Goal Committee Reports

1.2

Recruitment and Retention

Report Contents

University Goal 1.2

Charge

Recruitment and Retention

Criterion 1: Purposes

Recruitment

Retention

Recruitment

Retention

Goal 1.2 Committee Report

Goal 1: Sustain and Enhance the Quality of Undergraduate Education.

Subgoal 2: Assure the Recruitment and Retention of a High Quality, Diverse Student Body.

Committee Members:
Chair: Christine Anderson - Director: Educational Opportunity
Co-chair: Gloria Melton - Associate Dean: Student Affairs Office
Anne Baldridge - Undergraduate Student Government: Student Representative
Suzanne Beske-Diehl - Professor and Associate Dean: Engineering
Edward Fisher - Professor and Interim Dean: Engineering
Mark Plichta - Professor: Metallurgical and Materials Engineering
David Rudd - Assistant Professor: Business and Economics
James Turnquist - Associate Director of Recruitment: Admissions
Edward Wederath - Student Representative

Charge

The NCA 1.2 Goal Committee Charge was to evaluate Michigan Tech’s progress in meeting its goal of sustaining and enhancing the quality of undergraduate life through its recruitment and retention processes. In meeting this charge, the committee sought to

identify current University actions that affect recruitment and retention of undergraduate students (using the 1995–96 MTU Retention Task Force (RTF) Report),
identify outcomes and collect statistical evidence that describe the efficacy of current actions,
identify Michigan Tech’s strengths and weaknesses as they relate to current recruitment and retention actions,
note future proposed recruitment and retention actions, and
address recruitment and retention weaknesses noted in the 1988 NCA Accreditation Report.

Finally, we will recommend strategies for correcting deficiencies and improving the recruitment and retention processes.

The committee evaluated how well the University is meeting the projected targets outlined in the University’s Strategic Plan. It also specifically addressed the five North Central Association (NCA) criteria. See Attachment 1 for a more detailed explanation of this committee’s charge and responsibilities.

Recruitment and Retention

Patterns of Evidence—Criterion 1: Purposes

The University’s mission and vision broadly address both recruitment and retention [2.1D2]. The mission speaks of providing industries with "highly qualified graduates," and it says that the University will "educate all of its students to meet the changing needs of a global, technological, diverse, and environmentally sensitive society." These statements indicate that Michigan Tech will provide excellent educational opportunities, and imply that it will retain students in, as well as attract students to, our programs. It also suggests that, while attending the University, our students develop skills which ultimately will help them obtain jobs.

The mission statement refers to promoting diversity; it suggests that a desirable student body will have a balanced representation in ethnicity and gender. This also implies that continued, focused outreach and to recruitment of female and other underrepresented student groups will be supported. The vision statement refers more specifically to the attributes that the University will display in order to attract, retain, and graduate students.

The mission and vision statements are included in various documents the University distributes both on campus and externally. In most cases, the mission and vision are only partially described in these documents. The introduction to the "General Education" section of the University Catalogs has consistently outlined both the mission and vision almost in their entirety [1.3A]. The Catalog has broad internal and external distribution and is received by a variety of audiences, most notably potential students, parents, and school personnel. The Catalogs are perhaps the best vehicle for broadly communicating the University’s educational mission and vision. Therefore, in future catalogs, this section should be more strategically placed.

The University’s major marketing publications, the undergraduate Catalogs (1988–1990, 1991–1993, 1993–1994, 1995–1997) and Viewbooks (1991–1996) [7.5E], were analyzed to determine if they include clear statements that are consistent with the vision and mission. The Catalogs produced between 1988 and 1995 include both undergraduate and graduate school information. In the mid-1990s the graduate and undergraduate catalogs were separated. The 1995–1997 Catalog focuses entirely on undergraduate education with a more robust description of Michigan Tech as an undergraduate institution. The Catalog presentation closely matches the University’s vision statement as well as the strategic plan described in the 1998 and Beyond document [2.1D2]. The opening paragraph of the current Catalog promises students "a faculty committed to their success, an administration concerned with supporting their efforts, the facilities to support these efforts, and a history of successful placement." This emphasis on quality undergraduate education certainly enhances recruitment efforts and implies that retention is a priority.

The current Viewbook, The TECHnological Advantage [7.5E], is a major marketing tool used by Michigan Tech to attract students and encourage them to apply to the University. It conveys the essence of what undergraduates might expect from the Institution after their arrival. The Viewbook "positions" the University but does not translate its vision as strongly as does the Catalog. From 1990–1996, it carried a consistent theme of academic excellence, a caring environment intent on students’ success, successful placement at the end of the college experience, and teaching a number of career-management skills (e.g., teamwork, leadership, etc.) to help students change with the times as their careers develop. More recently (1993–1997), emphasis has been on being a "good value" institution and one that guarantees placement success, as opposed to the earlier position of promoting the institution’s academic reputation. (Since 1993, these factors have emerged as significant decision points for both students and their parents in selecting a higher education institution.) The "good value" rating primarily applies to the engineering and science disciplines at Michigan Tech. Compared to alternative institutions, MTU’s non-engineering/science disciplines are often premium priced, especially when our remote location and reputation as most notably a technological university are considered. As a result, the University’s marketing materials’ task of conveying an image of being a "good value" (benefits exceeding cost) can be very difficult for these discipline areas.

The goals set by the University in the strategic planning document, 1998 and Beyond, outline the Institution’s purposes as they pertain to recruitment. Recruitment goals are described under the "Quantitative Context for Planning" section of 1998 and Beyond. This document is distributed internally to departments and is accessible to the student body; but it is not officially distributed to them. The strategic goals contained within this document are shared with department and external advisory boards, but otherwise external exposure is limited.

The enrollment goals for underrepresented (minority and female) students were established by the 1986 Minority Programs Task Force (MPTF), and more recently, revised goals were set by the Presidential Commission for Women (PCW) and the 1995 RTF [5.5A, 5.5C, and 5.4A]. These goals and recommendations for reaching them were widely distributed internally to academic and administrative departments, the Undergraduate Student Government, and the Graduate Student Council. At the same time, the RTF also set ambitious retention goals for the University to achieve over the next ten years.

Recruitment

In order to assure adequate attention to both recruitment and retention activities, the review of NCA criteria two through five has been separated into a recruitment section and a retention section. A review of the remaining four criteria under the realm of recruitment will occur first, whereas a review of retention issues with respect to the remaining four criteria will occur thereafter.

Patterns of Evidence—Criterion 2: Resources

The University has significant processes and services in place to help meet its recruitment goals, and the University-wide resources that support recruitment are satisfactory to maintain current enrollment numbers. (The stabilization and modest turnaround in first year enrollments over the last three years are evidence of this [8.2].) Additional resources may be required to realize a significant increase in undergraduate enrollments. Continued review of the admissions, marketing, recruitment and financial aid processes, and improved coordination of University-wide efforts will help determine additional resource need.

