THE ENROLLMENT MANAGEMENT REVIEW - College Board



THE ENROLLMENT MANAGEMENT REVIEWVolume 24, Issue 4Summer 2009Editor: Don HosslerAssociate Editor: Chad ChristensenIndiana University Center for Postsecondary Research and PlanningIn this issue of The Enrollment Management Review we review several new publications on marketing, enrollment management, and public policy issues associated with financial aid. We also look briefly, first, at the turmoil in application and yield rates and speculate on what these trends might mean for the future of our profession.Fall enrollment numbers and admission yields are certain to dominate discussions at the fall meetings of the College Board and the National Association for College Admission Counseling (NACAC), as well as at the Strategic Enrollment Management conference of the American Association of Collegiate Registrars and Admissions Officers (AACRAO). Many senior campus policy makers, trustees, and faculty—and, of course, enrollment managers—are expressing considerable anxiety as to what entering classes are going to look like in fall 2009. Some of this anxiety stems from the uncertainty of the extent to which increases in applications in recent years have been a function of larger high school graduating classes or the result of more students submitting applications to multiple institutions. Unfortunately, databases and analyses from previous times of economic turmoil do not exist that would enable us to make accurate predictions about the entering classes across the range of postsecondary institutions in different sectors.Different institutional sectors experience good economic times and bad economic times differently. Local low-cost two- and four-year institutions, for example, generally see applications go up during recessions. Many working adult students find that opportunity costs fall at these institutions during economic downturns. Going back to college is often an attractive option for students who discover they can’t get overtime or can’t find a job.Application patterns at community colleges and less selective regional four-year institutions will merit examination once the dust settles this fall. Because the access mission of our postsecondary system falls heavily on these institutions, large increases in applications at a time when many states are freezing or reducing funding could result in many low-income students being denied admission (something already happening in the California State University system). If these trends spread across the nation they may have a chilling impact on access and the aspirations of many low-income students.During a downturn in the economy a larger proportion of applicants to highly selective public and private institutions may need financial assistance, yet demand for admission to these elite institutions generally remains high. Applications and/or deposits at many less selective private colleges and universities are down in this current recession, however, according to ample anecdotal evidence. Inside Higher Ed reports () that many private colleges are having to be more creative with financial aid to craft a class for the fall—but the pattern is surprisingly uneven. While one selective institution in New England saw an anticipated decline in yield, another selective institution in a state hit hard by job loss has done better than expected and has not seen an increase in its discount rate or a decline in yield. For public residential institutions the environment appears mixed. Better known, more selective institutions are seeing increases in applications, while enrollment deposits have been running behind at some publics, and at still other publics deposits look solid. One public institution is reporting a counterintuitive pattern, with applications and yield rates down among in-state residents and up among out-of-state students. Yields might be down among the more prestigious publics, unsurprisingly, where expanding applicant pools are likely to include more high-ability students, who have more options. A study published in Student Poll (), and funded by the College Board and the Art & Science Group, clearly reflects the concerns of students and their parents about the condition of the economy and the cost of college. As many as 86 percent of all respondents said they were giving much more or somewhat more consideration to working while going to college. More than 75 percent reported giving much more or somewhat more consideration to attending a public college or university. Nearly 50 percent reported having similar thoughts about the possibility of living at home while going to college. More than 70 percent of students reported having discussions with their parents about the cost of college and what they can afford.After the last economic recession many traditional-age students shifted their attendance from private to public institutions. The present recession could lead to a similar shift and, as anecdotal evidence suggests, a large shift toward community colleges is possible. Because such enrollment patterns are difficult to alter once they are established, private colleges may quite rationally increase their discount rate for one or two years to hold on to their market share during a recession—with the hope of reducing the discount rate when the economy improves. This may even be a rational strategy for some public institutions, but with the decline in public support it is harder for these institutions to hire sufficient faculty to deliver instruction to the admitted students. In an interesting twist of fate, some private colleges with small endowments may be weathering