#CIORadio | Phil Hill (MindWires) on Higher Education Going Mainstream (live @ Educause 2022)

On today’s episode of the Illumination by Modern Campus podcast host Amrit Ahluwalia was joined by Phil Hill to discuss the depth of transformation for higher education over the past decade and the pain points when digesting this change. This episode was recorded live at Modern Campus's Educause 2022 booth in Denver.

Transcript

(00:05) Voiceover: Welcome to Illumination by Modern Campus, the leading podcast focused on transformation and change in the higher education space. We’re continuing our CIO Radio series, where we speak with technology leaders about the trends and challenges reshaping our increasingly digital space. On today’s episode, we speak with Phil Hill, a market analyst at MindWires. Speaking live at EDUCAUSE, Phil and podcast host Amrit Ahluwalia discuss the depth of transformation for higher education over the past decade and the pain points when digesting this change. 

(00:37) Amrit Ahluwalia: Phil, hello. Welcome to the Illumination Podcast.

(00:40) Phil Hill: Yeah, I'm looking forward to it. 

(00:42) Amrit Ahluwalia: Absolutely. Well, we're recording live at EDUCAUSE here, so please forgive any background noise. Phil Hill's one of the leading analysts in the post-secondary space. The Phil on EdTech blog. Phil on EdTech on Twitter. Absolutely worth a follow worth checking out. Phil, how did you get into the higher ed space in the first place? What brought you here?

(01:02) Phil Hill: Well, I did the profound realization back during the.com era that if you do a fa failed hostile takeover of a company, you don't tend to keep your job. So I know it sounds shocking. Basically, I was working at an embedded systems company, did real-time image processing and we tried to do a ownership needed to change. So I tried to do that with an outside financing partner. It failed, and of course you don't keep your job, so I fell into consulting and then I'm working with a couple different industries, but since I do niche consulting, I needed to pick one so that my references knew each other. Right. And so basically, I just got the best feedback with my education clients who were saying, Hey, what you do is unique and it matches what we need and it's, I care about it too. So I fell into it, as a real answer

(01:54) Amrit Ahluwalia: That feels like a really common story. I think that a lot of folks on and across the post-secondary space just kind of happened to wind up here and you kind of captured your grip by the mission. You're grip by what's so unique about institutions and it's hard not to fall in love with the space. 

(02:10) Phil Hill: That's definitely true. It's a difficult sales cycle. I mean, there's a lot of challenges, but I love it. I'd say there's also a lot of, you either have people following, they're true academics. I've always been in academia, you have people like myself that fall into it and, you know, just discover, hey, this is a great place to work. But you also have a lot of people who made money elsewhere, you know, tech exit saying, and I want to spend my money to do good. So I think you have some deliberate things as well.

(02:40) Amrit Ahluwalia: What have been some of the things since you've entered the space? And how long have you been active for, by the way, it's coming in on two decades now, right? 

(02:48) Phil Hill: Exactly. Well, that's the key is whenever Jeanette Weisman who works with me, whenever we introduce ourselves, we realize we're now doing things in terms of decades, not years. So I think I hit the 21 year mark in ed tech. 

(03:04) Amrit Ahluwalia: So what have been some of the trends that you've been watching, some of the things that have really surprised you over the last, call it five to 10 years, certainly. But what, I guess if you think back to Phil of 2000, what would he be most shocked by when he looks at the higher ed industry in 2022?

(03:21) Phil Hill: Well, I'll start with a positive one. And at the time, like I did some LMS consulting, although it was called a CMS course management system at the time. 

(03:30) Amrit Ahluwalia: And because that's not confusing.

(03:33) Phil Hill: And it conflicted with content. But at the time, it was very much, people did not want pedagogy to be combined with technology. So if you were doing an LMS selection or an LMS training, colleges and universities needed to stay away from teaching and learning. While one of the positive effects over the past decade is people no longer feel that way. It's like, hey, if you're picking an LMS, do it so that you can improve teaching and learning. The systems are a lot more intuitive, so a lot more of the professional development reasons for doing it is to improve pedagogy. 

Whereas it used to be a force separation, don't talk about it. That's one of the most positive changes. The depth of the transformation of online education away from, this is only for for-profit institutions or continuing ed departments. Those people on the corner, they're not really one of us to the fact that education, online education needs to be part of a strategy for every school. Even if they're not doing it, they need to think it through. And all schools nonprofit, traditional schools, and they need to think through. And that view is accepted now. So if you think about the depth of that change, that's pretty stunning in the past 10 years, how much online ed has gone mainstream. 

