SimpsonScarborough: Intelligent Marketing for Higher Education

I can remember my first (and only) college fair experience clearly…I won’t bore you with all of the gory details, but the sweaty kid to campus rep ratio was about 30 to 1 and it was hard to find what you were looking for and nearly impossible to actually talk to someone. I left with a Clemson pencil and that’s about all.

Well, the times they are a changin’ folks…

CollegeWeekLive is a two-day virtual college fair, and my new favorite topic this week. While this is a new concept for higher education, it uses the technology that high school students use in their daily lives and reaches them on a level in which they are comfortable. Not only is it easier to access (you don’t even have to leave your house) but there is even more interaction possible on this virtual platform than at any normal college fair. If you want to read more about it, check out this great Newsweek article.

In the article, there is a great quote from the Robert Rosenbloom, the CEO of the company that created the event that really sums up the advantages of the virtual fair. He says,

"This isn't just creating 3-D booths in an exhibition hall so you can chat with an admissions person, get information about student life and apply online. In addition to all of that, there's the digital media piece. We're bringing all of this content together, streaming live video interactions with young professionals, experts, admissions officers all in one place—and allowing students and parents to ask questions of these experts, which you would never be able to do in a physical environment"

While using interactive technology that students can appreciate is definitely a plus, there are a number of other issues related to a traditional college fair that you don’t have to worry about. You don’t have to worry about transportation or location, and there is no fear of running out of materials. It is cost effective and much more accessible for all parties. Not to mention it is just really, really cool. Watch the video below to see what I mean.

-- Meredith Simpson

Posted by Meredith Simpson at 03:26 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Dear Governor Spitzer—

If you live in a glass house, then know people will catch you with a prostitute. Isn’t that how the adage goes?

--Teresa

_____________________________________________________________

Dear Dr. Laura—

You. Are. Priceless. And your outfit and Dr. Seuss boots do nothing to increase your credibility.

--Teresa

____________________________________________________________

Dear Everyone Else—

If you were every looking for an administrative scandal to follow and learn from, the state of New York is providing us with an educational moment. Look to see how Governor Spitzer messages out of this, the messages his colleagues and peers give publicly and to the media, and how collectively these resonate with the citizens of New York. I would never wish scandal or heartache on anyone or their family, but use the moments to shore up your crisis planning and messaging.

XOXO—Teresa

Posted by Meredith Simpson at 11:44 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Inside Higher Ed ran an article on Monday that differentiated the coverage of Northern Illinois University and other campus shootings, trying to find the differentiator between NIU’s coverage and the reportings of Louisiana Technical College’s Baton Rouge and Virginia Tech’s campus tragedies. For me, the difference was NIU’s ability to influence the message and flow of information after the shooting. Their response time was commendable and the resultant media coverage of the incident illustrated their ability to spread facts and dispel rumors quickly.

I continue to recommend that the keys to a blind crisis website include: its ability to activate instantly; the site addresses the institution’s key audiences; it include facts, statements, press releases, updates that are archived – hourly in some cases, daily in others; the website provides links to contact proper authorities for more information; and the text and links provide information as deemed advantageous. NIU hit each of these elements with its crisis site.

I encourage you to visit their site and take a screen shot of their layout, resources and hyperlinks. I think the layout and content should be the gold standard for information provided online during a crisis. Their site has been able to walk the line between sharing information and allowing for grieving. That’s not easily done, and especially not easily done well.

-- Teresa Valerio Parrot

Posted by Meredith Simpson at 01:23 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

From The College of New Jersey to Memphis, St. Johns, Wisconsin-Madison, William & Mary and many others, college and university campuses are scrambling to upgrade student warning systems quickly for use in times of crisis.

Most have implemented a combination of campus-wide siren alert systems, reverse 911 calls, mass email protocol, text messaging systems and door-to-door alerts. These efforts are long overdue and we applaud them.

We hope institutions aren’t failing initially to segment audiences, which would show that faculty, staff and students should be the first notified in times of crisis – but there are more stakeholders that deserve outreach.

While sirens blast warnings campus-wide, institutions also should employ concurrent crisis communications to reach parents and loved ones of faculty, staff and students; alumni; donors; opinion leaders and the business community locally; elected officials and others.

Good crisis planning demands audience segmentation: who are the most important constituents an institution must reach in times of crisis, and what is the most effective way to send constant, accurate and clear updates?

