Transcript Document
Positioning CCCU Campuses in the Third Millennium CCCU Forum February 9, 2001 www.maguireassoc.com Megatrends in Higher Education Drivers of change Shrinking revenues and rising costs Shifts in decision making Impact of workplace trends Growth in adult and traditional markets Strategic pricing and financial aid policies The Web and community Drivers of Change in Higher Education Changing demographics Increasing demand Knowledge explosion Technology Globalization More competitive environment Creation of new enterprises (Source: IBM Campuslink Project Office) Shrinking Revenues and Rising Costs The soaring expense of traditional needbased and no-need scholarships Declining financial support from state and federal governments The spending needed to bring – and keep – libraries, classrooms, IT, and laboratories up to date Shrinking Revenues and Rising Costs The pressures of deferred maintenance The price of faculty expertise The competition for students from for-profit institutions, providers of “electronic” education, and corporations’ own training programs Shrinking Revenues and Rising Costs The cost of technology The rising costs of recruiting students in the highly competitive environment Shifts in Decision Making Public policy is moving toward marketdriven mechanisms because of: The increasing power of the consumer Technology’s ability to transcend space, time, and political boundaries (Source: IBM Campuslink Project Office) Impact of Workplace Trends Retraining is becoming a requirement for employees. Technology is a required workforce competency. Telecommuting is becoming a way of life. (Source: IBM Campuslink Project Office) Growth in Adult and Traditional Markets Explosive growth in adult markets 90 million adults (46%) participated in one or more adult education activities in 1999. Overall participation rate of college graduates was more than three times the rate of those without a degree. Participation in adult education is six times the total higher education enrollment. National Household Education Survey Growth in Adult and Traditional Markets Qualified traditional student growth projections: The number of high school graduates in 2000 will mirror the early 1980’s. By 2004, this population is expected to reach the peak levels of the late 1970’s. By 2009, the total number of high school graduates will be 32% higher than in 1992. (Source: Challenges in College Admissions, AACRAO, ACT, CB/ETS, NACAC) Growth in Adult and Traditional Markets Qualified traditional student growth projections: A record of more than 3.2 million high school graduates will peak in 2008-09. Early in this century, more than a third of college students will be minority students. By 2020, the Hispanic population will become the largest minority group in the United States. (Source: National Center for Education Statistics) Growth in Adult and Traditional Markets Other notable trends: Between 1987 and 1997, the number of men enrolling in college rose by 7%, while the number of women rose by 17%. Between 1987 and 1997, the number of male full-time graduate students increased by 22%, compared to 68% for full-time women. (Source: The Chronicle of Higher Education Almanac, 1998) Growth in Adult and Traditional Markets There are many more small colleges, but most students attend the larger institutions. In1997, 40% of all institutions had fewer than 1,000 students; however, these campuses enrolled 4% of college students. 10% of the campuses enrolled 10,000 or more students and accounted for 50% of the total college enrollment. Strategic Pricing and Financial Aid Policies Higher education has been (re)embracing merit aid programs. Sophisticated financial aid models are being employed as revenue generating tools. Strategic Pricing and Financial Aid Policies The linking of institutional values and goals to pricing policies is changing the world of financial aid. The Princeton policy The domino theory The virtuous circle The Web and Community Distance learning techniques in a residential liberal arts environment College constituencies and community using the Internet Key Research Findings from the CCCU Membership Study Goals of the Project Determine how families define value Provide the CCCU with “big picture” themes Develop strategies for promoting underappreciated yet cherished elements of the CCCU mission Uncover profiles of target audiences Gain a longitudinal perspective (1986 vs. 2000) Benchmarks Comparisons of the1986 and 2000 Studies 1986 Versus 2000 Comparisons Prospects: Year 2000 versus 1986 More emphasis on cost More interest in investment value