1. Prospect Survey Research College Board Middle States Regional Forum 2008 Daniel J. Rodas, Long Island University Heather Gibbs, Long Island University Herman Kane, Kane-Parsons & Associates Thursday, February 14, 2008

2. 2 Outline Overview of prospect survey research Case Study: Brooklyn Campus Case Study: C.W. Post Campus Campus Comparisons Discussions & Questions

3. Overview

4. 4 Objectives Understand what students expect from attending college and what benefits they hope to receive Chronicle the reasons for choosing a particular college or university Clarify institutional image and how well it matches a college’s/university’s sense of itself

5. 5 Objectives Improving the Numbers Higher yield from admitted applicant to matriculant Higher conversion from inquiry pool Greater selectivity More effective recruiting of targeted populations (by race/ethnicity, academic caliber, geographic region, socio-economic subgroups, etc.)

6. 6 Sample Selection Students and parents, segmented by level of interest in the college/university Candidates not in the inquiry pool Non-applicant inquirers Admit-declines Incoming matriculants

7. 7 Sample Selection Influencers Parents High school guidance counselors High school teachers (especially when targeting students with already defined specialized interests, e.g., art, music, engineering, etc.)

8. 8 Methodologies Telephone vs. self-administered electronic surveys Advantages Disadvantages

9. 9 Survey Content Academic quality dimensions Quality of student life Experiential learning Student-faculty interaction Outcomes Cost and financial aid Location

10. 10 Survey Content Background information Institutional image Comparative numerical ratings Identification of attributes with college/university and its key peers Testing of positioning options

11. 11 Information Sources The influence of counselors, parents, institutional communications, third-party assessments, in making inquiry, application, campus visit and final selection decisions

12. 12 Findings Creation or modification of positioning and core messages Recommendation of programmatic and communications initiatives Marketing and communications priorities

13. 13 Findings Closing the gap between external perceptions and reality in: Web Viewbook College fairs High school visits Campus tours

14. Long Island University Market Research

15. 15 Purpose To survey Long Island University’s student prospect constituencies To understand better their demographic profile and other background characteristics academic and career direction perceptions of the University and Campuses To provide an empirical basis for academic planning, enrollment communication, program marketing, and student recruitment

16. 16 Long Island University Founded in 1926 as a private, co- educational, non-sectarian institution Mission of “Access and Excellence” 18,600 degree-seeking students  600 degree and certificate programs $360 million operating budget $100 million endowment $1 billion replacement value/physical assets

17. 17 Long Island University Two residential campuses: Brooklyn C.W. Post Four regional campuses Brentwood Riverhead Rockland Westchester 653 full-time faculty 162,000 living alumni

18. 18 Approach “Blind” telephone interviews with three samples Each Campus First-year prospects500 Transfer prospects300 Community College prospects 200

19. 19 Approach Representative sample, including: Applicants who are likely to enroll (“likelies”) Applicants who may enroll (“possibles”) Inquirers who are not likely to apply (“unlikelies”)

20. Case Study: Brooklyn Campus

21. 21 Background of First-year Prospects Likelies 91% non-white 71% female 53% of fathers and 54% of mothers do not have college degree Median household income of $36,000 Unlikelies 90% non-white 69% female 57% of fathers and 63% of mothers do not have college degree Median household income of $30,000

22. 22 Highest Rated Selection Criteria Among First-year Prospects First-year Undergraduate Prospects Matriculants/ Likelies % Admit-declines/ Possibles % Non-applicant Inquirers/Unlikelies % A successful job placement program for graduates 818482 Availability/possibility of academic merit scholarships and other forms of financial assistance 749086 You can get into the classes that interest you 7283 A strong program in your field of interest 698384 Overall cost/affordability6575

23. 23 Lowest Rated Selection Criteria By contrast, the lowest-rated college selection criteria are: An outstanding athletic program Availability of online classes Opportunity to join a religious organization

24. 24 Findings Academic ratings much stronger today, e.g., among admit-declines, now ranked #2, but was ranked #6 in 1987 among closest competitors. Strong identification with health-related programs parallels earlier finding Incidence of males is lower today (possibly related to pharmacy inclusion and omission) Incidence of whites is also lower

25. 25 Findings Greater emphasis today on outcomes, especially jobs, as indicator of excellence. Faculty teaching quality, while the #3 measure today, was #1 in 1987 Greater competitive prominence of certain institutions Accessibility to public transportation continues to be the strongest locational attribute

26. 26 Other Findings Scarcity of non-science liberal arts candidates, especially in the arts and humanities Most expect to work and will count on assistance in finding employment. Post-graduate job placement and academic program considerations are paramount.