We have templates on our website you can download to assist you in this process. Simply alerting students and those on campus is only half of the crisis battle.

-- Christopher Simpson

Posted by Meredith Simpson at 10:31 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

A week ago, College of the Holy Cross’s Ellen Ryder and Kristine Maloney and I visited with the National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities’ Tony Pals and Tony Wagner. “The Tonys” provided an update on the U-CAN (University and College Accountability Network) campaign, which is NAICU’s response to the U.S. News & World Report’s annual rankings of colleges and universities. The site went live on September 26th after many months of planning.

What is U-CAN’s goal? The site “is designed to give, in a common format, prospective students and their families concise, Web-based consumer-friendly information on individual private colleges and universities.” How does it work? I’ll use the Holy Cross page as an example. The college was able to submit institutional information of its choosing and provide a hyperlink to their own website’s “At a Glance” data. U-CAN provided electronic templates for Holy Cross to use and now hosts their information.

My friends at Augustana College called me last week and said they want to provide prospective students with more than just the information U-CAN requested. They believe they should take credit for all of their successes, not just those that fit the U-CAN template, and they are also willing to expose their warts for all to see to achieve full disclosure. They not only created a U-CAN page, they are also distributing “Open Book” (Download file), which shares the good accountability measures and takes responsibility for turning around the bad.

I say bravo on these approaches. But, long-term I worry that these efforts will remain unknown to high school seniors, their parents and high school counselors. A full-court marketing approach is needed. Without it, all of the good news will remain unread, unlike the USN&WR rankings.

-- Teresa Valerio Parrot

Posted by Meredith Simpson at 03:16 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Just like every Sunday morning, three days ago I was rounding up my family to scoot out the door (“we have five minutes before we’re late!”). Despite my destination goal and the time on the clock, something made me stop in my tracks. After Tim Russert signed off of Meet the Press for the week, an ad for avian flu came on the screen. The PSA encouraged viewers to visit www.pandemicflu.gov to get the latest news on the status of this virus. Interesting timing, I thought, since Christopher Simpson and I are hosting a webinar on planning for avian flu later this month.

Out of curiosity I visited the site today. A tab along the top of the page is labeled “School Planning” and provides checklists for rating institutional preparedness. The checklists, in addition to our webinar, will ensure that your institution will be prepared should pandemic flu hit.

-- Teresa Valerio Parrot

Posted by Meredith Simpson at 03:10 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

We encourage all of our crisis clients to write a plan that addresses every possible crises they may face, prioritize the likelihood of each incident, and finally hold table top or mock drills at least twice a year to test the ins and outs of their plan against the prioritized list. We also suggest that the crisis team leader present case studies at select cabinet meetings to review the institution’s crisis plan and remind people how a similar situation would be addressed and messaged should it occur closer to home.

I’ve had a few people ask where to find case studies. Unfortunately, our peers are experiencing crisis on a daily basis and the details they face can serve as the models to best prepare your institution. Need proof? Click here, here or here to learn of recent shootings on or near a college campus. Click here for a recent student fatality. And, here for a story that includes on campus drug use and a sexual assault. Click here for a story on free speech and the editor of a student paper. Finally, click here for a fiscal mismanagement allegation.

I don’t bring up these stories to smear the institutions or their handing of their crises. Instead, I mention these cases because we believe you can strengthen your approach, should you face a similar situation, by watching and learning from other institution’s approaches. Most crises you might face aren’t unique, and there is much you can learn from studying similar situations. Learn how the institutions that effectively control the message and flow of information are able to connect to their audiences throughout the crisis.

And remember, if you study and present case studies to your senior staff peers, you increase your credibility to lead your team through the worst.

-- Teresa Valerio Parrot

Posted by Meredith Simpson at 02:56 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

In times of crisis we often suggest a college or university recruit a student government leader, someone voted by the student body to represent their voice, to help in delivering the institution’s story. This allows the institution to control the message and flow of information; if a student voice is not provided to the media, the media will find their own—regardless of the student’s level of knowledge or eloquence.

Arm your student allies with talking points, and educate them on the questions they are likely to receive when talking to reporters. It is our experience that student leaders feel strongly about their institution and are willing to assist. Sometimes, though, the student leaders become the stories rather than the words they share.

