Transcript STRATEGIC ENROLLMENT MANAGEMENT Core Concepts and …

ARUCC Halifax 2008
Enrollment or Enrolment:
Implementing SEM in the
Canadian Context
Pre-conference Workshop
June 25, 2008
Halifax, Nova Scotia
© Gottheil, Smith
1
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Presenters
Susan Gottheil, M.A.
Associate Vice-President, Enrolment Management
Mount Royal College, Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Senior Consultant, AACRAO Consulting
[email protected]
Clayton Smith, Ed.D.
Vice-Provost, Students & Registrar
University of Windsor, Ontario, Canada
Senior Consultant, AACRAO Consulting
[email protected]
© Gottheil, Smith
2
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Let’s Meet You!
Introduce Yourself:
-Name
-Institution
-Title
-3 top SEM issues/concerns
for you/your institution
© Gottheil, Smith
3
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Workshop Goals
 Establish a common understanding of SEM
 Identify similarities & differences between U.S. & Canadian
SEM practices
 Use a case study to apply SEM principles in the Canadian
context
 Present recent trends, best practices & emerging
Canadian SEM issues
 Review key components of a SEM Plan
 Ensure lots of discussion and sharing of challenges &
best practices
© Gottheil, Smith
4
ARUCC Halifax 2008
The Booklet
 Copies of PowerPoint presentation
 SEM Audit
 Canadian Context SEM Case Study
 Article on Canadian vs. U.S. SEM
 SEM Plan Web Sites
 Bibliography
© Gottheil, Smith
5
ARUCC Halifax 2008
SEM Audit
© Gottheil, Smith
6
ARUCC Halifax 2008
A bit about SEM…
© Gottheil, Smith
7
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Prospects
The Classic
Admissions
Funnel
Inquiries
Applicants
Admits
Matrics
© Gottheil, Smith
8
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Enrolment Management
Enrollment management is an organizational concept and a systematic set of
activities designed to enable educational institutions to exert more influence
over their student enrollments. Organized by strategic planning and
supported by institutional research, enrollment management activities concern
student college choice, transition to college, student attrition and retention, and
student outcomes. These processes are studied to guide institutional practices
in the areas of new student recruitment and financial aid, student support
services, curriculum development and other academic areas that affect
enrollments, student persistence and student outcomes from college.
- Don Hossler, 1990
© Gottheil, Smith
9
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Promoting Student Success:
The Student Success Continuum
Recruitment /
Marketing
Orientation
Classroom
experience
Co-curricular
support
Degree/goal
attainment
Student’s college /university career
Admission
Financial
support
Academic
support
© Gottheil, Smith
Retention
10
ARUCC Halifax 2008
The Student Success Continuum
Traditional Enrolment Perspective
Recruitment /
Marketing
Orientation
Classroom
experience
Co-curricular
support
Degree/goal
attainment
Student’s college /university career
Admission
Financial
support
Academic
support
© Gottheil, Smith
Retention
11
ARUCC Halifax 2008
The Student Success Continuum
The SEM Perspective
Recruitment /
Marketing
Orientation
Classroom
experience
Co-curricular
support
Degree/goal
attainment
Student’s college /university career
Admission
Financial
Aid
Academic
support
© Gottheil, Smith
Retention
12
ARUCC Halifax 2008
What is SEM?

SEM is a comprehensive process designed to help
an institution achieve and maintain optimum
enrolment, where optimum is defined within the
academic context of the institution.
Michael Dolence (1993)

Strategic enrolment management is a concept and
process that enables the fulfillment of institutional
mission and students’ educational goals.
Bob Bontrager (2004)
© Gottheil, Smith
13
ARUCC Halifax 2008
The Concept of Optimum Enrolment
Ethnicity
Physical
Capacity
Undergrad/
Grad
Majors
Institutional
Mission
Academic
Profiles
Special
Skills
Residency
Program
Capacity
© Gottheil, Smith
14
ARUCC Halifax 2008
The Purposes of SEM are
Achieved by…
 Establishing clear goals for the number & types of
students needed to fulfil the institutional mission
 Promoting student academic success by
improving access, transition, retention, &
graduation
 Promoting institutional success by enabling
effective strategic & financial planning
© Gottheil, Smith
15
ARUCC Halifax 2008
The Purposes of SEM are
Achieved by…
 Creating a data-rich environment to inform decisions &
evaluate strategies
 Improving process, organizational & financial efficiency
& outcomes
 Establishing top quality student-centred service
 Strengthening communications & collaboration among
departments across the campus to support the
enrolment program
-Bontrager (2004)
© Gottheil, Smith
16
ARUCC Halifax 2008
No One Way
“Myths about enrolment management are abundant, yet
one truism has emerged…there is no single way to
implement enrolment management.”
