and refocusing the conversation on the student experience make up the central mission of The Coalition for Transformational Education. The Coalition is a learning community of almost 30 institutions across the country dedicated to changing the ways we teach and students learn, each pursuing distinct initiatives that offer best practices in engendering identity, belonging, agency and purpose in students based on experiences known to promote wellbeing.

The Coalition is focused on promoting this transformation across all of higher education by changing the narrative about what matters most in the student experience and encouraging faculty to experiment at the undergraduate level with evidence-based interventions to improve outcomes and wellbeing, and scaling these to all enrolled students. All of the institutions that are members of the Coalition are committed to assessing the interventions they introduce and refining them over time to continually improve their long-term impact. 

All members of the Coalition are committed to producing positive educational experiences that touch all enrolled students, not simply those that are focused only on specific populations such as the talented and gifted or the under-resourced or under-prepared. The Coalition is dedicated to making all of these interventions accessible to every enrolled student, regardless of their academic record or financial resources. The Coalition has the potential to transform higher education in ways that allow it to deliver on its full promise of career preparation and personal development, ensuring that students graduate not only with broader and deeper intellectual outcomes, but also with a greater sense of who they are and who they can become.

Invented Here

The following is a transcript of Invented Here, a new series from LearningWell Radio and the Coalition for Transformational Education. The first episode of Invented Here features Dr. John Volin, Executive Vice President for Academic Affairs and Provost at the University of Maine, on introducing research experiences to first year students as a pathway to belonging, wellbeing and retention.

Listen now on Spotify or Apple Podcasts.

LearningWell Radio in Conversation with Alex Kafka

The following is a transcript of LearningWell Radio’s interview with Alex Kafka on his new report, “Overcoming Student Loneliness: Strategies for Connection.You can listen to the episode on Spotify or Apple Podcasts.

Dana Humphrey: This is LearningWell Radio, the podcast of LearningWell Magazine, covering the intersection of higher education and lifelong well being. I’m Dana Humphrey.

Marjorie Malpiede: And I’m Marjorie Malpiedie, and we’re the hosts of Learning Well Radio. 

MM: Anyone who reads the higher ed press already knows Alex Kafka. For more than two decades, the senior editor at the Chronicle of Higher Education has been bringing information and insights on the most important issues in higher ed, including student mental health and well being. And he’s done this through both his regular coverage and his special reports.

Alex joins us today to talk about a new report he has authored that digs deep into a phenomenon that has been surfacing for the past several years. Certainly before and during and after the pandemic, this sense of loneliness, Gen Z students are reporting. His report, Overcoming Student Loneliness, Strategies for Connection, is, as the title suggests, an evidence based resource for how higher education can address student loneliness, a worrisome and, as we’ll hear from our conversation, complicated issue, by using its own built-in advantages. Alex, welcome to LearningWell Radio.

Alex Kafka: Thank you, Marjorie. I’m so pleased to be with you. 

MM: I’m very excited to have you with us today. And I’m not going to lie. I am a big fan. fan of your work. And I’ve been reading your coverage for years on this topic and others, obviously. So first question, you have covered so many topics in higher ed, including student wellbeing. What made you focus specifically on loneliness? 

AK: My editors and I were talking seriously about a loneliness special report in late 22 and early 23, even before Surgeon General Murthy brought additional newsiness to the topic with his campus tour. And the topic appealed to me because it was difficult and mysterious. And that’s what I like when I’m going into a reporting project. It’s difficult in ways we’ll discuss more later, I’m sure, but fundamentally because loneliness is such a ubiquitous but elusive phenomenon. Emily Dickinson called it the horror not to be surveyed but skirted in the dark. But she, of course, did survey it beautifully and artfully, and we wanted to tackle it too. Most everyone has felt lonely at one time or another, and if you ask just about anyone what was the loneliest time of your life, they’ll have an answer for you. But it’s a puzzle because those lonely times often are not the times when one’s alone. You can be surrounded by people, even by friends, a lover, people who cherish you, respect you, enjoy your company, and still feel lonely. And we’ve all read tragic news stories about rich, popular entertainers or athletes or influencers who, it turns out, were actually abjectly miserable. And in the higher ed space, a more specific, practical mystery, Marjorie, was why once the COVID lockdown period was behind us and students were back on campus, they were still in many cases, deeply lonely, more so than ever, according to some data. So, loneliness and isolation during the quarantine and lockdown were awful, but at least it made a kind of sense. The loneliness after that was a bit of a puzzle, and as a reporter who’d been following college mental health issues for a while, I wanted to talk to experts and figure out what was going on.

MM: So let’s get right into the mystery because I agree that this is not what people think of as being by yourself or lonely. This is a different phenomenon for this generation. So as you point out, It’s not as simple as one might think. Can you talk about the different types of loneliness that in your reporting you uncovered? And one thing that really stood out for me, the fact that loneliness is not a disease, it is a brain state. 

AK: Like a lot of primal feelings, loneliness at first seems simple. And then the more you examine it, the more variegated and complicated it becomes. So it’s widespread. There are societal influences, but it’s also subjective. If you feel hungry, you’re hungry. If you feel thirsty, you’re thirsty. And if you feel lonely, you’re lonely. Jeremy Nobel, a physician and public health expert and the author of Project Unlonely, cites work by John Cassiopo the late neuroscientist at the University of Chicago. And Cassiopo interpreted loneliness fundamentally as a craving, an important psychological and neurological mechanism that prompts us to seek connection.

