Teens Talk - Stamats
Upcoming SlideShare
Loading in...5
×
 

Like this? Share it with your network

Share

Teens Talk - Stamats

on

  • 1,921 views

Dr. Brenda Harms, Principal Consultant, Stamats, Inc. ...

Dr. Brenda Harms, Principal Consultant, Stamats, Inc.

Stamats’ annual TALK® study is one of the higher education industry’s benchmark research resources, offering insight into the Trends, Attitudes, Lifestyles, and Knowledge (T.A.L.K.) of traditional-aged, college-bound students
and their parents. For over 10 years Stamats has conducted research with college bound students to better understand how and why they make the decisions they do and what truly matters to them when they are considering their options. If you are interested in developing a deeper understanding of what is going on in the heads and hearts as teens make their college choice this session is sure to inform.

Statistics

Views

Total Views
1,921
Views on SlideShare
1,919
Embed Views
2

Actions

Likes
1
Downloads
7
Comments
0

2 Embeds 2

https://bbgroupb.syr.edu 1
http://www.docseek.net 1

Accessibility

Categories

Upload Details

Uploaded via as Adobe PDF

Usage Rights

© All Rights Reserved

Report content

Flagged as inappropriate Flag as inappropriate
Flag as inappropriate

Select your reason for flagging this presentation as inappropriate.

Cancel
  • Full Name Full Name Comment goes here.
    Are you sure you want to
    Your message goes here
    Processing…
Post Comment
Edit your comment