In response to declining total enrollments since 1993, the Noel Levitz Center for Enrollment Management, a national consulting firm, was engaged in 1994 to conduct an analysis of the MTU Admissions/Recruitment/Enrollment-management system. Alluding to a ‘well designed 1960s’ process, the analysis contained a number of recommendations on nearly every aspect of the recruiting process. Some of these recommendations have been pursued and implemented. The key aspects of the Noel Levitz Enrollment-management Analysis that have been acted on include:

moving to an overall enrollment-management strategy with functional area heads for Admissions, Financial Aid, etc. who report to a single leader;
implementing a student-records database (BANNER7) that is capable of tracking a potential student from inquiry to application to acceptance to enrollment to matriculation to graduation;
developing a territorially organized student-recruiting structure;
carefully analyzing the use of financial aid to gain maximum leverage across as many students as possible; and
tracking and analyzing our data more carefully to identify the most efficient sources of obtaining high rates of conversion from inquiry to enrollee.

Admissions

The Admissions area has eleven staff members. From 1991 to 1995, the current director of Enrollment Management also served as the Admissions director. In 1995, a new director of Admissions was hired. From 1988 to 1993, Admissions had five recruiters. In 1993, an additional Admissions representative was hired to focus on the recruitment of underrepresented students from southeastern Michigan [2.6H6.a] and those students who attend the summer pre-college programs (Wade McCree, Women in Engineering, Minorities in Engineering, and the Minority College Access Program) [7.4A, 2.6F2.c, and 2.6F2]. The division has since undergone some reorganization: this includes a move from a traditional Admissions counselor system to a territorial management system in which Admissions representatives have goal-setting and budgetary responsibilities.

All Admissions representatives are well qualified; each has several years of experience. The new Admissions director was recruited through a national search. She was previously an Admissions director at another higher-education institution. The Admissions director has provided the staff with more professional-development opportunities and additional time to interact with one another than had previously been provided. The office support staff are recruited locally.

One measure of how effectively MTU is organized to pursue the recruitment tasks comes from comparing key statistics with benchmark institutions. From the 1995–96 Missouri Rolla Retention Report, a number of comparisons can be drawn. Chief among them is the conversion from applications to acceptances to enrollees for 1994 (see Table 1). In short, MTU Admissions does very well in its conversion of applications to enrollments in comparison to a number of benchmark institutions.

TABLE 1. Conversion from Applications to Acceptances to Enrollees

School

# of Applicants

% Accepted

% Enrolled

Missouri-Rolla

1868

94%

47%

Clarkson

2174

90%

29%

Lehigh

6397

69%

25%

Michigan Tech

2622

85%

47%

Renssalear Polytechnic Institute

5110

80%

27%

Wooster Polytechnic Institute

2772

84%

39%

Carnegie Mellon

8727

60%

23%

California Polytechnic SLO

6008

65%

40%

The 1995 Enrollment Management Survey compares Michigan Tech’s marketing/recruiting/admissions budget as a percentage of the total institutional budget to other public and private schools (see Table 2). In this survey, MTU’s budget of $946,200 was reported as being less than 1% of the total institutional budget. This marketing/recruiting/admissions budget allocation is consistent with approximately 65% of the public university survey respondents. If MTU’s positioning is as a technological, premium quality university, in a remote location and with some premium-priced programs outside of engineering and science, then the indication might be that this budget should be compared to many private institutions (47.5% @ 2–3%).

TABLE 2. Marketing/Recruiting/Admissions Budget as a Percentage of the Total Institutional Budget at MTU in Comparison with other Public and Private Schools

Range of %

Private Schools

Public Schools

<1%

11.3% of schools surveyed

65.6% of schools surveyed

23%

47.5%

24.4%

46%

27.6%

7.8%

69%

9.0%

1.1%

Marketing

The Enrollment Management area has a director of student marketing. Until recently, this position held the responsibility for market research and evaluation, as well as for preparing Admissions’ recruitment pieces. As a result of the establishment of an integrated University-wide marketing committee in 1996, this position will work more closely with University Relations in preparing printed materials.

Financial Aid

The financial-aid distribution process greatly impacts recruitment. In the past, the Financial Aid Office reported to the dean of Student Affairs. In 1995, the Office became a part of Enrollment Management. Since that time, Noel Levitz, an external consulting agency, has conducted an exhaustive study to determine approaches that can be implemented to positively affect recruitment of students. The general fund dollars that are provided for University scholarships have significantly increased since 1990—even though the total number of undergraduates has decreased (see Table 3). The dollars available are adequate, but how the funds are distributed is a major component of the Noel Levitz study and their recommendations.

TABLE 3. General Fund Dollars for University Scholarships

Year

Amount

FY90

$2,064,481

FY91

$2,145,964

FY92

$1,737,000

FY93

$2,542,987

FY94

$2,488,539

FY95

$5,824,829*

FY96

$6,391,678*

* Includes exceptional student tuition rate

Other Factors

The percentage of total institutional budget support for Student Services (Student Services includes several units—Enrollment Management, Financial Aid, and Student Marketing are all part of this group) has decreased since 1990 (see Table 4).

TABLE 4. Percentage of Total Institutional Budget Support for Student Services

Year

FY90

FY91

FY92

FY93

FY94

FY95

FY96

Student Services

8.7%

7.0%

7.6%

7.3%

4.8%

4.8%

4.9%

The marketing/recruiting/admissions and student-services budgets do not include the funds expended on recruitment efforts by individual schools, colleges, and academic departments. Academic schools and colleges such as Business, Forestry, and the College of Sciences and Arts, that are interested in significant increases in enrollments, are contributing to the process of off-campus recruitment to a much greater degree than are other areas that may be oversubscribed [2.6C, 2.6D, and 2.6B]. Most academic departments/schools provide resources to support the University’s on-campus recruitment efforts. Faculty and graduate students working in Michigan Tech facilities introduce over 1500 pre-college students and 25 teachers to the University’s academic programs every summer through precollege career-exploration and skill-development programs. In addition, departments/schools such as Scientific and Technical Communication, Chemistry, and Biological Sciences, and Schools such as Business are initiating department teams to recruit local area students and, in several cases, community college students. Recently, there have also been increased efforts to involve more faculty in the recruitment process.

