Why Higher Education Admissions Staff Are Quitting in Record Numbers

Summary

• Admissions offices face a retention crisis, with a staggering 71% of staff leaving their roles within three years due to widespread burnout.

• This mass exodus is fueled by unrealistic enrollment targets, low compensation, long hours, and a toxic work culture where frontline staff feel disconnected from leadership.

• High turnover destabilizes recruitment, increases operational costs, and worsens the student experience, posing a significant risk to institutions facing the "enrollment cliff."

• To retain talent, institutions must improve compensation and culture while adopting technology to reduce manual workloads; AI tools like Havana can automate outreach, freeing recruiters to focus on high-value tasks and preventing burnout.

You've set up another weekend recruitment event. Your smartphone buzzes with emails from anxious applicants at 10 PM. Your supervisor just shared next year's enrollment targets—somehow even higher than last year, despite the shrinking applicant pool. And your salary hasn't budged since you started three years ago.

Sound familiar? For thousands of admissions professionals across the country, this relentless grind has become unbearable—and they're voting with their feet.

According to a report by the College and University Professional Association for Human Resources (CUPA-HR), a staggering 71% of admissions coordinators and counselors have been in their roles for three years or less, compared to 53% across all of higher education. This isn't just normal turnover; it's a mass exodus that threatens the very foundation of how colleges recruit and enroll students.

The crisis in admissions offices isn't merely about individual burnout cases. It represents a systemic failure—a perfect storm of toxic work environments, unrealistic expectations, inadequate compensation, and leadership disconnects that's pushing dedicated professionals out the door at an alarming rate.

A Profession on the Brink: The Data Behind the Departures

The numbers tell a troubling story. Even before the pandemic, 74% of admissions staff had been in their positions for three years or less. This chronic turnover creates a perpetual cycle of hiring, training, and losing talent that destabilizes recruitment efforts.

The demographic picture is equally revealing. Three-quarters of admissions coordinators and counselors are under 40, with a median age of just 30, according to University Business. The industry is churning through young talent at an unsustainable rate, creating an experience vacuum at the front lines of student recruitment.

This crisis extends beyond admissions to the broader administrative staff. A recent study in Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education found that:

• 70% of professional staff feel unable to disconnect from work during holidays

• Over 50% report working more than 10 hours daily

• 59% worked during their scheduled annual leave

As Inside Higher Ed notes, this reliance on "adrenaline and goodwill" is an unsustainable model that risks destabilizing core college functions.

The Anatomy of Burnout: Why Admissions Professionals Are Walking Away

The Pressure Cooker: The Enrollment Cliff and "Magic Projections"

Admissions professionals find themselves caught in an impossible situation: "fewer students to recruit and high pressure to recruit them," as one Reddit user aptly described it. With declining high school graduation rates creating what experts call the "enrollment cliff," competition for students has never been fiercer.

Yet, instead of adapting to this new reality, many institutions double down with what staff derisively call "magic projections" from enrollment management leaders. These unrealistic targets, often created without input from frontline staff, produce what one admissions counselor called a "Frankenstein enrollment plan"—a mishmash of competing priorities that sets teams up for failure.

"If I see one more chart where an EM leader is explaining nonsense like telling me their magic projections on the Fall enrollments I will scream," wrote one frustrated professional on Reddit. This disconnect between leadership forecasts and on-the-ground realities fuels a constant state of anxiety among staff who face the consequences when those projections inevitably fall short.

"Leaders Are Overpaid and Not Qualified": Toxic Culture and a Leadership Disconnect

Perhaps the most damning indictment comes from staff descriptions of leadership. "Most leaders are overpaid and not qualified. They tend to micromanage because they are under pressure from the provost or president which creates a toxic work environment," reported one admissions professional.

This toxic culture cascades downward, creating an environment where frontline staff feel simultaneously micromanaged and unsupported. The "data wars," as some call them, exemplify this dynamic—endless meetings debating enrollment projections with little acknowledgment of the human cost required to meet those numbers.