27. 27 Ratings of Educational Quality Among First-Year Prospects First-year Undergraduate Prospects Matriculants/ Likelies Admit-declines/ Possibles Non-applicant Inquirers/Unlikelies Brooklyn Campus8.07.66.7 College A7.67.87.3 College B7.17.37.0 College C6.67.16.4 College D6.67.26.8 College E6.46.86.2 College F6.36.76.2 College G6.36.96.1 College H6.26.35.9 1.0 = poor 5.0 = mediocre 10.0 = outstanding

28. 28 Other Findings The Brooklyn Campus is often perceived to be a public university – less than 50% of first-year, non- matriculants are aware that Long Island University is a private university The Brooklyn Campus competes overwhelmingly with public institutions

29. 29 Recommendations & Opportunities Counter the public/private confusion Increased emphasis on the business/financial/communications opportunities in downtown Brooklyn and Lower Manhattan Accentuate Brooklyn’s cultural and artistic saturation Document and emphasize the reciprocal relationship between Brooklyn and the Brooklyn Campus

30. 30 Recommendations & Opportunities Capitalize on the Campus’ strong image in the health sciences Highlight the potential for post-college connections and networking Reinforce outcomes Expand assistance programs to help students find attractive term-time jobs Address language barriers of prospect parents, especially Asian and Eastern- European communities

31. Case Study: C.W. Post Campus

32. 32 Background of First-year Prospects Likelies 75% white 48% male, 52% female 54% of fathers and 46% of mothers do not have college degree Median household income of $74,000 Unlikelies 50% white 30% male, 70% female 50% of fathers and 55% of mothers do not have college degree Median household income of $68,000

33. 33 Highest Rated Selection Criteria Among First-year Prospects First-year Undergraduate Prospects Matriculants/ Likelies % Admit-declines/ Possibles % Non-applicant Inquirers/Unlikelies % You can get into the classes that interest you 878085 A strong program in your field of interest 859593 Availability/possibility of academic merit scholarships and other forms of financial assistance 797681 A successful job placement program for graduates 778783 Overall cost/affordability 748377 An advising system that helps students educationally, professionally and personally 727775

34. 34 Lowest Rated Selection Criteria Consistent with results from the Brooklyn Campus, the lowest-rated college selection criteria are: An outstanding athletic program Availability of online classes Opportunity to join a religious organization

35. 35 Findings The Campus enjoys a strong image in: Education Business Criminal Justice C.W. Post’s attractiveness: Location Campus attractiveness Reputation for individualized attention Affiliation with Long Island University

36. 36 Findings Prospective liberal arts majors, although still a minority, are more numerous than they were in 1987 Interest has risen in: Criminal Justice Education Interest has declined in: Business

37. 37 Findings Jobs obtained by graduates is perceived to be a much more important measure of educational excellence. Long Island is a primary source of transfers but other areas, including NYC, are becoming prominent. More students, including transfers, expect to live on or near campus.

38. 38 Program Appeal The Campus has had limited success attracting prospective majors in: Liberal Arts and Sciences Natural and physical sciences Humanities Social sciences (except Psychology). More prestigious pre-professional programs Pre-medicine Pre-Law

39. 39 Ratings of Educational Quality Among First-year Prospects First-year Undergraduate Prospects on Educational Quality Matriculants/ Likelies Admit-declines/ Possibles Non-applicant Inquirers/Unlikelies C.W. Post Campus 8.17.36.4 College A 6.9 6.4 College B 5.96.05.5 College C 7.87.97.4 College D 7.57.67.2 College E 5.85.45.2 College F 7.0 6.7 College G 6.56.76.4 College H 7.47.67.2 College I 5.65.25.5 College J 7.67.77.5 College K 7.78.07.4 1.0 = poor 5.0 = mediocre 10.0 = outstanding

40. 40 Recommendations & Opportunities Reduce public/private confusion Enhance the academic image by further emphasizing faculty and programmatic quality Focus on specific, measurable outcomes Recruit high-ability women Recognize the prominence of the Web site. Target guidance counselors.

41. Summary of Findings:

42. 42 Similarities Public / private confusion Levels of parental education Focus on professional studies, but different mix of fields Importance of program quality and job outcomes as primary college selection criteria Relative lack of importance of athletics, online class and religious organizations in college choice

43. 43 Differences Ethnic/racial makeup Geographic source of students Socio-economic status Incidences of preferred on-campus living Academic reputation relative to competitors among non-matriculants Locational attributes Prominence of public sector competitors

44. Discussion & Questions