-Jim Black (2004)
© Gottheil, Smith
17
ARUCC Halifax 2008
What SEM is Not
 A quick fix
 Solely an organizational structure
 An enhanced admission & marketing operation
 A financial drain on the institutional budget
 An administrative function separate from the
academic mission of the institution
© Gottheil, Smith
18
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Institutional Mission &
Enrolment Goals Are Determined By:
Current
competitive
status
Programs
offered
Range of
influence
Niche
Aspirational
status
Weaknesses
Historical
status
Strengths
…with consideration to institutional differentiation!
© Gottheil, Smith
19
ARUCC Halifax 2008
The Enrolment Funnel is Different for
Different Students
Student Type:
•Aboriginal Students
•New Canadians
•International Students
•First Generation Students
•Northern Canadians
•Rural Students
•Students with Disabilities
•Dislocated Workers
•Francophone Students
•Sole Support Mothers
•Low-income Students
•Visible Minority Students
•High-Achieving Students
© Gottheil, Smith
20
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Determine your niche, focus
on it, and deliver on it as
well as you possibly can . . .
© Gottheil, Smith
21
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Enrolment Goals:
The Classic Conundrum
 All may want better students
 Administration may want more
students
 Faculty usually want fewer students
 Access vs. Quality
-Adapted from Henderson (2005)
© Gottheil, Smith
22
ARUCC Halifax 2008
“Capacity Development Loop”
+
+
“Delivery Loop”
Programs &
Courses Offered
Courses
Taught
+
+ or +
Programs &
Courses Developed &
Approved
+
Demand for
Programs &
Courses
Courses
Enrolled
Reasons
For Not
Continuing
+
+
+
+
Tuition &
Other Sources
Of Revenue
Gov’t Grants
& External
Funding
Student
Retention
+
Student
Attrition
Programs &
Courses
Completed
Students Graduated,
Transferred, Hired
=
Gov’t
Approval For
Credit
Programs
+
+
+
+
+
+
Source: P. Seto, 2008
© Gottheil, Smith
23
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Enrolment Management System
Student
Characteristics
Environmental
Factors
Member of
underserved
student group
Student
enrolment
behaviour
Beliefs &
values
Demographic
trends
Academic
preparation
Competition
Motivation to
learn
Educational
aspirations
Public
Accountability
(loan default
rate,
graduation,
Accessibility,
retention)
Self-discipline
Adaptability
Interpersonal
skills
Peer
involvement
Ability to pay
Study habits
Family & peer
Support
Student
geographic
draw
Institutional
Goals
Quantitative
Goals
Qualitative
Goals
Diversity
Goals
Institutional
Objectives
Student
headcount
Admission average
Transfer GPA
Visible minorities,
Aboriginal,
international
Federal &
provincial
polices
•Marketing
•Recruitment
•Admission
•Financial
aid/pricing
•Orientation
•Residence
•Athletics
•First Year
•Experience
•Advising
•Supplemental
instruction
•Service learning
•Learning
communities
•Academic
support
•Peer support
•Teaching &
learning
approaches
•Student
engagement
•SEM
organization
•Data mining
Persistence
Goals
Retention rates,
Student
Satisfaction,
graduation rates
Capacity
Goals
Classroom
capacity,
adequate sections,
Class size
Net Revenue
Goals
Financial aid
discount rate,
international
© Gottheil, Smith
enrolment
Economic
Trends
Off-campus
employment
availability
Institutional
Strategies
Desired
Outcomes
Awareness
Enduring
Effect
Institutional
Loyalty
Enduring
Behaviour
Institutional
Image
Interest
Commitment
Enrolment
Persistence
Satisfaction
Education
Relationship
Source: Kuh et al , 2007; Black, 2003
24
ARUCC Halifax 2008
SEM in Canada vs. the U.S.
