College and University Student Recruitment

This article discusses the recruitment of students at colleges and universities in the U.S. Student recruitment is one of two main components of the enrollment management process (Kroc & Hanson, 2003). Prospective students and higher education institutions both have a role in who is recruited to institutions. Technology, specifically e-recruitment, has come to be a major force in the student recruitment process through such avenues as personalized web recruitment. However, some are concerned that the use of technology may hinder equality of opportunity in higher education.

Keywords Enrollment Management; Equality of Opportunity; E-recruitment; Pipeline; Student Retention; Student Choice; Student Recruitment

Overview

It has been asserted that officials at colleges and universities must work hard to ensure that there is a match between the characteristics of their colleges and universities and the students they recruit to attend them (Paulsen, 1990). At the same time, this matching process may aggravate the issue of who has access to higher education institutions. For instance, Hearn (1991) offered, "The evidence suggests that within the matching process lies a sorting mechanism that subtly reinforces nonmeritocratic tendencies in U.S. society" (p. 168). The access issue is important because where one attends college or university may impact future livelihood. According to Hearn (1991),

Because attending a more selective, resource-rich institution has been associated with measurable positive impacts on educational attainment, income attainment, status attainment, and socially valued aspects of citizenship, the issues of who attends such institutions and how attendance patterns at such institutions change over time are of both policy and theoretical importance (p. 159).

The Student Recruitment Process

Student recruitment is one of two primary components of the enrollment management function of higher education institutions. In general, enrollment management is about managing "the flow of students to, through, and from college" (Kroc & Hanson, 2003, p. 79). Along with recruitment, the other main component of enrollment management involves the retention of students (Kroc & Hanson, 2003).

According to Kroc and Hanson (2003), the student recruitment process at an institution should be driven by questions of which students the institution wants to educate and what students are available (i.e., the recruitment "pipeline"). Institutional mission and goals help to answer the first question about who the institution is trying to educate (Kroc & Hanson, 2003). At the same time, an institution must also take into account its pipeline of potential students because "defining the boundaries of the educational pipeline for the institution is an important task for effective student recruitment" (Kroc & Hanson, 2003, p. 80). In general, an institution's pipeline of potential students is bound by the student characteristics desired and the number of students available in the overall pool of potential students (Kroc & Hanson, 2003).

Overall, yield rates are generally indicative of the effectiveness of recruiting activities (Kroc & Hanson, 2003). Institutions' yield rates are related to the number of students who actually enroll after being offered admission. Yield is closely tied to institutional selectivity, which basically translates into the number of students accepted for admission who apply (Hawkins & Clinedinst, 2006). The more selective an institution, the fewer applicants it accepts for admission. Yet, more selective institutions tend to have higher yield rates.

The Role of Student Choice

Student choice, or how students choose a college, is also an important aspect of student recruitment (Kroc & Hanson, 2003). Institutions may conduct or commission studies to determine what factors influence application and enrollment behaviors of the students in their recruitment pipeline. In general, the factors that mainly influence a student's decision of whether to apply to college and what institutions to apply to may differ from those that largely influence the final enrollment decision a student makes (Choy & Ottinger, 1998). For instance, parents, guidance counselors, and friends may help a student decide which institutions to apply to but the student may employ other factors in making his or her final decision. Blau (1994) noted, for example, that where students ultimately enroll depends in part upon differences in tuition and scholarships.

Regarding application behaviors, Blau (1994), for instance, found that certain factors help to predict what institutions outstanding prospective students will be attracted to. For instance, outstanding students will be attracted to affluent institutions with well-qualified and well-paid faculty members that offer a diversity of department programs (Blau, 1994). Such factors actually pose a dilemma for institutions because they generally necessitate that institutions be large in size yet the larger an institution the less attractive it is to outstanding students. Blau (1994) further explains that large size "inevitably makes the academic institution more impersonal and engenders bureaucratic developments in it, both of which reduce its attraction for the best students" (p. 100). Successful athletic programs have also been found to attract additional applicants by essentially acting as marketing devices. However, they may not necessarily help to improve the quality of applicants applying to an institution or the likelihood that students will enroll if accepted ("Do Bowl Wins Mean Better Students?," 2004).