(05:03) Amrit Ahluwalia: You know it's interesting you bring up that concept of periphery and core, because that it's defined our industry for so long. You know, the core—the traditional students served by the main campus, and then you've got folks on the periphery of the institution doing continuing ed use that example, doing some workforce training, doing student engagement in student affairs. But right now, it really seems like those things on the periphery are starting to really define the core of the institution. How have you been watching that progression happen over the past few years, and what impact do you think it's going to have on the way institutions define themselves going forward?

(05:41) Phil Hill: Well, short answer on the latter is it's profound. When I do keynotes two ways I look at that problem. One is that, you know, I call the people who are doing digital education, the support technology is, it used to be the, the kids playing happily in the hallway, and like you tolerate them, the kids are happy, that's fine, but stay over there. And now the kids are running amuck through the house, changing everything. Some of it's chaotic, some of it's, you know, not but it's just completely changed. And part of the way I relate it to is like Everett Rogers who did the diffusion of innovations and the sociological view of how organizations accept change. And he gets into, you know, the innovators, the early adopters, all those types of adopting groups. And part of what's happened is we've gone past these traditional boundaries of 20% or 25% of the early adopters and the innovators doing things to where now you're like, 80% of people have some experience with online education.

(06:50): And part of what that means is the mainstream is fully involved, right? So it's huge. And part of what it means is the mainstream needs much more safe, secure systems. If I'm going to do it, it just needs to work. And part of the stress on support organization is you no longer get to choose, am I at a school or a department that serves these innovators, or do I serve the mainstream? Now you're doing both, right? And that's the way it is. We're not going backwards. So I'd say it's a profound change that both mainstream and innovators are working side by side, and there's a tension there, but I think it's going to have a big impact.

(07:30) Amrit Ahluwalia: Well, it's an interesting approach, right? Because when I start to think about how the future of the post-secondary institution comes together, we're kind of redefining what each institution is great at. And I think, you know, for so long the quality of a post-secondary institution was defined myopically. There was a single approach, right? You're trying to mirror Harvard as much as you could. And now it seems like as we kind of get into this new era of what the institution can be, different institutions are looking at different things to stand out around. And, you know, taking a much closer look at who are students actually, and what do we need to do to serve them?

(08:09) Phil Hill: Yeah, no, I think that's a great point. Yeah. It used to be defined by who are your peers or who do you look up to. 

(08:16) Amrit Ahluwalia: So I remember for those of you who know Becky Takeda tinker, she would talk about how every October she'd get brochures from universities all around Colorado and similar institutions to ones she worked at across the country, so that she'd remember them when she was pulled for the US world to do is they're like, that seems like a weird way to spend your bargaining dollars.

(08:41) Phil Hill: And so part of what's happening, and just look at the language you used, is it's now more what does the student need? Who is the student? Wait, non-traditional is—traditional is no longer the mainstream. It's what are the needs. And it, but we have to recognize it's a painful change because you have to learn a new way of thinking of how do you understand student and potential student needs and develop a strategy for your institution to serve them, but hopefully to avoid it becoming consumerist, you know, just doing shallow needs. So I think it's profound, but we're in a chaotic transition, and it's not easy. Some schools veer in, you know, the classical thing talking about lazy rivers to attract students. That's consumerist mentality. But a lot of schools that have redefined them, you know, look at what Southern New Hampshire did. They were known for competency-based education, and it still are. But what they really did is do a deep dive into what student needs are and then redesign their online university to serve them. So it's a big but long-term transition we're in. 

(09:55) Amrit Ahluwalia: I'm going slightly push back on you there. Right, because you used a term that I love, but in a way I didn't like, okay. Which is the idea of consumerist. Because I think looking at the things Southern New Hampshire has done, looking at the shift to student centricity, I think is implicitly a recognition of, of the consumer mindset. It's just that we've better understood what consumers actually want. Like if we think about, you know, a consumer behavior, it's not going be dictated necessarily by bells and whistles around the core product. It's around how much can we streamline the experience to make accessing the core product easy.