…some things are the same
AND some things are
different…
© Gottheil, Smith
25
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Values/History
 Different cultures, history, values & systems of
education
 Social justice vs. market orientation
• Serving the public good; equitable access to basic
goods & services; education as a civic virtue
• Vs. business orientation – focus on pricing & meeting
financial targets
 Historical immigration patterns
 Privacy issues
 Equity/affirmative action
© Gottheil, Smith
26
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Educational Systems
 Provincial control in Canada; state & federal
control in U.S.
 Number & size of institutions
• Canada has fewer institutions (230 colleges & universities
•
•
•
•
vs. 3,500+), more homogeneity
Vary in size, not quality
Private, faith-based & for-profit institutions
Commuter vs. residential institutions
Quebec: Cegep system
 Tiering of institutions has been apparent in U.S.,
beginning to emerge in Canada
© Gottheil, Smith
27
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Educational Systems (cont'd.)
 Higher educational participation rates in Canada
• In 2003, 76% of Canadians aged 22 – 24 attended a PSE;
in 1999 proportion was 62%
• Proportion of high school graduates increased from 75%
in 1999 to almost 90% in 2003
• In U.S. only 2/3 of high school graduates go on to PSE
 Collaboration between colleges & universities
• Developed unevenly in Canada; varies from virtually
none to highly articulated (B.C. & Alberta)
 School spirit, role of athletics greater in U.S.
© Gottheil, Smith
28
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Changing Environment
 Constrained resources & tuition dependency
 Increasing competition for students
 Rising fees & increased student debt loads
 Growing concern with educational costs & financial
aid
 Changing demographics
© Gottheil, Smith
29
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Changing Environment
(cont'd.)
 Access to higher education an important
public issue
 Rising concern re: lack of academic
preparedness of entering students
 Focus on student success & student
engagement
 Increased use of merit aid/decrease in needsbased aid
© Gottheil, Smith
30
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Changing Environment
(cont'd.)
 Increasing number of part-time students & students
working longer hours
 Increase of e-services and on-line learning
 Pressure for public accountability (KPI’s, NSSE, CUSC)
 Millennial generation & “helicopter parents”
© Gottheil, Smith
31
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Millennial Students
The letter was very direct. The student was offered an entrance
scholarship to woo her to …but the young woman expected more
and went straight to the top to get it. She sent a letter to our
president – not the admissions officer, not the dean – but to our
president. It basically said, “Before I make my final decision, is
there anything else you’d like to put on the table?” And the
university did sweeten the package!
-National Post (2004)
© Gottheil, Smith
32
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Emergence of SEM in Canada
 Slower emergence of SEM in Canada
 Driven by funding cuts, lack of revenue, heavier
reliance on tuition, changing demographics
© Gottheil, Smith
33
ARUCC Halifax 2008
© Gottheil, Smith
34
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Emergence of SEM in Canada
 Many Canadian institutions have now adopted
SEM in name, practice or both
• We’re attending webinars, workshops & conferences
• Some of us are working with consultants
 What can we learn from our U.S. SEM colleagues?
• What makes us different & unique?
• Are there different approaches we might/should consider
in Canada?
© Gottheil, Smith
35
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Major SEM Components
 SEM Organization
 Recruitment
 Data Mining &
Analysis
 Admissions
 SEM Plan
 Marketing
 Financial Aid
 Student Services
 Retention
© Gottheil, Smith
36
ARUCC Halifax 2008
SEM Organization
 Lack of clarity as to what SEM is (e.g. setting
enrolment targets, renaming of registrar’s function,
conceptual framework, organizational structure?)
 Most manage SEM from the Registrar’s Office
 Some institution-wide committees
 Some matrix management
 EM title becoming more common
© Gottheil, Smith
37
ARUCC Halifax 2008
SEM Plan
 Many institutions use enrolment management strategies
• Many tactics fundamentally marketing activities
 Few have a SEM Plan
 Beginning to develop comprehensive & strategic plans –
but most PSEs don’t have the organizational structure to
support it
© Gottheil, Smith
38
ARUCC Halifax 2008
“Without data you’re just another
person with an opinion.”