The Michigan Tech administration has been supportive of various approaches to diversifying the University’s student body. For example, Summer Session staff are working with academic departments to reach out to a broader constituency (e.g., teachers and high school seniors). [ Summer Session Brochure] The Conferences and Institutes division worked with International Services and a lead faculty member to develop an English as a Second Language Adventure Program in the Summer of 1996. [ English as a Second Language] (Approximately 17% of the 63 participants returned in 1996–97 as graduate students. Over eighty students will attend the 1997 program.) New targeted programs such as the Pre-College Engineering Fellowship for Teachers and Counselors Program, which is designed to familiarize school personnel with Michigan Tech, are well supported by academic departments.

Finally, Michigan Tech students are strong advocates for the University. Students now function as an integral component of the recruitment process by serving as residence-hall counselors and teaching assistants for the pre-college programs,

providing campus tours,
setting up high school visits,
hosting on-campus programs, and
attending recruitment college fairs with Admissions staff.

Michigan Tech undergraduate student organizations continue to sponsor Red Carpet Days for high school students interested in attending Michigan Tech. The National Society of Black Engineers has sponsored the Pre-College Initiative since 1995; it annually brings 20–40 interested high school juniors and seniors from Detroit to visit or, in many cases, revisit the campus.

Patterns of Evidence—Criterion 3: Accomplishments

While the enrollment goals for individual departments are often met, the University-wide enrollment has been declining since 1992 as large classes have been graduated [8.2]. However, Fall 1997 numbers indicate that a turnaround in first year enrollments may be occurring.

Several factors indicate that the University-wide goal of increasing overall enrollment by 2–4% per year can be met over the next five years. [ Recruitment/Admissions Analysis for NCA] When some engineering departments raised their requirements for admission to address an oversubscription problem (Fall 1992), it appears that many high school counselors applied the standards to all University programs. Feedback received by the Admissions staff indicates that during the past ten years the growing perception that Michigan Tech is only for the very highest caliber student has increased to a level that has negatively impacted the Institution’s application rate. As a result, potential students with good academic records often self-select themselves out of the initial application process, or are advised by school personnel not to apply. More recently, interest in the engineering profession by high school students has decreased. Both of these situations have been recognized and actions are being taken to address them by increasing efforts to recruit engineering students and by expanding offerings, as well as recruitment, in other discipline areas.

Other strategies for increasing contact with potential students are being applied but still need to be strengthened. Until 1995–96, Admissions personnel had limited contact with the pre-college students who had already visited the University campus during the summer youth programs or other academic year outreach activities. The current, more aggressive follow-up contacts are made at the 11th/12th grade level, and most are designed to encourage engineering and science students. In the past, recruitment of local students (100–250 mile radius—a potential student market) has not been a priority for most departments, so that the University does not always have a visible advertising presence in this geographic region. However, departments like Physics (Rockets for Kids, 1997), Biological Sciences (Bioathalon 1992–97), and Educational Opportunity (Girls + Math + Science = Choices, 1991–97) and colleges such as Engineering (Engineering Olympics, 1991–97) have begun to actively provide outreach to local and regional schools throughout the year.

MTU, as a technological university, succeeds in serving its traditional niche market. Over 65% of its students are enrolled in engineering and over 85% in engineering or science. The University has strong programs in other areas, but these programs were not seriously marketed until the early 1990s. This narrow engineering/science market is subject to cyclical variations. Given the University’s desire to expand its market—building more in business, the humanities, education, etc.—while maintaining its engineering enrollments, the University has begun to aggressively promote its expertise more effectively. For example, a $150,000 Provost Incentive Fund was budgeted for the Admissions area in 1995–96. These additional one-time funds provided $1,000 awards to 150 entering freshmen: 1/3 to females and minorities, 1/3 to non-engineering students, and 1/3 unrestricted. These kinds of actions will continue to help improve and expand recruitment efforts.

The current financial-aid process does not provide prospective students with information about available estimated financial-aid packages in a time frame that supports the students’ decision-making process. Based on input from a number of department representatives and Admissions personnel, this committee recommends that the University use the Noel Levitz’s financial-aid leverage analysis program as an early-financial-aid-estimator program. In addition, although 75% of Michigan Tech undergraduates receive some form of financial aid, the method of distribution of the available scholarship dollars may have an impact on recruitment. By dividing available scholarship dollars among a greater number of potential students earlier in the students’ decision time frame, we may increase our enrollment yield. These two processes need to be reviewed. (Noel Levitz’s representatives currently visit the campus each Fall to review results of the financial aid leverage analysis, help establish goals, and recommend changes to how we award priorities.)

Michigan Tech understands that the recruitment process starts well in advance of students’ college selection decisions, and includes activities and programming beyond the Admissions office. Here are two examples:

The University supports an array of well-established pre-college programs that serve to introduce and involve over 1500 students, ages 12–18, with Michigan Technological University’s academic departments [2.6F2]. These programs target traditional student populations as well as underrepresented students (females and minorities). Three of the programs (Women in Engineering, Minorities in Engineering, and the Minority College Access/Summer Youth Program) are collaborative efforts between Michigan Tech, corporations, and secondary schools [7.4A]. Planned follow-up strategies with all Michigan Tech youth-program participants, however, have not been consistently implemented in the past. The reorganization of the Admissions area has resulted in several changes in this strategy.
A keener awareness of the potential for undergraduate applicants from the youth program alumni pool and more focused contact with at least the 10th–12th grade alumni is expected to improve recruitment efforts as well.

In addition, academic departments have increasingly recognized the need to be involved in the recruitment effort. Areas that are undersubscribed (School of Business, Scientific and Technical Communications, Forestry, School of Technology, Geology, Mining, etc.) and that have not been heavily advertised by Michigan Tech are now focusing resources on recruitment. For example, the School of Business schedules focused recruitment visits to community colleges located within a 100–200 mile radius [2.6C]. The School of Forestry, with the US Forest Service and Educational Opportunity, is sponsoring a summer pre-college Multicultural and Natural Resources Program [2.6D]. The Chemistry Department has adopted two Detroit area schools—Martin Luther King and Redford. For internal transfers (students contemplating changing majors or leaving), 29 departments/schools participated in the first annual Opportunities Expo [ Opportunities Expo, February 1997] held in February 1997.

The University has set goals for the enrollment of underrepresented student groups. The recruitment goals for female students, only recently set by the PCW [5.5C] in 1995, have not yet been met. However, the University’s special programs have helped Michigan Tech meet or exceed national percentages in engineering [8.2]. Compared to national data, as the percentage enrollment of females in engineering baccalaureate programs moved from 14.7% in 1984–1985 to 19% in 1994–1995, Michigan Tech’s percentage has been maintained and/or increased, at 17–20% during that same period (see Table 5). PCW not only set a recruitment goal for female students, but also recommended several strategies to help accomplish it. For example, continued and increased support for the pre-college Women in Engineering program was cited, in addition to increased targeted recruitment by non-engineering departments.