Just this fall, the Bloomsburg University student government president proactively approached the media to refute the coverage of the university’s annual block party. In a letter to the editor of The Press Enterprise, the student government president felt “the media has unfairly portrayed students as irresponsible” when describing the party as alcohol-fueled. The student leader said the article “painted BU students with a broad and negative brush and are both inaccurate and extremely unfair to the thousands of responsible, mature Bloomsburg students who are an asset to the school and this community.”

The story could have ended there. What could have been a crisis “how-to” model just a few weeks later became a crisis “how-not-to” model.

The president of the student government was arrested last weekend for allegedly driving under the influence of alcohol and driving 50 in a 15 MPH zone within weeks of his letter’s publication. He has since stated that he will step down from his elected position.

With this story in mind, I am going to tweak the use of student leaders in your media planning.

Make sure the students not only represent the voice of the student body, but that they also carry credibility, both short- and long-term, with those audiences you are trying to inform. Those serving as an official voice for your institution at any level should live what they preach. If they can’t, you need a new representative voice. When in a crisis, limit your vulnerabilities and ensure your team understands their roles and responsibilities. The last thing you need when on the front-line of a crisis is additional vulnerability.

-- Teresa Valerio Parrot

Posted by Meredith Simpson at 04:05 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

The National School Board Association and Grunwald Associates LLC released a study last month about how “teens and tweens are creating content and connecting online.” The report is based on large sample surveys of 9 to 17 year olds, parents, and school district leaders. They report that 96% of students with internet access use social networking technologies. And, “nearly 60% of online students report discussing education-related topics such as college or college planning.” The average number of hours per week spent social networking is at 9 hours a week; just one hour behind the average time spent watching television. Lois Kelly, of Foghound and author of "Beyond Buzz: The Next Generation of Word of Mouth Marketing", is not surprised. She said, “those figures may even be conservative.” According to Lois, “Social media has changed how we learn, connect, share ideas, make decisions, have fun. Especially college kids.” She points out that college admissions has embraced social networking twice as fast as Inc. 500 businesses, according to a new study by Dr. Nora Barnes of University of Massachusetts/Dartmouth. But also notes that colleges are using social networks to research students. So, it’s also time for teens to watch which party pictures they’re posting on Facebook.

-- Elizabeth Scarborough

Posted by Meredith Simpson at 10:43 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

OK, let me get this straight: U.S. Senator Larry Craig is the subject of a generation-long series of rumors and innuendo about his alleged gay lifestyle. The Idaho Statesman, in his home state, tracked the story interminable, eventually interviewing more than 300 people over the years --- including one man who contends he and the senator had oral sex in Washington, DC’s Union Station.

And they print nothing. Nada. Why? Editors at the western newspaper, known for local coverage not Pulitzer-Prize investigations, said they could never prove the story beyond a shadow of a doubt and the editors contrasted these rumors with Senator Craig’s stellar service to the state. The Statesman showed unbelievable restraint.

So when Roll Call, the Capitol Hill newspaper, recently published a story saying Senator Craig was arrested and pled guilty to lewd behavior in a Minneapolis airport, what did the senator do? He blamed it on a “witch hunt” by The Idaho Statesman. Former Senator Gary Hart blamed The Miami Herald for his personal problems 20 years ago, illustrating the media blame game rarely works.

In times of crisis, few buy “the media did it” argument. Instead, focus on your key audiences when communicating your message – not passing blame to ink-stained scribes.

-- Christopher Simpson

Posted by Meredith Simpson at 11:08 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

I recently came across this article about a new business offering personalized tours of California colleges to prospective students, and I wanted to share it with you. University Passport is the brainchild of two UC Davis students who wanted to create a college tour company that provides college-bound individuals with a personal experience. After a serious “why didn’t I think of that?” moment, I went to the University Passport website to get a little more info. Not only do these guys have a great idea, but it is also very well executed. You should definitely check it out if you get a chance.

University Passport describes their service as “A dynamic twist on college touring, University Passport (UP) is a premier service that helps college-bound students make their academic dreams come true by providing individually tailored, no-hassle visits to college campuses.”

Campus tours generally leave much to be desired, because schools don’t have the time or money to invest into tours like the ones offered by University Passport. Their tours last all day rather than only a couple of hours (or less) and go into much more detail, depending on the interests of the student. They even include off-campus spots that you wouldn’t see on a generic campus tour. While they are only in California at this point, the partners hope to have the company go national within three to five years. I personally hope they succeed!