In terms of enrollment behaviors, one study found that first-time freshmen who enrolled in a public or private, not-for-profit four-year institution in 1995-96 more often cited reputation than location, price, or the influence of others as the most important reason for their enrollment decision (Choy & Ottinger, 1998). At the same time, freshmen at public institutions were more likely than freshmen at private, not-for-profit four-year institutions to cite location or price as the most important reason driving their enrollment decision (Choy & Ottinger, 1998).

Applications

It is apparent that institutions tend to invest a great deal of resources in the student recruitment process. In fact, a survey of non-profit institutions conducted by Noel-Levitz (2006a) in the fall of 2005 found that four-year private institutions spend more than four-year public institutions to recruit students. The median cost reported for 2004-05 to recruit a single student was $455 at four-year public institutions as compared to $2,073 at four-year private institutions (Noel-Levitz, 2006a).

Market-oriented Approaches to Recruiting

In the 1970s, projected declines in the pool of traditional-aged prospective college students along with other factors helped to spark higher education institutions' interest in market-oriented approaches to student recruitment (Paulsen, 1990). The basis of these approaches is to be able to better project enrollments as well as better influence college-going decisions of prospective students (Paulsen, 1990). Over thirty years later, Moore (2004) documented that colleges and universities were increasingly taking a market-oriented approach to recruiting. For example, some higher education institutions appear to be doing more to enhance their particular image or "brand" in order to attract the types of students they desire, among other goals (Moore, 2004). Moore (2004) noted that "through effective marketing, many institutions have succeeded in aligning or enhancing their images to better fulfill the promise they convey to the constituencies that they already "own" or desire to attract" (p 11). Weisbuch (2007) noted that branding typically involves identifying the areas in which an institution excels or has the greatest competitive advantage. Sevier (2005) argued that a strong brand can aid in the recruitment process by helping institutions to attract better students, students who are more willing to pay full price, and students who are more likely to persist. One of the most important thing colleges and universities need to have when embarking on a branding initiative is support from top leadership (Sevier, 2007). Institutions have also tended to use both traditional (e.g., news media, website, advertising, and print publications) and non-traditional marketing channels to communicate their brand message (Sevier, 2007). Regarding non-traditional marketing channels, an alumnus and trustee offered to help the University of Maryland, for instance, plaster brand messages on 18-wheelers that travel between Washington, D.C., and New York every day (Sevier, 2007).

Increasingly, institutions are adding student blogs to their array of recruitment tools. In her study, Sandlin found that “authentic student-written blogs served as dress rehearsals for prospective college students—giving them the opportunity to role play as college students and experience college scenarios (e.g., taking classes, living with roommates, choosing a major, participating in college athletics). By doing so, student-written blogs helped participants shape their identities, reduce their anxieties about college and consider college compatibility” (Sandlin, 2013, p. 45).

Colleges and universities are also drawing on their capital facilities as marketing resources. According to Padjen (2002), "the size of the applicant pool and the eventual admissions yield frequently depend on one factor: the campus tour" (p. 19). As such, campus architecture is being tapped as a way to market to prospective students, who expect to get the most they can for their tuition dollars (Padjen, 2002). Recent campus construction projects, such as recreation facilities that resemble health clubs or dining halls that look like restaurants, are focused on buildings that can provide students with cushy or posh amenities (Padjen, 2002).

Technology's Role

Today, technology pervades market-oriented approaches to student recruitment. For example, Blair (2000) indicated that the "new style calls for shifting marketing efforts to the Internet, using 'virtual' tours, personalized e-mail newsletters, and online admissions" (p.1). Institutions are moving to make their websites interactive as well as highlight certain buildings and/or events on their campuses through virtual tours, for instance. One bonus of using technology to recruit students is that it can mean a cost savings for institutions (Blair, 2000). In general, e-mail and the Internet are the backbone of e-recruitment efforts today but a recent survey also showed that recruitment efforts that tap into instant messaging and cell phones (e.g., text messaging) may be other technologies that institutions should start investigating (Roach, 2006). A survey of non-profit institutions conducted by Noel-Levitz (2006b) in the spring of 2006 in fact found that the use of e-mail and Web pages as recruitment tools is most common while more innovative technological developments, such as weblogs and chat rooms, are still not readily utilized. At the same time, nearly half of all four-year institutions surveyed indicated that they do offer virtual tours on their websites (Noel-Levitz, 2006b).

