Download to read offline
We want you
- 1. We want you: Marketinghighly selective four year colleges to veterans Kim Blank M.Ed. Higher Education Administration College of William and Mary
- 2. Presentation Outline • Background information • Selection & Methodology • Survey • Selected Results • Interpreting Results • Practical Application • Recommendations
- 3. Background • Servicemen’s ReadjustmentAct of 1944 (also called the G.I. Bill) • Educational benefits – College, business – Technical or vocational – Apprenticeship/job training – Flight training
- 4. Background • Veterans’ AdjustmentAct of 1952 – Added Korean War veterans • Veterans Readjustment Benefits Act of 1966 – Added those who served in times of war and peace • Veterans Education Assistance Program (VEAP): in response to the transition to an all-volunteer military • Montgomery G.I. Bill
- 5. Background • VEAP wasChapter 32 (for those who entered active duty between 1/1/77- 6/30/85): contributions matched 2:1 • Post-9/11 G.I. Bill (Chapter 33) initially approved in 2008 and updated in 2010 and 2011 – Extends eligibility to members of the National Guard – Adds provision for distance learners
- 6. Selection • Carnegie Classificationsof Institutions of Higher Education – Highly selective – Not-for-profit – Four-year • 338 colleges/universities – Remove non-English language websites – Remove for-profit – Collect email addresses for chief enrollment officers (VP Enrollment, Director of Admissions, etc.)
- 7. Methodology • Qualtrics SurveySystem • Emailed survey to chief enrollment officers (personal email addresses when possible) • Reminder survey one week from initial email • 43/50 responses within the first week • 4 respondents requested results
- 8. Survey • Add stuffhere • REMEMBER TO CITE
- 9. Survey • Add stuffhere • REMEMBER TO CITE
- 10. Survey • Add stuffhere • REMEMBER TO CITE
- 11. Survey • Add stuffhere • REMEMBER TO CITE
- 12. Survey • Add stuffhere • REMEMBER TO CITE
- 13. Survey • Add stuffhere • REMEMBER TO CITE
- 14. Selected Results Approximately howmany veterans attend your institution? 0 1 to 15 6 to 15 16 to 30 31 to 60 61 to 100 Greater than 100
- 15. Selected Results Does yourinstitution have a separate office dedicated to services for veterans? Yes No
- 16. Selected Results Who tracksindividual G.I. Bill users at your institution? Admissions Financial Aid Registrar Veterans Benefits Office Staff Member Other
- 17. Selected Results Does yourinstitution contribute additional or matching funds (grants, scholarships, fellowships, etc.) to supplement G.I. benefits? Yes No
- 18. Selected Results Have youseen an increase in veteran applicants in the past 4 years (since 2008)? Yes No Unsure
- 19. Selected Results Does youradmissions office and literature include any specific information for veterans? Yes No Unsure
- 20. Selected Results Does youruniversity market specifically to veterans? Yes No Unsure
- 21. Selected Results How welldo you think your institution supports the unique needs of veteran students through the services you have previously identified? Very Poorly Somewhat Poorly Somewhat Well Very Well
- 22. Selected Results • “Weare currently looking into a variety of other services, such as a veterans orientation, programs to improve transition from the military to college, retention, and graduation. We are working closely with the collegiate student veterans group to ensure that the services we are providing and the avenues we are pursuing are meeting the needs of the veterans.” • “Our small class size and student to teacher ratio of 11:1 makes the return to the classroom for most veterans far less daunting… Most of our students fit the Army ROTC “Scholar, Athlete, Leader” model.”
- 23.
- 24.
- 25.
- 26.
- 27.
- 28.
- 29. What do theymean? • Enrollment is on the rise– should universities be acting differently? • Only approximately ½ mention veterans in their literature– could they add just a line or paragraph? • Many respondents are unsure of marketing strategies (see question 16) • Few universities require separate offices, since the numbers are not large
- 30. Practical Application • Aseparate office isn’t typically necessary • Many institutions provided website links; could create a linked page at little cost • Few institutions report specific literature; updates could be made to offer inclusion of basic info/link • Few noteworthy differences between states • Few noteworthy differences between public/private institutions
- 31. Recommendations • Create prominentlink on admissions website (many are hidden) –Include links to useful websites, like Veteran Friendly Toolkit –Link to other institutional sites (financial aid, residence life, etc.) –Include in literature (see next recommendation)
- 32. Recommendations • Update literatureto include information for veterans – Create insert if publications are already printed – At least include a link to the website from the previous recommendation – Consistency across publications
- 33. Recommendations • Utilize outsidesources (Veterans Toolkit, other websites) –Veteran Friendly Toolkit –VA website –Yellow Ribbon Program –Other military-supporting non-profits
- 34. Recommendations • Better trainingof admissions staff – Consistent information (do we market to veterans?) – Sharing across departments (residence life, academic life, registrar, financial aid) – Knowledge of outside resources (VA contacts, non-profits)
- 35. Additional Resources • MyWiki Page – http://kbmastersproject.wmwikis.net/ • G.I. Bill – http://www.gibill.va.gov/ • Yellow Ribbon Program – http://www.yellowribbon.mil/ • Toolkit for Veteran Friendly Institutions – http://vetfriendlytoolkit.org/
- 36. References • See completereference list at: http://kbmastersproject.wmwikis.n et/References