- Unknown
© Gottheil, Smith
39
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Data
 What puts the “S” in “SEM”; basis of SEM plan
• Transactional data
• Recruitment & retention analysis
• Course & classroom scheduling
• Assessment of strategies, services & outcomes
 Canada: no federal education office, no common
data set, until recently (CMSF, Educational Policy
Institute) little research
 U.S.: IPEDs, National Center for Education
Statistics, U.S. Department of Education
© Gottheil, Smith
40
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Creating a Data-Driven Enrolment Plan
The Enrolment
Data Agenda
Alumni
Research
Placement Data
Graduate Rates
Retention Data
Student Surveys
Enrolment Strategies
Active
Alumni
Graduated
Engaged,
Satisfied
Retained
Financial Aid Analysis
Alumni
engagement
Graduation/
Career Development
First Year Exp. &
Retention Programs
Enrolled
Yield
Yield Data
Admission Statistics
Competitive Analysis
Market Research
Deposited
Applied/Admitted
Recruitment
Prospective Students
Marketing
© Gottheil, Smith
41
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Marketing
 Purpose: to gather broad, initial interest in institution
 “Suspect” direct mail used extensively in U.S.
• In Canada more difficult due to privacy legislation to
target prospective students
• Goedemographic profiling not used widely
 But increased focus on capturing & managing inquiries
• Plan events to capture names (grades 9 – 11)
• Request for info cards/on-line requests
• Student e-mails/phone calls
© Gottheil, Smith
42
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Marketing (Cont’d.)
 Greater use of mass media advertising in U.S. (larger
population makes it less expensive)
• Greater use now in Canada
 Branding, positioning initiatives widespread
© Gottheil, Smith
43
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Recruitment
 Purpose: To attract the “right” students into specific
programs
 Move from “liaison” to “recruitment”
 Historical collegial approach…too many students for too
many years
 Shifting regional demographics & variability across Canada .
• Atlantic Canada: demographic decreases coupled with large number of
institutions
• Ontario: projected demand for new university in Toronto GTA
• Alberta: changing high school demographic, in-migration, hot economy
• B.C.: had more demand for seats; university-colleges created as high
school population declined – now universities as province cuts funding
to PSE system
© Gottheil, Smith
44
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Recruitment (cont'd.)
 College search process a “bigger deal” in U.S.
• Starts in Grades 9 & 10 or earlier
 Most Canadian students (¾) attend their local university
• Little student mobility between provinces
• Those not traveling far for college twice as likely to be 1st
generation
 Student life not a large factor in recruitment
 Use of current students & alumni limited
 Importance of campus visit
© Gottheil, Smith
45
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Targeted Recruitment Initiatives
 Declining enrolment  try to find students who
haven’t traditionally enrolled (low-income,
Aboriginal students, first-generation, rural,
international)
 2003: fewer than 1/3 of 19 year olds from Canadian
low-income families attended university
• One half of those in same age bracket from high-income
families enrolled
© Gottheil, Smith
46
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Targeted Recruitment Initiatives
 CMSF: 81% of 18 to 24 year olds whose parents
have a university education participate in PSE,
compared to 53% for young people whose parents
didn’t go past high school
 Specialized academic programs (e.g., Aboriginal
Education)
• Métis Criminal Justice program at Lethbridge College
• U Cape Breton: program in Aboriginal Science integrates
Aboriginal & western views of natural world
 Summer camps, bridging & transition programs
© Gottheil, Smith
47
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Targeted Recruitment Initiatives
 Community-based
activities/partnerships/mentorships
• School boards, churches, First Nations
 Boosting campus visits (bus-ins, fly-ins, etc.)
 Marketing in other languages, in community &
ethnic-based publications
 Targeted web microsites
© Gottheil, Smith
48
ARUCC Halifax 2008
International Student Recruitment
 More than 2/3 of Canadian universities actively
market educational products & services
internationally
 ¾ of Canadian universities now have education &
training programs outside Canada
© Gottheil, Smith
49
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Admissions
 Purpose: To use differing strategies,
processes & policies to maximize yield
 Basis of admission
• Primarily high school marks in Canada (Grade
12, now some Grade 11)
• U.S.: array of indicators (3-year high school
average, class ranking, SAT/ACT scores, essays,
interviews, AP courses) – now being questioned
• Intentional segmentation of “the class” in U.S.:
legacy, athletics, demographic, ethnicity
© Gottheil, Smith
50
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Admissions (cont'd.)
