Enrolment Management Transformation Project

1
Enrolment Management Transformation Project

• December 3rd 2008
• Presentation at Laval University

2
About Concordia

• 38,000 students
• 4 faculties
• Continuing Education
• Graduate Studies
• Urban Institute
• Two campuses

3

• Why Make Changes?
• Initially
• Address concerns raised about internal process
  efficiency
• Insufficient meaningful enrolment data to support
  management of processes and informed decision
  making

4

• Why Make Changes?
• Initially
• Improve responsiveness of services to students
• Initially examined recruitment, admissions,
  communication awards and data
• Limited internally focused perspective of EM

5
Why Make Changes (Continued)

• Mid-way to ongoing
• Articulate and act upon desirable enrolment
  profile in terms of quantity, quality,
  graduation rates and funding
• Needed to broaden the focus on student success as
  a result of better and shared understanding of EM
  issues based on internal data. Also wanted to
  address issues of persistence/retention.

6
Four Orientations to EM(D.H. Kalsbeek DePaul
University 2003)

• Administrative
• Focus on process
• Goal is efficiency
• Looks internal

• Student-Focused
• Focus on person
• Goal is engagement
• Looks immediate

• Academic
• Focus on programs
• Goals is enhancement
• Looks long term

• Market-Centered
• Focus on position
• Goal is elevation
• Looks external

7
Student Enrolment Cycle
Enhance Image of the University
Develop/Sustain Potential Student Markets
Graduate Students
Student Success
Cultivate Applicants
Support Student Success and Persistence
Qualify Potential Students
Enrol Students
Admit Students
8
The Geometric Model of Student Persistence and
AchievementDr. Watson Scott Swail
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - -
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - -
Cognitive Factors
Social Factors
The Student Experience
Institutional Factors
- - - - - - - - - - - -
- - - - - -
9
Financial Issues Educational Legacy Attitude
Towards Learning Religious Background Maturity Soc
ial Coping Skills Communication Skills Attitude
Toward Others Cultural Values Expectations Goal
Commitment Family Influence Peer Influence Social
Lifestyle
Academic Rigor Quality of Learning Aptitude Conten
t Knowledge Critical Thinking Ability Technology
ability Study skills Learning skills Time
Mangement Academic-related extracurricular
activities
Cognitive Factors
Social Factors
The Student Experience
Institutional Factors
Financial Aid Student
Recruitment
Services Admissions
Academic Curriculum
Services
Instruction
The Geometric Model of Student Persistence and
AchievementDr. Watson Scott Swail
10
Making the Case for the Institutional Commitment

• Because of the initial focus on internal process
  efficiency the Vice- President Services
  championed the need to address EM issues at the
  Presidents Executive Group
• Conducted an enrolment management audit which
  identified strength-weaknesses and gaps with best
  practices. Audit conducted by Noel-Levitz.
• Needed to better manage significant enrolment
  growth (30) realized from 1996 to 2002

11
Enrolment Management Transformation Project
Charter and Scope

• Project Scope
• To develop and implement a comprehensive,
  explicit and integrated institutional strategy to
  deal with enrolment management including detailed
  goals and objectives consistent with University
  wide and Faculty academic plans.
• Proceed with SIS development such that
  appropriate and timely data and information can
  support enrolment planning and decision-making in
  a system driven by academic plans and priorities.

12
Enrolment Management Transformation Project

• Project Scope (Continued)
• Reorient and train staff in relevant units to
  understand, execute enrolment management
  strategies and related processes with a view to
  meet goals.
• On approval from the Presidents Cabinet, effect
  changes necessary to support the implementation
  of an integrated institutional enrolment
  management framework.

13
Project Organizational Framework
Presidents Cabinet
Project Champion Vice-President, Services
Project Leader Associate VP, Instructional and
Information Technology (IITS)
Project Leader Associate VP, Enrolment and
Student Services
Project Team
Stakeholders
Clients

• HR Department
• Unions
• Financial Services
• Institutional Research
• Recruiters
• Feeder Schools
• Financial Aid Awards

• Enrolment Management Transformation Team
• Chair Associate Vice President, Enrolment and
  Student Services
• 4 Faculty Enrolment Managers
• 1 Registrar
• 1 Director, Communication and Services to
  Students
• 1 Manager, Administrative Systems, IITS

• Students
• Faculties
• Deans
• Provost
• Recruitment Office

14
Major Service Stakeholders in EM
Admission Services
Recruitment
Registrar
Government Reporting Statistics
Enrolment Analysis Process Control
Communication and Services to Students
Enrolment Services
Provost, Faculties and Academic Departments
Institutional Marketing
Student Institutional Success
Vice-President, Services
IITS
Academic Policies
Student Services
Student Accounts

Financial Aid Awards
Support Services
Counselling Development
Health Services
15
Role of Noel-Levitz in the Enrolment Management
Transformation Project

