Nagap perspectives summer 2016

VOLUME 28 NUMBER 2 SUMMER 2016

PERSPECTIVES A Newsmagazine for Graduate Enrollment Management Professionals

IN THIS ISSUE  2 From the President  4 NAGAP Member Spotlight: Jay Yander  5

The Ethics Corner

 7 The Portrait of NAGAP 10 Annual Conference 11 2016 NAGAP Award Winners 13 NAGAP Pre-Conference Institute 15 2016 Annual Conference Session Summaries

www.NAGAP.org

FROM THE PRESIDENT Dear Colleagues,

The Leader in Graduate Enrollment Management

Welcome to the summer issue of Perspectives! This is my very first letter as your newly elected President and I am brimming with excitement and adrenaline in anticipation of the coming two years. I will be honest with you, the responsibility of leading and serving an association that has meant so much to me over the past 10 years is also a little bit overwhelming. However, it is your passion, your commitment, your talents and expertise, and your investment both in GEM and in NAGAP that help me know that together we will do great things. It is an honor to serve you and I thank you for putting your trust in me.

This July, your 2016-2018 NAGAP Governing Board will be meeting in Chicago to engage in a 2-day strategic planning session. Led by a third-party facilitator, we will be identifying a set of goals and priorities that we believe are critical in keeping NAGAP at the forefront as the leader in graduate enrollment management. In addition, we seek to ensure that we all have the knowledge and tools we need to be firstrate professionals in the field. I look forward to sharing with you the highlights of that meeting and the four-year plan in the fall issue of Perspectives.

As I mentioned both in my election write-up as well as in my brief remarks at the conference in Nashville, my personal priorities are three-fold: to engage a broader membership base and leverage the talents that each of you brings to our association; to increase opportunities to serve the association and communicate clearly various pathways to leadership; and to make sure that NAGAP continues to build both its reputation and visibility as the leader in GEM. I have confidence that we will capitalize on the momentum of Immediate Past President James Crane’s keen leadership and help move NAGAP forward in critically important ways.

This issue of Perspectives is always my favorite – it is packed with summaries from many of the sessions offered at the Annual Conference and I can never get enough of the best practices, good data, and opportunity to stay current on so many topics critical to our work. I encourage you to take a look and to share this issue with colleagues who may work in other GEM offices; whether you attended the conference or not, there is so much here that I am confident you will all learn something that you can bring back to your offices. In addition, this issue contains an enlightening article from the NAGAP Diversity and Inclusion Committee, and a special feature from a guest columnist for the Ethics Corner. All are not to be missed.

I suspect that many of you might agree with me that there is no such thing as a “slow time” in graduate enrollment management anymore. However, I hope that you all are able to take some time for yourselves this summer. Whether spent with family, friends who are family, or enjoying some quiet time alone, it is critical to step away every so often to refresh and rejuvenate. Bring your sunblock, and how about your issue of Perspectives?! n

Happy summer, Julie Deland

2

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

PERSPECTIVES A Newsmagazine for Graduate Enrollment Management Professionals

Editor, Jennifer Kulbeck

Assistant Dean of Liberal Arts Saint Mary’s College of California 1928 Saint Mary's Road Moraga, CA 94575 NAGAPpublications@gmail.com NAGAP Perspectives is published three times per year (fall, spring, summer). Articles of particular interest for publication are graduate enrollment management research/ study results, how-to articles, success stories, reports of workshops/seminars, book reviews, etc.

Submissions should be sent to the editor via email. Articles should be provided in Microsoft Word, with figures and photos provided separately as high-resolution TIF or EPS files. APA style is preferred for documenting sources. Submission deadlines: August 30, January 6, May 16.

Copyright © 2016 NAGAP NAGAP is committed to diversity and inclusiveness in all of its activities.

This commitment embraces respect for differences including age, culture, disability, education, ethnicity, gender, life experiences, race, religion, and sexual orientation. NAGAP champions an open exchange of ideas in a collegial environment that embraces academic freedom, cooperation, mutual respect, and responsibility. NAGAP supports activities that promote and nurture professional development, best practices, research, and collaboration of a diverse and global community of graduate enrollment management professionals, encouraging dialogue that fosters professional growth among all of its constituents, in the U.S. and internationally.

N

A

G

A

P

NAGAP Chapters For those of you looking to get more involved with NAGAP, your local chapter is a great place to start. Chapters provide a wonderful opportunity to network, to participate in regional workshops and conferences, and to assume leadership positions. They are also a great resource for learning more about GEM, especially if you are unable to attend the national annual conference.

Join or Start a Chapter Today!

NAGAP has eight regional U.S. chapters, one international chapter, and two special interest chapters. To find out which chapter your state is a member of, visit NAGAP’s Chapters page. Here you will find contact information for each chapter president, and a link to the chapter’s website or social media page. Most chapters have a “join” or “contact us” link right on the landing page.

If you find your state is not affiliated with a chapter, you may be interested in beginning a new chapter. For more information, review the How To Get Started overview. Questions?

Please contact us at info@nagap.org.

NAGAP Volunteer Opportunities NAGAP is a member-driven association, and there are many ways to get involved!

Check out the Volunteer Opportunities Page to learn more about the committees, organizational activities, and other projects to which you may volunteer your time.

N

A

G

A

P

For more information, or to talk to someone about ways to become more involved with NAGAP, you can email a member of the Leadership Cultivation & Elections Committee.

The Leader in Graduate Enrollment Management

We hope you will take the time to consider the opportunities for volunteer participation, and that you will discover a way to become more involved in NAGAP.

P E R S P E C T I V E S

•

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

3

NAGAP MEMBER SPOTLIGHT: JAY YANDER, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR OF GRADUATE ADMISSIONS, MARYWOOD UNIVERSITY

By Stanley J. Kania III, NAGAP Membership Committee

Jay Yander began his higher education career back in 2004 as an admissions counselor at Keystone College, where he was responsible for recruiting undergraduate student prospects.

After Keystone College, he joined the Culinary Institute of America (CIA) in 2006 as an admissions counselor. While at CIA for seven years, he travelled all over the United States to recruit students and was able to experience different regional food and cultures.

“In his spare time, Jay enjoys golfing and volunteers his time and talents to a local high school’s sport programs.”

4

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

even worked for a period of time as a sports reporter for a local newspaper.

There’s one thing for sure, and his colleagues will attest to this, Jay is a sports fanatic. If there was anything sports related on television, he has probably seen it. He is a life-long fan of the Baltimore Orioles and returns to his alma mater, the University of Pittsburgh, from time to time to attend sporting events. In his spare time, Jay enjoys golfing and volunteers his time and talents to a local high school’s sport programs.

He graduated from the University of Pittsburgh in 2002 with a Bachelor of Arts in English, Writing/Journalism. He

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

Jay joined the Marywood University graduate admissions staff in the fall of 2013 as a graduate admissions counselor. In this role, Jay was responsible for managing the graduate enrollment process for eight graduate programs, most notably the MSW program in the Marywood University School of Social Work. Jay has also planned and executed open house and program information sessions throughout the years. He has an excellent rapport with faculty, fellow administrators and staff.

He quickly moved up the ranks and was promoted to Associate Director of Graduate Admissions in April 2016.

Jay now supervises four professional staff employees and oversees the graduate enrollment process for all master’s and doctoral students. Join us in congratulating Jay on this wonderful accomplishment! n

N

A

G

A

P

THE ETHICS CORNER A key goal of this column is to engage NAGAP members in thoughtful reflection on the ethical issues facing our profession.

This edition of The Ethics Corner was contributed by guest columnist and fellow member Joseph Paris, Assistant Dean of Marketing and Enrollment Management in the College of Education at Temple University. His topic is very timely, as the U.S. Department of Education recently published a new resource guide encouraging higher education institutions to remove barriers for those with criminal records: Beyond the Box: Increasing Access in Higher Education for Justice-Involved Individuals (www.ed.gov/beyondthebox).

As always, members are encouraged to share their thoughts, as well as suggestions for future Ethics Corner columns, by emailing integrity@NAGAP.org.

The Ethical Evaluation of Admission Applicants with a Criminal History

By Joseph Paris, Temple University The attainment of postsecondary education is a primary mechanism for social mobility and an essential pathway to personal prosperity and economic stability. As such, the admission policies of institutions of higher education require a judicious approach for evaluating applicants with a criminal history.

Institutions have a moral and ethical obligation to ensure the safety and well being of students. Furthermore, candidates for admission are evaluated to ensure requisite potential for academic success and achievement. However, it is worth considering whether policy and practice create unnecessary barriers that limit access to higher education for promising students with a criminal history.

Exclusionary admission practices may expand socioeconomic inequality by limiting access to underrepresented students. However, criminal history information is important for legal and public safety reasons and can be obtained without limiting campus diversity (Brown, 2015). A report by the Center for Community Alternatives suggests that approximately 66% of applications for admission request that applicants indicate whether they have been previously convicted of a felony (Weissman, M, Rosenthal, A., Warth, P., Wolf, E., & Messina-Yauchzy, M., 2010). This question is intended to identify potential risk to the student body and barriers to the academic success of the applicant.

N

A

G

A

P

Enrollment and higher education leaders must grapple with the following questions regarding the ethical evaluation of applicants with criminal records.

“The Center for Community Alternatives suggests, “Higher education opens doors of opportunity, enhances critical thinking, and leads to better and more stable employment. Studies show that a college education dramatically reduces recidivism.”

• Does law protect applicants with a criminal record from discrimination in the college admission process? If not, should law provide such protection?

• What do the standards of the enrollment management profession require when evaluating applicants with a criminal record for admission?

• Should personal conduct such as criminal history be taken into consideration in college admissions? If so, what weight should be given to the severity of a criminal offense?

• Are applicants who have been convicted of a felony less likely to achieve academically?

• Do applicants with a criminal background pose a risk to the safety and well being of the student body at large?

• Should all students have access to higher education under all circumstances?

While several landmark legal decisions (most notably University of California v. Bakke, Grutter v. Bollinger, Gratz v.

Bollinger, and Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin) have established protections of admission applicants from racial discrimination, such protections do not apply to applicants with criminal records (Weissman, et al., 2010). These legal proceedings prevent institutions from using quotas or placing specific weight on race as a criterion for making admission decisions (McBride, 2006). Conversely, the law does not prevent institutions from assigning a specific weight or using criminal history records as the exclusive criterion for making admission decisions.

As such, institutions are permitted by law to collect and consider criminal history when evaluating candidates for admission.

It is the objective of the admission process to ensure those offered admission have the capacity to meet the intellectual challenges of the institution. The criminal background of an applicant does not indicate his or her inability to be academically successful. Therefore, enrollment management leaders may consider the best interest of students from the standpoint of their equal and fair evaluation regardless of the consequences of previous life decisions.

The Center for Community Alternatives suggests, “Higher education opens doors of opportunity, enhances critical thinking, and leads to better and more stable employment. Studies show that a college education dramatically reduces recidivism. Colleges and universities continued on the next page

P E R S P E C T I V E S

•

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

5

ETHICS CORNER

CONTINUED

promote public safety when they open their doors to people with criminal records who demonstrate the commitment and qualifications to pursue a college education.” (Weissman, et al., 2010).

Therefore, one may consider whether providing access to higher education be extended to those with criminal backgrounds to improve their life chances. As noted, higher education is a mechanism for improving an individual’s status and station in life, and thus improving society as a whole.

Institutions of higher education are responsible for fostering a safe and supportive learning environment. Leaders must mitigate security risks by placing the safety and well being of students, faculty, and staff at the forefront of the decisionmaking process. While several tragedies on college campuses have been well documented in recent years, no link has been established between students with a criminal record and their posing a risk to campus safety (Weissman, et al., 2010).

Many academic programs require background clearances and prevent students previously convicted of a felony from enrolling. For example, academic programs with fieldwork in school- or healthcare-based settings frequently require students to obtain background clearances. Therefore, offering a student admission to a program with requirements the student cannot achieve, sacrifices their time and financial investment. It is in the best interest of students to protect their personal and financial well being by guiding their decision-making process.

Therefore, this raises the question of whether it is in the best interest of the student to deny admission based upon the inability to meet the background clearance requirements.

To assure the fair and ethical treatment of applicants in the college admission process, professional associations have

6

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

established standards and ethical codes to guide institutional policies and best practice. In July 2006, the National Association of Graduate Admissions Professionals (NAGAP) issued guidelines to ensure that high standards are applied in the development of graduate and professional school admission-related policies and practices. This statement affirms that “value systems, human resources, and belief in intellectual potential are integral to the fabric of higher learning.” Furthermore, it advocates that each student to be treated as an individual in developing a fundamental educational plan and that institutions adopt recruitment, admission, and retention processes where fairness and non-discrimination are essential components (“Statement,” 2006).

The following are recommendations for the fair and ethical evaluation of applicants with criminal history records: • Institutions should adopt a comprehensive, transparent, and uniform policy for all applicants requiring the disclosure of criminal history (Brown, 2015). The policy should be developed and regularly reviewed by Legal Counsel, Student Affairs, Campus Safety, and other relevant campus stakeholders. The policy should be available publically and made accessible for prospective applicants.

• Under well-developed and researched policies, institutions should establish a process for evaluating applicants with a criminal history and for determining whether the applicant poses a risk to campus safety. This should be a collaborative process and include those with the expertise and knowledge of campus safety and student affairs.

As enrollment managers develop strategic plans for the upcoming admissions cycle, there is an opportunity to reassess the policies and practices that govern the

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

evaluation of admission candidates.

The role of enrollment management is critical for supporting the life chances of promising students. However, this aim cannot be achieved by sacrificing the safety and well being of students currently enrolled at our respective institutions. n

References Brown, P. (2015, August 24). Essay defends practice of colleges asking if applicants have criminal records. Retrieved from https://www.insidehighered. com/views/2015/08/24/ essay-defends-practice-colleges-asking-ifapplicants-have-criminal-records.

Fisher v. University of Texas at Austin, 133 S. Ct. 2411, 570 U.S., 186 L. Ed. 2d 474 (2013).

Gratz v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 244, 123 S. Ct. 2411, 156 L. Ed. 2d 257 (2003).

Grutter v. Bollinger, 539 U.S. 306, 123 S. Ct. 2325, 156 L. Ed. 2d 304 (2003).

McBride, Alex. (2006, December). Regents of University of California v. Bakke (1978). Tulane Law Review. Retrieved June 6, 2015 from http://www.pbs.org/ wnet/supremecourt/rights/landmark_ regents.html.

Standards. (2006, July). National Association of Graduate Admissions Professionals. Retrieved from http:// www.nagap.org/documents/Standards_ July06.pdf.

University of California Regents v. Bakke, 438 U.S. 265, 98 S. Ct. 2733, 57 L. Ed. 2d 750 (1978).

Weissman, M, Rosenthal, A., Warth, P., Wolf, E., & Messina-Yauchzy, M. (2010). The use of criminal history records in college admissions reconsidered. Center for Community Alternatives, Inc. http://www. communityalternatives.org/pdf/ Reconsidered-criminal-hist-recs-in-collegeadmissions.pdf.

N

A

G

A

P

THE PORTRAIT OF NAGAP

By Ernest L. Brothers, Ph.D. and Valerie O. Robinson, Ph.D. The NAGAP Diversity and Inclusion Committee was created in 2014 and charged with assessing the current state of NAGAP through a diversity lens. The committee is chaired by Dr. Valerie Robinson, Assistant Dean of the Graduate Admissions at Miami University, and includes the following members: Dr. Ernest L. Brothers, Associate Dean of the Graduate School at the University of Tennessee-Knoxville; Mrs. Sylvia Alexander-Sedey, Assistant Director of Admission at St. Catherine University; and Mrs. Cicely McCray, Director of Recruitment, Marketing and Communications at the College of Charleston. The committee was also charged with creating a membership outreach plan to identify institutions and underrepresented groups who could benefit from NAGAP membership.

After several sessions of debate, dialogue, and deliberation, the committee thought it could best capture a “Portrait of NAGAP” by creating a survey instrument to examine the various dimensions of diversity within the association that is represented both in the individual NAGAP membership and the institutions represented by the membership. When broadly defined, diversity is simply the inclusion of many identities. Therefore, a culture of inclusion would be “an organizational environment that allows people from varying backgrounds, beliefs and ways of thinking to work effectively together and to perform to their highest potential in order to achieve organizational objectives based on sound principles” (Pless & Maak, 2004, p. 130).

Diversity and inclusion is especially significant and valuable to the higher education community. The United States Supreme Court has affirmed the importance of diversity in higher education in recent cases such as Grutter v. Bollinger and Gratz v. Bollinger, which reinforced the expectation that “institutional initiatives to educate a

N

A

G

A

P

Valerie Robinson, Sylvia Alexander-Sedey, Ernest L. Brothers

diverse student body should reflect the centrality of diversity to key educational goals and outcomes” (Locks, Hurtado, Bowman, Oseguera, 2008, p. 258).

Considering the political climate within higher education and the mercurial environments at many institutions, from transgender and gender neutral housing, to racial incidents and campus protests— there is much to consider regarding diversity and inclusion. The survey for NAGAP marked the beginning of our own self-examination.

conference in Nashville, Tennessee. The session was at 8:30 am on the final day of the conference. Although the audience was small, those attending were exceptionally engaged and interested in the topic. The presentation included an overview of the committee, the difference between diversity management and diversity implementation, and the value of diversity within the higher education context. Mainly, the presentation provided an overview of the survey findings. They are presented here in three sections - Membership, Institutions and Leadership.

The Diversity Demographics Survey was launched by the NAGAP executive office on September 10, 2015. NAGAP members submitted data until the survey closed on October 1, 2015. The survey instrument contained 16 multiple choice items covering three areas of diversity — member demographics (8), member institutions (4) and member participation in NAGAP leadership (4).

The survey instrument was completed by 262 NAGAP members. Because of the low number of completed surveys, the survey will relaunch in Fall 2016 to allow a broader scope of membership to participate.

This data only represents a segment of the NAGAP membership. Thus, these findings should be examined and interpreted with the understanding that it provides information only about participants who completed the survey.

This data cannot be translated to the larger NAGAP membership, but can be used to gain a better understanding. The survey was completed voluntarily. There were no required questions. The NAGAP office distributed the survey with an introductory email encouraging members to participate. There was also an introduction to the survey that described how the survey would be used and suggested an estimated time to complete the survey of less than 5 minutes.

On Saturday, April 16, 2016, the Diversity and Inclusion Committee presented The Portrait of NAGAP presentation at the 29th annual NAGAP

P E R S P E C T I V E S

•

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

7

THE PORTRAIT OF NAGAP

CONTINUED

Table 1.

Membership

The largest percentage of participants self-identified as White (71.76%), female (78.63%) with a Masters degree (59.16%) and areas of expertise that include Admissions Policies and Procedures (25.41%) and Marketing and Recruitment (21.19%). Other members who completed the survey self-identified as American Indian or Alaska Native (0.76%), Asian (2.29%), Black or African American (13.36%), Hispanic (7.63%), Multi Race (1.15%), or Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander (0.38). A small population of members indicated their citizenship outside of the United States, therefore these members represent our International (1.53%) members. Of the 262 individual who submitted the survey, a few (1.15%) did not respond to the Race and Ethnicity question.

Table 2.

The survey also asked individuals to select their gender. The options provided were Female, Male and Other. While most individuals self-identified as female (78.63%), others identified as male (20.61%) and less than 1% selected Other.