the current economic situation better than more affluent privates. At institutions that saw declines in their endowment portfolios, a modest increase in their discount rate may not present significant fiscal problems. While current trends are enough to give any enrollment manager sleepless nights in the short run, they should also give us pause about the longer term future. The publications reviewed below can productively inform the ongoing conversation about these issues among enrollment professionals and provide them useful tools to analyze and to address some of their critical enrollment concerns.Maringe, F., & Gibbs, P. (2009). Marketing in Higher Education: Theory and Practice. Maidenhead, England: Open University Press.This new publication from England reflects the relatively recent interest in the U.K. in the use of marketing theory and practice in educational settings. The warrant for this interest, with its focus on branding, as well as on admissions and development marketing, is consistent with similar higher education marketing foci in the U.S. Much like early publications in the U.S. on the role of marketing in higher education, the initial chapters of this book make the case for using marketing principles in higher education—covering ground already familiar to most U.S. practitioners. Subsequent chapters of this short but useful book discuss students as customers, marketing techniques, positioning the institution, pricing, reputation management, and enrollment management. Chapters four and five provide a succinct introduction to methods for segmenting student markets and for doing applied research on the factors that influence the enrollment decisions of students. Chapter six, on institutional positioning, includes a more detailed discussion of various approaches to market segmentation and a variety of statistical techniques for studying student market segments—but the chapter is not highly technical. It does not tell enrollment managers how to do cluster analysis, for example, but it does explain the benefits of cluster analytic techniques. Particularly for new professionals, this chapter is an excellent primer on the market research techniques enrollment management units should consider as they identify their priorities for market research. Chapter nine, which examines the role of pricing and value propositions in marketing higher education, is not particularly strong but it does provide a comparison of the pricing experiences of U.S. and U.K. universities and a broad (if overly simple) introduction to pricing strategies. Chapter ten gives a solid overview of reputation management and branding, with a particularly useful section on internal marketing that notes the importance of securing the support of internal stakeholders for marketing and branding efforts. Chapter eleven focuses on enrollment management as a management concept. Again, the chapter provides a useful primer but there are better resources on the topic. It is surprising that while the authors draw on work in both the U.K. and the U.S. when discussing other topics, they fail to draw on the robust U.S. literature when discussing enrollment management. Nevertheless, this book is a solid contribution overall and will be particularly useful for early- to mid-career professionals trying to better understand all the pieces of marketing and enrollment management.Steinberg, M. P., Piraino, P., & Haveman, R. (2009, Winter). Access to Higher Education: Exploring the Variation in Pell Grant Prevalence Among U.S. Colleges and Universities. The Review of Higher Education, 32(2), 235-270.As the scrutiny of the enrollment management function by public policy makers and critics increases, the proportion of Pell Grant recipients enrolled in public and private colleges and universities is getting more attention. Although public sector institutions are under more intense inspection because they receive a larger proportion of public funds, private institutions are also under the microscope because they enroll students who receive federal and state financial aid. Some even view the tax exempt status of private colleges and universities as a form of public subsidy. As a result of these pressures, enrollment managers need to be able to give informed responses to reporters, to trustees, and to other senior campus administrators about the factors that influence the enrollment rates of Pell Grant eligible students. This study examines these factors.Using advanced multivariate techniques the authors studied the interaction of the demographic characteristics of a state—including percentage of low-income high school students, percentage of minority students, and factors such as unemployment rates—with institutional-level variables such as Carnegie classification (community college, liberal arts institution, comprehensive institution, or research institution), selectivity, and tuition cost. For public institutions, the authors found the following variables have a positive relationship with the number of Pell Grant recipients at an institution: the amount of institutional financial aid, the percentage of low-income students in the state, and the generosity of state financial aid programs. Variables having a negative relationship include the public institution’s selectivity and size. Among private sector colleges and universities, the authors found the following variables have a negative relationship with the number of Pell Grant recipients: cost of attendance, institution selectivity, and institution size. The only state-level variable with a relationship—and it is positive—with the number of an institution’s Pell