Holistic admissions has been championed as the antidote to reductive, numbers-driven decision-making. By considering the full breadth of an applicant’s background, experiences, and potential, institutions proudly craft classes that reflect their values. But here’s the uncomfortable truth: most colleges abandon the principles of holistic admissions the moment the acceptance letter is sent.

Why do we stop listening?

Admissions teams pour resources into understanding who students are before they’re admitted, but once decisions are made, they often revert to outdated, scattershot approaches to yield management. Every admitted student is treated the same, despite the clear signals they send about their level of interest, intent, and engagement. This approach wastes time, alienates students, and undermines the entire purpose of holistic admissions.

It’s time to redefine holistic admissions—not as a process that ends with an offer, but as a commitment to respecting and responding to each student’s journey through their decision-making process. Machine learning makes this possible, revealing the hidden patterns in post-admission behaviors like event attendance, email replies, and portal activity. These signals hold the key to understanding where students stand and what they need to convert.

Instead of flooding students with generic outreach, machine learning enables admissions teams to prioritize their efforts where they matter most: with high-potential students who are actively deciding, or those who need encouragement to stay engaged. By ignoring these signals, institutions squander their counselors’ time and lose valuable opportunities to connect with students who might otherwise enroll.

Redefining holistic admissions demands that we extend its principles beyond the decision. The same care used to admit students should be applied to yield them. If institutions truly believe in treating students as more than data points, they must commit to engaging admitted students with the same intentionality—powered by machine learning and the respect for individual signals it enables. Anything less is a betrayal of the values holistic admissions claims to champion.

‍

An evergreen topic - the fair and appropriate use of standardized tests in college admissions. As a trickle of colleges who went test optional during the pandemic reverted back, we hosted a great conversation with "Jenn The Tutor", Jennifer Jessie, about how the tests impact her students and how she guides them through the process.

The full conversation is available on demand: https://www.crowdcast.io/c/tests

As we wrap up the calendar year, many institutions are looking ahead to an influx of late admits, through Direct Admission programs, to help them achieve their enrollment goals.

‍

‍

Last winter, he held a conversation with Joel A. Johnson, Ed.D., about how he was utilizing Direct Admission for his institution.

‍

The full conversation is available on demand: https://www.crowdcast.io/c/directadmit

Just over a year ago, our own Madison Snyder hosted a conversation with four cutting-edge leaders in enrollment management about how they leveraged data to achieve success in enrollment management.

The full conversation is available on demand here: https://www.crowdcast.io/c/womeninenrollment

When we look back on the last couple years in college admissions, the issue of staff morale will be one of the hallmarks of the post-pandemic era.  That's why I was excited to host this important conversation with Elizabeth Kirby about how - specifically - she was paying attention to this issue for her team.

‍

The full conversation is available on demand: https://www.crowdcast.io/c/morale

The admissions landscape is changing, and so should the way colleges shape their class. As we've discussed, relying on FAFSA submissions as one of the primary indicators of student interest has become increasingly unreliable. Delays, procedural submissions, and the elimination of FAFSA Position data mean that admissions teams are left with less information to accurately assess a student’s intent to enroll. But this change also presents an opportunity. Schools that adopt a more holistic, data-driven approach—focused on engagement metrics rather than just financial aid forms—will be better positioned to build a strong, committed class.

Moving Beyond FAFSA: Building a Holistic Strategy

It’s time for admissions teams to move beyond relying so heavily on FAFSA data and embrace a more comprehensive approach to shaping their admit pools. This means shifting the focus to behaviors that more accurately reflect student intent, like campus visits, virtual interactions, and communication frequency. The students who actively engage with your institution throughout the admissions process are the ones most likely to enroll, and their behavior should guide your outreach strategy.

This isn’t to say that FAFSA data should be ignored—it’s still a critical part of the financial aid process. However, it should be considered alongside a broader set of engagement metrics to provide a more complete picture of student interest. Admissions teams can use predictive analytics to combine engagement data with financial aid information, giving them the ability to make better-informed decisions about which students to focus on and when.

Using Machine Learning and Predictive Analytics to Drive Decisions

Machine learning and predictive analytics are game-changers in the admissions space. These tools allow schools to analyze vast amounts of data—including student behavior, communication patterns, and interactions with admissions counselors—and make predictions about which students are most likely to enroll. This is particularly valuable in an era where FAFSA data alone is no longer a sufficient indicator of commitment.

For example, predictive models can assign engagement scores to students based on how often they visit your website, attend events, and respond to personalized outreach. By focusing your efforts on students with higher engagement scores, your admissions team can prioritize those most likely to enroll, saving time and resources while improving your yield.

Predictive analytics also allow admissions teams to identify students who may be at risk of "melt"—as well as those who initially show interest but disengage later in the process. By tracking when and how student behaviors change, schools can intervene at the right moment, ensuring that at-risk students remain engaged and ultimately matriculate.