The irony is particularly bitter in higher education, where institutions espouse values of human growth, equity, and work-life balance, yet their employees experience the opposite. As Inside Higher Ed reports, staff want evidence of commitment to these values, not just lip service.

The Grind: Low Pay, Endless Hours, and a Career Cul-de-Sac

For many young professionals, the admissions office represents their entry point into higher education—but increasingly, it feels like a dead end.

"Why are young people leaving admissions? Because they're expected to be on the road recruiting, often overnight, and away from their young families. Oh and doing it while the pay sucks," explained one Reddit user. The job demands constant availability for "evening and weekend recruitment obligations," including "open houses, accepted student days, commitment days"—often compensated with comp time rather than overtime pay.

The compensation issue is particularly acute. Higher education has historically offered lower salaries compared to corporate roles, justified by better benefits and work-life balance. But as benefits packages shrink and workloads expand, that trade-off no longer makes sense for many.

Career advancement presents another frustration. Many staff report needing "a masters degree to be promoted to a job that pays barely more than the one they have, but no time to earn one because of weekend and evening recruitment." Caught in this catch-22, ambitious professionals increasingly see leaving higher education entirely as their only path forward.

The Ripple Effect: How Staff Turnover Destabilizes the Entire Institution

The consequences of this turnover crisis extend far beyond the admissions office.

For prospective students, constant staff changes mean inconsistent communication, lost relationships, and a disjointed recruitment experience. A student might build rapport with a counselor during a campus visit, only to have emails go unanswered when that staff member leaves mid-cycle.

Operationally, high turnover creates enormous inefficiencies. With 71% of staff having less than three years' experience, institutions are perpetually in training mode. Critical institutional knowledge walks out the door with each departure, and the remaining staff shoulder increasingly unsustainable workloads.

Financially, the costs are substantial. The Chronicle of Higher Education estimates that replacing a single admissions counselor can cost between 50% and 200% of their annual salary when accounting for recruiting, hiring, and training expenses.

Most critically, with the enrollment cliff looming, institutions can't afford to lose the very people responsible for bringing in new students. Experienced admissions professionals who understand their market, have built relationships with high school counselors, and know how to authentically represent their institution are irreplaceable competitive advantages in a shrinking marketplace.

Charting a New Course: Actionable Solutions for Retaining Talent

Rebuild from the Ground Up: Culture, Leadership, and Role Design

Institutions need to reconceptualize admissions roles. Rather than treating these positions as entry-level stepping stones with high turnover, colleges should design roles that emphasize the specialized skills required and focus on long-term retention.

Leadership development is equally critical. Administrators must move away from the micromanagement approach that creates toxic environments and instead foster cultures where frontline staff feel empowered to contribute their insights. Regular check-ins and recognition programs can boost morale and create open communication channels between leadership and staff.

As one admissions professional suggested, "Everyone outside of admissions thinks they know how to solve the school's enrollment issues." Institutions would be wise to actually listen to their admissions experts rather than imposing solutions from above.

Invest in People: Fair Compensation and Real Opportunities for Growth

Addressing compensation is non-negotiable. Institutions must conduct salary reviews to ensure admissions staff receive competitive, livable wages. University Business also highlights the need to address pay disparities, particularly for Hispanic/Latino men and women, and improve representation of Asian and Hispanic officers in leadership roles.

Professional development pathways must become more accessible. This means providing flexible opportunities for staff to earn advanced degrees, including adjusted schedules during recruitment seasons and tuition support. Creating viable internal advancement paths can transform admissions from a revolving door to a sustainable career.

Work Smarter, Not Harder: Realistic Goals and Technology Integration

Perhaps most importantly, institutions need to abandon "magic projections" in favor of data-driven, achievable recruitment targets. This means involving frontline staff in goal-setting processes and acknowledging market realities like the enrollment cliff.

