This Week In College Viability (TWICV) for Mar 9, 2026

It is Monday, March 10th, 2026. Yet again, it's time for This Week in College Viability News and Commentary. Hi everybody, Gary Stocker sitting in front of the Blue Yeti microphone and the smooth-running riverside.fm podcast software. And this is, of course, the podcast that talks about the financial health and viability of public and private colleges with data and details and perspectives offered nowhere else. And make sure to stick with the podcast to the end this week. I used one of my AI tools to help me write the wrap-up this week. And it came up with a fascinating conclusion, but listen to the stories and see what the conclusion that I used my AI tool to draft. And I, of course, did some editing for it. And here's a hint, don't fall out of your chairs. Higher education has become an industry of spin. And hiding bad data. This week's top stories and commentary: the uncomfortable questions about direct admissions, Keystone College accreditation reaffirmed by Middle States. When will these folks ever protect students? In Illinois, apparently they publish the winners and subsidize the loser public colleges. I'll have that story and commentary. And there is a faculty protest at DePaul University. Well, faculty protests are not news. They are as common, almost as common as the sun rising. This one though has some interesting spin. And of course, the 2026 College Majors Completion App for academic leaders and one for students and families is out, as is the new and updated College Viability Transparency Tool for students and families to make sure that they are comfortable with college decisions and the college search and selection process. In general. So where do we start each week? We start with layoffs and cutbacks, and the story this week leads off with major restructuring will merge two Boise State schools and close a college. Kevin Reichert had this story on March 4th at newsfromthestates.com. It was originally posted at idahoadnews.org on March 3rd. Boise State will merge two colleges and close a third. It was announced last Tuesday. It's not immediately clear, the story reads, how many positions will be cut. It's also unclear how much money Boise State expects to save with the restructuring. Interim President Jeremiah Chin and Interim Provost Zeynep Hansen said, while we understand that change can be challenging, And our campus has experienced a lot of it. We are confident that these changes will strengthen our university for the future. And you've probably heard me say before, one of the leading indicators of a college in trouble is how many of their leaders have the word interim in front of their job title. So right off the top, the president and the provost are both interims. Maybe it's a good thing, but I, I wouldn't bet the house on that. Page 2. SEMO, Southeast Missouri University spin. My headline, not theirs. University enrollment grows, officials report 167. Count them on your fingers and toes. Not my, my words, not theirs. Officials report 167 more students for spring 2026. Mark Bliss at the Southeast Missourian posted this on March 8th. And this was regurgitation reporting at its best or worst, depending how you look at it, publishing data with no critical analysis. I couldn't even tell what years were being compared, whether it was last fall or last spring. Nonetheless, we look at all the data here at College Viability, and since 2016, or from 2016 to 2024, the full-time equivalent enrollment was down 1,600 plus students down almost 18% in colleges. Feel free to spin. You're going to, I know that, we know that, we all know that. But your data is always going to be out there for the world to see. 'Cause you know I'm out there sharing it. And just ask yourself as you post this spin, and I don't doubt for a second that 167 is correct, but it's not in context, it's out of context. It's making the college look better than it is. Just think about your credibility because if there are folks like me and others out there using this data to say, hey, their credibility is not very good because they're not giving you the whole story, you just, you have to be concerned. Page 3, 8 education trends that are changing college admissions. I only want to talk about one. Scott White had the story at Forbes and it's direct admissions. Let me read to you from part of Mr. White's story. Direct admissions is one of the 8 changes he talks about, cutting out the application, cutting out the college application. So he writes, some schools are trying something radical— just admitting students without waiting for them to apply. Yes, you heard that right, admit students without waiting for them to apply. More than 210 colleges now participate in direct admissions programs through the Common App. Sending unsolicited offers based solely on academic profiles. I trust they're decent. Probably not. The number of participating schools has nearly doubled in a year. More than 150 colleges are participating, and for the 2025-2026 cycle, over 1 million students have received at least one direct admission and scholarship offer through the Niche the niche.com direct admissions. I'm betting they're making a buck on that. Nothing wrong with that. Averaging 8, averaging 8 offers per student. And for first-generation students, he writes, who might not know how to manage the traditional