Although a large segment of the membership has earned a Masters degree (59.16%) as their highest level of education, we have members in several other educational levels. The Baccalaureate degree (18.7%) and the Doctorate (11.45%) degrees are the next highest groups of members.

The remaining members indicated their highest degree earned as a professional degree (7.25%) that includes the Juris Doctorate, Medical degree, or Master of Business Administration, the Associates degree (less than 1%) or some college courses (less than 2%).

Table 3.

The Areas of Expertise Table (Table 1) tabulates the GEM fields selected by NAGAP members. The survey allowed members to select as many areas of expertise as are applicable and enter additional areas in an open ended text box. At first glance, it seems most of our members remain in the Admissions and

8

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

continued on the next page

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

N

A

G

A

P

THE PORTRAIT OF NAGAP Marketing areas. However, considering the history of NAGAP as the National Association of Graduate Admissions Professionals, and the broad areas of expertise included with collective percentages over 50%, this data is heartening. These findings suggest NAGAP members are involved in broad areas of Graduate Enrollment Management (GEM) -- including Student Services (10.54%), Leadership (9.84%), Student Support and Financial Aid (8.43%), International Students (7.26%), Retention Initiatives (7.03%), and Career and Staff Development (5.85%).

Institutions This survey asked four questions about the institutions where our members work. The responses suggest many participants represent public (53.26%) Predominantly White institutions (92.25%) in New York (12.64%), California (9.2%), Massachusetts (8.05%), Pennsylvania (6.51%) or Texas (5.75%).

There was almost an equal split in institutions recognized as public (53.26%) or private (44.83%). Less than 2% of members either indicated they served at a For-Profit institution or who did not respond to this question.

The Minority Serving Institutions Table (Table 2) tabulates the survey responses to members regarding the Department of Education (DOE) designations of their institution. The question asked members to indicate if their institution is designated a Minority Serving Institution (MSI) and if so, to select the designation. These designations are assigned to institutions with a high population of minority and underrepresented students. If a member indicated their institution did not have an MSI designation, their institution was assigned as a Predominately White Institution (PWI). Although PWI is not a DOE designation, it is recognized in educational literature as a category of institutions with a majority population of students who self-identify as White. Of the participants who responded to the institution type question, less than 10% N

A

G

A

P

CONTINUED

collectively indicated they represented one of the following MSI designations: Asian American and Native American Pacific Islander Serving Institution, Historically Black College or University (HBCU), Hispanic Serving Institution (HSI), or Tribal college or university.

The Graduate Student Count by Institution Type Table (Table 3) provides data on the number of graduate students at our institutions paired with their institution type (Public, Private or For-Profit). This table suggests although most members represent institutions with 1,000 to 2,499 graduate students (25.1%) mostly at Private institutions; institutions with more than 5,000 graduate students (28.19%) represent Public institutions.

“It was the desire of the NAGAP Diversity and Inclusion Committee to capture our portrait of diversity and inclusion within our organization, and then start the journey of exploring the complexities of diversity and inclusion and their impact on our various institutions.”

Leadership

It was the desire of the NAGAP Diversity and Inclusion Committee to capture our portrait of diversity and inclusion within our organization, and then start the journey of exploring the complexities of diversity and inclusion and their impact on our various institutions. Many of our institutions continue to struggle “with identifying the appropriate strategies and/or interventions necessary to recruit, engage, and educate students from underrepresented groups” (Whittaker & Montgomery, 2012, p. A44). Diversity and inclusion is not simply left up to one individual, or one office on our campuses. It is an ongoing transformative process that draws on the unique differences of everyone who makes up the academy, and is necessary to provide lenses that capture the multidimensional value and benefits of a global society. Diversity and inclusion is not just for the NAGAP Diversity and Inclusion Committee to champion, but also for the entire NAGAP community. n

References

The survey collected data on the demographics of NAGAP leadership.

There were 4 multiple-choice questions that asked about members’ service on NAGAP Committees (e.g. PDI, Membership, Research, Diversity and Inclusion), Chapter Committees (e.g.

BIOGAP, NYGAP, SEAGAP), Chapter Executive Board, or NAGAP Executive Board. Of those who indicated service on a NAGAP Committee, 23% selfidentified as Black or African American, Hispanic, or International and 80% identified as Female. Chapter Committee members self-identified as 82% Female and 28% Black or African American, P E R S P E C T I V E S

Hispanic, or American Indian or Alaska Native. Of those who indicated service on a Chapter Executive Board, 79% were Female and 21% selected American Indian or Alaska Native or Hispanic.

And finally, those who responded yes to serving on the NAGAP Executive Board were 70% Female and 20% Black or African American.

Locks, A. M., Hurtado, S., Bowman, N. A., & Oseguera, L.2008. Extending notions of campus climate and diversity to students transition to college. The Review of Higher Education, 31(3), 257-285.

Pless, N. M. & Maak, T. 2004. Culture: principles, processes and practice. Journal of Business Ethics, 54(2), 129-147.

Whittaker, J. A. & Montgomery, B. L. 2012.

Cultivating diversity and competency in STEM: challenges and remedies for removing virtual barriers to constructing diverse higher education communities of success. The Journal of Undergraduate Neuroscience Education, 11(1), A44-A51.

•

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

9

ANNUAL CONFERENCE

By Renanda Dear, 2016 Conference Chair, Georgia State University School of Social Work On behalf of the 2016 Conference Planning Committee, we want to thank all the conference attendees who helped make the 29th Annual Conference such a rewarding professional development experience. There were over 1,000 conference attendees in Nashville and we believe that this is a testament both to the value that you find in being involved in NAGAP and to your institutions for enabling you to participate and experience all the annual conference has to offer. Stay involved with NAGAP by participating in your local chapter, attending either the summer or winter Professional Development Institutes, or volunteering for a committee. Spread the word to new colleagues and share what you learned at the conference!

A special thank you to all the volunteers at the conference; your time and energy were greatly appreciated. The conference would not have been a

10

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

success without the efforts of outstanding volunteers. Also, thank you to all who donated to our community service beneficiary organization, Thistle Farms.

Attendees donated over $1,400 and the organization was able to sell more than $5,000 in products.

With the exception of a short break immediately following our return from Nashville, it’s back to work for the Conference Committee preparing and planning for next year’s conference – in Salt Lake City, Utah! The feedback and comments you provided in the conference evaluation will be a tremendous resource as we seek to build on all of the positives and try to improve in other areas. Every year we strive to make the conference more rewarding and do everything we can to make the return on your investment worthwhile. We’re confident that you’ll find next year’s conference to be another wonderful opportunity for intellectual and

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

social development as we celebrate our 30th anniversary.

The call for proposals for the 2017 Annual Conference is now open so as you read through this issue of Perspectives, think about submitting a proposal to lead an education session for next year’s conference. We know our membership has vast expertise and we want to capitalize on those strengths. Consider presenting on any GEM-related topic that would contribute to any level of professional or personal development. Finally, make sure you mark your calendars for next year’s 30th anniversary: April 19-22, 2017 at the Grand America Hotel in Salt Lake City, Utah.

Enjoy the rest of your summer!

N

A

G

A

P

2016 NAGAP AWARD WINNERS NAGAP, the Association for Graduate Enrollment Management, would like to congratulate its 2016 award winners. These awards were presented at NAGAP’s 29th Annual Conference in Nashville, TN on Thursday, April 14, 2016.

Distinguished Service Award The Distinguished Service Award is presented to an individual who has contributed exceptional service to the profession and to the association, and it represents NAGAP’s most prestigious award. The 2016 Distinguished Service Award was presented to Cammie Baker Clancy. Cammie has worked in the field of undergraduate and graduate enrollment management for 30 years.

Cammie has focused her work on adult learners and access to higher education. She has presented at state and national conferences on addressing the academic needs of the adult learner in online programs, connecting expertise with graduate education, ethical issues in graduate enrollment management, alleviating plagiarism in the admissions process, and nontraditional approaches to marketing graduate programs.

Cammie has also been involved in numerous professional organizations having held Congratulations Cammie! positions as Community College Representative, University College Representative, Vice President and President of the State University of New York College Admissions Professionals (SUNYCAP). She was the SUNY representative to the Legislative Forum Committee in New York State and co-chaired the Professional Scholarship Committee that provided scholarships for undergraduate and graduate students, studying public policy and education, to attend the annual Forum at the NYS Capitol.

A NAGAP member since 1997, Cammie has served on the Executive Board of NAGAP as chair of the Professional Development Committee (2008-12), chair of the Chapters Committee (2012-14), and as a member of the Education Committee (2014-16).

Cammie has received numerous awards for her service to SUNYCAP and NAGAP and received the State University of New York’s highest award, the Chancellor’s Award for Excellence in Professional Service.

Graduate Student Enrollment Management Research Grant The Graduate Student Enrollment Management Research Grant is designed to encourage emerging knowledge and understanding of the complexities of graduate enrollment management including all aspects of admissions and recruitment, enrollment, retention and graduation in higher education. This year, Ah Ra Cho received funding for her proposal, “The Missing Piece: An Examination of the Types of Student Support Services Graduate Students Use on a College Campus.”

Ah Ra Cho

continued on the next page

N

A

G

A

P

P E R S P E C T I V E S

•

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

11

2016 NAGAP AWARD WINNERS

CONTINUED

Promotion of Excellence Award

Carolynne Ciceri

Efe Peker

Jenny Phelps

Susan Porter

The Promotion of Excellence Award recognizes new or existing methodology (e.g., processes, policies, events, technologies, etc.) that demonstrates best practices for graduate enrollment management. Susan Porter and the team at the University of British Columbia were selected for the 2016 Promotion of Excellence Award for their efforts to deepen and broaden career preparation with three novel and interrelated projects: 1. The Public Scholars Initiative: a pilot program intended to explore how a top-tier university can support PhD pathways that encourage purposeful social contributions, innovative forms of collaborative scholarship, and broader career readiness for doctoral students.

2. Outcome Tracking: a project researching the post-graduation careers of PhDs to inform and enhance current program curricula and development activities.

3. Alumni Profiles: a web project showcasing the full breadth of career paths of graduates, as well as their advice to current students, to exemplify career opportunities.

Visionary Award The Visionary Award is presented to an individual in the higher education community who has demonstrated a unique and innovative vision in the graduate enrollment management (GEM) profession, the field of higher education and/or in NAGAP. Jacquelyn Brinkman, Manager of the Graduate Pathways to Success program in the Faculty of Graduate and Postdoctoral Studies at the University of British Columbia, was the recipient of the 2016 Visionary Award. Her current work focuses on improving the graduate student experience through professional development programs, orientation, and the Three Minute Thesis competition.

Jacquelyn Brinkman

Future Leader Award

Pamela L. Gustafson

12

S U M M E R

T he Future Leader Award is presented to an individual who has exhibited leadership qualities and an enthusiasm for the profession that distinguishes him/her as a rising leader in NAGAP and in the field. Pamela L. Gustafson was the 2016 recipient. Pam is the assistant director of the Clinical Psychology Doctoral Program at Long Island University-Post in New York. She is the recipient of numerous academic and writing awards and serves on the NAGAP Education Committee and the Resources Sub-Committee. She has contributed to NAGAP’s, Perspectives, as well as the Review of Higher Education, the Journal of Higher Education Outreach and Engagement, and the Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management. She is second author on a guide to thesis and dissertation writing in applied fields that is under contract with Oxford University Press. Her research has focused on graduate admissions in higher education, specifically faculty professional development in GEM, as well as the relationship between admission processes and graduate outcomes.

2 0 1 6

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

N

A

G

A

P

NAGAP PRE-CONFERENCE INSTITUTE Making Use (and Sense) of National Graduate Education Data Reported by Ian Dahlinghaus, 2016 PCI Fellow, Milwaukee School of Engineering Quite honestly, when I applied for the fellowship to attend the Pre-Conference Institute (PCI) it was no more than a shot in the dark. It couldn’t hurt to apply, right? Right! Needless to say I am very glad that I took that shot. The PCI was the perfect way to kick off the week.

Before the presentation even began I was already seeing the benefits. By simply sitting down for breakfast with other attendees, I was able to meet and network with great people, from whom I was able to learn so much. Sitting at a table with people in a variety of roles, from a variety of institutions, we chatted about the CRM we are using, trends we are seeing, and problems we are facing. It was the perfect segue into the presentation to follow. Because the PCI is an add-on to the rest of the conference, those that choose to attend do so because they are so driven and passionate, that they cannot pass up an opportunity to gain skills and knowledge.

This was evident from the moment I sat down at breakfast.

The presentation began with Jeff Allum, Assistant Vice President of Research and Policy Analysis at the Council of Graduate Schools (CGS), sharing national trends in graduate applications, enrollment and degrees, as well as an introduction to numerous datasets and resources available to us as graduate admissions professionals. This was incredibly informative and helpful. I work for a small, private university with a niche market, so these types of datasets and resources are extremely helpful for us to find new ways to reach our target market. Additionally, as I am responsible for completing the CGS surveys at my university, it was great to put a face to the survey I regularly complete. It was also great to hear that CGS is exploring the idea of merging their two surveys.

Bell, Executive Director of Vanderbilt Institutional Research Group at Vanderbilt University. These three panelists each shared valuable information from their roles and universities and led meaningful discussions on a variety of topics, ranging from Responsibility Centered Management (RCM) models to Economic Modeling Specialists International (EMSI).

Specifically, Dr. Ferguson’s demonstration of EMSI and what is capable of was very inspiring; just ask my colleagues and manager, as I came back to the office raving about EMSI and talking about what we need to do in order to get it.

All in all, my experience at the NAGAP Annual Conference this year was tremendously rewarding, and it all began with the Pre-Conference Institute, where I met great people, acquired new skills, and learned how to apply these new skills to further the goals of this institution and the Graduate and Professional Education department. I am not sure if I am eligible for the fellowship again next year, but it can’t hurt to apply, right?

After Jeff’s presentation, he turned it over to a panel of guests, made up of Chris Connor, Assistant Dean for Graduate Enrollment Management Services at the University of Buffalo, Dr. Chris Ferguson, Vice President and Dean of Admissions at Drexel University, and Dr. Roberta

Keith Ramsdell, Jillian Baer, Ian Dahlinghaus and Kathryn Kendall

N

A

G

A

P

P E R S P E C T I V E S

•

continued on the next page

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

13

NAGAP PRE-CONFERENCE INSTITUTE

CONTINUED

Where to Get It and How to Apply It: National Data Made Easy Reported by Jillian Baer, 2016 PCI Fellow, The Ohio State University The 2016 Pre-Conference Institute (PCI) was equal parts insightful and applicable. The presenters did a great job not only helping the participants understand the resources available to graduate student affairs professionals, but also how to take those resources and apply them to our day-to-day responsibilities.

As someone who has been working in graduate enrollment management for nearly 3 years, I found this year’s PCI to be eye opening. Jeff Allum, Assistant Vice President of Research and Policy Analysis at the Council of Graduate Schools (CGS), presented the national trends in graduate education. In addition to sharing trends, a large portion of the presentation focused around the national datasets available to all members of the graduate community. I found this to be especially useful in giving me new resources and tools that I could take back to my own university for the future.

I walked out of the PCI with a concrete list of datasets available for my own individual purposes, and this has proved invaluable and helped me to know where to begin upon my return to my home campus.

The other panelists, representatives from University of Buffalo, Drexel University, and Vanderbilt University, astutely walked the participants through various ways in which their campuses use these national data sets to accomplish their work and

14

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

improve the lives of graduate students on their campuses. Hearing from individuals from all different function areas and corners of campus helped me to fully realize the opportunities provided by this type of data.

“I most appreciated how these four panelists were able to share the floor, play off one another, and still contribute unique ideas across the line.”

Chris Connor, Assistant Dean for Graduate Education in the School of Engineering and Applied Sciences at the University of Buffalo, did a great job explaining how he has used national data to speak to faculty about the way their applications are being reviewed.

He showed the participants different ways to visually display the data to make it digestible and how to use that information to help make a case for additional support for graduate students throughout the lifecycle as well as a more holistic review of applicants. Chris Ferguson, Vice President and Dean of Admissions at Drexel University, discussed how national datasets and other technological tools can help staff and faculty think through market demands and new program ideas. Finally, Roberta Bell, Executive Director of the Vanderbilt

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

International Research Group, added a very different perspective as a member of their university research team. Roberta’s insight into how Vanderbilt has been able to use the data to “reboot” the graduate programs and analyze outgoing students was very inspiring when thinking through changes within my own department.

I most appreciated how these four panelists were able to share the floor, play off one another, and still contribute unique ideas across the line. From individual departmental uses of data as a tool to talk with faculty, to researchspecific approaches to using this data in-house to grow a whole new intentional plan for graduate programs, these senior student affairs professionals gave me a lot of information to consider in a short amount of time. Their experiences are vast, and I appreciated their suggestion that much more work needs to be done. The session wrapped up with implications for future research and a discussion of additional areas of GEM that need further dialogue. Their candor in sharing their successes and openness to discussing areas that still need attention was refreshing. The PCI was very worthwhile and I have already been able to meet with my own university’s institutional research team to discuss ways to utilize this data for our own purposes on my home campus.

N

A

G

A

P

2016 ANNUAL CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES Links to the presentation slides or handouts for each session are embedded in the titles, when available. Login is required to access the materials in the Precis itinerary planner. We hope NAGAP members will enjoy this enhanced access to session materials.

Utilizing Application Database Information to Identify, Assess and Modify Centralized Admissions and Academic Program Time to Admission Decision Behaviors Presented by Yvonne Kilpatrick and Savannah Ladage, University of Tennessee, Knoxville Reported by Greg Tipps, University of Tennessee, Knoxville A key element in applicant satisfaction is a timely response to admission application submission. In evaluating this element within the centralized-decentralized institutional Graduate School structure at the University of Tennessee, Knoxville, both presenters expressed concern over the length of time taken for academic programs to render an admission decision.

From their research over multiple years, they noted that: • Decisions were typically being made by programs only on the most critical and promising applications; • The number of application withdrawals were increasing; and • The number of denials by the central admissions office increased because the programs were not rendering a timely decision.

The presenters’ purpose for this session was to provide a framework for other Graduate Enrollment Management (GEM) professionals to evaluate their own decision models for application processing within their application cycles.

This framework includes: • Identification of the appropriate decision model based on the institution’s application process; • Development or identification of fields within the application database to allow for assessment of program time to decision; and

N

A

G

A

P

• Modification of existing processes or application of new strategies to increase efficiency and effectiveness based on assessment data.

• Creating additional fields within the application database to allow for specific department requirement tracking.

In the presenters’ research, each major step within the application cycle was examined with a focus on the time between when the application was sent to the program for review after being vetted by the central office and when a decision was rendered by the program back to the central office. Based on their findings, it took on average over 2 months to receive a decision back from the program. During this same time period there were approximately 150 application withdrawals.

Some of the challenges faced during this evaluation process included the length of time necessary to collect the data and the use of additional staffing resources.

However, the opportunities presented included:

As a result, several strategies were implemented in an attempt to decrease the amount of time an application was in departmental review. These included: • Reporting information to stakeholders including College Deans and the Office of the Provost; • Conducting meetings with program directors to better understand their application cycle patterns; • Creating automated emails for programs to provide reminder information when applications became available for review; • Providing the applicant with information regarding the date the file was sent to the academic program; and

P E R S P E C T I V E S

•

• Optimizing the time to decision by breaking the application cycle into incremental stages to identify specific barriers; • Providing indisputable quantitative stakeholder data; • Establishing a baseline for time to decision goals; • Allowing the stakeholders to consider alternate decision making strategies without assigning blame; • Creating an accountability framework at all levels; and • Encouraging collaboration between academic programs and centralized admissions to decrease the time to decision.