Teens Talk - Stamats Presentation Transcript

  • 1. 2010 TeensTALK® Findings Over a Complete Recruiting Cycle Presented by Dr. Brenda Harms Principal Consultant (800) 553-8878 brenda.harms@stamats.com
  • 2. About Stamats Stamats is a higher education marketing thought leader with a distinct, customized-solutions approach to the marketplace. Our array of time- tested services has set the standard for a marketing partner: actionable, research-based counsel that can inform effective, multiple-media creative solutions and strategic thinking. We promise our clients the highest level of professional service and attention to detail because we know our success is measured by theirs. Research Creative Services • Image, perception, and brand studies • Creative concepting • Recruiting, marketing, brand, and • Web strategies academic program marketability audits • Recruiting and advancement • Tuition Pricing ElasticityTM studies publications • Communication process mapping
  • 3. Methodology • Nationwide survey of 500 high school students who will attend college as first-year freshman in fall 2010 • 2009 summer interviews conducted in June • 2009 fall interviews conducted in November • 2010 spring interviews conducted in February–March • Sampling at random (probability sample) to provide rigorous data set for accurate assessment of college-selection decision process © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 3
  • 4. Methodology • Format provides a means to compare and contrast national figures with results among individual institution prospective students. Key issues include: – Timing of selection (Is the national audience ahead of, equal to, or behind the population of prospective students for individual institutions in terms of making final selection decisions?) – Number of visits, applications submitted, and deposits paid (currently and in the future) – Absolute and relative importance of specific factors in decision about which colleges to consider – Details of top choice college currently and incidence of having made final decision – Acceptable and preferred communication methods – Involvement of others in college selection process © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 4
  • 5. Geographic Dispersion of Spring Respondents Base: All 2010 Spring TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 5
  • 6. Spring Respondent Demographics: Gender, Ethnicity Respondent Gender Respondent Ethnicity Hispanic 10% Mixed, other 2% Asian Male, 47% 8% Black, Afr. Am. 12% Female, 53% White, Caucasian 68% Base: All 2010 Spring TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 6
  • 7. Spring Respondent Demographics: Taken ACT Exam? Took ACT, Percent with ACT score of: 55% 50% 40% 31% 28% 30% 21% 20% 13% 7% 10% 0% Not taken <19 19 to 22 23 to 26 27 to 30 31+ • Mean score: 25.6; Median score: 27.0 ACT, 45% Base: All 2010 Spring TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 7
  • 8. Spring Respondent Demographics: Taken SAT Exam? Percent with SAT score of: Have not taken SAT, 60% 40% 40% 26% 24% 23% 20% 13% 14% Took SAT, 0% 60% 1000 or 1001 to 1151 to 1301 to 1451+ less 1150 1300 1450 • Mean score:1196; Median score:1255 Base: All 2010 Spring TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 8
  • 9. College Consideration and Selection © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 9
  • 10. Fall 2009: Number of Applications Submitted Percent submitting applications to: 1 school 16% 0 schools • Mean number of 17% applications: 2.9 • Median number of applications: 2.0 10+ schools 5% • Strong majority of 2 to 4 schools prospective students 40% have applied to one or 5 to 9 schools more schools 22% Base: All 2009 Fall TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 10
  • 11. Spring 2010: Number of Applications Submitted Percent submitted applications to: 1 school 25% • Mean number of applications: 3.8 0 schools • Median number of 5% applications: 3.0 10+ schools • Strong majority of 6% prospective students 2 to 4 schools 42% have applied to one or more schools 5 to 9 schools 22% Base: All 2010 Spring TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 11
  • 12. Number of School Acceptances • Mean number accepted: 2.7 Percent accepted at: • Median number accepted: 1 school 1.0 38% 0 schools 14% • Strong majority of prospective students have 10+ schools been accepted to at least 1% one school, though typical 5 to 9 schools number just slightly higher 9% when compared to fall 2009 respondents who had 2 to 4 schools applied to one or more 38% schools (mean: 2.0, median: 1.0) Base: All 2010 Spring TeensTALK® respondents applying to one or more schools (n=474) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 12
  • 13. Fall 2009: Planned Total Number of Schools to Visit Percent reporting total visits to: 2 to 4 schools • Mean number of total 1 school 45% visits: 4.8 10% • Median number of total 0 schools visits: 4.0 4% • Total visits to colleges and 10+ schools 9% universities typically around five, and nearly two-thirds of those visits reported to take place 5 to 9 schools 32% before late November of the senior year Base: All 2009 Fall TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 13
  • 14. Fall 2009: Number of Schools Visited to Date Percent who have visited: 1 school 18% 0 schools 15% • Mean number of visits: 2.9 • Median number of visits: 10+ schools 3% 2.0 • Majority of prospective students have made one 5 to 9 schools 2 to 4 schools 16% or more visits, one-fifth 48% have visited five or more Base: All 2009 Fall TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 14