Technology can also ease the burden. For example, AI-powered tools like Havana are designed to augment human recruiters by automating the most time-consuming parts of the job. By handling initial outreach, 24/7 lead engagement, and pre-qualification through calls, texts, and emails, Havana frees admissions officers to focus on the high-touch, relationship-building aspects of recruitment that actually move the needle. This not only reduces manual workload and stress but also allows teams to work smarter, not harder, to meet their goals.

Beyond "Adrenaline and Goodwill"

The record turnover in higher education admissions sends a clear message: the system is broken. Institutions can no longer operate on what Inside Higher Ed calls the "adrenaline and goodwill" of their staff—a model that leads inevitably to burnout and departure.

With the enrollment cliff approaching, retaining experienced admissions professionals isn't just about staff wellbeing (though that should be reason enough). It's an existential imperative for institutions whose financial future depends on successful recruitment.

Campus leaders must act decisively. This means collecting data on employee experiences, actually listening to frontline staff, and making tangible investments in culture, compensation, and professional growth.

The alternative—continuing the cycle of churning through young professionals until they inevitably burn out—isn't just morally questionable. In today's competitive higher education landscape, it's institutional suicide. The colleges that survive and thrive will be those that recognize their admissions staff not as replaceable cogs, but as their most valuable recruitment asset worth investing in and retaining.

Frequently Asked Questions

Why is the turnover rate so high for college admissions professionals?

The turnover rate for college admissions professionals is exceptionally high due to a combination of intense pressure to meet unrealistic enrollment targets, inadequate compensation, and a demanding work culture. The article points out that 71% of admissions staff have been in their roles for three years or less, driven by a perfect storm of burnout, leadership disconnects, and limited opportunities for career advancement.

What are the primary factors causing burnout in admissions offices?

The primary factors causing burnout in admissions are unrealistic expectations, toxic work environments, and a poor work-life balance. Admissions staff face immense pressure from "magic projections" set by leadership, coupled with low pay that doesn't compensate for the long hours, including frequent evening and weekend work. This relentless grind, combined with a feeling of being unsupported and micromanaged, leads to a state of chronic stress and eventual departure.

How does high turnover in admissions impact the institution as a whole?

High turnover in admissions destabilizes the entire institution by creating operational inefficiencies, significant financial costs, and a negative experience for prospective students. Constant staff changes lead to inconsistent communication with applicants, a loss of critical institutional knowledge, and increased workloads for remaining team members. Financially, replacing a single counselor can cost up to 200% of their annual salary, a substantial drain on resources in an already competitive market.

What is the "enrollment cliff" and how does it contribute to the pressure on admissions staff?

The "enrollment cliff" refers to the projected sharp decline in the number of high school graduates, which creates a smaller pool of prospective college students. This demographic shift intensifies competition among institutions and places enormous pressure on admissions professionals to recruit more students from a shrinking applicant pool. Many institutions respond by setting unrealistic enrollment targets, or "magic projections," which directly contributes to the stress and burnout experienced by frontline recruitment staff.

What are the most effective strategies for retaining admissions talent?

The most effective strategies for retaining admissions talent involve addressing core issues of compensation, culture, and career growth. Institutions must offer competitive, livable wages, foster a supportive and empowering work environment, and create clear, accessible pathways for professional development and advancement. This includes abandoning unrealistic recruitment targets in favor of data-driven goals and truly listening to the insights of frontline admissions experts.

How can technology help alleviate the workload and stress for admissions teams?

Technology, such as AI-powered automation tools, can significantly alleviate workload and stress by handling the most repetitive and time-consuming tasks in the recruitment process. For example, tools like Havana can automate initial outreach, manage 24/7 lead engagement through texts and emails, and pre-qualify applicants. This frees up admissions officers to focus on high-impact, relationship-building activities, allowing them to work more efficiently and reduce the risk of burnout from manual, administrative overload.