The University of Dayton is one institution that has achieved success in wooing prospective students through personalized web recruitment strategies (Foster, 2003). Personalized web recruitment has been a major factor in increased numbers of applications to the university as well as a lower per applicant recruitment cost (Foster, 2003). Foster (2003) reported that "with competition intensifying for qualified students, and with teenagers becoming more Internet savvy, colleges like Dayton are finding that reaching students through the Web and e-mail is easier, faster, and cheaper than using telephone calls or postal mail" (p.6).

Fratt (2006) noted that there are some colleges and universities that are beginning to experiment with more innovative e-recruitment strategies like text messaging as well as instant messaging in communicating with prospective and accepted students. According to one director of admissions, "Both instant messaging and text messaging are cost-effective and reach millennial students in their comfort zone," (Fratt, 2006, p. 90). However, it has been advised that institutions testing the use of text messaging would be wise to approach its use cautiously as studies have found that some students consider it a very personal mode of communication and actually have to pay to receive messages (Fratt, 2006).

Rider University in New Jersey is one institution that has integrated email communications as well as instant messaging into its recruitment strategies (Santovec, 2004). However, the university generally uses email to supplement print publications because it has found that students respond best to email only once the university has already captured their attention (Santovec, 2004). Regarding instant messaging, Rider has trained current students answer questions prospective students may have about relevant topics, like campus life (Santovec, 2004).

A recent survey also found that prospective students may be open to recruitment methods that utilize social networking technologies, like those behind popular websites such as MySpace.com and Facebook.com (Roach, 2006). Blogs are also a potential recruitment tool as 63 percent of the students surveyed indicated that they would read a faculty member's blog (Roach, 2006). Several institutions, like Santa Clara University in California, have actually recruited current students to create and maintain blogs about their lives at university so that prospective students can access first-hand accounts about the student experience ("Santa Clara University," 2005).

While the Internet has come to be a major force in student recruitment, a sizeable proportion of prospective students still prefer printed brochures over websites and paper mail over email (Roach, 2006). According to Roach (2006), "that means that while schools may want to go entirely paperless and send all communications via e-mail or some other electronic means, paper still has a role to play in outreach and recruitment efforts" (p 5). Moreover, applicants who apply on-line have been found to yield at lower rates than those who apply by way of traditional paper-based forms (Noel-Levitz, 2007).

Current Issues

Hearn (1991) noted that "the pursuit of equal opportunity to attend postsecondary educational institutions has long been a focus of national attention," (p. 158). Hearn (1991) further elaborated that higher education institutions in the United States are stratified according to prestige and level of resources and those at the top of the hierarchy are arguably less accessible to the masses. Likewise, Blau (1994) remarked that "academia is an avenue of social mobility for many Americans, but not all universities and colleges are equally good channels of mobility" (p. 92).

Regarding the major role that technology has come to have in the student recruitment process, it has been asserted that colleges and universities should be sensitive to the impact this development may have on equality of opportunity. Gifford, Briceno-Perriott, and Mianzo (2005) acknowledged that "electronic applications have become a major part of the admission process" (p. 16). Specifically, institutions are increasingly offering applicants the ability to apply on-line while also receiving more electronic applications from prospective students (Gifford et al., 2005). However, subgroups of students may be disproportionately affected by the move toward on-line applications. Gifford et al. (2005) found in their study that students who applied on-line were significantly more likely to have higher standardized test scores and be white males. The researchers argued that "until each institution can conclude that online applications disadvantage no prospective students, it is in their best interest to develop programs and services that offer all students an equal opportunity in the admission process" (Gifford et al., 2005, p. 20).