And I really like this thought, it really resonated in my mind that in that sense, like hunger or thirst, loneliness is a gift. We think, Oh, loneliness, how awful, but it’s also a gift because that prompt is essential to function, to live. The problematic loneliness is loneliness that goes unanswered, unaddressed. And so in that sense the epidemic of loneliness is partly a matter of education, explaining to college students, like everyone else for that matter, that loneliness is ignored at one’s peril, literally, and more broadly at the peril of society. 

MM: So I’m particularly interested in your definition, or the literature’s definition, of psychological and societal loneliness and what that means for us in higher ed.

AK: I have to attribute properly, like a good journalist here, and say this is really Jeremy Nobel’s framing from his book that I draw from. And he’s an important source in the report. So he breaks loneliness down into three fundamental categories. Psychological, societal, and existential. And he in turn, by the way, is drawing from the book. from people before him who have been studying this for decades. He doesn’t pretend to be the creator of all these categories. So yeah, let’s briefly define them. Psychological is that basic craving for connection. As he puts it, I think the wanting of that just warm and fuzzy other human, that is a lifelong thing. Societal loneliness is feeling like you don’t fit in. That you’re excluded from a group of whatever kind. And then the third kind, and this is the trickiest in some ways, and also to my mind, really interesting is the existential or spiritual loneliness. So when you talk to Nobel and other clinicians and authors and experts who have been looking at this, they say that psychological and sociological loneliness are the predominant strains that you will see among college students. 

Then, it’s interesting when you look at recent surveys you find things that are either in or adjacent to that existential or spiritual loneliness. And that’s the fundamental human condition. The bewilderment at being alive. Who am I? How did we get here? Why are we here? What’s my purpose? What do I mean to others? What do they mean to me? That kind of thing. And when you look at what students, what everyone, but including students are thinking about and worrying about things like climate change, gun culture, political polarization, malfeasance, incompetence, war, racism, et cetera, et cetera. Existential concerns are kind of part of that stew, I think, beneath the psychological and sociological loneliness.

MM: That’s a phenomenal description. And it makes me think, and I would agree with you, that this isn’t just about FOMO, right? Although it is about that too, fear of missing out. And also who’s in, who’s out and how do people look at me, either among them or outside of them. And I know we have a lot of that in our young generation, particularly exacerbated by social media, which I do want to talk about. But I would agree, this existential feeling of who am I? What is my purpose? How can I control all of these sort of outer worldly events that are happening? I think when I talk to students I hear them worry a lot about that. So I’m glad you brought it up. 

AK: I think it’s real, that feeling that the world’s going to hell in a handbasket. And, why am I trying so hard to succeed? Why am I going through all this when things are spinning so much out of control?

MM: Yeah, let’s talk about some of the causes that you identify, and I love how you talk about social media as the Borg.

AK: I’m a big Star Trek fan, so I couldn’t help it. And I mean, doesn’t that describe social media? It’s like, when you look at all those studies about people who want to escape it, but they can’t, and they must assimilate.

MM: I have to tell you that was my favorite part of the report. The way you describe that is just priceless. And I think really spot on, to say it’s a love-hate relationship simplifies it, but you talk about, and again, you go back to the evidence and what’s in the literature. I love Jean Twenge’s work on this. We’ve all seen Jonathan Haidt’s new book, The Anxious Generation. So You know, you’re very balanced and research based when you talk about this, but do you have a personal opinion on how onerous social media is to this problem of loneliness in Gen Z?

AK: Ah, so now, Marjorie, you’re trying to trick a reporter into having an opinion about something.

MM: I’m thinking it might be there.

AK: I’ll give that a shot, and it’ll probably get me into trouble just like when any reporter strays into opinion land. Jean Twenge, a hugely influential psychologist and author, put her fingers on a lot of this stuff a decade ago. And I think most of your listeners are well aware of the argument, so I won’t rehash it at length, but, the confluence of smartphone adoption and ubiquitous social media and then Professor Haidt and his new book, and it seems like every book on this topic has to be accompanied by an article in The Atlantic, right? So he had one of those and he’s updated Dr. Twenge’s thoughts and argument in a more activist vein, saying we should look at policies and legislation curtailing the use, particularly among younger kids, of smartphones and social media. And influential folks are obviously hearing and thinking about this debate. Just this week, a few days ago, Surgeon General Murthy proposed putting warning labels on social media the same way we do on cigarettes in California, Florida, and some other states. Interestingly, states that have overall a lot of political differences are all considering legislation that would rein in kids’ use of social media. So in answer to your question, I’ll stray from my reportorial comfort zone a little bit. 

While correlation is not causation, I think Twenge’s and Haidt’s arguments pack a real wallop, and I totally understand why Surgeon General Murthy and legislators and parents and teachers and school administrators are alarmed. And, I’ve thought a lot about the counter argument I mentioned in the report, a George Will column where he says, society always freaks out about new technology, whether it’s a radio or TV or internet or cell phones. But, I think that doesn’t quite hold up. Bill Maher did a great bit a couple of years ago, making a serious point in his entertaining way that cell phones, especially in tandem with social media. Bring a technological change, not just in quantity, but in kind. That this is really a little bit different. And besides the occasional glance at LinkedIn, or catching up with music camp friends on Facebook, I don’t really go in much for social media. I have other addictions like binging on Succession. But here’s where my ambivalence or confusion or reservations come in, and I realize it’s mealy mouthed and totally unhelpful.