process, this is a major advance. However, however, Mr. White writes, it also raises uncomfortable questions Are students being steered towards schools with empty seats rather than schools that might be the best fit? And define best fit however you will. And when everyone gets an offer, he writes, what's the acceptance really worth? Why go through the process? Interesting perspective from Scott White on the Forbes article. Financial viability of women's sports at heart of Women's Collegiate Sports Protection Act. We're going to West Virginia. The Metro News of West Virginia, Dave Wilson, had the story on Sunday, March 8th. Headline reads, Charleston, West Virginia. In the rapidly evolving world of college athletics, the state Senate has taken a step to ensure the— to ensure, okay, that's a big word— to ensure the financial viability of women's sports. The Women's College Sports Protection Act Senate Bill 502 was approved by the Senate and is now being considered by the West Virginia House Education Committee. It creates a permanent endowment fund or endowment funds intended to support women's sports over time. The story reads, the funds are meant to represent a consistent revenue stream for scholarships, coaching, and facilities. Now, off the top I'm not done yet here. Off the top, this is an example of a market reacting. College leaders, at least in West Virginia, are worried about women's sports for lots of reasons. I won't go into those details today. And of course, it has to do with the name, image, and likeness, and the portal transfers. Got to be scaring the bejeebers out of the West Virginia leaders, and probably should be scaring the bejeebers out of most. But here's the rest of the story, and I read I quote, I quote from Mr. Wilson's story: State money would not be used— state money would not be used to seed the endowment fund. It would be built through private donations and other grant opportunities. The Senate Finance Committee amended the bill and removed a section that would have provided tax credits for donors and matching state funds. The bill only— the bill only creates the mechanism for the endowment fund. The bill only creates the mechanism for the endowment fund. Much ado about not much at all. Let's, let's call this what it is. It's one really small, really, really small step for womankind, at least in West Virginia. Illinois boosts universities— Illinois boosts universities losing students, punishes gainers. Now I guess this might only happen in Illinois. Patrick Andreessen had the story on March 15th— excuse me, on March 5th— at illinipolicy.org. And here's something that will make you want to move to Illinois, especially if you have college-age children or soon will have them. Illinois public universities lost more than 13,000 students during the past 20 years, and only 3 of, I think it's 11, public colleges in Illinois gained. They, those winners, lost state funding while the losers, those who lost enrollment, got more money. Mr. Andreesen notes in his story that Illinois punishes the winners and subsidizes the losers. The losers, subsidizes the losers. Sounds like the Illinois State motto to me. And the only universities, he writes, that reported higher enrollment this fall than back in 2006, 20 years ago, were the University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, University of Illinois Chicago, and Illinois State University in Bloomington-Normal. These are the ones driving the game, the most gains statewide. 6 of the colleges lost more than 1/3 of their students in the last 20 years. More than 1/3 they lost, with 3 losing more than half. Chicago State University saw the largest percentage decline, but you know what, as I reported earlier, they're starting a D1 football team. Sarcasm alert, that shall fix everything. At Chicago State, they lost nearly two-thirds of their students. Northern Illinois and Southern Illinois Carbondale lost the most in raw numbers, topping more than 9,000 fewer students each. It's really hard not to throw out a sarcasm alert here, but I fought the urge and stayed away from it. Maybe next time. Keystone College accreditation reaffirmed by the Middle States Commission on Higher Education. Fox 56 had this story on February 28th. And here we have the I-dotters and the T-crossers, those accrediting agencies, are at it again. Fox 56 reports Keystone College has received confirmation that its accreditation has been reaffirmed by the Middle States Commission on Higher Education. College officials announced on Friday. The commission informed the college that is now in compliance with several key standards— listen to these— including those related to ethics and integrity, planning and resource management, and governance and administration. The decision eliminates a previously scheduled show-cause appearance eliminates it, that had been set for mid-March right now. However, Keystone will be required to submit a follow-up monitoring report. I'm sure they'll say, here's what we plan to do. Keystone has to submit that report in the fall to update the commission on this continued progress. Oh, if only this were a video, you could see the anguish on my face as I read this. This is yet another stunning indication of an accreditor's chronic inability to warn students about a college's financial health. And if these accreditors don't have any interest in protecting