In closing, the presenters challenged the audience to determine their decision model for their application process and then utilize their application database system to assess the program time to decision and make adjustments to their processes as needed in a continuous cycle.

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

15

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Loading the Bases: Going Beyond the MetricsDetermined Scholarship Presented by Aaron Anderson and Amanda Wirtz, Cicero Group Reported by Joshua Walehwa, Brown School at Washington University in St. Louis Graduate programs assess and award merit scholarships through several processes. The goals of providing merit scholarships may include: improving overall yield, meeting institutional goals and priorities, meeting programmatic goals and priorities, and facilitation of retention or graduate students. Each institution or program uses one or more award practices in order to make these scholarship decisions.

Current awarding practices involve using a tiered system which involves identifying top tiered, middle tiered, and lower tiered scholarship recipients in order to identify higher scholarship dollars (top tiered scholarship admits) to the lowest scholarship dollars (lower tiered scholarship admits). Another practice is the “single bucket” approach which identifies an overall dollar amount in which all merit aid is dispersed. For this approach the quantity and number of scholarships is not pre-defined. Finally, the “multiple buckets” approach allows for multiple merit and foci for scholarship distribution.

In order to assess merit scholarships, many in the field use some form of rubric which quantifies a variety of data (e.g. undergraduate GPA, Standardized Test Scores, Work Experience, Recommendations etc.), merit aid indexes (taking into account GPA and standardized test scores), and/or qualitative data (scholarship interviews and staff conversations). Any combination of these assessments can be used as well.

The big question is how Enrollment Management offices and departments can use data modeling (historical

16

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

patterns) in their decision process to improve yield, meet institutional goals and priories, meet programmatic goals and priorities, and increase alumni giving. This use of data can help decision makers identify who will matriculate at what level of aid. Data modeling tailored to each institution and/ or program can help with data driven scholarship decisions.

Predicting yield and student success based on institutional or program data assumes this information can be easily accessed. If existing data is not great, there may be hesitation to attempt this level of data modeling. However, there may be existing information that would make this approach feasible for enrollment managers. The ability to use historical student data keeping in mind institutional priorities of yield, success, and giving can provide predictive targeting in recruitment efforts. Models exist that can utilized as a tool to use this data to identify where applicants land in specific admission processes.

2016-18 NAGAP GOVERNING BOARD Officers

President Julia B. Deland

Director of Admissions

Harvard Graduate School

of Education

Cambridge, MA

(617) 495-3414 julie_deland@gse.harvard.edu Vice President Keith Ramsdell

Bowling Green State University Secretary Teisha Johnson

Illinois College of Optometry Treasurer Jeremiah Nelson

Wake Forest School of Business Immediate Past President James Crane

Brigham Young University Executive Director Monica Evans-Lombe

NAGAP, The Association for

Graduate Enrollment Management

Questions regarding admitted students negotiating scholarship awards have come up. Additionally, questions regarding the ethics and transparency of utilizing a predictive process will continue to be discussed. This process would require a move away from gut decisions towards data driven decisions. Implicit in this proposed process is the ability to move away from the need to negotiate by identifying critical scholarship points in decision making based on available data. The use of this modeling is ultimately meant to help enrollment managers figure out how best to assess scholarship amounts in the most effective way that meets institutional goals.

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

The Leader in Graduate Enrollment Management

N

A

G

A

P

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Directors

Cammie Baker Clancy

Casting A Wide Net: Lead Generation Strategies for Graduate Students

Empire State College

Presented by Marcus Hanscom, Roger Williams University Reported by Amy Carver, Iowa State University

Katherine Beczak

Rochester Institute of Technology

Renanda Wood Dear Georgia State University School of Social Work

Dave Fletcher

Barry University

Andrew Kim Memorial University of Newfoundland

Jennifer Kulbeck

Saint Mary's College of California

Raymond Lutzky

New York University

Jahmaine Smith

Morgan State University

Dean Tsantir

University of Minnesota

Nicquet Blake, Ph.D. University of Texas Health Science Center San Antonio

Dave Fletcher, D.Min.

Barry University

Marianne Gumpper

With the challenges facing graduate schools, it is increasingly important to cast a wide net to gather a large number of leads. There are four key components to generating leads: laying the foundation, building awareness, making the sell, and collection of data.

It is important to know what sets your institution apart, know yourself and the key benefits you have to offer. Who are you, what are the core values of the institution? Why do we do what we do, what is the mission of the institution?

What is the institution’s place in the market and where are we going? It is important to look at the current students; they are the marketing persona. Is the institutional brand aligned with the needs of the marketplace and does the marketplace know you are aligned with their needs?

In reaching out to the marketplace you need to know where your audience is, and who uses specific media. Select the primary channel for your message based on goals. There are several channels of communication – web, print, in person (graduate school fairs), and others, but none of these is a vacuum. You should do your homework and integrate the messaging. Do not “spray and pray,” integration over saturation.

Publications Editorial Committee

CONTINUED

There are four content sales tactics, that when integrated with your marketing strategy, will help you have a bigger impact on your audience and convert more leads. Your messaging should be audience specific, tap into social media to better understand your audience.

Create opportunities to learn about your program through in person, print and electronic means. While each audience can be generalized, not all members are created equal. Make deliberate efforts to capture information at every opportunity.

Now that the leads have been generated, it is time to collect the necessary information of the leads.

Keep your forms short and simple, avoid tactics that “force” submission of information, and provide a disclaimer for use of information. It is important to create landing pages with ad specific content and vanity URLs for non-electronic sources. A large emphasis should be given on tracking everything to determine the return on investment (ROI) of marketing efforts.

Lead generation is at the top of the funnel, you need to create deliberate opportunities, wave the flag everywhere you can, and create comprehensive communication plans for follow-up and engagement.

Fairfield University

Raymond Lutzky, Ph.D.

New York University

Kate McConnell

Pennsylvania State Great Valley

N

A

G

A

P

P E R S P E C T I V E S

•

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

17

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Mentor City, USA: Approaches to Building Engaging and Dynamic Alumni Mentoring Programs Presented by Aaron Todd, Eshelman School of Pharmacy, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Reported by Sarah Jacobson, The Graduate School, The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill Alumni mentoring programs increase engagement, community, and provide valuable support and knowledge to students, alumni and graduate programs.

The Eshelman School of Pharmacy at The University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill has successfully created an alumni mentoring program that serves students, as well as alumni, and has also provided positive outcomes for the graduate program. Mentor City, USA identified strategies to invite student and alumni participation in shaping the alumni engagement experience, demonstrated design strategies to build, execute, and assess an alumni mentoring program, outlined ways to develop tools to promote and maintain active alumni interactions, and proposed methods to capitalize on newly-created alumni relationships.

The alumni mentoring program is built upon student and alumni engagement – the Eshelman School of Pharmacy used forums to recruit mentors, as well as create an Alumni Outreach Committee that included students, the program’s Alumni Association, alumni at large, and administrators from the graduate program.

Once interested mentors are recruited, the Eshelman School of Pharmacy matches

18

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

current students interested in connecting with a mentor with alumni experts in both industry and academia. These matches are intended to build lasting relationships, provide real-life experience and knowledge to both parties, and allow the graduate program to foster relationships with alumni. After being matched, the graduate program facilitates relationships through regular prompts to ensure that interaction is occurring and later re-matches mentors with students once a student has graduated. Various assessment tools are ongoing and have provided overall positive feedback as to the benefits of the mentoring program for all parties.

Since creating the alumni mentoring program over two years ago, the program has overcome challenges in order to utilize its distinct characteristics to build an alumni mentoring program that supports stakeholders through cost and labor efficient practices. The Eshelman School of Pharmacy has received feedback from mentors that the program has allowed them to give back to the University and also has offered exposure to the current top talent in the field for future employment opportunities. Students participating in the alumni mentoring

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

program note that they have received invaluable career advice, information on job postings, references, and assistance with job application materials. The graduate program has found that the alumni mentoring program has fostered a stronger relationship with the School’s Alumni Association, has increased alumni engagement and a sense of community, and has been utilized as a recruiting tool for attracting new students.

Mentor City, USA stresses the importance of knowing your population when undertaking the creation of an alumni mentoring program – while the benefits of alumni mentoring are widespread and consistently applied, there is no one size fits all method to creating and maintaining a successful alumni mentoring program. Additionally, the experience of the UNC-CH Eshelman School of Pharmacy demonstrates that mentoring is a team sport that requires ongoing engagement from all parties in order to be successful. The experiences presented in Mentor City, USA clearly outline the general process for creating a winning alumni mentoring program and their results indicate the value of alumni mentoring.

N

A

G

A

P

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

What We Know and Don’t Know About Graduate Recruiting Presented by Paul Marthers, State University of New York (SUNY); Ray Lutzky, NYU Tandon School of Engineering; and Cris Murray, The College of Saint Rose Reported by Dena Ross, Micron School of Materials Science and Engineering In recruiting prospective graduate students, there are elements of recruiting that we are aware, and elements of recruiting that we are still investigating.

What We Know: • The admission application process must be smooth and easy to complete.

• Working professionals seek customerfriendly schools that cater to their specific needs (online programs, flexible course scheduling, etc.)

• Online programs often attract highly qualified students; however, may not be universally valued at forprofit colleges that face increased government scrutiny.

• Debt is a significant factor when students are considering graduate school.

• One size fits all recruiting doesn’t exist.

Student needs and values differ by degree type, student status (PT/FT) and age.

• Current undergrads may be ideal recruits to your grad program. Build communication plans or specific messaging around this target market before graduation.

N

A

G

A

P

• Successful recruiting requires collaboration. Foster good relationships and figure out how to work well with faculty. Know when to pick up the phone. Email is not always best.

• Recruiters and marketers need each other. Consider ROI. How much are you willing to pay for an inquiry or enrolled student?

• Industry endorsements can help differentiate your school. Present relevance, applicability, specialization, and placement outcomes. Create programs that meet industry needs.

• Different types of programs (online, on-campus, etc.) are best promoted on separate web pages in order to appeal to varying audiences. Outreach for online is different than on campus.

• Grad employment data is difficult to identify but can be used for recruiting.

• Moving from a regional to a national brand takes several years and may not end up being successful. Focusing on regional recruiting and marketing is most effective.

• Enrolling and retaining international students requires campus-wide support to address financial stress and cultural differences.

P E R S P E C T I V E S

•

What We Don’t Know: • Why is domestic student enrollment declining?

• Is the part-time market becoming more popular?

• Will the most inexpensive and “easiest” colleges in a market always garner the lion’s share of part-time students?

• Does offering tuition discounts work?

• How transparent do we need to be in awarding aid?

• What is a “Graduate Community” and is it important to have one? How do we define a graduate community in a predominately undergraduate institution? Do alumni have a role in the graduate community?

• How effective are high profile media campaigns? While these can help promote notoriety, they are expensive and it is difficult to measure ROI. • What are the best ways to find and recruit non-traditional graduate students?

• What are the search (GRE/GMAT) tactics that are most effective for grad recruitment?

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

19

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Metrics of Inernational Student Success: From Inputs to Outcomes Presented by Rahul Choudaha, Global Higher Education Strategist; Daniel Chatham, UC Riverside; Thomas Rock, Teachers College, Columbia University; and Jewell Winn, Tennessee State University, Nashville Reported by Dan Sandford, Tisch School of the Arts, New York University Three universities described individual and innovative approaches geared towards identifying, addressing and developing strategies aimed at increasing international student success.

Two credits will be earned as part of their regular electives, not as an add-on.

Depending on the success of this initiative TC at Columbia may adopt it as a required course in the future.

Institutions are cognizant that the international student cohort has become an important factor in how their incoming classes are shaped. But increasingly, this sector, which is relied upon by many schools, presents challenges of acculturation and retention, academic success, integration within the student community, and eventually, how well it prepares students for the marketplace.

There is an acknowledgement in Higher Education that a student’s success reflects well on the institution; which in turn garners visibility, with a corresponding rise in prestige and ranking, and a continued influx of students. How then to implement strategies and measure their effects?

Tennessee State has seen its international student population jump from 79 to 853 students in 5 years. Ninety percent of this surge has come from Saudi Arabia, with noticeable additions from Asia and Africa. With this large increase there has been a challenge on how to best serve this population while maintaining the ideals of diversification and academic quality. A few years ago the school created a program called “First Friends”.

The aim was to provide each new international student with a regional peer (a continuing student who hailed from the same country), an academic peer (someone in the same major), and a community partner who would acquaint them with the culture of Nashville. The institution helps ensure the quality of the student’s experience through a Student Success Center, which assists graduates as well as undergraduates. Many of the Saudi students are assigned a part time tutor paid by the Saudi Arabian Cultural Mission. In addition, student clubs such as the African Student Association, the Asian Student Association and the Saudi Arabian Association have been instrumental in creating a wellness atmosphere by sponsoring and organizing programmatic activities.

The program’s success has been to the foresight of the University administration who created an articulated institutional support which is an absolute must.

Teachers College (TC) at Columbia has created a six-week pilot program which they plan to inaugurate this summer.

It is being presented to the incoming international students as an enhancement program whereby a student will have time to acclimate to New York City prior to full time enrollment, allowing them to hit the ground running. Students will get a chance to brush up on academic writing, learn how to research in-situ, and develop presentation skills. The course will be pass/fail and optional but it is hoped that the more ambitious students will see the value of getting an “advance” on what to expect from the program before the start of the fall term.

20

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

Another approach altogether has been taken by the Anderson School of Management at UC Riverside.

Following a recent examination of its analytics from input (matriculation) and output (graduation) the school determined that the traditional MBA curricular and pedagogical model was rooted in a typical classroom setting that did not adequately address the need for career preparedness among its new graduates. From the research he conducted as a Management Skills expert, Dan Chatham felt that UC Riverside was “largely teaching the wrong students the wrong things at the wrong time in their careers” and that with the added layer of being delivered to students from other cultures, made for a compelling argument for change. The business school is currently undergoing a transition from a traditional 1960’s based MBA model to one more focused on Competency Based Education. To this end, a co-curricular track has been set up by the Career Services Office; one that would that would involve required practical workshops (taken for credit) in career readiness, language skills, and presentation skills with an aim to inculcate an understanding of 21st century management skills firmly grounded in the cultural aspects of today’s work environment. The goal is to create safe but non-traditional places for students to develop, acquire and test their skills.

N

A

G

A

P

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Integrating Video Interviews into Existing Admissions Tools Presented by Emilie Cushman, Kira Talent; Nikki Lemley, Washington University in St. Louis; and Matt McKillen, Hobsons Reported by Kevin Zalanowski, Northwestern University Enrollment management professionals continually evaluate and evolve their assessment techniques to identify the best applicants and enroll those possessing the strongest characteristics for predictive student success. While solutions are periodically proposed to meet this constant need, the reality is that measurable benchmarks for assessment are rarely achieved. Sixty years ago, a Harvard professor had such an idea for benchmarked assessment that eventually became known as the SAT. We know that a contemporary change is needed in an era of holistic admissions, but benchmarking and implementing a standard remain elusive.

Case Study This session identified video interview technology, integrated into the application review process, to collectively save time and resources, efficiently make admission decisions, and ultimately improve the quality of the incoming student cohort for the Olin Business School’s Specialized Master’s Programs at Washington University in St. Louis.

These degree programs annually receive

N

A

G

A

P

utilizes a Hobson’s product suite, through which the Kira Talent video interview platform is designed to integrate. This integration has created additional points of engagement and streamlined technical support across vendors to create a more seamless environment for the applicant. The Kira Talent platform allows for multiple question sets, randomized question banks, and customized fields for internal tracking and standardized review.

large numbers of international and ESL applicants. Over four years since implementation, video interviews have proven effective in looking past English language proficiency test scores to ascertain deeper insight on applicant abilities to succeed in the classroom and workforce. The Olin School of Business has consequently strengthened University partnerships with the ESL office and career advisors to assess likelihood of workplace success with an emphasis on student retention and success upon graduation.

It is ultimately dependent on Programs and admitting units to identify how video interview technology can best be employed to meet the unique challenges of their competitive applicant pools. A dynamic layer to holistic review, this session presented a successful case study in which qualitative characteristics were enhanced, measurable results observed, and synergies realized through the implementation of this integrated technology.

• Faculty reviewers gain insight on program fit and language abilities not discernable from paper score reports. These GEM applicants shined in-person beyond lower TOEFL scores.

• Questions can be created to evaluate competencies predetermined by the Program.

Technology Implemented Synergies created while restructuring the application evaluation process were a broad theme, as was capitalizing on platform integration across technology products. The Olin School of Business

P E R S P E C T I V E S

•

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

21

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Using Results-based Financial Wellness Programs to Optimize Graduate Student Recruitment and Success Presented by Mike Gotcher, Austin Peay State University and Todd Woodlee, iGrad Reported by Joanne A. Thomas, Wilkes University In today’s world, 1.82 million Americans are carrying at least $100,000 of student loan debt, and the consequences can be harsh; for example, a debt of $30,000 can reduce retirement savings by $325,000. Home ownership for Americans under the age of 35 is on the decline, while the loan default rate is on the rise. When GEM professionals recruit graduate and doctoral students, often not much thought is given to the amount of debt students will incur by the time they graduate, or the kinds of jobs they will attain and what income potential these positions will offer. The reality of limited availability of assistantships and scholarships, results in students’ having a heavy dependence on federal or private loans.

22

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

As a way to help GEM professionals and students, Todd Woodlee Vice President of School Relations at iGrad, has introduced the company’s interactive learning financial literacy web platform at more than 600 schools across the country, offering over 1.2 million students the tools they need to manage their debt, have a rewarding career, and achieve a better financial life. The company’s mission is to empower students, alumni, staff, parents and families to make effective personal finance, student loan, and career decisions throughout their lives. Students are able to create a profile on the platform, and content is then customized to their needs based on career and financial goals. The results are positive for the students and the institutions since attrition and default rates decrease when students are making well-informed decisions about their educational and financial futures.

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

iGrad recommends the following institutional action plan when addressing the issue of financial literacy at a university: 1. Identify advocates on campus and in the community.

2. Start a task force.

3. Involve students.

4. Know your students.

5. Start small, but choose engaging content and delivery methods.

6. Learn from other institutions.

7. Create a mission/goal statement and definition of success.

N

A

G

A

P

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Inbound Marketing for GEM: A Dual Workshop for Beginners & Advanced Presented by Francesca Reed, Marymount University; Tony Fraga and Zach Busekrus, Direct Development Reported by Alounda Joseph, University of North Texas, Dallas Realizing that things change, we can no longer depend on the “old” ways of communicating to prospective students; those are being supplemented by today’s marketing mix which involves a multi-channel approach available through social media, blogs, videos, and infographics to name a few.

People are searching for information and they are not coming to you in traditional ways. How do we adapt to that? Inbound marketing is based on the premise that students (millennials) love content and the phenomenon of how they consume content. It is not just about putting content out there (content marketing), but building a strategy around it to make it work for you. What makes inbound marketing different is that you are able to track in a very detailed way, what media your prospects are consuming, identify their interest and needs, and offer relevant content resources which allows you to personalize your marketing and nurture

content for each stage of inbound marketing, the goal is to become a place where people go for information.