  • 15. Spring 2010: Number of Schools Visited Percent who have visited: 1 school 24% • Mean number of visits: 3.3 0 schools 10% • Median number of visits: 2.0 10+ schools 1% • Majority of prospective students have made one 5 to 9 schools or more visits, and typical 12% number of visits appears 2 to 4 schools slightly higher compared 53% to fall 2009 figure (mean: 2.9, median: 2.0) Base: All 2010 Spring TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 15
  • 16. Fall 2009: Number of Deposits Paid Percent paying deposit at: 2 to 4 schools 0 schools • Mean number of deposits: 5% 50% 0.6 • Median number of deposits: 1.0 • Only half of students accepted to one or more 1 school schools have submitted 45% deposit Base: All 2009 Fall TeensTALK® respondents accepted to one or more schools (n=308) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 16
  • 17. Spring 2010: Number of Deposits Paid Percent paying deposit at: 0 schools 35% • Mean number of deposits: 0.9 2 to 4 schools • Median number of deposits: 16% 1.0 • About two-thirds of students accepted to one or more schools have submitted deposit—as expected, deposit activity slightly higher than 1 school seen in fall 2009 (mean: 0.6, 49% median: 1.0) Base: All 2010 Spring TeensTALK® respondents accepted to one or more schools (n=408) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 17
  • 18. Summary of Recruitment Activity to Date Percent of prospective students who have: 90% 95% 100% 81% 80% 53% 60% 40% 20% 0% Made Applied Been Paid visit(s) accepted deposit • Majority of prospective students have made visits, applied, and have been accepted to at least one school • Two-thirds of those accepted to at least one school have submitted a deposit, though represents a minority of all prospective students Base: All 2010 Spring TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 18
  • 19. Number of Applications to Submit in Future Percent submitting application(s) to: 0 schools • Mean number of future 53% applications: 1.0 • Median number, future applications: 0.0 5 to 9 schools • Very slim majority of 2% prospective students suggest they are unlikely to submit applications to additional 2 to 4 schools schools (essentially half have 16% 1 school wrapped up application 29% activities) Base: All 2010 Spring TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 19
  • 20. Number of Deposits in Future Percent likely to submit deposit(s) in future at: 0 schools • Mean number of future 47% deposits: 1.1 • Median number of future deposits: 1.0 5 to 9 schools • A very slim majority of 5% all prospective students suggest they will submit 2 to 4 schools 10% a deposit to one or more 1 school schools in future— 38% suggests about one-half of deposit activity has been completed Base: All 2010 Spring TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 20
  • 21. 2009 Fall: Incidence of Having Made Final College Selection No final decision, 52% Yes, made final decision, 48% • Nearly one-half have made final selection by late fall (November) • Characteristics of those more likely to have reached final decision: attending 2- year school, attending public/in-state, attending professional rather than liberal arts program, have received financial aid offer, female rather than male • Factors not correlated with having made final decision: high school rank, ACT/SAT score Base: All 2009 Fall TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 21
  • 22. Spring 2010: Incidence of Having Made Final College Selection No final decision, 37% Yes, made final decision, 63% • Nearly two-thirds have made final selection by late winter/early spring (up from just over one-half who had completed final selection in fall execution) • Characteristics of those more likely to have reached final decision: attending two-year school, attending public/in-state, attending professional rather than liberal arts program, have received financial aid offer, female rather than male • Factors not correlated with having made final decision: high school rank, ACT/SAT score Base: All 2010 Spring TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 22
  • 23. Summer 2009: Incidence of Having Made Final College Selection Yes, made final decision, 96% No final decision, 4% • Essentially all have made final selection as of the middle of June – well-equipped to respond to questions regarding how final decision was made and who was involved Base: All 2009 Summer TeensTALK® respondents © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 23
  • 24. Length of Time Top School Has Been Preferred Option Percent who say: Known for years, others not considered • About one-third of 31% students really had mind No preferred option in past set on one institution 20% long ago, not really actively ―in play‖ • One-half say they had a Had preferred, preferred option, though considered were actively considering others other schools 49% Base: All 2010 Spring TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 24
  • 25. Fall 2009: Timing of Final Selection Decision Percent of students making final selection decision in: October 53% November 53% December 55% January 61% February 68% March 77% April 88% May 95% June 96% July 98% August 100% September 100% 40% 60% 80% 100% • Over half suggest final decision made before January of senior year, three in four will have decided by March • Notable proportion had mind made up about desired school long ago (a foregone conclusion rather than proactive decision) Base: All 2009 Fall TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 25
