Process Improvement at HBCUs

1

Preface

The role of this book is not to demonize Historically Black Colleges and Universities
(HBCUs). Most are well managed and produce graduates who are making significant
contributions to nation building. As a graduate of three HBCUs, I am proud of the efforts of
the staff, faculty, and students I encountered who helped shaped my academic and
professional development. I as well as family members are beneficiaries of the caring with
excellence attitude demonstrated at Florida A & M University, and the service is sovereignty
promoted at Alabama A & M University. I am proud of these principles, because they have
formed the foundation that governs my professional life.

HBCUs have continued to be successful with minimal resources, but more than two
thirds of the students enrolled fail to complete their degrees with their cohort within six
years. In addition, to these challenges there are both internal and external factors that
threatens the long term growth and survival of several institution. There are also the
perennial challenges to the relevance of HBCUs in the post-civil rights era, financial
constraints, the perennial perception of poor customer service, campus politics and
bureaucracy, political and leadership struggles between the Board of Trustees and
presidents, instability in leadership, public perception, and an unusually high rate of
accreditation violations. These challenges are not unique to HBCUs; they are also faced by
predominately white institutions (PWIs). However, as the highest producer of African
American graduates there must be frank discussion about the problems faced by institutions
serving predominately African American students, individually and collectively, and
develop solution suited for individual institutions.

As President Obama pushes American Higher education institutions to increase the
number of graduates by 2020, the nation expects HBCUs to play a significant role in
increasing the number of minority graduates. Meeting the graduation goals require that
HBCUs increase their enrollment, improve student retention and graduation, improve
program quality and diversity, improve the ability of their graduates to compete locally and
globally, and improve their data collection and decision-making processes. These efforts
must be integrated through continuous improvement programs that are customer focus,

2

tracks students from enrollment to employment, and entrenched in a culture of data driven
decision making.

Accountability for performance requires that the institutions not only improve their
data collection processes, but increase its utilization in driving the decision making process.
In addressing the 2009 National Historically Black Colleges and Universities Conference,
Education Secretary Arne Duncan, stated that “It is especially crucial that universities and
colleges do a better job of measuring, tracking, and supporting students to raise graduation
rates, which had not budged, unfortunately, in decades…. we want to build better data
systems to measure student success and use that data to inform classroom instruction and
drive a cycle of continuous improvement ” (USDE, 2009). This challenge comes as a result
of greater commitment by the White House to assist HBCUs through increase opportunities
for federal funding. These opportunities come with greater accountability and supervision
and all HBCUs and other minority serving institutions are expected to be more vigilant in
meeting the challenges ahead if they expect to remain relevant and viable throughout the
21st century and beyond.

HBCU leaders, however, are highly sensitive of criticisms of their institutions. Past
and present discriminatory practices justify this level of defense, but with increase state,
federal, and media scrutiny, the level of accountability increases and institutional
performances are judged against established scorecards. Data is the indicator to the public,
the capabilities of the schools in managing its available resources. Therefore, in the defense
of the respective institutions we must be honest in our discussions and be aware of the data
which is available to the public. We must be honest in the discussions of the challenges that
must be overcome by several HBCUs in order for them to remain viable and competitive.
These discussions must lead to transformation at the institutional level so that that the
quality of the programs, the friendliness of the staff, and the nurturing attitude of faculty will
continue to attract of students from all over the world and of all races to enroll and graduate.

There is hope within the HBCU community that other HBCUs will surpass Howard
University, Spellman College, Florida A & M University, Clarke Atlanta and others who are
moving aggressively towards restructuring their institution to increase their competitiveness
and efficiency. Institutions such as Hampton, Xavier, Morgan State, Fayetteville State, and

3

Maryland-Eastern Shore, North Carolina A & T and Prairie View who were making
adjustments to improve their efficiency before the economic crises are better prepared to the
meet the economic challenges brought on by the recession. However, there are others which
require fundamental changes in the way the institutions are managed to meet customer
service expectations, accreditation, and performance goals. Implementing austerity so that
they can impact the organizational cultural will require by-in from the Board of Trustees, the
president and cabinet, and the front-line staff. These changes will be hard-hitting, but
necessary if marginally surviving HBCUs are to continue exits.

“Measures of productivity do not lead to improvement in productivity….A product put out in
the market today must do more than attract customers and sales; it must stand up in
service”

Edward Deming 1986

4

About the Author

Howard Wright is a proud graduate three HBCUs. He holds a Doctorate of
Education with a concentration in Higher Education Administration from Tennessee State
University, a Master of Business Administration with a concentration in Human Resource
Management, and an Educational Specialist Degree in The Administration of Higher
Education from Alabama A& M University. He holds Bachelors of Science degree in 1993
in Agri-Business from Florida A & M University and received an Associate Degree in
Agricultural Sciences from the College of Agriculture in Port Antonio Jamaica. Dr. Wright
served as a high-school teacher, extension officer, project manager and served in managed a
variety of agro processing and manufacturing entities. He was a pioneer in the use of
distillation waste from rum productions for nutrient subsidization in sugar cane production
in Jamaica, and worked to improve his organization’s push to meet the quality and
environmental requirement for ISO 90001 & 14001 certification.

He had four-year stint as a customer service trainer with West Corporation
supporting AT & T’s business and wireless customers where he was highly involved with
continuous quality improvement practices and training over one thousand customer service
agents in Ohio, Alabama and Texas. Since 2008, he has served as the coordinator for the
Changing Lanes Mentoring Program at Alabama A & M University. He is a member of the
American Society for Quality (ASQ) and the National Association of Academic Advisors
(NACADA) and is actively involved in retention, mentoring and continuous quality
improvement activities in higher education. He is married to Andrea Wright and has four
children.

5

Table of Contents

Preface…………………………………………………………………………………….1

About the Author…………………………………………………………………………4

Acknowledgements……………………………………………………………………….6

Chapters
1 Performance of Historically Black Colleges and Universities in the
Past Decade………………………………………………………………………7

2 Embracing Quality Improvement: Factors Driving the Need for
Reform……….…………………………………………………………………...17

3 Leveraging a Continuous Quality Improvement Approach
to Improving Institutional Effectiveness………………………………………49

4 Driving Quality: Improving Marketing and Recruiting Strategy……………78

5 Measuring Up: Improving the Enrollment Management Process……………98

6 Driving Quality: Transitioning Students from High School to
the Sophomore…………………………………………………………………...123

7 Transitioning Students from the Sophomore Year to Graduation…………...158

8 Meeting Students Expectations: Improving the Technology
Experience………………………………………………………………….…….171

9 Transforming a Quality Driven Workforce through Training and
Development…………………….....……………………………………………..186

References…………………………………………………………………………192

Appendix A: Presidential Turnover 2000-2011…………………………….….208

Appendix B: The Cost of First Year Students Who Fail
to Return their Second Year.…………………………………………………….211

Appendix C: First to Second Year Retention and 2002
Cohort Graduation………………………………………………………………214

Index……..………………………………………………………………………...217

6

Acknowledgement

I would like to thank my grandmother, Vashti James who despite a second-grade
education instilled in me the thirst for knowledge and the value of education. I am also
grateful for the many excellent teachers I have encountered along the way, especially those
who have impacted me in the latter part of my academic career. I am grateful to Dr. Phillip
Redrick, Associate Professor of Educational Leadership at Alabama A & M University who
provided the inspiration for this manuscript which started as a class project. Thanks to my
dissertation advisor at Tennessee State University Dr. Denise Dunbar for helping me
understand the importance of my work to minority institutions and the need to keep refining
my skills. Special thanks to Ms. Wanda Cross and Mrs. Janet Jones for their tireless effort in
editing and formatting this project and other projects over the years. I would be amiss if I
did not thank my colleagues from the Office of Retention and Academic Support led by Dr.
Leatha Bennett at Alabama A & M University for their continued support, and their love and
determination in improving student success. I want to acknowledge the support, patience
and love of my wife Andrea and kids, Andre, Rojae, Georgiana, and Kayla.

7

Chapter 1

Performance of Historically Black Colleges and Universities in the Past Decade

Introduction

There is a public perception that students attending HBCU and minority serving
institutions receive inferior education and their students are not adequately prepared for the
workforce or graduate school. The performance of HBCU and minority serving graduates in
all aspect of American professional life and their rise to leadership at some of the most
respected organizations in the United States and around the world proves that the perception
is not reality. However, despite the success of the graduates of these institutions, there
continues to be a public relation battle to define HBCUs role to the majority population. The
financial reality of today’s economy requires that institutions re-examine their role and
redefine themselves in the market place by revamping their public relations strategy. In this
chapter, we will examine the profile of HBCU graduates and the challenges that lie ahead
for HBCUs.

Profile of HBCU Graduates

The role of HCBUs in the education of the African Americans middle class is an
integral part of American history. Historically Black Colleges and Universities enroll 11%
of African American students in higher education, and graduate 21.5% of all black students
who receive their bachelor’s degree (NCES, 2006). In 2001, HBCUs account for 30% of all
African American graduates in engineering, 44% of all natural science majors and 25% of
all social science majors. HBCU graduates make up more than half of the nation’s African
American professionals, more than 50% of African American teachers, 70% African
American dentist, and more than half of the National Black Caucus (Fredrick Patterson
Institute, 2004).

HBCU importance to the production of African American professional is reflected
through the number of degrees confirm annually. The 2010 annual Diverse Issues in Higher

8

Education article on minority production in higher education in the United States ranks the
production of African American graduates as follows:

1. Xavier and Howard University, number one and two in undergraduates in biological and
medical Sciences;

2. Xavier and Tennessee State University number one and two in the physical sciences;

3. Florida A & M University and Winston Salem University, number one and three in
production health professions and related clinical sciences;

4. North Carolina A & T University number one in engineers, followed by number two
Morgan State University;

5. Morehouse College in the number one producer in mathematics and statistics, followed by
number two Fort Valley State University;

6. North Carolina A & T two, Florida A & M three, and Alabama A & M five, top the top
five in agricultural and relate sciences;

7. Alabama State ranks 11th in computer information and supporting services; and

8. On the education front, Jackson State University is rank number two followed by number
three Albany State and number seven Alabama State University.

At the graduate level, North Carolina A & T University is the number one producer
of graduate engineers, Southern University number one in mathematics and statistics,
followed by number three Tennessee State University. Florida A & M tops the physical
sciences, followed by number two Norfolk State University and North Carolina Central
State University. Tuskegee University and North Carolina A T & T top the agricultural
related sciences. On the education front, Prairie View A & M State University is the nation's
number seven producer of African American educators at the graduate level (Diverse Issues,
2010).

HBCUs have also developed a reputation of sending a higher percentage of African
American students to graduate and professional schools than their predominately white
counterparts (NAFEO, 2006). Students attending HBCUs are more likely to attend graduate

9

school, are more like to choose a major in the sciences, and are more likely to remain in
graduate school and complete their Ph.D. They are also more likely to complete their Ph.D.
at a faster rate than their peers who attend traditionally white institutions (Wenglinsky,
1999). In 2006, 29.3% of African American with Ph.Ds. in mathematics, science and
engineering and technology received their bachelor’s degrees from HBCUs (Burrelli &
Rapoport, 2008). Not only are more students from HBCUs earning their Ph.Ds. the
institutions are now becoming leading producers of Ph.D. In 2006 there were 10.1
doctorates peer 1,000 degrees awarded to black students from HBCUs compared to 7.9 for
non- black institutions resulting in HBCUs producing more black Ph.D. recipients than
research and doctoral- granting institutions (Lieberman, 2008).

HBCUs not only affect the students they enroll, but are an economic catalyst for their
local communities as well. A study on the economic impact of HBCUs by the National
Center for Education Statistics (NCES, 2006) found that HBCUs collectively spend in
excess of $6.6 billion in their communities (62% public and 38% private HBCUs). They had
a $10.2 billion dollar impact in 2001 which ranks HBCU in terms of revenue at 232nd on
the Forbes Fortune 500 list of the largest companies in the United States. They are key
employers in their host communities, providing employment for over 180,142 part time and
full-time jobs, exceeding the Bank of America, the nation’s 23rd largest employer. In many
instances, due to their location in rural small towns, they are the largest employers in their
regional communities and have tremendous impact on local businesses (NCES, 2006).

HBCUs importance to nation-building and the black middle class goes beyond the
number of degrees offered and contributions to their local communities. They are the
cornerstone to the development of the African American community from emancipation
through the Civil Rights era, and have help maintain the culture and traditions of the African
American community. They have produced the black intellectuals who have become role
models, leaders, and advocates for the African American community (Brown & Davis,
2001). The number of HBCU alumni in the black middle class and who are holders of key
leadership positions in business, religion, sports, politics, community development, and
education, reflects their graduates’ contributions to nation-building in the United States,
Africa, the Caribbean, and Latin America.

10

Historically HBCUs, because of their mission of educating underrepresented
populations, accept academically weak and under-prepared minority students and have
developed them into aspiring professionals. The institutions are able to mold the academic
and professional development of their students despite not enrolling the most prepared
students from high school. Several institutions have accomplished this through open
enrollment policies and enrolling students with lower average ACT and SAT scores than
their predominately white counterparts. HBCUs developed reputations for investing in
remedial and professional development programs that have transformed the lives of the
students they accepted. Their small class sizes, affordability, accommodating faculty and
staff, and a supportive environment that promotes student success have traditionally been
their strength. They are also known for focusing on teaching rather than research, and are
able to shape their students’ intellectual development, develop their self-confidence, and
empower them to become outstanding professionals.

Despite their obvious success to nation-building, HBCU administrators have argued
over the years that their institutions are neglected and underfunded at both the state and
federal level when compared to their predominately white counterparts. Desegregation
lawsuits and subsequent settlement in the southern states have improved the funding parity
for state institutions, but years of neglect and financial challenges have left many HBCUs
unable to provide the resources to effectively compete with their PWI counterparts. Years of
deferred maintenance due to financial constraints, low bond ratings, reduction in state
appropriations, and declining endowments have left many HBCUs unable to make the
capital investment needed for new construction and infrastructure development.

HBCU presidents through various forums including the White House Initiative on
HBCUs, has been very highly vocal about the need for financial assistance in meeting the
challenges ahead. The White House has recognized the difficulties faced by HBCUs and
other minority-serving institutions. Through high-profile visits, President Obama and his
team participated in a number of Spring 2010 commencement exercises at Hampton
University, University of Arkansas – Pine Bluff, Morehouse College, Xavier University,
Huston-Tillotson University, Spellman College, Morgan State University, and Virginia
Union University. The increased level of media coverage and increase of federal

11

contributions have brought national attention to HBCUs and issues impacting their
performance through several leading national editorials.

The Challenges Ahead

The White House, in recognizing the financial need of HBCUs and the need to
increase minority student enrollment have increased the federal aid available for HBCUs
and minority serving institutions. In the FY 2010-2011 budget, close to $900 million was
made available to HBCU Pell grant recipients, with each student receiving a maximum
allocation of $5,710. The budget also allocated $98 million in new funding to HBCUs and a
pledge of $850 million within the next decade. This additional funding was increased by $13
million through the Strengthen HBCUs program and $85 million for the implementation of
the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility Act. Approximately $20.5 million was allocated
for the HBCU Capital Financing Program to assist with renovation, repairs and the addition
of instructional equipment. In addition, the White house allocated $64.5 million for
Strengthening Historically Black Graduate Institution Programs and $103 million for a
science and technology workforce program (Whitehouse.gov, 2010).

The increase in federal funding brings a greater level of accountability to the
respective campuses in meeting performance expectations. The Secretary of Education,
Arne Duncan has already indicated his expectations of increased accountability Secretary
and transparency with increase federal funding. This increase in oversight will ensure that
HBCUs receiving federal funds are more scrutinized and administrators held accountable for
efficiently using these funds to transform their campuses. This is an indication that there will
be greater oversight of spending by the Government Accountability Office and the
Department of Education to ensure that federal funds are spent appropriately and institutions
are meeting benchmarks for enrollment progression and graduate employment.

Institutions will be required to continuously demonstrate, through a common set of
performance standards, that they are providing quality services that foster the development,
retention and graduation of their students, irrespective of the student preparation levels and
the institution’s financial challenges. Several administrators and alumni argued that
increasing the performance outcomes will affect HBCUs more than other institutions. This is

12

because in staying true to their mission, they accept a disproportionate amount of
unprepared high school graduates, and they do not have the resources to fund the number of
scholarships to attract a large pool of students who are academically prepared for the college
experience. There are also suggestions that proposed accountability standards do not bring
the necessary funding needed to adequately reverse years of deferred maintenance and new
construction needed to put the campuses on par with their white counter parts. Irrespective
of the merits of the debate, the federal government has mandated each state to consider a
framework for increasing the number of college graduates in the next 10 years and HBCUs
must to be prepared for these challenges.

Some HBCUs are well managed and prepared for this challenge and have
consistently outperformed their predominately white peers in retention, graduation rates and
the number of students entering graduate and professional schools. Why this is not
consistent across the HBCU community is up for debate, but the data coming from several
institutions is indicating that the performance of some school encourages the merger debates
that recently occurred in the Georgia, Louisiana, and Mississippi legislature. A change in the
management of both public and private HBCUs and the implementation of management
reforms to improve the efficiency and performance outcomes of these institutions would
help stop these debates.

Avoiding merger discussions by state legislators will require that all HBCUs adapt to
the new higher education environment and develop processes that monitor performances and
establishing performance standards to compete with not only PWI, but online institutions as
well. This requires ensuring that funding and performance goals are achieved through
reforms that improve the effective and efficiency utilization of institutional resources.
HBCUs must demonstrate this through improvements in retention and the graduation rates
and accountability standards. This should begin by:

1. Developing collaborative relationships with K-12 feeder school in their key markets and
implementing programs aimed at improving the preparation of high school graduates for the
rigors of higher education.

13

2. Improving the quality of students entering the institutions, by improving alliances with
highly qualified high school graduates through feeder schools program, and teacher
development programs with schools districts in key markets.

3. Expanding relationships with middle and school counselors and principals aimed at
developing college preparation and mentoring programs with the students and their college
mentors.

4. Improving the management and use of the data for continuous improvement, decision
making, and resource allocation. The data is already available, because HBCUs already
collect enormous amounts of data on student outcomes, institutional practices and other
efficiency measures which are reported to the states, the Department of Education and
accreditation agencies.

5. Expanding their role as advocates of K-12 reforms and taking the lead in lobbying for
more state and federal assistance to develop programs at feeder schools.

6. Making a greater effort of attracting students from all ethnic groups in both urban and
rural middle and high schools. HBCUs must improve their alliances with the Hispanic
community, Asian and Tribal communities, local community colleges, and other four-year
colleges.

7. Expanding the relationships with students as well as parents and continue fostering the
relationship with parents from the freshman through to the senior year.

8. Improving public perception of the institutions by strengthening their public relations
strategy. This strategy should focus on promoting the institution’s signature programs and
the uniqueness of the respective campuses.

9. Strengthening the tracking of first year and sophomore students who are enrolled and
those who drop out or stop out.

Change may be difficult at several institutions based on campus morale, entrenched
culture, and the management style of administrators at the respective institutions. However,
long-term survival is dependent on reforming the campuses to meet the performance metrics
outlined by President Obama’s “reach to the top” college graduation goals.

14

The Centralize Performance Metrics

Many of the performance expectations of “reach to the top” are already a part of the
campus performance scorecards and are reported annually to the State Higher Education
Commissions, and the Department of Education Integrated Post-Secondary Education
System (IPEDS). These reports are available to the public so that parents and potential
students can examine school performance on retention and graduation rates, diversity
accreditation, population, and financial aid availability use of the information in making
their college choice.

Although this information is reported annually, there was not much incentive for
public colleges to improve their performance metrics, because state institutions are funded
based on full-time enrollment (FTE), rather than course completion and graduation. This
however, has already changed for some states and others are on schedule to change in the
next three to five years. The proposals from the National Governors Association
Chairman’s 2010-2011 initiative “Complete to Compete” program has laid the foundation
for the reform of state higher education at the state level. The proposal holds institutions
accountable by changing the state funding formula to allocate a percentage based on
performance metrics focused on progression to graduation and beyond. The intent is to
develop and establish common set performance metrics that will reshape the higher
education landscape by improving college efficiency and productivity. Meeting these criteria
requires continuous monitoring of college performance and developing policies that
efficiently utilize available recourses (National Governors Association, 2010).
Recommendations are made to the states to develop accurate data systems to track common
outcome metrics such as degrees completed, graduation rates, transfer rates, and time and
credits completion for each student. States will also be required to tract progress metrics
such as enrollment in remedial education, success beyond remedial education, success in the
first year college courses, credit accumulation, retention, and course completion rates
(National Governors Association, 2010).

Once implemented as a common reporting metrics for all states, all higher education
institutions, including HBCUs, must demonstrate through data their effectiveness in
managing resources allocated to their institution to graduate their students in a timely

15

manner. They will be expected to improve or develop programs and processes that not only
monitor the students they enroll, but track student performance and demonstrate their
progress towards graduation. Meeting these expectations will require that institutions make
an effort to benchmark outstanding peer institutions and create opportunities to continuously
improve programs and processes.

For many institutions this will not happen overnight. Reforms will require the
respective presidents to lead the way towards developing a data-driven campus culture
focused on tying measurable performances to intended outcomes. Several states, such as
Tennessee have already taken steps to develop outcome base completion variables in their
higher education funding formula. Tennessee’s formula outcomes are inclusive of graduate
per FTE, transfers, all degrees earned, student progress at 24, 48, 72, and 98 hours and
research and service (Tennesee.gov, 2010). This data-driven approach requires institutions
to assess and improve their data collection strategies and shift the focus from the number of
students enrolled, to the progress of the students from graduation to employment. This
performance-driven funding approach is expected be entrenched in most state funding
formula in the next decade. The Department of Education through its Institute for Education
Sciences is currently issuing grants through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
(AARA) to establish a data system that will monitor students’ progress from acceptance to
employment.

Several state proposals were accepted for the grants and many have already
implemented measures to align their higher education performance outcome to meet their
“reach to the top” goals. A report from the Midwestern Higher Education Compact (MHEC)
2009 revealed that 14 states including Louisiana, Indiana, Texas, Tennessee, Ohio and
Washington have already considered or implemented performance driven funding. The new
formulae are expected to drive improvements in degree completion, retention and on time
graduation. Some states have included performance-based incentives that will also take into
consideration the performance and progress of students taking remedial classes. Many
institutions are also focused on moving remedial classes away from four-year colleges to the
two-year colleges.

16

As the largest producer of African Americans graduates in critical areas to nation
building, HBCUs must continue to focus on growing the enrollment and graduation of low
income and first-generation students of all races. This is necessary because, improvements
in the retention and graduation rates have a twofold effect for HBCUs. First, this generates
significant improvement in revenue over time which increases the institution’s ability to
better serve their students. Secondly, it significantly increases the number of minority
teachers, military officers, business professionals and entrepreneurs, and graduates in the
Sciences, Mathematics, Engineering and Technology (STEM). Thirdly, it increases the
number of doctoral and professional school graduates over time. Not meeting the proposed
“reach to the top” performances will have an effect as well. It will damage the credibility of
the institutions, reduces the number of capable graduates for nation-building, reduces the
amount of revenue from student enrollment, and increases the number of minority students
with student debt without a degrees. The success of an institution is judged by data,
therefore collectively HBCUs must continue to refine critical benchmarks and market their
success to help change the perception in the public domain.

Embracing Quality Improvement: Factors Driving the Need for Reform

Introduction

HBCUs and other minority-serving institutions are faced with many challenges
which are exasperated by the recent recession. Although the majority of the institutions are
well managed, the cuts in funding at the state and federal level have forced many institutions
to reduce their staff levels, and cut back academic and non-academic programs, while
simultaneously developing initiatives to improve the quality of service provided to both
internal and external customers. Although the reduction in funding has forced many
institutions to implement reforms to remain competitive, there are other threats that are not
unique to HBCUs, but impact their ability to adequately serve their students. For minority
serving institutions, it is essential that these threats be confronted to better position them to
grow and provide highly rated service to their students. In this chapter, we will focus on
these threats by examining how the current and future existence of HBCUs is impacted by:
1. accreditation, 2. the imminent retirement of African American faculty and the hiring of
new faculty, 3. retention and graduation rates, 4. accountability, 5. diversity, 6. presidential
stability, 7. the Board of Trustees and President relationships, and 8. competition.

The Threats Facing HBCUs

The closure of Bishop College, Daniel Payne College and Kittrell College, due to
accreditation and financial problems, is a stark reminder that the future of private HBCUs,
such as Morris Brown College, Knoxville College, Concordia College of Selma, Selma
University and other marginally surviving HBCUs is uncertain. Public HBUCs, however,
are not devoid of these threats. Recent actions by the elements within Georgia’s legislature
to combine Albany and Savannah State University with predominately white institutions,
due to budgetary constraints in Georgia, the proposed merger of Alcorn State University and
Mississippi Valley State University into Jackson State University, and Governor Bobby

18

Jindal’s proposal to merge Southern University at New Orleans with the University of New
Orleans, has put public HBCUs on notice. Recent budget shortfalls have become the
platform for populist movement within state legislatures to join struggling public HBCUs
with neighboring predominately white universities. Public backlash has prevented the
passages of these bills through the state legislature this time around, but this experience must
serve as a reminder to marginally performing public and private HBCUs of the fragility of
their existence.

There are general sentiments within the African American community that the
actions of Southern state legislators to join struggling HBCUs with PWI has racial overtones
because the institutions were not given adequate resources to effectively compete. While
there are merits to these arguments, the reality is that the current economic climate has
placed enormous strains on states higher education budgets. States have been forced to make
difficult choices in order to balance their budgets and commit adequate resources for social
services and K-12. The loss of stimulus funding and the reduction in federal spending at the
state and federal level are impacting the resources available to all higher education
institutions, black or white. However, with scarce resources and a need to balance the budget
within the states, elements within communities who have questioned the existence of
HBCUs have found the ammunition to make their cases, due to the performances of many of
these institutions.

The threats from these individuals in the Southern states are real and they will not go
away unless state HBCUs demonstrate through data that they are excellent managers of tax
payers’ funds, and they can coexist and effectively compete with their neighboring
predominately white institutions. Performance is the key to the institutions long and short-
term survival of these institutions and there must be data to prove it. It is therefore,
imperative that as the African American community puts pressure on their state legislators,
congressional delegates, and makes court challenges, that they broaden their knowledge of
the higher education environment. They must also understand the threats and weaknesses of
the institutions, the internal and external factors that are impacting their continued existence,
and how they can assist in improving HBCUs performance.

Accreditation

19

Most HBCUs are located in Southern States and are accredited by the Southern
Association of Schools & Colleges Commission on Colleges (SACS). According to SACS
accreditation demonstrates to the public that the institution has a mission, has the resources
to support its mission, has clear program goals and objectives which it is successfully
achieving and appropriate for the degrees it offers (SACS, 2011). The loss of accreditation is
usually the last resort by the accreditation agencies, but when done, it has a severe impact on
the institution, the faculty, staff, the students, and past degree recipients. According to the
Council for Higher Education Accreditation (2010), loss of accreditation impacts the
students’ ability to obtain federal student loans and grants, donations to the institutions, the
ability of students to sit license exams, and the ability of the institutions to obtain state funds
(CHEA, 2010). With over 85% of the student population on some form of financial aid at
HBCUs, loss of accreditation would result in the automatic denial of federal financial aid,
followed by the flight of students from the institution, financial difficulties, and the
imminent closing of the institution.

The threat of closure does not deter SACS from ensuring that all institutions,
including HBCUs, met the guidelines set in the principles of accreditation. SACS requires
institutions to develop a management infrastructure that directs resources to comply with the
commission policies and standards. Irrespective of the amount of the resources available,
institutions are expected to manage their human and financial capital with transparency and
responsibility, and provide the necessary documentation as evidence. SACS in its manual,
The Principles of Accreditation: Foundation of Quality Enhancement, stated that they
"Expect institutions to dedicate themselves to enhancing the quality of their programs and
services within the context of their missions, resources, and capacities, be engaged in an
ongoing program of improvement and be able to demonstrate how well it fulfills its stated
mission...document quality and effectiveness in all its major aspects" (SACS, 2006).

Over the past decade, several HBCUs in Southern states have struggled to meet the
requirements of the principles of accreditation laid down by SACS. Since 1987, more than
25% of SACS sanctions and more than half of the institution who lost their accreditation
were HBCUs (AAUP, 2007). The new rounds of reaffirmations, however, have seen a shift
in the number of sanctions. More than 10 of 13 (77%) HBCUs had reaffirmation of
accreditation by SACS without any infractions, and the acceptance of candidacy of J. F.

20

Drake State Technical College has demonstrated tremendous improvement in efforts to meet
accreditation standards. The results are indicating that efforts are made to develop programs
and implement processes to ensure that the institutions are in satisfactory standing to meet
the criteria for the interim fifth year report and reaffirmation of accreditation. The Presidents
at several of these institutions have lead the way in ensuring that every member of the Board
of Trustees, administrators, directors, students, faculty, and staff is educated about their
individual and collective responsibilities in ensuring there is continuous evaluation of
processes, programs, and structures to meet the institution’s accreditation requirements.

In contrasts, during the past decade, the management of the accreditation process at
several institutions demonstrated questionable leadership and foresight at some HBCUs.
Knoxville College, Morris Brown, Paul Quinn College, Concordia College of Selma,
Grambling State University, Bennett College, St Augustine College, Barber Scotia College,
Edward Waters College, Lemoyne Owen College, Lewis College of Business, Mary Holmes
College, Selma University, Talladega College, and Florida A & M University were placed
on warning or probation. Most recently, Texas Southern University (twice), Tugaloo
College, Dillard University, Cheyney University, South Carolina State and Alabama A & M
University were cited for areas of non-compliance. The start of the new decade has seen
Concordia College and Saint Paul’s College being placed probation and Stillman College,
Fisk and Tennessee State University placed on warning. Many of listed above institutions
have been cited for manageable offenses such as financial instability and audit reports,
issues with faculty support, academic and governance structures, and processes for
managing and evaluating critical operations and support services (AAUP, 2007).

As we look ahead at another round of reaffirmation, there is optimism for Benedict
College’s reaffirmation in 2011 and an amicable resolution to the struggles of Paul Quinn
College in its current preliminary injunction to reinstate its accreditation. Not only is there
cautious optimism for these institutions, but 2010 saw Stillman College denied reaffirmation
of accreditation and placed on continued warning for failing to comply with standards
relating to financial stability reporting. Fisk University was placed on warning for similar
infractions, because they failed to demonstrate compliance with core requirement 2.11.1
(financial resources) and comprehensive standard 3.10.1(financial stability) (SACS, 2010).

21

Financial infractions are not the only core requirement that HBCUs must conquer.
Tennessee State University (TSU) was placed on warning for failing to comply with core
requirement 2.5 (institutional effectiveness). In its latest push to ensure that institutions are
implementing quality principles in its day-to-day operation, SACS requires that institutions
develop a culture of data-driven decision-making supported by a continuous quality
improvement strategy that collects and utilizes assessment for planning in academic and
non-academic areas. SACS requires that “ institution engages in ongoing, integrated, and
institution-wide research-based planning and evaluation processes that (1) incorporate a
systematic review of institutional mission, goals, and outcomes; (2) result in continuing
improvement in institutional quality; and (3) demonstrate that the institution is effectively
accomplishing its mission (Institutional Effectiveness)” (Page 22).

The importance of accreditation to the survival of HBCUs warrants the highest level
of attention by every member of the institution from the Board to Trustees to the front-line
staff. Presidential leadership in accreditation is essential in ensuring that structures and
processes are in place for a systematic review through self-study (quarterly, semiannually
and annually), and mobilizing the institution to act on the findings. The presidential
leadership ensures a culture of continual assessment and documentation, and a system of
accountability that monitors the strength, weaknesses, and progress of the institution. This
prevents non-academic and academic units without discipline specific accreditation
requirements from waiting every five years to focus on accreditation. The Board of Trustees
of the respective institution plays a critical role in this process. They must take a more active
role in holding the Presidents and their cabinets accountable through the academic sub-
committees for accreditation standards by requiring regular evaluation of programs, policies
and procedures as outlined by the accreditation agencies. The President on the other hand
must develop a campus culture in which every member of the institution understands their
role and is engaged in the process. Cabinet members and lower lower-level managers must
be held accountable for unit performances and budget should be allocated based on
performance. This has to happen not only when there is a site visit or a self-report due to the
accreditation agencies but must be entrenched as a continuous bi-annual and annual
evaluation plan (CHEA, 2007).

22

Imminent Faculty Retirement of African American Faculty and the Hiring of New
Faculty

The expected retirement of baby boomers from the professorate within the next
decade will see the retirement of some of the most experienced faculty from HBCU
campuses. While this may create significant cost savings to various institutions, campuses
will be losing some of the most passionate and dedicated educators the country has
produced. Many of these baby boomers were hired in the 1960s and 70s and were
instrumental in the development and expansion of the education, engineering, mathematics,
technology, and natural science departments of their respective institutions. They are highly
respected educators whose commitment to developing the African American middle class
that has helped changed the psyche of American society and the perception of the skills set
and professionalism of the African Americans. Many have an incredible ability to motivate
their students to dream big and have cultivated in their students a level of academic rigidity
required to succeed in the most prestigious graduate programs.

Although many of these faculty members are retiring later than usual, early-
retirement packages offered recently by several HBCUs has hastened the exodus of very
experienced teachers. These retirees are leaving with considerable experience and expertise
in research, grant writing, and networking within the federal government and corporate
America. They are also leaving the institutions with remarkable pedagogical skills emerging
from their understanding of the socio-economic background of the students they teach. In
many instances they are leaving their institutions without the opportunity to mentor and pass
on their knowledge to a new generation of junior faculty members.

There are many who argue that the imminent retirement of baby boomers may be a
benefit to higher education. Fleck (2001) argues that the retirement of aging professors,
brings the possibility of bringing fresh ideas and innovative ways of teaching and learning
from new hires. However, finding highly qualified African Americans in engineering,
technology, mathematics, science and business disciplines that are willing to teach at
HBCUs is a challenge many institutions face. The reality is that there is a large racial gap in
the production of African American earning Ph.Ds. in science engineering and business and
that gap has to filled by qualified foreign nationals. While some may argue that there is a

23

need to increase the hiring of African Americans in the STEM and business disciplines,
there are just not enough to meet the diversity demands of white institutions and HBCUs.
Here are the facts from the National Opinion Research Survey on doctoral recipients:

1. Between 2003 to 2008, the number of blacks earning doctorates in science and
engineering grew by 24.5%, however, in 2008 African Americans accounted for only 18.6%
of the number of doctorates offered.

2. The number of temporary visa doctoral recipients increased to 33.1% in 2008.

3. Almost three-quarters (74.1%) of temporary visa recipients intend to remain in the United
States to develop professionally after graduation in 2008.

4. The number of black doctoral science and engineering graduates employed at four-year
institutions was 35.6% compared to 44.7 % whites and 49.3% Asians. Blacks in science and
engineering are least likely of all ethnic groups to start their own business and or work in
industry.

5. Post-secondary commitment and employment was highest in the humanities (86%) and
lowest among engineering doctoral recipients (15%).

6. The highest representation of black doctoral recipients were in education and most were
more likely to be employed in the elementary and high school system (Fiegener, 2009).

The reality is that the majority of doctorates owned by African American are in
education related fields and there are not enough graduates to fill the void left by doctoral
retirees in science, mathematics, engineering, technology and business. This gap has to be
filled by foreign nationals, whites, and Asians in order to meet the academic needs of these
institutions. These new hires are not only potentially experiencing the traditional collegial
adoption challenges faced by young tenure tract faculty, but are also faced with cultural and
language challenges as well. Bridging the language and cultural divide between young non-
African American faculty, retiring African American faculty and African American students
is a workforce development challenge that HBCUs must be prepared to address. Creating a
true multicultural environment does not happen overnight. It is a human resources strategy

24

that has embraced by the institution in an effort to bridge the gap between ethnic and
cultural groups.

As institutions attempt to replace their retiring faculty, they must be mindful of the
following questions:

1. Is the HBCU environment and students they will serve the right fit for this individual?
Will they be able to handle the many challenges they will encounter?

2. Will they be able to mentor and develop African American students?

3. Are they able to motivate students to learn?

4. Will they be able to handle the stress of the tenure process, balance service to students,
the expectations of the community, and time between research, scholarship, and family?

5. What is the level of commitment to serving minority students?

For HBCUs in the market for new faculty, they must be mindful of the following questions:

1. How do HBCUs compete in the market place for available talent?

2. What is their reputation in the market place as an ideal place to work?

3. What relationships are established with leading graduate schools and their students? Are
they able to attract alumni to returning to their institutions?

4. Are there professional development opportunities for young faculty once hired?

5. Are there well planned orientation, mentoring, and learning community programs for new
faculty members?

6. Are there career advancement and management opportunities for non-African American
faculty?

7. Are there development programs for adjunct faculty?

These are challenges that HBCUs must grabble within the next 5-10 years. Attracting
talented faculty who will remain at the institutions for extended periods of time will require

25

a human resources strategy focused on building and retaining talent. Effective mentoring
and training of new faculty and staff is critical to this process. This ensures that new faculty
improves their pedagogical skills to teach students at different preparation levels, balance
teaching, research, and community service, while maintaining their hobbies and family life.
Institutions can help newly hired faculty and staff by creating an environment that promotes
the integration of new and old faculty and provides mentoring opportunities essential to
preventing young faculty burnout and flight.

As older faculty reach the end of their career, it is important for HBCUs to engage
them in campus activities and develop opportunities for them to meet and mentor their
replacements. For those who wish to be engaged, opportunities should be provided to teach
a class or volunteer to help with tutoring, mentoring, and advising of graduate and
undergraduate students. This, however, can only happen if the institutions make a concerted
effort to create an environment that fosters regular dialogue and engagement opportunities
for retirees.

Financial Challenges

The fiscal projections are not indicating improvements in the financial position for
higher education in the short term. According to NACUBA (2010), higher education budget
shortfalls for the 2009-2010 academic years have occurred in several states and the District
of Columbia. It is projected that this will continue into the 2012/2013 academic year
resulting in cuts ranging from 5 to 15 percent and a reduction in giving and federal funding.
It is anticipated that continued fiscal pressure on state legislatures will continue to have a
tremendous impact on higher education in all states until 2013 (Jones, 2005). This less than
dismal performance was also confirmed by Moody Financial Services (2009). According to
Moody’s Investor Service report (2009) on the 2009 U.S. Educational Colleges Outlook,
colleges will be faced with liquidity issues and institutions will be exposed to volatility in
variable market debt. Private colleges, however, will feel more of the effect of the financial
crises than public colleges and community colleges in the next year and a half.

These financial pressures are already being felt at Fisk University, Wilberforce
University Tougaloo College, Voorhees College, Bennett College, Huston-Tillotston
College, Clark Atlanta University, and Lemoyne Owen College. They are among 20 HBCUs

26

reported to be experiencing severe financial difficulties. In addition, the Department of
Education has listed Paul Quinn College, Wiley College, Saint Paul's College Benedict
College, Philander Smith College, and Concordia College as institution that have had failed
its test of financial strength for private nonprofit degree granting institution in 2008
(Blumenestyk et. al, 2009). In 2009, Paul Quinn College still remained below the composite
score of 1.5, but Benedict College passed with a 1.8 (pass rate 1.5-3).

The United Negro College Fund (2009) reported that some of its institutions are
already feeling the impact of the recession and are making adjustments to reduce costs.
Institutions have begun making management decisions to improve their future outlook by
terminating staff, laying off-full time and adjunct faculty, cancelling classes due to
decreases in enrollment and giving students grace periods to be current with their finances.
Many HBCUs, including Clark Atlanta University, Howard, Spellman and public HBCUs,
including Florida and Alabama A & M University and the University of the District of
Columbia have already taken the initiative to cut staff and restructure departments to cope
with the financial crises. In Louisiana, the Southern University System and Grambling were
asked by the state to consider closing programs with low enrollment and low graduation
output as a cost reduction measure. This option is also being considered by Tennessee State
University for it physics program.

As draconian as these costs-cutting measures are, only a few schools have the cash
reserves or endowment to support their institutions after cuts in federal and state
appropriations. Few HBCUs outside of Spellman, Morehouse, Howard, and Hampton, in the
best of times had large endowments or an alumni base that gives freely to their alma mater.
The strain on the general fund and endowment has forced many HBCUs to reduce
investments in capital projects, reduce spending on faculty and staff salaries and lower
financial aid discounts to incoming and currently enrolled students.