Proactive Engagement: Shaping the Right Class

To effectively shape your class, it’s critical to adopt a proactive engagement strategy. This means not only identifying which students are most likely to enroll but also engaging with them in a way that fosters deeper connections with your institution. Personalized communication is key here. Students are far more likely to respond to messages that address their specific interests, concerns, and goals.

For example, rather than sending generic emails, admissions teams can tailor messages to individual students based on their demonstrated interests—such as their preferred academic programs, extracurricular activities, or campus visit experiences. This kind of targeted communication shows students that your institution values them as individuals, which can significantly increase their likelihood of enrolling.

It’s also important to engage students early in the admissions process—well before FAFSA submission is even possible. By building relationships early on and maintaining consistent communication, you can keep students engaged throughout the entire admissions cycle, reducing the risk of losing them to other schools.

enroll ml Examples: Schools Leading the Way

Several institutions are already embracing this more holistic approach to admissions, using data and technology to guide their decision-making processes. These schools have seen improved enrollment outcomes by focusing on student engagement rather than relying solely on FAFSA submissions.

One example is a mid-sized liberal arts college that integrated predictive analytics into its admissions strategy. By tracking student interactions with their website, participation in virtual events, and frequency of communication, the college was able to identify students who were highly engaged but had not yet submitted their FAFSA. By focusing outreach on these students, the college increased its yield and reduced the number of students who disengaged late in the process.

Another example comes from a large public university that implemented a machine learning model to prioritize high-value students based on their engagement scores. By shifting resources away from students who showed little engagement, the university was able to better allocate its admissions efforts and ultimately build a stronger incoming class.

A New Path Forward

The days of relying so heavily on FAFSA data to shape your admit pool are over. Today’s admissions landscape demands a more comprehensive, engagement-driven approach that takes into account the full spectrum of student behavior. By embracing predictive analytics, machine learning, and proactive engagement strategies, colleges can build stronger, more resilient classes and ensure they are focusing on the students most likely to enroll.

In this new approach, FAFSA remains an important tool—but it is just one piece of the puzzle. Admissions teams that prioritize engagement and use data to guide their decisions will not only improve yield but also create more meaningful connections with students, leading to better outcomes for both the institution and the students themselves.

‍

For decades, the FAFSA has been viewed as an essential tool in gauging student interest. But in today’s evolving admissions landscape, it’s becoming clear that the timing and mere submission of a FAFSA are not enough to accurately measure a student’s commitment to enrolling. Instead, admissions teams must look deeper—specifically at how students engage with the institution before and after they receive their financial aid package. These behaviors provide far more valuable insights into whether a student is likely to enroll.

In an environment where more students are applying to multiple schools and financial aid timelines are becoming less predictable, focusing on pre- and post-aid engagement behaviors has never been more important.

Why Engagement Matters More Than FAFSA Submission

Students' actions before and after receiving their financial aid offer often reveal more about their intent than a FAFSA submission. For example, a student who actively participates in admissions events, asks detailed questions about campus life, or schedules a campus visit is showing genuine interest. These actions indicate that the student is seriously considering enrolling, regardless of whether they have submitted their FAFSA early or late.

On the other hand, a student who submits a FAFSA but does not engage with the institution in other ways may only be using the FAFSA as a financial planning tool, not as a sign of their intent to enroll at your college. In this way, engagement provides more reliable signals of commitment than simply submitting paperwork.

This is especially true after a student receives their financial aid package. Their response—whether they ask follow-up questions, express concerns, or schedule meetings with financial aid officers—can often indicate whether they will enroll. Schools that rely too heavily on FAFSA submissions as a sign of interest are likely to overlook these more meaningful forms of engagement.

Key Engagement Metrics to Track

There are several key engagement behaviors admissions teams should be tracking to better predict enrollment:

1. Pre-Aid Engagement: Before a student receives their financial aid package, how are they interacting with your institution? Are they attending virtual events, responding to emails, or requesting additional information? Pre-aid engagement shows that a student is seriously considering your institution, regardless of whether their FAFSA has been submitted.
2. Post-Aid Behavior: After the financial aid package is sent, what actions does the student take? Do they reach out to ask questions or request more information about scholarship opportunities? Are they comparing packages or attending decision-making events? Students who engage more after receiving their aid package are often those most likely to enroll.
3. Communication Frequency: A student who consistently communicates with admissions officers and financial aid counselors is more likely to be seriously considering your school. The frequency and quality of these communications provide valuable insights into the student’s decision-making process.
4. Participation in Key Milestones: Does the student attend admitted student events, campus visits, or orientation previews? Engaging in these key milestones often signals a higher likelihood of enrollment than FAFSA submission alone.

By tracking these behaviors, schools can develop a more accurate picture of student intent, helping them focus their outreach and resources on students who are most likely to enroll.