-- Meredith Simpson

Posted by Meredith Simpson at 11:40 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Call me old fashioned or old school but I do not understand the present discussions concerning accountability on college campuses. The crux of the issue seems to be that universities and colleges should develop voluntary accountability measures that are easily accessible to the public before they are forced to by the government. I believe this is analogous to fast food retailers having to tell the public what eating a super sized meal will do their health or a car manufacturer having to be honest about its gas mileage. Why aren’t we publishing such data because it is the right thing to do rather than what we have to do?

I believe that we in the field of higher education are in the business of educating, I also believe in market forces. If a college or institution is not graduating its students or those that attended have found that the school was not what it promised in its promotional materials, people should know. If more people were aware of how effective we are in our core business, graduating successful students, this would be the ultimate marketing tool.

If a school lacked the ability to engage its students, or failed in graduating students at a rate comparable to its competitors, such data would serve as a motivating force to examine its practices and systems.

A lesson I strive to impart on every student I teach is this. You can fight change, invest in change or create change. The only way to lose for sure is to fight. Maybe we should spend less time fighting the concept of accountability and more time finding a way to successfully implement it on our campuses. Both our students and our institutions will be better for it.

-- Tom Hayes

Posted by Teresa Valerio Parrot at 05:33 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

“Why Colleges Prefer Boys over Girls,” is the title of a recent U.S. News & World Report article (June 25, 2007). Of course the headline is sensationalized a bit to get us to pick up the magazine, but for those of us who have worked in enrollment management any time in the last 15 years, the story is nothing new. More qualified women than men are applying to colleges. While that sounds like a great thing compared to the number of degrees awarded to women in the U.S. just two generations ago, it is a true headache for smaller colleges that seek to keep a balance in the gender ratio of their entering classes.

This issue is complex and multi-faceted. It has all the makings of a sticky, political, media-ready battle. It is not one that will be easily or cleanly solved. In fact, I predict a legal case on the issue will make its way up to the Supreme Court in the imminent future. Many colleges will say it is their right and responsibility to maintain a gender balance to prepare their students for life after college. These schools should carefully study the affirmative action cases of the past 10 years before deciding how to proceed. We tend to think of affirmative action as dealing primarily with the admission rates of African American students, but the issue now covers an array of areas. A few pieces written in the 90’s chronicles how the nation’s premier public university was turning down qualified Asian applicants in favor of “more well-rounded” Caucasian applicants - in fear that the white students would very quickly become the new minority. Gender, I believe, may be the forthcoming component of affirmative action plans.

There are many groups who will forcefully and vehemently promote their views on the issue and these groups may come to a head. There are those who say that admissions should be blind to anything but merit and consider only GPAs, standardized test scores. On another front, there are those that argue that boys are less qualified because the system is biased towards females and against males. These folks will point to experts showing how the public school system and the nation in general has failed boys. Then again, since we all are involved in this issue in some personal way – most of us have mothers and sisters and it’s hard to demonize them from across the dinner table. And, maybe the gender quotas will never become a larger issue than they have been for the past 15 years.

Posted by CT Turner at 01:39 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Antioch College is a thirty minute drive from my home. Over the course of my life I have visited its campus on many occasions and enjoyed the “idiosyncrasies” of the city of Yellow Springs where it is located. Yellow Springs is a town caught in a time warp. When ever I had a desire to revisit the late 60’s early 70’s I would head there. The music scene, the head shops and public lectures offered at the school all brought me back to days when Antioch was considered a hot bed of campus radicalism and free thought.

As I am confident you know, Antioch College is closing. With less than 400 students it can no longer afford to operate. I am saddened by this for a number of reasons. The reputation of the school and the values in which it historically stood appealed to me. When I was in Yellow Springs or on its campus, I felt that this was what a campus should feel like. I am also saddened by my belief that it didn’t need to happen. Perhaps given its present situation, it seems inevitable but from outside looking in vantage point, the school was also caught in a time warp.

In a recent edition of Inside HigherEd, I read a story on the “Adjunctification of Antioch.” In this article there was a quote that I believed stood out. The quote was “Why is Antioch of all places setting up for a for-profit style university nationwide with their adjuncts and no place for tenure?” This quote was referring to the multiple extensions of Antioch that will remain open that do not offer tenure and which a few utilize only part time teachers. I believe I can answer the question in part. Without going near the issue of tenure, I think Antioch is setting itself up in a “for profit style” because it did not run itself as a “for profit university” in the past. As a result, it is closing.