Stealth Applicants

The rise of technology in the student recruitment process has had other unintended consequences. As students increasingly use the Internet to learn more about colleges and universities, they can find out about institutions that they may be interested in virtually anonymously (Hoover, 2006). In fact, a survey of four-year institutions that Noel-Levitz (2007) conducted in the fall of 2006 uncovered that filing an application for admission is the first contact a prospective student has with an institution for an increasing number of students. This type of applicant may be referred to as a stealth applicant or "secret shopper" (Hoover, 2006; Noel-Levitz, 2007). Dupaul and Harris found that “when stealth applicants receive a mailing or email that generates interest, they do not use the reply card to request more information. Instead, they utilize Google, the college’s Web page, or other college-related sites to learn more about the institution” (Dupaul & Harris, 2012. p. 16). They recommend that “these students might more accurately be labeled stealth prospects. Researchers and admission professions should continue to assess the role and behaviors of this population to improve the efficacy of enrollment modeling” (Dupaul& Harris, 2012, p. 16).

Unknown to their prospective institutions until the time of application, stealth applicants are not counted in an institution's inquiry total and thus complicate the enrollment management process by making it harder for institutions to predict yield rates (Hoover, 2006).

The Prospective Student Pool

For some institutions, stealth applicants are serving to complicate an increasingly unpredictable recruitment landscape. Faced with unfavorable projections in the pool of their prospective undergraduates, for example, some institutions are increasingly looking to out-of-state students to help meet their enrollment targets. Yet, the yield rate for out-of-state student applicants has been found to be less than that for in-state student applicants (Noel-Levitz, 2007). American colleges and universities are also going to greater lengths to recruit international students as prospective undergraduate students (McMurtrie, 2005). While international students are increasingly valued by institutions for their associated intellectual, cultural, and financial assets, the events of September 11, 2001, in combination with other factors, such as increased competition for foreign students from other English-speaking countries, have posed recruiting challenges (McMurtie, 2005). Institutions have had to take a more aggressive approach to international student recruitment enlisting such strategies as organized multicountry fairs and scholarships for foreign students (McMurtie, 2005).

One emerging trend in higher education is the targeted recruitment of gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender (GLBT) students by admission offices. Cegler found that “prospective applicants at higher education institutions are not currently asked to self-identify their sexual or gender orientation. Regardless, a number of institutions are engaged in passive recruitment of LTGB students. Some of these recruitment techniques include making sure GLBT-related services and programs are listed in advertising materials. A smaller number of schools participate in active recruitment, including attending LGBT-themed college fairs and contacting students who self-disclose a BGLT identity in their application” (Cegler, 2012, p. 23).

College Athlete Recruitment

Along with the recruitment of international students, college athlete recruitment can also be an aggressive business. In discussing recent competitive aspects of college athlete recruitment, for instance, Hoch (2006) explained that while high school coaches aid in the college athlete recruitment process parents of some high school athletes are also enlisting the help of recruiting services. These services help to compile and distribute information about the student athlete to colleges. Recruiting services may either be charged to the families who enlist their help or the colleges and universities that subscribe to them (Hoch, 2006).

Technology has also had an impact on the competitive arena of college athlete recruitment. Recently, the NCAA'S Division I Board of Directors voted to ban the use of text messaging in recruitment (Wolverton, 2007). While some coaches and recruits have come out in favor of the technology for helping them make better informed decisions, others have stated that the use of the technology has become burdensome and intrusive (Wolverton, 2007). There have also been cases where coaches have abused the technology by contacting recruits in class or late at night, for example (Wolverton, 2007).

In general, recruiting abuses in college athlete recruitment have been something some would soon rather forget. The University of Colorado is one of the more well-known cases of scandal in the college athlete recruitment process. In 2004, the university was investigated for allegations that sex, drugs, and alcohol were used to woo football recruits (Jacobson, 2004). Several women came forward with accusations of rape against Colorado football players and some eventually sued the university (Jacobson, 2004). The president of the university, Elizabeth Hoffman, submitted her resignation in 2005 due in part to pressures brought on by the recruiting scandal (Fain, 2005). Additionally, in response to the recruiting scandal at the university, the NCAA issued several new guidelines ("Student Athlete," 2004). Among the guidelines was direction that institutions develop written policies that "define proper behavior and prohibit alcohol use and gambling during recruits' campus visits" (p. 3).