More importance placed on social life Less reliance on general reputation of an institution 1986 Versus 2000 Comparisons Inquirers: Year 2000 versus 1986 More emphasis on monetary issues More importance placed on social life and location More interest in the integration of faith and learning Less confidence in receiving financial aid from CCCU institutions 1986 Versus 2000 Comparisons Accepted students: Year 2000 versus 1986 More importance on monetary issues, social life, location, and the integration for faith and learning Less interest in preparation for graduate school and quality of faculty and facilities Less interest in diversity Less confidence in receiving financial aid from CCCU institutions Concerns about Cost of Christian Colleges and Universities (1986 vs. 2000) Top Mention = “Expensive” 50 40 30 20.7% 19.3% 20 14.3% 12.0% 9.1% 20.2% 14.4% 10.1% 10 0 P ro sp ects In q u irers NonM atricu lan ts 1986 2000 M atricu lan ts 1986 Versus 2000 Comparisons Slight increase in CCCU visibility, but overall familiarity still low Gains in reputation for preparing students for graduate school and careers, but not as much in overall academic reputation Rise in concerns about “closedmindedness” Familiarity with Christian Liberal Arts Colleges and Universities (1986 vs. 2000) (Totally 5 Familiar) 4 2.73 3.08 3.34 3.53 3.28 3 2.42 1.79 1.97 2 (Not at All 1 Familiar) Prospects Inquirers 1986 Non-Matriculants 2000 Matriculants Research Highlights Year 2000 Membership Study Research Audiences Prospects Desired N Method Inquirers/ Parents 500 Inq/ 150 Par Mail Pre-mail/ Phone Sampling 8200 NRCCUA 5000 National CCCU Member Inquiry Pool Timing Initial 5000 (Interviewing Mailed June 6; June 28 to nd 2 3200 July 26) Mailed July 5 Actual N 559 514/205 400 Admitted Students (Matriculants/ NonMatriculants) 800-900 Mail 10,000 CCCU Member Admitted Student Pool Full sample mailed July 18 (540/343) The college search is starting earlier for families. Timing of College Search (2000) 50 40 28.2% 27.4% 30 21.0% 21.0% 18.0% 20 10 0 19.6% 17.1% 8.8% 8.8% 5.9% 6.0% B e f o re F re s hm a n Year 3.5% B e f o re F re s hm a n Year D uring S o pho m o re Year Inquirers B e f o re m id- po int o f J unio r Y e a r S pring o f J unio r Year S um m e r a f t e r J unio r Y e a r Parents of Inquirers 5.8% 2.4% F a ll o f S e nio r Y e a r The use and influence of the Web represents a major change in market behavior. Use of Source 100 93.0% 94.9% 80.7% 80 51.8% 60 47.3% 40 20 0 18.9% 7.0% Printed materials 4.7% The Internet Yes Personal contacts No Personal communication via e-mail/chat rooms How the Internet is Used Use and influence of Web sites Reliance from prospect to enrollment stages of the college search – Implications for content – Implications for investment Growing interest in email and chat rooms Need to develop electronic recruitment plans Call to reassess institutional policy on outside access to information and people Public universities are major competitors of the CCCU. First-Choice Schools (2000 Prospects): Florida State University, FL (3%) University of California, Los Angeles, CA (2%) University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI (2%) University of Florida, FL (1%) University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC (1%) Texas A&M University, TX (1%) University of Texas, Austin, TX (1%) Positioning Strategies Advantages of Christian mission and smaller size Opportunities for total student development Character development Spiritual development Personal growth in a values-based environment Faculty/student rapport Mentoring The phrase “liberal arts” is not helpful in clarifying image or communicating value. Understanding the Liberal Arts Families do not fully understand its meaning. The connection between the liberal arts and preparation for careers is not strong. The ability to give impressions of a Christian college or university was greatly reduced when the phrase “liberal arts” was added. The Christian mission plays a major role in the college decision-making process. Admissions Funnel Important College Characteristics (2000) Prospect-->Inquirer Prospect Inquirer NonMatriculant Matriculant The “6 Christian Variables” Liberal Arts Education Geographic Location Close Contact with Faculty in and out of Class Character Development Inquirer-->Applicant (Accepted) 5 of the “6 Christian Variables” (not Church Affiliation of Institution) Non-Matriculant-->Matriculant The “6 Christian Variables” Social Life (Residence Life, Extracurricular Activities, etc.) Character Development *Items listed are significantly more important