The actions taken by various institutions to aligned their cost and improve their
effectiveness is an indication that these institutions are taking seriously the need to balance
their operation with their current financial outlook. The economic crises however, have
provided opportunities for institutions to implement customer driven cost containment
measures to improve efficiency and institutional effectiveness. The extent to which

27

institutions realign their policies, management practices, hire staff with expertise in critical
areas, train current faculty and staff to function efficiently, align essential functions with
available technology, and stream line operations to meet student demands will help
determine their continued success. It is those institutions that strategically restructure their
operations to balance their budgets, and find new sources of revenue through grants and
tuition increases, that will remain solvent in the long run.

As institutions reform their operations, they must be mindful of the events in
Congress. Recent proposals to make cuts in Pell Grants from $5,550 to $4,705 will have a
significant impact on students attending minority institutions. These cuts, if approved, could
reduce funding to HBCUs and other minority institutions by $250 million and could affect
the ability of minority students to access and graduate from higher education institutions.
The approval of H.R. 1 into law could see other programs such as Title III, become slated
for reduction. These changes, if they become law will place severe strain on all HBCUs,
therefore, institutional leaders must begin making additional adjustments to their operational
budgets in preparation for these potential Congressional mandated cuts.

Retention and Graduation Rates

Students enter college from various socio-economic backgrounds, with different
preparation levels and with different goals. The positive or negative interactions encountered
within the institution shapes their perception of the institution and impact their decision to
persist (Tinto, 1993). It is student’s interactions with financial aid, recruitment and
admission, academic services, student services, the curriculum, faculty and peers, that will
help shape the student’s decision to depart early from the institution (Bean, 1980; Pascarella,
1985 & Swail, 1995). It is these experiences, along with their ability to adapt and get
involved in the institutional environment and exploit the opportunities available with faculty
and peers that will increase their commitment to the institution and ultimate graduation
(Pascarella, 1985; Astin, 1985).

Retention is a performance measure that demonstrates that the institution is
accountable for the students it enrolls. It demonstrates to the public that the institution is
capable of making informed decisions on policies, programs, and personnel that impact
student success (Bogue, 1998). Low retention rate is an indication of the ineffectiveness of

28

the institution in managing the progress of its students to graduate within the time indicated.
In the end the institution's reputation is compromised and it loses revenues that could be
generated for academic and student services (Leveille, 2006; Tinto, 1993).

Current Retention Trend at Selected HBCUs

An analysis of data collected from the NCES college navigator of students who
enrolled in fall 2007 and returned in 2008 at 82 four year HBCUs, showed a freshman to
sophomore retention rate of approximately 62% (national average 75.5%) (See appendix C).
Outside of Morehouse and Spellman College only Florida A & M, Prairie View A & M,
Albany State, Elizabeth State and Bennett College, no other institution had freshman to
sophomore retention rates in the 80s and high 70s. On the low-end the University of the
District of Columbia, Concordia College of Selma, Paul Quinn College, Arkansas Baptist
and Texas College, posted first to sophomore retention rates between 40 to 20%
respectively.

Further analysis of the data on students who enrolled in four-year HBCUs in 2002,
revealed an average four-year graduation rate of approximately 18 percent (national average
27%). Fisk, Talladega and Morehouse College graduated more than 4% of the cohort within
four years, with Howard topping the list at 45 percent. When the top 10 institutions were
removed from the analysis, the averages of the other institutions were close to 15 percent.
On the low end, Southern Christian College, the University of the District of Columbia,
Edward Waters, Huston-Tillotson, Coppin and Texas Southern University, are at the bottom
with less than five percent. The six-year graduation rates follow a similar trend. Albany
State, Shorter College, Hampton, Fisk, Howard, Morehouse, Rust, Spellman, and Talladega,
graduated more than 50% of their graduates with Talladega and Spellman topping the list at
more than 80% (Appendix C).

There were eight institutions that performed close to and above the national trend of
58%, but collectively the overall graduation rate of 34% is 20% below the national average.
For African American males, the situation is more daunting. From the 83 institutions
examined less than a quarter of the males graduate within six years. Only 27% of the
institutions studied had male six year graduation rates over 33 percent. Only Albany State,
Fisk, Shorter Collage, Howard University, Talladega, and Morehouse College graduated

29

close to or more than half the male students who enrolled in 2002. In contract, more than 32
of the four-year institutions had male graduation rates of 20% or lower.

There are several debates within the academic community about placing credence to
graduation and retention statistics as it does not reflect the true picture of those students who
drop-out and those who stop-out. Irrespective of the position taken these are the facts; close
to two thirds of students who enter HBCUs fail to graduate within four to six years with
their cohort. If the data from the 2002 cohort is an indication of graduation performances at
HBCUs, then institutions such as Southwestern Christian College, the University of the
District of Columbia, Edward Waters College, Huston- Tillotson, Coppin State, and Texas
Southern University, with less than 20% graduation rates for the 2002 cohort, warrant
careful evaluation of their management practices.

The Financial Impact of Retention

According to Swail et. al (2004), when an institution loses a student, it loses income
it would otherwise receive for the four to six years the students remained enrolled at the
institution. The institution also loses revenue from bookstores, residential halls, financial
aid, campus restaurants, and loses potentially contributions (Swail et. al, 2004). To have a
deeper understanding of the impact of retention on the institution revenue stream, the 2006-
2007 data from 47 public HBCUs affiliated with the Thurgood Marshal College Fund
(TMCF) were examined. The TMCF 2006-2007 demographic report reveals that the
institutions reported a Fall enrollment of 42,257 students, with an average freshman to
sophomore retention rate of 65% for the 2008 academic year. Based on the analysis,
approximately 14, 790 students did not return with their cohort for their sophomore year.

Whether these students are drop-outs or stop outs, they have the opportunity to
contribute significantly to the revenue derived by the institutions from tuition, fees and
boarding. With an average freshman to sophomore rate of approximately 65 percent, TMCF
institutions are slated to lose approximately $225 million from this cohort alone after their
first year. If the sophomore to junior retention gap follows the national trend of 12 percent,
the TMCF institutions may lose close to another 3,296 students by the beginning of the
junior year, bringing the total student loss of almost 18,086 (47%) from the cohort within the
first two years. This brings the estimated loss in revenue from tuition, fees, and boarding for

30

the institutions within the first two years to approximately $500 million (See Table 1). These
numbers are significantly higher if state appropriations are added for each student loss (See
Appendix B).

According to Kline (2010), nationally, states provide on average subsidies and grants
of $10,000 per student each year to institutions. With a loss of close to 18,086 students for
the first two years of the 2006- 2007 cohort, TMCF institutions lose in excess of $181
million dollars in state subsidies for the first two years of each cohort. With state
appropriation per FTE declining by 9 % in 2008 and 5% during 2009-2010, the loss of
tuition and fees due to attrition is a significant revenue loss to state institutions, and
institutions must make every effort to reduce the loss (College Board, 2011).

Table.1 Estimated Attrition Loss to TMCF Institutions for the 2006- 2007 Cohort over the
First Two Years

Cohort Attrition Year 1 Loss Year 2 Loss 2 Year Loss
Retention Percent (%) Millions Millions State
Appropriations

TMCF 35 Percent $225 $225 $148
Freshman to
Sophomore

Sophomore to 12 Percent $50.1 $33
Junior

Total $225 275.1 $181

* Average loss per student instate tuition, fees and boarding $15,213 for public institutions
(College, 2010)

Institutions must also be mindful of not only losses in tuition and fees from student
loss, but loss in investment from recruiting. The estimates in retention normally only reflect
the cost estimates of the students that were enrolled, but do not take into consideration the
cost associated with recruiting and enrolling each student. Institutions invest significant
resources in marketing efforts to attracting, recruiting and enrolling their students. When a
student fails to return to the institution, the institution loses revenue and fails to recoup the
cost associated with attracting and recruiting the student. According to a Noel Levitz report

31

(2009) on the cost of recruiting for public and private institutions, private four-year
institutions spend an average of $2,134.00 and public institution spend on average $461.00
enrolling an undergraduate student. While there is no data available on the recruitment cost
for HBCUs, the Noel Levitz finding creates a basis for assessing the recruitment loss of
TMCF public institutions. Based on the findings from the Noel Levitz study for public
institutions, TMCF member institutions could lose approximately $8.4 million dollars in
recruitment due to retention loss for the first two years of each cohort. This is investments
the institution makes, expecting the students to stay at the institution to graduation and
provide the opportunity to earn returns on their investment.

For private HBCUs who are tuition dependent, the loss in revenue from retention is
significant. The 2006 UNCF supported school report indicated that their institutions derived
34% of their revenues from tuition and fees, 26% from government, 15% from private gifts,
5% from endowment income, 13% from auxiliary enterprise, and 6% from other incomes.
Institutions such as Florida Memorial College, Shaw University, Benedict College, and
Virginia Union University, get more than half their general operating expenses from tuition
and fees. Other institutions such as Texas College, Lane College, and Tuskegee Institute,
receive more than 40 percent of their revenues from government funds, but rely on tuition
and fees to fund their general operations budget (UNCF, 2006).

Public HBCUs generate close to a fifth of their revenues from tuition and fees, but
although they are less dependent on tuition and fees, they are impacted by the state funding
formula which is tied to the number of students enrolled and full time enrollment (FTE).
High attrition rates impact the ability of the institution to generate enough revenues from the
state to meet their operational budgets. Public institutions that are not attracting and
retaining the number of students needed to obtain state disbursement will continuously be
faced with operating budget shortfalls, debt, and liquidity problems. This, in the short run,
forces the institutions to balance their budgets through cost cutting measures such as salary
and hiring freezes, furloughs, layoffs, and delays in capital projects.

There is no doubt that the economic future of some HBCUs and retention are
intertwined. Their continued existence is dependent on the ability to effectively manage the
students they enroll from freshman to graduation. Success requires that the institution not

32

only track freshman to sophomore and the sophomore to junior retention rates, but to
monitor their four-year graduation rates and the performance of students at mid-semester
and the end of semester as well. The impact of retention on the institution’s existence
requires that all HBCUs have established short-term and long-term goals to improve
retention and graduation rates. The process must begin by improving the student’s transition
from high school to college, studying the pre-college variables that influence first-year
retention and developing interactive learning environments for the students. The institution
can only be aware of the students’ performance by developing established progression
scorecards and monitoring course enrollment, performance patterns and the progression of
the cohort towards graduation.

Tracking student progression requires changes in the way data is currently generated
and tracked. Tracking must go beyond generating reports required to fulfill the
requirements of the Integrated Post Secondary Education Data System (IPEDS) and the state
higher education commission. It requires the development of an adequate staff department
with the expertise and tools to track all students, developing a monitoring system for those
who are at-risk before they enter the institution and monitoring those who left the institution.
This strategy also requires the development of early relationships with the students and
parents, and connecting them with resources and individuals beginning from their first week
on campus.

Accountability

The discussions on accountability and controls in higher education in recent years is
fueled by increases in tuition, student indebtedness, demands for more financial aid,
reduction in educational affordability for low-income students and the poorest citizens, and
financial crises at the federal, state, and local government level (Muraskin & Lee, 2004).
Increasingly, legislative and public discord with allegations of financial impropriety,
inappropriate allocation of resources, and in some cases fraud, at several higher education
institutions has also led to calls for greater accountability of taxpayer dollars. The frequency
of these issues in the media has created an impression that some institutions are poorly
managed, their leaders are unproductive, and poor stewards of the state and federal tax
dollars, and student pay the price for their actions through continuous tuition increases.

33

These feelings resonate more so during the current economic crisis, where states are forced
to balance their budgets by making choices between K-12, higher education, social services
for their citizens.

Deficits in state budgets has increased the lobbying of state legislators, forcing many
to become increasingly involved in higher education budgets. Federal, state higher education
agencies and accreditation bodies, under public pressure, are becoming more aggressive in
monitoring higher education institutions and are placing greater focus on fiscal control and
performance outcomes. Increased monitoring comes with frequent audits reports, financial
strength tests, the meeting timelines for reporting financial information, monitoring of
research and private contributions, and the proof of continuous improvement.

In recent years, there were only a few reported incidences of inappropriate uses of
funds and evidence of wasting. However, recent accreditation violations for not completing
financial reports in a timely manner and reports of the inability of a few institutions to
account for a substantial amount of money, has helped fuel outside speculations. This is
evident by SACS placing Florida A & M, Texas Southern University, Alabama A & M
University, Stillman College, Tennessee State University, and Fisk University on warning
for non-compliance with principles of accreditation core requirement 2.1 and comprehensive
standards 3.10. This is an indication that financial accountability is a top accreditation
standard for which all higher education institutions must be compliant to remain accredited.
SACS requires all institutions to meet comprehensive standards 3.10 (financial resources)
through submission of annual financial statements and a cycle of audits demonstrating
control of finances and show management of sponsored research funds (SACS, 2010).

The close scrutiny of all institutions by the general public and legislators will
continue into the future as outlined in a 2005 National Commission on Accountability in
Higher Education report. The commission recommends that accountability of institutions be
based on results, such as retention, student outcomes and assessments results. The
commission proposes that institutions provide a better system of accountability and make
information, such as tuition and performance benchmarks, available to the public. The
commission recommends that the federal government establish a plan to monitor the
progress of every student, and that Board of Trustees establish standards for oversight and

34

management of the institutions. It is expected that accreditation agencies, administrators,
faculty, and staff make a commitment to improve their performance by continuously
evaluating their accomplishments and create an avenue for improvement.

Accountability for performance outcome is moving towards the adoption of a
performance base funding formula aimed at improving graduation and course completion.
States such as Louisiana, Tennessee, Georgia, Florida, Ohio, and other first “round reach to
the top” finalists are moving from the enrollment-driven formula to a performance-based
funding. The new funding formula holds institutions responsible for performances in
retention, course completion, graduation rates and other weighted averages. Institutions will
be required to meet weighted averages which will drive the allocation of funding by the
states. It is anticipated that all institutions, including HBCUs, will raise their performance,
improve their productivity and hold department heads accountable for performance
outcomes or risk budget cuts.

Diversity

In 2005, minority groups in the United States consisted of 14 % Hispanics, 12%
Blacks, 4% Asians/Pacific Islanders, and 1% American Indians/Alaska Natives (NCES,
2007). According to the NCES report on the status and trends in the education of ethnic
minorities, 33 percent of the US population will be minorities with a prediction that they
will account for 39 percent of the total population by 2020. As the minority population trend
upwards, and the number of minority high school graduates increases there will be a higher
percentage of minority students prepared to enter the college ranks. This is evident by the
increase in the enrollment of undergraduate minority students from 17 to 32 percent between
1976 and 2004 (NCES, 2007). The increase in accessibility to higher education is
demonstrated in the surge in undergraduate minority enrollment in higher education from
1976 - 2004.

During this time, there was a 461% increase in Asian/ Pacific Islanders, a 372%
increase in Hispanics, a 130% increase in Native Americans, and a 103% increase in blacks
compared to a 26% increase for their white counter parts. At the graduate level during that
period Asians/ Pacific Islanders increased by 373 percent, Blacks and American Indians/
Alaska natives increased by 181%, American Indians by 162% and by whites 27% (NCES,

35

2007). Despite the steady increase in minority enrollment in higher education, there has not
been a significant increase in the non-black student populations at most HBCU campuses.
From 1999 – 2001 there was only an 3.1% for whites, 6.87% for Hispanics and a 1.68%
increase in Asian/Pacific Islanders enrollment (NCES, 2007).

As generations of African Americans move further away from the Civil Right era
and become engaged in a more multicultural and racially tolerant society, they will be
searching for the best opportunities available to meet their needs and comfort level.
Predominately white institutions, for-profit, and online institutions have already started
exploiting these opportunities as evident in their diversity campaigns. Their aim is to attract
more minority students and compete for federal dollars available through Pell grant and
other federal programs. Their goals are to not only increase the enrollment of black students,
but also the number of Hispanics, Native Americans, Asian/Pacific Islanders, and
international student populations as well. As the marketing strategy improves at online, for
profit institutions, two year colleges and predominantly white institutions, minority students
will have more alternatives for their college education.

This loss of market share for academically and socially prepared African American
high school population is a threat that HBCU‘s should anticipate and not take lightly. As
African American students have more choices in accessing higher education than in the past,
this threat cannot continue to be ignored. The sports talent drain in the post-Civil Right era
is a pattern that is emerging for academically talented African American students. The brain
drain has started and in a few generations there will be no guarantee that talented African
Americans will continue to be attracted to majority Black institutions.

For now, African American students will continue to be the main source of
enrollment at most HBCUs; however, they cannot continue to be entirely dependent on
Black students to grow their enrollment. Growing the enrollment and maintaining it at levels
to sustain growth and development will be based on the institution’s ability to develop long-
term strategies that attract and enroll more white students and students from all other races.

The projected increase in enrollment growth between 2005 and 2016 at degree-
seeking institutions is expected to be as follows; 8 percent White, 29% Black, 45%
Hispanics, 32% Asian or Pacific Islanders, 34% American Indians or Alaska Native

36

enrollment and 15% resident aliens (NCES, 2007). Institutions must be mindful of these
trends and re-adjust their efforts based on population growth, geographic location, high
school graduation trends, and the needs of the various ethnic groups. HBCUs must be
mindful of the projected increase in the number of Hispanics and other minority high school
graduates in the Southern states and large cities such as Chicago, Detroit and in states such
as Louisiana, Michigan, New York, Connecticut, and the District of Columbia. These
institutions must provide opportunities to reach out, develop networks and engage the
Hispanic, Asian, and American Indian communities. In addition, they must also make an
effort to engage and strengthen relationships with the Asian block countries and India, and
Blacks from Africa, the Caribbean and Latin America.

Reaching out to other minority populations and underrepresented groups is a
significant part of the HBCU’s mission and several schools have had great success doing so.
Improvement in the diversity of the school population does not change the mission of the
institution, but provides an opportunity to demonstrate that they are educators of all people,
especially the underserved and poor of any race. Growing enrollment requires that
institutions not only say we enroll any student from any race, but have policies with
achievable goals to enroll Hispanics and other non-black students from elementary to high
school. The purpose should be to strategically change the perception of students of other
races from not seeing HBCUs as a black school, but an institution of choice for pursuing
their education.

The process must begin by examining and removing the barriers that negatively
impacts attracting, recruiting, and retaining non-black students (Simms, 1994). Once the
barriers are identified, institutions must develop a diversified enrollment management
strategy with established performance goals. Achieving these goals will require the hiring of
a diverse recruiting and admissions staff, the utilization of non-black students and faculty in
recruiting and outreach efforts, and developing programs that are attractive to non-black
students. Once the students are enrolled, a concerted effort must be made to create a campus
culture that is friendlier to non-blacks, help non-black students acclimatize to the campus
environment, and develops cultural programs to help maintain their persistence to
graduation. This collaborative effort can be done with other strategies to improve the

37

services available to international students, adult and nontraditional students, generation
Xers, the Millennials, and the lesbian and gay communities.

Diversity at HBCUs must not only be examined from a student perspective, but also
must be part of the institution’s human capital development strategy. Showing a
commitment to diversity must be demonstrated through the number of non-blacks and
women in administrative positions and presidential appointments. However, this will require
an increase in the number of talented women, whites, Hispanics, blacks, and other ethnic
minorities born outside of the United States and the appointment of talented non-alumni to
key administrative positions and on the Board of Trustees. Moving in this direction
demonstrates to talented, skilled, and dedicated non- African Americans and women that
they will be able to progress to senior management positions and achieve success at the
institution.

If this is not fully embraced HBCUs, cannot continue to say that they are open to all
people if the data for both students and administrative appointments cannot substantiate
these claims. Predominately White Institutions have appointed diversity officers and
developed strategies to improve their minority enrollment in an attempt to ward off potential
lawsuits and negative publicity. HBCU must be mindful of this, because as the economic
and political landscape changes at the state and federal level and the call to end race-based
public education increases, there will be pressure on public HBCUs to succumb to what is
politically correct at the time. The challenges, whether in the courts, from state legislators,
and Congress will come and HBCU will need partnerships with other minority and majority
legislators in moving legislative agendas for funding and reform that supports their mission.

Presidential Stability

Evan, Evan, & Evans (2002) argued that many of the problems faced by HBCUs are
related to leadership and shared governance. When there is a tense working relationship
between the faculty and staff senate, and student leadership groups, there is normally a
climate of mistrust. A lack of shared governance normally leads to an antagonist relationship
between the president and the faculty senate and a subsequent vote of no confidence. When
there is not a cooperative working relationship between the major leadership, groups there
is normally a work climate with poor faculty morale, reduction in program effectiveness, a

38

reluctance of faculty and staff to speak their minds because fear of reprisal, and inefficient
processes (Evan, Evan & Evans 2002; Jackson & Nunn, 2002; Minor, 2004 & Schexnider,
2008).

Many of the problems outlined above are not consistent with most HBCUs, and are
not unique to HBCUs they are a part of the higher education landscape. However, HBCU
presidents, such as Humphries at Florida A & M University, Harvey at Hampton University,
Johnnetta Cole of Spellman College, Payton at Tuskegee University, Massey at Morehouse
College, Richardson at Morgan State University, Francis at Xavier University, and other
prominent HBCU presidents have transformed their institutions during their long tenure.
They not only transformed their institutions into leading global institutions that attracted the
best and brightest students from the United States and from around the world, but they
become significant players in higher education policies in their respective states and
Washington D.C. The tenure of their presidencies allowed them to build strong management
teams, develop long and short term strategic plans and implement their vision. They
demonstrated the capacity to diplomatically work through the difficulties encountered with
individual board members, faculty and staff senates, student associations, alumni, parents
and donors, to transform their institutions.

Many of these presidents came to their institutions at a time when they were given
the opportunity to develop and articulate a vision for their respective institutions and sought
the input of their constituents. Not only did they have the support of their constituents, but
they understood the higher education and political landscape and hired talented
administrators who had the skills to promote and implement their vision and develop a
management pool to sustain the vision over time. They increased their institution’s visibility
and raised the academic expectations of their students while building partnerships with
corporate entities and government agencies to shift resources to improve their campuses, and
employ their students.

What is unique about these presidents and their tenure is that all of them were given
the opportunity by their Board of Trustees to stay at their institutions for 10 or more years.
The ability to stand the test of time is currently displayed by presidents at Xavier (42 years),
Northwestern Christian (43 years), Morris College (36 years), Hampton (32 years), Harris

39

Stowie, (31years) and Wilberforce University (23 years). There are also other HBCU
presidents at Shorter College (25 years), University of Arkansas Pine Bluff (19), Virginia
State University (17), Benedict College and Langston University (18), Rust College (17),
and Stillman College (13) (See appendix A). There are two public and eight private HBCU
presidents currently serving their institutions for over 20 years with the most notable being
the presidents of Xavier University, Hampton University and Southwestern Christian
College. In addition, there are 6 public and 10 private presidents having tenures over 10
years. These presidents have shown the ability to rally their alumni base, faculty and staff
senates, legislators, students, and their Boards around a vision to transform their institutions
into world-class institutions.

However, the past decade has been one of the most turbulent periods of leadership in
the history of several HBCUs. While there is nothing unusual about the hiring and firing of
presidents at educational institutions, the number of firing, hiring and retirement of
Presidents among HBCUs should be of concern. An examination of the records of 38 public
HBCUs and 45 private HBCUs reveals that only 6 (16%) public and 14 (31%) private
HBCU presidents survived the last decade. Approximately, 14 (37%) public HBCUs and 10
(22%) private HBCUs had at least three presidential appointments, with two private HBCUs
having four presidential changes in 10 years. At the public institution that lost their
presidents, 22 (58%) served less than eight years, 16 (42%) served less than six years and 6
(16%) served less than three years. At their private four-year counterparts 22 (49%) served
less than eight years, 14 (31%) served less than six years and four (9%) served less than
three years (see appendix A). These changes occurred at a time when the American Council
on Education (ACE, 2007) reported that college presidents were serving an average of 8.5
years in office and administrative officers serving 6.5 years, one of the highest tenure
periods in their history of data collection. These changes in leadership at both the
appointment and interim position bring not only changes in presidents and interim, but
cabinet level and other administrative appointments as well. Having three or more campus
leadership changes in a decade creates enormous challenges in continuing the development
of those institutions and it undermines development, long-term planning and the institutions’
competitiveness.

40

The presidency at any higher education institution is a pressure-filled position with
high expectations. It requires the hiring of an individual with a unique set of managerial,
political, academic, and fund-raising skills to perform effectively in the complex higher
education environment. The path to the presidency requires a progressive record of
successfully managing in a complex environment. Prior academic management experience is
a requirement, but as demonstrated by the hiring of successful government and corporate
managers at several PWIs, it is a not a requirement for success. The ACE 2007 report on the
American college president found that 13% had previous positions outside of academia,
21% lead other institutions, 40% were chief academic officers, 23% were non-academic
officers, 28% were chosen internally, and 5% were chairs of departments. This is an
indication that presidents come from different backgrounds, but their selection is based on
proven administrative and political skills needed to effectively navigate the complexity of
the higher education environment.

Since 2007, there are 40 (48%) new presidents at the 83 public and private HBCUs
examined. These new HBCU presidents are expected to sustain their jobs by balancing and
serving the needs of the institutions, be fiscally responsible and operate within a politically
charged atmosphere (Millette, 2004). This group of presidents assumes responsibilities
during the worse financial crises faced by higher education in decades. They came expecting
to maneuver the political landscape and move quickly in transforming their organizations by
growing enrollment, improve efficiency, increase fund raising, increase retention and move
the Board of Trustees and alumni to focus on their vision. This is a feat that has not been
done successfully by many of their predecessors between 2000- 2010.

With almost a third of HBCUs having new first time presidents at the helm during
the past three years, mentoring of current groups of new HBCU presidents to maneuver the
numerous issues facing HBCU’s are central to the stability of the HBCU presidency.
Presidents who did not have long chief academic or operations officer careers or prior
academic leadership experience within the HBCU environment, will require all the
emotional, spiritual, political and administrative they can muster to effectively manage in
the complex HBCU environment. Finding a common ground in developing a working
relationship with the Board of Trustees, the faculty senate, alumni, and corporate donors,
will be essential to their success. The reforms needed to withstand the current budget cuts

41

will require that this group of presidents improve the culture of their institutions by
improving communication and shared governance, and improve faculty and staff
involvement in the budget process. They must hire experienced and effective leadership
teams that can create a framework to implement their vision, and encourage and develop a
new wave of leadership talent through structured succession planning. They must also
establish an assessment and continuous quality improvement system that can be sustained
irrespective of any leadership changes (Benchmark: Howard University & Spellman
College).

Succession planning must also become a part of the conversation at institutions. This
is necessary because institutions are expected to lose some of the most experienced HBCU
presidents and administrators in the next decade due to retirement or firings. This strategy
also falls in line with the ACE projection that more than 40 % of the presidents comes from
the chief academic officer position and this position must become the training ground for the
presidency. Succession planning through the identification of talented administrators and the
preparation of the next generation of presidents and qualified supporting administrators
requires careful consideration by the HBCU community. This is important in ensuring that
there are pools of new candidates both inside and outside the HBCU community that are
mentored and prepared for the presidency. In facilitating this process, the HBCU community
must engage in dialogue around the following questions:

1. What has contributed to the high presidential turnover during the last decade?

2. Is there a pool of presidential candidates at HBCs or PWIs who are prepared to move to
the presidency and meet the challenges of higher education landscape?

3. What roles are past and current presidents playing in helping to mentor the new group of
presidents?

4. Are the current set of provost and future presidential candidates formally prepared for the
office of the presidency and what are the opportunities for their development?

5. What criteria are the Boards of Trustees using in the recruitment and hiring of the
president?

42

6. Are the same criteria applied consistently by all Board of Trustee members in the hiring
process?

7. Do the candidates have enough entrepreneurial, academic, and management experience
that prepares them for the presidency and were they successful in their previous
assignments?

8. Do selected candidates understand the enormity of the job and demonstrate progressive
evidence that they have skills to successfully guide the Board of Trustees, and their
constituents in supporting the implementation of their vision?

9. Do candidates have the diplomatic skills to successfully resolve conflict with the Board of
Trustees, alumni, students, and the faculty and staff senate and capture the hearts and minds
of the community?

10. Do the candidates understand and support shared governance in making tough decisions?

11. Do candidates know how to manage in the new higher education landscape which
requires accountability, data driven decision making and continuous improvement at all
levels of the organization?

12. Do candidates understand how to manage effectively in a result-driven environment with
dwindling resources?

13. Do candidates understand the relationship between the assessment, planning,
institutional effectiveness, and budget process and its implication for accreditation?

14. Do they understand the needs of students and the requirements of the workforce in a
highly technology-driven customer service environment?

15. Do they have a history of forging new relationships with all stakeholders inside and
outside the university community?

16. Do they have a successful history of managing in a quality-driven environment, where
resources are allocated based on performance and institutional priorities?

43

17. Do they have the expertise to perform in the volatile partisan city and state political
environment?

18. Do they have a fund-raising history and know how to develop relationships with major
donors?

The Board of Trustees and President Relationships

Boards of Trustees have done outstanding jobs in sustaining the stability and growth
of the nation’s HBCUs. However, the battles between HBCU presidents and their Boards of
Trustees are legendary, with many believing that the short tenure of presidents over the last
decade is attributed mainly to the relationships between the presidents and the Board of
Trustees. While there is no evidence to substantiate these claims, media reports of the battles
between fired HBCU presidents and Boards of Trustees are well known. Embattled
presidents, students, faculty and alumni in colleges and universities across the country have
accused their Boards of meddling in the day-to-day operations of the institutions, micro-
managing the institutions, lacking of goodwill once the president does not conform to
individual Board members, political divisiveness, sleeping on the job, and pursing self-
interest at the expense of the institutions. These are just clichés used by individuals whether
the institutions (PWIs or HBCUs) who are dissatisfied with the institution’s current
management. However there is little published evidence to substantiate these claims at
HBCUs.

Irrespective of the opinions, the role of the Board in selecting and hiring a president
is its most important decision. The Boards of Trustees are the guardians of the HBCU legacy
and have the single greatest responsibility in ensuring the stability and long-term success of
these institutions. Selecting a president for the long-term requires the selection of a
candidate who understands the mission of the institution, is a skillful fundraiser, is sensitive
to the needs of students and faculty, in tune with education policies, exercises initiative in
leadership, is credible and impartial in judgment, and is receptive to faculty and staff
concerns. The modern president has to be politically savvy, be able to work with individual
Board members, work with different personalities and egos, and is able to choose a team that
can articulate and implement his vision. The wrong candidate for presidency can be a costly
mistake. Bad presidential choices have resulted in administrators who lack leadership and

44

interpersonal skills to engage faculty in decision-making, which in the long run impacts the
campus morale, institutional growth, and development (Jackson & Nunn, 2002).

Outside of retirement, the relatively high turnover of many institutions questions the
policies and practices of the Boards of Trustees in the selection process, the quality of the
candidates the institutions are attracting to the presidency, the quality of the candidates
selected and the difference in management philosophy between individual Board members
and the president in the execution of the mission of the institution. High rates of presidential
turnover also begs to question the effectiveness of the respective Boards of Trustees in
selecting presidents, and the level of mutual respect and cooperation between the Boards and
the presidents once they are selected, and the level of hostility created between the president
and his constituents (Jackson & Nunn, 2002; Millette 2004; AAUP, 2007).

Stability at the presidency requires a Board of Trustees that individually and
collectively understands their role and mission and collectively functions as a team focusing
on what is best for students and the institution. Individual Board members must clearly
understand that the role of the Board is to select and support the presidency and to act as a
policy-making body, ensuring that the president’s actions support the institution’s mission.
They must embrace their roles by becoming more outcome-driven, impartial in evaluating
and holding their presidents accountable for meeting performance metrics, and use only
institutional data and performance outcomes to evaluate the presidency. In doing so, they
must have established performance scorecards tied to accreditation, institutional
assessments, financial management and federal and state higher education guidelines. They
must take time to analyze all institutional reports and pay attention to the details, and be
educated on the accreditation process and standards for reaffirmation of accreditation. They
must understand and know how to interpret the bylaws of the Board, contribute to fund-
raising, and have a thorough understanding of student affairs, finance, academic policies,
and athletics.

Board members must do this because the future of HBCUs is tied to the relationship
or lack of between the respective Board of Trustees and their presidents. Presidents and
individual Board members must collaborate in developing working relationships that are
above ground, open and transparent. Board members must be candid with their suggestions,

45

be committed to their committee appointments and responsibilities, and avoid meddling into
the day-to-day operations of the institutions. They must create an environment for the
president to be successful by creating an environment of trust, give the president the
authority to manage the institution, and hold him/her accountable for performance outcomes.
They must act as an independent body, be forthright in their decisions, and reduce the
influence of outside parties in their deliberations. It is essential that they have a thorough
understanding of the current and projected higher education climate and be open to change
and new suggestions from the president. They must put the interests of the institution and its
students above all else by focusing their decisions on the best interests of the students.

When individual Board members do not clearly understand their roles, then the
relationship with the president will continue to deteriorate, and the institutions suffer in the
long run. Trustees are experts in their respective fields and are selected to serve based on
unique skills they bring, but they should be encouraged to develop their effectiveness in
serving in a higher education environment. Achieving this requires that new trustees be fully
oriented to the bylaws and regulations of the Board, and be knowledgeable of the
management and dynamic nature of higher education. They can do this by becoming regular
subscribers to The Chronicle of Higher Education, Inside Higher Education, The
Trusteeship Magazine, and other higher education publications. Trustees should also be
encourage to become members of the Association of Governing Boards of Universities and
Colleges (AGB), and participate in AGB national conferences on trusteeship, and attend
trustee institutes and training sessions. It is through their knowledge of the education
environment, and their commitment to work collaboratively with each other and the
president that they will be able to focus on what is best for their respective institutions.

Competition

The number of Black students enrolled in degree-seeking institutions increased from
12.4% in 2002 to 13.1% in 2007 (NCES, 2009), but the percentage of Black enrollment at
HBCUs declined from 12.9 to 10.6% from 2002 to 2006 (NCES, 2008). While the
enrollment at HBCUs has grown over 36 % between 2001 to 2007, Black enrollment in
higher education, as the percentage of students enrolled at HBCUs, continues to decline.
While this is not conclusive, there are indications that the enrollment of African Americans

46

in higher education is increasing, but the percentage of Blacks attending HBCUs is steadily
declining.

This is of concern because there are more aggressive marketing efforts by online
universities and predominately white institutions to grow their minority enrollment by
offering scholarships, stipends, and work-study opportunities aimed at competing for and
attracting the best and brightest minority students. As the marketing by PWIs and online
colleges increases, African American students are also more market savvy than in the past,
and are more aggressive in getting the best value for their higher education dollars. In
addition, there is also a larger pool of college educated and internet savvy parents who are
able to examine online institutional performance metrics, such as cost, enrollment patterns,
and retention and graduation rates prior to making enrollment decisions. Parents now can
make educated decisions based on their institution’s performance and ranking and can
evaluate schools that give their sons and daughters the best chance for success.

Parents and students are seeking a quality education, founded on outstanding
customer services, tuition discounts and scholarships, technology-driven services, friendly
staff, engaging experiences, flexible schedules and online classes, and social and intellectual
engagement in and out of the classroom. In this internet and smart phone age, bad news gets
around quickly and students can easily compare their HBCU services with those available
from their PWIs. They will not hesitate to withdraw or transfer if services do not meet their
expectations or the institution does not have the major they desire. This level of completion
is a realistic threat that HBCUs must be prepared to grapple with and must develop a
revolutionary marketing strategy capable of not only attracting larger number of African
American students, but a higher percentage of white and Hispanic, non-traditional students,
as well. Achieving this requires that the institutions develop a reputation for service, and
promotes their reputation of academic excellence and the quality of education they provide.

Although the majority of HBCUs are more than 80% Black, they can no longer
believe that Black students will continue to attend their institutions because they want to
attend a Black school. Institutions must aggressively win over the hearts and minds of the
public by increasing the market share in the Black, Hispanic and white communities. This
will require that those institutions make a concerted effort to reshape their images by

47

refocusing on presenting their product so that it is attractive to the needs of students and
their parents. However, for this to occur, HBCUs have to aggressively improve their local
and state public perception and examine how they can effectively compete with their PWI
counterparts. Achieving this will require the removal of the distrust that HBCUs have of the
media and to use it to their advantage to effectively communicate their successes. Instead of
allowing local media outlets to report only the negatives from these institutions, public
relations departments must consistently sell themselves in a positive light, hire “spin
doctors” and a public relations team that consistently monitors the airways, print, social
media and the Internet. Public relations must tout the success of faculty and staff, the
quality of their graduates and their performance, compared to their white counterparts.

Competing against PWIs requires the studying of peer white institutions and using
flagship programs and services to market the lesser known programs. Competing requires an
understanding that the PWIs are moving to develop relationships with students as early as
elementary school (Benchmark: Duke University BOOST and TIP Programs). It is therefore
essential that HBCUs develop programs that attract middle and high schools to their
campuses and develop relationships with these students over time. Not only must more K-12
students become familiar with the campus, but administrators must help the process by
diversifying their academic programs and developing majors in highly skilled, in demand
and growing disciplines. They must also use their strength of teaching and service as
leverage, scholarships and work study, small class sizes, support services, investment in
technology, faculty and staff, research capabilities, customer service, the quality of their
programs, and the success of their students in attracting students to the institutions.

Parting Words

Whether HBCUs consider the threats listed perceived or real, institutions have to
play close attention to their students and act aggressively to resolve their concerns. Success
requires that these institutions understand that this new generation of students are committed
to service and engagement opportunities and are less concerned about the history and family
affiliations with an institution. They see making the choice to attend an institution as making
choices between consumer products and will not hesitate to change if their objectives are not
meet. All levels of the institution, from the Board of Trustees, the president and

48

administrators, faculty and staff, must be mindful of this, and work together in developing a
culture that focuses on developing a student-centered institution that continuously monitors
students’ perception and learning outcomes. They must hold leaders accountable for
performance outcomes, and use information from assessment and market research to
develop project and formulate alliances which are in the best interests of the institution.

49

Chapter III

Leveraging a Continuous Quality Improvement Approach to Improve Institutional
Effectiveness
Introduction

The challenges facing higher education in the current economic climate requires that
all HBCUs look at integrating continuous quality improvement (CQI) as a strategy for
improving their institutional effectiveness and efficiency. CQI focuses primarily on the
internal and external customer and uses data to continuously document and review workflow
to drive process improvement in both academic and non-instructional areas. CQI holds line
staff, unit managers, deans, vice presidents, the president and the Board of Trustees
accountable for effectively using institutional resources to meet performance benchmarks
and improving interaction among each other.

Before CQI principles can be effectively integrated there has to be a thorough
understanding of CQI principles by all members of the institutions and their role in their
effective implementation. This chapter will attempt to explain CQI, CQI application in
higher education, the use of CQI at HBCUs, customer behavior in the higher education
environment, and the role of assessment in improving institutional effectiveness and student
experience. The chapter will also focus on assessing student learning outcomes, assessment
in student affairs, assessment relationships, assessment instruments and dashboards,
managing the data and information flow, and quality assurance through auditing.

What is Continuous Quality Improvement?

CQI is a proactive management philosophy that focuses on improving the customer
experience by continuously monitoring performance at all stages of the operation, and
focusing the institution on finding new ways to effectively utilize its resources to make
incremental improvements at the unit level. Continuous quality improvement places
emphasis on customer satisfaction by utilizing statistical analysis to examining the
development of the product from one stage to the next (Deming, 1986). Its foundation was

50

built on a four step management system developed by Walter Shewart in the 1920s and
popularized by Edward Deming in the Japanese manufacturing boom after World War II
(Deming, 1986).

According to Deming (1986) Plan- Do-Check-Act Cycle (PCDA) model,
organizations pursuing incremental quality improvement should focus their strategies around
a continuum from planning to implementation to evaluation and product improvement (Fig
1). In the plan phase, institutions should define their processes, customers, goals, assessment
strategy, and the best solution to the problems. The Do phase consists of making incremental
system changes, and is followed by the Check phase which examines the changes to
determine if the solution addresses the issue. The Act stage is the implementation of the plan
on a larger basis, and sets guidelines for establishing, monitoring, and control (Deming,
1993).

Fig. 1 Plan-Do- Check-Act Cycle

Source: Diagram by Karn G. Bulsuk (http://blog.bulsuk.com).

According to Deming (1986), a quality institution has to study its customers to
understand their needs and design its products to meet these needs. If the institution fails to
develop processes that improve the customer’s experience, they will lose the customer
which will be costly and create a bad impression of the product in the short and long term.
Deming suggested that what the customer thinks about the organization’s product a year or
three years from now is important. It is therefore essential that the organization continuously
focus on improving the quality of the product so that once the customer experiences the
product they will develop a positive relationship far into the future.

