Academic entitlement (AE) refers to the expectation of educational success despite the input of personal effort needed to earn it (Boswell, 2012). Entitled students feel that learning should require minimal work and that difficulties encountered during the learning process should be attributed to instructors, rather than themselves. AE has become increasingly associated with academic consumerism, or the view that "students are paying customers for their education and deserve the same customer satisfaction and service as any other type of consumer" (Sohr-Preston & Boswell, 2015, p. 183). AE has also been linked to many negative attitudes and behaviors including low self-efficacy and poor study habits (Greenberger, Lessard, Chen, & Farruggia, 2008). Entitled students are more likely to provide excuses for their work and express negative complaints when they dislike a course (Goldman & Martin, 2014; Goodboy & Frisby, 2014). Due to the negativity that surrounds AE, most instructors seek to combat entitlement in their classrooms. Not all students feel/act entitled, but for those that do, directly confronting their beliefs would likely be perceived as a personal attack and may alienate students from their instructor while creating unnecessary tension in the classroom. Instead, instructors must adapt their teaching practices around entitlement, not so that they implicitly acknowledge or reward AE, but so that they maintain an optimal learning environment for as many of the students as possible. Instructional communication research can help instructors adapt their practices around entitled students. Yet, just as student expectations continue to change, research must also evolve. It is possible that behaviors that were once promoted in the literature as effective are now considered by students to be a given, coinciding with their consumeristic expectations. As such, the authors offer and detail three directions to help future research address entitlement in today's classrooms: (1) Researchers should continue examining the strategies that instructors use to make course content relevant to students; (2) Scholars need to diversify their investigations of technology and the way in which it is used and discussed in the classroom; and (3) Researchers should reexamine millennial students' communication concerns. [For the other essays in this forum: (1) FORUM: Instructional Communication and Millennial Students: Scripting Knowledge and Experiences for Millennial Students (Angela M. Hosek, Scott Titsworth, EJ1102964); (2) FORUM: Instructional Communication and Millennial Students: Hoverboards and "Hovermoms": Helicopter Parents and Their Influence on Millennial Students' Rapport with Instructors (T. Kody Frey and Nicholas T. Tatum, EJ1102970); (3) FORUM: Instructional Communication and Millennial Students: "Me"llennials and the Paralysis of Choice: Reigniting the Purpose of Higher Education (Marjorie M. Buckner and Michael G. Strawser, EJ1102967 ); (4) FORUM: Instructional Communication and Millennial Students: Managing Imposter Syndrome among the "Trophy Kids": Creating Teaching Practices that Develop Independence in Millennial Students (Kirstie McAllum, EJ1102980); and (5) FORUM: Instructional Communication and Millennial Students: Teaching Communication to Emerging Adults (Paula S. Tompkins, EJ1102974). Responses include: (1) FORUM: Instructional Communication and Millennial Students: Millennials, Teaching and Learning, and the Elephant in the College Classroom (Sherwyn P. Morreale and Constance M. Staley, EJ1102955); and (2) FORUM: Instructional Communication and Millennial Students: The Power of Language: A Constitutive Response to Millennial Student Research (Kyle C. Rudick and Scott Ellison, EJ1102961).]