But there are three points I want to make, and I’ll try to make them quickly. One, smartphones are woven into so many facets of our lives. That while it may well make sense to delay their use, and my wife and I did just that with our now 26-year-old twins that might just make them all the more enticing. I think about when I was a kid, Marjorie, I wasn’t allowed to watch TV except a little on Friday and Saturday nights, and that just made TV gleam in my imagination, like the Holy Grail. And pretty much every school day, I snuck over to my friend Bruce’s house to watch reruns of M. A. S. H. But I think, the forbidden fruit, whether it’s TV or social media, is always very appealing, right? And then Two, within social media, the categories are so wide and blurred. Yes, obviously heavy teen users staring at TikTok or Instagram or YouTube most of every waking hour. That’s a horror show and the opportunity costs are huge. Not just in socialization, but just in reading and pursuing other skills and passions. But social media, as you know, serves affinity groups, marginalized populations, people with disabilities. During the pandemic, in some cases, it was a real lifeline for students who felt just dreadfully isolated. And social media can reveal occupational possibilities, they blend with entertainment, streaming, and video game platforms, they offer marketplaces for niche skills, they do a lot. And so it’s a very mixed bag.

MM: Yeah.

AK: And, then the third point I’ll make, and then I’ll hush up on this, is that when it comes to cultural battles over tech, I think we’re often fighting the last war. And so I wonder if warning labels on social media will feel like the explicit lyrics on albums that Tipper Gore proposed. Where teens just laughed and rolled their eyes and bought the albums. Gosh, I think if we look back in 10 or 20 years at the possibilities and perils of, say, AI, and how that blends into the mix, some of these other debates will be dwarfed. 

MM: A couple things. One is, what I think is interesting, and it’s pointed out in your report that kids themselves would just as well give up social media if all of their friend groups did the same. So there may be some sort of organic resistance to it that we might see. What do you think?

AK: I think there’s a total organic resistance to it, and I love you can read, or maybe you’ve already read, about the study by economists showing that people would literally shell out 10, 20, 30 bucks a month to rid social media from their universes. Except, and this is where the Borg assimilation metaphor comes in, you can’t quit because so much of your career life or student life or Just the logistics of communicating with your team or your carpool or whatever are so wrapped into it. And so you can’t. But I think, educating students about some of the perils and addictive issues with social media, just like you do, tobacco and alcohol and sex education and education about anything else in the world, that might yield better results, but I don’t know. I think it’ll yield a lot of great dissertations in the next decade or two.

MM: What is it specifically about — again, the many trends and habits and favorites and whatnot — what is the direct linkage to why they’re so lonely? 

AK: So there’s a great metaphor that a journalist used in an Atlantic piece, and Jean Twenge in her new book actually references that, where the journalist says, look, it’s not that everyone who uses social media is lonely and miserable and it’s a more, Subtle connection, the way a sip of wine might loosen people up at a party and make them feel a little less shy and inhibited. For other people, it might make them too uninhibited or depressed or whatever that it can have or, alcoholic and addicted. That social media is the same way, that for most people a little bit of social media goes a long way and it’s probably okay, but then for some relatively small percent, It’s really problematic. And when you look at the surveys showing percentages of, I don’t have them in front of me, but gosh, five, 10, 15 percent, you’ve got a line of 10 students in front of you and one or two of them is addicted to something, whether that’s social media or drugs or alcohol or whatever else that’s a big concern. And if you’re wrapped up in social media, first of all, there’s all the potential abuse, bullying, exploitation, deep fake nudes, sex, blackmail stuff, the things you read about in the newspaper every day. There’s that, but short of that, there’s also just, gosh, if you’re staring at your phone five, six, seven hours a day there’s so many other things you’re not doing.

MM: And not connecting around, certainly not in a real way. Speaking of smartphones and social media I want to sneak in a question about something you reported on recently. And that was a new report, a white paper that came out on the efficacy of mental health apps for college students. Big, huge question. I was glad that you wrote this. And also glad that Our friends and colleagues actually did the white paper. This was Sarah Lipson and Dan Eisenberg and others Healthy Minds Network. And I believe the Hope Center. Alec, what do you think about that in relation to what we’re talking about today?

AK: Yeah, so what they’re doing, so these are teams from BU, UCLA, Irvine, Temple, and I hope I’m not forgetting any institution in conjunction with the Ruderman Family Foundation. And what they’re trying to do is bring some quantification and some publicly available evidence. about whether mental health apps that colleges are using are working. And there’s some evidence, they cite, for instance, a study from 2019, that the apps are in fact doing something, maybe quite a bit. But there’s not a lot of evidence out there. There’s not a lot of transparency as to how many students are using these apps, whether they stick with the apps, that’s a big question whether the apps are taking the best approaches for the student populations they’re reaching, that kind of thing. And so in this report, they first of all are pushing, I would say, college leadership to ask more questions of the app vendors as to what exactly you’re selling, how good is it, and for the hundreds of thousands of dollars that we’re paying for it in some cases what are we getting for our money. And then in the longer run, they’re urging the app vendors and colleges to share their information about All those things, how effective the apps are, how many students are reaching so that people can, hopefully pick the right ones for their circumstances. 

MM: And there’s so much promise there to your point about the sort of flip side of social media and devices. There’s so much more we need to know about how it might actually benefit students. Certainly they’re using them. And it’s, there’s the proliferation of these that certainly came around in the last few years and We’re certainly accelerated by the pandemic. Before we leave the causes of loneliness, I didn’t ask you about the pandemic, Alex. There’s so much we still don’t know and analyze in that. But what do you say about that in your report?