students, why don't they say so? Why don't they say, students, hey, we're here just for the colleges. They pay us fees, they give us money, you don't. So we're going to give them every logical and illogical break that we can think of. So you know where I'm going next. You know where I'm going next— to the data for Keystone College. And why am I the only one looking at a college's financial health for students and families? Why am I the only source for transparency? From the 2016 to 2024 audited financial statements and IRS 990s for Keystone College, Get out a pen and paper. Total net assets decreased $68 million. Unrestricted net assets, essentially money they can spend, is negative. Negative! I hardly ever see that. In 2024, it was negative $6.4 million. The value of the college is a negative number, but Middle States doesn't care. I'm guessing they have enough in that budget to pay for their fees. They've had operating losses in 4 of the past 5 years. That's not going to surprise anybody. And the one year it was positive was probably from the COVID relief funds from the federal and maybe state governments. Enrollment's down 30%. The endowment is not even college couch money, not even college couch money. $6 million is their endowment in 2024. 5% earnings on that is $3.12. I made that up. But it's not much. Employee count is down 30% over the last 9 years but flat for the last 4. The number of W-2 employees, the number of employees per $1 million in total operating revenue, is significantly above the 75th percentile for our college, for all colleges, and that tells us too many employees for the revenue generated, but, but Middle States doesn't care. Tell us what you're going to do, we trust you, despite 9 years worth of data that says they shouldn't be trusted. I looked at the vendor payments, I looked at the top 5 vendor payments, and it appears that Keystone College is overpaying for most services, overpaying for most services when compared to all other private colleges. So will someone please call Middle States Commission and ask for a recount? Ask for a count. Clearly they're not doing that. Ask them, you know, to actually look at the financial data. I, I'm being silly here. Here's a sarcasm alert. I have to believe they forgot to look at the financial data when they offered reaccreditation. That's sarcasm alert. I'm going single geesh, but man, that could be a quadruple geesh. Time and time again we see this. And you feel for students going to Keystone College and others who probably have little, if any, idea that even if their college doesn't close, what kind of quality college education are they getting? I didn't even bring up their graduation rates. I don't have that in my notes. Page 4. Members of DePaul faculty published an open letter opposing the closing of an art museum. Nina Metz had this story on March 2nd in the Chicago Tribune. Here's a quote from Ms. Metz's story from Dr. Sean Kirkland, who's a philosophy professor at DePaul and is part of a group that spearheaded the open letter. All right, and he writes this well, But I'm gonna take issue with some of the conclusions, even though it's a well-written quote, is well-written. Dr. Kirkland writes, it's true philosophy is one of those liberal arts disciplines where the connection is not so self-evident. But the reason that so many of us in other non-art disciplines find the museum, they're gonna close, find the museum space to be so thought-provoking and experientially rich for the students is that these works of art in the museum are always, he says, by definition confronting students and challenging them with something they're not used to, something that goes outside the ordinary. Now, by definition, I'm not sure I buy that, but I'll let it stand for now. He goes on to say These things that seem like a luxury— interesting choice of words— a luxury like humanities, arts, things that are not so immediately monetizable— I guess that's a word— have enormous value in the actual education aims of the university. Kirkland writes, under these economic constraints, it can be tempting— and he's talking about the industry— Under these economic constraints, it can be tempting to think of the school as a vocational school. Now, that's an insult. No college likes to be called a vocational school. And he says there are good reasons for that. We have students, he says, paying a lot of money for their degree, and they want to get their money's worth. Great acknowledgement. Well done. That's a business model universities have adopted, he writes, and those pressures cause institutions of higher education to focus on practicalities and areas of study that are more immediately and tangibly seen as monetizable. I guess if you use it twice, it's got to be a word. And then he concludes, that creates a tension in the project of education. I don't know what that means. In the project of education that the university is committed to, making an assumption here and stating it as a fact, which is to teach our students how to think for themselves and ask questions and provide them with experiences and knowledge that allows them to imagine the world in really radically new ways. Making students think in these unfamiliar ways, he continues, he finally concludes, and engaging with questions about values and how human life should be lived is what the university is ultimately