No college or university can ignore market realities. There is simply too much competition to keep a blind eye to institutional drift. By this I mean the school focuses inward rather than outward and slowly drifts away from the marketplace. It does not monitor the relevancy of its offerings or image in relation to potential students and important constituents. It does not adapt to market changes and rather than abandon its image of itself, it perishes.

One does not have to abandon the concept of the “academy” to embrace the idea of running a college like a business. Return on investment, strategic planning and market research should not be dirty words. I know too many people on college campuses that look at the University of Phoenix with disdain. They do not believe it is a real university. However there are approximately 350,000 students and 250,000 graduates that may disagree with them.

Maybe running a college like a business is too radical of an idea for many in higher education. But, it is an idea you can live with.

I, for one, hope Antioch College reopens its doors as the administration promises. In the mean time I hope other schools look at the closing of this well known institution as a wake up call and embrace the lessons a business orientation may offer.

-- Tom Hayes

Posted by Meredith Simpson at 05:07 PM | Permalink | Comments (1)

Here is how my day started—got a cup of coffee. Then a second cup. And then spit out the coffee after looking at my computer screen. I. Had. Email. From. Bob. Morse.

Me! Yes, me! An email response from U.S. News & World Report’s architect of the controversial annual survey issue!

I had written a blog entry on Wednesday about Mr. Morse’s blog, Morse Code, and encouraged him to allow for comments on the site. He serves as USN&WR’s resident lightning rod since he develops the methodology and surveys for its rankings of colleges and universities. Not sure if you noticed, but he’s pretty popular – or should I say infamous -- these days. Click here or here and here for the most recent thoughts on his surveys.

Mr. Morse responded to my statement that his blog wasn’t a true forum by saying, “you are 100% right that it's 100% one way.” He mentioned that all of the blogs on the U.S. News site are unable to accept comments but his website people promised to add that functionality to his site soon (with “soon” serving as the nonspecific timeline given to him).

He isn’t sure of the feedback format and thought it could either mirror the style used by Inside Higher Ed or instead feed to a dedicated email address. I joked with him that I hoped people would actually post comments. I’m not overly optimistic that he will receive many comments, since it is easier to say something behind someone’s back than to them directly. On the other hand, he may well be flooded.

He also pointed out that he includes links to stories critical of his approach as a way of getting the other side of the story out.

Now… back to the latest stories on everything USN&WR… Robert J. Samuelson wrote a column that appears simultaneously in The Washington Post and Newsweek. You should check it out because it is a good read.

Mr. Samuelson says, “What's so shameful about this campaign against the rankings is its anti-intellectualism. Much information is in some way incomplete or imperfect. The proper response to evidence that you dislike or dispute is to supplement or discredit it with better evidence. The wrong response is to suppress it. And yet, that's the agenda of these college presidents.”

Those are some of the strongest words exchanged in this year’s brouhaha and based upon the number of comments on the Washington Post site it appears he hit a nerve. I can’t wait to see the next round of articles!

Within SimpsonScarborough we run the gamut from those who say break away and don’t look back to my thought that you play within this system until you have better defined alternatives. What do you think? I would love to get your take on all things USN&WR.

-- Teresa Valerio Parrot

Posted by Meredith Simpson at 06:16 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

My colleague, Meredith Simpson, alerted me to a “blog” entitled Morse Code by Robert Morse, rankings guru for USN&WR. He comments, among other things, on the statement released by independent college presidents during The Annapolis Group’s annual meeting, in which they said they would decline to participate in USN&WR’s annual survey.

I think it is important to note that the Wikipedia definition of blog includes the following text: “The ability for readers to leave comments in an interactive format is an important part of many blogs.” Mr. Morse’s blog does not allow for comments. By his own definition, “Morse Code provides deeper insights into the methodologies and is a forum for commentary and analysis of college, grad and other rankings.” Did you see the word “forum?” Again, where is the ability for a conversation on the site? This isn’t a forum or a venue for comments, this is Mr. Morse’s site to defend his methodology. Period.

Mr. Morse, I encourage you to allow for message postings on your blog site. If you run the ballot box for the largest college and university popularity contest, you should allow for comments on the voting process. Bring the definition of blog and forum to life… and if you do, consider me a repeat visitor to your blog.