AK: Yeah. When I was writing about student mental health during the pandemic, a lot of experts were hypothesizing/warning that there could be something they were calling an echo pandemic, which would be a post traumatic societal phenomenon. And they were looking back at previous historical examples like World War I, the Spanish flu pandemic, things like that, and saying, hey, after these things were quote, over, they weren’t really over, that there was in some cases, upticks in depression and anxiety and suicides and all kinds of things, and they were afraid that might happen with COVID too. And at least some, I don’t think it’s that clear and I don’t think it’s really a consensus, but at least some experts think we are in that eco pandemic now, when you look at the still rising rates. of anxiety, depression, suicidal ideation, social anxiety in particular subcategory of anxiety that we are seeing the results of those lockdown and quarantine periods and, the cognitive and emotional effects of those.

MM: And you say in your report that Gen Z students are the most lonely demographic, for all the reasons we’ve been talking about but that puts this whole issue squarely at the door of colleges and universities, particularly those who care deeply about protecting student mental health. And success, because I think you point out as well in your report, this affects how people learn, how engaged they are in their college experience, etc. I wanted to ask you about something I thought was a great point in your reporting, and that is that terms matter, right? Words matter in college student mental health. And there’s always this sense of, what is something that is a serious or acute diagnosis that has to be treated in one way? And what is, to reach back to what we first started talking about, more of a state of mind or feelings. And you talk about loneliness in a way where we need to be careful not to pathologize it, right? But at the same time understand when it becomes a problem. Can you talk a little bit about that?

AK: Sure. Yeah. As we’ve discussed, the mental health problems are all too real an unbeat of statistics from healthy mind study and other surveys, loneliness percentages in the forties or fifties or even higher, depending what you look at, anxiety and depression rates in the thirties or forties climbing rates of social anxiety. And students in psychological crises need substantial care, and they need it fast. And it’s great that stigmatization of mental health challenges has declined a ton over the last couple decades. But clinicians are also worried. That everyday stress is sometimes medicalized by students and by their parents. Being a social mammal is sometimes trying. Anyone with a roommate, schoolmate, or even just family members can attest to that, right? And there are financial, logistical problems that are very real, but not medical. Not psychological. And yet too many students, counseling center directors are saying, try to solve every problem with an appointment at the counseling center. And that can be unhelpful in a couple ways. First, the counseling center can’t help them. If the problem is finance and summer job issues, you got to go to financial aid and career centers. And second, if the misguided counseling center recessions take valuable time from students who really need them, that stretches already ragged and totally understaffed counseling centers even further. 

MM: I want to then segue into sort of what schools are doing to respond to this because I do Think that this is starting to become an acknowledgement on college campuses, you know I’ve been hearing for years counseling services can’t do everything, nor should they. And so we’re seeing the rest of the community get involved in this, which I think is a good thing. When it comes to this particular issue around loneliness, what are some of the strategies that you’re seeing that might be most effective?

AK: Oh, sure. That’s the fun part of the report. After all the depressing news about causes and whatever, is that this, unlike some things colleges can actually do quite a bit about, and it doesn’t always cost that much either. There practical, just plain old fun responses, outdoor movie nights with snacks, escape rooms, food trucks, outdoor concerts, dances. Do not underestimate, I’ve been told by a couple presidents now, how much this generation that did not get their prom and junior prom nights, how much they love dances. Speed-friending preferably in conjunction with pizza. Everything goes better with pizza. Quiet craft activities for students who just don’t go in for a lot of noise and commotion. For students who do go in for a lot of noise and commotion. Crazy traditions. The one that’s pictured on the cover of the report is the Colorado School of Mines cardboard boat race. And the precedent there is also big in the GaGaBall tournaments. I had no idea what GaGaBall was until I reported this. There’s some other things too changing expectations from the outset. So that students who have a few lonely weeks at the beginning of their first year realize Hey, that’s normal, and they are not the oddballs. They’re supposed to be feeling that way. Sometimes practical nudges, like at Bryant University in Rhode Island, they give every new student a lawn chair. And have kind of a block party that first night and going on that first week. Things going on outside, right outside their dorms every night. Social gatherings around academic programs in preparation for study abroad. And then finally I love the MIT example that I cite and especially one student who I feature, and I won’t tell you too much here and spoil it, but Students who turn those existential quandaries we talked about upside down. Why are we here? How can we better serve our fellow human beings? You know, if you’re sitting alone in your room those questions can lead to misery. But if you start, like they did, a quote, big question club and get together regularly and do readings around them and invite guest lecturers and that kind of thing, that can become a very social phenomenon and really fun. So I guess, two prongs. Humanize the campus, increase empathy and peer support, but also just make campus life vibrant and fun so that the fear of missing out doesn’t happen on your phone. It happens because, or rather it happens because you’re on your phone and you’re not out the door and actually interacting with your peers. 

MM: The other thing I love that you talked about, and if you have anything else to add, please do, but this idea about, so activities are terrific, right? Some people go for it, some people might not. But this kind of cultural change where everyone on campus is sort of acknowledging the reality of this, right? Not everybody has a friend group, or friends. And professors talking about that and staff talking about that. I think that’s really cool.

AK: Yeah, I do too. That strain of the argument came from Gary Glass, I think, at Emory University. And he was saying, yeah, this generation, they’ve grown up watching syndications of friends and other sitcoms where not only do you have a couple good friends, but you’ve got a circle of six or eight of them and they’re all witty. And there’s always some. Funny story arc going on that you’re all part of. And of course, people know, hey, that’s TV. It’s not real life. And yet, when you combine that with that parallel universe on social media, where everyone looks happy and healthy and thin and smiling, that can have in the long run kind of weird effects on what you expect from your social life. 

MM: Fantastic words of advice with chock full of evidence and some great best practices. So this is definitely a report that should be read and it should be read now at a very important time. I want to make sure that our audience knows how to get the report. 