51

In transforming the organization to focus on the customer, Deming (1986) suggests
14 points that are essential for the transformation into a quality organization. According to
Deming, the organization must establish: 1.goal specific improvements, 2. adoption of a new
management philosophy, 3. develop assessments and inspection strategies, 4. reward
performance, 5. continuously improve the products, 6. employee training, 7. leadership
practices, 8. remove fear by creating an atmosphere of trust and creativity, 9. encourage
teamwork, 10. manage through statistical thinking, 11. develop process improvement
strategies, 12. remove barriers to quality improvement, 13. promote employee education,
and 14. improve the culture and climate of the organization. Deming argue that these
management principles are essential for consistency in the processes, and the development
of a cooperative and satisfied workforce that is less mistake prone and focused on
developing a quality product.

Other quality control philosophies, such as Crosby’s (1979) 14 steps of quality and
Juan’s (1989) 10 steps to quality also share similar approaches to Deming. Crosby (1979)
postulated that proposed improvements should be passed down the organization through
education and dialogue, quality must be done right the first time, and zero defects are the
only performance standards. Juran (1989) on the other hand, emphasized that quality
planning, quality control and quality improvements, can occur in an organization by
designing quality programs to fit the organization’s current plans.

Several higher education institutions have modeled their quality programs from the
quality philosophy of Deming, Juran and Crobsy. One of the most highly acclaimed higher
education CQI models, the Penn State IMPROVE model, asks a series of questions
organized in seven different parts. The questions are focused on: 1. Identifying the process
to be improved, 2. mapping the current process, 3. matching the quality philosophy of
institution, 4. preparing and analysing of the process, 5. researching and developing possible
solutions, 6. organizing and developing a plan, and 7. verifying and documenting the results
(Penn State, 2003).

The CQI Approach in Higher Education

Continuous Quality Improvement philosophy, though having its genesis in the
corporate environment, has now become an integral part of the management system. In

52

higher education, CQI provides a management framework that allows higher education
managers to utilize a planned data driven approach that focuses on improving work
processes and the work environment that meets the changing demands of students. It
allocates resources based on results, strengthens employees’ involvement and integration,
increases student involvement and commitment, and improves the collaboration between
managers and employees (Chambliss, 2003). CQI engages all stakeholders (students, faculty
& staff, administrators and alumni), recognizes each contribution to organizational
improvement, provides the road map for institutional action plans, and validates key
performance areas for improvement (Wallace, 2001). This helps organizational planning by
anticipating changes in instruction, hiring, faculty and staff development, demographics and
market trends, technological needs, and the expectations of students, faculty, and staff
(Baldrige Criteria, 2006). It also sets the foundation for departments to establish
organizational goals to support the institution's mission, respond to changing demands of
student needs through structured student assessments, and the establishment of operational
framework in all aspects of the institution’s operation (Crosby, 1997; Bogue, 1998 &
Chamblis, 2003).

CQI is able to improve processes by focusing the organization on the customer, so
that faculty and staff can develop programs to improve the student experience, reduce cost
and waste, improve efficiency, hold mangers accountability, and is transparent. CQI models,
such as the Baldrige Criteria for Educational Excellence, Dashboards, re-engineering,
strategic planning, benchmarking, balance scorecards, process improvement, process
simplification, ISO9000:2000 and ISO 14001 series, six sigma, assist higher education
institutions in examining their work and focus the institution in understanding the needs and
expectations of the customers. The strategies provided by these models allow the institutions
to examine customer requirements, re-evaluate work processes, and continuously redesign
processes and programs to meet customer needs (Burrill & Ledolter 1999; Dew, 2006 &
Evan & Lindsay, 2005).

Rice and Taylor (2003), in a progress report on continuous improvement strategies in
higher education found, that continuous improvement principles are applied with success in
higher education for process improvement, continuous improvement, institutional
effectiveness, student learning assessment, and preparation for accreditation. Institutions

53

implementing CQI identified learning assessment, institutional effectiveness and
accreditation as the most widely used, however, process improvement is mainly pursued at
the departmental level (Rice and Taylor, 2003). Thalner (2005), in a study of directors in the
department of financial services, facilities management, and auxiliary services in higher
education in Michigan, found that the primary methods of CQI were CQI teams and
benchmarking. The groups were driven to pursue CQI due to demand from reduced
budgetary allocations, the need to improve efficiencies, improve competitiveness and
improved service and were more focused on smaller improvements at the departmental
level. In using CQI, the respondents realized better service, quicker responses, improved
efficiencies, increased financial returns, and improvements communication across
departmental lines (Thalner, 2005).

The increased use of CQI in higher education is also driven by accreditation agencies
that have made it an integral part of the higher education landscape. The Commission of the
North Central Association of Colleges and Schools (NCA), Higher Learning Commission,
which accredits over 1,000 higher education institutions in 19 states, uses the Academic
Quality Improvement program (AQIP) to drive their accreditation and continuous
improvement. The AQIP provides nine categories for institutions to focus on achieving their
goals. The accreditation process focuses on: 1. helping students learn, 2. accomplishing
other distinctive objectives, 3. understanding students’ and other stakeholders’ needs, 4.
valuing people, 5. leading and communicating, 6. supporting institutional operations,7.
measuring effectiveness, 8. planning continuous improvement, and 9. building collaborative
relationships (HLC, 2010).

Other accreditation agencies, such SACS, over the past decade has added the
Quality Improvement Plan (QEP) as part of its accreditation process. SACS intended for the
QEP to be entrenched into the overall institutional quality and effectiveness programs by
engaging broad segments of institution in focusing, planning, implementing and evaluating
an issue or issues related to institutional improvement over a time period. SACS has also
added core requirement 2.5 and comprehensive standard 3.3 (Institutional effectiveness).
This requires demonstration through documentation that institutions have an integrated
ongoing institution-wide strategy to review their mission, goals, and outcomes and

54

demonstrates a continuous improvement process for accomplishing their mission (SACS,
2010).

Despite CQI use in business, higher education institutions and accreditation
agencies, there are questions related to the long-term effectiveness beyond becoming a fad
in higher education (Birnbaum, 1999). There are still the skeptics who question the approach
to academic management, and there are institutional leaders who are not committing the
energy and funds to fully implement it due to lack of knowledge or fear of change. Bringing
the skeptics on board will require leaders who can demonstrate and communicate how CQI
will improve the effectiveness of the organization without creating significant disruption to
their way of life (Birnbaum, 1999).

Zhiming (1998), in a study of effective practices of continuous improvement in
United States’ colleges and universities in mainly administrative areas, found that
commitment of top management, quality planning, teamwork, and expanding CQI to involve
faculty and staff, are some of the best practices necessary for CQI success. Other factors,
such as involvement of partners, a dedicated quality staff, training for implementers, the use
of flow chart and benchmarking, union support, having a reward and recognition system,
establishing assessment standards, and communicating improvements to the constituency,
were practices important for CQI success. Zhimming (1998) also provided the following
don’ts of CQI based on the data and field studies. For beginning implementers, they must
not leave middle managers out of training; they must use world class benchmarking; and
they must not launch CQI initiatives institution wide unless they are ready for it. Zhimming
also emphasized that experienced implementers should not leave the unions and academic
areas out of the CQI processes and measures.

Continuous Quality Improvement at HBCUs

All accredited HBCUs practice some form of CQI. Institutional research and
planning departments at the respective institutions consistently collect data for internal
decision-making, and report key performance measures to meet, accreditation, state, and
federal requirements. They amass and generate an enormous amount of data on assessments
from faculty, staff, and students and provide information on the experiences of the
respective groups so that informed decisions can be made. They have administrative

55

structures in place, and are practitioners of some form of CQI to support their institutional
effectiveness policy. However, as demonstrated by the SACS warning to Tennessee State
University, HBCUs must not only collect data, but must understand and develop
competencies in the CQI process to avoid sanctions by the accreditation agency.

There is no evidence indicating that HBCUs do not have the management structure
and system capability to guide their academic and administrative services to meet their
performance objectives. There is evidence suggesting that continuous quality improvement
(CQI) models are a part of the HBCU management landscape and is used with varying
success at most institutions. An evaluation of several HBCU web pages show developed
short-term and long-term strategic plans at the departmental and institutional levels,
suggesting that strategic planning is a quality model widely used for institutional planning
and process improvement.

Studies by Ibekwe (2006) and Wright (2008) found an awareness and practice of
TQM and CQI among faculty, administrators and retention directors. Wright (2008) found
that retention directors at HBCUs practiced strategic management, benchmarking, process
management, balance score card and the Baldrige Criteria for Educational Excellence
individually or in combination as part of their retention management strategy. Both Wright
& Ibekwe found the main benefits of TQM/CQI at HBCUs were collaboration between
other university partners, improved communication with other departments, and increased
academic program effectiveness and student learning outcomes. Wright (2008), however,
found a lack of financial resources, turf protection, a lack of accountability and committed
leadership as major obstacles encountered in fully practicing CQI by retention managers at
HBCUs.

Examining the data from NCES and state higher education commissions reveals that
several HBCUs are failing to deliver on key performance metrics, such as retention and
graduation, despite evidence of the use and knowledge of CQI. There is evidence suggesting
that data is collected and analyzed at all the institutions, but underperformance in retention
and graduation raises skepticism as to whether the data is used to drive decision making
across the campuses on a consistent basis. To answer these questions, it is vital that all

56

institutions begin self-examination of their management philosophy by asking themselves
the following questions:

1. What are your customers (students, employers, alumni, faculty and staff)
perceptions of your institution and the services it provides?

2. What is the quality and consistency of the assessment process?

3. What kind of information is collected and how often is it collected?

4. How is this data analyzed, communicated, and used by the key stake holders in the
academic and non-academic units?

5. Is there an annual data review process across the institution and is there evidence
that data is used as an integral part of the management and decision-making process?

6. What system of accountability exists among the different management levels?

7. Do the managers understand work processes and its impact on their
customers/students?

8. Are there systematic collection, analysis, and use of data to allocated resources to
improve work process at the departmental and unit level?

9. Do employees at all levels understand the impact their level of customer service
has on retention and graduation rates at the institution?

10. Are there ongoing, unresolved problems encountered by internal and external
customers that remain uncorrected over extended periods of time?

11. To what extent is front line staff involved in the decision-making process at the
unit level?

12. To what extent are there cross departmental discussions on key decision
impacting the customer/student?

13. Is there a reward and recognition system for outstanding performers?

14. Are there planned activities aimed at improving faculty and staff morale?

57

15. Is there an environment that promotes ongoing training and development of
faculty and staff?

16. Is there a systematic plan for training and mentoring of young talented leaders?

These questions are not unique to HBCUs; they are questions that have to be
answered by every higher education institutions that are focused on becoming quality
driven. To become a quality organization, institutions are obliged to:

1. Meet their customer’s expectations (Evan and Lindsay, 2005).

2. Continuously re-evaluate their processes for weaknesses, and redesign the system
with the purpose of satisfying or exceeding customers’ needs (Burrill & Ledolter,
1999).

3. Create a atmosphere which constantly reviews its operation to find areas for
continuous improvement (Deming, 1986).

4. Establish measurable yardsticks which are driven by comparison with other
organizations through cost, accountability, performance and service (Seymour,
1993).

5. Conduct its transactions within the agreed framework by impacting every area
within the organization that contributes to improving the organization’s reputation
and ultimately its revenue intensity (Crosby, 1997).

6. Assist in efforts to frequently examining work systems (Dew & Nering, 2006).

7. Improve the institution’s accountability and marketability (Seymour, 1997).

8. Engage leadership in strategic and operational planning, creating measures and
benchmarks, and evaluating work processes.

The strength of CQI efforts at an institution rests with the ability of the managers to
show the leadership required to develop the framework needed to better serve every
customer, reduce waste, streamline operations, and promote openness and collegiality.
Deming (1986) suggests that it is the responsibility of the manager in the quality

58

environment to remove obstacles that will prevent optimal performance, because problems
that exist are due to system failure rather than unmotivated employees.

Changing or improving the campus culture to adopt these changes requires the Board
of Trustees and the president to lead the way by articulating a clear vision, establishing
performance goals and creating a climate that requires regular reviews of operations to find
areas for continuous improvement. The climate must include the holding of Vice Presidents
and unit managers accountable for improving processes under their control, reducing
departmental tension, encouraging dialogue across departmental lines, instituting training
and development, and monitoring and evaluating the progress made (Rice & Taylor,
2003:Thalner, 2005).

Understanding Customer Behavior in the Higher Education Environment

Students take on different roles in higher education; they are products that pass
through the system; they are internal customers for campus services and course delivery and
are laborers in the learning process (Codjoe and Helms, 2005). The success of a college
hinges on its ability to identify and understand the student/customer issues, work on
continuously improving the process that causes the problems they encounter, and effectively
manage its resources to help its customers. Becoming customer-focused, however, does not
happen overnight. It is a process that requires continuous anticipation of the customer’s
changing needs and habits, and develops proactive strategies to meet those needs (Seymour,
1993).

The competitive academic environment dictates that as service organizations,
institutions must make an effort to be service-oriented, reduce variation in service quality,
and maintain an image that will affect market share, student selection, donation dollars, and
research funding (Jurow, 2006). Becoming service oriented is vital, because
students/customers understand market forces and seek quality education at a reasonable
price. They also have more choices than in the past, and with these flexibilities, they are
more focused on organizations that satisfy them (Deming, 1983 & Leville, 2006). Surviving
in this competitive environment requires that all higher education institutions, including
HBCUs, become more adaptable and flexible to the changing business conditions and
develop programs and processes geared at improving student experiences.

59

Competitiveness drives efficiency and HBCUs must be cognizant of market trends
and quickly adapt their campus culture to become student-driven. A student’s decision to
attend an institution of his/her choice is based on their perception of the institution,
perceived friendliness of faculty and staff, and the ability to obtain a quality education in an
environment that fosters their growth and development. The mystique of the HBCU
experience cannot sustain competitiveness unless there is a significant improvement in
student experiences once they are enrolled. Improving competitiveness requires the
utilization of business models that maximizes the institution’s resources and delivers world
class education to its students. Sustaining this effort requires institutions to adjust their
policies and practices, aligning management functions to meet student demands, reducing
waste and eliminate redundancies, and hiring staff with expertise in critical areas. Achieving
this requires bringing all the entities to communicate with each other, training current
faculty and staff to function efficiently, aligning critical functions with available technology,
and streamlining operations to meet student demands.

The Role of Assessment in Improving Institutional Effectiveness and Student
Experience
Fig. 2 Assessment Strategy

Implement strategies

Document evidence Assess goals

Use results for planning
and resources allocation

(msche.org, 2002).

60

Improving student experiences requires an assessment strategy that captures student
opinions and uses the information to plan, continuously improve the processes and allocate
resources. An appropriate assessment strategy clearly defines the organizational and unit
goals, has strategies for achieving the goals, has established strategies for assessing
outcomes and used the results to plan and allocate resources (msche.org, 2005). It also sets
performance expectations for customer relationships and satisfaction and is the basis by
which managers determine if their decisions are adding value to the customer’s experience.
Successful assessment strategy is geared towards measuring the performance of the
institution, and communicates the results in a manner so that the units can understand and
identify their strengths, weaknesses, opportunities and treats. The process requires that the
institution selects key performance measures; develops strategies for tracking the measures,
and maps progress toward meeting its strategic goals. For this to occur, a process for
tracking performance measures has to be developed and evaluated at the end of each
reported period (monthly, annually, mid-semester, semester) and compared with earlier
periods, to determine if progress is made from one period to the next.

One of the four elements of the assessment strategy is the efficient collection and use
of the information to quickly and accurately verify the decision making process. Strong data
analysis and communication strategies at all levels of the organization ensures that the
conclusions reached are valid and shared across the institution. Shared data should include
comparative analysis of the data with calculated variances, a comparison of the data against
the previous year’s performance, comparing the institution's performance with benchmark
institutions, and highlighting best practices across the institution. Assessment reports should
also compare data at the department and unit level, ranking departments and units by
performance. This performance review process must be the basis for developing new ideas
and new projects, and for driving future performances (Baldrige Criteria, 2011).

Assessing Student Learning Outcomes

The assessment of student learning is one of the most important evaluation
proceedings of an institution. At the course level, it describes through the Blooms
Taxonomy framework and the skills and knowledge that students are expected to receive
upon completion of a course of study. Course level learning outcomes must show a

61

relationship with the course of study and be effectively mapped to the curriculum. It is
through a well-documented assessment process that faculty and department heads will have
the information needed to drive curricular review, develop prerequisites, add courses, and
identify what students are learning against what is required for proficiency in their major.

In developing an assessment plan, the Middle States Commission on Higher
Education (2003) suggests that institutions:

1. “Develop clearly articulated learning outcomes: the knowledge, skills, and
competencies that students are expected to demonstrate upon successful completion of a
course, academic program, co-curricular program, general education requirements, or other
specific set of experiences;

2. Offer courses, programs, and experiences that provide purposeful opportunities for
students to achieve those learning outcomes;

3. Assess student achievement of those learning outcomes; and

4. Use the results of those assessments to improve teaching and learning, make
informed planning decisions, and allocate resources” (Page 4).

According to the Georgetown University assessment manual (2008), the assessment
cycle should follow the following pathway:

1. Faculty should work together in identifying achievable learning goals for their course and
programs. Based on research, academic units should decide what students are expected to
know, what do students value at the end of each course, and by graduation what acquired
skills separate undergraduate and graduate students.

2. The next step is to combine the learning goals with the curricular offering. By connecting
the learning goals with the curriculum, institutions can determine if opportunities are
provided for students to acquire the skills needed to meet the learning goals. Examining each
course syllabi is essential in this process, because it allows departments to evaluate when the
skills are introduced, how they are reinforced, and how students demonstrate progress and
mastery throughout the curriculum. It also ensures developmental sequencing and courses
and learning goals are aligned with the programs

62

Fig 3. The Assessment Cycle
Use
Identify
Evidence
Student
to Make
Learning
Informed
Goals
Changes

Interpret Align
Evidence
Goals With
of
Learning Curriculum

Gather
Evidence
of Learning

Source: Used with permission from http://assessment.georgetown.edu/media/handbook.pdf

3. The third step is evidence gathering. This reveals what students are learning in
achieving the established learning goals. It requires documented measurable
evidence demonstrating that students are achieving the learning goals over a period
of time. This helps determine the stages throughout the curriculum that are providing
opportunities for students to meet the learning goals.

4. The fourth step is to examine and analyze the data to determine how learning
outcomes are achieved. Qualitative and quantitative data should help establish what
students know or learned, what they value, their ability to apply the knowledge, and
what is it they do not much know.

5. The final step requires the study of the documented findings to determine if
changes are needed to the curriculum. The discussion among faculty and department
heads should focus on what was done correctly, what needs improvement, what
plans for making the improvement and the resources required. The documented
evidence must be the basis for making the curriculum changes needed to improve
students experiences (Georgetown University, 2008).

For the assessment process to be effective, it is essential that academic departments
work with non-academic departments in utilizing data from the evaluation of first-year

63

students, graduating seniors, NSSE, internship supervisors, alumni and employers and use
the results to determine if as a unit, they are meeting what students and employers value. It
is through the assessments from career services, other departments and student opinions that
the academic units will be able to determine if the students are learning. This should be
effectively incorporated with information obtained from course evaluations, capstone
projects and on-the-job performance.

For institutions struggling to combine their lessons, units, courses, and curriculum
goals, frequent curriculum audits (manually or through software) are an ideal method for
helping institutions map the curriculum to departmental learning goals. It is ideal because it
utilizes a planning tool to show where learning outcomes are introduced, where it is
reinforced through practice, where there is demonstration of mastery through sufficient
practice and where the stated learning goals of the program are achieved. Audits are an
advantage for faculty members, because they link content, learned skills, and assessment. It
also place faculty in a position to demonstrate, through captured evidence, what they expect
the students to learn compared to what they know, where gaps exist in what they teach, and
opportunities for improving the learning outcome across the entire degree program. It is also
an ideal communication tool that encourages faculty and employers to participate in the
curricular design process that can later be transferred to specific skills within the discipline
(Fraser, Crook & Park, 2007) (Benchmark: University of Connecticut & University of
Hawaii).

Assessment in Students Affairs

Student Affairs is normally the largest non-academic department within an
institution. As a unit its effectiveness and productivity impacts student retention,
graduation, and the meeting of learning goals. Its function is not merely to provide services
to students, but also integrate these services with academic learning outcomes that impact
what students learn and the ability to apply what is learned. This falls in line with SACS
core requirement 2.10, which states that Accreditation agencies require that student affair
functions not only demonstrate that they are providing quality services, but are playing a
pivotal role in what students learn, how they are developed and how the services provided
contribute to the institution’s mission through assessment (Green, Jones & Aloi, 2008).

64

According to Green, Jones & Aloi (2008), a decentralized assessment model is
needed for student affairs assessment. A decentralized model is successful at the institutions
studied because the individual units are experts in their field and have the expertise to
enhance student learning outcomes. At the unit level, performance goals should be well-
defined and tied to the department goals and student learning outcomes. Once this has
occurred, it becomes easier to develop scheduled direct and indirect assessment and
demonstrates how the information is used to develop and implement innovative strategies to
improve customer service and learning outcomes. Successful assessment programs require
four levels of commitment to assessment starting with the vice president, coordinators of
assessment, assessment committees to the professional staff level (Green, Jones & Aloi
2008).

This commitment requires that all levels of student affairs understand the
relationships between the results of the CIRP, first year experience survey, NSSE, student
satisfaction surveys, customer service survey, the employers perception of graduates and
internship supervisor surveys. It is also important for them to understand how the results
impact student learning outcomes and how they can design and development programs goals
with academic units to continuously improve their units and students’ experiences.
Understanding the connection between assessment results and student satisfaction sets the
foundation for dialogue and collaboration across the divisions and participation of faculty
and staff in the decision-making process. This level of collaboration and the integration of
ideas are necessary to ensure that institutions meet the accreditation standards

Although student affairs units are subjected to the assessment standards of the
accrediting bodies, there are several agencies that have developed national operational
standards that can help student affairs units improve program quality. The Council for the
Advancement of Standards in Higher Education (CAS), International Association of
Counseling Services (IACS), and The American College Health Association (ACHA)
established standards for program quality and procedures for departments falling under their
jurisdiction. They have developed standards for admission programs and services, university
counseling centers, fraternity and sorority management, student leadership programs,
and university health centers career services. They also established standards for: for parent
and family programs, veterans and family programs, campus activities, international student

65

programs, registrar, sports and recreation, academic advising, and student support (CAS.org,
IACS.org, and ACHA.org). Although these bodies established guidelines for policy and
evaluation, it is the individual institution's responsibility to ensure that student affairs
measure the efficiency and effectiveness of the individual programs in meeting students’
expectation, learning outcomes, retention, and graduation goals.

Leadership and the Assessment Relationship

The role of the executive officers and unit managers is extremely valuable in
ensuring that a culture of evidence and assessment becomes the foundation for decision-
making and resource allocation. According to Deming (1986), improvements in quality
cannot occur unless top managers accept and carry out their responsibilities. They cannot be
detached from the process, but must be deeply involved with his/her own training and
development so he/she can lead the organization through the 14 point process. Periodic
reviews on a semester and annual basis through discussions and audits, laid the foundation
by which administrative officers evaluate work processes, examine evidence of continuous
improvement, and remove redundancies from the system. This has to occur on an ongoing
and systematic basis and cannot be an afterthought delayed until the time for reaffirmation
of accreditation or fifth-year review.

In essence, accreditation agencies require that institution leaders develop and
demonstrate a systematic method of evaluating work processes and outcomes, provide
evidence of continuous review and evaluation, and demonstrate a pattern of continuous
improvement over time. Agencies such as SACS, MSCHE, and NCA require as part of the
reaffirmation of accreditation, evidence of that within the institution that there is a culture of
streamlining operations to improve students’ experience through the utilization of
assessment results to improve the effectiveness of the institution. Administrative officers
must manage these processes effectively through efficient planning, guided by an
established quality model and review process. This will require benchmarking quality
models from other higher education institutions and industry that is aligned with their
campus culture (Benchmark: University of Wisconsin-Stout, Pennsylvania State University,
University of Alabama, and University of Miami).

66

For the HBCUs to be transformed, managers must understand all the elements of the
system, and the relationship between assessment outcomes and process improvement. In
leading the organization to evidence based decision-making, administrative officers, should
articulate their vision for transforming the institution, maintain interdepartmental dialogue to
reduce conflict and resistance, garnish group support, and maintain two-way communication
with constituents (Deming, 2000). They must also be focused on the institution’s projected
growth, plan strategies with staff to meet performance goals, periodically identify
performance gaps, and have measurable yardsticks to compare performances against
establish goals, and study benchmark institutions. Once the administrative officers take a
leadership role in evidence- based assessment planning and decision making, it sets the tone
for how the organization selects, collects, aligns and integrates data for tracking its operation
at the institutional, departmental and unit levels. Once this is systematically done, it places
the institution on a path for meeting the institution strategic objectives and accreditation
requirements.

Board of Trustees

Effective assessment strategies at various stages of the management structure are
necessary to ensure that ongoing performance evaluation is embedded in the institution’s
culture. The tone of quality and assessment outcomes must be set at the top of the
organizational chart, beginning with the Board of Trustees (Fig 2).

Fig. 3 Assessment Relationships

Board of
Trustees

The President

Vice Presidents

Deans and Unit
Heads

67

They must be educated on quality, assessment, and institutional effectiveness in
higher education and must be able to engage the president in discussing student learning
outcomes at the subcommittee level and regular Board meetings. According to the
Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges (AGB) 2010 report, entitled
“How Boards Oversee Educational Quality: A Survey on Boards and the Assessment of
Student Learning”, many Board members may not understand the academic culture to
comprehend and appreciate how the assessment process works. In addition to the assessment
process, they also may not have the time to pay detailed attention to the supervision of
quality. The 2010 report indicated that 20% of the Board members surveyed indicated that
monitoring student learning outcomes is not a Board responsibility, less than 40% said that
the Board lacks understanding of the assessment processes at their institutions and less than
a quarter use student learning outcomes in making budget decisions.

For assessment of student learning outcomes to be entrenched in the institution's
culture, the Board of Trustees has to embrace the notion that accountability for institutional
effectiveness requires that they pay as much attention to learning outcomes as they do to
financial outcomes. If members of the Board lack the experience or training in assessment,
it is the responsibility of the president and his team to educate new and existing Board
members on the assessment process, performance metrics, and how the results should be
used to support the institution’s continuous improvement strategy. AGB recommends that
assessment analysis, along with established performance metrics and student learning
outcomes should be submitted for Board review and discussions and should become a part
of the academic committee agenda before being brought to the full Board for discussion.

The AGB also recommended that Board members understand the relationship
between finance and educational quality, commit meeting time to discuss assessment and
student learning outcomes, and discuss the actions taken to improve the results. The report
further suggested that Trustees should recognize that measuring student learning is a
complex process done by faculty and academic administrators and their role is only to
ensure that performances are in line with established performance metrics and plans are
implemented to improve performance outcomes.

68

The report suggests that the president and administrators should find ways to engage
the Board in discussions about the accreditation process. These discussions are necessary,
because institutional effectiveness has become such an integral part of the accreditation
process. These frequent discussions will provide opportunities for the Board to have a
thorough understanding of the assessment process in the academic and non-instructional
areas. It is through their knowledge of both accreditation and the assessment processes that
Board members can develop standards for holding the president accountable for meeting
performance goals. Similar sentiments were expressed by Davis (2007) who argued that
Boards at HBCUs should be proactive in seeking information on the accreditation process
and how it is managed by the president. Davis reiterated that the president and his staff
have a responsibility to ensure that the Board understands the process and knows the right
questions to ask. The president and the Board bear equal responsibility for accreditation
outcomes, therefore, board members should have a thorough understanding of the
accreditation process so that they can have better discussions on whether learning outcomes
are aligned with accreditation expectations. Aligning the accreditation process and student
learning outcomes with the annual evaluating of the president, reduces the chances that it is
used periodically as a hidden tool to evaluate the president, when there is demand for his/her
termination.

A well-implemented assessment strategy requires that Board members use it as a tool
to improve their effectiveness as well. Annually, the Board of Trustees should evaluate their
performance, with the purpose of building better relationships between themselves
individually, as a unit, and with the president. According to Smith (2009), Board of Trustees
as a policy, should conduct annual quantitative and or qualitative self-assessment to
determine their strengths and weaknesses, use the findings to determine their effectiveness,
and set annual goals for improvement. To avoid political ramifications, the focus of the
assessment should not be on individuals, but how they function as a unit in serving the needs
of the university. The assessment should concentrate on Board policies, practices, and their
effectiveness in carrying out their duties (Smith, 2009). Making the results open to the
public sends a signal to the rest of the university that assessment and continuous
improvement are a part of the governance culture at the highest level of the institution.

69

Assessment of the President and Cabinet

The Board of Trustees has a responsibility to conduct an annual assessment of the
president and a comprehensive assessment every three to five years to determine his/her
effectiveness in improving the relationship with the Board and their constituents, and the
effectiveness and progress in meeting the institution’s goals, objectives and performance
criteria. According to the AGB, a comprehensive assessment must incorporate confidential
interviews from a broad section of the community by a consultant in order to bring
objectivity to the process. AGB recommends that this comprehensive assessment should
include Board leadership for overseeing the process, an agreed upon process by the
president, a campus communication strategy and the president self-assessment. Individuals
from across the campus community should be selected to participate in the interview
process, and the president should be given the opportunity to have face-to-face meeting with
the Board. The AGB suggests that the evaluation be done on a cycle and the Board should
avoid doing it in a response to crises. It is suggested that the process should not be rushed,
the parties should not breach confidentiality, and the agenda must not be shaped by the
president.

The president should establish an annual assessment of each cabinet member that
falls in line with the performance goals established by the Board and the institution’s the
strategic plan. Each vice president should be required to submit performance goals for
servicing students prior to the beginning of each academic year. At the end of each academic
year, past year performance metrics, assessment outcomes and a comparative analysis of
expected results versus actual results, should be examined and plans for the new school year
presented. Data from assignments should drive the evaluation process, and cabinet members
must demonstrate how each unit under their responsibility has contributed to student
learning. They should demonstrate how they are meeting the established performance
metrics, how assessment data is used to continuously improve their programs, and how
assessment results are used to allocate resources.

The president should determine the content of the evaluation and should be aligned
with the goals and performance metrics provided to the Board of Trustees. Data and
performance metrics must be independently provided by the Office of Institutional Research

70

and Planning and or the Office of Institution Effectiveness. At the beginning of each
evaluation, the respective vice presidents must submit their self-assessment and
achievements for the year, engage in face to face interviews with the president, and
subjected to a confidential evaluation by a university panel or committee. Once evaluations
are collected, a final meeting between the president and each vice president should identify
future directions and opportunities to help shape the agenda for the next academic year
(Southeastern Louisiana State University, 1997).

Assessment of Dean and Unit Heads

Each dean and unit head must develop and submit, prior to the beginning of the
academic year and budget cycle, the performance metrics of the units they manage. The
performance metrics must fall in line with those of the division vice president and the
institution’s strategic plan. The metrics must include student learning outcomes, and
predetermine performance goals geared at improving unit efficiency, student learning
outcomes, and student experiences. Midyear and annual indirect and direct assessment
should be verified for accuracy by the Office of Institutional Research and Planning or the
Office of Institution Effectiveness to guide the assessment process. At the beginning of each
evaluation cycle, the respective deans and unit heads must submit their self-assessment
(SWOT analysis) and measurable achievements for the year, participate in face-to-face
interviews with their respective vice presidents, and be subjected to an independent
evaluation by a panel of peers. Once these evaluations are completed, each unit head must
submit a continuous improvement plan with resource allocation for budget approval
(Benchmark: Florida A & M University).

Administration of the Assessment Process

To avoid politicizing of the assessment process, it is important for institutions to
have a designated individual with the qualitative, quantitative, and computer skills leading
the program. The following functions should guide the assessment process:

1. Have a working institutional effectiveness and or assessment committee to
oversee the assessment processes of the institution. The committee should
establish guidelines for institution effectiveness, develop performance metrics,

71

set standards for data collection and analysis, align assessment outcomes with
performance metrics and prepare and discuss the annual assessment report.
2. Have a developed and publicized assessment schedule with reporting time lines
and established policies for non-compliant.
3. Have established standards for assessment (both quantities and qualitative, tests
of reliability, forums etc.) and develop a survey instrument approval process
(Benchmark: Georgia State University).
4. Provide a methodology toolkit to include templates for reports, forms, rubrics,
and assessment examples for operational units. (Benchmark: Howard University
& James Madison University).
5. Have a clearly written manual with policies and practices for guiding the
assessment process. Develop manuals with policies and procedures for
evaluating the president, vice presidents, deans, and unit heads (Benchmark:
Southeastern Louisiana University).
6. Develop an assessment handbook for academic and non-academic departments
(Benchmark: Georgetown University).
7. Develop a self-study program review process to keep departments focused on
accreditation (Benchmark: University of Virginia).
8. Develop a quality leadership program with leaders who are trained to manage the
assessment program in their respective units (Benchmark: University of
Alabama).
9. Implement a centralized password secured data repository for housing
assessment results by department/ unit that channels the results to the respective
vice presidents. Assessment software such as SPOL, Weave Online, TEAL
Online and Blackboard Learn Platform are a few of the platforms available.
10. Develop and publish annual progress and effectiveness reports from academic,
administrative, and support units. The results should be made available on the
institution's web page for easy viewing.
11. Provide opportunities for forums to facilitate discussion of the data at the unit
and institutional level (Benchmark: Auburn University).
12. Make minutes from assessment committee meetings available to the general
public to promote transparency in the process.

72

Assessment Instruments and Dashboards

Program-by-program collection and analysis of data from the point of entry to after
graduation is pivotal to the assessment process. The indirect and direct assessment done at
the unit and program level should be linked to objectives, unit goals and strategic plan. The
basic dashboards should meet IPEDS and the state higher education data requirements, but
should be adjusted to meet new Compete to Complete outcome and performance metrics.
These data points should include a revised dashboard which places emphasis on cohort
progress towards graduation as outlined by the National Governors Association Center
Work Group on College Completion Metrics (2010). For public HBCUs, it is vital that this
begins before the performance funding formula is fully implemented in their respective
states. The metrics below should assist in recreating dashboards as the institutions look to
the future:

Outcome metrics

1. Degrees awarded.

2. The number of bachelor’s degrees awarded in four to six years and three years
for associate degrees.

3. Transfer rates from two to four year institutions.

4. Time and credits to degree, i.e. number of credits and years taken to graduate.

Progress metrics

1. Enrollment in remedial education, i.e. freshman enrollment in remedial
education
2. Success beyond remedial education, i.e. percentage of freshmen who complete
remedial mathematics and English and their completion rate in the next level of
general education math and English.
3. Success in first-year courses, .i.e. the percentage of freshmen completing college
level math and or English within the first two years.
4. Credit accumulation, .i.e. the percentage of first-time freshmen completing 24
hours within the first academic year.

73

5. Retention rates, .i.e. the percentage of undergraduates who enroll consecutively
from Fall to Spring and from Fall to Fall for each cohort.
6. Course completion, .i.e. the percentage of credit hours attempted and completed
during the academic year (NGA, 2010).

Every institution has an Institutional Research department which serves as a
repository of institutional information and a reporting system that maintains both internal as
well as external key performance benchmarks. Like most higher education institutions, they
generate performance reports on expected benchmarks based on requests or what is needed
by the federal and state agencies. Improving the effectiveness of the evaluation and data
reporting process will require moving beyond the state and federal reporting mandates by
shifting towards the analysis of efficiency and effectiveness measures.

The indirect and direct metrics listed below are suggestions to help guide the
assessment process, and provide a structured method of evaluation at the unit level for
academic and non-academic departments. This will provide an accurate picture of unit
performance in meeting student needs and strategically allowing administrators to better
develop programs to accommodate students’ needs.

Table 2. Assessment at Application & Enrollment

Assessment Strategy Assessment Schedule Instrument
ACT/ SAT, high school GPA of incoming Application Point Application Forms
freshmen. GPA of transfer students.
Enrollment by major and demographics and
residency.
Non Traditional, first generation and
conditionally admitted students.
Placement exams scores and course placement. Orientation or prior to COMPASS and or
Number of remedial placement registration placement exams
Freshmen Characteristics Orientation and CIRP
registration
Conversion from undeclared status to the End of the semester & Academic Query
major. Percentage of cohort with earned hour end of year
to meet sophomore, junior status
First year perception of their experience Spring Semester NESSE

74

Table 3. Academic Assessment throughout the semester

Assessment Strategy Assessment Instrument
Schedule
D/F/W ratio End of each semester Academic Query
The percentage of students on academic Mid and end of Academic Query
probation and getting off probation semester and year
Performance of students in remedial classes Mid and end of Academic Query
semester and year
Performance of remedial students in higher
level courses
GPA of conditionally admitted students, and Mid and end of Academic Query
first generation semester
Performance of students in general education Mid and end of Academic Query
capstone courses and selected upper division semester
courses
Average credit hour attempted & completed by End of semester and Academic Query
cohort year
Retention rates by sex, major, academic school End of semester and Academic Query
and cohort year
Average GPA at mid semester. Cumulative Mid and end of Academic Query
GPA at end of semester and end of year by semester and year
classification and major
Campus needs assessment Every five years Strategic plan
Academic performance of transfer students Academic Academic Query
performance of
transfer students
Credit hour production /instructional workload Beginning of each Academic reports &
analysis. Full-time enrollment and headcount semester query
Student learning outcomes Throughout the Class and course
semester assessment by
instructors
Student perception of the course. Middle of each Course evaluations
semester
Evaluation of general education outcomes End of each semester Measures of academic
(at the end of proficiency and
sophomore or senior progress (MAPP) or
year) Collegiate assessment
of academic
proficiency ( CAPP)
Evaluation of general education outcomes End of each semester Measures of academic
(at the end of proficiency and
sophomore or senior progress (MAPP) or
year) Collegiate assessment
of academic
proficiency ( CAPP)

75

Online & distant education effectiveness Middle of each Online Course
semester evaluations

Table 4. Student Satisfaction Assessment

Student engagement, academic advising, Middle of Spring NSSE or Students
instructional effectiveness, institutional Semester Satisfaction Inventory
climate, and student experiences (SSI)

Financial aid services End of the ACT or in-house
semester/year instrument
Residential life End of the ACUHO-I Resident
semester/year Assessment
Student Satisfaction Mid semester In-house Instrument
Survey/Customer service

Table 5. Exit Assessment

Pass rates and licensure rate for professional End of semester/year Departmental Reports
exams

Graduates perception on exit End of each semester In-house instrument

Non returning students perception End of each semester In-house instrument

Alumni Perception End of year In-house instrument

Recent Graduate follow up Bi-annually In-house instrument

Employer perception of graduates Bi-annually In-house instrument

Table 6 faculty and staff perception

Faculty workload, job satisfaction & climate Annually FSSE
Faculty and Staff moral Annually In-house Instrument
Managing the Data and Information Flow

Many institutions fail to use the data from both academic and non-academic
departments in making informed decisions about student services and courses, curriculum,
program and student learning outcomes. Whether the data is gathered through direct or

76

indirect assessment, planned assessment provides information for self-study and allows
institutions to better monitor its progress over time. Continuous self-study ensures that
students are demonstrating proficiency in core academic skills, faculty are continuously
focus on improving and enhancing teaching and learning, and the institution is monitoring
its effectiveness in utilizing its resources. If institutional leaders are focused on the
information they will be better able to enhance students’ experiences and improve faculty
development. This, however, can only be achieved if the data is analyzed, integrated, and
used by both academic and non-academic units in the planning process (Borden & Owens
2001).

Some higher education institutions generate an enormous amount of data through the
instruments and surveys discussed previously. However, the data system is weak, not cost
effective, and requires improvement in data utilization (National Commission on
Accountability in Higher Education, 2005). Weak data systems cause institutions to lose
time and money, become inefficient, miscalculate priorities, underutilize resources, and
create archaic situations in handling students information (Edirisooriya, 2002). Better
accountability and improvement in how data is efficiently utilized by the institutions is
required to effectively drive the decision making process (National Commission on
Accountability in Higher Education, 2005). Improving the information flow requires that
institutions put in place a coherent plan that utilizes available technology to gather, track,
and integrate the data, provide analysis to decision-makers and train key staff on how to use
the information for decision-making (Edirisooriya, 2002).