(10:32) Phil Hill: And I guess the way I'm using the term consumers, sorry to say it, the NYU student who complained that the organic chemistry course was too difficult and they wrote a letter and ended up getting rid of the professor who's been teaching it for 20 years with the rewards. That to me shows the negative content.

(10:55) Amrit Ahluwalia: It's the dangers of consumers.

(10:57) Phil Hill: The dangers of consumerism. Southern New Hampshire is the opposite side. That's where you view consumerist mentality as what do they need? Yes. Let's study them and let's figure out how

(11:07) Amrit Ahluwalia: To serve them. So that's fair. There are two sides of that coin there. We, there's a quote that I love, and it's from Shameless plug for the EvoLLLution from an article from Heather Chakis who's now, she's student affairs at a Northeastern institution. But prior, she was the Chief Student Experience Officer at UCLA Extension, and she said, treating students as customers doesn't mean the customer is always right. It means removing unnecessary barriers and obstacles that stand in the way of their success. And that's a mindset that is, it's really kind of stuck with me, is that idea of how much of the post-secondary experience is designed for learners and how much of it is just a continuous iteration of the way we've always done things. So I think we're in an industry that tends to focus on iteration as opposed to innovation, right? We just, we take computers and we put the paper-based processes on the computers, but we don't necessarily look at what are the processes that we’re doing. 

(12:13) Phil Hill: So part of what I think we're doing in this conversation is our terminology is not adequate. Capture what we mean by the positive negative side of consumerist point. I'd also like to point out, I've always wondered evoLLLution is it pronounced evolution or do you pronounce it evolllllution? 

(12:31) Amrit Ahluwalia: You know what we pronounce it evolution, but I would, I'm never opposed to someone making the three Ls obvious. That makes me so happy. 

(12:43) Phil Hill: So I think it's yeah, maybe we need to start calling out this type of difference between profound, you know, redesign to serve needs versus just reaction to the quick feedback of the day. Yeah. And so that's where we're at, but we have to give it time because you're talking about an entire industry ecosystem that's transforming. And then you take C O V I D and of course what that does compresses everything within two or three year period that causes chaos, but it causes more change than the system has been ready to digest. So I think that's part of what we're in right now, is digesting that change.

(13:29) Amrit Ahluwalia: Now for the listener's benefit, about a week ago I sent Phil a list of questions that I built the conversation around, and we haven't touched them yet.

(13:39) Phil Hill: I was curious about that

(13:40) Amrit Ahluwalia: So we're going to come to that because I do, this is actually a fascinating perspective. And again I mentioned the Phil on EdTech blog a little bit earlier in the discussion. Please do check it out if you haven't. Now in the blog you, you wrote a piece on some of the enrollment declines that we've seen over the past two years through covid. Obviously they've massively shaken our space. We're talking about 1.4 million fewer post-secondary students pursuing degrees. We're talking about a 4.2% decline in undergraduate enrollments, a 3.1% decline in graduate enrollments. We're talking about really a pretty staggering drop in every segment of post-secondary institution, with the exception of highly selective. You in, in the blog you wrote on the piece you wrote about a widening separation between have and have not institutions. Could you expand on that a little bit?

(14:32) Phil Hill: But first I have to say for the listeners, he rattled that whole thing off with the things without looking at his screen. So he's got this down. So if you look at the National Student Clearing House, they came out with the fall enrollment estimates in Thursday. And they captured some of this where they segment schools by their selectivity and the more selective schools are increasing their enrollment. And then the biggest declines are in the least selective schools. So a lot of people point to it being how well resourced they are, how much money, but I think it's deeper than that. Part of what we're seeing is students have a different view of that value of education. They need to be convinced that college or university, whether it's certificate or degree, is worth it. And this isn't pop. I mean, it's just their elite brand. We know they're worth it. If you can say, I got my degree from Harvard, trust me, that is worth something whether you like it or not. 

(15:41) So I think part of what we're seeing is the big name schools, it is crystal clear there is value there for the rest of us, for the rest of the community, you're going to have to work a lot harder to prove that students are getting value out of their education. So I think that's part of what's going on. It is partially a resource issue, but I just, I think too often we make that the easy answer, that school's rich. Whereas it's the reality that we need to rethink how we're serving students and they're not passive here, here's the word again, passive consumers, they want to know this is going to be worth their time, particularly when they have employment opportunities now. So I think there's many things going into it, but be careful of the easy answer on resources. That's only part of it. 