• Conducted EM audit and help the University
  acknowledged the gaps between current and best
  practices and de-personalized findings
• Helped introduce and promote EM conceptual
  framework. Yield rates and strategic
  interventions to improve institutional
  performance.
• Helped maintain pace of development
• Acted as consultant/advisor to Project Steering
  Committee and facilitated process and information
  sessions
• Involvement spanned two years 2- 4 days per month

16
Key Challenges

• Transform processes while in production
• Balance strategic and operational perspectives
• Change culture of Control to one of Service
• Pursue institutional effectiveness and depart
  from unit/silo perspective
• Embrace technology but use it with clear purpose
• Introduce changes within a very short window of
  opportunity

17
Carrying-out the project

• Sharing an understanding of the conceptual
  framework
• Information sessions and workshops on EM
  concepts
• Internal media coverage
• Presentation Presidents Executive Group by
  Noel-Levitz
• Assess stakeholder needs and conduct gap analysis
• Focus on present and future needs

18
Carrying-out the project continued

• Audit existing policies and practices
• What and why?
• What is the value added of doing it this way?
• Business process analysis with input from
  stakeholders
• Develop capacity to generate and disseminate EM
  data

19
Carrying-out the project continued

• Data rich and information starved
• Finding meaning, capacity to analyze data
• Developing institutional capacity to link data
  sets
• Focused on Raw FTE and not Weighted FTEs
  (Clarder)
• Established an IT team for the EMTP
• Developed and piloted process and systems.
  Roll-out when opportunity presented itself.
• Project Team met every two weeks for 24 months

20
Carrying-out the project continued

• Project leader gave regular updates to
  Presidents Executive Group
• Project leader validated academic policy
  direction and changes with Provost and decanal
  team (Academic cabinet)
• Provost addressed divergent perspectives among
  decanal team
•  

21
Results/outputs

• Academic plan (Moving Ahead), which was lead by
  the Provost, provided strategic direction (
  Quantity, mix of cycle, international enrolment
  University wide and faculty basis)
• Establishment of functional University wide
  coordinating groups (Recruitment Planning,
  Admissions Coordination, Communications, Student
  Success). Linking other existing and emerging
  work groups.

22
Results/outputs continued

• Institutional Planning contributed significantly
  to planning process with EM data and information
• Web and Portal EM data reports on admissions
  yield rates through the funnel, FTEs, retention,
  graduation. Data available institutional wide to
  program level.

23

• Recruitment
• Re-aligned Recruitment Function enrolment goals
  with greater integration with the admissions
  process.
• Introduced mechanism to capture pre-application
  enquiry information and follow-up communication
  and applicant cultivation using EZ-Recruit
  Software
• Centralized international student recruitment
  planning and coordination in matrix delivery
  environment
• Develop international recruitment partnerships
  with agencies in targeted markets
• Introduced Call Centre to cultivate and qualify
  applicant interest. Shifting to
  faculty/department based selected calling.

24

• Admissions
• Developed communication plan throughout admission
  process (Segmented mass e-mails)
• Transformed the admissions process with improved
  cycle time efficiency as well as improved
  capacity to monitor production activity.
  Separated data capturing and adjudication of
  files.
• Automated processing of CEGEP admission
  applications. Non- Cegep applicants processed in
  holistic review. 

25

• Admissions continued
• Created SIMS as distributed access to information
  system and operating platform with integrated
  data and image management.
• Developed communication plan directed at admitted
  students to increase awareness level of on campus
  services as a means of improving acceptance to
  registration yield rates.
• Offer of Entrance Scholarship integrated in
  admission process.
• Pilot use of peer led blogs for admitted
  international student .

26

• Student Success
• Introduced CSI test (pilot phase) to triage need
  and target deploy services to students. Testing
  student success/attrition predictive modeling
  tool with CRI-Facts.
• Developed New Student Orientation Program with
  early outreach to admitted students
• Use peer support intervention in new student
  mentor program
• Introduced Supplemental Instruction Program in
  selected academic departments as a result of
  engaging department chairs in dialogue on means
  of enhancing student
• Success. Student Orientation Program

27

• Outcomes
• Focus of service sector expanded from mostly
  operational to strategic.
• Greater collaboration and integration of
  Enrolment Services and Student Services with the
  Faculties and their respective Student Affairs
  Offices.
• Improved performance of admissions process
  (Graduate and Undergraduate)
• Increased collaboration and integration of
  service planning and delivery within service
  sector
• Greater appreciation of the value of
  non-admission levers as a means of influencing
  enrolments. Student success leads to
  institutional enrolment goals

28

• Lessons Learned
• Need to be committed for the long term
• Need conceptual framework to frame interventions
• Enact short term successes and build conditions
  favourable for changes in the organizational
  culture (2 to 4 years)
• The more you know about current enrolments the
  more compelled you are to effect changes to
  address issues
• Reporting of enrolment data has to be both
  strategic as well as local and actionable. How
  does it matter at the departmental level?
• Need to find ways to engage new academic
  department chairs in EM paradigm

29
Presenter
Roger Côté Associate Vice-President, Enrolment
Student Services E-mail rcote_at_alcor.concordia.ca
http//www.concordia.ca
30
(No Transcript)