  • 26. Fall 2009: Current Top Choice: 2-Year vs. 4-Year Institution Top choice a 2-year, 14% • Respondents citing two- year school as current top choice are more likely to indicate decision is firm (despite the fact they’re behind others in terms of submitting application, deposit) Top choice a 4-year, 86% Base: All 2009 Fall TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 26
  • 27. Fall 2009: Current Top Choice: Public vs. Private Institution Top choice private, 33% • Respondents citing public school as current top choice more likely to indicate their decision is firm Top choice public, 67% Base: All 2009 Fall TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 27
  • 28. Summer 2009: Applied to Public vs. Private Institutions (Top-3 Options) Percent applying at: Public and private 30% Private only 14% Public only 56% Base: All 2009 Summer TeensTALK® respondents © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 28
  • 29. Fall 2009: Current Top Choice: Liberal Arts vs. General/Professional Top choice liberal arts, 33% • Respondents citing general/professional school as current top choice more likely to indicate decision is firm Top choice general, 67% Base: All 2009 Fall TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 29
  • 30. Summer 2009: Applied to Liberal Arts vs. General Professional (Top 3 Options) Percent applying at: Liberal arts only 35% • Nearly one in five respondents were unable to identify the programmatic orientations of the institutions to which Both Professional they applied only 39% 23% Base: All 2009 Summer TeensTALK® respondents who answered this question © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 30
  • 31. Current Top Choice: Size of Institution Student enrollment at top choice school Under 5K students 21% • Respondents citing smaller schools slightly more likely to indicate they’ve made final decision—likely 5 to 15K corresponds to scale of students 44% many two-year schools 15K+ • Size of current top choice students institution similar to that 35% identified in fall 2009 study Base: All 2010 Spring TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 31
  • 32. Fall 2009: Current Top Choice: In-State vs. Out of State Out of state, 29% • Between one-quarter and one-third of prospective students currently favor school outside their home state • Mixed bag of interests among those looking out of state (no single In home state, demographic 71% characteristic correlated with focus across state lines) Base: All 2009 Fall TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 32
  • 33. Distance to Current Top Choice Campus Percent with distance between home and campus of: 100% 80% 60% 36% 40% 28% 20% 13% 11% 12% 0% 30 miles 31 to 60 61 to 120 121 to over 500 or less miles miles 500 miles miles • Those with top schools close to home more likely to select public, general/professional school • Longest distances to top school found among those favoring private, liberal arts institution (though also less likely to have made final decision) • Distances similar to those suggested by fall 2009 respondents Base: All 2010 Spring TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 33
  • 34. Factor Importance When Selecting Colleges to Consider Share of importance when identifying colleges to consider: Quality of preferred major 20% Graduates get good jobs 17% Feels like a good fit for you 13% Net cost after financial aid 11% Total cost of attending 8% Overall academic reputation 5% Quality faculty-teach, mentor 5% Quality of academic facilities 3% Quality of campus amenities 3% People welcoming, friendly 3% Safety of the campus 2% Variety of campus activities 2% Study abroad opportunities 2% Community where located 2% Distance: campus to home 1% Off-campus activities 1% Religious/denominational affil. 1% Appearance of the campus 1% Family, friends connected 1% 0% 10% 20% • Final decision process is somewhat different and separate from the process for identifying what colleges to consider—faculty quality, for example, is twice as important in final decision • Quality of outcomes, fit, and economics key selection criteria when trying to determine which to consider Base: All 2009 Fall TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 34
  • 35. Factor Importance When Selecting Colleges to Consider Share of importance when identifying colleges to consider: Graduates get good jobs 17% Quality of preferred major 15% Net cost after financial aid 13% Feels like a good fit for you 10% Total cost of attending 8% Quality faculty-teach, mentor 7% Overall academic reputation 6% Quality of academic facilities 4% Quality of campus amenities 3% People welcoming, friendly 3% Safety of the campus 3% Study abroad opportunities 3% Variety of campus activities 2% Community where located 2% Distance: campus to home 2% Off-campus activities 1% Religious/denominational affil. 1% Appearance of the campus 1% Family, friends connected 1% 0% 10% 20% • Factor importance among spring respondents fairly similar to that indicated by respondents in previous fall, though slightly greater emphasis on cost and outcomes suggests value is more carefully considered later in the decision process Base: All 2010 Spring TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 35