between stages, moving DOWN the “admissions funnel.” COUNCIL FOR CHRISTIAN COLLEGES & UNIVERSITIES Chaid Analysis CCCU Distinguishing Inquirers and Applicants (Admitted Students) Based on Importance of Characteristics 1 = Not at all Important 2 3 4 5 = Extremely Important Integration of the Christian faith and learning 4 61.74% n=264 1 32.47% n=77 2,3 46.13% n=349 Character development Preparation for graduate/ professional school 1-3 48.57% n=35 4,5 19.05% n=42 % Applicants (vs Inquirers) TOTAL 62.68% n=1329 4,5 34.25% n=219 Value of education Liberal arts education 4,5 58.65% n=104 1,2 53.85% n=39 Academic facilities (quality of library, labs, computer center, etc.) Diverse student body 1-3 66.15% n=130 1-3 96.15% n=26 5 75.74% n=639 3-5 30.00% n=180 1,2 80.70% n=57 3,4 61.80% n=178 5 24.14% n=29 Christian service opportunities 1-4 68.79% n=141 5 35.14% n=37 1-3 91.05% n=190 4 74.92% n=303 5 57.53% n=146 Quality of major Diverse student body Quality of major 1-3 98.44% n=64 4,5 87.30% n=126 1-3 81.62% n=185 4,5 64.41% n=118 1-4 82.61% n=46 5 46.00% n=100 Positive and Negative Images of a Christian Education Quality-of-life issues emerged often: “Good atmosphere” “Good environment” “Nice/friendly/caring people” “Values/morals” “Christian fellowship” “Christian atmosphere” Positive and Negative Images of a Christian Education Top negative mentions: “Too small” “Too sheltered” “Too protected” “Closed-minded” ”Strict” “Expensive” COUNCIL FOR CHRISTIAN COLLEGES & UNIVERSITIES Chaid Analysis CCCU Distinguishing Prospects and Inquirers Based on Added Value of Educational Experiences TOTAL 51.72% n=988 1 = Adds No Value 2 3 4 5 = Adds a Great Deal of Value Christian morals and character development are central to the educational process. 1-3 32.06% n=340 4,5 62.04% n=648 Liberal arts education and a Christ-centered view of life are at the heart of the education. 1-3 27.04% n=270 Figure 6.15 Maguire Associates, Inc. Bedford, MA 4,5 51.43% n=70 % Inquirers (vs Prospects) COUNCIL FOR CHRISTIAN COLLEGES & UNIVERSITIES Chaid Analysis Distinguishing Matriculants and Non-Matriculants Based on Added Value of Educational Experience TOTAL 61.37% n=862 1 = Adds No Value 2 3 4 5 = Adds a Great Deal of Value % Matriculants (vs Non-Matriculants) Christian morals and character development are central to the educational process. 1-3 34.34% n=99 4 54.45% n=191 All professors are Christians. 1-3 36.73% n=49 Figure 6.17 Maguire Associates, Inc. Bedford, MA 4,5 60.56% n=142 5 68.36% n=572 A Christian worldview contributes to an excellent preparation for graduate school and the job market. 1-3 54.24% n=59 4,5 69.98% n=513 Understanding of a Christian campus is an underdeveloped building block of the Christian educational experience. Integration of Faith and Living Prospective students are focused on rules and regulations. Students have a siloed image of campus life Service learning Social life Community experience Prospective students have concerns about the relationship between the Christian influence and intellectual life. Integration of Faith and Learning Concerns voiced about closed-mindedness References to academic quality missing from first-word responses Concerns about restrictions on academic breadth and content Students’ priority of advancing personal academic agenda Appeal of the freedom of intellectual discourse and growth from within Academic excellence is intertwined with preparation for the future. Academic Quality and Future Orientation Prospective students for the CCCU identify their top priorities as: Educational value Preparation for future careers Quality of a specific major Quality of faculty Availability of financial aid Employment opportunities after graduation Quality of academic facilities COUNCIL FOR CHRISTIAN COLLEGES & UNIVERSITIES Factor Analysis Dimensions of Importance (2000 Inquirers) FACTOR 1 FACTOR 2 FACTOR 3 FACTOR 4 FACTOR 5 Christian Quality (Academic) Athletics Money Value Variance Accounted for: 20.3% Variance Accounted for: 12.4% Variance Accounted for: 4.0% Variance Accounted for: 1.7% Factor Loading Christian atmosphere Christian faculty Integration of the Christian faith and learning Fellowship with other Christians .95 .91 .91 .91 Christian service opportunities .83 Church affiliation of institution .71 Figure 6.2 Maguire Associates, Inc. Bedford, MA Variance Accounted for: 4.7% Factor Loading Quality of faculty .70 Close contact with faculty in and out of class .64 Quality of major .53 Preparation for graduate/professional school .42 Academic facilities (quality of library, labs, computer center, etc.) .38 General academic