By doing this, you can lead people to your website where you can then have them subscribe so that you can then capture their information and continue communication.

your prospects towards applying and enrolling.

Elements of Inbound Marketing: • Calls-to-action • SEO • Social Media • Blogging • Landing pages • Contact tracking • Email workflows So where do you start…especially with limited resources. Inbound marketing is driven by personas, which are fictional representations of your ideal student that is based on real data. They present a behavioral model and can be used to help identify the motivations, expectations, and goals that influence the behavior of our persona. They are the “why” behind your content.

Blogs are a great place to start. It is the most effective way to grow your organic search. Constantly creating premium

This is the basic premise behind the 4 Stages of Inbound Methodology: attract, convert, close and delight. By first having content that attracts people to you (your website), you create forms or calls to action that converts them to inquiries where you then send them emails perhaps inviting them to visit or apply; and ultimately, those inquiries become your students. Advanced tactics to accomplish to reach your goal include paid ads on social media, blogging and SEO, faculty-generated content, creating guides (premium content), smart content, and data-driven decisions.

Innovations in Diversity & Inclusion: Creating Sustainable Initiatives through Continued Assessment Presented by Colleen Gabauer and Christal Musser, Purdue University Reported by Lisa Garber, University of Michigan As the GEM mission to address inequality in our campus communities grows, we are implementing more programming to recruit and retain diverse scholars.

In order to develop truly sustainable initiatives, it is essential that we measure the effectiveness of all programming and continuously make improvement.

The Purdue Graduate School Office of Interdisciplinary Programs offers two examples: First, the “Social Justice Series” was designed to simply start conversations

N

A

G

A

P

on challenges that students may face daily. Faculty speakers lead discussions on a wide range of topics. A survey is conducted before and after participation to evaluate the success of the speaker’s learning outcomes, and collect requests for future topics. By including basic demographic information on each survey, the presenters were able to identify the populations who were and were not participating. Simple adjustments to event marketing drastically improved the program’s reach to students from a wider range of backgrounds and disciplines.

P E R S P E C T I V E S

•

Second, the YouTube campaign was designed to showcase specific programs to prospective applicants. But often times, the things we as administrators believe are important to feature, do not really answer the questions of contemporary college students. The presenters engaged focus groups of current students to provide feedback on each video, and to steer the direction of future videos.

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

23

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Inventive Approaches to Crossing College Silos: Collaborative Recruitment at Ohio State Presented by Megan Alexander, Jillian Baer and Rachel Foltz, The Ohio State University Reported by Tracy Collum, Idaho State University When recruiting, is there a way to increase program visibility and leverage brand recognition while also sharing costs and collaborating with colleagues?

Yes! First, identify your recruitment objectives and conduct a needs assessment to grow the prospect funnel.

The assessment will allow you to see what you are doing correctly and what is missing. For the group at The Ohio State University, the in-state regional area had great potential that could be addressed.

In order to establish who the collaborators could be, look at who is in the same situation with regard to low budget and similar target audiences. This is a way to aim for doing more with less in both cost and workload. Identifying target markets and looking at location to narrow down which feeder universities would work is a primary place to begin.

Look at unrepresented groups and create the outlet and opportunities.

24

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

Recruitment events are best divided up between different colleagues to work with each feeder university to set up logistics.

Table fairs provide the important face to face factor. In addition, aim to be in a high traffic area such as the library or dining hall. An important question to ask the university contact is about schedules, class changes, and other information that may be useful in the event set up. When possible, double up to attend multiple fairs in the same area to cut down on mileage and travel time. Google Docs is an efficient way to coordinate everything.

To maintain consistency with branding, as well as a time saver with graphics, one flyer can be utilized, with only the program name changing. Social media is also a great outlet to promote these events as well.

The ability to share costs for the fairs is important. Having someone on the group visits who can speak with general

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

knowledge is important, thus the buy in and the participation from the central graduate office would be helpful. Low turnout for events may mean having to regroup and brainstorm. One reason for low turnout could be the need to market more and make direct signage for the event so those walking by would know what was going on. Promoting the event to faculty and staff at the feeder universities could help as well.

To get buy-in from other departments and the central office, it is important to showcase the enrollment funnel from each visit, as well as itemize the financial comparisons per individual versus the collaborative visit. In addition, getting feedback from the collaborators from each visit helps to see if it meets the needs and is a benefit to each program.

N

A

G

A

P

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Supporting the Needs of a Changing Student Population through Collaborative Services Networking Presented by David Bamburoski, Georgia Institute of Technology Reported by Teisha Johnson, Illinois College of Optometry With the evolution of online and distance learning programs, many colleges and universities are now faced with the challenge of adapting their student support services to meet the needs of this specific student population while maintaining services for the traditional on-campus student population. In response to providing better student support services to its graduate student population, the Georgia Tech’s Office of Graduate Studies restructured and developed a campus partnerships program. With this program, two distinct groups were developed, one with academic partners (graduate program directors & coordinators and the Academic Advising Network) and the second with service networks (Registrar’s, financial aid, career services, Council for GradLife, Graduate Student Government Assoc., etc.). With these new partnerships the office is able to meet periodically with each group to share best practices on a variety of topics (i.e. recruitment, career development, mentoring, etc.), keep each other in the loop regarding

N

A

G

A

P

communication challenges they faced were dealing with the volume of email, making sure to set the right tone for the email messaging, timing of emails and making sure students read and followed instructions. They also had to work to help students not feeling connected to campus. Since this population doesn’t follow the traditional 9-5 model, other things they had to take into consideration were downtime with campus resources and tech support needs.

department updates and utilize a shared common calendar.

With 32% of their enrollment in online programs, there was a challenge to provide student support services and resources to their online and distance learning students. One program highlighted during the session is their online Master of Science in Computer Science and how they work with this group of students. With an enrollment of 2800+ online students in various geographic locations, they shared how collaborations with the various campus partners assisted them in providing student support services to this student population and overcoming some of the challenges they faced. In addition to the standard email communication and social media groups, they developed a virtual advisor who was able to answer questions real-time for students and created dedicated support staff to work specifically with these students.

Some of the lessons learned and best practices Georgia Tech developed from this were to have open lines of communication (email, phone/ text and social media) and accessible and mobile friendly websites for this student population. Offering orientation programming by videos and providing detailed documentation worked for this group. And lastly, by working with these campus partners they were able to bring the campus to the students which resulted in building stronger communities for their online student population.

However, they still had some challenges with this group. Some of the

P E R S P E C T I V E S

•

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

25

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Recognizing Qualifications of Refugees Without Proper Documentation: Best Practices From Norway & The U.S. Presented by Marybeth Gruenewald, Educational Credential Evaluators and Marina Malgina, Norwegian Agency for Quality Assurance in Education Reported by Marina Gano, University of Washington Nearly 60 million individuals today can be identified as forcibly displaced from their homes. In the United States, refugees are defined as those seeking entrance to the U.S., while asylees are identified as those trying to stay in the U.S. As this growing population may seek admission to higher education institutions, it is imperative that we best serve them through fair procedures and appeal processes. Documents of refugees and asylees are most commonly undocumented, unavailable, or unverifiable, placing this population at a serious disadvantage. Documents can be unverifiable if the student’s home institution has closed or is no longer operating, is located in an area of conflict, or if contacting the institution for verification may put the student or even their family at risk. When evaluating our own best practices in serving this population, the following factors should be incorporated: • Know your environment, institutional policy, documentation requirements, and essential resources.

• Create a separate, documented portfolio of the applicant’s history, including significant dates, academic history, and qualifications.

• Hear the applicant’s story, preferably with a required written statement.

• Review all data: verify (if possible), check your resources, and consult with others via letters or emails.

26

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

• Utilize additional admissibility tools such as tests, examples of previous work, and interviews.

• Consider final recommendations, maintaining balance between flexibility and institutional needs.

Higher education institutions remain relatively autonomous in their verification procedures when serving these students.

As we establish best practices, we can look to other countries for examples.

The Norwegian Agency for Quality Assurance in Education (NOKUT) is the officially recognized quality assurance agency for higher education and tertiary vocational education in Norway; in 2013, NOKUT established a structured procedure for persons without verifiable documentation. This procedure is split into 5 sequential stages: • Application for general recognition of credentials.

• Mapping and assessment of applicant’s background.

• NOKUT’s level placement of qualifications and comprising a committee of experts.

• Assessment by committee of experts.

• Final assessment / NOKUT’s decision on general recognition or degree comparability.

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

NOKUT has found that following this standardized procedure, while also serving as advocates for the students’ goal of pursuing higher education or employment opportunities, not only results in a fair and equal process, but allows society to rapidly benefit from these displaced individuals work skills and unique expertise. NOKUT has recently introduced a pilot program of the European Qualification Passport for Refuge – a universal document providing necessary information about the refugee’s educational and training background.

Reflecting on the standards and procedures recommended by ECE and NOKUT, higher education institutions and admission offices should develop and define their own recognition policies and procedures for prospective refugee students who may seek admission with unofficial, incomplete, or non-existing documents. In closing, as we serve this population it is important to remember behind these documents, is a person, who has gone through incredible hardship and is seeking to better themselves and the lives of others through further education.

N

A

G

A

P

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Strumming New Tunes in European Admissions: Potential Shifts in Global Enrollment Presented by Joshua LaFave, State University of New York at Potsdam; Kees Kouwenaar, Vrije Universiteit; and Christopher Connor, University at Buffalo Reported by Gretchen T. Briscoe, University of Rochester Globalization and shifting demographics have forced dramatic change to the graduate admissions process in the US and the EU to meet institutionally required enrollment projections.

In Europe, the Bolonga agreement of 1999 began the official process of ensuring academic compatibility across institutions. Previous to the Bolonga agreement, a master’s degree was a highly-specialized degree and an extension of the bachelor’s degree. This practice led to little student mobility and made it nearly impossible for students to explore a separate educational concept. Academic institutions were not offering an educational degree the modern workplace was happy with.

The Bolonga agreement opened up the recruiting market, it also required an entire profession to reinvent itself.

Kees Kouwenaar has been working to revamp the admissions process in the EU, documenting the work through his website, http://mastermindeurope.eu/.

He has spent significant time focusing on

holistic admission review and creating transparency for master’s applicants in the European review process. His website hosts multiple decision making tools that have helped institutions in the EU change the admissions practice from diplomarecognition to a competency-assessment application review. The implication is European students will have the ability to have more mobility.

enrollment management practices to the graduate market. Including, but not limited to; utilizing the National Student Clearinghouse data, longer applications process, revisiting conditional admissions and exploring different deadlines for master’s students. These research and strategy tools have helped Christopher to build a convincing body-of-evidence that faculty respect in the admissions process.

In the United States, graduate enrollment has also been impacted by dramatic demographic shifts, an institutional reliance on tuition revenue, students expecting holistic review, and master’s programs that are skills/resume building.

Holistic admissions practices have seen great success at the undergraduate level in admitting a diverse student class.

So how do we change our graduate admissions practices when programs/ committees are unwilling to change the traditional competency-based admissions practices?

Both educational systems need to reinvent what a master’s degree means to their institutions and ultimately to the society at large. A graduate degree is critical to the success of many countries and we need to be better about changing our educational systems to meet the demands of a highly educated population and workplace industries. While the changes have provided a challenge to the graduate admissions process, it also has allowed for an increase in graduate student mobility and will continue to diversify our graduate programs if our institutions are open to critically look at our internal admissions processes.

Christopher Connor has found success in applying traditional undergraduate

Equality in Graduate Admissions: A Holistic Noncognitive Approach in Decision Making Presented by Jennifer Agatep, Pepperdine University Reported by Lindsay Gentile, NC State University A holistic review of admissions applications is important because it allows the reviewer to grasp all qualities that an applicant has to offer, not just their academic successes. Noncognitive variables are not determined by grades or test scores; examples include, confidence, independence, and determination. Through her dissertation research, Jennifer is studying the application review process for Master of Arts in Teaching programs. She wants to promote a holistic review of applications,

in order to recruit and admit the best candidates who will become teachers.

N

P E R S P E C T I V E S

A

G

A

P

In some fields of study, when the GPA is not a strong determining factor for success, the program might be able to consider life experiences when deciding if a candidate will be successful in their program. This helps to promote diversity and equality, which creates innovation and competitiveness.

Considering non-cognitive variables in the application review process is extremely important in the medical fields.

While good grades are also essential to determine if the applicant will be able to withstand the rigorous coursework, a person should be able to connect with patients on a personal level. These variables are best assessed through an admissions interview.

•

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

27

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Keeping in Touch - Using an Effective Email and CRM Strategy Presented by Michael Giordano and Jessica Miller, The University of Texas at Tyler Reported by Dena Ross, Micron School of Materials Science and Engineering The University of Texas at Tyler had a common strategy regarding graduate recruiting: Turn prospects into applicants.

Some suggestions for improving success, based on their experience, include the following: Organize Communications: • Use a CRM. Prospects are moved from one category to the next within the CRM. Filters can be applied for tracking purposes. UT Tyler uses filters on four prospect stages: Prospect, application, accepted, enrolled. They view results using these filters.

• Ensure that messaging is current and not obsolete. Analyze what content is working, eliminate or update the rest.

• Ensure a logical progression of messaging. Set up calendars for sending emails.

• Control contacts. Identify Status Categories such as prospect, applicant not accepted, applicant not enrolled, enrolled, inactive, etc.

28

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

• Use a CRM to move contacts from one stage to the next. This allows targeted messaging to specific groups.

• Maintain contact throughout the application/admissions process.

• Build relationships and engage prospects.

• Ask prospects to provide the email address they use most so you can stay in touch.

Focus on Email Content • Ensure consistent branding and design.

• Include a call to action (apply, complete an information form, contact me button, etc.) Respond within 24 hours of receiving an inquiry.

• Keep emails short and include only one topic per email.

• Avoid social media links as they are distracting and may cause you to lose your audience.

• Test emails. Send different versions to subsets of people to identify which communications were more effective.

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

• Send a checking in email every 60 days. Touching base with all prospects may result in improved enrollment statistics from those accepted. UT Tyler found that enrollment increased by doing this, even with fewer applications.

Consider Interactive Forms on Your Website • Using Qualtrics, set up a “profile evaluator” survey that prospects can complete. A survey can engage them in several ways, depending on their responses. If their information (GRE scores, GPA, etc.) are high enough, the survey can recommend that they apply, or recommend other actions based on results.

Using a CRM can automate your communications. It can provide a standard look and feel for all emails by using the same banner and branding for all email communications. A CRM can automate email communications, saving time, and providing a standardized communication plan.

N

A

G

A

P

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Positioning Students for Successful Outcomes through the Student Lifecycle: Leveraging Collaboration among Offices of Admissions, Career Services, & Alumni Relations Presented by Julia Deland, Valerie Sutton and Jonathan Steele, Harvard Graduate School of Education Reported by Caela Provost, University College Cork Today’s graduate school hopefuls are entering a world of academia paved with financial burdens, high expectations for success, and an increasingly competitive admissions market. Many are apprehensive about completing, or simply applying to any given graduate program; they are cognizant of the role “outcomes” play in shaping their professional future.

Because of this, graduate enrollment professionals must be vigilant when it comes to understanding, monitoring, and managing student expectations and demands concerning tertiary education.

Enter into this realm of uncertainty Julia Deland, Valerie Sutton and Jonathan Steele, individuals from the Harvard Graduate School of Education – working in separate offices, yet together, for a common goal –to ensure student success through the entire academic lifecycle.

For many GEM professionals, collaboration between institutional offices might seem utopian at best given the ever pervasive “silo culture” many campuses face on a day-to-day basis.

However, through their presentation and

N

A

G

A

P

example, Deland, Sutton, and Steele provided listeners insight into cultivating strong, mutually beneficial, cooperative relationships between admissions, career services, and alumni relations professionals – relationships that, in the long run, might be catalysts in improving statistics of student applications, matriculation, and retention.

While the speakers gave a number of examples of interoffice collaboration specific to the Harvard Graduate School of Education, concluded by a dynamic question and answer session, they were astute enough to pinpoint key goals and objectives for GEM professionals hoping to learn from their examples. Such recommendations included: • Ensure clarity in all lines of communication.

• Use the same terminology throughout campus offices to encourage student understanding and staff alliance.

• Leverage data to quantify accomplishment, and then humanize the metrics to build success stories.

P E R S P E C T I V E S

•

• Understand your institution’s marketing strategy, mission, and culture.

• Never underestimate the value of faculty as experts in their fields, or of alumni as spokespeople for your program.

• Set clear expectations for all those involved in making a program effective.

• Use feedback from other offices to help develop internship programs, help students with skill building, and aid in student work placement.

• Do not be afraid to manage unrealistic student expectations from the start.

These recommendations can be summarized into one simple phrase, “it all comes down to personal relationship building”. When offices, like the Harvard Graduate School of Education, are open with one another – sharing resources, data, ideas, and a common “language”, that is when all parties will be perfectly situated to affect positive, lasting change in the student lifecycle. Only then can student needs, not office silos, be the focus of GEM professionals.

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

29

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

English Isn’t the Only Thing Holding Back International Student Success: Why Culture, Social & Classroom Success Also Matter Presented by John Cheney, English3 Reported by Betty Vu, California State University, Dominguez Hills To encourage international student success, institutions must look beyond admission criteria to assess and improve retention strategies. Over 1 million international students are in the US and the undergraduate population is growing.

These students will look to graduate programs to continue their education.

Many institutions rely on standardized English proficiency tests and orientation programs to assess baseline English skills and to integrate their international student population. International students struggle with acclimating to a new country unfamiliar with local customs, laws, and expectations. Even the definition

of plagiarism is different. Oftentimes, international students find acclimating to a new environment daunting and institutions find a mismatch between the test scores and actual academic performance. By harmonizing both international student and institution expectations, retention of international student can be achieved.

Institutions are encouraged to rethink their onboarding and socialization of international students within their community. Consider the mission of the institution and the resources available at your campus. Creating pathways for students to academically and socially engage within the larger institution will

create lasting relationships, stronger retention, and less student complaints.

Recent alumni are one of the best assets an institution can have in promoting and retaining international students.

International students want to know there is a network of people and resources designed for their needs. By properly socializing and engaging international students, institutions will see increased confidence, engagement, and less academic issues. The benefits of increasing and retaining international students improves the diversity within your institution and promotes cultural awareness.

Indispensable Worker Elves: Building a Strong Assistant/Intern Program to Help a Small Office Presented by Youlim Yai and Sarah Brickey-Nguyen, Harvard Graduate School of Education Reported by Rachel Foltz, The Ohio State University How do you use interns to help you do your work, particularly in a small office?

Youlim Yai and Sarah Brickey-Nguyen at the Harvard Graduate School of Education (HGSE) provided solutions to this question during their session at NAGAP. Using their student worker system as a model, Yai and BrickeyNguyen walked participants through the process of setting up and managing a similar system at other campuses.

The first step in the process of hiring a student worker is to consider advantages and disadvantages of establishing such a program. Advantages could include delegation of work responsibilities or cost savings compared to a full time staff member. Disadvantages could include staff time to train and manage new students. Prepare a budget in advance so that you know your office’s ability in terms of financial commitments to new hires.