Most institutions rely on their institutional research units to act as a repository of
their university’s information, but these units cannot be fully relied on to handle
the assessment in each individual academic and non-academic unit. They have to serve as
facilitators in the process, while each unit and program leader has administrative
responsibilities for developing unit goals and objectives, instrument design and validity
testing, and the frequency of data collection. This is necessary, because it is through unit by
unit self-assessment, that the data can be interpreted through key organizational performance
areas, such as student learning and stakeholders’ outcome, financial and market outcomes,
faculty and staff outcomes, organizational effectiveness outcomes, leadership, and social
responsibility outcomes (Baldrige National Quality Program, 2006).

77

Quality Assurance through Auditing

A quality-driven program should show improvement over time through statistical
analysis and control through frequent audits (Deming, 1986). Frequent self-review of
teaching and learning promotes accountability and ensures that work processes are
supporting student learning outcomes, and the standards of the units are aligned with the
strategic plan and institutional mission. Regular audits ensures that the institution is
complying with the performance goals outlined in the strategic plan and the president’s
vision, and that units are demonstrating that they are making progress in meeting the
learning outcomes established for the respective units. Structure audits also ensure that units
are completing the required reports in a timely manner, assessment meets expected
standards, and delinquent units are quickly identified. It also ensures that academic units are
not using grades as learning outcomes, and units are using the assessment results to
continuously improve the students’ experience.

To ensure that there is compliance with the accreditation process; audits should be
conducted annually by experienced faculty or consultants to determine the state of readiness
for reaffirmation of accreditation, and fifth year reports. Developing this system requires a
structured system of review that is communicated to the institution by the president and
provost/vice president through a published quality audit handbook and a review process by a
committee of peers or occasional consultant. The audits should become teachable moments
for participants who should carry the experiences learned to improve their respective units.
Whenever a unit is found to be weak in its compliance or preparation, unit heads should be
provided with a comprehensive report with conditions and time to meet the review board
expectation. They should also be allowed to present to a committee of peers what was
accomplished during the probationary period to meet the compliance requirements. At the
end of the year, a report on the status of all departments should be communicated to the
university community in the form an institutional compliance report and reviewed by the
Board of Trustees and the president’s cabinet (Benchmark: University of Mississippi).

78

Chapter IV

Driving Quality: Improving Marketing and Recruiting Strategy

Introduction

Growth in enrollment is dependent on the ability to brand and effectively market the
institution. Successful branding and marketing requires frequent market research to
determine market trends, enrollment patterns, student demands and the requirement of the
workforce. The data from the research along with indirect market assessments should
become the foundation for driving the marketing and recruitment strategy and the
commitment of resources to strengthening existing marketing and expanding into new
territories. The data is also necessary for targeting school counselors, teachers, and students
and for developing outreach activities that promotes relationship-building and two-way
communications between elementary schools, high schools, and community colleges.

This strategic approach ultimately places the institution in a better position to use its
network of school counselors, alumni, civic and religious groups, and local media to
increase its visibility as it competes with other schools in their respective markets. In this
chapter we will discuss branding the institution, the integration of marketing and recruiting,
leveraging the institution’s web page, pre-college recruiting of talented K6-12 families,
recruiting transfer and international students, recruiting and managing readmitted students,
and recruiting active duty service members and veterans. This chapter also focuses on
developing an admission data and assessment system, admission assessment, and evaluation
instruments.

Branding the Institution

Some HBCUs, like most higher education institutions have used the same
recruitment strategy over the past two decades. Recruiters engage key high school
counselors with high to moderate African American student populations, and utilize African
American churches, civic groups and alumni associations. Campus visits are arranged, the
institutions attend college fairs or career days, high school students are invited to high

79

school days on the respective campuses or students visit the campus on bus tours.
Recruitment goes into full gear at highly visible events such as football and basketball
classics, marching band and choir performances and summer programs. Many institutions
have increased their visibility on social networks such as Facebook, blogs and tweets, and
have increased their campus visibility through virtual recruitment and virtual tours.

While this approach has a high degree of success, in many markets it is the same
strategy used by competing institutions. In many cases, predominately white institutions
have successfully developed sophisticated marketing machinery aimed at targeting minority
students from urban and rural high schools, once considered HBCU territories. Regaining
market shares and expanding into new markets requires that HBCUs go beyond being
predominately Black, but leverage their strength in differentiating their individual campuses
in the market place. Market differentiation takes into consideration that students are
consumers of education and have an array of institutions to choose from and must be able to
connect with things that are unique about a particular institution. Some institutions are
already known in the market place for their uniqueness. Florida A & M University is known
for its Marching 100, Pharmacy and Business School, Xavier University, for the number of
African American students in the sciences and medical school, Spellman and Morehouse
College for the academic excellence and character building and Tuskegee University for its
agriculture, engineering and veterinary programs, Howard University for it medical and
graduates programs, North Carolina A & T University for its engineering programs and
Hampton University for its nursing, health services, marine and coastal programs.

These institutions have branded themselves to represent the image and uniqueness of
the institution in the market place by developing quality programs and producing
outstanding graduates. They have also instituted institutional codes of conduct, for students,
faculty, staff and administrators, aimed at protecting their image and brand. Other
institutions can learn from the nationally recognized HBCUs by developing institutional
wide strategies to improve brand visibility within their core markets and beyond. However,
before a marketing strategy is developed the institution should ensure that they have clear
answers to the following:

1. What makes the institution unique?

80

2. What is the academic, professional, and social reputation of the institution in its
surrounding areas and core markets?
3. Why a student should select your institution above all competing institutions?
4. How is the brand promoted in the media and the Internet?
5. What is the public relations and marketing strategy in core markets?
6. How many positive attributes are placed in the print, television and Internet for every
negative comment about the institution?
7. What is the general public perception of the institution in its key markets and
surrounding areas?
8. What is the perception of your most recent graduates or individual who have had
contact with the institution?
9. How engaged is the entire institution in promoting the brand and delivering on its
promise?
10. Are members of the institution meeting their internal and external customer service
expectations?
11. Are the images marketed different from student, faculty and staff experiences?

The Integration of Marketing and Recruiting

Promoting the HBCU brand requires changing a public perception that is skeptical of
HBCUs due to the consistent feed of negative stereotypical information. Case in point, the
visit of President Obama, Mrs. Obama, and senior White House officials to HBCUS in
2010, created a great marketing opportunity by focusing on the success of the nation’s
HBCUs. It was an opportunity for HBCUs to highlight on the national stage, the
performance of their recent graduates, the success of its current students and faculty, their
research capabilities, grants awarded and the successes of its alumni. The national platform
created by these high level visits was not fully utilized, creating avenues for critics to use the
occasion to highlight the negatives of the institutions. The opportunities presented by the
Obamas, senior White House officials and celebrities, come once in an institution’s history.
These visits should be fully developed as marketing tools showcasing HBCUs, and be
methodically promoted in every possible media venue, in key recruiting and prospective
markets.

81

Consistently having positive images and experiences in the eyes of parents and the
technology savvy 18-year-old prospects is vital to increasing visibility to new prospects.
Success requires understanding how prospects and parents get their news about the
institution is important to this process. A one-shoe-fit all media approach will not be highly
effective in reaching the target audience. Developing programs that integrate information,
such as Facebook, mobile apps, e-mail updates, twits, virtual campuses and the institution’s
own web page are critical to recruiting 18-24 year old prospects. For older and adult
students who may not be as Internet and social network savvy, different marketing
recruitment strategies will have to be utilized. Capitalizing on a positive marketing
campaign, requires a collaborative effort between the marketing program and enrollment
management so that positive media images can be converted into recruitment and enrollment
growth.

Despite the marketing strategy, institutions must be mindful that current students are
one of the best promoters of their institutions. Every marketing strategy must showcase
current students’ positives experiences at the institution. High school prospects are more at
ease with students from their own race and peers rather than seeking advice from adult
recruiting staff. Using outstanding students of all races in promotion and outreach efforts
helps to create a great impression of the institution through mediums such as Facebook,
Twitter, blogs, YouTube and other social networks. Trained students are also effective in
developing and keeping frequently updated blogs, conduct live chats with prospective
students and parents, and participating in campus tours.

Leveraging all the assets of an institution to develop the brand and connect positive
images to the brand requires skilled personnel who understand; the marketing machinery,
the institution’s history, culture, the relationship between marketing and recruiting, alumni
relations, and media outlets and personalities. Many institutions do have a public relations
and/or communications staff to fulfill this role. However, market success in a highly
competitive market requires dedicated public HBCUs relations personnel who are visible,
consistent, reliable and credible. They should have connections with media staff and should
use every opportunity to place short impact comments, stories and promotional materials in
the social media, print and electronic media, and the Internet in highly recruited and key

82

markets. Developing partnerships with social outreach programs with minority organization
chapters, such as the NAACP, 100 Black Men, Urban League, sororities and fraternities,
masons, other professional organizations, social clubs and church groups, should become a
part of this outreach strategy. In essence they must develop effective spin machinery fully
capitalizing on every aspect of the market.

Consistently having images and experience in the media that is both attractive to the
technology-savvy 18 year old prospect and their parents requires that positive news about
the institution is continuously placed in the public eye. Capitalizing on a positive marketing
campaign requires a collaborative effort between marketing and enrollment management to
convert the positive media images into recruitment and enrollment growth. Understanding
how prospects get their news is important to this process, therefore a one-shoes-fits-all
media approach will not be effective in reaching the target audience.

Leveraging the Institution’s Web Page

According to the Noel Levitz 2010 report on e-recruiting practices and trends at two
and four-year colleges, web pages provide prospects with the first impression of the
institution and is the number one recruiting and marketing tool. More than 74 percent of
high school seniors surveyed indicated that they searched for the college through their web
address and went directly to it, while close to a quarter viewed the college web page on their
smart phones. More than a third of the students secretly shopped around on the web page
before making an official inquiry, and close to two-thirds indicated that their opinion of the
institution improved because of their web page experience. However, one in five students
dropped the school because of their web experience.

Social media is an important part of the web experience for high school seniors.
More than 74 percent of high school seniors indicated that colleges should increase their
social media presence and more than 81 percent indicated that they need both official and
unofficial content when they visit the web page. More than three quarters of the students
indicated that the institution should create their own private social network, more than half
indicated that they viewed videos about the college, and one in 10 indicated that they viewed
the videos of the college on YouTube (Noel Levitz, 2011).

83

Having a campus web page that is exciting, attractive, user-friendly, easy to
navigate, interactive, and provides consistent information is integral in assisting students and
parents to developing a prospect’s confidence in his/her decision to attend the institution. As
indicated in the Noel Levitz survey (2010), the quality of the web page impacts enrollment
across all academic departments. Therefore the design and cohesiveness throughout the
entire website are integral to prospective student perception of the institution. Interested
recruits and prospects expect a flawless and interesting web experience without
redundancies that waste their time during the search. High school students expect to see
videos of current students’ experiences, information on their major, financial aid, tuition and
fees, information on academic advisors and the advising process, academic calendars and
catalogs, information of transfer credits, the military and special needs students, alphabetical
faculty and staff directory with e-mails and telephone numbers. Prospects are also expecting
access to orientation information, campus Google maps and applications, student support
services, frequently asked questions, a to do list for their parent and themselves
(Benchmark: University of Alabama & Fayetteville State University).

This is a generation of gamers who are expecting to view the campus through virtual
tours, have access to online applications and are expecting to see opportunities to interact
with faculty and staff through various web meetings. The competition is providing
interactive online chats which allow for easy access to their admissions counselor, academic
advisor, and financial aid counselor and the students entering HBCUs are expecting the
same level of interaction. They are also expecting to receive updates and campus news
through text messages, Facebook, blogs, Tweets, and Skype, which they can easily access
from their smartphones (Benchmark: University of New Haven).

Prospects are expecting a high level of remote interaction from their prospective
institutions and their final decision rests on the personal connections between someone from
the institution, starting at the admissions office, their assign advisors and student leaders,
and faculty and staff from their major. Making that connection requires each academic and
non- academic department to develop web strategies to showcase the best of their
department in audio, video, photographic, and captivating word format. The process can be
further enhanced through the use of electronic engagement tools, such as net meetings and

84

telephone conferencing technology to communicate with school counselors, recruiters,
parents and students from all over the country and the world. Improving the effectiveness of
remote access requires a well-planned online recruitment and enrollment management
process that provides the appropriate online forms, admission updates for each student,
online appointments with admission representatives, online chat with representatives, and
periodic online presentation with admitted students and parents on Facebook, WebEx or
other online video technology (Benchmark: SUNY College at Oneonta, University of
Virginia).

Recruiting Transfer Students

During the 2006-2007 academic year, community colleges enrolled close to 35
percent of all students enrolled in higher education and their tuition is typically less than half
that of four-year colleges (NCES, 2008). The perception of community colleges as trade
schools, where students only go to pursue certification or obtain an associate degree has also
changed and many of these students have GPA and test scores which would gain acceptance
at four-year institutions. A report on community colleges by the NCES (2008), revealed that
close to two-thirds of the 2004 high seniors who enrolled immediately in a community
college after high school, intended to pursue a bachelor’s degree or higher and used the
community colleges as a stepping stone to attend a four-year college. In contrast many
community colleges provide an opportunity for thousands of low-income and non-traditional
students, who are not yet mentally, academically and financially prepared, for the four- year
experience.

President Obama’s goal is for community colleges (CC) to work in partnership with
private corporation and philanthropy groups to help increase enrollment and production to
five million students by 2020. It is expected that community colleges will educate a larger
percentage of African American students than in the past. These strategies, though critical to
meeting the nation’s education needs, will see more African American students who would
traditionally enter HBCUs and minority-serving institutions, entering community colleges.
With their open door policy and cheaper tuition, they are a threat especially in rural areas,
but these threats must be seen as opportunities to form partnerships and colorations with
selected community colleges. Predominately White Institution (PWIs) over the years has

85

focused on developing transfer programs and policies with two year institutions and are well
ahead of most HBCUs in this regard.

To effectively compete in this market, HBCUs will have to establish or re-examine
articulation agreements, develop transfer guidelines and policies, and increase their
marketing strategies and presence on two- year college campuses. Presence on community
college campuses require frequent discussions through the years on programs, course
integration, credit transfer and the transition process with students, faculty, academic
advisors, department heads and program administrators, geared at stimulating dialogue, and
enhancing the transfer process. Developing and sustaining this relationship requires an
institution-wide commitment with proper planning and coordination between recruitment
and admissions, the registrar’s office, academic advisors and program heads at the
respective institutions.

Transfer students are interested in getting on with their careers and are focused on
how quickly they can complete their requirements for graduation. Once the students are
accepted as transfers, four-year institutions must put in place a cohesive advisory process
and a clear policy on how credits will be transferred, develop a timeline for the transfer to
occur so as to avoid course duplication and graduation delay. To reduce student frustration,
institutions must develop and train a cadre of personnel who can advise, interpret and
evaluate course credits in a timely manner and quickly assist students in developing their
program of study. Developing and providing a faculty and transfer student guide on the
institution’s web page is essential to ensure that transfer students have information available
24/7.

Employing a transfer student coordinator and developing a transfer student center is
important in this process. This will help improve the accuracy and speed in evaluating
transfer students transcripts across the various academic departments, and have an individual
who serves as an advocate on the transfer student’s behalf, and assists transfer students
orientate and acclimatize to the new environment. Having a point man/woman on the
respective campuses allows for the development of recruiting and enrollment and retention
goals, the development and analysis of performance metrics, the development of criteria for
dual campus relationships and the development of relationships with advisors and students.

86

Having a point of contact is an indication to community colleges and their students that the
institution is serious about developing and improving relationships and student once they
make the transition (Benchmark University of Alabama).

International Student Recruiting

The estimated impact of international students and their families on the U.S economy
was $17.6 billion with $12.3 billion associated with tuition and fees during the 2008/2009
academic year (NAFSA, 2010). This spending is associated with the 29.6 percent increases
in international student enrollment between Fall AY 2005/2006 to AY 2009/2010. In the
2009/2010 academic year there was record enrollment in international students, a three
percent increase from 2009/2010. The growth was mainly due to a 30% increase in Chinese
students and a two percent increase in Indian students who now account for 18% and 15% of
the international student population (IIE, 2010).

In 2004, approximately 1.8 percent of the students enrolled at HBCUs were resident
aliens (NCES, 2007) representing students from all over the world. While there is no recent
data available on resident alien enrollment at HBCU, a brief examination of the resident
alien enrollment pattern at several HBCUs showed a low of less than 1% to a high of 3% at
Howard University in 2008. In contrast the top 25 enrollers of international students’
averaged 13.5% of their student population in 2009/2010.

Table 7. Ranking by Attendance of International Students at US Universities

Country Percent Country Percent Country Percent

1. China 18 8. Mexico 1.9 15. Thailand 1.2

2. India 15 9. Vietnam 1.9 16. Hong Kong 1.2

3. South Korea 10 10. Turkey 1.8 17. France 1

4. Canada 4.1 11. Nepal 1.6 18. Indonesia 1

5. Taiwan 3.9 12. Germany 1.4 19. Nigeria 1

6. Japan 3.6 13. United 1.3 20. Malaysia 0.9

87

Kingdom

7. Saudi Arabia 2.3 14. Brazil 1.3 22. Kenya 0.8

Table 8. Top Area of Study by International Students

Area Percent Area Percent

1. Business & Management 21 6. Fine & Applied Arts 5

2. Engineering 18 7. Health Profession 5

3. Physical & Life Sciences 9 8. Intensive English 4

9. Mathematics & Computer Science 9 10. Education 3

11. Social Sciences 9 12. Agriculture 2

Source: http://www.iie.org/en/Research-and-Publications/Open-Doors/Data/Fast-Facts

Over the past decade, more PWIs have made international student recruiting
enrollment a priority and have committed resources to improve this effort. They have come
to recognize that international students bring a global perspective and diversity to their
campuses, are revenue generators, and give the institution higher return on investment.
International students bring similar advantages to HBCUs, and are a major source for
increasing the enrollment of students at the undergraduate, masters and doctoral level in the
STEM disciplines and the agricultural sciences. They are integral to meeting the enrollment
and graduation goals in disciplines where there is a decline in enrollment of African
American student and provide opportunities to develop long term global relationships, once
the students return to their respective countries to hold key leadership positions.

However, expanding the international student presence requires a commitment from
the respective institutions in marketing their programs to students and parents with the
resources to sustain the student education. PWIs are ahead in their marketing efforts and are
no longer waiting for international students to find them. They are applying the same
strategy used for recruiting local students to boost their international recruiting effort. They
are establishing relationships in key countries, visiting American model high schools,

88

conducting career fair and enrollment seminars, and establishing relationships with school
counselors in the respective countries. HBCUs have the capacity to utilize alumni in the
respective countries and international faculty as part of their global outreach programs to
develop relationships with feeder institutions.

HBCUs alumni are scattered all over the world and many are leaders in various
sectors in their respective countries. If properly utilized they are an effective source in the
recruiting effort in their respective countries and can be utilized in developing research
partnerships and collaborations with colleges, universities and human development agencies
in their respective countries. They are a great referral point, because they are familiar with
the development in their respective countries and will be able to engage government
agencies, United States embassies, local employers, international business conglomerates,
and representatives of international agencies that play an integral role in human capital
development of these countries.

Not only must HBCUs exploit their international alumni base, but they must work
together to maintain a global online presence on websites, such as the College Board, Hot
Source, US News & World Report, and e-brochure set up through ISA Media.
Collaboratively, they should capitalize on the world-wide appeal of social sites for recruiting
purposes by effectively utilizing Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, blogs, view books, and
virtual tours, to share information with international prospects and for alumni to share
information about their experiences at HBCUs. Integrating social media with a web-based
international student guide to provide clear instructions on the applications and admissions
process is critical to improving the application process.

Online information should include health insurance, F120/ FI dependent visa, J1 visa
requirements, estimated cost of attendance, housing, financial support, and documentation
needed to satisfy the Department of Homeland Security requirements. Students also need
information on employment options, area K-12 schools, places of worship, scholarships and
graduate assistantship, evidence of financial support, the US culture and living in that part of
the country, and contact information for the international student liaison. The guide should
include information on the nearest US embassy in the respective countries, and academic
and travel restrictions associated with the F120 visa requirements. In addition, information

89

on testing requirements for ACT, SAT, GRE, GMAT, TOEFL or IELTS, international credit
evaluation, contact information to the world education services, course by course
assessment, and transfer of credits. There must also be clear credit guidelines for students
who have passed Caribbean Advance Proficiency Exams (CAPE), GCE Advance levels,
South African Senior Certificate, the Netherland Antilles Diplomas, and other international
postsecondary certificates (Benchmark: Duke University & University of Maryland Eastern
Shore).

Once the student is accepted, there must be continuous dialogue with the student,
guiding them from acceptance to arrival in the U.S. Once the student arrives in the country,
it is important for them to be assisted to the campus, linked to international student groups,
faculty, staff and community groups from their respective countries. In assisting with the
transition, it is critical for the students and their families to have their housing finalized, and
directed to the international student liaison. Structure orientation should be organized for the
students and they should be provided with student guides and advised early. Having trained
personnel who understand possible issues that will be faced by international students is
important in assisting international students to make cultural adjustment. The individuals in
these capacities must be cognizant of the changes in immigration laws and F-120
requirements, understand how to resolve the adversities faced by international students, and
is able to provide guidance to student on issues of SEVIS, employment, status changes,
traveling, transfer credits and the Study in the States web page from Homeland Security
(http://studyinthestates.dhs.gov/) (Benchmark: University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill &
Stanford University)

Recruiting and Managing Readmitted Students

High attrition rates at HBCUs, over the years have created a large pool of students
who have not completed their college degree. Many of these students require a few courses
to complete their requirements, but have not re-enrolled due to family commitments,
financial difficulties, work, and adjustment issues. Remarketing the institutions to these
students provides an opportunity for institutions to re-engage these students, getting them
refocused on completing their degree requirements. There is tremendous gain from this

90

strategy; it provides revenue generating opportunities for the institution, it improves the
institution’s enrollment and increases the students’ employability.

Engaging students immediately after they drop out or stop out allows the institution
to develop a relationship with the student. From this relationship, counseling can be
provided to help the student find solutions to issues that contributed to their initial departure
and develop a plan for their return. The development of a re-enrollment return plan must be
spearheaded by knowledgeable professionals from the admissions office, office of academic
support and the advising center. These offices can bring the best functions of the offices
together to serve the student during counseling until they return to the institution. However,
for the plan to be effective, counseling sessions should provide information on the academic
appeals process, financial aid implications, and deadlines for submitting academic and
financial aid appeals, terms of admission and online courses and programs. Having an
outlined graduation path, and plan of action for the student before they enter the institution,
sets the tone for the level of service available to them and the institution’s expectations.
Having trained professionals who understand how to re-focus and connect with re-enrollees
not only brings the best function of these offices together, but creates a point for collecting
data on the reason students leave the institution (Benchmark: University of New Mexico:
Lumina Foundation Project Win-Win).

In developing a returning student program, one must be mindful of the different
types of students who drop out. Stokes (2005) reported that the college population is made
up of a diverse group of students. The traditional age 18 to 22 year-old undergraduate
students make up only 16% of higher education enrollment. Forty percent of student
population is 25 years or older and 40% of students study part-time. Adult (25 years and
over) students are focus on their employment rather than school, they have a fear of
returning to academics, they struggle to balance family and school and face financial
difficulties which cannot be remedied through the financial aid process. These factors and
similar factors impact their integration and assimilation into a community designed for 18 to
22 years old students (Tinto, 1993). It is essential that institutions understand these dynamics
to prevent the development of a “cookie cutter” approach for all stop outs and drop outs.

91

Adult students come with different idiosyncrasies. They return to school with the
intention of completing a degree that will aid in their career advancement or transition. They
bring extensive work experience and knowledge to the classroom and require classes that
can accommodate their schedules. Many of these students may have been out of higher
education for years and have not returned due to job and family commitments. They require
specially designed programs that understand their enrollment patterns, along with friendly
staff and accommodating faculty. They require assistance in developing an institutional plan
and need help connecting to counseling resources to help map their success (Pusser et al.
2007). Separate strategies have to be pursued for those who are part-time, older, and meet
the non-traditional description, because they need more assurances, flexibility,
encouragement, and guidance as they return to complete their degrees.

All institutions should make a special effort to provide information in the form of a
readmission checklist that is easily available in written or online format. Information for
non-traditional students should include contact information to specific admissions
counselors and academic advisors, and avenues for transcript evaluation and financial aid
counseling. The counselors must be equipped to help the adult student develop their
program of study, identify tutoring, supplemental instruction and any self-help services
available at the institution (Benchmark: University of New Mexico).

Active Duty Service and Veterans

The military provides enormous opportunities for distant and non-traditional
education for HBCUs that are in the vicinity of military bases. Their proximity provides
great opportunities to strengthen the recruitment, enrollment, and collaboration with base
commanders, veterans and active duty groups. There are also great marketing opportunities
in the approximately two million veterans returning from the three most recent wars. There
were more than 376,759 service members enrolled in more than 736,000 undergraduate
courses funded by Department of Defense tuition assistance program in 2009 (ACE,
200:OSD,2010). In addition, there is the Post-9/11 Veterans Educational Assistance Act of
2008 (GI Bill) and allocations from the Department of Defense that provides eligible, active
duty military spouses with funding to pursue careers in high demand fields.

92

According to an ACE (2009) report, military undergraduate enrollment patterns are
more similar to non-traditional students. They will require many programs and strategies to
improve the experiences of non-traditional students and a committed Veteran’s Affairs
office that caters to veterans, and provides assistance in continuing their education, once
they are transferred to another location. There are several for-profit, online and traditional
PWI institutions, such as Virginia College, Troy University and Embry Riddle Aeronautical
University that have successfully developed extension branches on military bases worldwide
to recruit military personnel. If HBCUs are to compete with these institutions, they must
work collaboratively or independently to develop targeted marketing plans aimed at
attracting and enrolling military personnel to their programs. To improve enrollment, they
should offer out of state tuition irrespective of residency, accept CLEP and ACE credits for
service, have flexible weekends, evening classes, and develop programs that will allow
participants to track and verify their payments (Benchmark: Norfolk State University).

Developing an Admission Data and Assessment System

The success of any enrollment initiatives is tied to the ability of the institution to
accurately capture student data at first contact and provide updated information quickly and
accurately, when required. Accurately capturing students profile on first contact and
responding immediately to inquiries gives the perception that the institution is committed to
quality service. To improve this process, it is important to develop self-service options that
allow prospective and current students through pass word specific access to check their
admissions status, view the status of their application, be informed of missing documents,
check their financial aid and housing, and other information important to the student
enrollment online. (Benchmark: University of Phoenix).

A successful enrollment management information system requires frequently
updated data system which is tied to financial aid, the registrar’s office, residential life, the
cashier’s office, student health, orientation and advising, and an external document retrieval
program. Integrating information from all these areas allows key personnel to track
prospects and enrolled students, and view and generate reports that are essential to the
institution’s ability to accurately focus on serving the student populations. An efficiently
integrated data system improves information flow to students, reduces duplication of

93

services, improves office efficiency and work processes, and allows students to monitor
their progress and make inquires through self-service.

Admission Assessment

As the admissions office works to establish relationships with academic departments

Web page traffic (Google analytics) The number of applicants

Number of enquiries from potential students The number of students accepted

Number of applicants rejected Reason for rejection

and external groups, data plays a critical role in increasing accountability and developing
continuous improvement strategies. Developing data fields around performance scorecards
allows enrollment managers to look at historical data, pinpoint areas that need attention,
examine performance trends, and make data driven decisions. This approach creates
transparency and improves the efficiency and effectiveness in the operation of the
admissions office. The following scorecard could be considered as the foundation for
developing databases to track daily enrollment. The scorecard should include the
information listed in table 9-11

Table 9. Tracking Application Flow
Once students are enrolled, it is essential that a profile is developed for each cohort for
enrollment management and retention tracking.

94

The number of students enrolled The conversion rate

Number of readmitted students Number of transfer students application

Speed of transcript evaluation for new & Number of transfer students application
transfer students

Fig 10 Cohort data points
The country of origin The state Residency status

The number of international applicants Date of birth Non- traditional
status
The high school or college transfer origin School Types High school GPA
(public/private)

ACT and SAT scores Gender Ethnicity

Special needs Veterans Program enrolled

First generation Conditional admitted Regular admits

Transfer students Attendance status Yield by major
(part time or full time
Source of payment of admission fees The number of
deposits waived
Source of payment of admission fees The number of
deposits waived

Within the admissions office, developing measurable data points to monitor the
operational efficiency requires the development of weekly, monthly, semester, and yearly
reports. This allows enrollment managers to better track applicants and direct resources
where they are most needed. These efficiency measures are highlighted in Figure 11.

Fig 11. Efficiency measures

Inquiry dates Date of application arrival Document arrival dates

Folder completion time Number of folders Time for entering data into
completed banner or data base

Response time to inquires Time from acceptance to Length of time of the
notification review process

95

Number of folders to be Response rate per month Web traffic to admission
reviewed page

Number of phone calls and Number of applications from Number of application
enquires received college visit and number of from high school visits
college visits

Number of applications from Number of applications due Applications from virtual
college fairs to letters, e-mails and phone open house and virtual
calls campus tours

Speed of folder completion and Speed of notification Number of training hours
file completion per staff

Contact rate for applicants The ratio of full time staff to Average cost of enrollment
the number of enrolled
students

Time between receipt of Number of students applying Number of paper
application and transfer to online applicants
registrar and financial aid

Number of electronic Number of applicants place
reminders on hold due to missing
document

Offices can develop individual metrics for field officers and admissions counselors to
help evaluate their individual performances. Metrics such as the number of inquiries and
applicants received, the number of students enrolled, filed completion rates, the number of
students visiting the campus due to a particular recruiter/counselor, speed of file
completion, speed of notification, and speed of student response, can be significant variables
in improving individual performances.

Evaluation Instruments

96

Efficiency measures highlight strengths and weaknesses in the admissions process, but
will not provide valuable information on the applicants perception of the service received.
Developing an evaluation instrument that captures the student’s experiences with the
admissions office is important in ensuring that the student’s experiences become a part of
the planning process. Survey instruments should ask the following questions:

1. What are your views of the application process?
2. How user-friendly and relevant is the institution’s web page?
3. Is the web page cluttered with too much information?
4. Is it attractive and easy to read?
5. Was the application process simple or confusing?
6. How friendly and responsive were the admissions staffs?
7. Were inquires resolved in a timely manner?
8. How knowledgeable is the staff about the process within the university?
9. Is the service consistent irrespective of who you spoke to?
10. How do you rate the quality of service?
11. Were your needs met during the encounter with the staff?
12. Would you recommend the institution to another student based on the service
received?
13. Were your needs anticipated and attempts made to address them before your call?
14. Were the services received from with admissions office seamless?
15. How long did it take to complete the application process?
16. How long, from the time of application were financial aid and living arrangements
confirmed?

While it is important to collect the data, success in continuously improving the
admissions office cannot occur without an analysis and interpretation of the data. If this is
not occurring, then a system that consistently collects and reviews the data should be
developed and reviewed against performance goals for the semester or year. The information
gathered should be consistently used by enrollment managers and the vice president of
student affairs to make operational adjustments and allocate resources.
Conclusion

97

Staying competitive requires that institutions attract all groups of students to their
campuses and develop an assortment of programs that not only meets the needs of the
traditional 18 to 24 year old who live in the residence halls, go to classes between 8 am to 5
pm, and do not work, but non-traditional students as well. In increasing their enrollment,
institutions must be mindful of the shift in enrollment demographics and develop creative
and innovative programs to meet the needs of the different student populations. Achieving
this goal requires that institutions bring all academic and non-academic departments together
to develop a unified enrollment management strategy.
Working collaboratively to plan programs and develop policies to improve processes
has a long-term impact on improving the student experience. Establishing great partnerships
require the implementation of programs that focus on improving customer service, and
developing personalized relationships with other departments that impact student enrollment
and persistence. These partnerships across the campus are vital for other departments to
contribute to the admissions process. When there is collaboration and ideas are received and
discussed, all academic and non-academic departments will share a stake in recruiting and
devote more effort in assisting the admissions office. Successful admissions and recruiting
professionals understand that it takes an institution wide-effort to recruit and enroll students
in this competitive market.

98

Chapter V

Measure Up: Improving the Enrollment Management Process

Introduction

HBCUs, like other higher education institutions is operate in a more competitive
environment where institutions have to do more with less financial resources, and students
are expecting more efficient and faster services. Irrespective of the financial pressure faced
by institutions, students come to the institution with certain basic assumptions. They come to
the institution expecting to pay tuition and fees, be provided with the best possible service,
engage in programs that guide them to graduation within four years, and receive a job or
attend graduate or professional school after graduation. As students pay more for tuition,
they are expecting institutions to satisfactorily meet these basics requirements, and will not
hesitate to transfer to a competitor or drop out if there is a perception that their needs are not
met. In this chapter, we will discuss how institutions can create an environment to facilitate
a student’s transition through the institution, improve student experiences and progression,
improve the admission processes, develop a successful financial aid experience, and
improve the residential life experience.

Improving Student Experiences and Progression

Changing the perception of inefficiency within the scope of the limited financial
resources available requires finding the most effective methods to improve students
experiences. Strategically it is best for the institution to develop an effective system that
manages personal relationships with students before they enter the institution. This is
imperative to ensure that students are connected to critical offices and personnel early, and
as often as often as they need (Figure 4). This will require that an institution reduce
the paper trails by finding the most effective method of communication between the student
and admission office, financial aid office, registrar, orientation, residential life, student
support services, academic advisors, and faculty. Reducing paper trails and providing quick,
accurate, and accessible information, will require that institutions with
the use of data gathered from customer experiences improve the automation

99

of critical processes. Automation provides opportunities for services to be
strategically developed to meet individual student
needs, and gives students direction to services on an ongoing basis.

Figure 4 Communication Cycle

Student & Cabinet Integrated
Academic Relationship
Affairs Management
Faculty
&
and
Staff Communication
Strategy

Students & Parents
Perception

Developing a strategic communication strategy that leverages the institution’s
communication capability with social networks, YouTube, e-mails, blogs, and text
messaging, is essential to ensuring that students are provided with the correct and most up-
to-date information of all times. An integrated student communication strategy must begin
with improvements in internal communication between administrators, faculty, and staff.
Each group must understand their role in the relationship-building process and must work
together to ensure there is clarity in vision, strategic direction, and how information
disseminated. This ensures that the information provided is accurate and consistent with
the institution's programs, policies and strategic focus. It also increases the assurance that
lower level school officials will have the necessary input for planning how information is
disseminated to students and parents. Once there is clarity through the command chain,
frontline staff will be better equipped to answer questions from all the customers they serve.
Developing relationships with students, from application to graduation, is critical to
any retention strategy pursued by an institution. Central to this strategy is the ability of the
institution to leverage its data to develop an at-risk prediction model that identifies students

100

who are underperforming, and targeting them for real-time intervention. This strategy that
helps the institution to focus on student behavior and develop accurate and comprehensive
information that will improve the speed of decision-making and the development of
effective intervention plans. The success of this model, however, hinges on developing a
reporting capability that monitors and measures students progress metrics daily, monthly,
and semester and annually. The analytics should be made available to members of the
institution from the president, to the cabinet, to the department heads, to faculty and staff for
discussions and decision making.
Before an institution purchases any system, it must ensure that the purchase is
thoroughly discussed with end-users before a decision is made. There must also be dialogue
with benchmark institutions regarding program effectiveness, user friendliness, and
projected impact on improving customer service. The institution should aim to find one
solution that is user-friendly, attractive, have buy-in from faculty, and staff and have the
ability to communicate to students in a timely manner. It must use multiple communication
channels for students, parents, faculty and staff and must be very user-friendly. The solution
should include the ability to integrate the online application portal, orientation, the academic
departments, financial aid, residential life, academic support services, counseling and career
services in the short and long run to be effective.
There are several cloud integrated customer relationship management (CRM)
systems currently on the market that can be added to the existing information system. The
most notable are PeopleSoft's Enterprise Learning Solution, Talisma, Firstlogic, Microsoft,
Dynamics Jenzabar, Oracle CRM, Intelliworks, Starfish and EMAS Pro. All these systems
focus on relationship management through the efficient use of data analysis, reporting, and
communication, to drive retention. However, institutions in selecting a system, must
be mindful to select systems from vendors who have a reputation in the higher education
community, and the system can be easily integrated with the student information system.

The primary goal of an institution purchasing a CRM system should be to improve
the institution’s graduation and retention rates by identifying at-risk students early, improve
communication and building relationships with students before they drop out. Converting
the CRM system into a retention management system provides opportunities for institutions
to establish retention goals at the institution and department level. Achieving the retention

101

goals will require an integration of data from all departments so that a predictive models can
identify, monitor, and tract each student from enrollment to graduation and predict
their possibility of leaving. It is essential that there is buy-in across campus if a CRM model
is purchased so that information such as class attendance, grades, high school GPA, ACT
scores, student alerts, financial data, and the learning management system is effectively
utilized during the freshman and sophomore year. The system must be so designed that once
a student is identified, information is immediately sent to student support departments,
academic advisors and counselors for intervention (Demsksi, 2011).
Figure 5. Retention Workflow in the CRM System

Enrollment
Retention Goals
Orientation
Leveraging Data Financial Aid
Predictive Model
Faculty
At‐Risk Indicators
Early Tracking & Monitoring Residential Life
Students' Progress
Communication Academic
Strategy Support

Academic
Coaches/ Advisors
Establishing Relationships
Improving Enagagment

Proactively identifying at-risk students from the time they submit their applications
allows the institution to develop a profile of every student, so that the advising faculty and
staff can work together in customizing a coordinated intervention plan. This will allow for
easy development of workflows that track students who fail to register during early
registration, observe students who are have financial problems, monitor students who are not
making satisfactory academic progress (SAP) and continuously track students who are not
making academic progress with their cohorts (Fig 5). Once the students are tracked and
engaged through a preferred communication network, a concerted effort should be made
to deliver personalized real-time intervention for each student and effectively monitor the
student connection with campus resources (Benchmark: University of Florida, DePaul
University).

102

Improving Admission Processes

The admissions office is the face of the institution to prospective students and their
parents and requires a well-defined strategy to ensure a steady flow of positive experiences
and information to prospective students. As the primary point of contact, and the first office
in the enrollment process, the future of the institution depends on an admission office that
is effective in targeting potential recruit, and is useful in recruiting, enrolling, and retaining
its students. The competition for students in higher education requires a smooth transition
that instills confidence in the students and their families, and that the decision to attend
the institution was the right choice. Ensuring this experience require that admission offices
continuously examine operations, streamline their processes to ensure a quick evaluation of
transcripts, and disseminate enrollment notices to prospective students in a timely manner.
However, for this to be implemented, institutions must develop a pre-enrollment and
enrollment process with clear operations and communication guidelines regarding
application processing and communication (benchmark: Kennesaw State University).

Despite the importance of the office to the institution, many admission offices have
been processing applications using the same procedures for decades, creating delays and
customer service issues. They date stamp the information received, utilize files with folders
and file cabinets to store information, input data into the computer system, review the files
and manually track the admission of each student. The enrollment management staff
manually archives transcripts, letters of recommendations, medical and insurance
records, award and financial aid letters, and other student documentation. This is a labor
intensive process that is expensive, reduces the effective delivery of services, and creates
errors in the application process which intensifies with increase applications. Efficiency
requires reducing the paper trail and implementing automated practices that allows the
admissions staff to work faster and smarter.
Competition for students demands an extremely fast and efficient system that
is effective in tracking student information, from the point of inquiry, and compiling and
reviewing documents received electronically. Improving the process requires clear
guidelines and timelines on how prospect transcripts and other student information are
received and stored, how folders are created and updated, and how the data is entered and
database is maintained. The guidelines must also include processes for contacting students

103

with incomplete applications, guidelines for e-mails and letters that are returned, guidelines
on how completed files are distributed to the registrar, financial aid and residential life
offices.
Improving this process requires the development of an admissions flowchart to map
admissions work low. The upside to the workflow is that it continuously helps to reengineer
the admissions process. A developed map should bring into focus areas for improving the
monitoring of recruitment and performance goals help reduce review time for the
dissemination of financial aid awards and housing confirmation, reduce the number of
complaints, increase the response time to student and parent inquires, and remove many of
the bottle necks and errors with the department.
Admission and Imaging Technology
As campuses become faced with more financial challenges, admissions offices, are
asked to do more with less, reduce the cost of recruitment and enrollment, and provide
quick and efficient services at all times. Meeting this demand requires a reduction in
application processing time, and full utilization of a paperless and efficient document
management system that reduces operational cost and increases productivity. Changing
this process requires an effective electronic document generation system that is capable of
accessing transcripts and other documents electronically, verifying and capturing large
volumes of paper, and routing the data to the student information system. Auto imaging
and/or hand scanning, web services solution, the use of certified PDFs to send transcripts
and other confidential documentation, are in use by most institutions as part of their
electronic documentation system. There are also more efficient practices, such as the use of
services like ConnectEdu and Docufide, to link high school records with admissions
offices. The efficient use of these technologies will significantly increase the efficient
tracking of data, a reduction in errors, and the seamless transfer of information from one
department to the next. Implementing such a system, though costly initially, will assist in
streamlining the volume of paperwork associated with the admissions process, improve
efficiency, and reduce the application, processing time, and wait time for students and
parents.