TABLE 5. Michigan Technological University and National Total Female Enrollment and Percentage of Total Enrollment in Engineering from Fall 1986 to Fall 1996.

Year

MTU Total Enrollment

MTU Female Enrollment

MTU % Female

MTU % Females in Engineering

National % Females in Engineering [ Engineering Workforce Commission AAES, 1996]

Fall 1986

6326

1491

23.6%

17.39%

NA

Fall 1987

6187

1439

23.3%

16.21%

16%

Fall 1988

6502

1503

23.1%

16.07%

16%

Fall 1989

6662

1605

24.1%

17.08%

16%

Fall 1990

6640

1588

23.9%

16.97%

17%

Fall 1991

6921

1675

24.2%

18.00%

17%

Fall 1992

6961

1736

24.9%

19.25%

18%

Fall 1993

6603

1667

25.2%

19.94%

18%

Fall 1994

6460

1618

25.0%

19.58%

19%

Fall 1995

6390

1663

26.0%

20.63%

19%

Fall 1996

6195

1619

26.1%

20.29%

NA

The 1986 MPTF’s stated goal of enrolling at least 300 domestic minorities by 1994 was ambitious. Despite over a 200% increase in the number of African, Hispanic and Native American students between 1988 and 1992, (from 103 to 205). By Fall 1994, only 178 students from underrepresented groups were enrolled. This number increased only slightly over the past two years to 184. (Table 6 contains a history of all of our enrollment figures and statistics for underrepresented groups.) This aspect of recruitment planning will require a serious review in light of the current goals that have been set by the PCW and the RTF. For minority undergraduate and graduate students, the RTF recommends a goal of 5.5% by 2001 and 12% by 2006. The PCW recommends 35% by 2001 as an enrollment goal for female students. Recommendations for supporting specific programs that help recruit underrepresented students were included in both reports along with the enrollment goals.

TABLE 6. MTU Enrollment by Ethnic Group, 1976–1996.

Increased efforts to acquaint educators who teach in secondary schools that have high populations of African-, Hispanic-, and Native-American students about MTU may enhance the effort to recruit underrepresented students. (An example is the Secondary Educators’ Fellowship [ Secondary Educators� Fellowship] program.) Expanded recruitment beyond the Detroit area is also necessary, as well as continued support for the Native American, Minorities in Engineering, and Minority College Access/Summer Youth Program. The Educational Opportunity Department is preparing a report that describes the University’s minority programming efforts and will include a recommendation to develop a strategic plan for recruitment of minority students based on the RTF recommendations [5.4A]. The University’s involvement in a number of external consortiums, partnerships, and organizations also facilitates the recruitment of underrepresented students. Table 7 describes many of these associations.

TABLE 7. University Involvement in External Groups to Facilitate Recruitment of Students from Underrepresented Groups.

Organizational Membership and State Programs

Facilitating Department

Michigan State King-Chavez-Parks Program

College Day
Future Faculty
Visiting Scholars

Educational Opportunity

Graduate Education for Minorities

Educational Opportunity;Dean of Engineering

National Association of Minority Engineering Program Administrators

Educational Opportunity;Student Affairs

Women in Engineering Programs Advocate Network

Educational Opportunity;Dean of Engineering

State of Michigan Select Student Support ServicesProgram

Educational Opportunity (PI);General Engineering;ME/EM;Student Affairs;Dean of Engineering

State of MichiganMichigan College and University Partnership

Educational Opportunity (PI);Admissions;Gogebic Community College;Bay de Noc Community College

National Association of Student Personnel Administrators

Student Affairs

Michigan Space Grant Consortium

Educational Opportunity

State of Michigan Wade McCree Scholars Program

Educational Opportunity;President/Provost

Detroit-Area Pre-College Engineering Program

Educational Opportunity;Admissions

The 1988 NCA Visiting Team Report emphasized some recruitment-related weaknesses [6.1A]. It was noted that, given the University’s geographic location, a greater number of Native Americans might be enrolled at Michigan Tech. Since that report, the Outreach and Multiethnic Program division was established (1989) and more recently (1996), a Native American Outreach Coordinator was hired [2.6F2]. The Coordinator’s assignments include working to increase Native American enrollment at Michigan Tech for both first-year and transfer students. The American Indian Biological and Computer Science Workshops for students ages 12–16 years were also initiated in 1989. The goal of this program is to increase awareness of careers and help build academic skills of pre-college Native American students, as well as encourage them to prepare for, and consider, post-secondary education.

The 1988 Report expressed a concern that the Admissions staff and University marketing pieces did not always convey the same message. Because an enrollment-management process has been implemented (1995) and an Admissions director hired, coordination in this area has increased; this provides more creative, uniform Admissions pieces. In addition, a University-wide marketing committee under the direction of the Vice President for Advancement is in the process of developing an integrated marketing plan.

Since the 1998 Report, the Admissions area has gained some staff, including the director and a recruiter who focuses on underrepresented student enrollments, and thus, its role in the enrollment-management process has been strengthened. Individual departments are spending some portion of their budget on recruitment efforts to complement Admissions’ work, thereby allowing for more targeted recruiting. In addition, qualitative and quantitative processes have been established to measure the success of recruitment efforts. However, a reduction in Admissions operational budget (a 1% reallocation that is assessed on all department accounts) and the overall reduction of the Student Services budget has hindered expansion of some services that would enhance the recruitment effort (see Table 4 on page 7).

Patterns of Evidence—Criterion 4: Continuous Improvement

Overall enrollment, while currently unevenly distributed, generates sufficient resources to allow the University to achieve its stated educational purposes at its current size. Particular departments and schools (e.g., School of Business, Metallurgy, or Geology) can enroll higher numbers of students, while others (Mechanical Engineering/Engineering Mechanics, Chemical Engineering, Civil/Environmental Engineering) have experienced what the departments consider over-enrollment. Controlling enrollments in some disciplines, while attempting to increase it in others, is necessary and will prevent student/faculty ratios from becoming too high and laboratory capacities from being inadequate for the number of students.

The current enrollment, however, does not provide the diversity that will greatly increase the value of the quality education provided by the University, nor does it offer the mix of majors that might protect the Institution from the vagaries of cyclical changes in engineering and science. The challenge (a function of available resources) for the University is to attract a wider array of students who will enroll in targeted areas. This will require balanced marketing that does not detract from the University’s recognized strengths but highlights its other less-recognized quality programs.

Recruitment processes have been established and allow for ongoing review and planning. The need to improve some processes has been identified, and recommendations to address them have been formulated. It is uncertain if additional resources will be available to support enhancement activities or new initiatives that are critical to improving recruitment rates.