AK: Go to chronicle.com, which you should check out anyway, because it’s awesome. But then go to the store button at the top of the page on chronicle.com, and then you will see on the drop down menu reports or featured products, as well as other things like data collections, back issues. And this will be under, at the moment, I think it’s under reports and featured products. But anyway, you’ll find my report. You’ll find brilliant reports by so many of my colleagues at The Chronicle on all kinds of urgent and important issues.

MM: Thank you so much, Alex. This has been a real treat to have you on the show. Thank you so much. And we are looking forward to more from you.

AK: Great. I’ve had so much fun speaking with you and thank you Marjorie.

MM: Take care.

Ian Elsner: This has been learning while radio, a production of learning. Well, for more information about our work, go to learning well mag.org. And if you like what we’re doing, leave us a rating or review. Thanks so much for listening.

Our Students Have Something to Tell Us

As the academic year drew to a close in May, I waited for my fears to be actualized. After a spring of over 3000 arrests of college students—something unprecedented in my professional experience of nearly 30 years—I found myself questioning my confidence in the core commitment I made to my students. I have always expected students to change the world, to utilize the educational experience to be, what I call “comfortably uncomfortable.” Yet, I was getting increasingly uncomfortable as encampments, protests, and arrests proliferated around campuses in the United States. I worried, for the first time, that perhaps we were afraid of our students and their calls for intervention in a time of global crisis. I saw campuses closing their gates and worried we might temper our commitment to the rigorous exchange of ideas that so fundamentally defines higher education and the joys found in this setting. 

And then I listened. Over the course of a week, I attended nearly a dozen graduation ceremonies involving countless student voices. I have gone to senior balls and hugged tearful students who, only a few weeks earlier, presented me with lists of demands. Time and again, I am reminded that our adolescents are experts in their lived experience. We fail that expertise when we presume the wisdom we gained as adolescents decades ago somehow supplants the wisdom of today’s lived experience. We need to listen and then apply our wisdom as leaders and educators. As I reflect on that remarkable spring, I am reminded of a few key factors influencing our future work together: 

Teenagers don’t “get over” a pandemic. The impact of the isolation resulting from the pandemic interrupted an important stage of adolescent development among teenagers. It has left an undeniable impact upon today’s youth and it will influence our understanding of early, mid, and late adolescence for years to come. This should not be a surprise to educators. Assessments of adolescent health and well-being clearly established a prevalence of stress, anxiety and depression that preceded the pandemic. Isolation caused by the pandemic increased loneliness and adversely impacted interpersonal skill development. For a community whose high school and early college experience was defined as “Wake up, open Zoom, close Zoom, sleep. Repeat,” learning how to meaningfully connect with others is anything but inherent. The Healthy Minds report of 2022-23 noted 42% of respondents missed companionship and nearly 70% of respondents reported feeling isolated often or some of the time. It is now normative, not exceptional, for our emerging adults to be lonely, want true friendships (not the social media kind), and are urgently seeking a sense of community. The resilience I may have learned in my college experiences in the 80s, is not the same resilience our students learned during periods of mass shootings, isolation, and the desire to be compassionate actors in a complex world. Our students are trying very hard to change the world on a stopwatch, understandable given the disruption of time, space and developmental growth caused by the pandemic.

I have gone to senior balls and hugged tearful students who, only a few weeks earlier, presented me with lists of demands.

Listen to what our students are telling us. They care. And they are learning how to show it to an older (yes, that’s us) generation that doesn’t seem to be listening. Countless encampments, arrests, and fear of a global crisis enfolded this past academic year on the heels of years of mass shootings and uncertainty. There is no better time than now for higher education to invest in our youth and engage in developing skills associated with care for others, curiosity, and, yes, conflict. Let’s remember everything we learned in high school through interpersonal interactions. Our hearts were broken and restored, we had best friends and best best friends (they might have changed often based on how the day went), and there was a “cool kids” table in the cafeteria. We learned, through interpersonal engagement, empathy by being in the 3D presence of emotion expressed without a mask on. 

In their graduation remarks at my institution, students repeatedly appealed to each other for community, dialogue, and compassion; not revolution. One of my favorite graduation speakers remarked on this theme by sharing, “We are united by…this innate desire to be interconnected and care for one another everywhere we go.” They are just learning how to do that in a world where Chicken Little, to them, is starting to look like a soothsayer. These students share our compassion but they haven’t learned as well how to express and moderate that compassion and care for others. They may protest sometimes, they may express frustration when they see horror: they are retroactively learning how to express those feelings in real time, in 3D. Our colleges and universities are well prepared to provide some calm and purpose. 

There is no better time than now for higher education to invest in our youth and engage in developing skills associated with care for others, curiosity, and, yes, conflict.

I am confident our institutions can continue to do what they know is best: educate and inspire global scholars who will transform our world. The expression and curiosity of those scholars serve as a litmus test for the success of today’s adolescence following the interruption of the pandemic. Higher education must pursue our mission in a manner that is responsive to the curiosity, compassion and isolation our students carry within them. The actions of our younger scholars are impacted by these realities and require responsive and continued commitment to their post-graduate success in a world that is complex—and eager—for their impact. Let’s listen, please, and then do what we do best.


Eleanor J.B. Daugherty, PhD, MEd, is the Vice President of Student Affairs at Georgetown University. Daugherty previously served as Associate Vice President for Student Affairs and Dean of Students at the University of Connecticut (UConn). 

Seeing the Unseen

In the landscape of higher education, student fathers face a particularly stark lack of recognition and support. A new report by Generation Hope,”EmpowerED Dads: Amplifying Voices, Advancing Higher Education for Student Fathers,” sheds crucial light on the unique challenges and needs of these individuals. As we strive for a more inclusive and equitable educational environment, it is imperative that we amplify the voices of student fathers and advocate for policies that support their success.