Terms & Concepts

Brand: "The promise of an experience" that communicates what merits differentiate an institution from others (Moore, 2004, p 4).

College Athlete Recruitment: The recruitment of high school athletes by colleges and universities.

E-recruitment: The use of the Internet to recruit students.

Inquiry: An individual who makes contact with an institution regarding admission. Contact can be made in various ways, such as by e-mail, phone, Web form, or in person; the first contact an individual who is interested in admission may make with an institution may also be their application (see "Stealth Applicant")

International Student Recruitment: The recruitment of international students by colleges and universities.

Millennial Students: The generation born after 1992; among other traits, tend to be associated with strong family ties, a comfort and inclination towards technology, and multi-tasking abilities (Tucker, 2006).

Personalized Web Recruitment: In order to personalize subsequent visits to an institution's website, the institution may ask prospective students visiting their website to input personal information, such as their name, e-mail, and potential major area of study.

Selectivity: The number of students accepted for admission versus the number that applied for admission.

Stealth Applicant: An applicant to an institution whose first contact with that institution is their application. Sometimes known as a "secret shopper."

Yield: The number of students who enroll versus the number of students accepted for admission.

Bibliography

Blair, J. (2000, June 14). Colleges going high-tech to recruit students. Education Week, 19 , 5. Retrieved June 18, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=3345764&site=ehost-live

Blau, P. (1994). The organization of academic work (2nd ed.). New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers. Retrieved June 18, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=6825052&site=ehost-live

Cegler, T. D. (2012). Targeted recruitment of GLBT students by colleges and universities. Journal of College Admission, , 18-23. Retrieved December 27, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=74258755&site=ehost-live

Choy, S. P., & Ottinger, C. (1998). Choosing a postsecondary institution (Report No. 98-080). Washington, D.C.: National Center for Educational Statistics.

Do bowl wins mean better students? Not really, Economist says. (2004, October). Recruitment & Retention in Higher Education, 8 , 3-4. Retrieved June 18, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=14687832&site=ehost-live

Dupaul, S., & Harris, M. S. (2012). Secret shoppers: The stealth applicant search for higher education. [cover story]. Journal of College Admission, , 8-16. Retrieved December 27, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=74258754&site=ehost-live

Fain, P. (2005, March 18). Under fire on 2 fronts, U. of Colorado chief resigns. Chronicle of Higher Education, 51 , A1, A28. Retrieved June 26, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=16621335&site=ehost-live

Foster, A. (2003, May 2). Colleges find more applicants through personalized web recruiting. Chronicle of Higher Education, 49 , A37. Retrieved June 18, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=9724642&site=ehost-live

Fratt, L. (2006, May). Text messaging: The newest recruitment innovation. University Business, 9 , 89-90. Retrieved June 18, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=21333342&site=ehost-live

Gifford, D., Briceno-Perriott, J., & Mianzo, F. (2005). Pen to mouse: Web-based technology's impact on college admission applications. Journal of College Admission, 188, 16-20.

Hawkins, D. A. & Clinedinst, M. (2006). State of college admission 2006. Alexandria, VA: National Association for College Admission Counseling.

Hearn, J. (1991, July). Academic and nonacademic influences on the college destinations of 1980 high school graduates. Sociology of Education, 64 , 158-171. Retrieved June 14, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=14653376&site=ehost-live

Hoch, D. (2006, December). Help with the recruiting process. Coach & Athletic Director, 76 , 14-15. Retrieved June 26, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=23354788&site=ehost-live

Hoover, E. (2006, March 31). The rise of 'stealth applicants'. Chronicle of Higher Education, 52 , A40. Retrieved June 22, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=20351014&site=ehost-live

Jacobson, J. (2004, May 28). Panel blasts U. of Colorado for handling of scandal. Chronicle of Higher Education, 50 , A1, A36. Retrieved June 26, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=13532777&site=ehost-live

Kroc, R. J., & Hanson, G. (2003). Enrollment management. In W. E. Knight (Ed.), The primer for institutional research (pp. 79-102). Tallahassee, FL: Association for Institutional Research.