 Admission cycle/timing of offer
• Early admission, early action, rolling admission
• Offer dates & confirmation deadlines
 College-university transfer & articulation
• Increasing seamless pathways
• Blending/overlap of college & university roles, offerings
© Gottheil, Smith
51
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Financial Aid
 Before the late 1970’s:
• Financial aid generally used to meet students’
demonstrated financial aid
• An incentive for enrolment
 Modern financial aid practices focus on:
• Both students’ willingness to pay & ability to pay
• Influencing institutional brand, reputation & rankings
(U.S.)
• Recruitment & retention goals
 Shift from student support service to key SEM
activity
© Gottheil, Smith
52
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Financial Aid (cont'd.)
 In U.S. “out of control” tuition increases &
sticker shock have led to increased spending in
student financial support
• 63% of U.S. undergraduates receive some form of
financial aid (2003/04)
• Average student debt levels comparable to Canada
• Loans have replaced grants as primary method to pay
for college
© Gottheil, Smith
53
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Financial Aid (cont'd.)
 In Canada, increasing government intervention
(tuition decreases, freezes or limits; tax
credits; savings programs)
• Inability of federal, provincial & institutional financial
aid programs to make up difference between family
finances & PSE costs
• Represents 60% of funding announcement over last
5 years
• Universal aid theoretically benefits all students
equally but used predominantly by higher income
families
• Growing perception by low income students that
they cannot afford college
© Gottheil, Smith
54
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Financial Aid (cont'd.)
 Low income Canadians overestimate costs of postsecondary education by 75% and underestimate
benefits by 40%
 Needy students opt to take less costly programs, live at
home and work while in school to avoid debt
• i.e., they reduce their perceived need
 In Canada, complete financial aid information isn’t
available to students until after enrolment decision
© Gottheil, Smith
55
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Financial Aid Practices
 Needs assessment
• Government controlled in Canada; institutionally based
in U.S.
 Awarding philosophies
• Front-loading
• Gapping
 Awarding timetable
 Tuition discounting
 Leveraging
© Gottheil, Smith
56
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Financial Aid Practices (cont'd.)
 Merit scholarships
 Athletic scholarships
 Needs-based aid/bursaries
 Work-study programs
 Tuition/pricing policies
 Debt relief (tax credits, post-graduation tax
rebates, income-contingent loan repayment,
tuition payment plans)
© Gottheil, Smith
57
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Student Services
 In general, very similar & of good quality
 High tech, high touch
 Student government coordinates many student life
services, including student union management
 Relatively small number of residence students at most
institutions
• Residential Life services are provided by auxilliary
services
© Gottheil, Smith
58
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Retention
 Although 4 out of 5 Canadians take some sort of PSE
by their mid-20s, 1 in 7 drop out (Statistics Canada,
2007)
 Nearly 1 in 4 high school grads with A averages are
at risk for AW/DQ in first year (lack of structure,
loneliness, inadequate preparation, uncertainties
about academic majors)
 Student success initiatives help students achieve
their educational & career aspirations through
quality academic & student support services,
programs & experiences
© Gottheil, Smith
59
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Retention (cont’d)
 Co-curricular & extra-curricular activities help foster
students’ leadership & learning abilities & improve
chances of academic success
 Retention programs & planning not well developed
at most institutions
 Most Canadian institutions have not set retention
goals
 Use of NSSE Survey & Canadian University Survey
Consortium (CUSC)
© Gottheil, Smith
60
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Retention/Student Success
 Use of NSSE & Canadian University Survey
Consortium (CUSC)
• Emphasis on “student engagement” in & out of class
 “Cut the Red Tape”: U Calgary, McGill, U Ottawa
investing (student’s ideas) in improving student
experience
© Gottheil, Smith
61
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Retention
The success of institutional retention
efforts ultimately resides in the institution’s
capacity to engage faculty & administrators
across campus in a collaborative effort to
construct educational settings, classrooms
& otherwise, that actively engage students
(all students, not just some) in learning.