Shifting to an Engagement-Focused Model

To successfully transition from a FAFSA-reliant approach to one focused on engagement, colleges must implement tools that allow them to monitor and assess these behaviors effectively. Predictive analytics and machine learning models can help identify students who are more likely to enroll based on their engagement patterns, giving admissions teams the ability to prioritize outreach to high-interest students.

Additionally, schools should develop communication strategies that encourage meaningful engagement. This could include personalized emails, invitations to virtual events, or one-on-one meetings with admissions counselors. The goal is to create opportunities for students to engage with your institution in ways that reveal their level of interest and intent.

By focusing on engagement behaviors—rather than relying solely on FAFSA submissions—admissions teams can build stronger relationships with prospective students, better predict yield, and ultimately shape their admit pool more effectively.

FAFSA Isn’t the Full Story

The takeaway for admissions teams is clear: FAFSA submissions are just one part of a much larger picture when it comes to student intent. Schools that focus primarily on financial aid forms risk missing out on critical engagement cues that more accurately predict whether a student will enroll.

Engagement behaviors before and after financial aid offers provide a clearer view of student commitment, and by tracking these actions, colleges can better allocate their resources, prioritize their outreach, and ultimately build a stronger, more committed class. The key is to shift from a FAFSA-driven strategy to one that puts student engagement front and center.

‍

For many admissions teams, FAFSA submissions have traditionally been viewed as a strong signal of student interest. However, in reality, not all FAFSA submissions indicate serious intent to enroll. As competition for students increases, it's critical to re-evaluate how FAFSA data is interpreted, especially in light of the information colleges can't access.

One important data element that has been affected is FAFSA Position, eliminated about a decade ago, which provided insights into where a student listed a particular college relative to others on their application. For years, many institutions used FAFSA Position to infer a student’s level of interest—assuming that being listed first or second meant the student was highly likely to enroll. While this wasn't a formal tool, the position was often treated as an important clue in the enrollment puzzle. However, due to concerns from the Department of Education about how colleges were using this information, FAFSA Position is no longer available. This change forces institutions to rely on other indicators of interest, and it underscores the need to diversify strategies for assessing commitment.

Why FAFSA Submissions Alone Don't Reflect Engagement

While none of us have assumed that every FAFSA submission equals similar levels of intent - this data blindspot has left us no alternative way of measuring this signal by student. Students now apply to more schools than ever before, and many submit FAFSAs to schools they’re considering only as “backup” options. Completing the FAFSA is simply a procedural step for many students, not a declaration of their commitment to attend a particular institution.

As a result, colleges that heavily weigh FAFSA submissions may end up focusing resources on students who have no serious intention of enrolling. Without the added layer of insight from FAFSA Position, schools are left with less context, making it more difficult to gauge genuine interest based on FAFSA data alone.

The Changing Landscape of College Decision-Making

The dynamics of student decision-making have evolved over the years, but FAFSA submissions are no longer a reliable indicator of where a student will eventually commit. In today’s environment, students submit multiple applications and FAFSA forms, often as a matter of precaution rather than as an expression of intent. In this climate, admissions teams need to be more cautious about assuming that FAFSA submissions equate to real interest.

Additionally, the inability to access FAFSA Position means schools can no longer know where they stand relative to other institutions. This lack of visibility into a student’s preferences highlights the growing importance of using additional methods—such as behavioral data, engagement metrics, and predictive modeling—to better understand and prioritize students who are truly interested in enrolling.

Prioritizing Engagement Over FAFSA Data

The shift away from relying on FAFSA Position presents an opportunity for admissions teams to reframe how they assess student intent. Rather than focusing on FAFSA submissions as a primary indicator, schools should shift their attention to other forms of student engagement. Metrics such as website visits, participation in virtual tours, attendance at campus events, and interactions with admissions officers can provide far more reliable insights into a student’s commitment to your institution.

In addition, colleges can leverage machine learning and predictive analytics to better understand how engagement behaviors correlate with enrollment decisions. By analyzing patterns in student interactions—such as the frequency of communication, the types of inquiries made, or the timing of their engagement—admissions teams can develop a more nuanced understanding of student intent. These insights help schools prioritize their outreach efforts toward students who are most likely to matriculate, rather than relying solely on the submission of financial aid forms.

Diversifying Your Approach to Student Commitment

The end of FAFSA Position data had forced an abandonment of nuance in interpreting the signal of FAFSA submissions. The rise of high-level data science now allows for a reassessment of how colleges interpret FAFSA submissions, making it clear that this form alone should not be the main driver of admissions decisions. While FAFSA remains an important part of the financial aid process, it is no longer a reliable indicator of student commitment. By focusing more on engagement behaviors and leveraging data-driven insights, admissions teams can make smarter, more informed decisions about how to allocate their resources and shape their admit pool.

In today’s competitive landscape, relying on a single metric—like FAFSA—can result in missed opportunities and misallocated efforts. Schools that embrace a broader, more holistic approach to understanding student commitment will be better equipped to build strong, resilient incoming classes.

‍