Student fathers often juggle multiple roles, balancing their studies with the demands of caregiving and employment. This multifaceted responsibility is compounded by societal stereotypes that frequently cast fathers, particularly fathers of color, as absent or uninvolved in their children’s lives. The report highlights that Black and Latino student fathers, in particular, face significant obstacles, including higher rates of basic needs insecurity and lower utilization of support services​.

Despite these challenges, student fathers demonstrate remarkable resilience and dedication. They are not merely pursuing degrees but striving to provide better futures for their families. However, their efforts are often overshadowed by a lack of visibility and recognition within the academic sphere. This invisibility can profoundly impact their self-esteem and academic performance, perpetuating a cycle of underachievement and disengagement.

The Need for Tailored Support

To address these issues, tailored support systems that acknowledge and address the specific needs of student fathers must be developed and implemented. Policies and institutional practices must evolve to provide flexible scheduling, accessible childcare, and financial assistance for this demographic. Additionally, mental health services should be made readily available to help student fathers manage the stress and anxiety that come with balancing their multiple roles.

As we strive for a more inclusive and equitable educational environment, it is imperative that we amplify the voices of student fathers and advocate for policies that support their success.

Furthermore, creating a campus culture that celebrates the contributions of student fathers can go a long way in fostering their sense of belonging and purpose. Universities should promote awareness campaigns and support groups that provide a platform for student fathers to share their experiences and build a supportive community.

Policy Reforms and Institutional Changes

Policy reforms are crucial in driving systemic change. Legislators and educational institutions must work together to ensure that student fathers are included in discussions about higher education support strategies. Financial aid policies should consider the unique financial pressures faced by student parents, and academic policies should offer greater flexibility to accommodate their schedules.

Generation Hope’s report underscores the importance of including student fathers in the broader conversation about diversity, equity, and inclusion in higher education. By advocating for policies that recognize and value the experiences of student fathers, we can create a more equitable and supportive educational environment for all students.

A Call to Action

The journey of a student father is marked by resilience and a deep commitment to their families and education. It is time for us to recognize and support their efforts. By amplifying their voices and addressing their unique needs, we can help student fathers achieve their academic goals and secure better futures for themselves and their children.


Brittani Williams is the Director of Policy, Advocacy and Research at Generation Hope.

Generation Hope engages education and policy partners to drive systemic change and provides direct support to teen parents in college as well as their children through holistic, two-generation programming.

Democratizing the Liberal Arts

As part of his listening tour, Matt vandenBerg, the new president of Ohio Wesleyan University, created a YouTube and TikTok video of himself not listening to a legendary superstition that stepping on a seal outside of University Hall would bring bad luck. In the hilarious parody, vandenBerg cautiously steps, then stomps, dances, and jump-jacks on the seal before he is beset by a series of calamities that have him appearing at a university function sporting tattered clothes and a black eye. 

@ohiowesleyan

POV: your university president decides to test fate and steps on the seal – bad luck level: Presidential Edition!

♬ original sound – Ohio Wesleyan University

There is much to unpack here. First, it takes a certain level of confidence for a new president to humble (vandenBerg might say “humiliate”) himself in front of his students, and on their own medium at that. It is also refreshing to see a college president bringing some levity to a position that, certainly of late, is not perceived as being much fun. His inauguration on April 19 was another opportunity to depart from the implied rules. In referring to Paul Revere’s famous ride on the same date, vandenBerg evoked a rebellious spirit in laying out nine new initiatives the school would be taking on, including partnerships with the community and other institutions that would increase access and affordability. In his speech, vandenBerg rejected a number of “unhelpful” conventions in higher education – the idea that faculty and administrators are naturally at odds, that host communities are either competitive with or overly-reliant on their university partners, and, perhaps most importantly, that the liberal arts are for the fortunate few and will not bring the kind of return on investment Americans are looking for in a college degree. 

In our interview, President vandenBerg talks about that speech, as well as what drew him to Delaware, Ohio, how he plans to distinguish OWU’s mission from “what everyone else promises,” and what new college presidents might learn from the public’s current frustration with higher education. 

LearningWell: You were most recently at Presbyterian College in South Carolina. What made you leave there and come to OWU? 

MV: My family and I were committed to staying at Presbyterian College for a good number of years, but serendipity hits in your life at times, and for us, serendipity hit in the form of an old friend calling me to say, “I know you’re not looking for a new job opportunity. I just need you to pick up the phone and listen.” This friend happened to be leading the search for the presidency of Ohio Wesleyan University, and I realized that from that short conversation with her, I didn’t just want to know more about Ohio Wesleyan; I needed to know more.

So much of the spirit of the institution, its situation in the higher education landscape, and its aspirations resonated with me. But I also thought it might bring some important enhancements to the life of my family. After a consultation with my wife, I decided to throw my hat in the ring, and the rest is history. 

We had some trepidation, but in the end, moving my family to Delaware, Ohio, was a no-brainer, primarily for three reasons. Number one, the people. The students, faculty, staff, trustees, alumni, and the community members that we met were really special. They wanted to do big things. Together, we were going to be able to do transformative work to elevate and amplify a tremendous institution. 

Number two, the community. The city of Delaware, in Delaware County, loves its university. It was evident to us at first blush. There’s been a bedrock of trust built over decades between the institution and the community. That stands in stark contrast to where a lot of small, private, residential liberal arts institutions are situated. They are often in struggling communities and are the sole anchor that is relied upon to drive the local economy, to bring all of the artistic and humanistic enhancement to the community. That’s simply not the case with Ohio Wesleyan University and the city of Delaware and Delaware County. This is a healthy place looking to go from great to phenomenal, and that is always a charge that I get excited about. 

