Even though the fall semester is nearing its end, there is still plenty of higher ed news worth your attention. In this week’s issue, we look at a new warning applied to some institutions when students designate their FAFSA results to be sent to them, ongoing discussions about Workforce Pell, and new data showing surprisingly high levels of employer confidence in higher education. 

After reading today’s issue, share your thoughts about Workforce Pell and its impact on your campus in the comments! 

FAFSA Warning 

From Nearly One-Fourth of Colleges Will Come With a Warning When Students Apply for Financial Aid | The Chronicle of Higher Education

Starting this year, students who complete a FAFSA will receive a warning about any institution they select if its graduates do not earn more, on average, than adults with only a high school diploma. 

Our Thoughts  

I understand why ED would make this move. Students repeatedly say that they want clearer information on what happens after graduation, yet many do not know where to find outcomes data or how to use it in real time as they make choices. The new “lower earnings” indicator on the FAFSA puts at least one piece of that information in front of first-time undergraduates at the exact moment they most need it. 

However, I also understand why some institutions are worried, because I share some of that hesitation. The earnings test is blunt. It does not adjust for regional wage differences, local cost of living, or program mix within an institution. A college in a low-wage state could escape the label even if many graduates struggle to afford housing in a more expensive metro area, while another institution that sends a large share of graduates into public service or regional roles might look “low earning” on paper despite delivering strong community value. The forthcoming “Do No Harm” standard in federal law, which will eventually tie aid eligibility to whether graduates earn more than typical high school completers, raises the stakes even further because these same metrics will sit behind consequential federal decisions rather than simple FAFSA nudges. 

Cue the mixed feelings. I fully support additional accountability for programs that routinely leave students worse off than if they had never enrolled, especially in sectors that have a documented history of predatory recruitment and poor outcomes. The fact that many flagged institutions are for-profits and cosmetology schools is not an accident. At the same time, we are operating in a political climate where data can be weaponized quickly. A simple “lower earnings” label can be turned into viral lists of “worthless colleges,” fueling narratives that undermine community colleges, regional publics, HBCUs, and fields of study already under ideological scrutiny. It is not hard to imagine these numbers being pulled out of context to advance arguments that have more to do with ideology than with student protection.   

So, here’s where I’ve landed. Giving students more information is a good thing and using the FAFSA as a delivery channel is a smart way to reach those who would never go hunting for Scorecard tables on their own. But if we want this to be a tool rather than a weapon, we need to pair the indicator with clear explanations of what it does and does not say, continued investment in better program-level data, and honest conversations about regional labor markets and student goals. Used well, it can help students steer away from truly harmful programs. Used carelessly, it risks flattening a complex landscape into a simple “good” or “bad” label that serves no one well. 

Workforce Pell 

From What to Know About Workforce Pell Talks | Inside Higher Ed

Discussions are underway for how to extend federal aid to short-term workforce programs by July 2026. 

Our Thoughts  

My thoughts about Workforce Pell are complicated and incomplete. On the one hand, I think this could be a genuinely positive development for students who have no desire to pursue a two- or four-year degree but still want a real shot at better work. Workforce Pell opens Pell eligibility to short term workforce programs that are offered by existing Title IV eligible institutions and are aligned with high-demand occupations. That design closely matches the wishes of prospective students and adult learners who say they want more job readiness and shorter paths to career opportunities compared to traditional degrees. While research on non-degree credentials is mixed, it does suggest that some well-designed certificates and industry credentials can improve employment and earnings, especially when they are at least several months long and tightly connected to specific sectors like health care or manufacturing.  

On the other hand, I do not think we can pretend that there is no risk of a “wild west” moment here. Short term credentials are already booming, and we know their value varies dramatically by field, provider quality, and local labor market. Some studies find that very short programs deliver little or no wage gain on average, while a smaller set of high-quality offerings generate meaningful earnings bumps. That is exactly why strict guardrails matter. Workforce Pell includes some strong accountability concepts on paper but implementing them could be challenging. If done well, those standards could protect students from the worst actors and focus public dollars on programs that actually move the needle. If implemented poorly or loosely enforced, they could open the door to aggressive providers who see federal aid as a new revenue stream without delivering real value to learners. 

In the end, I think Workforce Pell is still worth pursuing simply because it expands opportunity for a variety of students and may create more flexible on ramps to meet regional and local workforce needs. However, in order to fulfill the promise it holds, federal and state leaders will need to keep student outcomes at the center and invest in the data, oversight, and enforcement capacity needed to turn that promise into reality. 

Employer Confidence 

From Most Employers Confident in Higher Ed | Inside Higher Ed

A new survey from the American Association of Colleges and Universities has found that most employers have high confidence in higher education. 

Our Thoughts  

In a month when yet another public opinion poll found low levels of confidence in higher education, this new employer survey is welcome news. Not only did the majority of employers say that colleges and universities are doing a good job preparing students for the workforce, but over 90% said it is just as important for institutions to develop informed citizens as it is to produce skilled workers. This feels like a win for higher education because employers aren’t saying it’s either/or, but both. 

What I really enjoyed about the results of this survey was the emphasis employers place on producing graduates who can collaborate with people with diverse backgrounds and viewpoints. Employers are not looking for political limits on what institutions can say and what students can learn in the classroom. They are asking for the very learning environments that have been under pressure in some statehouses. This aligns with other research showing that employers consistently rank problem solving, teamwork and communication at the top of their wish list for new hires, even as job tasks and tools evolve in the age of artificial intelligence.  

The challenge for campuses, then, is not just to say “we do this,” but to help students show it. For years, AACRAO and NASPA have been advocating for more widespread adoption of comprehensive learning records and portfolios that showcase real projects to help graduates demonstrate not only what they can do, but how they learned to do it. The more tools we can give our students that allow them to carry their story into the job market with clarity and confidence, the better we can counter the media narrative that “college is broken.”