McMurtrie, B. (2005, February 11). American universities step up their sales pitch overseas. Chronicle of Higher Education, 51 , A8-A10. Retrieved June 18, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=16190468&site=ehost-live

Moore, R. (2004, May). The rising tide. Change, 36 , 56-61. Retrieved June 14, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=13120844&site=ehost-live

Noel-Levitz (2006a). National research study: Cost of recruiting report. Iowa City, IA: Author.

Noel-Levitz (2006b). National research study: E-recruiting practices report. Iowa City, IA: Author.

Noel-Levitz. (2007). 2006 admissions funnel report. Iowa City, IA: Author.

Padjen, E. (2002, Summer). Campus architecture is campus marketing. Connection: The Journal of the New England Board of Higher Education, 17 , 19. Retrieved June 18, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=7169465&site=ehost-live

Paulsen, M. B. (1990). College choice: Understanding student enrollment behavior. Washington, DC: ERIC Clearinghouse on Higher Education (ERIC Document Reproduction No. ED333854).

Roach, R. (2006, December 28). Prospective college students receptive to electronic social networking recruitment methods, survey finds. Diverse: Issues in Higher Education, 23 , 40. Retrieved June 18, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=23705419&site=ehost-live

Sandlin, J. (2013). The blog dress rehearsal: College identity, anxiety and compatibility. Journal of College Admission, , 38-45. Retrieved December 27, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=92504493&site=ehost-live

Santa Clara University Recruiting Students with Blogs. (2005, November 17). Diverse: Issues in Higher Education, Retrieved June 18, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=19088536&site=ehost-live

Santovec, M. (2004, January). Recruiting plans must reflect students'---not recruiters'---tech comfort level. Recruitment & Retention in Higher Education, 18 , 1-2. Retrieved June 18, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=11863505&site=ehost-live

Sevier, R. (2005, June). How to build support for brand marketing. University Business, 8 , 24-33. Retrieved June 26, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=17362519&site=ehost-live

Sevier, R. (2007, February). Advancing the brand. University Business, 10 , 46-51. Retrieved June 26, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=24035626&site=ehost-live

Student Athlete Recruiting Visits. (2004, October 15). National On-Campus Report. Retrieved June 26, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=14702803&site=ehost-live

Weisbuch, R. (2007, January 26). Branding isn't a dirty word. Chronicle of Higher Education, 53 , C3. Retrieved June 26, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database, Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=23897142&site=ehost-live

Wolverton, B. (2007, May 4). NCAA bans text messaging, frustrating some coaches and relieving others. Chronicle of Higher Education, 53 , A46. Retrieved June 26, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=24988933&site=ehost-live

Suggested Reading

Blumenstyk, G. (2006, December 1). Marketing, the for-profit way. Chronicle of Higher Education, 53 , A20-A25. Retrieved June 18, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=23349168&site=ehost-live

Goral, T. (2004, May). At all costs. University Business, 7 , 40-51. Retrieved June 26, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=13124930&site=ehost-live

Hearn, J. (1984, January). The relative roles of academic, ascribed, and socioeconomic characteristics in college destinations. Sociology of Education, 57 , 22-30. Retrieved June 14, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database, Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=12549530&site=ehost-live

Marketing Institutions and Recruiting New Students: What Works Best? (2004, April 30). Chronicle of Higher Education, 50 , B12-B14. Retrieved June 18, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=12996613&site=ehost-live

Riesman, D. (1998). On higher education: The academic enterprise in an era of rising student consumerism. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction Publishers. Retrieved June 26, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=6822606&site=ehost-live

Selingo, J. (2013). Colleges must prepare for a buyers market. Chronicle Of Higher Education, 59, A60. Retrieved December 27, 2013, from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=87012157&site=ehost-live

Stoner, M. (2004, April 30). How the Web can speak to prospective students. Chronicle of Higher Education, 50 , B10-B11. Retrieved June 18, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=12996612&site=ehost-live

Wolverton, B. (2007, February 23). A wonder of modern design closes deals in the Heartland. Chronicle of Higher Education, 53 , B1-B3. Retrieved June 18, 2007 from EBSCO Online Database Education Research Complete. http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=ehh&AN=24281210&site=ehost-live