30

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

Once you have decided to move forward in hiring a student intern, it is recommended that you design specific tasks for each student and have a job description that clearly outlines responsibilities. If you hire multiple students, consider how you can differentiate responsibilities amongst the students. By providing the student a clear understanding of performance expectations, you will likely attract candidates with complementary skills and give Time and consideration should also be given to the onboarding and training process. Having clearly defined office procedures and policies can help in setting expectations. Think strategically about the hiring and training timeline so it complements the student’s schedule as well as work demands. Regular supervision is also needed to ensure •

P E R S P E C T I V E S

optimal work performance. Be sure to check with each student on the goals for the position to ensure the experience is beneficial for both parties.

Once you’ve planned the basics, consider taking your program above and beyond by developing a professional development series for student workers.

Suggestions include offering brown bag lunches on topics of interest or additional development of transferable skills – marketing, data analytics, etc. When possible, partner with Career Services to help your students develop their resume and practice how they will translate this work experience when interviewing for their next position. Finally, don’t forget to celebrate the successes. Commemorate your students’ milestones, like graduation or project completion, through parties or other small recognition events.

N

A

G

A

P

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Strategic Innovation: A Leadership Imperative Presented by Jeremiah Nelson, Wake Forest School of Business Reported by Bonnie Sofarelli, Clear Organizations Down from Mount High many of us have heard commands to grow our graduate program enrollment with minimal change in resources and programming. Within his doctoral study on leadership, presenter Jeremiah Nelson outlines a careful framework of rules to follow when introducing innovative thought around developing graduate enrollment.

He stresses the need to suit innovative thought within the culture of the programs and institutions we serve –“how you innovate drives what you innovate and if you innovate” stated Nelson.

Nelson urges graduate enrollment leaders to strategically frame the conversations you need to have with leadership. Be prepared first by understanding the misnomers about innovation. Then, determine the context of the innovative idea you’d like to bring to fruition.

Nelson provides 7 Rules to abide by when promoting innovative thought around your plan of action, including:

N

A

G

A

P

We are reminded to promote innovative thinking on campus within a context of safety and value: creative ideas should be celebrated, while unwanted results from an innovative approach are framed as learning versus failure.

1. Infuse your idea within what’s important to leaders.

2. Culture matters: be sure to integrate your thought within the organization’s culture.

3. Match innovation to strategy by amount and type.

4. Manage tension between creativity and value through buy-in and building networks.

5. Neutralize organizational antibodies, aka: naysayers. Be aware that success can breed resistance to change.

6. Recognize innovation as a fusion of internal and external ideas and knowledge. Cultivate an innovation network.

7. Create the right metrics and rewards for innovation: measure what matters.

P E R S P E C T I V E S

As an innovative leader, Nelson demonstrated engagement and energy throughout his presentation, “Play to win, not to lose”. He encourages us to understand the environment we work in first, and then find a way to make innovation work by asking ourselves, “How much innovation do we need, in what areas, and what type?” Finally, Nelson urges us to be mindful that what may appear innovative today, may not be so tomorrow. It’s a matter of practicing flexible agility throughout it all.

•

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

31

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Partnering to Support Holistic Review in Graduate Admissions Presented by Julia Kent, Council of Graduate Schools; Ambika Mathur, Wayne State University; and Jacque Smith, Michigan Tech Reported by Marcus Hanscom, Roger Williams University In December 2015, the Council of Graduate Schools (CGS) produced a comprehensive report, Holistic Review in Graduate Admission, with support for the project provided by Hobsons. NAGAP contributed to the report. This session brought together NAGAP members Ambika Mathur and Jacque Smith with Julia Kent from CGS to discuss the report’s findings.

Stephen Smith, President of Advising & Admissions Solutions at Hobsons, introduced the session, identifying three key points about the report: 1. The world we live in has changed and we need to develop admission policies to be more reliable and equitable.

2. The role of admission and holistic review will become more important to our institutions.

3. An evolution from traditional review practices to holistic review will better support university objectives.

With more than seven years of research experience in the Best Practice division at CGS, Kent, the Assistant Vice President of Communications, Advancement and Best Practices at CGS, directed the Holistic Review project. She said the title of the session “reflects the needs for collaboration on our campuses.” The report included three main components: a literature review, a survey of CGS member institutions including faculty and staff, and a meeting of experts held in October 2015.

Kent said holistic review could be referred to as “whole-file review,” primarily associated with efforts to increase diversity in graduate programs.

She added that traditional admission processes tend to be biased in favor of certain groups of students.

By employing a holistic review process, “We can get a better sense of whether a student can be successful in a program,” she said. The process would “consider a broad range of characteristics,” straying from solely relying on traditional admission criteria like grades and standardized test scores.

Kent underscored the importance of diversity in graduate programs, stressing “all students benefit from diversity,” and implored attendees to think beyond the admission process to increase diversity.

“It’s important to educate faculty on how to evaluate students with the context needed to evaluate students appropriately,” she said. She stressed that faculty tend to evaluate students based on unconscious bias.

Kent concluded her portion of the presentation by suggesting three key strategies to deploy a successful holistic review process and increase diversity: 1. Gather and analyze departmentspecific data, including key demographics of students in the program and their academic performance.

2. Provide faculty with rubrics to create a standardized review process and provide transparency.

3. Encourage partnerships between GEM professionals and graduate faculty.

Ambika Mathur is Dean of the Graduate School at Wayne State University (WSU) and has worked extensively on programs geared at serving underrepresented students, particularly in PhD programs.

In her work, she found underrepresented PhD students have comparable completion rates to non-minorities, and stressed the key to ensuring holistic

and equitable processes is to have an extensive dataset.

In 1971, WSU developed the Initiative for Maximizing Student Development (IMSD) program to increase non-white students in biomedical and health science professions. Mathur said the program has yielded an 88 percent degree completion rate and found common metrics like time to degree, publication, and fellowship were similar to those of majority students in biomedical programs at WSU. In fact, 44 percent of graduates from the IMSD program went on to postdoctoral study.

The Graduate School at WSU recently created a fellowship program with two high-performing departments to pilot holistic review to help grow underrepresented students in the field.

Selected fellows were offered four years of guaranteed funding and would meet each semester with a mentoring committee. Faculty helped create development plans and annual plans to ensure student success.

Mathur suggested institutions often mistake the word “minority” to refer exclusively to students of color and stressed we should instead track students that are “underrepresented in the discipline.” As an example, she mentioned the lack of white males in MSW programs, a group traditionally considered among a “majority.”

continued on the next page

32

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

N

A

G

A

P

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Partnering to Support Holistic Review in Graduate Admissions (cont.)

Jacque Smith is Director of Graduate Enrollment Services at Michigan Technological University (MTU) and he participated in a recent effort to implement holistic review in the MTU Graduate School. “Diversity is essential to the overall success of graduate programs,” he said.

Smith stressed the importance of creating a rubric with faculty to “ensure faculty review every part of the application.”

A rubric also allows faculty to assign weights to each part of a student’s application, he said.

MTU addressed all aspects of the application process, implementing a 3,000 character limit on personal statements, analyzing the effectiveness of TOEFL scores, and requiring an additional statement of purpose. Smith said MTU identified the optimal length of personal statements to be 1.5 pages, appeasing the faculty, and suggested a statement of purpose be utilized in addition to, not in place of, a personal statement. He added with “95 percent confidence” he believed student TOEFL scores to

be accurate within 10 points in either direction of a student’s true score.

Smith said MTU has had success funding student visits, which allow students to meet faculty and students, tour labs, and fulfill interview requirements. The Graduate School provides the funding and logistical support for such visits, even taking students to lunch offsite, showing childcare facilities, and touring local elementary schools as part of what Smith called a “community tour.”

The primary challenge to implementing the holistic review process has been resistance from faculty, who argue the process takes too much time, Smith said. MTU addressed the problem by building partnerships between graduate administrators and staff with the faculty, easing the burden of the process on both sides.

During the session’s question and answer period, the panelists addressed questions regarding international students, legal issues, and CGS’s continued support of the holistic process.

Implementing holistic review for international students is more challenging than domestic students, Mathur said. She suggested engaging faculty from specific regions to evaluate students from those regions.

Mathur addressed questions about legal issues using holistic review, telling attendees it is critical to “document everything” including admission decisions and the process, particularly when decisions are made beyond grades and test scores. “We get legal challenges practically on a daily basis,” she said.

Kent talked about next steps for CGS, saying that CGS is moving in the direction of the use of rubrics because they are “a helpful tool for deans and faculty.” She said the topic of rubrics came up at the expert workshop in the fall and some attendees even called rubrics “impersonal” and could “get in the way of faculty’s ‘gut sense’ about students.”

What happens next remains to be seen, but the panel believed strongly that the use of holistic review is here to stay.

International Recruitment & Agents: A Global Roundtable Presented by Raymond Lutzky, New York University Tandon School of Engineering and Pia Wood, American International Recruitment Council Reported by Michele Getter Taylor, Texas Southern University The presenters shared best practices used to recruit international students through the use of Recruitment Agents.

They presented the pros and cons of the deciding to use this recruitment strategy. They introduced the American International Recruitment Council (AIRC), which is the professional organization in the United States which deals with the issues related to international student recruitment and collaborates with foreign institutions through official agents. The

N

A

G

A

P

With recruiting becoming very competitive, this new trend is proving to be a cost-effective approach for some US colleges due to a strong return on investment — saving time and money.

The most important suggestion offered by the presenters is for recruiters to visit the recruitment agency to see firsthand what they are doing and how they work with students and their families.

AIRC has a very rigid certification process and regulations agents must follow and adhere to in order to maintain their good standing. The presenters suggested U.S. college representatives educate themselves on the cultural aspects and marketing intelligence of the regions where they plan to recruit to ensure potential students’ best fit their school’s profile. They impressed upon recruiters to be sensitive to the needs of both the student and their parents.

P E R S P E C T I V E S

•

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

33

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Leveraging Career Services as Recruitment Resource Presented by Erica L. Knight, Spelman College and Angela Jewell, University of Georgia, Athens Reported by Caela Provost, University College Cork It’s a rare presentation, indeed, that begins, not with a brief presenter biography delivered by the presenters themselves, but rather with a “thank you” to all those in attendance for their service to the graduate enrollment management profession. Those who attended the presentation given by Erica Knight of Spelman College and Angela Jewell of University of Georgia, Athens were the happy recipients of such a “thank you” from both Knight and Jewell before they began their presentation on including Career Services in the graduate recruitment process.

Spelman and Jewell began their session by emphasizing one vital point: typical recruitment strategies, though effective to a point, are not enough when engaging potential students. Rather, it’s imperative to remember it’s through the relationships we cultivate with other GEM specialists, with campus offices such as Career Services, and faculty members, we are able to harness our collective power to inspire and motivate those we seek to serve.

34

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

When dealing specifically with Career Services, it is important to begin building a relationship by asking for and gaining an understanding of the office’s policies and procedures, how best to align the GEM recruitment cycle with the institution’s calendar — specifically “blackout dates” (homecoming, alumni weekend, midterms, finals, breaks, etc.), and determining what are student needs from the inception of the student lifecycle.

• Holding webinars, best practices workshops, and faculty-led events.

• Refocusing information sessions to include universal topics with a “splash” of brand marketing to reach a larger audience.

• Leveraging social media as a source of free advertising.

• Finding the strengths of your institution and leveraging them to your advantage

Once a rapport is built with Career Services, GEM professionals can better use their skills and newfound knowledge to develop audience specific recruitment strategies. According to Spelman and Jewell, such strategies could include:

A connection with Career Services is an indispensable bond for any GEM professional, one that is often overlooked or ignored completely. It behooves all of us who hope to make strides towards more successful recruitment efforts to emulate the efforts of Spelman and Jewell — be willing to ask for advice, seek out new and innovative ways to engage incoming students, and thank those who help us to achieve triumphs in our vocation.

• Identifying a designated point person in the Career Services office to be your point of contact for questions and new information.

• Utilizing alumni and faculty to drive recruitment.

• Reaching out to student organizations to make direct campus connections.

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

N

A

G

A

P

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

The ETS® Data Manager: GRE® and TOEFL® Scores & Applicant Information at Your Fingertips Presented by Julie Shurts, Educational Testing Service Reported by Elsa Evans, University of San Francisco Universities with a GRE or TOEFL score reporting code now have free and easy access to GRE and TOEFL score information via the Educational Testing Service (ETS) Data Manager.

Benefits of using the data manager: • Find “lost” scores – when students say they sent the score, now you can verify if they have and export a PDF of their score report.

• Data Reports – You can create quick or custom data reports for both TOEFL and GRE. • Score data is available in PDFs, excel, Scorelink format, you can also view clear color test-taker photos, Analytical Writing responses for the GRE, and more.

• No PGP or Encryption Key required Reporting: “Score Reports” allow users to search for individual or groups of score reports by name, registration number, report date

N

A

G

A

P

language, country of birth, test center country, country currently living in, desired major, age and more. Users can also report on mean scores, but not against national data like the GRE.

range, test date range, birth date, and other parameters, and can be exported into Excel, PDF or Scorelink formats.

“Quick Reports” allow users to access data such as the number of test takers, mean and standard deviations of a school’s test takers.

“Custom Reports” allow users to set the parameters of a specialized search. For GRE, these parameters include gender, age, racial/ethnic group, U.S. citizenship, country of citizenship, educational level, undergraduate major, years of work experience, graduate degree objectives, enrollment preferences, intended graduate subject and more. Users can also set the parameters of what date range up to 5 years ago (new format exam, only) and allows to compare to national data.

For TOEFL, users can also add in if the test was iBT or PBT, individual measures of the test, and can report on total population, just one code or department with the variables of gender, native

P E R S P E C T I V E S

•

Requesting access: Universities have two types of users: leads and secondary users. Institutions can have more than one lead, but it is recommended to keep the number of leads low. Leads are responsible for approving and updating access for secondary users. Secondary users can look up score data and reports, can be given access to more than one code and are unlimited.

For more information on how to access these reports and other ETS services, visit http://www.ets.org/portal and then select “Request Access” to sign up.

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

35

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Expanding the Reach of the Admissions Infrastructure Presented by Ulf Nilsson, Emory University, Laney Graduate School Reported by Bonnie Sofarelli, Clear Organizations From experience implementing an electronic application for the fall of 2012 and CRM for the fall of 2015, the presenter shared rapid development inside and out of his enrollment operation.

Serving mostly Ph.D. programs, he has expanded his operations to manage multiple letters of recommendation, professional development support funds, and fellowships. In tandem, he’s increased his prospective student base as a result. The presenter encouraged a savvy approach to technology with diplomacy beyond just a prospective student and application database.

Within the model described, the development of a CRM serves not only the enrollment office and the programs

supported, its vital functionality becomes integral with the student experience as well. The presenter argued that familiarity with the system as an applicant makes it easier to navigate as a continuing student later on. Faculty may also become comfortably familiar with the system as an admission decision platform.

Some faculty the presenter’s institution adopted the database to manage student applications for fellowships and the balances of funding available.

From an operations perspective, the system described not only exports data for decision making, it supports workflow that can be automated, scripted, and communicative. The success of this electronic application and CRM

infrastructure helped to bring program directors on board. The benefits include feeding the admissions funnel, building partnerships, providing client-type service to programs across campus, enhancing operations, and recovering costs.

Initial investments included the funds required to bring the systems in house, the staff time to implement and launch, and the transition to the office as a “vendor” of services to graduate programs. These efforts have increased convenience and transparency through the production of reliable data. Down the road, the presenter hopes to continue to build a long-term, full service graduate enrollment operations system aligned with best practices.

Powered by

Reach prospects who have demonstrated graduate-level readiness through their GRE® test performance.

Select from about 30 criteria to EXPAND your pool or REFINE your recruitment strategy.

• Be cost efficient in your recruitment, knowing they’ve already taken a decisive step toward pursuing an advanced degree.

• Identify potential candidates using GRE® score bands and UGPA academic performance criteria.

• Recruit a diverse class for graduate or business

school programs using demographic and geographic data, academic disciplines and more!

Create your GRE® Search Service account at gresearch.ets.org and start recruiting GRE test takers around the world today!

36

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

•

gresearch.ets.org Copyright © 2016 by Educational Testing Service. All rights reserved. ETS, the ETS logo and GRE are registered trademarks of Educational Testing Service (ETS). MEASURING THE POWER OF LEARNING is a trademark of ETS. 34194

P E R S P E C T I V E S

N

A

G

A

P

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Getting a Seat at The Big Table: The Emergence Of Strategic Graduate Enrollment Management Presented by Christopher S. Connor, University at Buffalo, The State University of New York Reported by Judith Holzer, Johns Hopkins University, Bloomberg School of Public Health As colleges and universities face increasing competition for students along with declining demand for some graduate programs, Strategic Graduate Enrollment Management (SGEM) becomes more important then ever to ensure the success of graduate programs.

There are unfortunately many obstacles to a successful SGEM. Many senior officials do not understand the difference between strategic enrollment management (SEM) and graduate enrollment management (GEM) and incorrectly assume that the practices from the undergraduate level can be applied to graduate programs. There is an absence of a cohesive national common data set at the individual graduate program level. Graduate enrollment targets and business processes and practices are frequently based on past successes and folklore (“we have always done things this way” or “lets admit them and hope they come”). And at some institutions,

N

A

G

A

P

a fractious relationship exists between financial budgets and enrollments, leaving many graduate institutions and programs at a severe disadvantage for both long-term and short-term enrollment planning. The development of a successful Strategic Enrollment Plan (SEP) is one of the first steps to begin the planning process.

The presenter suggests beginning to build an SEP by collecting and consolidating data into one uniform format approximately 16 months in advance of the enrollment period. Several types of data can be obtained from different sources that will help build the foundation of your enrollment model. For short-term planning, the students who decline the offer of admission can provide benchmark data on competitor programs.

Implementing an immediate response survey in a CRM or with survey monkey will allow programs to collect answers to the 3-5 questions deemed critical to

P E R S P E C T I V E S

•

gauge why students didn’t enroll. Longerterm planning can incorporate data obtained from The National Student Clearinghouse which can provide information on where both declines and rejected applicants ultimately did enroll.

Other longer-term factors to build into the model might include considering the global flow of International students, the national and global labor trends (which may be different) along with specific occupational forecasts. Continuing student enrollment must also be considered for a successful enrollment model, especially if the goal of the SGEM is to maintain overall program enrollments at a consistent level.

While building the enrollment model may seem daunting, the presenter suggests the TreePlan Excel plug-in (www.TreePlan. com), which can provide assistance and help generate the tables and graphs that one can then use to present to senior leadership.

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

37

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Embracing Technology: Exploring CRMs and Other Technological Instruments Beyond Recruitment Presented by Jillian Baer, The Ohio State University and Abby Ehling, University of Kansas Reported by Ann Hurley, Dominican University The presenters urged the audience to consider using a CRM, or Client/ Customer/Constituent Relationship Management system, as a communication tool for enrollment management. This communication tool can create automated messaging and efficiency within recruitment cycle, and involve current students, staff and alumni.

The presenters suggested starting by “thinking big” and then work down from there in planning for a CRM. The further suggest the development of a communication workflow for a select group (recruitment, current students, staff and/or alums) as a starting point. They advise that the process being with some mind mapping – thinking through the entire lifecycle for an event, recruitment

efforts, alumni giving – whatever the effort to plan out all communications.

Using a CRM requires developing messages to touch the audience in a set period of time – Day 1, Day 7, Day 14, etc. It is also beneficial, according to the presenters, to work collaboratively with your marketing and communication department for communication templates to ensure consistency with your institution’s branding.