reputation of the college/university .35 Factor Loading Varsity athletics (football, hockey, basketball, swimming, etc.) Recreational athletic facilities for general student use Factor Loading Total cost (tuition, room, board, etc.) .78 Availability of financial aid/ scholarships to meet need Factor Loading Value of education .50 Preparation for future careers .47 Study abroad and offcampus opportunities .32 Diverse student body .31 Character development .31 .78 .73 .73 Parents are more involved in the college search in the CCCU market. Parents’ Influence in Choice of College/University (2000) (Very Influential) 5 4 3.49 3.49 3.34 3.41 3.44 3 2 (Not at All Influential) 1 Prospects Inquirers Parents of Inquirers NonMatriculants Matriculants COUNCIL FOR CHRISTIAN COLLEGES & UNIVERSITIES Factor Analysis Dimensions of Importance (2000 Parents) FACTOR 1 FACTOR 2 FACTOR 3 FACTOR 4 Christian Career/Academic Quality Money Social Variance Accounted for: 6.2% Variance Accounted for: 3.1% Variance Accounted for: 23.7% Factor Loading Christian faculty Integration of the Christian faith and learning Fellowship with Other Christian Christian service opportunities Figure 6.14 Maguire Associates, Inc. Bedford, MA .88 .87 .81 .72 Variance Accounted for: 13.9% Factor Loading Factor Loading Employment opportunities graduation Academic facilities (quality of library, labs, computer center, etc.) Quality of faculty Quality of major Close contact with faculty in and out of class Preparation for graduate/ professional school General academic reputation of the college/university .66 .63 .62 .54 .36 .33 .32 Availability of financial aid/scholarships to meet need Total cost (tuition, room, board, etc.) .76 .58 Factor Loading Social life (residence life, extracurricular activities, etc.) Diverse student body Liberal arts education .77 .68 .30 The Parent Perspective In their own words, parents placed substantial weight on practical outcomes, such as: “Employment opportunities after graduation” “Preparation for careers” The “value proposition” for CCCU schools should include messages about tangible outcomes and character development. Value Proposition Every institution should prepare a distinctive value proposition. Cost: Reverse tendency to think about money issues in terms of sticker price rather than net cost. Value: Students and parents are interested in “return on investment.” First jobs, graduate school acceptances Development of the whole person Educational Value Integrated definition for prospects: Closely tied with the importance of preparation for future careers and character development Integrated definition of value for inquirers: Preparation for future careers Character development Exposure to different cultures on campus and in off-campus programs Educational Value Integrated definition of value for accepted students: Career opportunities Quality of major Academic reputation Preparation for graduate school Academic facilities Quality of faculty Character development Hallmark Themes Academic Quality: A high-quality education in a secular world. Christian-centered Community: A close-knit, Christian community that emphasizes character development and spiritual growth. Future Orientation: Preparation for life as well as a living. Financial Investment: The value proposition. Academic Quality: A high-quality education in a secular world. Introduces the Christian focus Positions against public and private secular universities Acknowledges concerns about invasion of voiceless/faceless world Sets the stage for conveying freedom of intellectual inquiry as well as the integration of faith and learning Christian-centered Community: A close-knit, Christian community that emphasizes character development and spiritual growth. Highlight character development Distinguishes spiritual growth opportunities Enhances appreciation for value Develops understanding of integration of faith and living Future Orientation: Preparation for life as well as a living. Addresses interest in careers Advances concept of development of the whole person Provides foundation for moral and spiritual lifestyle Raises the bar for definition of success Financial Investment: The value proposition. Calls for the creation of a succinct statement at the Council and member institution levels Fold in essential elements of the first three hallmark themes Write to a parent audience Connect to cost discussions and copy at all times Maguire Associates, Inc. The Art of Research The Science of Communications 135 South Road Bedford, Massachusetts 01730 781-280-2900 Contact Dr. John Maguire, Chairman [email protected]