The University takes advantage of its ability to track its recruitment patterns. [Recruitment/Admissions Analysis for NCA.] The use of the recruitment-pattern information for planning purposes has been available in the past but is just beginning to be used effectively by the Admissions area and some academic departments. The entire process, including tracking, is currently being examined by a TQE team, Recruitment Activities Increase Student Enrollment (RAISE). Their recommendations will be used to improve this process.

A primary recruitment concern is that in the last three years the University has not been able to meet its total undergraduate student enrollment goals. The goal does not appear to be unrealistic, therefore the process clearly requires some assessment and adjustments of resource allocations. The University’s recruitment process is especially weak in the initial-inquiry-to-application phase. The Levitz Model for MTU indicated (in the absence of detailed data to support the calculation) that MTU should be converting approximately 21% of their inquiries into applications. Detailed information for the Fall 1996 shows that the University is experiencing a 14% conversion of inquiries into applications.

Further support for a weakness in the conversion from inquiry to application comes from comparing MTU to other public and private four-year colleges and universities. The Fall 1995 National Enrollment Management Survey, conducted by Noel Levitz, indicated that four-year public universities were experiencing a 27.7% conversion from inquiry to application [5.4B, p. 18]. Private four-year colleges and universities were experiencing a 9.2% conversion from inquiry to application. Given MTU’s remote location, niche offerings, and premium price (which, while it is a "good value" given the quality, is nonetheless a premium-price offering for many of the disciplines) the 14% conversion from inquiry to application indicates that for recruiting purposes MTU might look more to the private four-year college numbers for some comparisons. The effort to increase the conversion rate of inquiries into applications may require additional effort and resources.

Michigan Tech spends more per student on recruiting/marketing/admission than the average four-year public university. In the Fall 1995 Enrollment Management Report from Noel Levitz, the average four-year public university spent $345 per enrolled new student. Michigan Tech, responding to the same survey, indicated a total budget of $946,200 for the categories included to achieve 1,332 new enrollments; thus it is spending $709 per new enrollment. This is less than half of the report of $1,562 spent on new recruits by private, four-year colleges and universities, many of whom share similar characteristics with MTU.

The current allocated resources (including individual department budgets for recruiting) may be sufficient to allow the University to meet recruitment goals, especially if high school students’ interest in engineering increases. It does not, however, adequately address the need to increase the ethnic diversity of the student body or the diversity of the student body by majors.

Admissions’ ability to recruit more extensively in Minnesota, Illinois, Wisconsin, and even parts of Michigan may be hindered by the number of recruiters it has on staff. Increased recruitment in these regions has the potential to improve the University’s exposure to a much greater number of underrepresented students, as well as broaden our pre-college participation, general inquiry and undergraduate-student applicant pool. Thus, it appears that the admissions budget may be somewhat underfunded in order to accomplish these goals.

The University’s precollege Women in Engineering and Minority College Access/Summer Youth Program have had the student market pool to increase the number of participants each year, but currently, funding is not available to support the expansion at this time [7.4A]. External funds continue to be solicited for this expansion.

A limited, distributed authority sets recruitment goals for the University. Although individual departments/schools affect these goals by changing required ACT’s, class rank, etc., no admissions advisory team works with the Admissions department to develop sound, long-term goals which realistically address the Institution’s capacities and growth potential in all areas. At this time, the Admissions recruiters are being held ultimately accountable for final numbers. The numerical goals provided to the recruiters by the University are not always consistent with individual-department goals. This leaves the Admissions officers not wholly clear for which goals they are to be held accountable.

The recent reorganization of the Enrollment Management/Admissions area and a new emphasis on University-wide, as opposed to department-level, planning will help the University move toward its recruitment goals. The addition of an advisory team would assure that the outcomes are regularly assessed and than long- and short-term goals are annually evaluated. In order to facilitate recruitment planning, an admissions advisory group composed of the president, provost, and representatives from academic departments (Student Affairs, Residence Life, Educational Opportunity, Career Center, and Advancement) should be created. This group would work with Admissions to develop a long-term plan and review and revise it on an ongoing basis. Their responsibility would be to help determine recruitment goals and identify where the University should invest its money to positively impact enrollment (and thereby increase its income).

In addition, several committees have studied various elements of the recruitment process (e.g., the TQE team for Forestry and the RAISE team identify continuous improvement strategies). The annual strategic-planning process, as well as the NCA Self-Studies, will contribute to assessment and improvements in recruiting.

Patterns of Evidence—Criterion 5: Integrity

Recruitment material such as the Viewbook, department flyers, and the Student Handbook are generally accurate and consistent in their representation of the University and its purposes [7.5E, 7.5, and 1.2C]. Over the years, visual representation of the percentage of female and minority students and of the physical climate have not always been completely accurate but have been brought into line in recent issues. The University has worked to balance its presentations of diversity in its literature. Informational pieces such as the Commitment to Diversity [ MTU Commitment to Diversity Poster] poster help explain what the University has to offer by focusing on its support for ethnic diversity.

Written procedures for the admissions process reflect the actual practice. The increased willingness by Admissions personnel and academic departments to review nontraditional admissions information (letters of recommendations, student experiences, etc.) as well as traditional measures (ACT scores, class rank, etc.) positively impacts the University’s ability to enhance its diversity.

The Fall 1996 Undergraduate Student Government Survey [ Undergraduate Student Government Survey] of first-year students can be cited as an indication that the expectations of the majority of students who completed the survey (30% of first-year students) are met. The students indicated that, to date, 55% thought their experience at Michigan Tech was about what they expected, and 30%, better than expected. A Spring 1997 USG survey completed by 488 freshmen, sophomore, and junior students (a 15.5% response rate) who voted at the Undergraduate Student Government elections indicated that 41% felt their experience at Michigan Tech, to date, is better than expected; 45% about the same as expected, and 13% less than expected. When asked "Why did you decide to attend Michigan Tech?" the most frequently mentioned reasons remained the same as in the Fall freshman only survey: 24% of the votes went to academic reputation, 15% for job opportunities, 12% location, 10% campus, 10% financial support, 8% recommended, and 8% friends. (Respondents generally indicated more than one reason.) These responses are an indication that the University does accurately represent itself to students and is satisfying a large percentage of its clients’ needs.

Retention

Patterns of Evidence—Criterion 2: Resources

The University has significant processes and services in place to help meet its retention goals.

The resources (both financial and human) that support current retention programming are satisfactory and stable. The Student Affairs (including Counseling Services) and Educational Opportunity departments have twenty staff members whose responsibilities include attention to the retention of undergraduate students. The 1996 RTF, comprised of a cross section of University faculty and staff, developed an extensive set of retention goals, and recommendations for accomplishing these goals. In this report, the appropriate departments and individuals who will implement the recommendations are also designated.