Grant recipients is the percentage of low-income students in the state.Although these findings are for the most part intuitive, enrollment managers can use them to explain how the characteristics of their state and institution are related to the proportion of students with Pell Grants on their campus.Kalsbeek, D. H., & Hossler, D. (2008). Enrollment Management and Financial Aid: Seeking a Strategic Integration. College and University, 84(1), 3-11. All enrollment professionals are well aware of the intense competition among institutions for the top students, but early-career enrollment professionals may have little knowledge of the broader implications of financial aid and how it is used to meet the revenue goals of colleges and universities. This article provides sound perspective on this topic by focusing on the importance of integrating financial aid and enrollment management. From an institutional perspective there are myriad reasons to integrate enrollment services and financial aid. Financial aid is used to enhance enrollments and to advance institutional goals—from supporting tuition revenues to constructing class profiles consistent with the institutional mission.The article’s succinct overview of financial aid will help new and seasoned enrollment professionals understand the history of financial aid, its shifting functions, and its uses in institutions of higher education. The cost of a college education has risen dramatically and, with state and federal support for higher education shrinking, colleges and universities must increasingly rely on tuition for revenue. Yet an increase in tuition also brings an increase in the need for financial aid—both to attract high quality students and to allow access to college for underrepresented and disadvantaged students. Turning to the challenges that enrollment managers face when dealing with financial aid, the authors shed light on the often ambiguous and confusing language used in discussing financial aid processes, defining terms such as tuition discounting, financial need, and merit need. This useful overview also clarifies concepts important to all enrollment managers: access and affordability—their meanings and their roles in the institution and in the financial aid framework. Kalsbeek and Hossler describe the challenges enrollment professionals may encounter through honest dialogue about the efficacy of tools and technologies for calculating the likelihood that students will enroll. Market structures and positions within the national framework are then explored.Overall, this article provides a concise overview of the complexities that enrollment managers face in financial aid. Although often housed in different places on campus, financial aid and enrollment management systems are becoming increasingly complex and increasingly intertwined. Financial aid policies are salient for all enrollment professionals and open and effective communication between enrollment managers, financial aid administrators, and other senior administrators is vital for success in enrollments. This article will be of great use to new enrollment managers and will provide sound insights for veteran professionals currently engaged in such dialogues on their campuses. Hossler, D., & Kalsbeek, D. (2008). Enrollment Management and Financial Aid, Part II: A Public Policy Perspective. College and University, 84(2), 3-9. Hossler and Kalsbeek continue their discussion on financial aid and enrollment management (begun in College and University, Vol. 84, No. 1) by focusing on public policy debates at the federal and state levels. A look at the myriad state systems in the authors’ overview of federal and state financial aid models reveals that—when it comes to financial aid—no state model is the norm. Rather, each state has a unique system. Adding to the complexity, in each state system the kinds of financial aid offered vary according to institution type. Private and public institutions may have quite different enrollment goals and the systems in place to distribute financial aid at private institutions may be quite distinct from those of public institutions. The same is true for community colleges—further complicating the picture.The authors suggest that enrollment professionals focus on federal and state financial policies, as these policies are—directly and indirectly—tied to the enrollments of students. Federal and state policies assuredly impact institutions, forming parameters within which enrollment managers must operate. Thus, turning their attention to public policy issues relating to federal and state financial aid, Kalsbeek and Hossler review the critiques of the federal financial aid policies. This section is valuable to enrollment professionals, as it provides concise points of criticism on how need is calculated at the federal level and it explores theories of how the financial aid system is broken and how it may evolve in the future. The authors then explain how possible changes to the federal system may impact enrollment management. Although state policies on financial aid are more difficult to investigate because each state has its own unique policies, the authors explore the use of two types of state-level aid: merit- and need-based. Any enrollment manager will face the challenge of determining how best to use aid in recruitment efforts. As the authors poignantly surmise, very few states can afford to invest adequately and equally in both merit- and need-based aid. The buy-in for one detracts from the investment in the other. The decision on which system will be dominant has a great impact on the students that will enroll. This