-- Teresa Valerio Parrot

Posted by Meredith Simpson at 09:40 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

Finally, a unified stance against US News & World Report – and from an unlikely source.

Many attempts have been made in the last decade to derail the influence of the dreaded USN&WR annual rankings. But until the Annapolis Group, a small but influential liberal arts consortium, took aim at the magazine this week, those attempts failed.

No more.

The New York Times detailed a decision made by “dozens” of independent liberal arts college presidents to boycott participation in the USN&WR survey used as the basis of their annual rankings. The presidents were attending the Annapolis Group’s annual meeting of approximately 80 college presidents and announced their decision at the conclusion of the event.

Their reasoning, as outlined by The New York Times, is that “the ranking system lacks rigor and has had a harmful effect on education priorities, encouraging colleges to do things like soliciting more applicants and then rejecting them, to move up the list.” The participating presidents are going to “develop their own system of comparing institutions. The group intends to work with other higher education organizations to come up with a common format with comparable data.”

I applaud the presidents for taking on such an arduous task, I agree with their assessment of the limitations of the USN&WR approach and I wish them well in their journey. But, I have to say I think I might approach this situation a bit differently if I were in their shoes.

This past spring I conducted a series of focus groups with high school students and learned that they employ a variety of online search engines and ranking tools to choose where to apply, but ALL of them used these tools. Those websites and guides with mainstream names were used more often then those with less cache. Even if dozens of presidents launch a new ranking system, will students understand why and choose their assessment tool over that used by USN&WR? Will their counselors? The renegade group shouldn’t just develop a survey instrument and ranking methodology, they should develop a marketing campaign, too.

As for the presidents feeling guilt for accepting more applications to then reject them… the students also indicated they are applying to a larger number of schools then previous research showed so that the students could have their pick of institutions. It’s a two way street.

When I was in high school my mom told me that if nominated for Homecoming queen, even if you don’t really want the crown, make sure you vote for yourself in the polling because there is no second chance. A high school popularity contest has similarities to a college and university popularity contest, even when the popularity contest is between colleges and universities.

Just because the presidents are boycotting the process, that doesn’t mean that the process won’t go on without them. But I admire the foresight of the Annapolis Group, and I encourage them to develop a new survey instrument and overcome the bias of the USN&WR approach, but don’t forget to vote for yourself and those institutions you think provide strong educational opportunities. There’s no going back.

-- Teresa Valerio Parrot

Posted by Meredith Simpson at 09:51 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

In honor of CT Turner’s entry on Margaret Spellings’ appearance on The Daily Show, I’m going to also mention that she appeared on “Celebrity Jeopardy!” last November. If Diana was the people’s princess, perhaps Spellings is the people’s cabinet secretary.

PS—She came in second to the guy who played Lenny on “Laverne & Shirley” and was on SNL. Guess you can’t win them all.

-- Teresa Valerio Parrot

Posted by Meredith Simpson at 02:38 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

When Secretary of Education Margaret Spellings recently appeared on The Daily Show, she became the only sitting member of the Executive Branch ever to talk with Jon Stewart. As I watched the interview there was one point that stuck out above all in my mind. Stewart asked her how she would improve education and gave her a few of his own ideas. She quickly pointed out the extremely disjointed nature of our K-12 system of education in the U.S. She stated that Health and Human Services is responsible for the food pyramid guidelines, that the Department of Agriculture is responsible for student health issues and that the Department of Education is responsible for “the school stuff” – but the curriculum and textbook choices are handled by local jurisdictions.

This is a perfect illustration of how our approach to education neglects to put the person at the forefront. What can be said about K-12 education can also be said about colleges and universities. Too many times we break apart pieces of our organizations – parsing them out to experts in each area – then never have the energy or buy-in to bring them all at hand to look at how they TOGETHER affect education.

When did we abandon the education of the whole person – mind, body and spirit? Just a few weeks ago Harvard changed its curriculum to require a religion course . While I don’t advocate our colleges and universities becoming extensions of religious sects, we are remiss not to have a discussion about spirituality on campus.

If you think I’m off the mark, just look at the literature that Astin – the guru of student learning in higher education – and the folks at UCLA uncovered: “A 2004 survey of 112,000 college freshmen found that nearly half of them say they are seeking opportunities to grow spiritually. But once at school, nearly half of all students are dissatisfied with the opportunities for ‘spiritual reflection,’ according to the survey by the Higher Education Research Institute (HERI) at the University of California, Los Angeles.”