aiming at. Well, that's what he says. And the ultimate punchline is that it will make— punchline? And the ultimate punchline— he wrote this, not me— is that it will make them better workers and employees and more successful at whatever profession they pursue. While well-written, this is some serious spin. It's a straw man. It's a monetization of a straw man. Dr. Sean Kirkland at DePaul University frames the issue as vocational or monetizable— I guess I'll jump on the bandwagon— versus intellectual exploration and humanistic thinking. But this framing oversimplifies reality. Many fields that are considered monetizable, engineering and business and computer science and health sciences, they also require critical thinking. They also require ethical reasoning. They also require creativity and interdisciplinary awareness. Those things are not exclusive to the humanities. And likewise, humanities programs are indeed monetizable. Somebody's gonna slap my hand for using that word. Just not in obvious ways. Law— my understanding is attorneys make a decent living. Public policy, communications, user interface designs, consulting, leadership. That's just a handful. The real problem here is not monetization. It's not monetization as Dr. Kirkland proposes. It's market alignment. It's what the market wants. And DePaul having made a business decision, right or wrong, that a museum in, I think, close to downtown Chicago is not where the market is. Right or wrong, that's the business decision they made. Humanities As a standalone field, get ready to throw something at your computer or at your cell phone. Humanities as a standalone field are becoming the blockbuster of higher education. The ability to stand alone, I, I, you gotta wonder if that will continue to exist. So let's, let's, let's do a wrap. And like I said at the top of the show, I used an AI tool. 'Cause each week I pull together stories from my Google Alerts that I told you about and other sources as well. And I write my own wraps. Sometimes I like 'em more than others, but this time I said, hey, let me just see what my AI tool will do. And so the essence of this is from my AI tool. There's some kind of cute acronym these days. I edited it to make it more readable, more understandable. You know, when you step back and look at all these stories together, a pattern starts to appear. Here are the examples. One university in the podcast today shows a short-term enrollment bump of 167 students, while the longer trend shows a decline of more than 1,600. Another restructures colleges, but no one can say if or how much money it will actually save. Accreditors reaffirm a college even when the financial data tells you they shouldn't. And now we're seeing a new admissions model where students don't even have to apply anymore. Colleges are just sending offers of admissions. And at a glance These indeed seem like separate stories, but they're really about the same thing. And this is what caught my attention from the AI summary. American higher education is entering a period where the marketing narrative and the financial reality are drifting farther and farther apart. Colleges will always present their optimistic version of their story. That's what colleges do. Their definition of transparency is limited to their best interests. Judge that any way you want. You know how I'm going to judge it, but I won't share that with you again today. But the data tells a longer story. It shows trends. It shows the patterns. It shows whether a college is financially stronger or financially weaker. Enrollment trends, financial statements, major completion numbers. Operating losses, graduation rates— those numbers don't spin when you look at them as trends, when you look at them as comparisons. And I would add, increasingly, students and families are the ones who need to look at them, look at these data points. That's what we do at My College Viability. Colleges are the ones that should acknowledge them, but they don't, or they won't. So I'll address this question to students and their families, although it applies to other stakeholders. Here's what you want to ask when you hear or read a college announcement: Is it a trend line, or is it just a headline? Because colleges are very good at headlines, but a college decision is a 4-year investment of time and money and opportunity costs, and those types of decisions deserve more than press releases and promotional narratives, what we just simply, what we get from colleges. They deserve data. And that's why we keep looking at the numbers here at College Viability. The goal here isn't to criticize colleges. Yes, we do. Guilty as charged. They need to be criticized. And I've had countless folks tell me that. The goal is transparency. The Kelley Blue Book, I've said many times before, the reverse FAFSA, I've called the apps that I've created If you, if you give FAFSA numbers to the college about your finances, the college owes you a reverse FAFSA in terms of their finances. And that's why I created those apps. Students and families deserve to understand the financial and enrollment realities behind the college brochure, and that's what we will keep— that's what I will keep bringing to this conversation. Until next Monday. Again, thanks as always for all who make time to listen to the podcast. Gary Stocker at College Viability. I'll be back next Monday.