  • 36. Factor Importance in Final Selection Grads get good jobs 18% Net cost after aid 15% Quality faculty, teach/mentor 12% Academic reputation 9% Feels like good fit 7% Safety of the campus 6% Quality academic facilities 6% Study abroad opportunities 5% Total cost to attend 5% Friendly, welcoming people 5% Campus amenities 3% On-campus activities 3% City, community location 2% Distance from home 2% Religious affiliation 1% Campus appearance 1% Off-campus activities 1% Family, friend connection 1% 0% 10% 20% 30% • Final decision process is different and separate from the process for identifying what colleges to consider in the selection set (less important factors likely had more sizable impact earlier in the process) • Job opportunities and net cost are the most important final selection criteria across all respondents Base: All 2009 Summer TeensTALK® respondents © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 36
  • 37. Involvement of Others When Narrowing College Options Others are Others are Others are involved, 57% involved, 53% involved, 48% When narrowing When making When making options - Fall final choice - final choice - Spring Summer Entirely own Entirely own decision, 43% decision, 47% Entirely own decision, 52% • Majority of prospective students sorting through college options with help from others • Percentages reverse when making final choice, somewhat less likely to rely on outside help Base: All 2010 Spring TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 37
  • 38. Others Involved in Narrowing College Options Extent of involvement at this stage by: Parents 39% 15% High school counselor 9% 16% Sibling 9% 15% Friends 6% 20% Other relative 6% 12% Current college student 5% 12% High school teacher 4% 15% Admission counselor 4% 9% Very Involved College coach 3%4% Somewhat Involved High school coach 2%4% College prof essor 2%4% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% • Parents the only widespread mention in terms of helping thin out options • Six or seven others mentioned by fairly sizable group of prospective students—few students lean heavily on multiple sources Base: All 2009 Fall TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 38
  • 39. Others Involved in Final College Selection Decision Extent of involvement in decision by: Parents 66% 26% High school f riend 16% 43% High school teacher 12% 39% High school counselor 23% 29% College admissions coun. 13% 35% Current college student 9% 32% College prof essor 6% 26% Sibling 10% 24% Other relative 9% 24% Very Involved High school coach 4% 14% Somewhat Involved College coach 5% 12% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Base: All 2010 Spring TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 39
  • 40. Others Involved in Final College Selection Decision Extent of involvement in final decision by: Parents 70% 25% High school f riend 15% 38% High school teacher 14% 39% High school counselor 20% 31% College admissions coun. 13% 38% Current college student 12% 34% College prof essor 9% 25% Sibling 9% 31% Other relative 9% 30% Very Involved High school coach 5% 12% Somewhat Involved College coach 7% 10% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Base: All 2009 Summer TeensTALK® respondents © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 40
  • 41. Acceptable Communication Methods Before Applying Percent citing method as acceptable: Personal letter: postal mail 94% Personalized e-mail 93% Publications: postal mail 86% Personal visit to high school 76% Phone calls to you 69% Mass electronic mail 54% Phone calls to parents 44% Facebook, MySpace message 30% Text message: cell phone 24% Personal visits to home 23% Instant messages 20% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% • Text, instant messaging, and social media still not widely accepted as means of communicating • Nearly all forms of communication moving from college to students less acceptable at this stage compared to post-application stage (late spring, summer) Base: All 2009 Fall TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 41
  • 42. Acceptable Communication Methods After Applying Percent citing method as acceptable: Personal letter: postal mail 96% Personalized e-mail 95% Publications: postal mail 88% Personal visit to high school 77% Phone calls to you 73% Mass electronic mail 50% Phone calls to parents 36% Facebook, MySpace message 32% Text message: cell phone 22% Personal visits to home 19% Instant messages 18% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% • Text, instant messaging, and social media still not widely accepted as means of communicating • Nearly all forms of communication directly with parents show limited acceptance (who is perhaps more important than how) Base: All 2010 Spring TeensTALK® respondents (n=500) © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 42
  • 43. Acceptable Communication Methods After Applying Percent citing method as acceptable: Personal letter: postal mail 99% Personalized e-mail 95% Publications: postal mail 94% Phone call to you 94% Personal visit to high school 78% Phone call to parents 75% Mass electronic mail 60% Facebook, MySpace message 31% Personal visit to home 30% Instant messaging 25% Text message: cell phone 24% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100% • Text, instant messaging, and social media still not widely accepted as means of communicating, even among applicants to the school Base: All 2009 Summer TeensTALK® respondents © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 43
  • 44. Major Takeaways? © 2010 Stamats, Inc. - 44
  • 45. Thank you Presented by Dr. Brenda Harms Principal Consultant (800) 553-8878 brenda.harms@stamats.com