- Vincent Tinto
© Gottheil, Smith
62
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Retention Best Practices
 First-year programs/orientation & transition programs
 Intrusive academic advising
 Early feedback & intervention
 Learning communities
 Supplemental instruction
 Learning/information commons
 Teaching & learning centres
 One-stop student services centres
© Gottheil, Smith
63
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Case Study:
Canada College
© Gottheil, Smith
64
ARUCC Halifax 2008
President’s Questions:
 What are the strengths and weaknesses in Canada
College’s situation?
 What do we need to do to improve our institutional
strength and our public position?
 How should we make short-term and long-term
decisions that affect our offerings, services and
enrolments?
 Do you have any specific proposals that you would
like to put forward?
© Gottheil, Smith
65
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Group Discussion Points
(within the SEM context):
 How would you respond to the president’s
questions?
 What kind of information is available to you?
 What information do you need in order to make
substantive contributions?
 How do you think this should unfold?
© Gottheil, Smith
66
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Group Assignment
&
Case Study Discussion
© Gottheil, Smith
67
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Emerging SEM Issues
in Canada
© Gottheil, Smith
68
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Educational System
 Blending/overlap of college & university roles,
offerings
• What is a university? A college?
• What is national? What’s regional?
 Re-conceptualization of post-secondary
education, move to differentiation
• New Brunswick: polytechnics
• B.C.: regional universities
• Alberta: baccalaureate, polytechnic & community-based
institutions
© Gottheil, Smith
69
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Educational System (cont'd.)
 Emergence of accreditation bodies (quality
councils)
 Private institutions (e.g. Quest)
 Out-of-country universities establishing campuses
in Canada
• e.g. Australia’s Charles Stuart U in Burlington;
Fairleigh Dickinson U in B.C.
© Gottheil, Smith
70
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Educational System (cont'd.)
 Public/parental view: preferable to attend
university than college
• Gap in earnings – 2 years post-graduation: $8,000
 Notion of education as a commodity now
stronger
• Meet/exceed “customer” expectations
© Gottheil, Smith
71
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Enrolment Planning
 Not just first-year numbers, but total enrolment….right
through the funnel
 Concern over reversed gender imbalance – “where are the
boys?”
•
1971: 68% of university graduates were male
•
2003: 26% of 19 year old men attended university; 39% of women
 Demographic “bubble” about to burst
•
Will increase in educational participation rate & immigration make up for
it?
 Impact of economy → a “wild card”
 Impact of e-learning
•
Number of students
•
Support services
•
Academic success
© Gottheil, Smith
72
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Data
 Concern over lack of common data set
 Questioning whether we’re collecting &
sharing the “right” data
 Use of KPI’s
• A tool for assessment of strategies, tactics &
outcomes but….
• Also used as a basis for funding (& ranking)
institutions
© Gottheil, Smith
73
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Recruitment
 Increasing competition has resulted in seeking of
new markets (geographic, post-secondary,
“mature”, under-served populations)
 CRM systems, segmented marketing, more
sophisticated marketing plans, Web portals &
enhanced Web sites and e-services
 Impact & use of social networking
 On-line “navigators” being promoted by Maclean’s,
Globe & Mail/Strategic Counsel
© Gottheil, Smith
74
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Recruitment (cont'd.)
 Concern with access (& persistence) of “1st
generation” & “low-income” students
 Desire for increased flexibility (scheduling,
course offerings, mode of instructional delivery)
 Focus on parental expectations & pressures
• Gen-X parents involved in children’s college search,
selection & career choices
© Gottheil, Smith
75
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Admissions
 Change in philosophy from gatekeeper to
facilitating enrolment
• Self-admission (UBC); self-reporting of grades
 Centralized application centres
 Some universities beginning to advocate
entrance testing due to a concern over grade
inflation at the high school level
© Gottheil, Smith
76
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Admissions (cont'd.)
 Holistic admissions assessment
 Pressure for more transfer pathways &
collaborative agreements
 Dual enrolment programs
 Reserving spaces for under-represented
groups
© Gottheil, Smith
77
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Financial Aid
 Rising fees & higher student debt load
• “Sticker shock”
• 59% of undergraduates graduate with debt (2007)
 Affordability seen as an accessibility issue
• Low-income students think they can’t afford tuition &
rule themselves out before graduating from HS
- Overestimate costs of PSE by 75% & underestimate
benefits by 40%
© Gottheil, Smith
78
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Financial Aid (cont’d.)