104

Leadership and Staffing of the Admissions Office

Attracting the brightest and best students to an institution requires an admissions
office that is well-trained, motivated, and in tune with the market and the needs of their
perspective recruits. Staff should be guided by established short and long-term performance
goals, that are entrenched into the institution‘s strategic plan. In leading this charge, the
admissions director must be cognizant of the changes within the market, continuously
strengthening the relationships with key schools and regional recruiters developing
relationships with key alumni and friends of the institution, monitoring the scope of
competitor’s strategies, and utilizing assessment outcomes from prospective and current
students for continuous improvement.
The director and staff must establish key performance indicators that are focused on
improving the number and quality of applicants received, the number of students accepted
and improving the conversion ratio. In order to meet the established performance goals, it
is crucial that staff be given specific responsibilities and evaluated each year on their
performance. It is essential that these goals are tied to objectives for scholarship applications
and processing, notification, notification to students, relationships with high schools and
junior colleges, international admissions, transfer students admission, and the evaluation of
credentials for both American and international. Student information must be compiled and
monitored through daily, weekly, and monthly reports. The reports must be routinely used
by managers to evaluate, performance, track progress towards establish objectives, and
determine where corrective actions are necessary.
Success require that directors continuously improve coordination of off
campus efforts, such as such career days, recruiting fairs, campus visits and recruiting
activities on the local, regional and national levels. Decentralizing the office to link
regional recruiters with specific on campus based admissions counselors ensures that student
credentials are evaluated in a timely manner and feedback is passed to the recruiters in the
field in a timely and continuous basis. This is an important step in ensuring that the
institution optimizes the recruitment and service effort to cover key markets and to penetrate
new markets (Benchmark: Louisiana State University). Communication between recruiters
in the field and counselors, however, requires the development of a culture which embraces
open communication between managers, recruiters, counselors and prospective students.

105

Creating a culture of open communication allows ongoing consultation and feedback
between students and staff and keeps all parties in tune to ensuring a successful enrollment
process.

Meeting the annual recruitment goals also requires that admissions managers
continuously look at the competencies within their offices and delegate operational
responsibilities based on the strength and skill set of the team. Improving the skill set of the
team will require an ongoing evaluation of the team’s strengths and weaknesses, threats and
opportunities, and provides training and development opportunities for team
members. Developing a well-trained team not only impacts the ability of the staff
to serve students, parents and counselors quickly, but it improves the ability to examine their
work process and makes suggestions for improvement. This level of service can only be
achieved if enrollment mangers continuously assess the training levels of the staff, provide
resources to workshops and conferences at the regional and national level, and benchmark
their team performance against successful member institutions of the National Association
for College Admission Counseling.

Managing the “Summer Meltdown”

Increasing the number of enrolled students from the pool of accepted students
is essential to improving the conversion rate of the institution. Improving the conversion
requires a collaborative effort between academic departments, academic advising, and
student support services. Getting applicants engaged and delivering the services that
encourages and assists prospects in making the transition from high school to the college
environment is an institutional priority. All departments, both academic and non-academic
should be engaged through a coordinated customer service effort that engages prospects
through telephone, video and e-mail communication.
Ensuring that students enroll in a major is no longer an admissions office issue.
Admission officers ensure they received enough applications, but academic departments
should assist in improving the chances of enrollment in their major by engaging the students
who have completed their application and declared a major. The academic units should
develop interactions with undecided prospects, providing them with information about
career options in their academic unit, scholarships and engagement opportunities. Achieving
this requires the collaborative effort of key academic departmental representatives, such as
the Deans, chairs, faculty and outstanding students. This process can be strengthened by
utilizing trained and enthusiastic students via teleconferencing, online interactions and social

106

networks to develop these relationships with the prospects and improve their confidence in
attending the institution.

Developing a Successful Financial Aid Experience

For many African American students, problems with financial
aid begin before they are enrolled at the institution. This can be attributed to a lack of
understanding of the financial aid process, which continues into the college environment. In
a study conducted by the Frederick Douglas Foundation (2004) for Sallie Mae Foundation,
on how and when financial aid information is directed to high school low-income minority
students, found that parents and students would like to have their financial aid information
as early as junior high school from teachers and counselors. The study found that financial
aid information should be better targeted in venues such as churches, civic areas, and
libraries, and should be placed in areas that are highly visible to parents and students. The
study recommends that every effort should be made to keep parents and students informed
of the financial aid process as early as possible while in high school.

Many of the financial aid problems encountered by incoming freshmen and their
parents, with the financial aid process, are due to the failure to pay attention to the Students
Aid Report (SAR), and providing documentation in a timely manner to complete all aspects
of the FASFA. One of the major impediments to delays in aid processing is the failure to
complete the Expected Family Contribution and provide
the appropriate information. Correcting this problem requires collaboration between
the financial aid office and counselors at feeder middle and high schools. Familiarizing 9-12
graders and their parents with the financial aid process and the FASFA.ed.gov web page is
essential to this process. Conducting sessions focused on the online application process, the
utilization of the FAFSA web page, how to calculate the total aid needed using the
FAFSA4caster and the college worksheet, the documentation needed to complete the
FAFSA, how to apply for their PIN (Personal Identification Number), how to determine
eligibility for the Pell Grant, and the different types of loans available, is essential in
improving financial aid education. For parents who are not computer savvy, they should be
provided with phone numbers to high school counselors, college financial aid counselors
and the Federal Student Aid Information Center.

107

Once students are accepted by the institution, it is imperative that the admissions and
registrar’s office complete their files and provide the financial aid office with all required
information, electronically or manually. After the financial aid office receives the updated
financial aid information from the National Student Loan Data System on the students, it is
critical that communication is established with the incoming freshmen and their parents
regarding their FAFSA application, award letter, and the amount and type of aid
rewarded. To ensure that all enrolled freshmen receive their aid in a timely manner, financial
aid officers should cross reference the number of enrolled students against those who have
completed their FAFSA and awarded their aid. Enrolled students who are not awarded
should be contacted by phone, informing them of the missing documents and the need to
check the e-mail or physical address that they used for their FAFSA application. This
ensures that all first-time freshmen complete their FAFSA applications on time and have
their awards ready for disbursement before they enter the institutions.
Although a student portal is provided by The National Student Loan Data System
(NSLDS), institutions should develop a password-secured financial aid information
system. Developing a password-secured portal with clear instructions to incoming students
on how to activate the portal, allow the students to view their awards and award letters,
and sign their promissory notes online. The institutions should enhance the process by
developing an efficient e-mail and text messaging system for communications, provide
updated staff contact information, provide information on all loan types, provide instructions
on applications and reapplication deadlines, provide a medium for work study and work
study authorization, and develop an online refund disbursement program.

To improve students access to their information, the system must have clear
instructions, forms and student guidelines on scholarships and scholarship
disbursement, entrance and exit counseling, loan default, rehabilitation of defaulted student
loans, loan repayment strategy, loan forgiveness programs, the financial aid probation
process, and the dispute resolution process (Benchmark: Duke University & Alabama A &
M University). Having this information available 24/7, through the institution’s web page,
helps reduce the number of inquiries to the financial aid office and improves student access
to their information.
As institutions develop processes to improve the communication between new

108

students and the financial aid office, they must be mindful of the issues faced by returning
students. Allgood (2005) in a study of financial aid knowledge of students at HBCUs, found
that students knew that they needed financial aid to persist. They had minimal knowledge of
the financial aid process and were late planners, even though they completed the application
themselves. Allgood (2005) also found that the level of financial aid knowledge increased
based on residency. Out-of-state students had more knowledge of the financial aid process
than in-state students, but they both had the same knowledge of the process. However, both
groups were most dissatisfied with the length of time of the financial aid process, office
staff, and the level of service they received.
Students generally complained about the speed of processing their loans, the
disbursement of refund checks, and the level of customer service received. Financial aid
staff, on the other hand struggles to handle the number of student concerns during high
peak periods and staff complaints that students were not taking responsibility for completing
their FAFSA by the deadlines established. The student's failure to complete the financial aid
process in a timely manner, can be attributed to a lack of proper documentation to complete
the application process, failure to make satisfactory academic progress (SAP), failing to get
communication from the aid agency, and waiting until the "last minute" to make inquires
about their aid. Improving the relationship and the quality of service requires that
the financial aid office not only listen to the complaints and suggestions of students, but
also develop proactive processes that continuously monitor each student’s compliance and
communicate the information to the student periodically.

Managing the Processes

HBCUs, like most higher education institutions, are required by the Department of
Education, accreditation agencies, and state higher education commissions, to
demonstrate that funds allocated to the institution for the Federal Student Aid programs
(FSA) (grants, loans, and, work study) are managed and distributed to the students in a
timely manner. Institutions are expected to demonstrate that the payment received and
distributed from FSA meets transparent fiscal responsibility guidelines for financial
and administrative responsibility, as outlined by the Office of the Auditor General and the
Program Participatory Agreement (PPA). The PPA, signed by the designated school
official, sets clear guidelines for requesting Title IV funds to meet the student’s immediate

109

needs, and establishes guidelines for maintaining processes and structures for the receipt and
management of funds. It also establishes clear guidelines as to how the funds should be
distributed or returned, recordkeeping and reporting guidelines, and policies and procedures
for governing the institution’s financial aid program.

The FSA provides electronic aid for managing student information data through the
Student Aid Internet Gateway (SAIG) and enroll, award, and distribute grants through the
Common Origination and Distribution network (COD). According to the FSA (2010),
institutions should be fully utilizing e-applications, such as Eligcert, to update school
eligibility information, be enrolled in SAIG, regularly access the Central Processing System
(CPS) e-mail system, use the Fiscal Operations Report and Application to Participate
(FISAP) to process Federal Work Study (FWS), Federal Perkins Loans (FPL), and Federal
Supplemental Educational Opportunity Grants (FSEOG). Institutions must also fully utilize
The National Student Loan Data System (NSLDS) for Federal Perkins Loans, overpayment
and enrollment information, utilize ezaudit to submit annual compliance and audit reports,
and use Ifap.edu to monitor cohort rates (ifap.ed.gov, 2010).
These systems and processes are available and accessible to all HBCUs
to manage Title IV funds, therefore, all institutions have the capacity to develop
an efficient system for delivering funds to students in a timely manner. Institutions that are
completing their verification in the CPS in a timely manner, should be disbursing and
delivering aid packages received from FSA within the specified three days, through direct
deposit to student accounts. If institutions are distributing the students’ funds within
the three-day window and if there are still long lines each semester, then a
serious evaluation of the workflow and operational efficiency of the office must be
considered. Improving operational efficiency will require the utilizing of off-peak periods
to evaluate each student aid record and identify students who have not completed their
application in a timely manner. This period must also be used to identify those students who
need additional documentation, and to identify students who fail to make satisfactory
academic progress (SAP). This review should highlight students with outstanding balances
before each academic year begins, and communicate the information to students through e-
mails, letters, text messages, and telephone calls.

110

Fiscal Management and Responsibilities

Improving the operational efficiency of the financial aid office also requires
improving the fiscal management within the offices. The continuation of Title IV funding
requires that the institutions maintain timely and accurate financial records of the financial
aid process to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the receipt and disbursement of different
grants, scholarships, and loans. Transparency requires that the institutions’ business offices
reconcile their financial aid and operational accounts on a monthly basis, to ensure that
information from the business office reconciles with the financial aid office and the G5
system. Any extra funds must be tracked, removed from the institution’s operational budget,
and returned or utilized within the three-day period (Ifap.ed.gov, 2010). Monthly
reconciliations make end of the year reconciliations between the financial aid office,
the institution business office, and G5 much easier for developing the general ledger,
auditing, compliance, and certification renewal.
Private institutions may require further research to test their financial viability and
accountability by calculating and analyzing the primary reserve, equity, and net income
ratios. Further research is also required for the strength of factor score, weighted score and
the composite score. This analysis is necessary to ensure that institutions are fiscally
and programmatically sound to carry out federal mandates. In addition, this helps determine
where administrative action should be taken to correct processes that could jeopardize the
reaffirmation of accreditation. This is necessary because non-compliance with Federal
regulations due to negligence can have dire consequences for the institution and for the
individuals in charge. It is therefore essential that the Vice President for Administration and
the financial aid office ensure the adherence regarding all protocol for the use of financial
aid funds for business operations.

With the federal government moving the federal student loan system out of
the hands of private lenders to the Direct Loan Program (DLP), it is critical for all
institutions to be prepare to meet the demands of full participation in these new programs
and prepare students for the changes they may encounter. Aligning the financial system and
training staff regarding the rules associated with DLP compliance is essential to reducing
mistakes and improving the overall service to students. Improving the students’ overall
experience requires that they be made knowledgeable of the DLP process, their expectations

111

as a borrower, the consolidation loan process, and its impact on their loan limit.
Early communication helps to resolve many of the issues faced by students before
they arrive for registration, and prevents many of the long lines associated with the
beginning of each Fall semester. Further improvements in efficiency will require:
1. Daily staff discussions on updates from the central processing system (CPS) and
reviewing updates from the Financial Aid Professional (IFAP) web page.
2. Developing training schedules for staff. This should include Ifap.ed.gov training sessions,
in-house training and staff assessment on operational processes, attendance of National
Association of Financial Aid Administrators (NAAFSA) conferences, webinars, and
workshops.
3. Conducting weekly meetings for facilitating two-way discussions on procedures and
policy updates between managers, supervisors, and staff.
4. Evaluating the effectiveness of financial aid counselors in serving their group of students.
5. Providing information to students on updating their Expected Family Contribution
and verification of required documentation.
6. Communicating enrollment periods, payment periods, and electronic
or manual disbursement policies and Perkins Loans distribution on a regular basis.
7. Communicating schedules for Fall, Spring and Summer semester deadlines for financial
aid.
8. Developing an online frequently asked questions, inquiry, and complaint system.
9. Developing compliance policies, guidelines for academic progress towards degree
completion, and SAP calculations for each student.
10. Developing policies and appeal processes for student academic progress (SAP),
admissions, refunds, and return of Title IV refund payments.
11. Developing a system of verifying conflicting data from students and training staff to
resolve conflicting issues.
12. Communicating SAP eligibility measures and communicating to students early, about
their SAP status, as well as their ineligibility for future aid.
13. Developing an appeals process for students who have their aid suspended for not
fulfilling their SAP requirements.
14. Developing documentation and reporting system that shows SAP performance, and
proof of financial aid counseling.

112

15. Developing policies and processes for distributing loans and grants that is visible on the
institution’s financial aid web page.
16. Develop an effective entrance and exit counseling process (Ifap.ed.gov, 2010).

Managing the Default Rate

The impact of default to the student’s future requires that institutions make every
effort to educate the student from his/her first semester and provide resources through all
possible communication tools needed to reduce student debt default. It is imperative for
students to be aware early that they must graduate and they are still responsible for paying
off their debt. They must be informed that if the debt is not repaid, and student loans are in
default, they are no longer eligible to receive additional Title IV federal student aid, and
will leave the institutions financially worse off than when they first attended. Students must
also be informed that the Department of Education can take the following actions against
them;
1. Payment of collection fees once the loans are transferred to a collection agency,
2. Garnishment up to 15% of disposable wages from an employer,
3. Being sue in a federal court,
4. Inform credit agencies. This impacts their credit score and their ability to get a job, buy a
home, or car, and the ability to receive an occupational license in various states, and halts
their ability to gain employment, particularly in sensitive jobs. In reality their future hopes
and aspirations are destroyed (Ed.gov 2010).

Default Rate Management

Currently, the Department of Education (DOE) mandates that institutions put in
place control measures to ensure that its cohort default rate does not exceed 25 percent for
three consecutive years or exceed 40% for any year. Institutions who fail to meet the
requirements are subjected to losing their Direct Loans, Pell Grants, Federal Family
Education Loans (FFEL) and their eligibility in Title IV Higher Education Act programs for
up to three years. This, however, is based on a two-year cohort default rate which will be
changed by 2014. The 2014 provision, under the new Higher Education Opportunity Act
(HEOA) of 2008, changes the two-year default rate calculations to three years and moves
the cohort default rate from 25 to 30 percent. Institutions will be required to make this

113

information public through the National Center for Educational Statistics College
Navigators System and must post by October 29, 2011, on their web site, a net price
calculator with up to date information on the cost of attendance for public viewing. The
institutions will not be sanctioned until 2014, but the current data indicated that HBCUs
have much work to be done in improving their default rates.

Preliminary studies by the Department of Education in 2007 on the impact of the
three year default rate on institutions revealed that HBCUs moved from 11.6 to 18.5 default
rate with several institutions hovering close to the 30% rate (Dillon & Smiles, 2010). Dillon
(2011) found in 2008 that the average three-year default rate was 20.2%, but 18% of the
HBCUs were above 30% and half were over 20%. This places several HBCUs in an at-risk
category, once the three-year default rate is implemented. Improving the default rates at
these at-risk institutions is essential before 2014, because sanctions by the Department of
Education would have devastating effects on the institution’s existence. Although there is an
appeal process before sanctions are enforced, the threat of losing their eligibility to
participate in the Title IV federal student aid program can result in a flight of students from
these institutions i.e. the Morris Brown effect.
As the economy continues to tighten and African American students find it difficult
to find meaningful employment, it is anticipated that default rates will continue to increase.
The seriousness of this threat requires better institutional understanding of how to
effectively manage the predictors of default rate. Dillon & Smiles (2010), in a study of the
predictors of default rates, revealed that the percentage of Pell grant recipients, the
percentage of African American student enrollment, higher enrollment, higher student
faculty ratio, and high average annual debt are predictors of higher cohort default rates. The
study also found that higher graduation and retention rates and the percentage of women
enrolled were predictors of lower cohort default rates.

Effectively managing these variables must become a top enrollment management
priority. Administrators from the president down must get on board in assisting the financial
aid office by improving student performance and progression metrics and put in place the
conditions established by the DOE for HBCUs and tribal colleges. At-risk institutions must
also begin working on their default management plans, hire an independent third party

114

consultant and begin working on the factors that will continuously improve their default rate
(ifap.ed.gov, 2010).

The Texas HBCU Default Management Consortium also provided a model for at-
risk HBCUs. In developing a default improvement plan for participating institutions, the
consortium established key strategies for success. The consortium members:

1. Established campus default management team to include academic affairs, student
affairs,

financial aid, alumni affairs, career services, registrar, admission and instructional

research.

2. Established cohort default rate goals.

3. Identified at risk burrowers early.

4. Hired a default rate manager to execute the committee’s recommendation.

5. Committed financial resources to support staff and operations.

6. Developed partnerships across campus.

7. Examined loan packaging strategy.

8. Developed education and counseling program for students.

9. Improved customer service and communication with students.

10. Invested in training and utilization of external online resources, such as
mappingyourfuture.org.

11. Shared resources with peer institutions.

12. Developed strategies to communicate with and serve former students.

13. Invested in technology infrastructure to service students and improve work
processes.

14. Developed an institution persistence and retention plan.

115

15. Improved assessment, data collection and analysis.

16. Improved career planning and placement.

17. Collaborated with advisors, faculty and all student support services to educate
students.

18. Developed strong entrance and exit counseling programs (TG, 2004).

Default rate management is an institutional effectiveness problem that must be addressed
by the campus president and cabinet. This is necessary to develop the partnerships within the
institution which are required to improve key performance metrics, such as retention,
progress to graduation, and career counseling. Institutions that fail to address these issues
collectively and put resources in place to address students’ persistence and career
development will continue to be at-risk. Putting resources in place requires educating the
campus about default rates, provides adequate support in student support services to manage
the at-risk population within the first two years, develops a data collection system that
monitors the academic, social and professional progress of all students, and get campus buy-
in to default rate management initiatives (TG, 2004).

The efficiency and success of the financial aid program require a director who
communicates the operational goals of the department effectively to every staff member and
the university community. This is important in ensuring that the university community is
cognizant of the role they play and the impact their actions have on the operation of the
financial aid office. For this to occur, the financial aid administrators must become visible
on their campuses by conducting workshops with students groups, conduct class
presentations, marketing their programs on campus radio, TV and student newspapers, and
utilizing campus social networks to advance programs and timelines, and use every campus
opportunity to promote the office. It is through the leadership of the director that standards
for transparency in the receipt and distribution of federal funds to students in a timely
manner. There will also be frequent internal audits to ensure that standards are establish for
customer service, operational goals and objectives, and program quality is maintained
through frequent assessments.

Default Rate Management Financial Aid Assessment

116

Continuous improvement of the financial aid office hinges on the periodic collection
of data from its key stakeholder: the students. Period direct and indirect assessment using
qualitative and or quantitative analysis provides information that can guide the decision-
making process. Assessment of efficiency and effectiveness should cover standards for:
1. The accuracy of information on students files.
2. The compliance with federal mandates for all loans, grants, and work-study.
3. The percentage of funds distributed within three days of receipt of students aid from the
federal government or scholarship source.
4. The speed of verification, completion of the application process,
and distribution of award information.
5. The number of continuing student and freshmen completing their application in a timely
manner.
6. The time between receipt of funds and distribution of refund checks funds.
7. Initial acceptance and denial rates.
8. Audit reports determining the use of Title IV funds for other purposes than its intended
use
9. Accuracy of monthly and annual reconciliation reports.
10. The default rate reports.
11. The number of students that withdrew and their refund amount.
12. The response time to student phone messages and e-mails.
13. Number of hours committed to training and the knowledge level of the financial
aid staff.
14. The number of students and parents attending financial aid promotional events.
Financial aid assessment for customer service should entail:
1. The number of student complaints received, the number of students visiting the office,
and the number of phone calls and e-mails received.
2. The speed of resolving questions from students and parents.
3. The perception of office and staff friendliness.
4. The accuracy of information given and ease of obtaining the information online.
5. The wait time during peak season to see a counselor.
6. The quality of service received.
7. The clarity and usefulness of the web page and web services.

117

8. The front counter assistance.
9. The acceleration and grievance process.
10. The communication of critical individual information.
11. The use of professional judgment.

Making the Transition: Improving the Residential Life Experience

Residential living is an integral role in fostering the academic, social,
and cultural growth of students at HBCUs and plays a significant role in student retention.
Residential life has evolved over the past two decades from providing living
accommodations to specialized living learning communities for freshman to upper-
class students, the Honors Program, themes and social groups, student faculty interactions,
academic support, and academic disciplines. They create social structures among groups of
students with similar interests aimed at increasing student engagement and peer interaction
over time. These programs set the stage for success during weekdays and on weekends, by
engaging students in peer-to-peer and faculty to peer discussions, through leadership forums,
male and female convocations, entertainment, intramural sports, mentoring, tutoring,
and academic services (Benchmark: Boston College, Monmouth University).
With more students coming from middle-class families to HBCU campuses, they
are expecting to be provided with housing solutions with many of the amenities similar to
what they left at home. Students expect clean and comfortable rooms, attractive and
comfortable lounges with big screen TVs and games, Wi-Fi and cable connections, study
areas that are adequately furnished, computer labs and kiosks, cafeterias with high quality
food, laundry facilities and services, and a staff providing a high level of
service. They compare their campuses to predominately white institutions and expect fitness
facilities, temperature-regulated environments, working air-conditioning and heat,
continuously functioning hot water units, microwaves, vending machines, and kitchen
facilities. They expect their campuses to accommodate their tastes and life styles and are
usually willing to pay more for housing that meets their tastes and accommodations
(Benchmark: Prairie View A & M University).
Students not only come with high expectations of living conditions,
but they come with pre-college behaviors. Generally, students in residential halls come
from different socio-economic backgrounds. Many are leaving home for the first time and

118

for the first time attending they are attending an institution with a high percentage of Black
students. They find themselves with freedom and opportunities that many are not mature or
disciplined enough to handle. Successful residential life programs understand these factors
and institute programs to assist their residents with time management, conflict resolution and
decision-making starting the first week of the freshman year. To assist the process, they
generally provide residential life and student handbooks online and in print with clear rules
and guidelines for student behavior, discipline and residential policies, that must be
reviewed and signed by each resident.

Residential Life Computer Information System
Paramount to improving the residential hall experience is an efficient residential life
information system that allows students to view personal residential life information, submit
work requests, and track the responses to their requests. A residential life information
system helps residential hall directors reduce the paper trail on student complaints, room
request changes, judicial grievances, communication to students, response time to repairs,
requests for housing application, billing, and housing assignments. Once the paper trail is
reduced, directors and managers will have more time available to implement learning
community activities and improve services to students.

Achieving this will require a system that is compatible to Banner, PeopleSoft or
other student data systems. Once the databases are integrated, students should be provided
with a secure portal to complete and pay their housing applications, view rooms and
roommate assignments, check outstanding balances, update meal plans, and view potential
roommates. Although this may initially require an investment in licensing, institutions
can offset the cost by developing their own in-house residential life information systems. If
they do not have the personnel for in-house development, there are cost-effective programs,
such as Residence by Simplicity and Reslifeportal from Cyber View that allows the
institutions to develop an easy-to-use system that ties information from residential life,
the cashier, and the enrollment management office.
In addition to the residential life information system, efforts must be made to
develop and or improve the system through an updated residential life web page and social
network web page. The web page should act as the primary source for virtual tours of the
residential halls, information on deadlines and schedules, information designed for incoming

119

freshmen, returning, and graduate students. It should be the source for the housing
application guide, online forms, seminars, information for parents, frequently asked
questions, property insurance information, living learning communities, contact information
for residential hall managers and RAs, emergency contact information, updated messages as
well as, Facebook, Twitter, and blog links. It should also have the residential and student
handbooks, along with an electronic work order request, a complaint system, housing
application, an electronic help desk, and information for residential staff. (Benchmark:
University of Manitoba & Temple University).
Managing Residential Life Staff Development
The scope of the residential personnel job has evolved to promote a living learning
experience capable of supporting the academic development and retention of the residents.
Developing a successful residential life program requires highly skilled managers
with backgrounds in student personnel management, higher education administration and
counseling. They must possess great leadership and communication skills, have knowledge
of retention and education programs, certified in emergency response protocols, understand
the learning community concept, demonstrate proficiency in Microsoft suites, Banner,
Blackboard, residential life information systems and card access technology. Managers must
be cross-trained and capable of motivating their employees to embrace technology and
customer service principles by continuously providing training in computer skills, customer
service, assessment, student discipline, and residential life education.
For the residential team to function within the framework outlined, employees must
be continuously trained through a regular training schedule. To accelerate this
training process, employees should be encouraged to attend institution sponsored in-service
training programs through the Department of Human Resources, distant education programs,
faculty and staff development workshops, and School of Education professional
development programs. They must be encouraged to attend state, regional and national
conferences sponsored by Association of College and University Housing Officers –
International (ACUHO-I), so that they can interact with peers from other institutions. The
training exercises must be aimed at meeting specific goals, and must include facility
managers, supervisors, and staff that maintain the residential facilities. Joint training and
discussions with this group promotes continual dialogue which is essential to improving
work processes and maintenance of high standards of cleanliness and prompt responses

120

to repair requests
Regularly scheduled training must not only be restricted to residential staff, but to
residential life assistants (RAs) and graduate assistants (GAs) as well. Training and
orientation of GAs/RAs at the beginning of the Fall and Spring semesters and periodically
throughout the semester sets the expectation for the leadership GAs/RAs are
expected to provide throughout the semester. GAs/RAs should be provided with training on
leadership and decision-making, crises management and conflict resolution, team and
community building, and time management. GAs/RAs must also be trained on computer
skills, university policies and codes of conduct, program development, administrative
procedures and campus resources, peer engagement strategies, communication skills, crisis
management, customer service, and emergency protocol. As part of their training, GAs/RAs
must be taught group facilitation skills and provided with guidance on how
to conduct hall and group meetings.

Facilitation training of student leaders is essential to the development of student
leadership through the Residential Housing Associations in each residential hall. Training
student leaders to represent the needs of students is an integral part of student development
and residential living, because it allows residents to have a voice in their governance.
Empowering students to be active participants in their residential councils creates a
command structure on each floor of the respective residences. It is from the residential
councils that an executive council with representatives, from each residential hall, can be
developed to create a student organization within residential life that gives students a voice
in planning engagement activities, developing residential life policies, and airing student
concern. This student leadership approach creates opportunities for students to be affiliated
and involved with their peers from other institutions, as members of the National
Association of College and University Residence Halls (NACURH).
Residential Hall Assessment
The expectation of residential living requires an assessment system that is driven by
specific goals and objectives. This system must include performance benchmarks that
are assessment-driven and utilizes the data for decision-making and process improvement.
Improving student satisfaction with the residential life experience must be the primary goal
driving residential life on HBCU campuses. Residential life assessment seeks feedback from

121

current and former residents on living experiences, the overall experience of residential
living, and its impact on their perception of the university. The assessment must include
experiences with residential life staff, the general facilities, computer networks, the level
of engagement in activities and educational programs, and data from discussions and focus
groups. This information should be used in association with hall-by-hall analysis on the
occupancy levels and residential hall assignments, the number of activities and attendance,
number of students attending academic programs, the percentage of residents attending the
programs, demographic and classification information, the number of students living in the
residential halls compared to the spaces available, and delinquency rates. The academic
performance of the each resident must be compared at mid-semester, end of the
semester and the end of academic year to determine the academic achievement by residential
hall.

Resources, such as The Association of College and University Housing Officers-
International (ACUHO-I) benchmark survey, administered through Education
Benchmarking Inc. (EBI), provides an instrument for measuring the satisfaction
of students with their experiences. However, institutions that are unable to afford the EBI
survey can develop their own survey and have the residents complete the surveys at the
end of year checkout. Once the surveys are collected, the data must be analyzed and
discussed with all residential hall managers and used along with residential performance
metrics to compare current performance with expected annual performance. The result from
the assessment should guide the strategic planning and continuous quality improvement for
the next academic and fiscal year (Benchmark: Penn State).

Recognizing and Rewarding Residential Staff
Recognizing and rewarding residential life staff is important in improving staff
morale and motivation and promoting a culture of high performance. While promotion and
pay increases are always a great motivational factor, the current economic factors restrict
the availability of these rewards. It is important that residential directors develop a peer
reward and recognition system that recognizes outstanding performers and individuals who
have given exemplary service throughout the academic year. When used effectively as part
of the evaluation and promotion process it provides an incentive for outstanding performers
to be recognized and promoted. Exceptional residential managers and their teams should be

122

rewarded for outstanding student evaluations, academic performances of residences,
intramural sports championship, operational efficiency, leadership, and unique and
innovative programs. Awards must also be presented for hall of the year, program of the
year, top residential hall director, most outstanding RA,
most outstanding learning community, and most outstanding resident.

123

Chapter VI

Driving Quality: Transitioning Students from High School to the Sophomore Year

Introduction

Due to their unique mission HBCUs enrolls a high percentage of African American
students with low ACT and high school GPAs, who would traditionally have difficulty
gaining acceptance into predominately white institutions. Like their white counterparts,
many of these students come into the college environment not fully prepared to succeed.
They require individualized assistance during the first two years to improve their chances of
successfully obtaining their degree within four to six years. A large percentage of students
have proven that once the institutions make a collaborative effort to address their many
academic and psychological issues, they can have successful academic and professional
careers.

In this chapter we will focus on strategies that can help first-year students make the
transition from high school by focusing on understanding who are the first year
customers/students, designing a quality driven first year experience program, transitioning to
the college campus, the first-year seminar, learning and living communities, and student
leadership/peer mentoring. This chapter also addresses African American male students in
the first-year experience, technology, the first year experience and parental involvement, the
Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA), and first year assessment.

The Dynamics of First Year Students at HBCUs

First-year success in college is the sustenance for enrollment improvement and the
continued success of an institution. The strength of the first-year program has an inverse
relationship on the sophomore and junior year, and subsequently, the institution’s retention
and graduation rates. The impact on the sustainability of the institution requires a carefully
planned first-year experience program that is goal oriented and focuses on improving the
student experience as they make the transition from high school to college. Meeting these
goals requires front-line staff that provides services to meet the needs of the freshmen, and
provide experiences that encourage them to stay at the institution (Canady, 2007). HBCUs

124

have demonstrated that once underprepared students are exposed to proper guidance from
concerned individuals on and off campus, and become involved with programs that focus on
academic skills development, they can be as successful as their highly qualified white or
black counterparts.

However, having programs and services that assist students makes the transition
from high school to college, is just one part of the retention equation. Students expect that
once enrolled they will be engaged in a student-friendly campus that provides services that
are effective, efficient and customer service driven. They expect that the institution will
make an effort to effectively utilize available resources to create experiences that keeps them
engaged and connected to classmates, faculty, staff, alumni and other groups that can
contribute to their education. Successful retainers of first-year students have demonstrated
that with the establishment of clear performance goals, continuous assessment of student
needs, and the utilization of the data to allocate resources and drive-decision making, they
can create a customer/ student friendly campus that meets and exceeds the students’
expectations.

Understanding the Customers/Students

Before HBCUs can effectively design programs to improve the performance of first-
year students, they must first understand the characteristics of the students they enroll. The
Cooperative Institutional Research Program (CIRP) from the Higher Education Research
Institute provides a synopsis of a wide range of characteristics on cohorts entering the
institutions. CIRP provides baseline data for retention studies, comparative analysis against
freshmen at peer institutions, and comparisons against the national cohort trend. Several
public and private HBCUs participate in the program, as part of their annual assessment
cycle and use the information to improve their first-year experience programs.

Extracts from a Customized 2009 CIRP Survey Summary for Participating Public
HBCUs

The Fall 2009 d CIRP summary report details the characteristics of 5,490 students
entering participating state and private HBCUs. The survey revealed that more than 95.7%
of the respondents were from public schools with close to 60 percent living 100 miles or

125

more from the institutions. Almost half applied to three to five schools, while a quarter
applied for one or two colleges. Close to 78 percent indicated that the institutions they
attended were their first choice and close to three quarter indicated that the institution was
their first and second choice. More than 98% expected to obtain undergraduate, graduate or
professional degrees, but only 65% and 18% respectively expected to obtain a bachelors and
master degree from the college where they were currently enrolled. In examining their
decisions to attend the institution close to fifty percent indicated that they came to the
institution due to their parents and relatives influence; a half came due to the offering of
financial assistance and the cost to attending college, and 40 % made their decision based on
campus visits and the need to attend a school of the college’s size. Close to 60 percent came
because the institution graduates had a reputation of getting great jobs while 40 % came
because the graduates were accepted by the best graduate schools.

The growth and dynamic nature of the African American middle class are reflected
in the diversity of the studied cohort. Approximately a third of the parents were living
together, while two thirds of respondents’ parents were divorced or separated. An
examination of the education of the parents reveals that more than a third of fathers and
close to 60% of mothers had some kind of college education. In estimating parent income
before taxes, the freshmen indicated that more than a third of the parents received income of
less than $24,999, which is close to the U. S Government poverty guideline for a family of
five. In contrast, more than a quarter of the respondent parents earned between $25,000 to
$49,999 per year and a third earn between $50,000 to $149,000 per year. The diversity also
extended to the neighborhood schools and communities. Close to more than 56% came from
entirely non-white to mostly non-white high, schools while 44% came from nearly half non-
white to predominantly white high schools. Close to two thirds of the respondents lived in
mostly or entirely non-white neighborhoods, and close to a third were from roughly half
non-white to white neighborhoods.

Financially, close to a fifth expressed serious concerns about their ability to secure
funding to complete their degrees; a little less than a third were confident that they would be
able to finance their education while half thought they might have some funding problems.
Close to 60 percent of the respondents indicated that less than $1,000 of their first-year
expenses would covered by family resources, while a little less than a third expected family

126

resources to cover $1,000 to $5,999. More than a quarter expected to receive no non-
repayable aid (scholarship, grants etc.), and more than a third expected to receive $6,000 or
more.

In examining their high school performance, the respondents indicated that a fifth
were C to C+ students, 57.2% were B- to B+ students, and a fifth were A-to A+ students.
More than 71% spent less than 15 hours doing homework and talking with friends, while
almost three quarters spent less than two hours talking to teachers outside of the classroom
peer week. In rating themselves in comparison to persons their age, a little more than half
rated themselves above average in their academic ability, emotional health, physical health,
and popularity. When probed on activities that they often did in the past year in high school,
only half of the respondents asked questions in class, and sought feedback on their academic
work. A little less than half revised papers to improve writing, evaluate the reliability of the
information they received, and sought alternative solutions to problems.

An evaluation of their study pattern showed that 85.6 % frequently studied with
other students, 58 % tutored other students, and close to two-thirds came to class late. Close
to three quarters used the Internet for homework, with less than 30% exploring topics on
their own. In rating themselves against their peers, only 54.7 percent rated their academic
skills above average, nearly 72% rated themselves above average in cooperativeness, efforts
to achieve, social and intellectual self-confidence and self-understanding. However, when
comparing their mathematical ability, public speaking, writing ability and computer skills to
an average person their age, the respondents rated themselves 36%, 37%, 49% and 45%
respectively. This could have contributed to a little less than 90 percent of the respondents
expecting to require some form of tutoring in mainly mathematics, writing, English, reading,
social studies, and science.

The students from the CIRP survey were not a particularly physically active group in
high school. More than 75% spent less than 10 hours per week exercising or participating in
sports. However, on the service learning front, less than 68% spent less than two hours per
week actively participating in volunteering activities, and less than 41%, typically worked
11-20 hours per week during their senior year. Although a little less than 85% planned to
live in the residential halls, more than 41% expected to work in college, participate in clubs

127

and organizations and students groups, and socialize with someone from another ethnic
group. More than 44% expected to work with professors in research projects, and more than
41% expect to participate in volunteer work or community service, indicating that this group
came to college expecting a high level of interaction with faculty, staff, and the university
community (Pryor, Hurtado, DeAngelo, Palucki, Korn & Tran, 2008).

Student Dynamics

The characteristics of the students from the CIRP survey (2009), represented one
aspect of the freshman group dynamics. A true reflection of the behavior of this group of
students is reflected by their demographic description; the millennial generation. Millennials
are characteristically highly nurtured, technologically advanced, multi-taskers, require fast
service, are extremely impatient and expect instant services. They expect engaging classes,
need classes that fit their schedules and have parents who are highly involved in their
academic decisions (Carlson, 2005). Their degree completing is dependent on the level of
engagement with faculty and peers, and the level of motivation in and out of the classroom.
They have to be motivated to take their studies seriously and must be actively engaged in the
learning process (Carlson, 2005).

The millennials, however, are not the only student group on campuses across the
country. In 2000, the undergraduate population in higher education consisted of 55% of 19
to 23 year olds, 31% of 31-39 year old, and 26 % 40 year old or older. Approximately 57%
of students 30-39 years old and 70% of students 40 years old or over, attended four-year
institutions part-time (NCES, 2002). It is projected that from 2006-2017, there will be a 10
percent increase in enrollment of students under 25 years old and a 19 percent increase in
enrollment of students 25 years and older (NCES, 2008). As more adult students are
returning to higher education, the increase in non-traditional students creates challenges that
institutions must address.

Irrespective of the type of student (generation Xers, non-traditional, first
generation), students entering HBCUs are expecting friendly, quick, convenient, and
efficient service from a competent and warm frontline staff. They require structured
advising, guidance from admissions and financial aid staff, proper handling and processing
of their paper work, no lines and reduced waiting time for services (Canady, 2007). In

128

contrast, many students who leave HBCUs, complain of disorganization, rudeness, archaic
systems and processes, and frontline staff that are not motivating or meeting the needs and
expectations of the incoming freshmen, issues with registration, bureaucratic red tape, and
poor customer service, which impacted their decision to leave (Hurd 2000 & Canady, 2007).
These are issues that must be addressed by all institutions Black or white, but at HBCUs,
freshmen come expecting a staff that is motivated and nurturing creating a positive parent
like atmosphere.

