Kenyon should take steps to address demographic decline

by David Bonnen

October 31, 2024

3.9 million American high school students are expected to graduate in the class of 2025. Due to an aging population caused by low birth rates and high life expectancy, that number is projected to drop to 3.5 million by 2037. Colleges and universities that have grown fat on large applicant populations will soon have to adapt to a new and wintry playing field. As this demographic shift nears, Kenyon must respond by prioritizing outreach to prospective students in the youngest and fastest-growing parts of the country, utilizing the green spaces and institutions it controls to the fullest pedagogical extent and preserving students’ freedom to curate their own college experience.

Kenyon is tuition dependent, meaning that the majority of its yearly expenses are covered by student tuition and fees, and not its endowment fund. Implicitly, then, it is more susceptible to shifts in the population of college applicants than schools with larger endowments. Given Kenyon’s prestige, donor population and consistently high national ranking, the College will likely never struggle for its existence like the smaller, lesser-known schools closing across many parts of the country. The College should pursue measures to cost-effectively expand its prestige to attract more applicants who are willing to meet the steep cost of tuition.

While the population is aging nationally, the southern and western regions of the U.S. are getting younger. In 2022, the year that I was admitted to Kenyon, there was not a single meetup for prospective or admitted students in the Gulf Coast states. The College urgently needs to allocate more time and money to engaging with prospective students in areas of the country that have previously been underrepresented in the student body.

The College could also capitalize more on the vast amounts of green space and farmland (over 5,500 acres) afforded by the Philander Chase Conservancy. As of the time of writing this, there is no single concentration, major or department devoted specifically to the study of agriculture and its cultural implications, which would mesh seamlessly within the framework of a liberal arts education. Through the Conservancy, it should not just hold land, but make effective use of it as a tool for learning and self-actualization.

Finally, snafus like The Gund board’s decision to do away with the Capstone Program for art majors should be avoided at all costs: They needlessly divide the community and create an unhealthy, antagonistic dynamic between the administration and students. There is no use in having a prestigious institution on a college campus if students are not able to share in that prestige. The Gund’s explanation that students will gain more from viewing professional work than from exhibiting their own is frankly insulting. The College should have faith that its own student artists will one day find success and be able to point to the Gund as the site of their first exhibition. In every consideration, the College should remember its role as a place of learning and professional development, not an institution designed to keep its prestige away from its students.

What draws many students to a college like Kenyon in the first place is the freedom they are afforded to engage with it however they choose, both academically and socially. The quality and availability of these choices will determine students’ willingness to apply and stay four years. Across many colleges, students have little to no input in the planning of all-campus social events, and some schools even charge students to attend these gatherings. Parties are just one extreme aspect of social life that can and have fallen victim to over-administration on college campuses, but they are not the only one. To avoid such a fate, Kenyon should foster choice by maintaining agency in its large and diverse student body.

Ultimately, preserving students’ freedom to shape their own social and academic experiences is necessary for Kenyon to attract and retain those who value a vibrant, autonomous campus life. By empowering students and minimizing administrative control over social events and organizations, Kenyon can strengthen its sense of community and uphold a level of independence and responsibility befitting young adults.

David Bonnen ’27 is a columnist for the Collegian. He has not yet declared a major and is from Houston. He can be reached at bonnen1@kenyon.edu.

1 Comment

Comments for this article have closed. If you'd like to send a letter to the editor for publication, please email us at collegian@kenyon.edu.

Pete Dickson

November 3, 2024 — 2:33 pm ET

The demographic decline in domestic births which began in 2008 the first year of the financial crisis and which has continued until at least last year
has been known for a long time in Admissions Departments where it has been called the "Admissions Apocalypse" which begins next fall when high school seniors born circa 2008 begin to apply to colleges. This "Apocalypse" or contraction of the applicant poor will continue to 2040. About ten years ago, I had conversations with the long-time Finance VP Joe Nelson and his view was that "not to worry" for Kenyon because as long as it sustains its brand, its reputation for excellence, then the historically stable "three percent of American families" which has consistently desired (craved) an education for their children and/or grandchildren at a residential and ideally one of the elite private liberal arts colleges, then Kenyon should and would be able to get its market share (however small?) for full enrollment. The rising cost would not deter these ambitious families - meaning demand was inelastic/indifferent to inflation. Something like those persons who crave the best Scotch to drink such as Chivas Regal no matter what the price. But the last two entering classes have been undersubscribed with the yield rate being circa 18 percent -- meaning circa only one in five offered admission agrees to enroll.

This raises questions about Nelson's optimism and also might explain why the US News & World Report dropped Kenyon's rank to 49th from about 30th. If it was not that, what was the reason? Whatever the truth about that, Kenyon is loaded with female applicants and offered admission to 62 percent of them, but it seems obvious it has to do that because so many of them are very highly qualified and are able to pass up Kenyon as a fall-back choice. A higher percentage of men offered admission (circa 38 percent) are eager to enroll, hence a 57/43 final ratio which might 58/42 if the college would be less secretive in the last two years than in the past about providing more richly-detailed demographic data about the Classes of 2027 and 2028.
It is hard to predict what will happen when the "Apocalypse" begins next fall. Kenyon is heavily focused in terms of recruiting in favorable niche markets (i.e. in California, especially LA) and boasts a level of geographical spread which many rivals probably cannot match.
During the Apocalypse, it will be increasingly a "buyers' market" and Kenyon will probably not be able to throw more financial assistance (30 percent of the most recent budget) to get the kind of ethno-socio-economic diversity that was the rage during the Decatur Era. One option would be to compromise a bit on academic qualifications and go more with full-payers/legacies to ensure the cash flow -- meaning getting what USNWR and Credit Raters like Moddy's want to see, which is higher net tuition revenue (also known as financial assistance). The soaring annual operating costs (now just short of 200 Million) fueled via the Gundian expansion/enhancement of the campus since the late 1990s will -- in addition to the "Admissions Apocalypse" -- may mean that Kenyon will not be able to be as selective about admission as it has been during more favorable market conditions.