(16:28) Amrit Ahluwalia: Yeah, no, that's fair. And you know, as you look at that, because we know there's a thin band of an elite institutions that'll always be great. They'll always do fine. The enrollments will always shake out. And just to rattle off a few more of broad data points if you actually look at the, the clearinghouse data along among those highly selective institutions at public four year, the enrollment increase has been about 1% at private not-for-profit four years. In that highly selective band, it's almost a 7% enrollment increase as compared to 2020 for 2022 compared to 2020. And it's a staggering increase. But as you start to look down the line and as you've said, I mean it's a precipitous decline from tier to tier, how can leaders in those spaces start to better define the value they deliver to students? And how much does credential innovation and alternative credentialing start to play into pathways they can take to buck these trends?

(17:29) Phil Hill: Well, one thing, and this was in the context of digital education to serve hybrid and online, but I think it's broader. People have asked me, when should my school start that? And I'm like, a decade ago. 

So part of it is the, so the who's the haves and the have-nots also gets to the schools that invested at least 10 years ago. And they were ready for the pandemic. And they are serving working adults and disadvantaged populations because they've rethought things. They're doing much better than the rest. So the have and have nots captures that. So part of the lesson is you've got to invest time and money to figure out how to serve these students. And you have to be patient because it will take years. You mentioned the credentials. One little reported aspect of the data from last week is that students who are in certificate programs, undergrad or grad, their enrollment is up two and a half percent or 2.6% in fall. All the degree programs are technically negative if you aggregate everybody together. 

So I think that the credential innovation expansion of how we do it is a huge movement. It's just a very slow moving movement. So it's almost, but it got no press. And I think part of the reason is two and a half percent's not that exciting, but if you look at it to like, it's a flywheel, it is turning now and it keeps going. So I think it's profound. It's just not the everything changes in two year type of perspective.

(19:06) Amrit Ahluwalia: That's fair. And I liked the signal that we're starting to get, which is that, you know, if consumers are aware of their education options, consumers are also aware of cost outcome, ROI, like they're consumers and if they're thinking like consumers, they're going to behave like consumers are going to decide, like consumers. So how does the post-secondary institutions start to position itself to serve consumers?

(19:29) Phil Hill: Yeah. All right. So let's add in an unpopular sentiment. We need to give students more credit that they are making the judgments that you said. So the view too often with for-profit institutions is oh, those evil things that are tricking students. But we never look and say, wait, part of what the for-profits dead is simple. It's start the programs multiple times per year. So if you're about to want to get something, I can go do it. I don't have to wait until next September. Part of what the for-profit schools have done is pay attention to the students and what their needs are and deliver it. And I think it does a disservice when we give, like we infantilize students, oh, they got tricked. How do we protect them? They got duped. 

(20:17) Amrit Ahluwalia: Of that for sure, you know, because I mean it's a good and a bad, right? Like they did consider that the student is a consumer. They did everything they could to position themselves to serve consumers, and then they went too far. 

(20:30) Phil Hill: Well, and some of them way too far and actually are gone. But the point is, when we look at these students, a lot of times they made the decisions to go to the schools they went to, because this fits in my life. So don't assume they just got, got tricked by bad actors. What, what was their decision making? What did they see of value in that? And who else in the nonprofit sectors could serve that same need?

(20:57) Amrit Ahluwalia: I mean, it's part of this broader shift as you think about sort of the foundations of it, the six-year curriculum model or a lifelong learning model. This shift that seems to be happening from being, you know, the institution is a gatekeeper of knowledge to the institution as a partner in learning. Yes. And if you're a partner in learning, it indicates it, it necessitates a different mentality around who the learner is than if it's a, if you're a gatekeeper of knowledge and it's a unit directional flow of information that, you know, you're sitting in the lecture, you're going to get what you're going to get and you're going to be happy about it. Whereas, well, if you're a partner in learning, you have to be responsive, you have to be agile, you have to be respectful of where that learner's coming from. It's a super different take on the role the institution needs to play in a student's learning journey.