Designing a Quality Driven-First-Year Experience Program

A quality program sees students as customers passing through the system where they
are prepared to survive the rigors of the college experience and learning professional
development skills that carry them through to graduation and beyond. Creating a successful
quality driven first- year experience requires the establishment of clear operational goals that
are aligned with the unique needs of its students, and the commitment of resources to assist
the students make the transition from a high school to a college environment. However,
developing a quality driven first year program does not happen overnight. The president of
the institution must lead the way by providing a clear vision that transforms the institution
into a student driven unit and hold the cabinet members accountable for performance
outcomes. This will stimulate innovation at all levels, allowing departments to continuously
focus on the student as a customer, become sensitive to student needs, work towards
developing programs that are driven toward improving student achievement, develop
scorecards that measure first-year student learning outcomes, and have measurable factors
that drive first-year student satisfaction.

Developing quality driven first-year programs on all campuses will require careful
examination of existing first year experience programs. Several HBCUs use the University
College Model as the gateway for entrance to the institution. The University College has
become the central point of advising and developing of students with 30 hours or less and is
responsible for developing programs to help students make the transition from high school
to college. The success of these models, questions the effectiveness and relevance of the
University College Model in meeting the demands of the current group of students. Data
indicates that more than a third of first-year students fail to return for the sophomore year,

129

and by the beginning of the junior year, close to half of the cohorts have left the institution.
While there are several debates about student quality and preparation levels, data suggests
that many of these programs have failed to significantly improve first-year retention over the
past ten years.

Whether it is the concept of the model, a lack of focus, resources, or poor
management of the first-year program at the respective institution, Prairie View A& M
University has demonstrated that with proper resources and visionary leadership, the
University College is an effective method for first year development of low-income
students. Raab & Adam (2005) found that when service learning and learning communities
are used with the University College concept, it can be successful for low-income students.
Success, however, requires that the institution help the student develop habits to improve
their chances of success, and develop social, decision making and study skills. These
strategies are aimed at improving the students’ academic, professional and engagement
skills, so as to help them make the transition to the sophomore and junior year (Raab &
Adam, 2005).

The Prairie View experience has demonstrated that the diversity of the student
population at HBCU does not allow institutions to solve many of the problems facing
African American students with “cookie cutter” first-year programs. First-year programs
must be driven by performance outcomes with achievement set at achieving a freshman to
sophomore retention rates of 85% percent and a sophomore to junior retention rate of 70%
or higher. There are several HBCUs that are currently meeting these benchmarks, because
the institutions have strong assessment programs that continuously monitor performance
outcomes.

Several institutions may have various reasons for meeting 85% freshman to
sophomore retention rate. However, the institution accept the student indicating to the
students and their parents that, irrespective of their preparation levels, the institutions will
commit all their resources to ensure the student academic and professional success. Living
up to that expectation require that all organizational structure and programs from the
president’s office down focus on efficiently utilizing existing resources to improve the
experiences of first-year students and their parents. The institutions must live up to that

130

expectation and use their assessment tools to monitor students’ progress. Effectively
utilizing the data provides opportunities for the institutions to identify students with at-risk
characteristics (low high school GPA, first generation, undeclared majors, conditionally
admitted and at-risk ethnic groups), provide distinct visible codes within the student
information system for staff to identify these students, and develop tailor made programs
aimed at targeting these students.

Components of a Successful Freshman Experience Program

The problems with most colleges are that they have amassed data for at-risk students
before the students enter the institution, but fail to use the information to create a profile on
each student and use it in the advising process. Amassing data on each student allows the
first-year advisors to see their charges high school GPA, sex, socio-economic background,
first generation status, traditional and non-traditional status, identifying part-time or full-
time students, the student expected workload, family responsibilities, identifying
conditionally admitted students, and those with undeclared majors (See figure 3). Identifying
these variables, through the admissions process and creating specific computer codes at the
point of admissions to ensure that the data is stored in the student information system and
available to first-year advisors, is essential in identifying these students at the admissions
stage. Once this information becomes available to academic support staff and first-year
advisors and used effectively, they can become significant in developing individual
academic plans. The information can then be used to help at-risk students develop their
social skills, self-confidence, and self-efficacy (Tinto, 1993;Lotowski et. al, 2004, & Peters,
2007).

Evaluating first-year student performance in standardized placement exams, such as
COMPASS, helps determine student competency in basic college-level mathematics,
reading and English. African American students, however, are poor takers of standardized
tests and traditionally are placed at a disadvantage when the tests are used to determine their
placement in college freshman level courses. In order to reduce the number of African
American students placed in remedial courses, institutions should help incoming students
prepare for these exams. First, institutions should begin by informing first-time freshmen

131

about the importance of the exams, the objective behind the exams, and the necessary
preparation required to improve their success.

Fig. 3 Tracking at risk students

Develop risk
indicators & identify
at risk students
Summer Bridge
Program Mid and final
Learning commuity semester
Supplemtal instruction evaluation
Conditional admits Tutoring
first generation Mentoring
undeclared Information update
remedial Probation strategy

Relationship
Early advisor contact building
Campus communication
startegy
First year residential life
Faculty
2 weeks alert Student support services
system Progress report

Second, an effort should be made to inform prospective students on the impact of
placement exams on their class selection, cost of tuition for remedial courses, and the impact
of remediation on graduation time. Third, institutions should develop an interactive testing
center web page which is highly visible on the admissions, orientation and the institution’s
social network and web page. The web content should include testing samples and practice
guides, testing center staff and contact information, and testing information for independent
test-taking centers (Benchmark: University of New Mexico).

Improving Preparation through Summer Bridge Programs

Summer bridge programs are ideal in assisting underprepared students make the
transition to higher education. These programs, when properly executed, are aimed at
improving the preparedness of students before they enter the institutions, improve student

132

self-confidence, and assists in improving the students’ chances of graduating within four to
six years. However, for Summer Bridge programs to be effective, institutions must first
identify freshmen deemed most at-risk who plan to enroll in the Fall, and develop a
rigorous academic program aimed at improving their math, reading, English, and
engagement skills. To be effective, students must be engaged with their advisors, be exposed
to campus resources and participate in workshops focused on improving their time
management, note taking, test taking and study skills.

Although funding is an impediment to some HBCUs in planning Bridge programs, if
planned properly, the programs can provide students with an opportunity to utilize their
financial aid for summer school and enroll in credit-bearing general education courses.
Institutions should also consider federal and private competitive grants for assisting
underprepared, first generation, and minority students. Agencies, such as the National
Science Foundation (NSF), offer grants on a competitive basis to assist minority students
prepare for careers in Science Technology Engineering and Mathematics (STEM). In
addition, there are also grants to attract and increase the number and success of students in
specific majors. Whether the funding is by the institution or from external sources, the long-
term loss of revenue from attrition, in the first and second-year at most institutions requires
careful study on the opportunity cost of not developing a Bridge program for underprepared
students (Benchmark: Florida State University).

Improving Remedial/ Developmental Education Programs

The mission of HBCUs requires that they not only enroll a higher percentage of
students who need remediation in math, English, and reading, but also provide resources to
support their transition to college-level courses. Nationally, close to 20 % of all incoming
freshmen are in need of some form of remediation due to poor high school preparation for
the college experience. This has created several debates at the state and federal level on a
need to reform the K-16 education system. The debates have focused on improving the
preparation of high school students for the college experience, reducing the cost associated
with remediation to students at four-year institutions, and limiting or removing remediation
from four-year public colleges. HBCUs must be mindful of these reforms and develop and

133

implement scientifically sound remedial programs geared towards helping students identify
their weaknesses and develop programs to quickly assist students progress for the general
education curriculum.

Ensuring that remedial students acquire the academic skills to persist towards
graduation requires finding creative avenues to strengthen existing remedial programs and
developing effective methods for shoring up student skills in math, English, and reading.
Once the programs are implemented, academic progress for remedial students cannot be left
to chance. Instructors must continuously assess students progress and leverage resources to
improve their performance outcomes. To ensure that instructors are meeting performance
expectations, continuous assessment is necessary to determine if students are equipped with
the necessary skills to perform adequately in the next sequence of courses.

Whatever the assessment methods used, there is a range of technology that can assist
in the diagnosis of student deficiencies and help improve specific content areas and skill
sets. If institutions have an interest in pursuing this strategy, they should develop
mathematics, English, and reading labs equipped with diagnostic software and teaching aids.
These tools help students identify areas of deficiency and help students improve their
performance in key critical areas. Many of these tools provide information to instructors on
intervention strategies for each student, based on the diagnosis and provides self-paced
English, math, and reading exercises. These tools, used effectively with class activities, can
be instrumental in helping students overcome some of their deficiencies, and improve their
confidence for the next level courses.

However, central to reshaping and improving remediation is leadership. Leadership
requires accountability in performance through ongoing review and evaluation of the
effectiveness of the program. It also requires development of performance goals and
learning outcomes, the establishment of performance benchmarks, the development of a data
and assessment mechanism, and the systematic review of established performance metrics.
Once the information is generated, it is important that there are analyses and discussions
with all individuals and departments involved in the remedial programs.

Reshaping how remedial courses are taught and monitoring students progress to the
next-level course is essential to improving students confidence and the institution’s ability to

134

implement strategies geared towards increasing the students success. The following
suggestions are vital to assisting students in remedial courses persist to degree completion:

1. Develop, through the summer Bridge program, an action plan inclusive of the mandatory
diagnosis of deficiencies in math, English, and reading.

2. Use the student’s math, English, and reading results to develop an improvement plan for
each student.

3. Align remedial math and English outcomes with college-level courses, and provide
supplemental instruction in all remedial math, English, and reading courses.

4. Train remedial course instructors and first-year faculty on how to further improve the
classroom experience for remedial students.

5. Develop a remedial education advisory committee, with representation from students,
faculty and staff.

6. Create a program where successful local high school teachers and adult educators are
brought in to assist with teaching of remedial classes.

7. Develop clear policies on students who have not performed satisfactorily in remedial
classes.

8. Create an evaluation plan for remedial programs (Benchmark: Florida State University,
Washington State University).

In addition to students enrolled in developmental courses, institutions must identify
their conditionally admitted population (ACT & GPA below the minimum requirement or
matrix of indices) as well. Many of these students have similar characteristics and often
times are the same students enrolled in remedial courses. The success of conditionally
admitted students begins with their first contact with an academic advisor who assists with
their development by establishing performance goals for the students during their first-year.
It is essential that the academic support center work, in tandem with the rest of the university
community, in developing programs aimed at improving student critical thinking skills, self-
efficacy toward learning, and self-confidence in key areas such as mathematics, English, and

135

reading. It is also essential that there is collaboration with other units in helping students
become engaged with peers and faculty, teaching them how to navigate online resources,
helping them find relevant offices, buildings, and individuals in the campus community who
can assist in resolving their concerns quickly.

Entering College: Orientation and the First Week

Once students are accepted by the institution and pay their enrollment fees, they
should be immediately assigned a first-year advisor. Once informed of their advisees,
advisors should utilize Skype, Facebook, Twitter, telephone, online multimedia
presentations, web conferencing, and online chats to engage students and outline
performance expectations. These interactions should be used to provide answers to parents’
concerns regarding orientation, and the registration, and advising process. For students and
their families attending summer orientation, this level of interaction provides families with
information up-to-date plan ahead, keep up to date on critical information, get a better
understanding of the school culture and programs, and connect with individuals and offices
that can assist in enhancing their experience at the institution.

Orientation

Orientation programs provide opportunities for the s to showcase to students and
parents their ability to provide the resources needed to strengthen student academic and
professional development. It is an ideal time for students to complete their placement exams,
register for classes, meet their advisors, tour the campus, meet faculty and staff within their
majors, and socialize with members of their cohort. It is also an ideal time to obtain
information on financial aid, parking decals, meal plans and housing, class schedules,
tuition, and support services. Undecided students can use the exercise to learn about
academic and professional opportunities and resources on the campus that can assist them in
determining their major.

Creating the perception of flawless customer service and providing accurate
information, are key elements to a successful orientation exercise. It is the institution’s
responsibility to ensure that both parents and students complete this experience confident
that their questions are answered correctly or that they have the contact information for

136

departments and individuals who can assist in the future. Too much information at once or
too little information leads to further confusion, if the students and parents are unable to
complete and understand key requirements to enter the freshman year. To facilitate the
transition, it is important for institutions to develop the following:

1. Develop an orientation web page that includes resources for students, parents and faculty.
The web page should include a checklist sheet, frequently answered questions, housing,
financial aid and contact information to key offices and staff, student services and student
life, social network links, important dates, application forms, testing information, orientation
schedules, learning communities, course catalogs, and all campus resources needed require
by freshmen.

2. Provide information in both online and paper format as well as student, and parent
handbooks.

3. Collaborate with departments and schools to develop engagement programs for students
to connect with faculty and faculty within their majors.

4. Ensure that each student is assigned an advisor once they confirm the invitation to attend
the institution, and develop a medium through which contact can made before and during
orientation.

5. Collaborate with the admissions, financial aid, registrar’s office and the health center, in
ensuring students complete all requirements for enrollment before arriving for orientation. If
all the required documents are not updated, develop an information system that informs
students of missing documents prior to their arrival for orientation.

6. Provide contact information for the respective advisors and their group of potential
advisees on the orientation web page.

7. Provide updated parent information booklets in online and pager contact information
online and paper format.

8. Provide easy step by step instruction for using the student information system.

137

9. Develop a cadre of trained student leaders/peer advisors to assist with customer service
and the registration process during the orientation exercise.

10. Develop a self-registration model to engage students with self-registration, after they
have completed their placement exams.

11. Develop fun filled activities that promote critical thinking, encourage team work, and an
increased understanding of the institution.

12. Provide a separate orientation program for transfer, international, non-traditional, and
adult students. Each group has different requirements, therefore, providing separate
orientation information for each group in paper form and on the web page will better assist
with their transition (Benchmark: University of Alabama & The University of Texas-
Dallas).

Several HBCUs have developed summer orientation programs that allow students to
have their orientation activities complete at specific dates prior to their Fall enrollment. This
allows first-year students and their parents easy access to offices and personnel that support
their transition to the institution. While these activities have proven to be successful on
many campuses, it requires long term planning and cooperation from all areas of the
institution. Having an assigned orientation coordinator is critical to this process, because it
centralizes short and long-term planning, so that the respective orientation committees can
plan a program that showcases the best the institution has to offer. (Benchmarks: University
of South Carolina).

As students pass through the orientation process, it is vital for institutions to begin
the development of critical thinking skills and setting expectations for the classroom through
a first-year summer reading project. With the majority of incoming freshman spending less
than 10 hours per week reading for pleasure during their senior year in high school, there is
an urgent need to help students develop an appreciation for literature through reading and
book discussions during their orientation and the first two weeks of classes. The selected
books can be tied to research and class themes infused with blogs, films, poetry, drama,
small group discussions, and presentations, culminating with the visit of authors to discuss
their work. This type of exercise encourages students to be engaged early in the pursuit of

138

knowledge, and is pivotal to integrating intellectual development and technology across the
first-year curriculum. Expanding the reading project across the first-year experience will not
only help freshmen develop their critical thinking skills, but also improve reading and
comprehension skills in freshman history, psychology, and other liberal arts courses, that
require extensive reading and comprehension skills.

Transitioning to the College Campus

Transitioning to the campus is an extremely difficult time for freshmen and their
parents. This is particularly taxing for students entering HBCUs, who have never attended
an institution with a large Black population, have lived in predominantly white
neighborhoods all their lives, and have never left their state or local communities.
Identifying and helping these students along with those who are shy and introverted to
become engaged within the campus environment is essential to their transition. These
responsibilities cannot be left to the first-year programs only, but must be a part of the
institution's vision. Presidential leadership ensures that the president’s cabinet, residential
life, dining facilities, academic departments, campus security, health and counseling
services, student activities, student support and advising units get involved to ensure that
every student is contacted during the first two weeks on campus. This helps resolve many
issues students may have and fosters a welcoming environment in which the students feel at
home. This is essential in satisfying the parents’ emotions, and helps the students overcome
the initial shock of leaving home.

Having the freshmen arrive a few days before the general population on campus is
essential to implementing programs that help students become acquainted with the college
environment. Engagement geared programs must be structured to assist students develop the
skills needed to assist in their transition to the college environment. It must provide
opportunities for first-year students to interact with their curriculum, become familiar with
using the student information system, and develop an understanding of the registration,
financial aid and, the advising process and four-year graduation planning. It is also an
opportunity to teach small groups of students how to manage their newfound freedom,
through small workshops on time management and management, studying and note taking,
conflict resolution and relationship building, sex, HIV/AIDS awareness and alcoholism.

139

Once the semester begins, the Vice President of Academic Affairs should work
collaboratively with faculty in ensuring that students have a graded activity within the first
two weeks. Students who are underperforming or not attending classes should be alerted for
intervention by faculty, student support services, and all academic and non-academic areas
that impact students. Underperforming freshmen should be referred to tutoring, introduced
to supplemental instruction, and provided with counseling, where appropriate. Continuous
monitoring of all freshmen, particularly those identified as at-risk and those
underperforming in the first two weeks, should continue until mid-semester where each
student GPA is evaluated. Once mid-semester GPAs are evaluated, students with GPAs less
than 2.5 should be contacted for academic counselors.

At the end of the semester, a GPA analysis is essential for all first-time freshmen to
identify students on academic probation or warning and those who fail to return to the
institution. Students placed on academic probation or performing below the GPA threshold
must be contacted by their academic advisors for counseling, and be required to attend
mandatory workshops aimed at improving academic performance. Students experiencing
academic difficulties should be provided with academic counseling and a plan to return to
good academic standing the next semester, with the help of a specialized academic advisor.

The Role of Effective First Year Advising/Coaching

According to Cuseo (2003), academic advisors are in an ideal position than any other
academic support personnel to connect with students. However, it is the effectiveness of the
advising process that helps determines the academic and professional development of the
students. Quality advising practices, however, must have distinct hallmarks. It requires
frequent face-to-face interaction with first-year students, assisting students in identifying
their strengths and weaknesses, connecting students to campus resources, developing four-
year graduation goals and performance expectations with students, and continuously
monitoring students academic performance. The impact of these practices is far reaching,
and the extent of the positive interactions that advisors have with students helps determine
whether a student leaves or stays (Tinto, 1993).

One of the key factors contributing to poor advising is the lack of consensus about
the role and function of advisors. Great advising programs recognize that advising is not an

140

isolated process; it is an integral part of the retention effort and is rooted in the strong
relationship between the advising programs and the various departments on each campus.
Creating a culture in which advisors can effectively collaborate with support programs such
as the admissions office, TRIO Special Programs, career services, testing, orientation,
academic support, athletics, the registrar’s office, and sophomore experience program, is
crucial for advisors to fulfill their mandate. Their effectiveness however, requires
administrative leadership in making advising a priority by committing the resources needed
to develop a successful program.

Whether the success or failure in retaining first-year students is due to resources,
management or administrative policies, the success of first year advising to student success
requires a closer look at the advising philosophy. First-year advising is a teaching process
where first-year students are taught how to take ownership of their academic development,
understand the institution’s programs and policies, and how to follow their progress to
graduation. This process begins once the student accepts the enrollment letter, continues
during the summer orientating and registering process, and mushrooms when the student
arrives on campus. Once the student arrives on campus, an atmosphere must be created that
is conducive for the student to have meaningful discussions about their career path and
issues that may impact their college experience.

It is important for advisors to continue creating an atmosphere that encourages
students to see their advisors throughout the semester. Developing an efficient system that
reduces long lines and wait time, and providing adequate time to engage each student on a
personal level is essential to the process. Improving this process requires the utilization of
phone and online appointments during peak and non-peak periods of registration, thereby
reducing the flow of students with minor inquiries. Improving this process requires the
development of online counseling, frequently asked questions, online and Skype chats, and
office processes capable of providing quick questions and feedback. These processes will
greatly prevent advisors from being overwhelmed so that they can spend longer time
engaging in one-and-one interaction with students who need more individualized attention.

Hiring knowledgeable, friendly and student-oriented advising staff that understands
the needs of students is important to the process. Knowledgeable staff utilizes student

141

information to identify early at-risk characteristics, and develop relationships that will
positively impact students over time. As the number of contacts and communication
between first-time, at-risk freshmen and advisors increases, advisors will be better able to
identify students’ academic and professional motivation, examine student success in
transitioning to the institutional environment, and recommend services to improve their
success. This level of personalized interaction supports each student needs.

The importance of advising to improving the retention of first-year students requires
that HBCUs play closer attention to the quality of advising on the respective campuses.
Examining the quality and effectiveness of first-year advising entails careful review of the
following:

1. Advisor professional development, demonstrated by the number of workshops, National
Academic Advising Association (NCADA) conferences, participation in and conducting
cross- training activities on courses and degree requirements.

2. Patterns of student flow through the advising center throughout the school year.

3. Number of undeclared students declaring a major, the time taken to declare the major, the
performance of students accepted on conditionally admitted status, the performance of first-
generation students, and the performance of African American males and students taking
remedial courses.

4. Advisors knowledge of best advising practices in higher education and practices at
benchmark institutions.

5. Four-year graduation strategies for individual students. This will require teaching students
about their curriculum, pre-requisites, class selection and registration process, and their roles
in managing their program of study, and its impact on their career path.

6. Student assessment of the quality of the services received and the utilization of data to
continuously improve the processes within the advising center.

7. The time allocated per student, especially those deemed at-risk, throughout the semester.

9. The provisions made for non-traditional students.

142

10. The development of an interactive and informative advising webpage and social network
to make advising information more accessible to students and parents.

11. Advisor workload and the student to advisor ratio.

12. The automation of the advising system to include a self-help advisor, online advisor
tools, appointment and tracking tools, and identifying students at-risk.

13. The peer advisor/ peer mentoring program.

14. The communication strategy between advisors and their students throughout the year.
Programs must examine how they can better integrate Smartphone technology, text
messages, Banner, Blackboard, blogs, e-mails, live chats, video conferencing, Facebook and
AccuTrack for communication and online consultations.

15. The interaction between first-year students and their majors.

16. The first three to six weeks, mid semester and final semester assessment of students
performance.

17. FERPA strategy for seeking parental assistance in encouraging and supporting
persistence to graduation.

The First Year Seminar

The first-year seminar when used effectively sets the tone for student assimilation
into the college environment. Successful first-year seminars provide opportunities to
integrate academic performance, professional development and social integration. It
generates opportunities within the curriculum for students to become engaged through topics
covering global awareness and diversity, domestic violence and anger management, the
judicial system, race and race relations, and health/wellness. Well-planned first-year
seminars should address stress management, sexuality, drugs and alcoholism, money
management/management, leadership, note taking and study skills, extracurricular
engagement, class absenteeism, academic and social engagement, academic integrity, dress
code and classroom etiquette. It should also become the medium to begin engaging students
in portfolio development, career and personal development, professional decor, internship,

143

and job prospects after college. These topics should not be conducted in a lecture style
setting, but formal and semi-formal small class discussions (15-25) aimed at developing
students critical thinking, writing, reading, and communication skills.

An inquiry-based approach that integrates first-year seminars with learning
communities, mentoring, career services center, faculty, staff and students from the
respective majors, computer services and service learning, sets the tone for engagement
inside and outside of the classroom. Successful interdisciplinary integration, however,
requires continuous review of the first-year curriculum by the seminar instructors, students,
and all relevant academic support departments. This is necessary to ensure that the topics
presented are relevant and determined through assessment is effective in helping students
assimilate into the campus environment and enhance their persistence to the sophomore
year.

Achieving this requires that first-year instructors understand the learning styles of
the students and getting them involved early in the classes. Technology integration is a vital
part of this process, because generation Xers relate better to the topics presented that are
connected to their experiences in a multimedia environment. This level of integration
provides opportunities to improve the student’s communication skills, allowing them to
become more engaged in the classroom. With free cloud applications, such as second life,
multimedia packages, video conferencing, online portfolio, Facebook, Twitter and Flicker,
blogs, and Blackboard there are ample opportunities for instructors and students to become
more creative and engaged in the classroom. Technology integration also provides
opportunities for students to develop online skills, and increase their peer-to peer-
interaction.

Technology integration is one of the challenges instructors of first-year seminars
must overcome to get first-year students to consistently attend and become engaged
involved in class. Class attendance for freshman seminars or any other class is essential to
improving class performance, the development of attendance policies tied to letter grades
and enforced on a consistent basis by faculty and staff. However, having a policy is not
enough, unless students are told the consequences of not attending classes, are informed that
instructors are taking attendance on a consistent basis, and there is an alert system that relays

144

the information to residential, student support, advisors and as a last resort their parents, if
FERPA waivers are available.

To ensure dialogue and continuous improvement in the first-year experience
program, first year seminar coordinators should examine their courses annually using the
following questions:

1. Is the first-year seminar assisting students to integrate academically and socially into the
school community, and are they learning about the institution’s culture and tradition through
this medium?

2. Do the students consider the topics discussed stimulating, interesting, interactive,
engaging, and relevant to their needs?

3. Does the syllabus allow for discussion on diversity and accommodate the experiences of
traditional, nontraditional, gays and lesbians, and multicultural students?

4. Does the seminar create opportunities for in and out of class engagement activities
between teachers and students?

5. Is the syllabus continuously revised to reflect the needs of the students and the university?

6. Are faculty and staff members teaching freshmen seminars in tune with student
expectations and experiences, current student college experiences, and issues current
students encounter during the start of their college careers?

7. Is there collaboration between faculty members from the respective majors and first-year
staff in developing freshman seminars?

8. Do faculty and staff see the seminars relevant? Are they excited about the idea of teaching
freshmen seminars?

9. Are faculty and staff motivated to think outside of the box in creating programs to
improve course content and delivery, and are their suggestions implemented?

145

Learning and Living Communities

First year student decision to leave a university hinges on their social interaction or
lack of it. They are impacted by their ability to develop meaningful opportunities for
meeting compatible friends, have comfortable living arrangement, and utilize instructional
and informal support such as course relationship and tutors. The support structure acts as a
buffer in stressful situations and creates an emotional support system equivalent to family
members (Wilcox, Win, Fyvie-Gauld, 2005). The extent to which they interact with their
peers in the dining room, residential halls and through extracurricular activities impacts their
ability to connect to a concern individual. However, it is their ability to create a balance as
they interact between the academic and social domain that student will able to maintain the
academic performance necessary to remain at the institution (Tinto, 1993). The level of
interaction and engagement is highest when it is cultivated in the learning environment,
therefore, the use of collaborative learning techniques, and the application of higher-order
cognitive activities in the classroom has to be prompted. Faculty should, enhance the
interaction with and among students, challenging students academically, and value enriching
educational experiences so that the student will become engaged and connected in and out of
the classroom (Umback & Wawrzynski, 2007).

Learning communities (LC) are a valuable method for first-year students to be
engaged socially with faculty and their peers in the classroom and in the residential living
environment. Successful LC programs aim to increase first-year retention by engaging
students through a common theme. They are effective when there are collaborations with
residential life, academic support, service learning, and community activities. Collaborations
allow students within a common discipline to have meaningful relationship with peers and
faculty by attending two or more classes together and living in the same residential hall.
This creates an environment for students to interact around common themes, core classes, or
activities outside of the classroom. Guided organized interaction helps develop friendships
and interactions, improves students’ connection to the institution, and enhances the desire of
students to stay at the university beyond the freshman year (Tinto, 2000) (Benchmark: Iowa
State University).

146

There are challenges that several institutions must overcome before the learning
community concept can be developed. However, when done successfully, it will have a
major impact on the freshman to sophomore retention rate and student leadership
development. Overcoming these challenges will require collaborative partnerships with the
following departments across the university:

1. Registrar. Course offering and scheduling, protection of blocks of courses, class location,
accommodation for students with extracurricular activities (Athletics, band, choir etc).

2. Enrollment Management. Marketing and transitioning students to the university and
learning communities.

3. Testing Services. Providing students with pre-testing and retesting information.

4. Orientation and Advising. Assisting students enroll in the correct cluster of classes.

5. Academic Support and Counseling. Testing students for deficiencies, assessing student’s
educational needs, developing transition courses, developing strategies to correct
deficiencies, and developing early intervention system.

6. Faculty. Participation in course development, collaborative teaching, advising and
mentoring, and creating an environment that fosters critical thinking. They will be expected
to collaborate with student affairs professionals in developing programs outside of the
classroom.

7. Residential Life. Developing and managing the living learning community and residential
life education programs.

8. Student Mentors. To assist in peer to peer mentoring, out of class activities, and faculty
and student engagement.

9. Student Activities. The development of learning community social activities.

10. Faculty & Staff Development and Training. Develop cross curriculum instruction and
the training of staff and student mentors.

147

11. Project Coordinator. Administer all aspects of the program by collaborating with
freshmen experience and living and learning community. This will be important in
conducting analysis and developing research, developing and implementing strategic plans,
and collaborating across all departments in implementation and evaluation.

12. Chief Information Officer. The development of e-learning through the use of technology
to develop online learning community, and the utilization of technology in the classroom.

13. Vice President of Academic Affairs. Selecting first-year faculty, developing faculty
incentives, collaboration with deans and chairs in selecting ideal faculty members for
learning communities, and approving budget, direct and approved strategic policy changes
to meet the requirements of the learning community.

14. A Steering/Advisory Committee. Advice the project and help the college community
understand and buy into the project, publish the project, and provide valuable feedback for
implementation.

15. Institutional Research & Planning. Implementation of the assessment plan and analysis
of learning outcomes.

Residential life plays an integral part in the success of learning communities. The
success of residential communities is dependent on a trained staff that understands the
concept of a learning community, is willing to collaborate with faculty, academic support
services and first- year experience in developing programs that engages students throughout
the school year. The training of area coordinators and residential hall managers is essential
to the process, because not only must they understand the objective of the learning
community but they must be able to work collaboratively with academic success services.
This collaboration requires the identification and counseling of students at-risk students, and
providing services to meet the needs of residents.

Student Leadership/Peer Mentoring

Mentoring is a key component in transferring the skills and modeling behavior that
creates the social environment conducive for learning and professional development (Key,
2003). Key (2003) emphasizes that mentoring assists the institution by providing positive

148

experiences for the student when he/she leave the institution (Tinto, 1993). A strong
mentoring program, demonstrates to students that there are individuals who care about their
needs at the institution, and they can become more comfortable aligning their goals with that
of the institution. Peer-to-peer and faculty-to-students mentoring helps create a nurturing
environment, and provides students with increasing levels of psychosocial support. This
allows incoming freshmen to meet and interact with exceptional students and instructors
whose actions they can emulate. According to Bank, Slaving & Biddle (1990), protégés
tend to pattern the level of behavior and action of a positive peer, which can significantly
influences, the student’s decision to persist. It is, however, the expectations and standards set
by peers that have the strongest effect on student persistence to the sophomore year.

Any mentoring program that is developed to target first time freshmen must be
aimed at providing each admitted freshman with a trained peer mentor/student leader that
will assist them in meeting their academic, personal, and social skills throughout their
freshman year. For the program to be effective, it is important to develop a cadre of trained
student leaders/peer mentors to engage in leadership roles. Developing a pool of student
leaders starts by formulating a strong recruiting program targeting students, who are
involved in extracurricular activities, demonstrate maturity and leadership traits, are trained
in the institution’s policies and procedures, and understands the advising and registration
processes, and trained in customer service. Once trained, student mentors can assist
freshmen adapt to the college environment, provide peer advising and orientation assistance,
assist with tutoring and study groups, and assists with first-year activities planning
(Benchmark University of Louisville & The Ohio State University).

Peer mentors are also ideal for assisting first-year seminar instructors within their
major. Assigning a peer mentor to each first-year seminar provides an opportunity for peer
mentors to work alongside and assist faculty in helping first-year students make the
transition to the academic and social environment. Peer mentors are ideal for creating and
facilitating electronic learning communities that integrate Facebook, Twitter, blogs, video
conferencing, text messaging, and instant messaging. Their assistance is important in
developing a highly interactive social and academic environment within the classroom and
create opportunities for students to learn more about relationships, financial management

149

self-control and career development. (Benchmark: Georgia Tech, University of Tennessee
Knoxville & Alabama A & M University)

Addressing African American Male Students in the First Year Experience

During the past decade, there were several forums and discussion held about the
disproportionate academic performance of African American males in comparison to Black
females and other ethnic groups by K-16 administrators, policymakers, campus leaders,
legislators, African American leaders, legislators, and student groups. African American
males disproportionally under achieve in all areas of education and their performances are
reflected in the graduation average of under 30 percent at HBCUs. The graduation rates of
African American males lag behind close to 10 points below African American women at
HBCUs and in higher education they lag 10 percent below Hispanics men and nearly twenty
points below white males, making them the ethnic group with the lowest graduation
percentage (NCES, 2010). Their low retention rate is a significant contributor to the overall
low-retention rates at HBCUs, but institutions fail to highlight retention by gender in their
reporting.

There are many who believe that the performance of Black males in higher education
is because they have greater difficulties than African American females and white students
in adjusting to the rigors of higher education, but not enough is done to manage their
academic career and improve their graduation rates (Davis, 1999; Cuyjet, 2006). There are
many who believe that contributing to this disparity is the commitment of African American
males to engage in their academic pursuit. According to Harper, Briggs, & Hayet (2004),
there is an evolution in the engagement of the sexes at HBCUs, with more women
increasing their engement in the classroom and in devoting more time to their academic
pursuits. The retention and graduation outcome for African American men at HBCUs is
indicating that they are spending less time reading, studying, and preparing for classes, than
their female counterparts, are extending less effort in meeting instructor’s expectations, and
are spending less time preparing for classes. African American men are also less likely to be
involved in campus activities and student organizations and do not read student news
bulletins and campus communications (Cuyjet, 1997).

150

Improving the retention and graduation rates of African American males requires
addressing the factors impacting their persistence in first-year experience programs. To be
successful, institutions should attempt to utilize the network of mothers, family members,
support groups, and individuals of influence in the students’ life to keep male students
focused on their development. Institutions should also focus on implementing male only first
year seminars, learning communities, and develop continuous quality improvement
strategies aimed on improving first-year retention and graduation of Black males.

During the past decade, there have been state sponsored Black male intuitive
programs in Georgia and New York. There also a few are campus and national organizations
that have made efforts to develop programs aimed at developing African American male
students and bringing their issues to the forefront at their respective organizations. The
verdict on the effectiveness of these programs, on the overall graduation rates of African
American men at the institutions is still out, but their success is worth watching. The most
notable programs are:

1. The Fisk University Fellows: Run by male faculty and staff members aimed at providing
training to young men on issues relating to diversity, etiquette and masculinity (fisk.edu,
2007).

2. The Morgan’s Mile: Morgan State University program that teaches leadership to African
American males (Morgan.edu, 2007).

3. A Few Good Men (AFGM) and the Gentlemen Scholars Program at Howard University:
This creates a framework to develop black males with talent and leadership through mentor
and male development and guides them to graduation (Howard.edu, 2007).

4. Student African American Brotherhood (SAAB): This organization has established
chapters on various campuses. Through SAAB, Black males are asked to raise their
commitment to academic excellence, participate in community service, instill leadership
traits, and organize study sessions with the purpose of building leadership and academic
discipline (SAAB.org, 2007).

5. The University of Georgia System, African American Initiative program: This program is
designed to identify issues impacting obstacles to African American participation in higher

151

education in Georgia. Programs are developed to strengthen learning communities, and
improve admission and retention of Black males in higher education (USG, 2005).

6. The Black male initiatives at Hampton University.

7. The African American program at Philander Smith College.

Irrespective of the administrative position taken in addressing black male graduation
and retention at HBCUs, each institution must reflect on their effort to engage African
American males and promote graduation and academic success at their respective campuses.
In order to effectively address the plight of Black males on each campus, it is essential that
administrators reflect on the following:

What is the first to sophomore and sophomore to junior year retention rate for African
American males at your institution?

2. What are the fourth, fifth, and six year graduation rates for African American males on
your campus?

3. Is the first-year experience addressing the socio-economic, cultural and social problems
faced by African American males?

4. Are there discussions with the male population on how to get more in tune with their
academic and professional development?

5. Are advisors trained on issues affecting African American males and on how to address
their assimilation into the college environment?

6. Are there male advisors and counselors assisting in the development of programs and
workshops aimed at African American men?

7. How open is the campus community to programs targeting African American males?

8. Are campus-wide, continuous improvement strategies applied to services and programs
that have the greatest impact on African American male attrition?

9. What is the level of campus engagement of African American males in campus
leadership, and improving the first-year student academic experience?

152

Technology and the First-Year Experience

First-year students are entering the classroom with the expectations of taking the
path of least resistance to achieve their educational goals. They want the teaching and
learning to be quick, easy and fun, and instructors to be entertaining. These perceptions,
along with their high school preparation, adversely impact their perception about school, and
their motivation to learn new ideas. In addition, they also have challenges studying and
managing their time, and do not have a keen appetite for reading. These attitudes and habits
run counter to their instructor’s beliefs and so the students typically experience a culture
shock when they enter the college environments, trying to follow the path of least resistance
in passing a course (Leamson, 2004). On the other hand, they come to college with multiple
devices and are extremely comfortable working in online and multimedia environments and
are in tune with music, fashion, cars and the latest fads. They expect instructors to be
familiar with the technology and to be able to develop interactive activities that tie their
experiences in to the classroom (Wilson, 2004).

The students expect faculty to bring technology into the classroom to create an
interactive web-driven atmosphere. They are expecting hybrid classes that utilize lecture
capture that will allow them to tune into lectures after classes are over or link to classes
while they are in session, through their multimedia devices. Students are also expecting
more classes and assignments online, course content, class discussions and assignments tied
to multimedia presentations and video streaming within the online environment. Bringing
first-year students to perform at that level and becoming continuously engaged in their own
learning experiences require that instructors provide the opportunity for students to
challenge themselves and maximize their strengths. Bringing students to that level also
requires that instructors learn to teach this generation of students, by readjusting their
pedagogy to get the students attention, and motivating their students to learn (Leamson,
2004).

In addition, instructors must try to understand the barriers many African American
students face in their learning environment and make an effort to develop effective strategies
to keep the students engaged. This might require moving the focus from taking a test and
getting a passing grade, to convincing them of the importance of learning the information.

153

Motivating-first year students to learn is an art that first-year faculty must learn, and
instructors must continuously challenge themselves to look at innovative ways of teaching,
in order to improve the level of engagement and interaction required to stimulate the
students' intellectual development (Leamson, 2004).

Getting first-year faculty buy-in and involvement in developing strategies to improve
the students’ social, and communications skills, is essential to this process. With faculty
buy-in institutions can begin enforcing dress codes and attendance policies, integrate
technology in the classroom, improve critical thinking skills, developing writing and
speaking skills through discussions and dialogue within the classroom, integrate Meta
cognitions skills and develop pedagogical strategies conducive to improving the classroom
environment. Once the faculty is engaged, first year experience directors can seek faculty
involvement in developing early alert programs to evaluate students during the first two to
six weeks of the first semester, and design proactive intervention plans to assist at-risks
students. Success, however, hinges on ensuring that first-year students focus on the college
environment by getting regular and frequent feedbacks from exams and assignments. This
not only helps in providing feedback to the instructors about their effectiveness, but it helps
identify students who are having problems adjusting to the college environment.
(Benchmark: University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee: Mississippi State University).

Parental Involvement and the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA).

The role of parents in the lives of their young adults is integral to their academic
success. More than half of students entering HBCUs are from single mother led homes and
are instrumental to the student’s upbringing. Close to half of the mothers have some kind of
college experience and are deeply involved in the life of their young adults. In most homes,
mothers are the authority figures and play the most critical role in monitoring the student’s
social activities and academic performance activities from middle to high school. Once the
student is enrolled, parents expect higher education institutions to continue the high school
trend of providing all information about their young adults. They are adamant that paying
for their child’s tuition provides them the right to all information regarding their
sons/daughters. Most school officials, though sympathetic to the parent’s dilemma, fail to
notify parents on any issue due to the fear associated with violation of FERPA. FERPA,

154

however, gives designated school officials specific rights in sharing information with
parents about students over 18, without the student’s consent.

School officials can share information under the following rules;

1. The student is claimed as a dependent for taxes.

2. There are health or security issues involving the child.

3. The child under 21 has violated the law or policy related to alcohol possession or
substance abuse (ed.gov, 2010).

Most institutions have FERPA release forms to protect their legal rights in releasing
academic information to parents. When signed, permission release forms must to be coded
and made available in the student information system for designed school official use. If this
cannot be done through the student management system, a central repository, such as the
registrar or legal office, should develop a database that provides information to only
designated school officials through a secured portal. Having this information in a secure
gateway is critical to ensuring that all resources are available to designated faculty and staff,
and the student’s information is protected. The success of such programs, however, is
dependent an early an alert system that identifies student social behavior and academic
performance from the first two weeks of the semester through to the end of the school year.
This ensures that the student grades are not only monitored, but there is parent and family
input in improving the success of at-risk students.

