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]