 Need for financial aid workshops for families
when students in middle & high school to build
expectations for attending PSE
 On-campus work-study programs
 Need to simplify financial aid & make it more
transparent
 Biggest failure of student financial aid system
has been its inability to close gap in access to
post-secondary education for low-income youth
© Gottheil, Smith
79
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Financial Aid (cont'd.)
 Growing use of merit aid
• Disproportionately awarded to higher income students
• Now being questioned, shift to more use of needs-based
aid
 Targeted aid/scholarships to Aboriginal students
(B.C.; U of Winnipeg)
 Increase in athletics scholarships (Ontario)
 Slated closure of Canada Millennium Scholarship
Foundation in 2009
© Gottheil, Smith
80
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Student Success
 Recognition of link between recruitment & retention
 Primary obstacles to access & success are unmet financial need;
inadequate academic preparation; & insufficient information,
guidance & encouragement
•
Students drop out because of dissatisfaction with their program, financial
concerns, & career indecision (CMSF, 2008)
 Many programs focus on academic support & social integration
•
More e-service programs & support
 Bridging & transition programs
 Recognition of need to reach out to parents, families &
communities
• Parent listservs, web-based resources
© Gottheil, Smith
81
ARUCC Halifax 2008
The Next Horizon …
Graduate SEM
© Gottheil, Smith
82
ARUCC Halifax 2008
The SEM Plan:
A Great Place to Start
© Gottheil, Smith
83
ARUCC Halifax 2008
When you don’t know where you’re going, any road
will take you there.
- Cheshire Cat, Alice in Wonderland
© Gottheil, Smith
84
ARUCC Halifax 2008
The enrolment plan serves as the road map for
achieving specific institutional goals, typically
connected to student body size, enrolment mix,
and revenue, while also providing specific
indicators on the effectiveness of the learning
environment.
- Janet Ward, 2005
© Gottheil, Smith
85
ARUCC Halifax 2008
SEM Planning Model
Meeting
Goals
Typical starting
point
Tactics
Strategies
DATA
Enrolment Infrastructure
Structure, Staffing, Skills, Systems, Service
Clear Mission & Goals
© Gottheil, Smith
86
ARUCC Halifax 2008
SEM Planning Model
Meeting
Goals
Tactics
Strategies
DATA
Enrolment Infrastructure
Structure, Staffing, Skills, Systems, Service
Starting point
for long-term
success
Clear Mission & Goals
© Gottheil, Smith
87
ARUCC Halifax 2008
The SEM Plan- Components
1. Define relationship to the College’s strategic plan
2. Produce an environmental scan
3. Collect data: informs everything (goal-setting, tactics/strategies,
assessment)
 Enrolment: totals, demographics, 5-year trends, etc.
 Promotion & marketing
 Admissions & entry process
 Image & reputation
 Retention
 Market surveys, competitor analysis
 Financial aid
 Course offerings: capacity, scheduling, waitlists
 Budget: income streams, expenditures
© Gottheil, Smith
88
ARUCC Halifax 2008
The SEM Plan- Components
(cont’d)
4. Identify key enrollment-related issues
5. Identify how to respond to those issues
6. Set goals: enrolment targets, program mix,
program delivery, income targets, services
© Gottheil, Smith
89
ARUCC Halifax 2008
The SEM Plan- Components
(cont’d)
7. Suggest strategies
 Recruitment
 Marketing
 Program mix
 Policies and procedures
 Retention
 Financial aid
8. Establish accountability
 Who does what and when?
© Gottheil, Smith
90
ARUCC Halifax 2008
The SEM Plan- Components
(cont’d)
9. Include measurements/ key performance indicators (KPIs)
 Most goals should be measurable
 Know your baseline data, and measure against it
10. Be sure the process is on-going:
 Follow-up on assessment of the KPIs
 Update often – this is not a long range plan...it is a
strategic plan. Be strategic!
 Ensure continuous communication with campus
© Gottheil, Smith
91
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Let’s Continue to Share our
Ideas!
© Gottheil, Smith
92
ARUCC Halifax 2008
Q&A
Thank you!
© Gottheil, Smith
93