Once the communication is written and planned, one can load templates into the CRM and set scheduled touch points. The presenters advise that users “be creative,” as this can be used for recruitment and much more. A CRM system can be used throughout the lifecycle; current

students can receive communication from advisors about registration, campus events, and career opportunities. Staff can be scheduled to receive all campus messages; alumni and alumnae can be updated or invited to events.

A key advantage of using a CRM is the ability to collect and analyze data.

By developing various reports users can review their efforts and re-design communications as needed. Whether a professional is working within a de-centralized or centralized office, they can gain tremendous reach, efficiency and results through this automated tool.

Deconstructing The Prospect Journey: “Experience Mapping” The Student Lifecycle From Prospet To Enrolled Student & Scientifically Isolating Your Target Market Presented by Jennifer Arthur, Alexi Waul and Brian Goodman, University of California School of Social Work Reported by Jennifer Adair Hay, University of Houston College of Education In this session, the presenters shared how tailoring experience maps to suit the unique needs of programs — essentially, “taking a walk in prospects’ shoes” to identify and tweak gaps in performance — could ultimately improve overall experience and boost conversion rates.

According to the presenters, an experience map is a visual representation of the formal research, informal conversations, and stories gathered about target audiences. Experience mapping illuminates the holistic customer experience, demonstrating the “highs and lows” people feel while interacting with a product or service.

38

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

During this session participants were encouraged to create an experience map for our own institutions and graduate programs by using a few practical approaches: 1. Uncover the Truth (Study Audience Behavior — Survey) 2. Chart the Course (Workshop the Data to Find Common Themes) 3. Tell the Story (Create! The Map should feel like a catalyst, not a conclusion) 4. Use the Map (Follow the Story the Map is Telling to Improve Process and Promise)

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

Participants also learned that experience mapping is a recurrent process of recognizing needs, developing and implementing strategies, measuring impact and starting all over again to make subsequent improvements. The presenters offered that by tracking results, using student feedback and the observation of other professionals, an institution’s graduate program will continue to expand.

N

A

G

A

P

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Making It Work And Making It Better: Leveraging Technology To Enhance Process & Reduce Inefficiencies Presented by Marchelle Payne-Gassaway, University of Maryland School of Nursing Reported by Jennifer Webb, Marymount University Implementing new processes and technologies can positively impact staff productivity, student experiences, and institutional relationships. Steps presented for process development included conducting SWOT analyses to determine what technological solutions can enhance processes; determining ways to eliminate inefficiencies by integrating technology; and identifying key personnel that can assist with the development, implementation, and assessment of new tools.

Beginning with a vision and outlining strategic initiatives, GEM professionals should examine the best practices in the field, the return on the investment,

and the latest innovations. These steps enable professionals to compare various technology solutions such as software, database modifications and upgrades, and programmatic changes and updates.

To optimize support options, it is useful to consider support within the school/ department, institution/campus, and any other types available.

The most effective technology systems incorporate security, accountability, accessibility, and productivity. Beyond the security of the systems, systems’ users also need to be trained in security policy and FERPA regulations. Other important considerations of technology

systems are capabilities in the areas of data collection and analysis; tracking and analysis; and accountability and processes as well as operational costs, measureable outcomes, and efficiency or processes.

Recommendations to gain buy-in from faculty and staff for transitioning to new technology processes include presenting the benefits to them and offering education/training sessions in all possible formats including online, phone, and in-person at times convenient to them such as their regularly scheduled meetings.

GEM: Everything You Wanted To Know But Were Afraid To Ask! Presented by Kate McConnell, Pennsylvania State Great Valley School of Graduate Professional Studies and Marianne Gumpper, Fairfield University Reported by Elsa Evans, University of San Francisco The presenters offered some key points about Graduate Enrollment Management: Know Your Market: Determine if programs advance credentials, allow for change of professions, and are fast and convenient. The presenters posited that most graduate students fund their own education, and asked participants to consider the value proposition of your programs well as the delivery preference is for programs (on campus, online or hybrid).

Know Your Students: The presenters suggested participants look at data on current students to create personas in order to examine the time it takes to get the degree. They further ask participants to look at the people that have withdrawn, transferred out, were dismissed to gain better insight into admission profiles and personas.

N

A

G

A

P

the dean/director, and an email from a current student of the program or alumni.

The also encourage a strategy that includes mailed outreach and outreach to “stale” prospects.

Leverage Institutional Data: Participants were encouraged to develop models using current, accurate and relevant institutional data. These models allow professionals to examine whether recruitment goals and enrollment projections are based on data. The presenters argued that graduate admissions should be at the table when setting those kinds of projections/goals.

Application Process: The presenters asked that participants make the application process seamless with clear, concise and easy to use instructions. They further suggest institutions accept electronic transcripts and make it easier to submit letters of recommendation electronically.

Strategic Marketing: The presenters suggested that professionals integrate their messaging with university messaging and branding on websites, through social media and in any advertising. They further suggest using SEO to increase web traffic and build inquiries.

Measure Success: The presenters closed by suggesting use of a campus CRM to analyze return on investment of marketing and to track the recruitment/retention funnel. Retention was emphasized by reminding participants that all inquiries have the potential to become students and then alumni, who may then increase referrals that lead to inquiries.

Develop Personalized Communication plans: The presenters suggest that communications include an acknowledgement of interest, a note from

P E R S P E C T I V E S

•

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

39

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Untapped Opportunities: Recruiting Your Undergraduates To Your Graduate Programs Presented by Ann Talbot and Ronald Martin, Loyola University Chicago Reported by Stacy Doepner-Hove, University of Minnesota Many GEM professionals work at institutions with robust undergraduate programs and may overlook this prime recruiting ground for graduate programs.

The presenters took a look at their own undergraduate populations and realized they needed to tap that potential market to see if they could boost enrollment.

From that experience, they provided 5 tips for participants: 1. Form a working group to answer questions and create a plan a. Start small with both the team and the goals b. Stay with it, try again as it may take a couple times to get something to stick 2. Set priorities and strategies a. Break the big goals into smaller groups so that you can set up clear tactics for each piece of the bigger goal

40

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

3. Gather data, data, and more data a. Where are you now with recruiting your undergrads b. What relationships do you have across campus c. What is already being done d. What is a realistic goal e. Then use any data you have to help bring people on board with the overall plan 4. Find partners, new and old a. Share your goals with others and see where you can leverage help to make things easier for people as you try to set up strategies i. Could you help a career services office that has a lot of students wondering what to do next? Maybe your program would be a good fit and you have a great placement rate for your students.

5. Spread the word a. Think through marketing strategies on your campus

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

i. Newspapers, shuttle ads, student unions, etc. ii. Are there student influencers?

1. Maybe these are student leaders, but they will also be advisors and instructors iii. Host events yourself and invite yourself to others 1. If undergrad career services is having an event, see if you can be there 2. Be prepared to give a good description of what is the return on investment for coming to your program 3. Remember – have food…it helps The presenters offered that they have seen an initial bump of 4% in their applications from their own undergraduates as a result of these efforts.

N

A

G

A

P

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Building External Partnerships That Will Increase Program Recognition Presented by Ann Dabrosca and Carin Algava, Brown University Reported by Christine Morales, Rutgers University The presenters shared their experience in implementing impactful recruitment initiatives. After describing the nuances of the Masters of Arts in Teaching and Urban Education Policy, the presenters highlighted the relationships each program developed with community partners, such as City Year, Institute for the Recruitment of Teaching and Teach for America. Through these partnerships and web advertisements on homepages, the programs developed natural pipelines for prospective student.

These partnerships provided a forum for the programs to recruit graduate students already passionate about and experienced in the field of teaching.

• Increase in the number of quality applicants • Increase in internet presence • Expansion in network connections

During the beginning states of the partnership, university representatives would visit and provide “education sharing” sessions leading to a final memorandum of understanding.

Additional events much like leadership breakfasts, spring galas, and summer recruitment fairs were among the suggestions presented to strengthen an already existing partnerships that may have not impacted the application pool.

Applicants from partnerships were eligible for several financial benefits, which included application fee waivers, fellowships and possible job placement.

These partnerships proved to be a winwin-win situation for the applicant, the graduate programs and the community partners.

While the relationship with each community partner varied in origin and duration, the outcomes were clear.

The presenters reported that as a result of external partnerships, the following occurred on a limited budget:

Unleashing The Power Of Virtual Recruiting Fairs & Optimizing Your ROI Presented by Gayle Oliver-Plath, CareerEco Virtual Events; Kevin Zalanowski, Northwestern University, Feinberg School of Medicine; and Kimberly Dunn, Campbell University College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences Reported by Katherine Beczak, Rochester Institute of Technology As Graduate Enrollment Offices struggle with constantly tightened budgets, and as the value of traditional graduate school fairs are questioned, our profession continues to seek alternate and affordable means of recruiting students and marketing graduate programs.

CareerEco has developed a tool that allows institutions to participate in virtual graduate fairs, effectively reaching a wider student audience and offering alternate means to communicate with students. The tool can help to increase yield, while maximizing resources.

CareerEco offers a number of opportunities to utilize their tool – including hosting discipline-specific and targeted population (e.g. yellow ribbon benefits, honor society) graduate fairs.

These fairs give students from around the country and world access to programs and institutions they may never have

N

A

G

A

P

heard about before, which provides participating schools wide exposure to new markets. Unlike traditional graduate school fairs, where students need to fill out paper inquiry forms, the CareerEco registration process captures prospective student information and shares those inquiry lists with each school with which the student speaks. Easy-to-moderate and customize chat rooms also allow each institution the ability to moderate their chats with individual students or through a broader group chat.

Campbell University implemented the CareerEco technology in a variety of ways – including to communicate with accepted students and to connect new students in virtual fairs with current students. They also use the virtual chat feature to provide financial aid information and host a career fair. Both Northwestern University and Campbell

P E R S P E C T I V E S

•

University spoke to the positive feedback they received from student users, and the improvement in the platform over a traditional webinar. With CareerEco students can ask as many questions as they want, and frequently build upon contributions from each other, providing access to more information.

For institutions and offices that can’t justify a budget to travel all over the country, a virtual fair can help reach students from around the world. CareerEco allow universities to access a fun and engaging platform from anywhere, with much lower costs than actual travel. The virtual fair is a trend that is changing the GEM recruitment game and becoming a larger part of the overall marketing picture for many institutions.

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

41

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Successful Strategies For Addressing Stem Diversity Presented by Raymond Lutzky, New York University Tandon School of Engineering and Matthew Cipriano, Weill Cornell Graduate School of Medical Sciences Reported by Salvatore Calabro, Albert Einstein College of Medicine Increasing diversity in science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) has been a challenge for graduate enrollment managers.

Improving the rates of traditionally underrepresented minorities (URM) in the sciences who enroll and graduate can lead to better lives for individuals’ and their communities’. From a scientific perspective, today’s most challenging scientific problems rely on a team approach. Diverse viewpoints help scientists make important progress.

Sociological research into the barriers used by the majority helps us understand how access has been limited for URM students in higher education. Paulo Freire, a leading sociologist, provided some of the foundational theories in critical pedagogy.

Today this has led to create a learning environment where students are not afraid to be who they are on their campus. The theory of “stereotype threat,” developed

by Steele (2002) states, “stereotype threat is the resulting sense that one can then be judged or treated in terms of the stereotype or that one might do something that would inadvertently confirm it.” An improved understanding of sociological theories can help us to better understand the factors that impact who enters STEM fields.

helps demonstrate to applicants that diversity and inclusion is a priority. It doesn’t stop there; everyone needs to be working towards this goal. Admissions professionals should continually work together by meeting with diversity offices and cross-training each other in order to be knowledgeable. For example at Weill Cornell, URM students leveraged support from nearby institutions to create ‘Minority Graduate Student Network’. The graduate school provides support to attract speakers and provide meeting space to the group. There are a considerable number of external organizations that provide opportunities for graduate programs to recruit URM students. Some of the largest programs are: the Leadership Alliance, ABRCMS, SACNAS, McNair, UMBC –Meyerhoff Scholars, AAS-ERN, and Louis Stokes.

When forming a recruitment plan you

2 0 1 6

Increasing diversity is an ongoing process.

Stakeholders need to continue to stay engaged by holding meetings to discuss what is working and to develop ways to improve diversity on their campus.

Hobsons helps students identify their strengths, explore careers, create academic plans, match to best-fit educational opportunities, and reach their education and life goals. Through our solutions, we enable thousands of educational institutions to improve college and career planning, admissions and enrollment management, and student success and advising for millions of students around the globe.

In order to increase graduate student diversity campus stakeholders should work together to achieve their diversity goals. During the recruitment phase of the enrollment cycle it is useful to include the school’s official diversity talk with applicants at their interview. This S U M M E R

Developing a diverse campus climate should also include the surrounding community and not just the students in your programs. Reach out to your community relations office. They are skilled at how to bring people from the community together for a common good.

Finally encourage your current graduate students to be a partner in the process by creating a student ambassador program.

Connecting learning to life from start to finish

There are many tactical and operational efforts that can be implemented to recruit and retain the underrepresented minority students (URM) in STEM. Some efforts that should be considered are GMAT, GRE, TOEFL search services, online webinars, partnerships, and the GEM-consortium.

42

may want to consider adding recruitment trips to Puerto Rico (University of Puerto Rico system) and to Historically Black Colleges and Universities (HBCU).

Hobsons.com

•

© 2016 Hobsons. All rights reserved worldwide. 160205

P E R S P E C T I V E S

N

A

G

A

P

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Successfully Managing Helicopter Parents in the Graduate Admission Process: Strategies and Legal Considerations for Dealing with Aggressive Parents Presented by Jamie R. Grenon, Boston College and Sarah Petrakos, Simmons College Reported by Erica L. Knight, Spelman College While student-centered approaches continue to remain prevalent in graduate admissions, institutions are now faced with incorporating families into the admission process. Albeit with good intentions, parents, especially overprotective ‘helicopter’ parents, who are actively engaged in the graduate admission process can sometimes present an arduous challenge. Sarah Petrakos and Jamie Grenon outlined strategies to assist administration with positively interacting with parents while adhering to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA).

Deliverables: • Millennials are defined as those born between the early 1980s to the early 2000s.

• Millennials are still the most educated generation to date, with 34% earning a bachelor’s degree.

• The tethered generation tends to be consistently connected to technology, lacks coping mechanisms, and doesn’t have good personal space management.

N

A

G

A

P

• Helicopter parents are defined as hovering parents who attempt to shield their children from personal accountability.

• Helicopter parents are evolving into drone parents as a result of surveillance software and technology, (i.e. Family tracker, SmartThings, Zubie).

• The irony is that college aims to teach independence and critical analysis while helicopter parenting is counterproductive to this goal.

• Strategies for dealing with aggressive parents: Ø Decrease parental anxiety Ø Recognize the parents’ influence (stakeholders) Ø Don’t eliminate a candidate because of their parent(s) Ø Hold a workshop specifically for parents Ø Establish boundaries early Ø Have a ‘parent lounge’ during orientation events Ø Ensure parents have an opportunity to pose inquiries after conversing with the student/ applicant alone

P E R S P E C T I V E S

•

Ø Explicitly outline student and parent expectations Ø During admitted students day incorporate a ‘parents’ track’ which includes information sessions exclusively for parents.

• Encourage administrators to have a policy for managing helicopter parents.

• Assemble an advisory panel specifically to address the concerns of helicopter parents.

• Be mindful of FERPA policies when interacting with parents.

• FERPA doesn’t take effect until the student is actually in attendance at the institution.

• It is not a good practice to hide behind FERPA in an attempt to avoid interaction with parents. Instead create university based policies as a means of protection from helicopter parents.

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

43

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Fostering Community from Application to Graduation & Beyond Presented by Jenny Reitano and Dianna Gray, Drake University Reported by Caela Provost, University College Cork American psychologist and author Rollo May once remarked, “Communication leads to community, that is, to understanding, intimacy and mutual valuing.” Attendees of NAGAP’s session delivered by Drake University’s Jenny Reitano and Dianna Gray were reminded of the incontrovertible value of community as a means of drawing student interest in programs. With a focus on part-time students, Reitano and Gray drew from their experiences as GEM professionals, working via creative and budget-friendly means, to shed light on the significance of highlighting institutional communities.

Themes of innovation, creativity, and community building in Reitano and Gray’s presentation were abundant, and were made manifest through these candid words spoken by Gray, “’They’ll come to us’ doesn’t work anymore [in regards to student recruitment].” Students thrive

44

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

in community settings where they feel a strong sense of connection and loyalty; such a connection must be fostered before students apply and must remain a focal point throughout the student lifecycle and beyond.

With part-time students the process of promoting and encouraging such a sense of campus kinship can be an even greater challenge considering that many of the program scholars are working fulltime, raising families, balancing financial burdens, and/or racing against the hourglass on a daily basis. These challenges should, however, never serve as invitations for GEM professionals to allow such students to remain separate from their institutional communities or disown their college/university identities.

Rather it is our calling, through original and imaginative marketing, branding, and networking efforts, to ensure

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

that these students gain the same appreciation for their academic home as their fulltime counterparts.

James Montgomery Flagg had the right idea when he appealed to the need of every human being to be valued, to be accepted, to belong when he created the famous Uncle Sam “I Want YOU!” posters used in World War I and later in World War II. His poster demonstrated then, and still demonstrates, his understanding of the human condition: we all want to be a part of something.

Reitano and Gray share that same understanding in regards to their student population--an understanding that, if embraced by all GEM educators, could lead to a greater appreciation for campus communities across the realm of higher education.

N

A

G

A

P

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Where Did They Go? Using National Student Clearinghouse Data Presented by Emily Easton and Laura Chavez Hardy, The University of Chicago Reported by Judith Holzer, The Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health The National Student Clearinghouse is a non-profit data exchange formed in 1993. Over 3600 colleges and universities currently participate in the Clearinghouse, which provides data on where applicants enroll, enabling schools and programs to learn where applicants who decline their offer of admission ultimately enrolled. As data-driven decision-making becomes increasingly important in graduate admissions, it is critical to use all data that is available.

Access to data from the Clearinghouse is FREE to participating institutions.

Using the Clearinghouse data is common in undergraduate admissions but not as much in graduate admissions. There are a few limitations to the data: some schools choose not to participate or participate in a limited capacity, only enrollments in US accredited schools are reflected in the data, and some students may choose to opt-out of having their information reported. But when carefully reviewed, this data can help programs understand their market position, their

N

A

G

A

P

peer institutions or programs and why admitted applicants are not accepting offers of admission.

In order to request the Clearinghouse data, specific data elements are required, including the applicant’s first, middle and last names along with their date of birth. An applicant reference number or student ID is also recommended.

Output from the Clearinghouse will be 3 reports, including a control report, an aggregate report, and a detailed report.

You will need to manipulate and clean the data to eliminate duplicates and undergraduate applicants.

Several case studies were presented to demonstrate how the Clearinghouse data was used at the University of Chicago. In one case, the data was used to help a program identify their true peer competitor programs. Faculty had always assumed that declining students were accepting offers to programs ranked higher in the US News rankings.

However, the Clearinghouse data revealed that students were declining

P E R S P E C T I V E S

admission offers to attend schools that were not as highly ranked, challenging the faculty to reconsider their admission process. Another program used the data to identify a trend in declining applicants who were accepting offers of admission to a competitor program who had changed its scholarship policy.

It is important to identify your university’s Clearinghouse Administrator in order to get access to your data; the Clearinghouse will work only with this individual. This individual is typically in the Registrar’s Office or Institutional Data/Analysis/Research Office. The Administrator may be in undergraduate admissions. If you are not able to identify your school’s administrator, contact the Clearinghouse directly at studenttracker@ studentclearninghouse.org to identify the person at your school.