Academic-support programs are available to all students. The University supports six Learning Centers housed in the Chemistry, Humanities, Biological Sciences, Physics, Mathematics, and Mechanical Engineering departments. In 1997, the director of the Center for Teaching, Learning, and Faculty Development began to work with Learning Center directors to coordinate resource requests and share ideas for future strategic and budget planning. Through the 1997–98 budget cycle the Centers report to the department chairs and receive their funding through department allocations.

Each engineering department offers an orientation course to help students explore careers in the discipline (often using a variety of corporate speakers), explain the department’s curriculum, and in most courses, help improve academic skills.

Since 1994, the Residence Hall program has begun focusing on student-development issues that can be addressed through residence-hall programming. A reorganization in 1994 brought the Residence Life staff under the Dean of Student Affairs, and in 1995 a director of Residence Life was hired. In 1996, Residence Life moved back to Residential Services where it had historically reported. Since that time, cooperative planning between Student Affairs and Residential Services/Residence Life has resulted in a number of changes in residence life that positively impact students’ personal and academic experiences at Michigan Tech [2.6H5].

Faculty and department advisors have the responsibility to provide academic advising. First- and second-year students tend to interact with the department advisor more than with faculty. Faculty often provide professional advising as well. Many departments use alumni and corporate role models to support this advising effort. In addition, personal-advising and professional-development programs are provided through the Student Affairs and Educational Opportunity departments.

Benchmarking with peer institutions indicate that the University’s programs are comparable or more extensive in their outreach and diversity (see Attachment 2). Resources to expand retention efforts are limited or are provided by external grants.

The president, provost, deans, department chairs, Student Affairs, and Educational Opportunity personnel have the task of reminding faculty that they are the most integral component of retention. Providing the support and resources that academic departments need to be successful is an administrative challenge. Regular distribution and analysis of retention and graduation rates will be part of Educational Opportunity’s follow-up to the RTF recommendations. To assist with the assessment of progress, a University-wide RTF standing committee will be established in the Summer of 1997.

Finally, in May 1992, the president established the PCW and in September 1992, the Presidential Commission on Diversity. The formation of these groups was a response to the concerns associated with the recruitment and retention of underrepresented students (females and minorities) and a desire to identify strategies to improve the climate for all students. The initiation of the Commissions has resulted in a number of actions. For example, a climate study and set of recommendations has been completed by PCW, and the Parade of Nations and Multiethnic Celebration has been expanded to include activities in the local schools, and a Powwow culminated the 1996 celebration activities.

Patterns of Evidence—Criterion 3: Accomplishments

The University’s current retention rates, when compared nationally with our benchmark and peer institutions, are the same or higher [ 1994 AASCU/Sallie Mae Retention Survey Institutional Report and National Reten tion Project Information] (see Attachment 3). (In 1995, Michigan Tech was selected as a model for retention/diversity programs by the American Association of State Colleges and Universities, Sallie Mae National Retention Project. The University’s programs were described at a regional conference on retention and published in a report on Initiative Profiles.) However, the University goal for retention, set by the RTF in its 1995 Report, has not yet been met. It is an aggressive goal that is meant to recognize the University’s commitment to the quality students it recruits—95% after the first year, 90% after the second, and 85% graduating after five years [5.4A].

Retention rates, as well as graduation rates, have always been available through Institutional Analysis and are often required for state and federal reports. They have rarely been examined on a regular basis and distributed to all departments. The RTF Report calls for the collection, review, and distribution of retention data on an annual basis. The Educational Opportunity Department will work with Institutional Analysis to collect and distribute the data and the RTF standing committee will track progress.

The quantitative measures for retention are established. Examples are one-, two-, and four-year retention rates by gender, race, school, and department and graduation rates by the same breakdown. [ Retention Rates by Gender, Race, School, Department] Qualitative measures include summaries of student responses to a satisfaction survey that is administered regularly by Student Affairs [2.6H11]. Overwhelmingly affirmative responses from students to requests to work with precollege students and at college fairs, the small number (and kinds) of concerns brought to the PCW and PCD over the last few years, general student success, and the willingness of alumni to support the University are all indications of an overall satisfactory campus climate [5.5C, 7.1B, and 2.6H2].

Students, as participants and facilitators, are being trained and supported to become an integral component of the retention-related work that is accomplished on campus. A few examples are listed:

Peer Orientation Leaders, trained by the Student Affairs staff, help introduce first-year students to Michigan Tech’s academic life.
A workshop designed to increase student efficacy and grade point average is being offered on a regular basis for underrepresented students and other student groups (The Guaranteed 4.0 Workshop). [ The Guaranteed 4.0]
The Peer Academic Leader (PAL) student group has participated in the Guaranteed 4.0 Workshop and will use the information as an additional tool for helping first- and second-year student "pals." [ Peer Academic Leader Brochure (PAL)]
Student organizations such as Omicron Delta Kappa, the Black Student Association, American Indian Science and Engineering Society, National Society of Black Engineers, Society of Automotive Engineers, Blue Key Fraternity, and Michigan Tech Student Foundation work with University administrative and academic departments to provide leadership; personal and professional development opportunities; and recreational, enrichment and academic-support activities and programs for their peers. [ ODK Poster and News Article]
Some departments now also provide opportunities for upper-class and graduate students to interact with first- and second-year students. For example, the University recently joined the Council of Undergraduate Research. Three departments have received NSF funds to coordinate undergraduate research programs (Mathematics, Electrical Engineering and Civil/Environmental Engineering) and are working with Educational Opportunity to pool funds for underrepresented student research in order to expand opportunities for students.

The 1992 Multicultural Advisory Committee [ 1992 Multicultural Advisory Committee Recommendations] recommended the development and/or implementation of an Efficacy program for faculty and students, an "early warning" system that signals possible academic difficulty for "at risk" students, and quality "peer support" programs. To some degree, each of these has been implemented (approximately 100 faculty, to date, participated in the Efficacy Workshops, and a Residence Hall "early warning" system and the Peer Academic Leader programs are in their second year of a three-year pilot.). A concern is that approximately 75% of the funding to maintain these programs is currently coming from external grants. An assessment of each of these activities will be recommended in the minority programming review to be completed in August 1997. It appears, to date, that each program, or variation of the initial program, has proved to be successful in providing academic support to minority as well as a number of non-minority students.