First-Year Assessment

At the end of the semester academic year, a freshman performance report should be
tabulated for evaluation. The report should include, average GPA, numbers of students on
academic probation, freshman to sophomore retention by sex, at-risk groups and African
American males. Faculty, in association with institutional research the number of absences
reported, performance in remedial classes, class dropout rate, D & F ratio performance of
students with three or more reported absences, performance of students on probation,
average GPA of regular, conditional admits and other risk groups, average GPA of African
American males and retention rates and compared to other students groups. It is also

155

noteworthy that institutional research generates first-year satisfaction surveys to cover a
range of experiences from the admission process, first-year seminars, course evaluations,
registration, advising and academic support, residential life and service learning, learning
communities, and freshman engagement, satisfaction, and attitudes.

In addition to first-year surveys, it is essential that informal and formal town hall
meetings are conducted each semester between freshmen, their representatives and
administrators to develop and improve processes that impact the first-year experience. In
order for the results of the assessment to be effective, it is essential that administrators and
department heads conduct town hall style meetings with all individuals who have contact
with first-year students to review the assessment results. The focus of the discussions should
be on the results of the assessments and strategies for continuous improvement. Listed
below are commercially available assessment tools for acquiring information on first-year
students.

Cooperative Institutional Research Program (CIRP) Freshman Survey: Provides a range of
information on student characteristics and social information on incoming freshmen.

National Freshman Attitude Survey (Noel Levitz): This survey highlights the attitudes and
motivations of first-year students at the beginning of the undergraduate experience.

College Student Inventory (CSI) by Noel Levitz: It measures students satisfaction with
quality of student life and learning.

National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE): This survey assesses how involved
students are in practices associated with high levels of learning (Swing, 2004).

Institutions can also develop their unique first-year opinion surveys to reflect their
assessment and strategic plans. This helps improves the ability of the institution to
understand its first-year students.

Conclusion

A successful first year program at HBCUs requires collaborative planning by all
units that impact first-year students. This necessary to ensure that students and parents

156

witness a flawless system that is focus on service and four-year graduation. The tables
below list many of the elements that are need for a successful first year experience program.

Figure 13. Element of a Successful First Year Program

Sophomore transition strategy Social network and social Strategy to improve critical
that begins prior to transition integration program thinking, mathematics,
reading, writing and speaking

Presidential support Coordinated remedial program Diagnostic laboratories for
math, reading and writing

Defined remedial performance Developed tutorial program Social network and social
measures integration program

Measure of progress beyond Four-year graduation program First generation, conditional
remediation admits and nontraditional
students program

Advisor training and evaluation Advisor recognition and First year assessment program
reward

Program for undecided majors Career development and Academic support workshops
electronic portfolio

Advisor training and evaluation Three to four meetings between Extracurricular activities and
advisors and students intramurals for first year
students

Program for identifying and Advisor recognition and Frequent meetings between
counseling underperforming reward first year staff and faculty
students

Constant review of freshman Reward program for top A continuous improvement
success curriculum performing staff and faculty program

First-year steering committee Dedicated first year Parental partnership through
instructors
parent groups or association

Web page dedicated to first-year Web page with orientation Parent handbook and

157

students information established FERPA policy

System for tracking mid A reading across the first year A dedicated online
semester and final semester GPA curriculum program community through
Facebook, blogs etc.

Early alert system and a first Learning communities and Freshman seminars with
three weeks strategy freshman residential halls defined learning outcomes

Step by step orientation, First-year mentoring program Early involvement with the
advising, and registration guide with faculty and student major and continuous
mentors dialogue with the academic
departments

Easy access to academic course A well-developed data driven Leadership programs. Peer to
calendar, academic and calendars action plan with defined peer and faculty engagement
benchmarks activities outside of the
classroom

Accessible contact information An outcome base assessment Advisor training and
for key personnel strategy that monitors student development
engagement

Friendly and customer driven Training and development A core of educated and
staff program for faculty & staff informed advisors

158

Chapter VII

Transitioning Students from the Sophomore Year to Graduation

Introduction

HBCUs, like most higher education institutions loose between 15 to 20 percent of
their students from the sophomore to the junior year at considerable cost to the institution
and the students. High freshman to sophomore retention rate is an indication of weak first-
year experience programs, which generally translates to weak sophomore retention.
Improving cohort retention and graduation in the lower divisions requires a commitment of
resources, to not only improve the retention of the freshman class, but assist sophomores in
making the transition to the junior year as well. Achieving this requires a clear vision for
success during the sophomore year so that the lessons learned can be transferred to the upper
division. Establishing programs with achievable retention goals sets the tone for improving
the sophomore year and beyond. In this chapter, we will discuss how students should be
transitioned from one year to the next by focusing on transitioning to the sophomore year,
transition to the junior year, transition to the senior year and beyond, and the role of the
career services center in helping students make the transition beyond the institution.

Transitioning to the Sophomore Year

There is growing evidence to suggest that as sophomores become more involved in
extracurricular activities, they become disengaged with their academic pursuit, adversely
affecting their GPA. The students who are able to maneuver the transition are those who are
committed to their major and engaged with faculty throughout the sophomore year
(Pattengale and Schriener, 2000; Graunke and Woosley, 2005). Despite the evidence
suggesting that commitment to the academic major and faculty interactions were significant
predictors of grade point average in the sophomore year, little is done to improve the
performance of the sophomore group at most institutions. Graunke and Woosley (2005)
found that in order to improve sophomore academic performance, institutions should focus
on helping sophomores declare their majors early, develop engaging student activities, and
increase student faculty interaction. Avoiding the “sophomore slump” requires creating
structured systems with specialized staff, who can assist sophomores navigate the college

159

environment, and develop their confidence to continue to the junior year. A structured
environment decreases sophomore alienation from the academic community, improves their
self-efficacy, and strengthens confidence in their ability to make decisions for their future
and their careers (Lewis, 2009).

As freshman loose the structure of the freshman year, many sophomores lose the
support structure, and attention of their first year advisors. They become faced with higher
academic demands, they lose peer connections and friends from the freshman year, become
overwhelmed and disengaged from the college experience, feel pressured to declare a
major, are not certain about their majors, tend to be more stressed and prone to depression,
and develop what is commonly referred to as the “sophomore slump”. For those freshmen
with low GPAs, adjustment difficulties, personal family and financial difficulties, and little
or no engagement with peers this creates an extremely difficult and perplexing transition
period. In the confusion, sophomores are expected to develop relationships with faculty,
staff and peers, be exposed to study abroad programs, become knowledgeable of internships,
cooperative education, and graduate schools, and participate in professional development
activities (Gardner, Pattengale, & Schreiner, 2000).

Alleviating these factors requires well-developed institutional and departmental
advising plans, with specific goals and policies, aimed at assisting faculty and staff serving
sophomore students. Institutions can start the process by creating a framework that allows
for easy collaboration between first-year experience and sophomore advisors in creating a
smooth transition from the freshman to the sophomore year. The transition from first-year to
sophomore advisors requires ongoing dialogue on student performance, the transfer of
updated files on student characteristics from one department to the next and three-way
communication between the student, first-year advisors and sophomore advisors. This
provides an opportunity for sophomore advisors to evaluate each transcript prior to the
beginning of the sophomore year to determine if the student has met all the prerequisites for
sophomore-level general education courses. Early transcript evaluation provides
opportunities to connect with underperforming students and students who need academic or
psychological counseling.

160

Improving efficiency and accuracy is crucial to this process. Institutions must make
the appropriate technology available to advisors so that they can transfer students files
electronically, instead of shuffling papers between offices. Appropriate use of technology
increases the time available for sophomore advisors to coach students individually.
Developing engaging activities for freshmen prior to the beginning of the sophomore year
provides an opportunity for them to become more familiar with their majors, and meet
upper-class students, faculty and staff from their academic area. Building early relationships
with students helps develop long-term working partnerships which are critical to guiding the
students to appropriate campus resources. Effective sophomore advisors encourage each
student to take responsibility for his/her professional development through discussions about
plans of study and graduation. Effective advisors assist students refine their goals for
graduation, internship, and cooperative education. However, for the advising process to be
effective, advisors must be knowledgeable of campus resources, assist each student to
graduation, and stay connected with each student through frequent office visits and online
office hours.

Providing information for sophomores in a medium where they communicate is
essential to keeping them connected to the institution. Keeping sophomores informed
through Social networks such as Facebook and Twitter, text messaging, video conferencing,
student newspapers and TV and radio stations are important to keeping students and faculty
informed. The process can be further enhanced through the development of a frequently
updated sophomore link on the institution’s web. To be effective, the web page should
include events and activities for the class, staff contact information, frequently asked
questions, links to the curriculum, information on the registration and advising process and
links to all other university offices that should be utilized by sophomore students
(Benchmark: Stanford University).

Helping sophomores stay connected and engaged with the institution and their
cohorts requires the development of programs geared specifically towards improving the
engagement of the sophomore class. Institutions with successful sophomore programs have
implemented the following strategies that can be benchmarked by HBCUs:

161

1. Identify first time freshmen approaching sophomore status and schedule meetings
with their department and major advisors in the Spring semester.

2. Provide major exploration fairs for undeclared freshmen who need assistance
identifying and developing a career path.

2. Send a welcome letter to all students meeting sophomore requirements regarding
yearly planned activities.

3. Develop or update online communication portals, specifically geared toward
updating sophomores and their parents with current events.

4. Institute sophomore convocation and kick-off that is addressed by the president of
the university at the beginning of each academic year.

5. Develop departmental sophomore traditions, such as pinning ceremonies,
sophomore honors programs, and departmental events, where the deans, chairs,
faculty and upper- division students meet new sophomore students.

6. Have sophomore retreats and field trips at the beginning and end of the sophomore
year.

7. Provide social networking medium that allow students to maintain friendships
during the freshmen year.

8. Institute career planning events that provide information on internship,
cooperative education, resume writing, interview skills, mock interviews, and
business etiquette aimed at the sophomore class.

9. Provide information on study abroad programs, scholarships, fellowships, and
faculty research opportunities.

10. Institute monthly sophomore programs with sophomore class president and
executives, the sophomore class, and student government association.

11. Conduct sophomore consultation with 25-30 students aimed at helping
sophomores develop their professional acumens and marketability.

162

12. Develop sophomore living and learning communities.

13. Institute sophomore mentoring programs that allow sophomores to be paired
with seniors, graduate students, and research faculty.

14. Develop service learning activities specifically geared toward the sophomore
class.

15. Develop intervention plans for academically-struggling sophomore students. It
is important for challenged sophomores to meet with specialized staff who can assist
with transcript evaluation, help students review the academic forgiveness policy, and
get students get back on track academically and professionally (National Resource
Center Sophomore Year Resources, 2011).

For sophomore programs to be successful, HBCUs must show commitment to
improving the sophomore experience by allocating the resources needed to develop an
effective program. Selecting a staff or faculty who has a vision for a successful sophomore
experience program is extremely important to setting the stage for improving retention
outcomes. The individuals leading sophomore initiatives must understand the impact of
sophomore retention on the institution’s finances and should focus on working with the
university community in enhancing the factors that can improve sophomore retention. The
designated individuals should have experience in advising and evaluating student academic
performance, have experience planning student activities, be knowledgeable of assessment,
and able to work across the various departments (Benchmark Institutions: Duke University,
University of Texas-Dallas & State University of New York- Oswego).

Transition to the Junior Year

Juniors, having at least two years of college experience under their belt, are
expected to be familiar with their major, advisor and career development. Despite their
experiences they need guidance on career development, internships, cooperative education,
graduate school preparation, study abroad programs, and maintaining their four-year
graduation plan. Institutions that successfully retain their juniors have institution-wide
advising guides for helping juniors transfer to the senior year. These institutions invest in
resources that engage juniors outside of the classroom, provide favorable circumstances for

163

interaction with professionals in their field through mentoring, and provide opportunities for
juniors to participate in research and service learning projects.

In well-developed advising programs, juniors should have declared a major, be
cognizant of their degree requirements and courses relevant to their majors, and align their
courses to meet workforce or graduate school expectations. They should have completed at
least one internship and have a detailed exit strategy from the institution. Advisors should
facilitate interactions with the students to discuss courses and graduation maps, provide
guidance on GPA and employment, discuss resumes, and encourage students to develop
meaningful, social, professional, and academic relationships. They must also help students
enhance their portfolios, emphasize the need to establish professional networks, discuss the
utilization of the career services center, and talk about life after college.

To maintain consistency in the information given to juniors, advisors within the
majors should be trained on the latest advising strategies. Training should involve
developing graduation plans by effectively utilizing the student information system,
monitoring academic performance of the advisee, help students develop professional and
academic goals, discuss how to effectively assist transfer students, and the utilizing of social
network and other online communication tools. In addition to the mandatory training,
institutions should require a collaborative developmental advising strategy at the beginning
of the junior year which involves students working with faculty and staff advisors to
examine data on the academic performance and progress of all juniors at the departmental
level. Compiling data on the academic progress of juniors provides information to develop
strategies that can guide juniors in maximizing the resources available to meet their
academic and career goals (Rios, 2008).

Improving the advising process for juniors requires that the respective academic
departments make a concerted effort to enhance communication with this group by
delivering information in the most accessible and efficient manner. Increasing interaction
within the major requires that juniors get information in a medium that they frequently use
(smart phones, Facebook, text messaging etc). The information provided should include a
mix of information on social activities targeting juniors, how to access information on future
course offerings, graduation planning, curriculum mapping, career development and senior

164

year strategies. Additionally, institutions should make an effort to provide at least one year
of information on future course offerings so that students can develop long term plans for
their courses, and graduation.

Transitioning to the Senior Year and Beyond

Preparing seniors who have never had a full time job is a responsibility that colleges
cannot take for granted, and students must be guided through the process. Securing
employment after graduation and deciding where to live are two of the major challenges
faced by college seniors (McCoy, 2003). Seniors who were properly guided in their
sophomore and junior year will be less stressed about life after college, because they
participated in internships, cooperative education, graduation planning, employment
prospecting, and graduate school preparation. Seniors with developed plans should have
well-prepared career portfolios, with elements of their capstone courses, know and have met
the requirements for graduation. They should have plans to take or preparing for their
graduate and professionals examinations if their goal is to attend graduate school or
professional schools. Seniors, at the beginning of their final year, should also have several
convincing resumes, cover letters, and portfolios capable of demonstrating to an employer,
that among several thousand applicants, they are the best candidates for the job. To do this,
they should be refined in the art of interviewing and business etiquette, and should be
confident in not only applying to the jobs of their choice, but are able apply job searching
and interviewing skills to any available jobs.

In helping graduating seniors make the transition out the institution, it is vital for
institutions to conduct forums or small group discussions at the beginning of the senior year
on grace periods and loan repayment. Seniors should be required, as a part of their
graduation requirements to attend counseling sessions on loan repayment. The financial aid
office should develop mandatory workshops and exit counseling with the goal for seniors to
be aware of when the grace period on their student loan ends, when to begin making
payments on their students loans, and federal loan forgiveness programs. They should also
be taught budgeting, fiscal responsibility and money management, cost of living and earning
potential based on geographic location, and how to develop new social and professional
networks.

165

While it is the students’ responsibility to get this done, it is also the institutions duty
to ensure that seniors are properly prepared for their post-college years. Institutions must
make a campus-wide effort to develop senior-year experience programs and make available
web-based resources for seniors on career preparation and networking opportunities,
graduate and professional schools, life skills support, insurance coverage, and alumni
networking opportunities. This is important, because it is essential that seniors be linked to
all the campus resources that can assist with their graduation, transition and relationship-
building. This is a prelude to developing strong alumni relationships, which in the long run,
creates fund-raising opportunities as the student leaves the college environment more
satisfied with their college experience (Benchmark: University of Connecticut & University
of Texas- Dallas).

The Career Services Center: Helping Students Make the Transition Beyond College

Career services play a vital role in helping students connect their academic and
professional goals as they make their transition from the freshman year and beyond. Their
primary goal is to prepare students for internships, cooperative education and the job
market by teaching students business etiquette, interviewing skills, self-marketing skills,
career goal setting, cover letter and resume writing, networking within their professions,
salary negotiation, completing job applications, and communication skills. Meeting this
goals require that they assist every student and inquiring alumni with career exploration to
develop the confidence needed to succeed in their chosen professions. However, despite this
important role, most students on college campuses fail to utilize this service and it becomes
an afterthought until the senior year.

Changing student attitudes towards their career development requires an integration
of career discussions of the curriculum, starting with first-year seminars and other freshman
courses. This requires the development of collaborative partnerships with advisors in the
freshman, sophomore and junior year, faculty, department chairs and deans, residential life,
enrollment management, student activities, and other departments that have direct contact
with students. This collaborative approach takes career development to the students and
provides opportunities for the career services staff to be more engaged in the students'
academic and professional development. It also provides favorable circumstances for

166

students to connect their professional success to the programs offered by career services
rather than having the perception that it is “that office that holds career fairs”.

Changing this perception is vital to students taking a proactive approach and
becoming more engaged with their career and the activities of career services. The
importance of the services offered are so critical to the success of African American students
that career services must find creative solutions to utilize all avenues within their
institutions to increase student participation in workshops, seminars, and career fairs. They
must work on strengthening the relationships with academic and other non-academic
departments in connecting each unit’s goals, objectives and learning outcomes to the
professional development of students as they progress from the freshman, sophomore and
junior year. It is through the integration of career development in course objectives and
learning outcomes, that faculty can provide opportunities for students in their courses to
integrate what is learned in the courses with their careers and job expectations. Students can
begin to further embrace the services provided by career services on their respective
campuses, through these symbiotic relationships (Benchmark: The Ohio State University)

To facilitate the process, freshmen should be provided with an online career services
account at the beginning of their first semester and activated as part of their freshman
seminar class activities. From this account, students should be allowed to provide updated
demographic information, set an appointment to see a counselor or work with a virtual
career consultant, upload resumes, and view the Occupational Handbook. They should be
provided with online information on: the interest and skills inventory, Strong Interest
Inventory, and the Myers- Briggs Indicator. Once they have completed these evaluations
they should have the option of setting online appointments to consult with a counselor. This
level of individualized online interaction provides opportunities for improving
communication with students in the medium they most frequently use (text messages,
e-mails, phone applications, and social networks) and maintaining contact with the students
as they progress through the institution.

In developing the communication system, institutions must be mindful that the way
students communicate is also changing. The increased use of smart phones among the
student population creates a demand for information that can be accessed through their smart

167

phones 24/7. With this access, recorded excerpts from workshops can be available online or
through live feed to the Internet. Students can also be provided with frequent text messages,
Twitter and Facebook updates, weblinks with interactive resumes and cover letter builders
with resume- building tutorials, interview tips, tips on how to create video resumes and
online portfolios, calendar of events, and updated links to internships and job opportunities.

Meeting these demands requires continuous improvement in web content. Enhancing
the web page requires providing links to federal student jobs, links to online corporate job
fairs, leading employers, other university career pages, graduate schools, and online job
search sites. Web content should include links to career development information from other
useful Internet sites, connection to a listserv for all students and faculty who require frequent
e-mail updates, an online counseling capability, career development opportunities, staff
contacts, and information on opening hours (Benchmark Arizona State University).

The capability to upload relevant career information must be provided to, alumni,
recruiters, and graduate schools, to download and upload relevant career information.
Improving partnerships with recruiters requires that they have easy access to the best
students available through a well-developed registration and referral system. Through a web
registration tool, students should have the capability to download jobs and vacancies and
employers should have easy electronic access to student and alumni resumes. With easy
access to students, corporate partners will be able to devote more time building relationships
with potential recruits on their campus visits. Ease of access should also be available to
alumni to access frequently asked questions and information specifically geared towards
alumni job and graduate school searches (Benchmark: Louisiana State University).

Staff Training and Development

The ongoing professional development of career services staff is critical to the
effectiveness of the program in the short and long term. It is essential that the institution
commit resources to their progress to professional training, workshops, national and regional
conferences through the National Association of Colleges and Employers, and cross-training
within the department. Training must be geared towards improving program quality,
enhancing student experiences, learning the latest strategies from benchmark institutions,
utilizing updates from the labor market and employment trends analysis, assessment

168

strategies, and upgrading the career development information system. Managers must insist
that staff training also include strategies for developing partnerships with other units across
the university and tying the functions of career services to course and degree learning
outcomes.

Career Services Assessment

The use of assessment in careers services is important in determining unit success in
meeting its objectives and measurable learning outcomes. It should also measure the
satisfaction levels of service provided to students, alumni, and recruiters, and the preparation
of students for their careers and graduate school. The assessment program should involve
evaluating graduate 6 -12 months after graduation, evaluating the perception of employers
of the institution’s graduates, and recruiters’ perception of the students they encounter.
These direct and indirect assessment measures should be inclusive of surveys, focus groups,
and self-studies and the information gathered should be used to drive the decision-making
process.

Career services managers must be mindful of their role in meeting accreditation
guidelines and should consider the assessment methods listed below:

1. Employers’ assessment of student quality.

2. Survey of graduates one year after graduation.

3. Student and alumni satisfaction surveys.

4. Graduates’ perception of the office.

5. Recruiters’ perception of the students interviewed and the career services
processes.

6. Number of students interviewed and placed on internships, cooperative education
and job opportunities.

7. Number of students utilizing the services.

169

8. Number of students based on majors and classifications attending workshops as a
percentage of the undergraduate population.

9. Number of students visiting the office.

10. Number of events and attendance, and

11. Online traffic.

Once the data is collected, analyzed, and discussed with university partners, it should be
used to improve the quality of service to current students, graduates and employers.

Conclusion

As students matriculate through institutions, it is expected that they will be equipped
with the academic and professional skills needed for their continued success. These skills
should be acquired as the students transition from course to course and from one
classification to the next through the advising process. However, a student's decision to
remain at the institution to learn these skills is dependent on the experiences encountered
and the relationships forged as they progress from the freshman year to graduation. Creating
positive experiences and developing relationships with students requires a student/ customer
service focused institution, where student satisfaction is everyone’s business and the student
is placed on a four-year success plan from orientation to graduation.

Becoming a customer focus institution does not occur overnight. It begins by
improving access to critical information, improving program quality, increasing training
opportunities to all personnel, developing assessment strategies to gauge student perception,
and allocating resources based on assessment results. Becoming a student focused institution
also requires a coordinated effort across the institution to improve student experiences
starting at the recruiting phase, and continuing with each cohort until graduation. Keeping
the students committed to the institution requires an investment in staff training and
development, implementation of measures that hold unit managers accountable for student
experiences, and the allocation of resources to student support services. It is by demanding
excellence in financial aid, residential life, academic advising, career services and course
offerings, that students will become more engaged and committed to remain at the

170

institution until graduation. These are the expectations that students bring to the college
environment and it is the responsibility of all minority-serving institutions to provide quality
programs and services that exceeds the student expectations.

171

Chapter VIII

Meeting Students Expectations: Improving the Technology Experience

Figure 6. Technology Centers

•Cognitive Tutors
•BANNER self‐
• Residential Life
registration
Education System
•Facebook
•Residential Life
Information System •Web Broadcast
• Web page
• AccuTrack
• You Tube
Admissions
Residential
Life/Housing First Year
Experience
•Finacial Aid
System • Lecture Capture
•Survey Monkey Financial • Itune University
•Assessment Faculty & •Multimedia
Aid &
Software Academic •Virtual Office
Administrative
•CRM system Advising •Phone Apps
•Retention Offices •Blackboard
Management •Second Life
System •Phone Apps
•Student Complaint •Skype
Information System •Google Apps
•Blogs & Wikis

Introduction

The majority of 18-22 year olds entering colleges are digital natives. They are more
technology-savvy than in the past. They grow up as heavy users of gaming technology and
use social networks and cell phones as their source of communication. The Internet and cell
phones are their primary sources of establishing relationships, entertainment and acquiring
information and are more comfortable building relationships in a virtual environment. They
are exposed to learning online from as early as kindergarten, where their classrooms are
integrated with smart boards, and they are familiar with completing their homework and
assignments electronically. These past experiences allow them to be comfortable learning in

172

the electronic environment and can multi-task across different gadgets and activities. For
many of these students early emersion in an electronic learning environment has created an
expectation, that once they are enrolled in college, they will continue to be immersed in a
multi-media environment. Integrating technology in the classroom is critical to improving
the classroom experience for Millennials. In this chapter the focus will be on technology
expectations, faculty and staff adoption to the dynamic technology environment, meeting the
demands for online programs, improving the students experiences in the online environment,
faculty and program development in the online environment, and leveraging the social
network.

Technology Expectations

Many students are anticipating that instructors will facilitate their learning styles by
bringing relevant digital content into the classroom and are expecting a high level of tele-
presence and multi-media experiences. They expect presentations to be integrated with
virtual field trips, guest lecturers from other institutions, engagement through the Internet
with experts and students from around the world, and the use of digital content from
libraries and institutes from around the country. As the students become exposed to
immersive experiences with 3-D technology, virtual tours and Second Life, two-way voice
and video communications, and live chats, their learning styles are changing them to become
more visual learners. As visual learners, they are not into details and like their content
simple and straight to the point.

Students expect to be engaged inside and outside the classroom through the
integration of video and voice with online content, in the form of lecture captured
technology, which can be accessed through their smart phones, laptops and iPods. In
addition, students are collaborate through video using 3-D technology on research projects
and are becoming more involved in online study groups, and use document sharing software
for group based projects. In addition, there is an increased demand for video-rich
communication with clearer and richer video content for meetings, socialization, games and
research collaborations, placing great pressure on existing bandwidth.

173

To meet diverse student population demands, institutions are investing in lecture
capture technology, clickers and other interactive devices. They are changing the classroom
landscape by making the IT investments necessary to improve hardware in the classrooms,
improve distance learning capability and enhancing the multi-media experience for students.
They are also improving institution web pages and integrating them with classroom
experiences to provide immediate access to media-rich immersive experiences. In addition,
campus web designers are developing user interfaces that are attractive, appealing,
credible, reliable, fast, and compatible to varied student devices (Benchmark: Purdue
University). However, the demand for these experiences places tremendous burdens on
current IT infrastructures, which in many cases, will require substantial investment in
servers and supporting devices to provide the bandwidth needed to expand WiFi capability
necessary to stream voice and video throughout the campus. However, before making any IT
investment, institutions must be mindful of the next wave of communication devices and the
speed at which technology changes. Currently, devices utilizing 3-D technology are placing
greater demands on the institution’s networks. This is driving the demand for more
bandwidth necessary for clear and richer video streaming to support campus demands.

For most institutions with older systems the cost of upgrading hardware, software,
servers and the entire network is daunting. This is even more challenging as investments in
IT infrastructure becomes less of a priority for institutions try to reducing operational costs
to balance their budgets. Irrespective of the limited resources, a more robust computer
network is needed than what many HBCUs currently have. To understand the demands on
the network, IT officials, must keep pace with the growth and sophistication of student
devices, increase in online traffic, increase use of technology in the classroom, increase
demand by enrollment management, research needs, enrollment growth and other academic
demands. Meeting the current and future resources requires a bold IT vision, focused on
current and future technological innovations, waste reduction and improvements in
efficiency.

Developing a short-term and long-term technology plan for the institution requires
that the Chief Information Officer, Chief Financial Officer, the President, and the
institution’s technology committee engage in continuous dialogue on technology. They must
plan by examining the technology currently available in the market, emerging technology,

174

review building and infrastructure plans, as well as enrollment growth, system capacity and
efficiency, consider future demands, and financial allocations within the context of the
institution’s strategic plan. Having a clear IT vision sets the foundation for the IT staff,
faculty and students to be engaged in dialogue on what the institution and students need. The
dialogue must include results from frequent self-assessment to determine the type of devices
used by students, the quality of the services delivered, network access and speed, the
frequency and number of complaints, support services response to resolving complaints, and
future needs. Periodic self-assessment is necessary for technicians and end-users to engage
in conversation about the efficient utilization of existing resources, purchasing of new
equipment, new investment in infrastructure, customer service, and the use of cloud
providers (Benchmark: Duke University & University of Alabama).

Collaboration and consultation between students, faculty and staff, IT staff, and
consultants, is important in the design phase, as it helps reduce waste incurred from
equipment purchased and seldom usage. As institutions move to encourage more faculty use
of smart classrooms to meet teaching and online specifications, designers must be mindful
that faculty require simple and easy-to-use devices which do not require much technical
skills to operate. They require systems that are easy to configure and schedule, have good
end-user support, and support the objectives of their courses and expected learning
outcomes. Meeting these requirements means IT and faculty must be engage in candid
discussions about the objectives of purchasing any system that support teaching and
learning, the expected outcomes, and the expectations and ease of use. Faculty input, from
design to implementation, can provide ideas as to the correct specification for microphones,
cameras, smart boards and projectors, recording and streaming equipment, and master
controls, to purchase. Early discussions with faculty create a sense of ownership for the
purchase, which in the long run, improves the chances of full integration in their courses.

Faculty and Staff Adoption to the Dynamic Technological Environment

Students are driving the technology revolution and if HBCUs are to remain competitive,
they must identify the resources to accommodate the changes required to facilitate
continuous engagement of students in the media rich-environment. The multiple mobile
devices that students bring to the classroom requires knowledgeable faculty and staff and

175

who understand the technology and are willing to engage and interact with students in that
environment. Several institutions have already developed professional training for their
faculty and staff to accommodate this device growth. These institutions have developed
structured training programs (based on assessment results) to improve faculty and staff
engagement in a medium that students feel most comfortable communicating. For
institutions without structured technology training programs, it is important they investigate
through assessment, answers to the following questions:

1. What is the level of computer literacy among staff and faculty?
2. What is faculty perception of integrating technology in the classroom?
3. What is the technology gap between faculty staff and students?
4. How can the technology gap be bridged?
5. Is faculty reluctant to integrate technology into the classroom?
6. How comfortable are all faculty and staff with the current technology available to
them?
7. Is front line staff able to fully utilize the available technology to meet the needs of
their students and colleagues?
8. To what extent are faculty, staff, and students communicating via text, video
conferencing, social media and lecture management tools?
9. Are faculty and staff effectively utilizing the tools and programs currently available
on the campus?
10. What is the level of attendance and participation in technology training from the
respective departments?

The results from the assessment will provide a foundation to guide training and the
purchasing of hardware and software needed to expand online learning.

Meeting the Demand for Online Programs

The Sloan Report on online learning indicates that during the 2008-2009 academic
year, there was a 17 percent growth in online enrollment compared to a 1.2 percent growth
in the general student population, and more than one in four students now takes at least
one online class. According to Beasley (2010), nineteen HBCUs offered online degrees, a 58
percent increase from 2006 to 2010. Private HBCUs recorded the highest gains, but more

176

public institutions are now offering online degree programs. Beasley reported that more than
70 percent of the online degree programs were outsourced, making it easier for smaller
universities to avoid the investment in developmental cost that hindered the expansion into
online education. Whether other institutions will follow the collaborative model and
expand, the partnership with HBCUsOnline and Education Online Services Corporation will
be closely observed.

Fig. 14 HBCU Online Programs

HBCU With Online Degree Programs as of Fall 2010

Credits
Institutions Courses Associate Bachelors Masters Doctoral
Bethune Cookman University Yes Yes
Delaware State Yes
Elizabeth State University Yes Yes Yes
Fayetteville State University Yes Yes Yes
Florida A & M University Yes Yes Yes
Fort Valley State University Yes Yes
Grambling State University Yes Yes Yes
Hampton University Yes Yes
Howard University Yes Yes Yes Yes
Jackson State University Yes Yes
Norfolk State University Yes Yes
North Carolina A & T University Yes Yes Yes
North Carolina Central
University Yes Yes Yes
Prairie View A & M University Yes
South Carolina State University Yes Yes
Southern University Yes Yes
Tennessee State University Yes Yes

177

University of Arkansas-Pine
Bluff Yes
University of Virginia-
Lynchburg Yes
Winston Salem University Yes Yes
Kentucky State University Yes
Langston University Yes Yes
Morgan State University Yes
Morris Brown College Yes
Prairie View A&M University Yes
Texas Southern University Yes
Tugaloo College Yes

Source: http://www.dll.org/hbcus/DistanceLearning/default.htm

According to the Sloan Report, close to 75 percent of public institutions felt that
online learning is important to their long-term strategy compared to half the private for-
profit and private nonprofit institutions. The report indicates that despite having online
programs as part of the long-term strategy, chief academic officers had a stronger conviction
that it is harder to retain students in online courses.

As HBCUs expand their online degree programs they must be mindful of the
retention and graduation rate of minority undergraduates in major for-profit online players.
IPEDS data from the large online players indicates that African American undergraduates
are not as successful as we are led to believe by the major online players, despite their large
enrollment. In 2008, the University of Phoenix online campus enrolled the largest number
of African American undergraduate students in the country (17% of the 314,308
undergraduate students), but had a six year graduation rate for African Americans who
entered in 2003-2004 of four percent. More than 80% of the total student enrollment was 25
years or older, and only 38% of the students who began their studies in fall 2008, returned in
fall 2009 (NCES, 2010). Of the 32,000 students enrolled in Capella University in 2008,
almost 21% were African Americans. Approximately 96% of the students enrolled were 25
and older, and they recorded a first to second-year retention rate of 20% for full-time

178

students and 29% for part-time students for students enrolled in 2008. At Strayer
University, 52 percent for full-time students and 45 percent for part-time students returned
for their second year in 2009, but had a six-year graduation rate for students enrolled in the
2002- 2003 academic year of 12 percent.

The online graduation rates at the major for-profit online programs, have
demonstrated that online programs are not for all students and must not be considered a
magic bullet for solving enrollment decline. Although for-profit institutions generate
enormous revenue and are very profitable, the students who fail to graduate are left with
tremendous financial burden and are obligated to repay the loans borrowed. According to
the Department of Education report (2010), in award year 2008-2009, “students at for-profit
schools represented 26 percent of the borrowing population and 43 percent of all defaulters”.
According to Field (2010), thirty percent of the loans made to students attending four-year
for-profit colleges defaulted within 15 years of entering repayment, compared to 15.1 % at
public four-year and 13.6 at private four-year institutions.

According to a 2010 Department of Education report, HBCUs in general have higher
than average default rates. The report indicated that as of September 2010, all 98 eligible
HBCUs have 2008 cohort default rates below the regulatory thresholds, but there was only
one HBCU subject to cohort default rate sanctions (USDE, 2010). With the new three-year
default rate setting to take effect in 2014, more HBCUs will be at-risk of sanction as the
poor job market for African Americans gets worst, and retention and graduation rates fail to
improve. As HBCUs venture into the online environment, they must be mindful of their
face-to-face performance in default, retention and graduation rates, and of the performance
of African Americans for the larger for profit players. They must also be mindful of the
consequences high retention rates have on the African American community and its long-
term impact on the African American family.
As HBCUs consider online education as part of their long-term strategy to increase
enrollment and boost revenue, they must be mindful that although there is a demand for
online programs, low graduation rates in the online medium places enormous financial
burdens on older African Americans who fail to graduate. It, therefore becomes a moral
responsibility for HBCUs not to contribute to the experiences encountered by African

179

Americans who enroll at for- profit institutions. They must help to reverse the for-profit
trend by developing a financial model for their online programs that brings value to their
students and the institution. Greater administrative vigilance is needed to ensure that as the
primary educator of African Americans they are not further contributing to the further
demise of undergraduate African American students and themselves. All minority-serving
institutions have a responsibility to ensure that they focus on a combination of strategies that
will assist students in meeting their educational needs in the online environment and provide
student support and engagement necessary to reduce the attrition rate.
Institutions venturing into online programs must be mindful that a successful distant
education program must be built on the demand of a diverse student population, workforce
demands, and the ability to acquire gainful employment after completion. Demands should
dictate whether to develop or expand to traditional, blended/ hybrid, web facilitated, online,
and a combination of evenings, weekend and distant education programs to boost
enrollment. Developing an online strategic plan requires looking beyond the glamour of the
perennial for -profit online players, but focusing on transforming their campuses by paying
close attention to the needs of its customers. For-profit institutions realized early that there
was a need and acted on it, but failed to deliver the end product, the degree.
The exceptional growth in online enrollment suggests that there is a demand for
online education among the minority population. Enrollment at the leading online programs
and at HBCUs is suggesting that older African American students and professionals are
becoming more comfortable in attempting the virtual environment, thus driving the demand
for distant learning. This group is made up of mainly older students (25 years and older)
who require post-secondary education that is convenient and accommodating to their work
schedules and family responsibilities. Institutions must be mindful of the characteristics of
this group of students and develop support services to ensure their success online or in
hybrid courses.
Improving Experiences in the Online Environment
Low retention and graduation rates are creating enormous challenges for several
institutions that are moving into the online environment, where the dropout rate of students
in online courses is 15-25% higher than face to face courses (Parry, 2010). Many of the
issues in the face-to-face environment are related to customer service, infrastructure, student
support problems, fits with the institution, and student ability to finance their education.

180

Over the past decade, several institutions were unable to resolve many of these issues and as
they expand into the online environment, students face the same problems as their face-to-
face counterparts. As institutions increase their presence online, they will be challenged to
raise their online course completion, retention, and online degree graduation rates by
addressing many of the factors that impact face-to-face students. For the public institutions
in states where progression metrics determines their funding formula, performance in online
programs could have a significant financial impact on the institution, if the online
enrollment is not properly managed.
In designing support services, institutions must be mindful that students in the
online environment face greater or similar challenges as face-to-face students. Avoiding
failure requires an understanding by the institutions of student behavior in the online
environment and developing prudent management practices that will drive the online
experience and improve the student’s chances to succeed. Many students, who are usually
dependent on peers and instructors for their success, enter the online environment with a
myth that online classes are easier, less demanding, require less effort, and structure to be
successful. Many believe that it is less challenging than the face to face environment and do
not require much investment in time. Many of these students come into the online
environment lacking the discipline and commitment, are ill-prepared for the online
environment, are procrastinators and lack the discipline to get assignments completed in a
timely manner. Many of these students also work 40 or more hours per week, have family
responsibilities and can become easily disengaged. These students also cannot handle the
isolation with diminished engagement with peers and faculty as their ability to be successful
decreases.
Successful students in the online environment are usually independent learners who
are intrinsically motivated, are disciplined and are engaged with their peers and instructors
in the online environment. They normally fit well into the online environment, are well
organized, are able to manage their time, and complete their work in a timely manner. They
normally spend time reading and researching on their own, are technologically savvy, can
easily navigate the online landscape and can be very successful in a face-to-face
environment, if circumstances allow. They like quality programs that significantly enhance
their academic and professional development and are quickly turned off by programs that
are of low-quality and do not meet their expectations, academically or technologically.

181

Many students entering the online environment do not fit that mold, therefore,
institutions have the responsibility to develop strategies and services to ensure their success,
once they are enrolled. Ensuring that students are successful requires an institutional focus
on the following:
1. Developing an education and orientation program targeting students who wish to
complete classes in the online environment.
2. Develop time management, study skills, and professional and academic development
seminars, specifically targeting online students.
3. Develop tests such as the Smart Measure Learning Readiness Indicator to determine
student readiness for the online environment.
4. Develop a mandatory orientation program for all first-time students in the online
environment.
5. Identify as early as possible students who are at-risk and link them to the appropriate
student and academic support personnel and resources.
6. Infuse multi-media presentation to improve online course content.
7. Develop programs and social networking opportunities that foster an online learning
community that engages student with peers and faculty through blogs, discussion
groups, Facebook, etc. that are unique to the HBCU experience.
8. Train instructors on how to intervene with students having difficulties in the online
environment.
9. Monitor course completion and student satisfaction within the online experience.
Focusing on a quality program will require detailed assessment of the technology
infrastructure, course and degree demands, faculty and staff competency, course curriculum
and assessment, and accreditation strategy (Benchmark: University of Phoenix & New
Jersey Institute of Technology).