The third thing that got me so excited to come here was the transformative impact that OWU has on the lives of young people. I believe that in higher education we often focus on the transaction: How much does it cost? What degree do you graduate with? What is your first-year salary? Are you seeing that immediate return on investment? To me, if done well, higher education is not a transaction. It is a transition into adulthood, and it is supposed to be transformative. Ohio Wesleyan University intrinsically understands that. It’s baked into the ethos of this place. They’ve got 40,000 success stories to showcase that impact. So, that’s how I went from not looking for another position to realizing the calling of my life was to come to this spot in Ohio. 

LW: You recently had your inauguration. Tell me a little bit about what you said that day. What was most important for you to lay out in terms of your vision for the school?

MV: We wanted to be rebellious in terms of what an inauguration actually is. They are often kind of boring, stuffy — too focused on the new person getting the job. I believe that an inauguration should be an inflection point in an institution’s trajectory. It should be an opportunity to celebrate the past and everything that brought us to where we are. It should be a chance to grapple earnestly and honestly with the challenges and opportunities that we have today. And then it should also be a way to galvanize ourselves around an exciting future. 

If you’re a college president and you’re not leveraging the concerns and criticisms for self-reflection and self-improvement, you’re missing a big opportunity. 

That day, we made the case that we need to seek and secure distinction in this overcrowded higher education landscape. We were pretty direct in tackling that head-on. Not only will we not thrive in the future if we don’t figure out what it is that makes us distinctive, but we’re also doing a tremendous disservice to students and families by not pointing out the meaningful differences between institutions. We all tend to sell ourselves the same way using the same tired cliches: “Come here because we have small class sizes, faculty who really care about you and who know your name. We have tight-knit communities. We have beautiful campuses. We have successful alumni. We’ll give you a job or an internship. You’ll learn how to apply what you’re learning in the classroom to an external context.” Those are things that every institution is saying right now, and it can contribute to this sense of white noise that students and their families have when they go on different campus tours.

I want Ohio Wesleyan University to be able to answer the question of what makes us truly unique. The title of my inaugural address is “What’s in the Water?” — What is it about Ohio Wesleyan that we offer to students that they can’t or don’t or won’t get anywhere else? And how do we channel our energy, our resources, and our focus in the same direction so that our unique, meaningful, defensible value proposition truly shines? 

We invoked the spirit of 1842, our founding year, and we connected that to the historic spirit of the day on which the inauguration actually occurred. It was April 19th — the day of Paul Revere’s ride and the day of the Battles of Lexington and Concord.  That day sparked the American Revolution. So, we invoked the spirit of rebellion of that day to discuss how OWU began and to proclaim with confidence and joy where we were going. 

In 1842, a local Methodist minister went door-to- door, just like Paul Revere did, to rally the countryside in a call to do something important and in service to a greater purpose. That was a fun message to deliver, but it had a serious undertone. The idea was to apply a sense of rebellion to the way we move forward, and that means categorically rejecting all of the things in higher education that are broken, all the things that we think are supposed to be truisms but that are absolutely not. For example, the understanding that faculty and administrators are supposed to be at odds with each other — we categorically reject that notion. The idea that the liberal arts are not inherently valuable as an educational model, that they don’t lead to good careers, that they are a poor choice if you’re looking for return on investment. We categorically reject those notions. And lastly, we wanted to showcase that at OWU, we don’t just talk about things; we do them. Our love language is action. We made nine significant announcements that day, and they all boil down to three different things. One is investing in people, especially our students, faculty and staff; two is building community, especially through investments in our infrastructure; and three is changing lives through innovative partnerships. 

LW: Can we talk a little more about that third goal? 

MV: Establishing partnerships is a big part of what we want to do. We want to radically expand affordability and accessibility and build equitable pathways that help students get to where they want to go in their lives. We want to deliver on the student’s timetable, not necessarily just higher education’s timetable. So, we announced a few new ways of doing just that. 

Columbus State Community College is the major two-year institution in central Ohio. Together, we launched a powerful three-part partnership to help community college students realize that there is a viable pathway for them to a four-year degree at a liberal arts institution. The first component of our partnership is called “Preferred Pathway.” It’s fairly common for community college students to want to pursue a bachelor’s degree once they graduate. The problem is that, at many institutions, their credits don’t always fully transfer and they don’t maintain their hardfought status in their major.  They are promised this two-year pathway to a bachelor’s degree, and then they discover that it’s going to take them longer and cost them more to graduate than they were told. It can feel to them like a bait-and-switch. Moreover, for a lot of students, including those transferring in from a community college, just the idea of going to a private liberal arts college can sound expensive – perhaps even out of reach, financially. We knew we could improve that experience for students. In partnership with about 25 different professors, we hand-built transparent, hassle-free two-year pathways for students across 20 different majors. It’s the most comprehensive pathway program that Columbus State has among national liberal arts universities.

The second part of the partnership attacks the real and perceived cost issue, head-on. For up to 25 students with at least a 3.5 GPA at Columbus State, we have a tuition match program, so they actually pay the Columbus State tuition rate to attend and complete their Ohio Wesleyan University degree. The tuition match program means that students now not only have the logistical means to succeed, but they now have extraordinary financial support as well. No other university, public or private, can match that commitment.

We want to democratize access to the transformative benefits of a liberal arts education.