The PCW Climate Study recommendations include the need for both visiting and permanent role models. Established in 1996, the Visiting Women and Minority Scholars Program and the Visiting Women Lecturers Series [ Visiting Women and Minority Scholars & Visiting Women Lecturers Series] address the short-term need, while academic departments have been, since 1995, pro-active in recruiting female faculty (for instance, in engineering the number is up from 40 in 1988 to 59 in 1996). [ MTU Faculty: Percentages of Women and Minorities]

The RTF Report describes the activities and programs that are positively impacting retention progress on our campus and offers a framework for addressing retention. The RTF emphasized that the well-established Learning Centers, [ Learning Centers] the University’s annual schedule of diversity-related programs, [ First Year Experience Brochure] and the variety of opportunities for students to engage in leaership, team, and research activities [ Activities/Projects in Support for Undergraduate Education, 1988�1996] enrich educational experiencesand positively impact retention progress. These programs, especially, help students develop a connectedness (bond) to Michigan Tech, which is a significant component of our retention strategy. The RTF recommends maintenance and/or enhancement of current ongoing retention-related programming. Recommendations also include actions that require systemic change—a change from quarters to semesters, substantial improvement in academic advising, and improved course availability. These require a commitment from the upper administration, as well as full participation by all academic departments.

Each department has been asked by the Provost to incorporate the relevant recommendations into their strategic planning. The recommendations are being addressed across departments, but the action and/or results are not yet consistent across campus. For example, not all departments have determined how to best organize advising by faculty in order to provide consistent, intensive academic advising for lower-division students. Both the Colleges of Engineering and Sciences and Arts have committees that are exploring first-year experience/program ideas for possible future implementation. In June, 1997, Educational Opportunity and the PAL Program sponsored a workshop by the National Research Center for the Freshman Year Experience and Students in Transition (at University of South Carolina). This program, entitled Designing Successful Transitions, was heavily attended by faculty and staff planners.

The recommendation to move from quarters to semesters has been debated for over five years. If supported, it will require considerable resources, especially faculty time, but should ultimately result in time and resource savings through a reduction in administrative activity. In Spring 1997, the Senate polled its faculty constituents with regard to a move to semesters. A referendum with results to be taken to the Board of Control is planned for a 1997 Board meeting.

Periodic review of the status of the recommendations and tracking, collecting, and distributing retention and graduation numbers will provide regular follow-up. This will encourage regular ongoing attention and evaluation of retention programs.

Retention was not a defined issue in the 1988 NCA Report, although the recommended improvements in the curriculum definitely would impact a student’s academic experience and therefore his/her decision to remain at the University. Retention of individual students also may be affected by uneven enrollment numbers in departments and thus by the effectiveness of recruitment strategies. For example, departments that provide introductory-level and/or design courses to large numbers of students may not be able to offer the faculty/student ratios that would enhance student learning or provide time for special attention to student needs.

Patterns of Evidence—Criterion 4: Continuous Improvement

It appears that sufficient resources will be available to maintain the University’s current retention efforts. It is uncertain if additional resources will be available to support enhancement of current efforts or new initiatives that are critical to improving retention rates. Retention processes are established and allow for ongoing review and planning. The need to improve some processes has been identified and recommendations to address them have been formulated.

The University is situated to move toward meeting the retention goals set by the RTF [5.4A]. This assumes that the established programs which positively affect retention of students can be maintained and enhanced over the next ten years, the academic advising process is significantly improved, and the course availability concerns are sufficiently addressed. In addition, reasonable increases in funding for the Learning Centers, first-year orientation program, multiethnic/outreach activities, precollege outreach, and some other existing programs, as well as the development of a more effective advising system will be required.

Such groups as the Presidential Council of Alumnae will provide additional opportunities for students and departments to interact with, and gain input from, alumni and role models. An increased effort to recruit and retain faculty who are also role models for our underrepresented students (minorities and females) would help support (long-term) the retention of these students.

The University’s desire to provide a quality education is apparent in its documents and its support for such initiatives as the Upper Midwest Faculty Forum (1991–1997), the New Faculty and Graduate Student Orientation (1995–1997), and the Center for Teaching, Learning, and Faculty Development (1996–1997). [ MTU Center for Teaching, Learning, and Faculty Development]

Significant progress has been made in maintaining and improving the University’s delivery of education and student services. The Goal Committee 1.1 Report describes many of the projects that have been initiated over the past ten years to help improve undergraduate education [1.1]. Examples include the Century II Equipment Endowments; the academic advising workshops that have been recently instituted; a new atom-guiding and interferometry lab and several refurbished laboratory spaces in physics since 1995; and the increase of faculty time, space, and financial resources that have been dedicated to student project teams and competitions since 1988.

At this time, however, available increases in funding are not adequate to meet the education-improvement needs of each academic department. Additional support for state-of-the-art laboratories, academic advising, student projects, and undergraduate research opportunities is specifically related to the goal of increasing retention. The fact that departments are requesting support for these items indicates that they continue to be committed to meeting the educational needs of their undergraduate students. Increases in enrollment would provide funds to support such items. This is an obvious example of how successful recruitment may impact retention of students.

As described in the RTF Report, structures are in place to support the academic departments in their efforts to retain students [5.4A]. In some cases, regular communication and linkages between academic departments and coordinators of academic support services need to be improved or established. The RTF standing committee will help inform the campus of retention progress (qualitative and quantitative), increase awareness of "best practices," and provide ongoing recommendations to the provost and president to help meet the retention goals.

Patterns of Evidence—Criterion 5: Integrity

The information contained in the RTF Report and the published retention and graduation rates are accurate [5.4A]. The quantitative representation is prescribed by state and federal guidelines. Comparisons to the University’s benchmark or other peer institutions are made using data that is similarly described.

While the official words of the University vision are not inculcated in all of its communications, the essence of the University vision is generally portrayed in both the official and the marketing communications. In terms of retention, a gap may exist between the official and marketing communications and the reality of some students’ experiences in three areas:

The Catalog has an internal emphasis on team capabilities but "individual effort" is often promoted as well. This is clearly an area where the amount of emphasis being placed on individual effort and teamwork is changing, and the appropriate balance is not yet well delineated. [ Preliminary Content Analysis of Official and Marketing Pieces for MTU]
The visual image of the campus, as presented in the Viewbook, overstates the enrollment of females and minorities, and understates the role of faculty in students’ lives at Michigan Tech [7.5E].
Students arrive on campus with the expectation of finding faculty that are caring and involved, but this is not always the case. The results of eight student focus groups, conducted by the University’s RTF found that students are, at times, confronted with faculty who do not offer a nurturing environment for a variety of reasons, e.g., faculty personality, research obligations, department’s perceived undervaluing of quality teaching efforts and high teaching loads [5.4A]. This type of student experience impacts their impression of Michigan Tech in ways that are difficult to evaluate, definitely lasting, and may contribute to attrition.