(21:45) Phil Hill: Yeah, I think that's definitely true. And as I said, it's a difficult transition. And just like we're saying, some of the for-profits went way too far. I think the people who are trying to transform the more traditional universities can also go too far. So, for example, one of the things is if you're a partner in learning, we need more emphasis on student learning, which is good. And it's good to recognize just disseminating knowledge and then doing a summative assessment is not enough. But then we can go too far where it's like we shoot down all academic integrity, shoot down all standardized interest test in entering testing, yet nothing to replace it with. And so I think that's, when I say it's a difficult transition, there's some big issues we need to deal with, such as, well, what is the appropriate way to deal with academic integrity? How do we make sure we're getting students who can, you know, can succeed? And we're doing a broad access mission, we're not just going for the easy answer. 

(22:54) Did we, how many of the questions did we hit so far? 

(22:59) Amrit Ahluwalia: We’re going to come onto to three now. Because as you release data every year on OPM partnerships and gives projections for the number of partnerships that we're going to see. So they look at OPM bootcamp pathways partnerships, and, you know, we've seen an astronomical growth in the, the signing and establishment of these partnerships between post-secondary institutions and, and these companies over the past few years. But from 2022 to 2021, the number of new partnerships is declined massively. So it's, you know, in 2021, there are 342 new partnerships. Now I'm reading and in this year, this coming year, the projection is that there will only be 185 new partnerships. That'll be the first time in, I think it's something like five or six years that the number of new partnerships is less than the year before. And we're talking nearly half. What do you think is behind that shift that slowdown in the number of new partnerships?

(23:55) Phil Hill: Well, I'll be a little bit careful here. You you've seen my mad max diagram for the OPM market. Well, I'll be honest with you, part of the reason that was created was in reaction to hollin iq, that they've been too much of a booster of the industry, everything of the industry, everything's optimistic, we're expanding definitions. And I think the numbers have been too optimistic in the past. Having said that, they, they do a great service and there's some good information there. And the one you're calling out is important. Why fewer partnerships. Part of it, I think, is because during Covid, everybody had to go online and it forced schools to think about what are we doing and what should we be doing. The end OPM industry came from too much of quick decisions by deans without an institutional strategy. And that doesn't mean they made a bad decision to start an OPM partnership, but it does mean there was a lot of reaction of let them do the thinking.

(24:58): For us, part of what's happening now is schools are saying, well, first of all, I have a lot of chaos I have to deal with and make sure that we're stable. But then you also need to think, all right, what is the right type of partnership, if at all? So I think that's part of it. The other one is competition way too much of the OPM market. And here I'm talking more online program versus online program. What we haven't fully dealt with is there's so many of them, they're competing with each other. Well, what that means is they might still be viable programs, but it's not going to be the, if you build it, they will come, we're going to grow forever. It's got to be much more strategic. What's my niche, my unique value? And the numbers are more modest and too much of the OPM market has been built on an expectation of growth.

(25:49): Well, if you look at the numbers coming out of the companies that do this, their enrollments, Coursera to you, Pearson, all of these, their enrollments of programs they serve are flatlining or even slightly going down. And in a normal world, you'd say, well, that's okay because it's still at a pretty high level. But there was such an assumption of growth built into them. I think there's turmoil in the market, both with the companies, but also with the schools saying they're suddenly realizing, I can't just assume that if I build it, I'll not only get students, but I'll keep growing forever. And it's like, oh, I actually have to think what is reasonable and can we do it? So I think there's, part of the reason the partnerships are going down is chaos. The other part is you need to think of what is realistic. I can't just jump in and assume growth. So those are, I wouldn't say those are the only two, but those are for podcast answers, two that come off the top of my head.

(26:54) Amrit Ahluwalia: I mean, it's two pretty damn good answers. And it, you know, as I look at that space as well, one of the things that strikes me is, is this question of, you know, well what's the role of the institution in delivering the learning product? Right? So I've always thought of partnerships as being really valuable in simplifying, call it periphery necessities. So, you know, a technology partnership to streamline the delivery of a given service. An active consultative partnership for the delivery of things like call centers or academic coaching like, but everything's in the service of allowing staff, faculty in the institution to focus resources on developing and delivering great programming. So one of the things that's always struck me about the OPM model is, who owns the program? Like, how, how much of that programming is coming from things that the institution has expertise in, and how much of it is just trying to offer something?