In 2005, Newsweek and Beliefnet partnered on a poll which found that “79% of Americans prayed at least once a week” and that 57% of Americans say “spirituality is very important in their daily lives”.

If half of our students are seeking spiritual growth, and half say they do not have enough opportunities for spiritual reflection, shouldn’t we realize that this is a vital element of educating the whole person? While religious debate and discussion can’t be a major component of every class, neither can it be relegated solely to dorm room conversations at 3am.

Besides students’ desire for thought and reflection on spirituality, take a look at the violence happening in the name of religion around the world. Is it not the responsibility of everyone – especially educators – to encourage discussions on this globally relevant topic? Shouldn’t we be discussing the roles of spirituality and government in our country and the delicate balance of church and state? “In the end, we may realize that spirituality, a vital component to living a full life for many Americans, has an important place in higher education.”

-- CT Turner

Posted by CT Turner at 10:24 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

At the University of Massachusetts at Boston commencement in May, Governor Deval Patrick outlined his $1 billion “cradle to career” education plan, which the Boston Globe described as “provid[ing] preschool for all children, extend the school day and year, and guarantee two years of community college paid for by the state.” With my liberal tendencies, I am leaping with joy at the thought of extending free education for the masses and strengthening the public education available to students during the critical P-12 years.

But having said that, if Governor Patrick’s plan comes to fruition, it will have a tremendous impact on the numerous colleges and universities in the state. I heard anecdotally last week while working with a college in Boston that there are over 200 institutions of higher education in the greater Boston area. Each institution is in a fight to cut through the clutter and make themselves known to prospective students. With the governor’s plan, they will need to make the case for their institution that much stronger for graduating high school seniors and then again for community college transfers. More than ever, if the institutions in Massachusetts haven’t yet launched comprehensive integrated marketing and branding plans to build their images and reputations, they should start now. If they wait for the outcome of the new governor’s plan, it might be too late.

-- Teresa Valerio Parrot

Posted by Meredith Simpson at 04:51 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)

ARROGANT.

I have no other conclusion in looking back at the reaction by Duke University and its well-heeled brethren who are sobbing in their tangerine martinis over the horrible injustice doled out on their men’s lacrosse team. How arrogant has the Duke administration become?

What a disappointing finale that the men’s lacrosse team lost the NCAA men’s finals in an epic duel with Johns Hopkins on Sunday. Wouldn’t it have been a wonderful story had Duke prevailed – atonement to the miscarriage of justice heaped on these wonderful young future leaders of our country?

What BS, as I have noted in countless media interviews and blog postings. The three Duke lacrosse players implicated wrongfully in the scandal splashed across the national media were "tossed under the bus" by – Duke. Recall that the administration, when the proverbial headlines hit the fan, dismissed the coach and then the players, ending the season for a promising team. They washed their hands of these young men and then hid behind the ivy covered walls designed to keep the Durham folks on the other side.

A district attorney then ran amok, the players were acquitted and all lived happily ever after. Or did they?

That erroneous conclusion would ignore the horrendous handling of the scandal by the administration and the reams of evidence that these players and their teammates were anything other than choir boys. John Feinstein, one of the nation’s preeminent sports writers, called out the Duke administration in a brilliant column in Wednesday’s Washington Post.

And don’t hammer me because I echoed Feinstein’s thoughts, or vice versa. Applaud the fact that one – and only one – prominent sports journalist had the courage to pull back the curtain on Duke athletics and paint a vivid, accurate picture.

Touché, I say.

-- Christopher Simpson

Posted by Meredith Simpson at 09:52 AM | Permalink | Comments (2)

As promised in Teresa Valerio-Parrot's recent blog entry, here are my thoughts on how to influence your US News & World Report rankings.

Few days pass when a client or potential client doesn’t ask: How to improve my US News & World Report rankings?

The short answer is this: It won’t happen, at least not easily or quickly. My partner Elizabeth Scarborough has analyzed institutions that have made significant jumps in rankings. Her conclusions, which will be detailed in a forthcoming blog, are that few if any accomplish the miracle jump unless the move up in categories.

So what to do?

Start here – what not to do: Do not print a beautiful, 12-page, four-color glossy publication and mail it to the 200-plus institutions that vote on your reputation. When I was chief of staff at Indiana University for seven years, my job wasn’t to put those lovely pubs in the hands of the president – but to keep them off his desk.