The third part of our partnership addresses a vexing national issue – and certainly one that affects our region as well. It’s the looming teacher shortage and the dearth of people entering the teaching profession. We don’t think that we can solve that problem on our own, but one of the things that we can do is begin to reduce the barriers to entry for people who do have an interest in the teaching profession. How do we encourage those students who feel a calling toward this work to get their credentials and degrees without saddling them with crippling debt?

In partnership with our local Delaware County school systems and Columbus State, we found a new way to deliver extraordinary value and encourage more teachers to enter the system. Using the College Credit Plus program in Ohio, students in their junior year of high school are able to earn credit toward their associate degree from Columbus State. By the time they graduate from high school, they get not only a high school diploma, but also an associate degree, and then they can jump seamlessly into Ohio Wesleyan University and complete their bachelor’s and teaching certificate in just two years. This program cuts the time to completion in half and reduces their costs dramatically. 

Another partnership, the Delaware County Promise, is a great example of our vision for the future. Delaware County is considered the healthiest, wealthiest, and fastest-growing county in the state of Ohio, and the unfortunate truth is that not everyone participates equally in that prosperity. We can prove over and over again that higher education is the great social mobility agent, but a lot of people who are from disadvantaged backgrounds, even in Delaware County, don’t think about going to their local liberal arts college, because they dismiss it as being out of reach. This was one of the earliest problems I remember thinking about when I came here. I started talking with city and county leaders, and we came up with an exciting program to tackle that problem, which we announced at the inauguration. “If you are from Delaware County or go to school in Delaware County, and you earn a 3.5 GPA in high school and your family makes $100,000 a year or less, you can now go to Ohio Wesleyan University absolutely tuition-free.” We worked out a way, through our own investments in financial aid, to make that possible and then partnered with the community and the Delaware County Foundation to make it happen. 

Ultimately, what we really want to do is to democratize access to the transformative benefits of a liberal arts education. We want to be able to reach anyone for whom the liberal arts can be a life-changer. We want a student’s personal choice to determine where they attend college, rather than financial barriers, social constraints, self-confidence constraints, or other challenges. We want personal choice and fit, as decided by the individual, to be the ultimate determinant. 

LW: Major change, as opposed to tradition, is not something we often associate with higher education. What are your thoughts on that?

MV: Higher education certainly features some significant strengths. For example, shared governance, academic freedom, and free speech strengthen what we do and how we do it. But we can improve in some areas.  Among our relative weaknesses is our sense of toxic egalitarianism — the idea that we have to do everything with the same amount of effort, that we can’t give anything we do more attention unless we give an equal measure of attention and investment to everything else. Most people who start a business, or run a business, understand that that is no way to succeed. We need to know our distinctive value proposition and make disciplined and strategic decisions accordingly.

Moreover, higher education has tended to have an incremental approach to mustering its way through challenges by adding a few programs here or there, adding a few more students, and reducing operating expenses a little bit. My abiding notion is that this moment in our history is not a time for incremental strategies alone. We should be thinking about continuous improvement — how we can be better and better at what we do — but if we don’t start breaking some of the implied rules about what higher education is and what it is supposed to be, we are going to miss the mark as our society – and students’ needs – continue to change at unprecedented levels.

LW: Do people ask you why you wanted to become a college president at a time when higher education, and presidents in particular, are under such scrutiny? 

MV: The presidency of a college can be a hard job, no doubt, as I said to a group of aspiring vice presidents and presidents in Washington, D.C., last week. I told them, “If you’re thinking about a presidency simply because it gives you a fancier title, because the pay is better, because you think people will respect you more, or because you receive more visibility, this job will eat you alive.” 

One underrated quality of liberal arts institutions is that we’re fundamentally good for democracy.

You have to want to do this work because it’s a calling. I’ve known I wanted to do this job since I was 20 years old. I know that is an oddly specific sense of vocation for a 20-year-old to have, but I have always believed in the value of higher education and particularly in the power of liberal arts colleges to transform lives. I don’t think liberal arts colleges are for everyone, but I do think they are for a lot more students than who currently realize it. That is what gets me out of bed in the morning. Religious connotations aside, I see myself as a liberal arts evangelist, helping to bring the word of what we do to more people who would benefit enormously from this important educational philosophy and delivery model.

Without a doubt, higher education is under attack by some, and many in our society question the value of a college degree. The truth of the matter is that going to college brings enormous financial and other benefits over the course of one’s career. An educated populace also benefits humanity writ large. But affordability concerns, rising costs, political rancor, the alarming deterioration in our public discourse, and other factors sometimes cloud how people understand that value. Nevertheless, for many, perceptions are reality. So, our job is to educate others and clarify what we do and why it matters. It seems to me that, for higher education leaders, now is a time for us to listen, to reflect, and to respond. I try to use what I’m hearing to become a better leader and to help OWU to improve. If you’re a college president and you’re not leveraging the concerns and criticisms for self-reflection and self-improvement, I think you’re missing a big opportunity. 

One underrated quality of liberal arts institutions is that we’re fundamentally good for democracy. We promote and engender in our students an appreciation for civic participation, free speech, intellectual inquiry, and service to others. And in these fractious times, we think it’s critical for our institutions to serve as an antidote for the deficits we see in our society’s discourse. Our educational approach is uniquely effective at training students to engage in constructive dialogue, especially amidst disagreement and difference. We believe that more people need to learn how to be productively engaged citizens who understand how their government works and who can work to address problems in ways that bring others together, rather than in ways that exacerbate divides. In the coming months, OWU will seek to amplify its role in that vital work. We think it’s essential to our democratic republic. And that work is just one more example of the vital role of higher education.