(27:48) Phil Hill: Yeah. Well, and I think it's migrating over time. Institutions are picking up some of these skills slowly, and they should, if they're core competencies, instruction, instructional design, it's sort of a no-brainer. They should pick up more over time. Well, what about digital marketing? There's an argument saying at attracting and getting students to enroll through digital marketing should be a core competency. So they should take it over. There's another view to say, we're not set up to do that. I mean, we work with a school that shall remain nameless, where their marketing department had just a handful of people and they were doing an online program and they had to approve every department's website changes. So if you're in a department, you want to change something based on the program outside, you know, across the board, not just online. It had to go through them. So they were a bottleneck.

(28:43): So they couldn't even do department webpages. Well, if you look at them, there's no way they could have handled a digital marketing campaign to grow a new online program. They didn't have the mindset, they didn't have the capabilities, the resourcing. So there's a little bit of would it happen if you didn't partner at all? And in that case, it would not have happened. Now once this school or any school like that gets into it, then there's a question is yes, but should we over time figure that out so that we can take it over 10 years from now? I think schools need to think that through. It's like, even if a good partnership, it's not just doing the periphery, it's like enabling something to exist in the first place. But once it exists, you need to think, well, where should we be five years from now or 10 years from now? And that will likely be a different answer. 

(29:40) Amrit Ahluwalia: That's interesting. Well, I mean, we've covered a lot of topics in the last, I want to say half hour-ish or so. Are there any other sort of trends or shifts that, that you're watching the ed tech space right now?

(29:52) Phil Hill: Well, I mean, I'm looking at a lot of it. I'll go back to the one we were talking about, the change in credentials and the ability of schools to create alternative pathways programs is very difficult. So competency based education, you can write a great white paper. You've had tons of great articles and EvoLLLution on it. But if you get down to how do you create these programs, there's a lot of barriers to putting that in place. A lot of it's financial aid rules, A lot of it's accreditation approval. But a lot of it, and I'm looking around this room here, do we have IT systems that can handle a start every month? A mix of asynchronous and synchronous programming. So part of it is how well are we removing these barriers to enable schools to create these alternative credentials or alternative pathways or alternative pedagogical styles such as CBE. 

(30:54) And a lot of it's about getting rid of barriers. Cause like I said, you can write a great white paper, but implementing it is really difficult. And I'll give one example. If you look at CBE, so many people were talking about, well, we need to do true CBE, which is direct assessment. And it really is asynchronous self-paced, that purest view. It's not just that it's not happening very quickly because of barriers, but a lot of schools are starting to rethink this saying, I'm not even sure that's serving students well because do they have enough skin in the game? And we don't want to just say, do it however fast you want. So I think there's a rethinking of what's the best way to serve students. But just that ability to enable schools to innovate is a big thing. Then looking at, and a lot of times, since we're here to educate, it's what technical barriers are out there that you can get rid of?

(31:53) Amrit Ahluwalia: Well, Phil pretty much does it for us. And I guess the last question I'll ask you is the way that we tend to end every podcast, which is you know, usually we ask people their favorite restaurant in their hometown. Since we're in Denver, I'll ask you either in your hometown or Denver, what's a favorite restaurant that people need to try?

(32:10) Phil Hill: A favorite restaurant that people, here's a chain. But I was just talking to somebody about this last night. Capital Grill Steakhouse. It's a chain. I get it. But I've done corporate events in Denver and the Denver Capital Grill is one of the most professionally run individual restaurants I've dealt with. Like, if you're doing an event, it's like a cruise ship. They know when to come in and serve people, they notice when they're talking and don't get in your way and disrupt an event. So it's just sort of that experience. So I know it sounds silly, picking a chain. But the one here in Denver is just one of the best run co steakhouses and one that can support a corporate event. 

(32:56) Amrit Ahluwalia: Phil, it's been awesome meeting you in person, man. And hey, thank you so much for, for joining us on the podcast today.

(33:01) Phil Hill: Yeah, I really enjoyed it and great meeting you. 

(33:05) Voiceover: This podcast is made possible by a partnership between Modern Campus and The EvoLLLution. The Modern Campus engagement platform, powered solutions for non-traditional student management, web content management, catalog and curriculum management, student engagement and development, conversational text messaging, career pathways, and campus maps and virtual tours. The result innovative institutions can create learner to earner life cycle that engages modern learners for life, while providing modern administrators with the tools needed to streamline workflows and drive high efficiency. To learn more and to find out how to modernize your campus, visit moderncampus.com. That's moderncampus.com.