discussion illuminates how complex decisions in this area are made and how financial aid, public policy, and institutional enrollments are aligned with one another. Keeping any of these in a silo by itself is difficult, as they are all intertwined. Overall, this article will be of great benefit to enrollment professionals, as it illustrates the extent to which public policies affect the choices of institutions and of enrollment professionals. The authors suggest that enrollment managers must be knowledgeable about public policy—much like financial aid—to help shape it and inform it. The enrollment manager may most accurately recognize how financial aid influences student outcomes—and so should play a significant role in forming policy. Walpole, M. (2007, December). Economically and Educationally Challenged Students in Higher Education: Access to Outcomes (ASHE Higher Education Report, Vol. 33, No. 3). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.The debates about access and affordability are salient and timely for all enrollment managers, as the publications reviewed above demonstrate. This monograph helps illuminate those debates with insights into the literature on underrepresented and disadvantaged students. To better define what it means to be a student with a low socioeconomic status (SES) background, Walpole first reviews the research literature to determine the historical meanings of the term and finds that students of low SES have historically been studied in three ways: 1) by parental income, 2) by parental educational attainment, and 3) by parental occupation. Noting how greatly these three measures can vary from one another and suggesting possibly even greater discrepancies within each of the three, Walpole proposes an alternative term: economically and educationally challenged (EEC). This section of the monograph can help enrollment managers better understand how students are categorized in respect to access and affordability and can provide institutions seeking to create more opportunities for EEC students much needed language for the accurate modeling and tracking of their enrollments.Following an overview of theories relating to EEC students, which enrollment professionals are likely to find less practically relevant, Walpole turns her attention to students’ college experiences—and the very different college experiences of EEC students. No matter how they are defined, EEC students are found to be less engaged on campus, and less engaged students are less likely to persist.This discussion of engagement leads logically to a discussion of institutional outcomes. Students from low SES backgrounds and with lower educational aspirations are less likely to graduate than their peers. Institutions can address this issue by identifying their EEC students, developing programs to keep them engaged, and coordinating efforts across campus to target these students to help them persist and achieve their educational aspirations.The last two sections of the monograph are the most practical for enrollment professionals. The section on organizational structures, practices, and responses looks at how organizational structures, practices, and programs at different colleges affect the success and persistence of EEC students. A brief review of some successful programs gives enrollment professionals the opportunity to consider such programs on their own campuses.Walpole concludes with recommendations and implications for practitioners, policymakers, and researchers. The section for practitioners can help shape the efforts of enrollment professionals to recruit EEC students. Walpole notes the importance of informing prospective EEC students early of the college admissions process and of creating partnerships with local high schools. Reminding readers that recruitment is only a part of the effort to make higher education accessible and affordable for EEC students, Walpole encourages faculty and staff to address EEC students’ greater difficulty in persisting by working together to ensure that students are engaged on campus.With its call for enrollment professionals to become more involved in financial aid and public policy debates, this monograph provides a good overview for enrollment professionals of the literature on underrepresented and disadvantaged students. Although sections such as the one on conceptual approaches are not as practically relevant to enrollment managers, most of the material in the monograph can help start a campus dialogue about ensuring that EEC students enroll, persist, and graduate.Briefly NotedUK Higher Education International Unit & Europe Unit. (2009, April). UK Universities and Europe: Competition and Internationalisation (Research Series, No. 3). London, England: Authors. Retrievable at europeunit.ac.uk.As noted above, there is a growing interest in enrollment management outside North America. This monograph casts a hard light on efforts of European universities outside the UK to attract more international students and on the increasingly competitive framework being used with higher education enrollment concerns in Europe. The authors look at a range of issues including the Bologna process and factors influencing the competitive recruitment of international students, such as students’ ability to work and the use of English as the language of instruction. This publication would be of interest to any U.S. university that enrolls, or hopes to enroll, large numbers of international students. ................
................

In order to avoid copyright disputes, this page is only a partial summary.

Google Online Preview   Download