You can have an impact on your rankings by first creating a reporting team responsible for ensuring that you complete the survey as honestly and favorably as possible. Often we see institutions that drop in ranking due to inadequate survey responses. Get a team, get them to work and hold them accountable.

Next, the president, provost and dean of admissions should look at the list of roughly 210 schools that often vote on peer institutions. If you are ranked 110, for example, divvy up the names from – roughly – 75 to 135. Over the course of the next year, the president, provost and admissions director should have strategic outreach efforts designed to meet and get to know these voters. When a relationship is established, the pretty brochures will be more effective. This is high maintenance, but the only way we have seen to make a significant impact.

If the president, provost and director each meet a dozen people a year, that is 180 over five years. Voila. Look also for opportunities to reach many at once, such as invites to a distinguished speaker’s series or something similar.

Reputation is important in the US News rankings, but ensure that you are realistic when you try to improve your standings.

-- Christopher Simpson

For a deeper look at the rankings and the lengths some schools have gone to influence them, read this article from The Chronicle of Higher Education. Very interesting.

Posted by Meredith Simpson at 09:44 AM | Permalink | Comments (0)

It was interesting to see Monday’s AP story about a dozen university presidents leading a charge to boycott the US News & World Report ranking survey. We’ve already blogged about the focus placed on the rankings; today begins a three-part blog on how USN&WR rankings work, how to influence your placement and does anyone really make quantum leaps from year to year?

In recent months I tracked down information on the methodology of the often misunderstood peer assessment category within the USN&WR rankings and I obtained a copy of the survey instrument, which we are making available to you.

The comprehensive rankings are based upon the following categories and their assessment weight: peer assessment, 25%, retention, 20%; faculty resources, 20%; student selectivity, 15%; financial resources, 10%; graduation rate performance, 5%; and alumni giving, 5%. There is a paragraph within the methodology description that delineates the “peer assessment” rankings:

Peer assessment (weighting: 25 percent). The U.S. News ranking formula gives greatest weight to the opinions of those in a position to judge a school's undergraduate academic excellence. The peer assessment survey allows the top academics we consult—presidents, provosts, and deans of admissions—to account for intangibles such as faculty dedication to teaching. Each individual is asked to rate peer schools' academic programs on a scale from 1 (marginal) to 5 (distinguished). Those who don't know enough about a school to evaluate it fairly are asked to mark "don't know." Synovate, an opinion-research firm based near Chicago, collected the data; of the 4,089 people who were sent questionnaires, 58 percent responded.

So how does it work? I called and talked with Robert J. Morse, Director of Data Research for USN&WR (this means he is the rankings guru), and asked him for clarification on the peer assessment portion of the rankings. He was kind enough to walk me through the process used.

A school’s Carnegie classification is used as the basis for its overall categorization within the rankings. For explanation purposes, I’m going to use the liberal arts rankings to illustrate how the peer assessment calculation works. There are 215 schools within the liberal arts college category; USN&WR sends a survey to the president, provost and dean of admissions from each of the 215 institutions, for a total of 645 surveys distributed. The responses are used to calculate 25% of the overall ranking referenced above. The tiers used in the reporting of the rankings are based upon the overall score and reported annually as follows:

Top Schools: The top 50 percent of schools in this category, ranked numerically
Tier 3 Schools: The next 25 percent of schools in this category, listed alphabetically
Tier 4 Schools: The bottom 25 percent of schools in this category, listed alphabetically

So what’s on the survey? The three recipients from each school are asked to rank all 215 liberal arts colleges on a five-point scale ranging from distinguished to marginal, with “don’t know” serving as a sixth option, based upon “each program’s scholarship record, curriculum, and quality of faculty and graduates.” The scores are compiled, and the 25% of the overall ranking is calculated.

Here is the absolute coup of my telephone call: Mr. Morse was kind enough to send me a copy of the liberal arts survey used in 2006. Our blog software is unable to upload files, so please visit our resource page if you would like a copy of the survey. Enjoy!

Watch for the upcoming “how to influence the rankings” blog by Christopher Simpson, and Elizabeth Scarborough's entry detailing her analysis of schools' moves up and down the rankings ladder.

-- Teresa Valerio Parrot

Posted by Teresa Valerio Parrot at 12:26 PM | Permalink | Comments (0)