However, the following examples are cited to illustrate that the University is continually working to address integrity in campus relations and to consistently meet the expectations of its students (set by the University’s publications):

All students in the College of Engineering participate in team projects and group-work experiences. The educational value of both individual and teamwork is often well defined by individual faculty or departments. Most students, in a variety of disciplines, are encouraged to participate in collaborative-learning groups. (Collaborative-learning groups were established in mathematics and chemistry (1992–1994) by the director of the Learning Centers with support from an external grant to Educational Opportunity, and the facilitation of these groups continue to be supported by the departments.)
All faculty are required to hold regularly scheduled office hours. In addition, many faculty offer help sessions and collaborative-learning assignments to further promote a nurturing environment. Many also participate in professional-development activities and programs that promote improved teaching and learning (e.g., Efficacy Workshops, [ Efficacy Workshops Description] Upper Midwest Faculty Forum, [ Upper Midwest Faculty Forum, April 1997] New Faculty Orientation and Seminar Series, [ New Faculty Orientation and Seminar Series] etc.).
Role-model speakers, the Presidential Council of Alumnae, [ Presidential Council of Alumnae Guidelines] the PCW, the PCD, the annual Parade of Nations, and the Human Relations Series help students envision the broader aspects of diversity.
The Educational Opportunity Department, the Affirmative Programs Office, and Student Affairs help monitor and provide programs that address issues that concern equity, discrimination, affirmative action, and ways of enhancing access to education. The University’s participation in several organizations and State programs illustrates its commitment to building a diverse educational community. See Table 7 in Recruitment – Criterion 3.
The University also supports minority student groups, such as the National Society of Black Engineers, Black Student Association, Ibero-Latino Association, American Indian Science and Engineering Society, and Society for Women Engineers, that help retain underrepresented students.
The Educational Opportunity Department, its Outreach and Multi-Ethnic and Youth Programs divisions, and Student Affairs work directly with students, faculty, and the community to promote an environment that is supportive for students and is not only tolerant of diversity, but celebrates it.

Maintaining and improving undergraduate education to improve retention, as well as learning, will require that administrators, faculty, and staff to continue to make difficult decisions based on feedback from all stakeholders. Since 1988, the University administration has encouraged the use of total-quality tools to help explore problems and identify solutions or improvements. TQE (Total Quality Education) requires input from a number of sources and will help the University in its efforts to continually improve its services.

Recruitment

SWOT Analysis

This section summarizes the goal committee’s analysis of the strengths, weaknesses, opportunities, and threats associated with the University’s recruitment and retention strategic plan.

Strengths

The University supports extensive precollege and outreach programs.
The University recently added an Admissions Director position.
The positive reputation of University engineering, forestry, and STC programs is widespread.
The University’s location/physical environment is pleasant and attractive.
The academic reputation of the University is widespread and the academic reputation as an engineering/science institution is even more well known.
Native American Outreach coordinator and programs have the potential to affect both recruitment and retention of this student population.
The growing involvement of faculty in recruitment efforts encourages enrollment.
Overall, a large percentage of classes are taught by faculty, in person.
The University has a history of a high conversion rate of applicants to enrollees.
The University enjoys a high rate of placement of students after graduation.
Our current student body is of the highest quality.

Weaknesses

The University lacks a long-term University-wide plan that is endorsed by all departments.
The University lacks a unified marketing strategy.
The University’s campus is a great distance from the pool of potential students.
Some departments fail to cooperate in assisting Admissions with on-campus recruitment needs.
Lateness of financial-aid notification is a barrier.
A recruitment budget based on the assumption that MTU is a typical state university, as opposed to a premium priced (for many), premium quality, remote school—$500/student recruitment budget at MTU vs. $1,500/student recruitment budgets at many of our benchmark institutions—limits our abilities.
The University lacks visibility, nationally and, in some cases, regionally.
The University’s historical conversion rate from inquiry to application is low.
The University lacks diversity in majors and student body.
Regional students and school personnel entertain the perception that the University is an extraordinarily difficult (tough) institution.

Opportunities

Demographics—the University can recruit the increasing numbers of female and minority high school graduates.
The University can redouble its efforts to increase the percentage yield from inquiry to actual application.
The University will work to increase visibility with teachers and other school personnel (Detroit Teacher Fellowship Programs, etc.).
The University can expand its recruitment efforts of targeted student populations, e.g., Hispanic Americans and community college transfers, that have not been a focus in the past.
The expansion of some of the precollege programs and outreach activities can boost recruitment.
To increase number of majors in a controlled manner (e.g., bioengineering, STC, etc.)
The growing significance of technology to society will naturally reinforce our efforts.
The University can continue to build partnerships to recruit increased numbers of transfer students from community colleges.
We will refine recruitment strategies based on assessment of data.
We will promote the University as a whole—integrated marketing.
We will increase the use of students and alumni in recruitment.
The University will expand emphasis on majors other than engineering.
Our publications will stress our expectations of high standards as a counter to the perception of our institution as being "tough."
The University will take advantage of the increase of national and international student exchange and community-college students looking for transfers.

Threats

Other institutions’ aggressive recruitment and outreach pose stiff competition.
Diminishing external financial support for youth programs and scholarships for targeted groups hamper our efforts in these areas.
Recent intense debates and rulings concerning Affirmative Action, especially directed toward underrepresented populations, are obstacles to our efforts with regard to diversity.
The reputation or perception of the University as too rigorous for most students is not easily reversed.
The University must contend with a national decline of interest in engineering by high school students.
The University lacks sufficient funds to grow enrollment in a tough, competitive environment.
The university cannot compete with other institutions’ growth in spending on recruitment.
The perception of the location of the University in a severe climate (weather) affects student’s decisions to inquire.
The community lacks reliable public transportation to the University.
There is an internal unawareness (sometimes) of the potential for promoting MTU and creating an environment for innovative, unique, and quality precollege programs.

Recommendations for Action

The University should:

establish a long-term planning group to define reasonable University-wide recruitment goals that all departments can actively support and by which the effectiveness of Admissions recruitment activities can be assessed;
aggressively budget for enrollment growth, not maintenance, by determining if the Admissions area would more quickly and effectively meet recruitment goals and diversity goals if an additional admissions representative and/or increased recruitment budget were supported;
create a uniform, integrated marketing program that is actively promoted and adequately funded;
continue to involve departments in recruitment efforts;
budget for a response-handling center for first-inquiry students;
encourage a focus on outcome results in Admissions;
aggressively recruit students at an earlier age—focus on Youth Program participants and the quality of their campus experiences;
establish an early-financial-aid estimator program; and
increase less traditional approaches to recruitment through more aggressive use of the WEB, continuing to build partnerships with community colleges and international institutions, and using alumni more effectively.