The presenters noted that they are available to serve as a resource for individuals who want to use the Clearinghouse data.

•

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

45

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Re-imagine the Experience: 7 Ways to Delight Your Future Students Presented by Brian Niles, TargetX Reported by Dena Ross, Micron School of Materials Science and Engineering TargetX is a CRM company that works with more than 450 colleges. Their goal is to get you to think and to help your institution/program to change.

What We Know About Graduate Admissions: • There is relatively little graduate admissions research, though it is starting to increase.

• The average age of graduate students is 33.

• How to fund a graduate degree is important to prospects.

• Your website is increasingly more important.

• Grad students want to visit schools in person.

• The majority (85.6%) of prospects expect a response in 30 minutes.

• Prospects are interested in “the buzz.”

They want to know who has gone to your institution, success rates, etc.

• Email is 69% of communication, live chat 4%, social media 4%, messaging 3%, text 8%.

Three Critical Trends: 1. Mobile Viewing—70% of the time, prospects are looking at your website via cell phone. Research indicates that

46

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

20% of prospects who had a bad experience on your site will have a negative view of your school.

2. Social Media—Younger students are moving away from Facebook and are using Instagram and Twitter.

Include images of your campus (Instagram), frequent news (Twitter), real experiences (YouTube), live engagement (Periscope), etc. These methods work well for international and online students who may not visit in person.

3. Personal Engagement—All universities look the same to prospects. If a student has nine interactions with another student after being admitted, they are 93% more likely to enroll.

Seven Ways to Delight Your Future Students: 1. Buttons and links on your website should be big enough to use when viewing on a mobile device. 67% of students who applied for undergrad admissions completed some part of the application on a cell phone. Test your website on your phone. Fill out online forms and receive emails. How good is the experience?

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

2. Reduce roadblocks. Are your forms easy to complete? Ask students about their preferred method of communication: a link to download information or hard copy via mail.

3. Tell authentic stories. Stories are more important than statistics. It’s not about you; it’s about them. When “you” come to this school, etc.

4. Hosting campus visits is near the top of the top 10 most effective methods. Prioritize the experience.

Basics: Immediate confirmation, campus signage, visitor parking, clean restrooms, etc. Customize the visit. Make it memorable and include a wow factor. Acknowledge that spouses are part of the process. If bringing married prospects to campus, encourage the spouse to come. Have a spouse program.

5. Close the deal. Sales 101: ask for the sale. Tell students you want them there.

6. Pave the path to student success.

Recruit the right students. An interactive and proactive approach is important.

Ask your students if they are happy.

7. Get your team delighted! This starts with office staff, who are the first contact. Be welcoming and accommodating.

N

A

G

A

P

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

What Keeps You Up at Night?

Presented by Linda Horisk, Fordham University; Marcus Hanscom, Roger Williams University; Cammie Baker-Clancy, Empire State College; and Matthew Cipirano, Weill Cornell Graduate School of Medical Sciences Reported by Kristen Sterba, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences The Graduate Enrollment Management Professional has a number of issues that can keep them up at night. This session was an interactive discussion between panelists and audience members on these different concerns. Audience members listed issues that could be replaced or repaired at their institution including technology, curriculum delivery, cross campus relationships, financial aid, and tuition models. The group also discussed trying to engage faculty

N

A

G

A

P

paid ads was used by a number of attendees to promote their offerings to undergraduates. One big concern expressed by many attendees was the cost of attendance and debt that many students are incurring. Financial counseling to improve financial literacy was discussed as one strategy for assisting students.

participation in the admission process, and utilizing data to reinforce best practices in admissions to earn faculty respect. Geo-fencing was discussed as a new marketing strategy that some institutions are using to promote their programs. Other programs are going to begin focusing additional attention on recruiting their undergraduates to their graduate programs. They plan on giving in class presentations to feeder undergraduate programs. Facebook

P E R S P E C T I V E S

•

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

47

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Rapid I-20 Generation & Improved Student Experience: A Case Study on How Small Innovations Can Make a Big Difference Presented by Mariah McNamara and Bill Webster, Cornell University Reported by Elsa Evans, University of San Francisco About Cornell • Application: CollegeNet • SIS: PeopleSoft • Decentralized with 100+ programs offered • Graduate Applications: 20,000 – about 50% international • Graduate Enrollment: 5,400 – about 48% international • I-20s Issued: 1,000 per year • I-20s per day (peak): 40 Requesting Documents Once an applicant is admitted, the program populates CollegeNet with details as to how many total units they are taking and any funding awarded. The applicant gets an email invitation to complete an information form, including how much proof of funding to provide and which documents are needed. They create a new document checklist to keep track of their status. The form also allows for transfer, change of level, or change of status situations, if necessary. The applicant pays a $30 flat rate fee to cover shipment of the I-20.

Through their portal Cornell is able to share the SEVIS ID and FedEx tracking number once they are available.

48

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

I-20 Batch Processing Once the applicant has submitted documents, the Grad School enters data into a form in PeopleSoft. The ISSO runs a query each day and queues it up to transfer to SEVIS via a batch XML file.

If it’s entered by 3:30pm, they can get PDFs of the documents back for printing the next morning. They email the PDFS to the admission offices who print, sign and ship them, since each admission office has a DSO. Errors and Delays Errors are the biggest cause for delay in issuing I-20s. Strategies to reduce errors include: • Provide training to the offices that do the data entry.

• Manually validate the XML file each day with the help of an XML editor.

• Use a SQL query tool to test for common errors like no DOB or duration of program.

I-20 Take-Aways • Don’t over-automate (Look before you send! Learn how to do it manually.)

• Buy an XML editor.

• Use the SEVIS test environments.

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

• Join the SEVIS Batch users working group: sevistechnicalfeedback@ice.dhs.gov.

• Use your SIS SEVIS forum, if it exists.

Student Lifecycle With reporting required up to three years after graduation, they wanted to push data collection to students, thereby allowing advisors to approve data, rather than enter it. With 2,700 new students reporting each year, and about 300 per day in August, they needed a faster and more accurate system.

They created a new check-in web form for incoming students with immigration data prepopulating from their application based on their university ID number.

The used free services to create a web form that is mobile friendly (important!).

They review and correct if needed, then bundle it in XML to send to SEVIS. Dispersed data entry allows staff to focus on advising, gives incoming students more flexibility to check-in, eliminates the need for seasonal staff hiring, improves timeliness of reporting and results in fewer students to track down. The downside is that students do not have as much personal contact with the ISSO.

N

A

G

A

P

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Build the Relationship: Web Conferencing from Prospect to Enrollment Presented by Kevin Zalanowski, Northwestern University Reported by Melanie Steele, Ursuline College How do you reach a diverse, geographically-spread audience on a limited time and financial budget? This is exactly what Kevin Zalanowski from Northwestern University’s Feinberg School of Medicine Physician Assistant Program faced when reviewing the possibilities.

Kevin utilizes web conferencing to connect and recruit the best applicants regardless of their physical location.

When adding web conferencing to his recruitment plan, Kevin took into consideration the needs and goals of his program. He wanted to connect with students in order to consistently build relationships and to personalize the application process as well as to increase yield and inclusion of students during the admitted stage.

During the prospective student informational webinars, Kevin covers program information, hosts a question and answer session, and provides

N

A

G

A

P

student web conferences, 68% reported they better understood the orientation process; 61% said they had a better relationship with the school; 75% found current student advice valuable; and 39% reported the web conference positively impacted their decision to enroll.

program handouts. He uses web conferencing with admitted students in order to help facilitate connections between students, disseminate program information and reduce anxiety about starting the PA program. He also uses a current student panel to help answer specific questions for incoming students, which the new students appreciate! For both sessions he makes sure to follow up with a quality survey in order to track the success of the conferences throughout the year.

A few takeaways that are important to note from Kevin’s experience include:

Kevin integrated two web conferences into his recruitment strategy. The first web conference is held in April, which corresponds with the opening of the application and then again in July, about half way through the application cycle. From the web conferences, 52% of the matriculating students said they had attended a live session and 64% responded that they referenced the recordings at least once. For the admitted

P E R S P E C T I V E S

•

1. Coordinate sessions to complement an overall recruitment strategy and schedule around other events with similar populations; 2. Be careful of overspecialization leading to audiences that are too specific; 3. Present your best professional impression and don’t try to incorporate too much into your session; and 4. Attend any vendor trainings and ensure familiarity with technology before the session.

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

49

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Grand Ole Orientation: Building Community by Integrating New Student Orientation for Online and On-campus Populations Presented by Jay Stefanelli, Rutgers University Reported by Amy Carver, Iowa State University Efficiency aside, integrating online students with an on-campus event will help build a sense of community amongst your student population. The Rutgers School of Communication and Information student population is made up of approximately two-thirds seated students and one-third online students.

The first unique opportunity to bring these students together is through an orientation that will meet the needs of students, faculty and staff.

The three key components that you will need to host an online orientation session are software, hardware and support.

1. Software: Rutgers School of Communication and Information uses Adobe Connect; however, any program that will record audio and video and allows for audience engagement will work. The presenter needs to find what they have available to them and what works for them. All the available systems have their pros and cons.

50

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

2. Hardware with a wired internet connection. If your program has a “smart classroom” this space works well for the on-campus presentation.

You will need a laptop, projector and screen. To broadcast the video, you will need one or more cameras. It is helpful if the camera is on a tripod or stabilized in some manner. A microphone(s) to capture audio and a remote to progress through the slide presentation are also essential.

3. Support from IT, students and staff will assist in the online orientation going smoothly. IT can advise in the purchase of any necessary hardware or software and set-up of the space for the presentation. A current student panel can serve as a welcome wagon, community builder and online student liaison(s). Colleagues can also assist in setting up and tearing down the room, checking-in for the event, and moderating questions that come in from the online participants.

The orientation session itself is an asynchronous sandbox experience. The

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

students should learn what to expect as online students. They may need productivity tools along with the other resources that are available to both the on-campus and online students. The goal is to make them feel connected to campus. One such way is to have the online students introduce themselves with the use of a Flipgrid. It is important to evaluate the effectiveness of the orientation session and get feedback.

Last, but not least, make it fun!

Jay’s Top Ten Tips 1. Establish ONE community 2. Use student moderator/liaison 3. Have an introduction exercise 4. Create interactive opportunities 5. Repeat every question to both populations 6. Respond quickly with immediate positive reinforcement 7. Do not forget eye contact 8. Embrace speaking to the void 9. Perform a “technology dress rehearsal” 10. Use a wired internet connection

N

A

G

A

P

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Best Practices for Efficiently Managing and Processing International Applications Presented by Camila Haselwood, Kansas State University Reported by Sarah Schuble, Bellarmine University KSU is a public University with 114 graduate programs and over 4,000 students. They have three full-time staff to process applications, and they use CollegeNET. They have specific submission dates for international applications to allow time for processing each I-20.

To conduct transcript reviews, KSU uses AACRAO, which offers a secure website.

KSU often receives applications without a financial affidavit included, which is a vital document needed to issue an I-20, or the affidavit is submitted with errors, signatures missing, or the incorrect amount. To streamline the process they:

The objectives of the session were to:

• Analyzed the current process • Determined process bottlenecks and areas of improvement • Implemented internal controls • Implemented an annual review of the process for effectiveness

• Understand how to streamline processing for international applications • Implement effective communication to international applicants and departments • Determine methods to implement at your own organization • Manage the multiple challenges associated with international applications

To correct the communication issues, they have automated communication where they can and defined an appropriate communication plan.

Currently, KSU is asking students if they will be using their own funds or sponsorship funds, which prompts the applicant to submit the required materials.

They are also admitting the student, sending the admission letter, then asking for the financial affidavit. This entices the student to submit the required materials and delivers quicker results.

The takeaways of the session are:

KSU found communication was not timely, processing documents was taking too much time, and transcripts were being over-evaluated. To correct this they implemented monthly meetings, created more strict policies, and worked to educate the departments on the importance of a complete application.

• The importance of evaluating your process and what will work • How to implement step-by-step changes or phase in new changes • How best to manage challenges

You’re Hired: Leveraging Your NAGAP Network for Career Success Presented by Jeremiah Nelson, Wake Forest School of Business; Keith Ramsdell, Bowling Green State University; Marcus Hanscom, Roger Williams University; and Jennifer Kulbeck, Saint Mary’s College of California Reported by Sylvia Alexander-Sedey, St. Catherine University These four GEM leaders shared how they successfully utilized their NAGAP networks to obtain new positions and professional experiences. Attendees were provided with the opportunity to partake in conversations regarding how and why to participate in NAGAP. Additionally, they learned how to apply their NAGAP experience to their advantage regarding prospective employers.

Key takeaways regarding benefits of the NAGAP network:

N

P E R S P E C T I V E S

A

G

A

P

• Personal and professional growth • The opportunity to serve others (and on the board) • The opportunity to display your willingness to learn and to grow (to potential employers) • Benefitting from a national understanding of trends in GEM

•

• Access to nation-wide experts • Showing your dedication to the field • Idea, resource and best practices sharing • Professional confidence and contributions • Support from colleagues who understand your field and the challenges and benefits of GEM work

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

51

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

What Goes into the Study-Abroad Decision-Making Process: Understand Student Motivations & Enhance Your Recruitment Efforts Presented by Dawn Piacentino, ETS Reported by Alounda Joseph, UNT Dallas If your university is like most, there quite possibly is a push from upper administration to increase the number of international students on your campus; or the question may center on why we don’t have more students from a certain region. But, what exactly goes into an international student’s thought process when determining not only if they should study abroad, but where geographically they want to study?

This presentation centered on the results of a survey conducted by the TOEFL program to help shape their communication with TOEFL takers around the world; but the data obtained can be very useful to universities who are wanting to become more targeted in their efforts to increase the number of international students on their campuses.

The online survey was conducted with students (Grad and undergrad) planning to study abroad in an English-speaking country or in a program taught primarily in English. The countries surveyed were

52

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

grouped into 4 regions: Europe & Eurasia, Latin America, South/West Asia/ Middle East & Africa, and East Asia.

About 5 million students flood into other countries to purse a higher education.

Some know exactly their destination country, some have an idea of where they want to go and are open to influence. In our attempts to develop a profile and increase the effectiveness of our outreach effort, it is important that we understand the decision-making process of study-abroad students as to increase the likelihood our messages are received.

• Who initiates the decision to study abroad?

• What are the primary reasons for studying abroad?

• Who are the top influencers for selecting a country in which to study?

• What is the duration of the studyabroad journey?

students provided responses that varied significantly by country. As an example in East Asia, the primary reason Malaysian students study abroad is to experience new cultures; they start their journey at a younger age; they are the initiators (indicating independent thinking); and the top influencer in their decision is the university itself (information on university websites).

Data such as this helps shape your communication to study-abroad students.

Once you have a sense of what is important to your audience and how they differ from region to region, then you can more effectively shape your recruitment strategy by customizing your message, highlighting your geographic location, and/or creating specific we pages to present the most relevant messages.

Though grouped by region, study-abroad

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

N

A

G

A

P

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Campus versus Program: Creating a Clear Communication Plan in a Siloed Environment Presented by Yosmeriz Roman, Rutgers University Camden Reported by Jared G. Fritz-McCarty, Roosevelt University Developing a communication plan, which consists of clear, meaningful, and consistent messages, can be one of the greatest challenges we face as graduate enrollment professionals – especially, within a decentralized, multiple-campus institution, such as Rutgers University. The following bullets are intended to assist in the process of establishing a sustainable communication plan.

• Take inventory and do research. Gather any communications that currently exist – ask other university departments or centralized offices to provide you with copies of the materials they send to students. It is important to revisit communications from previous cycles, especially those labeled as “send and forget.” In some cases it is most helpful to review these communications as a student.

Consider immersing yourself in the application process by submitting a test application. This will allow you to experience first-hand the flow of communications a student receives from your institution.

• Identify key communication points. Begin by identifying the

N

A

G

A

P

Who is my audience? 2) What needs to be accomplished? 3) How can the student accomplish these objectives?

Provide concise instructions as to how the student may complete the required actions. Don’t forget to send reminders – successful communication plans provide the same message in various formats (email, text messaging, social media, phone calls, etc.).

• Measure results and be responsive. If possible, track a message’s read and click rates. This data can help you better understand when and how students are responding to your messages. Include clearly labeled hyperlink buttons towards the top of the message that allow the student to easily complete required actions (application completion, event registration, surveys). Ask for student feedback as students may interpret the message differently then you intended.

Most importantly, acknowledge when a student has successfully completed the objectives.

information that is critical for a student to know in order to complete the admission and enrollment processes.

Determine if the information is applicable to all students or subpopulations within the enrollment funnel.

• Understand the student lifecycle and applicant pool. Define populations that share common attributes or are representative of your program’s enrollment lifecycle. An example may be: prospects, applicants, admits, confirmed/deposited, enrollees.

• Create a calendar. A strong plan will guide a student through the enrollment process and remind her/ him of deadlines (application, FAFSA, scholarship, assistantship), on-campus recruitment events, and orientation requirements. Utilize your event calendar to plan multiple communication points and reminders that are intended to drive student response or involvement.

• Prioritize objectives. Often less is more – messages that are “text heavy” can confuse students and decrease response rates. Write a message the considers the following questions: 1)

P E R S P E C T I V E S

•

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

53

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Using Digital Marketing To Increase International Student Applications Presented by Murray Simpson, Net Natives Reported by Katherine Beczak, Rochester Institute of Technology Net Natives, based in London, helps recruit students from over 150 countries by tracking student behavior from initial inquiry to enrollment, profiling students on their online behaviors, and ultimately raising awareness of graduate programs, generating leads, and increasing conversions. Institutions are facing global challenges and increased competition for international applicants, and knowing who the true customer is and having all the data in one place are key. The ability to have all that data in a single place is the biggest challenge for many institutions, and actually knowing how marketing efforts contribute to overall enrollment, is essential. This information is what Net Natives gathers to improve overall yield.

Institutions should examine how to more effectively measure their combined efforts for enrollment. Possessing comprehensive data about incoming graduate students in a single place can allow institutions

54

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

to expand their audiences, improve personalization, and select the most appropriate media. Yet, gathering all this data from multiple systems can be a challenge for the majority of institutions.

Net Natives plugs into multiple different systems to track the habits of prospects – for example, they can track the amount of time a prospect remains on a website, the specific content they reviewed, and whether or not they completed an inquiry form.

The presenters also addressed digital behavior by prospective students in India.

For this demographic the most important factor and decision-making tool for students is knowing their job opportunities and increased earning potential from a graduate program. The most popular international searches to the USA from prospects from India include programs in nursing, accounting, medicine, and STEM programs. Indian students also still heavily utilize Facebook to gather

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

and share information. This knowledge is crucial in successfully marketing to this demographic. A marketing focus should be on generating quality leads from international students and creating a specific campaign and specific landing pages across different platforms.

In sum, in der for schools to focus their digital efforts to recruit new students, it is imperative for them to completely understand how the market receives their brand. What do you want international students to say about your university?

What emotion do you want to obtain from prospective students? Where on your website do you want students to visit and how do you capture data when they do? Creativity and innovation breeds engagement and creates an emotional reaction from prospective students, which can increase interest and ultimately improve yield.

N

A

G

A

P

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

What International Students (Probably!) Think About Your Website & How To Chagne It For The Better Presented by Megan Brenn-White, The Brenn-White Group; Petra Bevek, CME-PIUS; and Roger Senden, Utrecht University Recorded by Kara Cleveland, University of Nevada, Reno The ability to design a university website so that it attracts international students can be an important factor in increasing international recruitment. The British Council reports that by 2024 there will be 4-5 million international mobile students and that China and India will continue to dominate as countries sending the most international students.

International recruitment is becoming more competitive as institutions aim to expand their brand. Central Europe now offers 8,000 master’s program taught in English and there are at least 1,500 master’s programs in countries where there is no tuition for students coming from other EU countries.

So what do international students care about and how does that match the content of your university’s website?

Five things to consider when designing a website that targets/considers international students: • International students do not know the cultural or local context • Most will not visit the campus before they attend

N

A

G

A

P

wanted to make their website mobile/ tablet friendly. Through focus groups and surveys they found that international students wanted easy access within the site, the ability to compare programs offered, and information on career possibilities, scholarships, and support after admission. The international student population has increased so far to 14%.

• Students may have English language deficiencies • Students have concerns about money • Many may be anxious about living abroad Most US university websites only provide international students the required forms needed before admission. They are lacking in the ability to connect with international students. Australia and the UK are two countries with great international student websites. These websites provide the ability to change the viewing language, show pictures that are culturally relevant, and explain information in a context that the student can understand.

Case Study 2 The Slovenia National Agency is working with higher education to create the Study in Slovenia website. There are 90 higher education institutions and they offer 133 programs in English. They wanted to increase their international student population but they needed to identify the gap and provide formal information and informal (cultural) information. They began working with the Brenn-White Group to create a new website. The website covers all higher education intuitions and allows international student to gain information at one site instead of having to research many website.

This has allowed a one stop shop for international students seeking education in Slovenia.

Case Study 1 Utrecht University had a 6% international student population and they wanted to increase it to 25% by 2020. In 2014 they reviewed their master’s website and found that the one size does not fit all for international students and that it was lacking in information for international students. Utrecht University developed a new campaign and changed its attitude for writing for the web. They also

P E R S P E C T I V E S

•

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

55

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

The Three-Year Degree Debate: What Is Our International Admission Policy?

Presented by Emily Tse, International Education Research Foundation (IERF) and Ujjaini Sahasrabudhe, University of Southern California Reported by Kara Cleveland, University of Nevada, Reno Emily Tse and Ujjaini Sahasrabudhe conducted a flash survey online before the conference began in order to gain a snapshot of how institutions are handling three-year degrees. The link to the survey was posted in 6 different online communities and they received 85 respondents with 60% from public institutions and 40% private institutions.

INDIA – Are 3-year bachelor’s degree holders from India eligible for admission into your graduate programs?

No Answer – 1%

Other – 26% – consideration on a case by case basis or petitions, depended on outcome of an evaluation agency, or that no policy has been established.

ALL 3-year degrees – Are all 3-year bachelor’s degree holders eligible for admission into your graduate programs, regardless of the country of study?

Yes – 15%

Yes – 21%

No – 66%

No – 40%

No Answer – 4%

Other – 39% - majority allow three year degree with considerations such as admission to same major, Indian school has a NAAC rating of A, or first class division students only.

Other – 15% – consideration on a case by case basis or petitions, depended on outcome of an evaluation agency, or that no policy has been established.

EUROPE – Are 3-year bachelor’s degree holders from Europe eligible for admission into your graduate programs?

Yes – 35%

No – 27%

The final questions were open-ended which allowed participants to express their concern and explain how their school handles 3-year degrees.

• Concerns were expressed regarding the stance of regional accrediting bodies and the US government • Cautions was advised with receiving applicants who intend on perusing teaching or CPA licensure • Opinions were given in support and against the level of preparedness of 3-year degree holders Emily and Ujjaini concluded with two emerging themes: • There is no accreditation standard that prescribes specific admission practices • Determination is left to each individual institution

SPEND

LESS TIME ON

ADMINISTRATIVE TASKS ... ... AND

MORE TIME

Other – 38% - majority allow three year degree with considerations such as admission to same major, dependent of the country, or outcome of evaluation agency report.

ENROLLING BEST-FIT STUDENTS! By working with Liaison, you’ll be able to: • Analyze, evaluate, and target best-fit prospective students • Access applicant data in real time • Deliver a better applicant experience • Reduce time, effort, and cost

AUSTRALIA – Are 3-year bachelor’s degree holders from Australia eligible for admission into your graduate programs?

56

Yes – 29%

No – 44%

S U M M E R

Visit LiaisonEDU.com to learn more!

2 0 1 6

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

N

A

G

A

P

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Marketing on a Shoestring Budget: Recruitment and Retention Presented by Ashley Hurley, Memorial University of Newfoundland, Canada Reported by Caela Provost, University College Cork Countless GEM professionals know and understand all too well the challenges of formulating effective recruitment and marketing strategies with dwindling or non-existent budgets. Speaker Ashley Hurley of Memorial University of Newfoundland’s School of Graduate Studies faced such financial strains with aplomb, evidenced by the valuable pieces of advice and personal examples she provided to attendees at her session investigating marketing on a “shoestring budget”.

Rallying behind a strategically generated tagline “What’s your master plan?”, Hurley and her colleagues created a successful marketing campaign for the School of Graduate Studies placing

N

A

G

A

P

a particular focus on the following strategies and tactics: • Collaboration with other offices to share in costs and benefits • Utilization of student voices as a means of direct “word of mouth” marketing (student and alumni profiles, videos, and a blog) • Development of target audiences for specific mini-campaigns • Implementation of email promotions with universal messages helpful to all student types • Organization of webinars to aid students in the research and application processes • Use of social media as a means to reach specific markets

P E R S P E C T I V E S

•

Following the application of Hurley’s marketing strategies, Memorial University of Newfoundland’s School of Graduate Studies saw an increase in applications, total enrollment, and international enrollment, in addition to gaining several strong relationships with other departments on campus. The success of the School of Graduate Studies is further proof that identifying campus strengths, collaborating with associates in various departments, and leveraging cost-effective resources as means of promotion can aid in the accomplishment of recruitment goals on any budget.

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

57

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Using Data To Inform Decision-Making and Institutional Change Presented by Marchelle Payne-Gassaway, University of Maryland School of Nursing Reported by Bonnie Sofarelli, Clear Organizations Marchelle Payne-Gassaway takes intelligent decision-making to another level. Her leadership comes in the form of fact finding through data analytics within and outside of her own operation.

Through regular reporting on her team’s enrollment efforts, she brings another form of knowledge to the table where leadership decisions are made.

Marchelle describes a downward trend of false hunches and hyperbole from stakeholders around campus who may question the hard work of her team.

Instead, a culture of accountability ensues as others now understand that she will investigate, assess and report outcomes through data.

She invites us to dive deeper into data capabilities at our fingertips. By analyzing our own processes, we too can enhance productivity, reduce inefficiencies, compare and expand data sets; using it all to make smarter decisions. Marchelle adds, “…knowledge from data creates a respectful conversation”.

To begin asking the right questions from data, Marchelle recommends we look for missing facts within operational costs (time), for example. Consider evaluating processes step-by-step to determine if a paper application has a higher price than the cost of implementing electronic

58

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

systems. Within her own operation, she eliminated up to fifty percent of workflow implementing an electronic application system. Marchelle warns us to gradually evolve decisions based upon data collected. She adds that one should regularly assess with others how different questions can be asked of it.

Managing change through measurable benchmarks and outcomes has created an environment of best practice and accountability for Marchelle and her colleagues. From her experiences, she outlined a web of strategic initiatives: consider assessing quantitative (numbers) and qualitative (coding value) data and/or a mix of both. She urged participants to be mindful of process and outcomes with equal priority, while acknowledging a comfort level with our developing knowledge base. She cautioned the audience to ensure that they include all stakeholder experiences with the newfound power base. She also pointed out the importance of accepting that some efforts in the end have little meaning, or just don’t work.

One can hope we all see equal success to Marchelle’s efforts: her data diva presence has influenced a predictive model used by faculty at the University of Maryland’s School of Nursing to

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

determine student success through assessing completion of previous coursework. She encouraged the use of multiple sources of data: a database or spreadsheet, phone records, web analytics, and surveys, to name a few.

Start collecting data with something new, such as asking visitors to fill out a contact card on an iPad when visiting. Show movement in your operation through coded activity and use the data to educate others. She stressed that it was also important to document procedures to demonstrate that all parties are viewing the same data points. This will come in handy whenever data is called into question.

The true nature of Marchelle’s leadership comes in the form of developing others on her team. Throughout the strategic changes she’s implemented in her shop, she responded to resistance by encouraging staff to take their work to another level, “Understand how to look at other implications of your own work to explore what you’ll need to know in the future.” Ultimately, Marchelle’s goal is to implement best practices throughout her organization. Her data driven decision creates a “smart” operation that is consistently reliable around campus.

N

A

G

A

P

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Beg, Borrow & Steal: Tech Tools To Survive With Limited Resources Presented by Kimberly Dunn and Kimberly Whitted, Campbell University College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences Reported by Kristen Sterba, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences Many Graduate Enrollment Management Professionals wear 27 hats and are expected to do more with less. Campbell University’s College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences utilizes a number of digital tools to help recruitment and retention activities with their limited staff.

to provide information on housing and campus resources. Virtual fairs for current students focus on career fairs and alumni outreach. It is important to market these events through email blasts, website posts, social media, and banner ads in order to have adequate participation.

originate. To utilize these, an email with a call to action website link is developed.

The website address is entered into a “URL builder” that will feed into Google analytics. So, when users click on the web address, the interaction can be tracked.

To identify prospective students, names of students who have taken the GRE or TOEFL are purchased. This allows a targeted and cost efficient way to recruit based on categories such as geographic location, undergraduate major, and education/employment history.

Facebook ads are an additional way virtual fairs and the college are marketed. When using Facebook ads, it is important to know what content will be used first and make sure that content is mobile friendly. Parameters for the Facebook ad audience can be set up along with the maximum amount of time and money that the campaign will last.

Additional tools utilized by the presenters include: • Google docs (for meetings minutes and information) • Wufoo (for forms) • Doodle (for scheduling) • Trello and Basecamp (for project management) • Google calendar and Sunrise calendar • Hootsuite (for scheduling Twitter posts) • Dropbox (for document sharing)

Virtual fairs are used to connect with prospective, admitted, and current students. The college participates in recruitment fairs with other universities, but it also hosts accepted students fairs

Google analytics campaign tags are another tool used to identify where and when website interactions or clicks

DON’T USE YESTERDAY’S STRATEGIES TO REACH TOMORROW’S STUDENTS We use our deep knowledge of the nontraditional student lifecycle to launch programs, grow enrollment, improve learning and connect education to careers.

Contact Aaron Edwards aaron.edwards@keypathedu.com 913.254.6273

For more than 26 years, we have helped universities navigate the complex higher education landscape with solutions that build sustainable institutions.

N

A

G

A

P

P E R S P E C T I V E S

•

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

59

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Peer Mentorship As An Admissions & Retention Tool In Professional Graduate Programs: You Won’t Believe Our Success!

Presented by Kristin Chalberg and Paul Niemuth, St. Catherine Universit Reported by Teisha Johnson, Illinois College of Optometry The Graduate Admissions Office and the Doctor of Physical Therapy Program at St. Catherine University teamed up to develop three unique programs that offered their prospective, entering and current students the opportunity to engage with one another socially and academically. The first is the Student Admissions Ambassadors program where current students volunteer their time to answer questions from accepted students, participate in admissions information sessions and host visiting prospective students on campus. The feedback they received from the prospective students was overwhelming positive! Seventy-nine percent of their prospective students had contact with an ambassador, of which 86% felt it was helpful or influenced their decision to apply to the program.

The second program, Class by Class Peer Mentoring, was developed to

60

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

prevent that feeling of “being left out” that students often feel coming into a cohort program by increasing engagement amongst students. All students are required to participate. Entering students (mentee) are matched with a current first year student (mentor) either by common alma maters or extracurricular interest.

The mentor is expected to follow an established contact schedule with the mentee and the relationship continues as each student progresses through the program. Ninety-seven percent of their students have reported that this was a beneficial and positive experience.

The third program, Collaborative Learning Models, was developed to support and encourage camaraderie, not competition amongst the students. Six programs were established some of which include: daily rotating partner list, small group tutorials & research, and integrated clinical

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

experience (ICE). The daily rotation pairs same year students with someone different each day. The small group tutorial has students solving a case per course in a small group setting of 6-7 students. The small group research project has groups of 4-5 students who starting in 2nd year work on a research project until spring of 3rd year. For ICE, students travel in groups of three to clinical sites to provide hands on patient care.

While these efforts require time for development and implementation, it has been worth it for St. Catherine’s Doctor of Physical Therapy program. They have been able to maintain 100% student retention, produced engaged alums and have created a cooperative learning environment where the entire student body is supporting one another.

N

A

G

A

P

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Change, Consolidation & Communciation: How To Lead & Support The Consolidation of Graduate Admission Offices Implementing Gem Presented by Robert MacDonald, Teachers College, Columbia University Reported by Jennifer Coleman, Western New Mexico University Silos in higher education cannot withstand the strain of limited resources.

Effective strategies to centralize graduate admission can address the economic realities we face and assure consistent, quality services to our stakeholders. Even though program champions might worry that their uniqueness could be blurred by centralization, methods to actually enhance programs’ unique “brands” and their footholds in marketing and recruiting may be realized. MacDonald shared both his hands-on experience of centralizing admissions and his current work consulting with universities facing the same challenges.

Resistance should be expected. The concept of centralization provokes concerns about competition for resources, makes people want to protect what they have, even if that is very little, and resource envy has created long-standing animosity among people that you now want to work as a team.

N

A

G

A

P

Faculty buy-in is essential. Whereas in undergraduate admissions, administrators run the show, faculty make decisions when it comes to graduate admissions.

MacDonald suggests exposing faculty to data about what other schools are doing and how centralization can impact numbers. Framing data in areas of interest to the faculty will help make them receptive to the changes. It is also useful to bring things back to what is best for students.

In order to overcome the resistance you will face, make sure you offer great service. How your staff is perceived is very important, so make sure you hire and retain the right people and engage in public relations management efforts.

Working with your staff using a strengthbased approach, including individual assessments, might help them maximize their performance or guide you in reassigning them to roles in which they can be their best professional self.

P E R S P E C T I V E S

•

When recruitment and admissions are decentralized, it is easy to lose track of who is recruiting where and who has what budget. During a centralization re-organization, processes and expenditures need to be documented on paper and compared item by item. This can result in discovery of opportunities to collaborate or piggy-back efforts.

Interesting things can happen with centralization, including increasing recruitment, preventing redundant efforts and wasted expenses, improvement of the application, and more consistent treatment of students. Assuring program faculty that collaboration will not reduce but rather enhance opportunities to showcase their uniqueness, and making sure you live up to that claim, will help you realize a successful re-organization.

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

61

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Alumni Engagement: Using Alumni As An Extension of Your Gem Team Presented by Jeremiah Nelson, Wake Forest School of Business Reported by Caela Provost, University College Cork Jeremiah Nelson’s session focusing on alumni engagement wasn’t merely a speech- it was a conversation sharing ideas and best practices. Throughout the course of the presentation new topics were introduced to attendees centered on the utilization of alumni to drive enrollment for graduate programs. Such topics included, but weren’t limited to: • Alumni in the recruitment schemeattending fairs, hosting webinars, serving as ambassadors, and volunteering as mentors • Alumni and their contributions to student yield • Alumni as aids to the interview and welcoming processes • Alumni in the area of career development- working with Career Services, holding alumni panels,

62

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

attending “meet and greets”, and leveraging networks to help with student placements post-graduation • Alumni working with financial aidholding giving evenings and events, donating to their alma mater, engaging in the college culture, etc.

Prime takeaways from the conversation led by Nelson were numerous. Many can be implemented and utilized by the graduate enrollment management community if individuals simply remember • Alumni are more willing to help than we might imagine (we just need to ask!)

• Follow through is key for alumni engagement • Making friends with LinkedIn is never a bad idea

•

P E R S P E C T I V E S

• Starting small is okay, and certainly preferable to stagnancy • Training and educating alumni is a must (even if it’s with just a FAQ sheet!)

As the session came to a close, participants were left with not only a better idea of how to engage alumni at their respective institutions, but also with a revitalized sense of community in the GEM field. Conversations involving a myriad of individuals dealing with diverse alumni networks from all over the country, are infrequent – making this session all that more vital and beneficial to all involved.

N

A

G

A

P

CONFERENCE SESSION SUMMARIES

CONTINUED

Links to presentation slides or handouts are embedded in the titles, when available.

Data Segmentation for Graduate Enrollment: No Two Students & No Two Degrees Are the Same Presented by Katie Williamsen, Elon University and Melissa Rekos, Carnegie Communications Reported by Krystal Hope, Brandeis University Communications technology is consistently evolving and strategies for meeting our graduate enrollment outcomes must evolve as well. Admissions offices can adjust their marketing strategy to navigate the over-crowded media channels and deliver the right content to potential clients. In order to maneuver the rapidly changing multimedia landscapes, graduate schools can utilize two important pathways to success - segment messages to speak the right way to the right prospective students, and datadriven campaigns to drive behavior.

Graduate prospects are generally bombarded with information from a multitude of channels and successful programs target their audiences directly and personally to provide them with the information they need at the right time.

However, are programs really taking advantage of marketing advancements that allows the targeting of information to the people who need it? Are institutions increasing brand recognition and motivating their intended audiences to action by evaluating the frequency with which the audience receives relevant, high quality, consistent messaging?

Do they assess marketing strategies to identify market segmentation opportunities that the graduate enrollment office can implement to meet strategic goals?

N

A

G

A

P

Segmentation opportunities: • Tracking inquires based on prospective student activities – standardized test search names; campus events; admissions travel; organic leads; prospect-initiated contact; etc.

• Utilizing the data collected from prospective students to develop content segmentation that meets prospective graduate students where they are.

• Optimize Google Analytics by reviewing the search terms your audience uses. There are ways to reduce cost and enhance key terms based on where your prospective students are in the process of identifying the right graduate school.

• Refining marketing strategies to consider individual graduate programs in the context of market saturation and the unique needs of the institution.

• Increase program visibility by targeting individuals based on geographic location. Look into IP/rooftop targeting and geo-fencing to increase prospective impressions.

• Increase visibility by targeting online display placements on content-specific websites, affinity networks, and audience behavior.

• Retarget advertisements to identify messaging that resonate with the specific audience and leads to conversions – billboards, emails, digital campaigns, and travel.

P E R S P E C T I V E S

•

• Social media has become a cultural norm. The institution’s presence should reflect its marketing strategy.

• Personalize emails/pURLs (personalized URLs) and encourage recipients by adding a call-to-action.

• Design content that consistently translates well on both mobile and computer platforms.

• Consider variable data printing to identify messaging that is specific to programs, geography, affinity groups, etc.

• Identify opportunities that exist in your backyard, for example, target messaging to alumni and undergraduates.

Some communication segmentation solutions can be implemented in small enrollment and admissions offices. Other marketing segmentation strategies can be implemented with the support of a talented marketing and communications team. The key is to provide prospective students with only the information they need and want. Thus, the marketing funnel is no longer linear and institutions should take advantage of the infinite series of opportunities to optimize their messaging to prospective students.

S U M M E R

2 0 1 6

63