Faculty and Program Development in the Online Environment
Institutions outsourcing their online programs and using outside faculty must be
mindful that outsourcing to a for- profit third party does not develop in-house online
expertise, and in the long run will impact faculty support and commitment to developing
their online teaching skills. Establishing faculty commitment and expertise in the online
environment is critical to sustaining online programs in the long term. They play an integral

182

role in improving the drop out, withdrawal and failure rates (DWF) as well as the
development and teaching of online courses. Their success is dependent on their personality,
computer literacy, pedagogy, and their ability to design an effective course.
Not all faculty members are suited for this environment. In selecting faculty to teach
online, institutions should make an effort to select instructors who have experience in the
online environment as students, sat through an online experience and are willing to adapt to
the online environment. Administrators must be mindful of this and must select instructors
who not only have the right fit for the online environment, but understand students concerns
and fears. They must be motivated about engaging students with technology, have above
average technology literacy, are open to change and are willing to bring new ideas to
improving course content and delivery. They must also have the skills to engage their
students in blogs, YouTube, iTunes University, Facebook, Google applications, etc.
Institutions should use a variety of methods to train faculty for teaching online. More
than a third use internally run training and little less than a third use informal mentoring
(Allen & Seaman, 2010). Irrespective of the method used, instructors must be continuously
trained in designing course content, delivery methods, instructional design, testing, feedback
and record keeping in the online environment. They must also be trained in learning
management systems and online pedagogy. First time instructors must pass through a
certification program to ensure that students experience the same level of consistency in
instruction, irrespective of the instructor. They should also be mentored by more
experienced online colleagues, who are versed on the learning management system and
spend a few weeks as students in a course. This training and mentoring is necessary to
ensure that the instructors know how to set up course introduction, how to organize and
design courses, how to deliver courses effectively, how to develop rubrics for the online
environment, how to keep students engaged and collaborating in the environment, how
provide feedback and post grades, how to support and advise students in the online
environment, and how to check for teaching effectiveness (Benchmark: University of
Phoenix & Kennesaw State University).

To maintain the quality of the online program, it is essential that institutions hire
instructional designers as part of the academic team, to assist with instructional design and
course development. Having an individual with expertise in course design and development

183

ensures consistency across the institution in the layout of all online course offerings, and
students will experience the same quality, irrespective of the course taken. This is necessary
to ensure that online instructors have syllabi with clearly defined learning outcomes, and
performance expectations and instructions, which are visible for reviewing by students. A
designer helps instructors establish performance expectations, develop visible contact
information for the instructor, make book and course material available, and develops the
assignment and assessment schedule. A professional designer is also necessary to help
faculty develop online modules, integrate web based course materials, blogs, I-Tunes U and
other multi-media tools into the online environment. This level of professionalism allows
faculty to focus less on the technology, but more on content delivery and student learning
outcomes.
Effective administrators of well-developed online programs take a collaborative
approach to integrate the ideas from instructional designers, faculty, staff and students, to
improve course content. Through a collaborative approach, policies are developed regarding
online courses and each semester is evaluated to ensure that courses meet the same standards
for educational programs as in the face to face environment. Working in partnership
guarantees that each online course and programs have clear goals, objectives, and learning
outcomes that are visible on the syllabus. Working in tandem also helps in assessing the
effective use of the learning management system, course delivery, student feedback, and the
instructor’s and student’s perception of the program. The evaluation of the effectiveness of
the program, and collaboratively finding solutions to improve the delivery and design, must
not only meet the accreditation requirements, but provide opportunities to develop and
improve training for both faculty and students.
Leveraging the Social Network

The phenomenal growth of Facebook to become one of the most used web pages in
the world is an indication that more students are becoming immersed in the Facebook
experience. Facebook provides enormous opportunities for institutions to engage current
students and alumni and create an environment conducive for engagement, marketing, and
public relations. When used effectively in collaboration with You tube, Twitter, view books,
blogs, Flickr, and other social media, it brings meaning to the campus experiences and
provides high school prospects with an opportunity to be connected with the campus of their

184

choice. It also provides a great medium for communicating out of class, thus improving
engagement opportunities for students, faculty, and staff outside of the classroom. These
experiences create learning communities that keep students engaged with the course content
through text, video, voice, chat and other multi-media functions.

Unfortunately the use of Facebook, Twitter, and You tube on a campus cannot be
controlled, but institutions can control their likeness and images through policies on social
networks and affiliated web pages. Controlling university-sanctioned information is vital
from the public relations and marketing department perspective, therefore, institutions
should create one major page as the “official” page from each social provider. The
institution can then integrate the pages along with other multimedia images into its web page
so that it can become a medium for other content creators and students groups to portray
positive images of the institution (Benchmark: The University of New Haven, The Ohio
State University, Webster University & Stanford University).

Integrating social networks into the institution’s web page and student life is
important, not only to communicating with current students and alumni, but prospective
students as well. Prospective students pay attention to the content and quality of Facebook
pages on the main and departmental web pages, and provide valuable information on
students interaction and campus activities. Many institutions have recognized the need for
structured peer-to-peer engagement among their school community, as well as with
prospects. They have met the need for peer-to-peer engagement through well-developed
customized Facebook-driven social networks catering only to their current students, alumni.
These institutions have enhanced their Facebook pages with multi-media functions such
video, Twitter, chat and texting in their daily communication about sports and campus
activities. Many of these pages have also found their way into the classroom and have
become frequent methods for out of class engagement for online, face-to-face and hybrid
course participants (Benchmark: University of Alabama).

Conclusion

The pace at which technology is evolving requires that institutions pay close
attention to population trends in order to remain technologically relevant. Currently, we are
witnessing a shift in communication where e-mails are no longer the preferred medium of

185

communication on campuses. Texting and social media have become the quickest and
desired medium for peer-to- peer communication, and are driven by the increased use of
sophisticated smart phones. The sophistication of smart phones is shaping the future on
campuses where laptops are no longer the primary device for accessing the Internet,
completing online assignments, accessing lectures and course notes and engaging in peer-to-
peer socialization. Administrators must be mindful of this, and realize that in order to gain
competitive advantages in both the face-to-face and online environment they must be
cognizant of student needs and provide the resources that encourages student persistence.
While this may be easier said than done, institutional leaders must challenge their
constituents to continue to promote technological integration and collaboration on campuses
in their mission, vision and policies, by supporting technological initiatives with incentive
driven programs, certifications and assessment.

186

Chapter IX

Transforming a Quality-Driven Workforce through Training and Development

Introduction

Quality programs continuously focus on educating and motivating their employees in
process improvement and problem solving, building strong customer relationships,
strengthening human resources, and benchmarking top performers. In addition these
programs focus on developing and retaining human capital by paying attention to
employees, who are committed, add value, and have the expertise and experience needed to
develop and maintain a quality environment. Organizations that are focused in creating a
highly productive environment ensure that training and development does not occur in
isolation. It must be an integral part of the institution’s strategic framework, and supported
by managers who understand the need to develop and sustain the talent needed to meet the
institution’s strategic goals and objectives. In this chapter, the discussion will focus on
training in the Continuous Quality Environment (CQI) environment, and developing leaders
for this environment.

Training and Workforce Development in the CQI Environment

CQI centers on a team approach that monitors processes from beginning to end. This
approach forms the basis from which organizations plan and generate new ideas, analyze
and display data, and develop consensus, and action plans. These techniques includes
Strength, Weaknesses, Opportunities and Threats (SWOT) analysis, Plus, Minus and
Interesting (PMI), Pareto diagrams, Nominal Group Techniques, Cost Benefit Analysis
(CBA), tree diagrams, relationship diagrams, fishbone diagrams, brain storming, and
affinity diagrams (uwstout.edu, 2010). Many of these techniques will be new to employees
and are not learnd overnight. It will require thoughtful planning and consultation to create
the lifelong learners needed to adopt and move the CQI process forward.

CQI implementers must be mindful that teams take time, training, and energy to
create. Bringing different people together, with different personalities and agendas to work
out of their comfort zone to try new ideas, are challenges that institutions must never take

187

for granted in an academic environment. Buy-in requires the development of a training
strategy with clear objectives and timeliness that exposes members of the Board of Trustees,
administrators, faculty, staff and students to CQI. To create a cooperative environment,
members of the institution must be taught how to participate in defining goals, objectives
and learning outcomes, learn business process mapping, problem solving, data and
performance metrics interpretation. They must also be taught the relationship between
assessment outcome and resource allocation, how to implement action plans, and how they
contribute to the continuous improvement of their units and the institution.

Customer service training plays a pivotal role in this process. It ensures that
members of the institution understand the ever-changing needs of the customer, and how
individually and collectively, they can improve work processes to provide seamless service
to the customer. Meeting customer/student needs requires teaching employees how to
identify what students needs are, what they and their parents expect, what are students
experiences are at competing PWI, and how benchmark institutions develop programs to
meet their customers’ expectations. Customer service training requires simple, but effective
strategies for answering the phone, using the proper tone and expression when resolving
student issues, referring students to the correct campus resources, being intrusive and
proactive, taking ownership for students concerns and showing that the institution cares. In
reality, it is about building relationships with customers by changing their perception, one
customer and one interaction at a time.

Fostering this environment requires a commitment by administrators to cultivate an
atmosphere that is customer service driven, embraces change, and acknowledges the
creativity and ideas of individuals. This is essential in ensuring that each member of the
organization feels that he/she has a vested interest in the decision-making process, and
his/her ideas and skills are valued. It is critical for human resources departments at HBCUs
to move this agenda by promoting an environment that fosters professionalism and trust,
develops and encourages two-way communications by seeking the views of individuals and
work units. This helps empower lower-level staff to develop and bring new ideas to improve
their processes, and feel confident that their ideas will be heard and implemented.

188

It is critical to have training facilitators and quality champions at the unit level to
conduct discussion session and promoting employee participation in the decision-making
process. Facilitators have to be taught how to develop group dynamic so that they can assists
in creating a climate for open discussion of ideas. They have to be taught how to effectively
facilitate group meetings, engage in problem solving, and how to introduce discussions on
quality strategies. When each employee envisions that their role in contributing to the
effectiveness of their units, and how he/she can individually and collectively improve the
services offered to each customer he/she will have greater buy-in to the quality process
(uwstout.edu, 2010).

Developing Leaders for the CQI Environment

Benson (2000) research on the perception of continuous improvement at state
universities found that the success of CQI in higher education depends on sustained
leadership over time. Leadership impacts CQI through frequent changes, frustration with the
CQI process, a lack of support, waning support over time, not dealing with senior
administrative resistors, lack of trust, and poor communication. Benson found that not
dealing with resistors in senior administrative ranks significantly impacted support for CQI.
Benson (2000) also found that as the institution try to address its management issues without
addressing resistors in upper leadership in the institution, CQI effectiveness will diminish.
Leadership in quality initiatives, therefore, requires the participation and buys-in of every
leadership group, from the Board of Trustees to the President, Vice Presidents, Dean, and
unit managers.

In a study of the leadership of University of Wisconsin- Stout in winning the
Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award in Education, Seanor (2004) found that there are
ten leadership guidelines for successful implementation. Seanor (2004) found that the leader
must: (1) develop a mission and vision that is widely understood and believed by every
organizational member, (2) develop a leadership process with stakeholders (3) find means to
motivate and spark participation in the leadership process, (4) have a visible passionate
leader, (5) hire or develop inspiring leaders, (6) develop an effective method for
communication to the stakeholders, (7) make data driven decisions, (8) organize
relationship-building activities with leaders on a consistent basis, (9) frequently recognize

189

outstanding individuals, (10) develop a long-term college-wide commitment to adopting the
Baldrige process, and get organizational commitment to accomplishing the process.

However, transitioning leaders into the CQI environment requires structured training
and talent development. Managers have to be trained to think like business owners as they
hire, lead, and mentor teams to focus on customer concerns and business outcomes. Training
and developing leadership to manage in a CQI environment is critical to sustaining growth
and meeting the challenges ahead. Leadership development is vital to ensuring stability in
the institution whenever there are presidential changes, but efforts must be made to ensure
that all leaders participate in training that is driven by the strategic plan.

Bringing all administrators to the same page training must begin with the Board of
Trustees. Board members need to be provided the opportunity for training through The
Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges (AGB). In addition, new
trustees must be effectively oriented and trained through the (AGB) and provided training on
the CQI philosophy and the accreditation process. According to Davis (2007),
comprehensive annual or bi-annual training of the board of trustees by an internal or
external expert is essential to engaging and orientating the board to the accreditation process
and its requirement. Once the board understands its mandate regarding accreditation it is in a
better position to provide presidential oversight in maintaining the standards established in
the institution's mission to meet the standards of accreditation. Training for Board members
may require frequent briefings by experts in the field of continuous quality improvement,
institutional effectiveness, and technology in higher education. They must also be frequently
briefed on instructional services, retention, student services, and trends in higher education
to ensure they remain abreast with the current trends and research in higher education.

Training must also be required for senior managers. Training of senior administrators
is essential to changing the culture of the institution into one that is customer focused and
customer driven. Ongoing training provides senior administrators with opportunities to have
an accurate perception of how viable quality control is to the efficient management of their
institution (Mcmillan, 1998). Training also provide with the foundation to lead their team to
improve goals established in the strategic plan.

190

Succession Planning

In a CQI environment, identifying and recognizing talented high performers for
career development through leadership and management training, is necessary to developing
talented aspiring leaders. To keep young talent motivated individuals, training should be a
human resource strategy working in tandem with a well-developed succession plan for all
departments through associate titles and a mentoring structure. This is crucial to maintaining
a talented pool of upcoming administrators needed for the long-term stability and continuity
of a CQI environment. To avoid politicizing the process, the selection for any such program
should be based on established criteria that provide opportunities for the selection and
promotion of the best available talent. In essence, there must be integrity in the selection
process to avoid workplace disharmony, which is fundamental to retaining and motivating
the talent necessary to sustain a CQI environment.

To retain and motivate talented personnel needed to sustain CQI institutions need to
continuously develop a structured training program with a curriculum and schedule for all its
lower-level employees. Structured training of front line staff helps creates a pool of
knowledgeable employees, armed with the skills to effectively resolve customer concerns. A
reputable training program empowers employees to become involved, creates cross-training
opportunities, and promotes professional development.

Before a training program is developed and implemented, institutions should ensure
that faculty and staff development is driven by training needs assessments departmental
scorecards and the broader strategic goals. This helps determine training needs that are
customer-driven and focus on changing specific behavior that can be measured. To
encourage participation by all impacted employees, consideration should be given to the
type of training and delivery.

To maximize participation, training should be delivered in a form that is convenient
to the participants. It should involve classroom sessions, guest speaker presentations,
conferences and external workshops, group projects, in-house, face-to-face, blended/hybrid
or self-pace online programs. Irrespective of the delivery method, institutions must commit
resources necessary to develop a structured training plan. However, to reduce cost,
institutions should examine internal resources, such as the continuing education department,

191

Centers for Teaching and Learning and human resource training departments, to effectively
meet their training and development mandate (Benchmark: University of Alabama and
University of Florida).

192

References

AAUP. (2007). Historically Black Colleges and Universities: Recent Trends. Retrieved
September 12, 2009, from http://www.aaup.org/AAUP/comm/rep/HBCUTrends.htm

Allgood, T.L. (2005). An investigation of the level of financial aid, knowledge and degree of
financial aid satisfaction among students of Tennessee State University. Dissertation
Abstract International, 66(03), 832.

Allen, E., & Seaman, J. (2010). Class differences online education in the United States,
2010. Retrieved February 2, 2011, from
http://sloanconsortium.org/publications/survey/pdf/class_differences.pdf

American Council on Education. (2004). Shifting ground: Autonomy, accountability and
privatization in higher education. Retrieved April 10, 2007, from
http://www.acenet.edu/bookstore/pdf/2004_shifting_ground.pdf

American Council on Education. (2007). The American college president. Retrieved
December 3, 2010, from
http://www.acenet.edu/Content/NavigationMenu/ProgramsServices/CPA/Execu
tiveSummary.htm

American Council on Education. (2010). Military veterans’ experiences using the post-
9/11 GI Bill and pursuing postsecondary education. Retrieve January 10,
2011, from
http://www.acenet.edu/AM/Template.cfm?Section=Programs_and_Services&TEMP
LATE=/CM/ContentDisplay.cfm&CONTENTID=39233

Baldridge National Quality Program. (2010). Education Criteria for Performance
Excellence. Retrieved on September 20, 2010, from
http://www.quality.nist.gov/Education_Criteria.htm.

Bank, B.J., & Slavings, R.L., & Biddle, B.J. (1990). Effects of peer, faculty and parental
influence on student’s persistence. Sociology of Education, (63)3, 208-225.

193

Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: Freeman.

Bean, J.P. (1980). Dropouts and turnover: The synthesis and test of a casual model of
student’s attrition. Research in Higher Education, 12(2), 34-50.

Beasley, R.L. (2010). HBCU distance learning 2010. Retrieved January

5, 2011, from http://www.dll.org/hbcus/DistanceLearning_Nov2010/HBCU-
Distance-Learning-2010-Final-21Nov10.pdf

Benson, D.S. (2001). Measuring perceptions of continuous improvement at multiple
universities of a state system. Dissertation Abstracts International, 61(10),
3833.

Bogue, E.G. (1998). Quality Assurance in higher education: The Evolution of systems and
design ideals. New Directions for Institutional Research, 99, 7-19.

Birnbaun, R. (2000). Management fades in higher education. San Francisco, CA: Jossey

Bass.Borden, M.H & Owens, J.L. (2001). Quality: Measuring choosing among surveys and
other assessments of college quality. Retrieved August 10, 2010, from
http://applications.airweb.org/surveys/measurequality.pdf

Blumenstyk, G., O’Leary, B. & Richards, A. (2009). Hundreds of colleges fail the grade on
financial responsibility. Retrieved February 20, 2010, from
http://chronicle.com/article/Hundreds-of-Colleges-Fail-to/123872/

Brown, M.C., & Davis, J.E. (2001). The historically black college and university as a social
contract, social capital and social equalizer. Peabody Journal of Education, 76, 31-
49.

Burrelli, J., & Rapoport, A. ( 2008). The role of HBCUs as baccalaureate-origins
institutions of black S & E doctorate recipients. National Science Foundation ,76(1),
31-49. Retrieved on March 1, 2011, from
http://nsf.gov/statistics/infbrief/nsf08319/nsf08319.pdf

194

Burrill, C.W., & Ledolter, J. (1999). Achieving quality through continual improvement. New
York: John Wiley and Sons.

Canady, D.M. (2007). African American college dropouts: Expectations of an experience
with historically black university’s customer service delivery and student service
provisions and implications for retention. Dissertation Abstracts International,
68,01. (UMI 324667)

Carlson, S. (2005). The Net generation goes to colleg.. The Chronicle of Higher Education.
Retrieved from January 5, 2010, from http://chronicle.com/article/The-Net-
Generation-Goes-to/12307

Chambliss, C. (2003). Making departments distinctive: The continuous quality improvement
(CQI) mindset. (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 479751).

Codjoe, H.M., & Helms, M. (2005). "A retention assessment process: utilizing total quality
management principles and focus groups", Planning for Higher Education, 33 (3),
31-42.

College Board, (2011). Trends in college pricing 2010. Retrived April 10, 2011, from
http://trends.collegeboard.org/downloads/College_Pricing_2010.pdf
Collegemeasures.org. (2008). The American freshman: National norms for Fall 2008
Retrieved May 1, 2011, from
http://collegemeasures.org/reporting/institution/scorecard/gra/100724.aspx

Cusoe, J. (2003). Academic advisement and student retention: Empirical connections and
systematic intervention. Retrieved February 17, 2004, from
http://www.brevard.edu/fyc/listserve/remarks/cuseoretention.pdf.

Codjeo,M.H., & Helms, M.M. (2005). Retention assessment process: Utilizing total quality
principles and focus groups. Planning for Higher Education, 33(3), 31-42.

195

Council for Higher Education Accreditation (CHEA). (2007). Using the
accreditation visit to benefit the institution Presidential Guidelines Series volume 5.
Retrieved January 10, 2011, from
http://www.chea.org/Research/PresidentialGuidelines5-0407.pdf

Cowhan, S. (2005). Strategic Planning Higher Education: Fact or Fiction? Perspectives
Policy and Practice in Higher education, 9(4), 103-109.

Creadle, J.O., & Dean, G.J. (1991). A comparative model of enhancing black student
retention in higher education. Journal of Multicultural Counseling and
Development, 4 (19),158-164.

Crosby, P. (1979). Quality is free: the art of making quality certain.
New York: McGraw-Hill.
Crosby, P. (1997) Quality management. In R.J. Kimber, (Ed.), Quality management
handbook. New York: Mercel Dekker.

Cuyjet, M.J. (2006). African American college men: Twenty-first century issues and
concerns. In M.J. Cuyjet, (Ed.), African American men in college. San
Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Cuyjet, M. (Ed.). (1997) Helping African American men succeed in college. New Directions
for Student Services, no. 80. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

Crowe, M. G. (2007). Stayers and leavers among newbies: Influences on the early departure
of HBCU freshmen. Dissertation Abstracts International, 68(02). (UMI No. AAT
3253252) Retrieved May 24, 2009, from ProQuest Digital Dissertation Database.

Davis, J.E. (1999). What does gender have to do with the experiences of African. American
college men. In J.E Davis & V.C. Polite (Eds.), African American males in schools
and society, practices and policies for effective education. New York: Teacher College
Education Press.

Davis, Sr., L. (2007). Still surviving what HBCU board of trustees need to know about the
SACS accreditation process. Retrieved from March 20, 2011, from
http://www.southerneducation.org/pdf/DavisReport2.pdf

196

Deming, W.E. (1986). Out of this crisis. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, Center for Advance Engineering Studies.

Deming, W.E. (1993). The new economics for industry government and education.
Cambridge, MA: M.I.T Center for the Advance Engineering Study.

Deming, W.E. (2000). The new economics for industry, government and education.
Cambridge: MA: MIT Center for the Advancement of Educational Studies.

Demki, J. ( 2011). Shining a light on retention. Campus Technology, (24), 7, 43-46.

Dew, J.R., & Nearing, M.M. (2004 ). Continuous quality improvement in higher. Education.
Westport, CT: American Council on Higher Education Praeger Series on Higher
Education.

Deming, W.E. (1986). Out of this crisis. Cambridge, MA: Massachusetts Institute of
Technology, Center for Advance Engineering Studies.

Dew, J.R. (2006). Go Beyond. National Association of Colleges and University Business
Officers (NACUBO). Retrieve July 15, 2007, from
http://www.nacubo.org/x8456.xml?ss=pf.

Dillon, E. & Smiles R.V. (2010). Lowering student loan default rates: What one consortium
of historically black institutions did to succeed. Retrieved January 12, 2011, from
http://www.educationsector.org/sites/default/files/publications/Default_Rates_HBC
U.pdf

Diverse Issues in Higher Education. (2010). Top 100 Producers of Minority Degrees.
Retrieved January 15, 2010, from http://diverseeducation.com/top100/

Ed.Gov. (2010). Official Cohort Default Rates for Schools. Retrieved January 5, 2011, from
http://www2.ed.gov/offices/OSFAP/defaultmanagement/cdr.html

Ed.Gov. (2010). Facing Loan Default. Facing Loan Default. Retrieved January 15, 2011,
from http://www2.ed.gov/offices/OSFAP/DCS/default.html

Evans, A.L., Evan, V. & Evans, M. (2002). Historically black colleges and universities.
Education, 223, 3-16.

197

Evans R. E., & Lindsay, W.M. (2005).The management and control of quality (6th ed.).
Eagan, MA: Thompson-West.

Edirisooriya, G. (2002). Information management in higher education: A slow drive on the
information superhighway. Hershey: Idea Group.

Fiegener, M. (2009). Numbers of U.S doctorates awarded rise for sixth year, but growth
slower. National Science Foundation Directorate for Social, Behavioral, and
Economic Sciences, 10-38. Retrieved January 10, 2011, from
http://www.nsf.gov/publications/orderpub.jsp

Fleck, C. (2001). Faculty retirement: The issue, the prediction, and the effects on
campuses. Retrieved January 5, 2011, from
http://www.greaterexpectations.org/briefing_papers/FacultyRetirement.html

Fraser, G.A., Crook, A.C., & Park, J.R. (2007). From principles of science to publishing: a
new interactive resource for bioscience undergraduates. Proceedings of the Science
Teaching and Learning Conference, 239-240.

Frederick D. Patterson Research Institute. (2004). Importance of HBCUs. Retrieved
October 20, 2008, from http://pattersonresearchinstitute.org/importanceofhbcus.htm

Gardner, B.O., Barefoot, B.O. & Swaby, R.L. (2001). Guidelines for Evaluation. The First
Year Experience at Four Year Colleges. The National Center for First Year
Experience and Students in Transition, University of South Florida (2nd edition).

Gardner, J. N., Pattengale, J., & Schreiner, L. A. (2000). Summary and recommendations. In
L. A. Schreiner & J. Pattengale (Eds.), Visible solutions for invisible students:
Helping sophomores succeed (Monograph No. 31, pp. 89-93). Columbia, SC:
University of South Carolina, National Resource Center for The First-Year
Experience and Students in Transition.
Graunke, S.S., & Woolsey S.A. (2005). An explanation of factors that affect the academic
success of college sophomores. College Student Journal, 39(2), 367-376.

198

Georgetown University, (2008). Assessing student learning: A handbook for departments.
Center for New Designs in Learning and Scholarship Georgetown University.
Retrieved April 5, 2011, from
http://assessment.georgetown.edu/media/Handbook.pdf

Green, A. S., Jones, E., & Aloi, S. (2008). An exploration of high-quality student affairs
learning outcomes assessment practices. NASPA Journal, 45, 133-157.

Harper, S. R., Carini, R. M., Bridges, B. K., & Hayek, J. C. (2004). Gender differences in
student engagement among African American undergraduates at historically Black
colleges and universities. Journal of College Student Development, 45(3), 271-284.

Hermanowiz, J.C. (2004). The college departure process among the academic elite.
Education and Urban Society, 37(12), 74-93.

Higher Learning Commission. (2010). Handbook of Accreditation. Higher Education
Commission. Retrieved from March 10, 2011, from
http://www.ncahigherlearningcommission.org

Hurd. H. (2000). Staying power: Colleges work to improve retention rates. Black Issue in
Higher Education, 17(18), 42-46.

Institute of International Education. (2010). International student
enrollments rose modestly in 2009/10, led by strong increase in students from China.
Retrieved January 20, 2011, from http://www.iie.org/en/Who-We-Are/News-and-
Events/Press-Center/Press- Releases/2010/2010-11-15-Open-Doors-International-
Students-In-The-US

Ibekwe, L. (2007). Using total quality management to achieve academic program
Effectiveness: An evaluation of administrator and faculty perceptions in business
schools at historically black colleges and universities. Dissertation Abstracts
International, (67) 11, 263. (UMI 3241788)

199

Ifap.ed.Gov. (2010). Information for Financial Aid Professionals (IFAP). Retrieved January
10, 2011, from http://www.ifap.ed.gov/ifap/

Jackson, J.L. & Nunn, E.F. (2002). Black Colleges and Universities: A reference handbook.
Santa Barbara, CA: ACB-CLIO.

Jones-Giles, J. (2004). Current and future institutional practices and policies established to
address student retention at selected historically black colleges and universities.
Dissertation Abstracts International, 65(03), 781A. (UMI No. AAT 3010522)

Juran, J. M. (1989). Juran on leadership quality ( 1st edition). New York: Simon & Schuster.

Jurow, S. (2006). Set in your ways. National Association of Colleges and University
Business Officers Retrieved April 5, 2007, from
hppt://www.nacubo.org/x7741.xmlon.

Kaye, M. & Anderson, R. (1999). Continuous improvement: Ten essential criteria.
International Journal of Quality and Reliability management, (16)5, 485-506.

Key, H.E. (2003). A comparative study of the perceived effect of nurturing as a factor
contributing to graduation of African American students at a historically black
university and a predominately white university. Dissertation Abstracts International
(64)04, 1190A. (UMI AAT 3087221)

Kline, A. M. (2010). Billion dollar dropout model. Accuracy in Academia. Retrieved
January 10, 2011 from http://www.academia.org/billion-dollar-dropout-riddle/

Klocinski, R.J. (2000). Evaluation of success and failure factors and criteria in the
implementation of total quality management principles in the administration at
selected institutions of higher education. Dissertation Abstracts International,
60(07), 2403A. (UMI No. AAT 9936335)

Labunski.R. (2003). The educated student: Getting the most of your college years. Versalles,
Ky: Marley and Beck.

Liederman, D. (2008). Who produces Black Ph.D.’s? Retrieved January 10, 2010, from
http://www.insidehighered.com/news/2008/09/02/phds

200

Leamson, R. (1999). Thinking About Teaching and Learning. Developing Habits of
Learning With First Year College and University Students. Sterling: VA Stylus
Publishing.

Lewis, J. (2009). Social alienation, self-efficacy and career goals as related to the academic
performance of college sophomores. Dissertation Abstracts International, (71), 2.
(UMI 3394771).

Leveille, D.E. (2006). Accountability in Higher education: A public Agenda for trust and
cultural change. Center for Studies in Higher Education. Retrieved April 3, 2007,
from http://www.repositories.cdlib.org/cshe/CSHE-20-06.

Lotkowski, A.V., Stevens, B.R., & Richard, J.N. (2004). The role of academic and non
academic factors in improving college retention: An ACT Policy Report. Retrieve
March 3, 2004, from http://www.act.org/path/policy/pdf/college_retention.pdf

McCoy, B.T. (2003). The senior year: A study of transition, liminality and students'
perspectives of their final year as undergraduates. Retrieved from Electronic
Doctoral Dissertations from UMass Amherst. (AAI3078708)

McMillan, J. H. (2001). Essential assessment concepts for teachers and administrators.
Thousand Oaks, CA: Corwin Publishing Company.

Middle States Commission on Higher Education. (2005). Student learning Assessment:
Options and resources. Retrieved January 10, 2011, from http://www.msche.org

Midwestern Higher Education Compact. (2009). Completion-based funding for higher
education. Retrieved September 8, 2010, from
http://www.mhec.org/pdfs/0209completionbasedfunding.pdf

Millette, R. (2004). Leadership and shared governance at Historically Black Colleges and
Universities:Observations and recommendations. Retrieved January 5, 2008,
fromhttp://www.lincoln.edu/history/journal/millette1.htm

201

Minor, J. T. (2004). Decision making in Historically Black Colleges & Universities. Journal
of Negro Education, 73(1), 40-52.

Moody’s Global Credit Research. (2009). United States higher education outlook. Retrieved
February 13, 2009, from http://www.alacrastore.com/publisher-rss/moodys.

Muraskin, L. & Lee, J. (2004). Raising the graduation rates of low income college students.
Pell Institute for the Study of Opportunity in Higher Education. (Eric Document
Reproduction Service No. ED490856).

National Association of College and University Business Officers. (2009). NACUBA
endowment study. Retrieved February 11, 2009, from
http://www.nacubo.org/documents/research/NES2008NewsRelease.pdf

National Center for Educational Statistics. (2006). Status and trend in the education of
racial and ethnic minorities. Retrieved February 11, 2010,
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/minoritytrends/tables/table_28.asp?referrer=report

National Center for Educational Statistics. (2006). Projection of education statistics to 2016.
Retrieved March 6, 2011, from
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/projections/projections2016/sec3b.asp

National Center for Educational Statistics. (2007). Status and trends in the education of
racial and ethnic minorities. Retrieved February 06, 2009, from
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/minoritytrends/tables/table_23_1.asp?referrer=report

National Center for Educational Statistics. (2007). Economic impact of the nation’s
Historically Black Colleges and Universities. Retrieved September 15, 2009, from
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2007/2007178.pdf
National Center for Educational Statistics. ( 2008). College Navigator. Retrieved January
25, 2009, from http://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/

National Center for Educational Statistics. (2010). Status and trends in the education of
racial and ethnic minorities. Retrieved January 25, 2011,
http://nces.ed.gov/pubs2010/2010015/index.asp

202

National Center for Educational Statistics. ( 2010). College Navigator. Retrieved January
25, 2011, from http://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/

National Commission on Accountability in Higher Education. (2005). Accountability for
better results: A national Imperative for higher education. Retrieved August 10,
2007, from http://www.sheeo.org/pubs/pubs_search.asp

NAFSA. (2010). International students contribute $18.8 Billion to U.S. economy. Retrieved
January 3, 2010, from http://www.nafsa.org/publicpolicy/default.aspx?id=23158

National Governors Associations. (2010).Complete to Compete. Retrieved December 10,
2010, from http://www.subnet.nga.org/ci/1011/

Noel-Levitz et al. (2010). Focusing your E-Recruitment efforts to meet the expectations
of college-bound students. Coralville, Iowa: Noel-Levitz.

Noel-Levitz et al. (2009). 2009 cost of recruiting report: Comparative benchmarks for two-
year and four-year institutions. Coralville, Iowa: Noel-Levitz.

Padilla, R.V. (2000). College student retention: Focus on success. Journal of College
Student Retention: Research Theory and Practice, 1(2), 131-146.

Parry, M. (2010). Preventing online dropout. Does anything work. The Chronicle of Higher
Education. Retrieved from April 22, 2011, from
http://chronicle.com/blogs/wiredcampus/preventing-online-dropouts-does-anything-
work/27108

Pascarella, E. (1985). College environment influences on learning and cognitive
development: A critical review and synthesis. In J. Smart (Ed). Higher Education:
Handbook of Theory and Research, V5, New York: Agathon.

203

Pattengale, J. & Schreiner, L. A. (2000). What is the sophomore slump and why should we
care? In L. A. Schreiner & J. Pattengale (Eds.), Visible solutions for invisible
students: Helping sophomores succeed (Monograph No. 31, pp. 31-45). Columbia,
SC: University of South Carolina, National Resource Center for The First-Year
Experience and Students in Transition.

Pennsylvania State University. (2010). Continuous quality improvement model: Penn State
IMPROVE model. Retrieved December 21, 2010, from
http://www.psu.edu/president/cqi/overview/files/v.htm

Peters, K.A. (2007. The academic success of students at an HBCU in Maryland.
Dissertation Abstract International (66)04. (UMI ATT 3258434).

Pryor, J.H., Hurtado, S., DeAngelo, L., Palucki Blake,L., & Tran, S. (2009). The American
freshman: National norms fall 2009. Los Angeles, CA: Higher Education Research
Institute, UCLA.
Pusser, B., Breneman, D.W., Gansneder, B.M., Kohl, K.J., Levin, J.S.,Milam, J.H., &
Turner, S.E. (2007). Returning to lean: Adults success in collage is key to America’s
future. Retrieved September 20,2007, from
http://www.Luminafoundation.org/publications/return tolearningApril2007.pdf.

Raab, L., Adam, A.J. (2005). The university college model: A learning-centered
approach to retention and remediation. New Directions for Institutional
Research, 2005(25), 87-106.
Rice, K.G. & Taylor, D.C. (2003).Continuous Quality Improvement strategies in higher
education: A progress report. Retrieved March 05, 2007, from
http://net.educause.edu/ir/library/pdf/ERB0320.pdf.

Rios, I. (2008). Perceptions of Practice: An Examination of the Extent to which Faculty
Advisers Perceive Delivery of their Undergraduate Advising as Developmental or
Prescriptive. 2008 Student Research Award — Doctoral Level Research Award
NACADA. Retrieved August 20, 2010, from
http://www.nacada.ksu.edu/programs/Awards/StudentResAwardAbstracts.htm#2008

204

Schexnider, A.J. (2008). Perspectives: The Future of public HBCUs depends on exceptional
leadership. Diverse Issues in Higher Education. Retrieved January 10, 2011, from
http://diverseeducation.com/article/10631/

Seanor, A.T. (2005). Analysis of the leadership of UW-Stout in winning the Malcolm
Baldrige National Quality Award in education. Dissertation Abstracts International,
65(08), 2857.

Seymour, D. T. (1993). On Q causing quality in higher education. American Council on
Education. Phoenix, AZ: The Oryx Press.

Seymour. D.T. (1997). Charting a future. About Campus, (2)1, 4-11.

Siedman, A. (2005). Minority student retention: Resources for practitioners. New Direction
for Institutional Research, 125, 7-24.

Sims, S. J. (1994). Diversifying historically Black colleges and universities: A new higher
education paradigm. Westport, CT: Greenwood Press.

Smith, C.J.(2009). Assessing Board Effectiveness: Resources for Board of Trustees Self-
Evaluation. Community College League of California. Eric Document (ED509222)

Southern Association of Colleges and Schools. (2010). The Principles of accreditation:
Foundations for quality enhancement. Retrieved
January 14, 2011, from
http://www.sacscoc.org/pdf/2010principlesofacreditation.pdf

Southern Association of Colleges and Schools. (2002). The impact of budget reductions
on higher education: A position statement. Retrieved August 22, 2007, from
www.sacscoc.org/pdf/Budget%20Reductions%20Statement.pdf

Southeastern Louisiana State University. (1997). Policy and Procedures for the Evaluation
of the President and Vice Presidents. Retrieved September 8, 2010, from
http://www.selu.edu/admin/ir/inst_eff/files/admin_eval_policy.pdf

205

Spanbauer, S.J. (1992). A quality system for education. Milwaukee: ASCQ Quality Press.

Stokes, P. J. (2005). Hidden in sight: Adult learners forge a new tradition in higher
education: A national dialogue. Secretary of Education Commission on the Future of
Higher Education. Retrieved September 1, 2007, from
http://www.ed.gov/about/bdscomm/list/hiedfuture/reports/stokes.pdf.

Swail, W.S., Redd, K.E., & Perna, L.W. (2004). Retaining minority student in higher
Education: A framework for success ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report (30), 2.
San Francisco :Jossey

Swail, W. S. 1995. The development of a conceptual framework to increase student
retention in science, engineering, and mathematics programs at minority institutions
of higher education. Dissertation Abstract International, 57(09), 1624A. (UMI
No. AAT 9703727). Retrieved September 4, 2008, from ProQuest Digital
Dissertation DatabaseBass.

Swing, R.L. (2004). Proving and Improving, Volume 11: Tools and Techniques for
Assessing the First College Year. Policy Center on First Year of College.

Thalner, D.M. (2005). The practice of continuous improvement in higher education.
Dissertation Abstract International, 66(05), 1675.

The Association of Governing Boards of Universities and Colleges. (2010). How boards
oversee educational quality: A report on a survey on boards and the assessment of
student learning. Retrieve January 5, 2011, from
http://agb.org/sites/agb.org/files/AGBBoardsandEdQuality.pdf

The National Center for Higher Education Management Systems. (2009). Retention
Rates - First-Time College Freshmen Returning Their Second Year Four-Year Total
– 2008. Retrieved September 15, 2010, from
http://www.higheredinfo.org/dbrowser/index.php?measure=92

The Texas Historically Black Colleges and Universities Default Management
Consortium. (2004). Breaking New Ground. Retrieved November 5, 2010,
from http://www.tgslc.org/pdf/HBCU.pdf

206

The Higher Learning Commission, (2010). Using the AQIP Categories. Retrieved February
20, 2011, from http://www.ncahlc.org/aqip-categories/aqip-categories.html

Tennessee Higher Education Commission. (2010). Formula review meeting May 17, 2010,
Retrieve December 2010 from
http://www.tennessee.gov/thec/complete_college_tn/files/funding_formula/Formula
%20Review%20Committee%20Materials%20May%2017%202010.pdf

Tinto, V. (1993). Leaving college: Rethinking the causes and cures of student Attrition.
Chicago, IL: The University of Chicago Press.

Tinto, V. (1997). Student retention and graduation: Facing the truth, living with the
consequences. The Pell Institute for the Study of Opportunity in Higher Education.
Retrieved October 25, 2007, from
http://www.pellinstitute.org/tinto/TintoOccasionalPaperRetention.pdf.

Umbach, P. D. & Wawrzynski, M. R. (2005). Faculty do matter: The role of college faculty
in student learning and engagement. Research in Higher Education, 46(2), 153-184.
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. (2009).
Digest of Education Statistics,2008 (NCES 2009-020). Retrieved October 11, 2010
from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d08/tables/dt08_226.asp

U.S. Department of Education. (2009).National Center for Education Statistics, Integrated
Postsecondary Education Data System. Completion Data 2007-2008.

U.S. Department of Education. (2009). HBCUs and higher education: Beyond the iron
triangle remarks of Arne Duncan to 2009 National Historically Black Colleges and
Universities Conference. Retrieved January 4, 2011 from
http://www2.ed.gov/news/speeches/2009/09/09022009.html

United States Department of Education. (2011). College completion tool kit. Retrieved
March 10, 2011, from http://www.ed.gov/sites/default/files/cc-toolkit.pdf
University of Wisconsin-Stout. (2010). BPA Quality. Retrieved on November 10,
2010, from http://www3.uwstout.edu/bpa/quality.cfm

207

University of Wisconsin-Stout. (2010). Handouts: Total Quality Tool Nov-3-2010.
Retrieved on November 10, 2010 from
http://www.uwstout.edu/parq/upload/handoutfa10.pdf

Wallace, L.H. (2002). Strategy for institutional improvement: Application of
Baldrige criteria at a selected community college. Retrieved from ProQuest Digital
DissertationDatabase. (UMI No. AAT 3026197)

Wenglinsky, H. (1999). Historically Black Colleges and Universities: There Aspirations and
Accomplishment. Princeton NJ: ETS.

Wilson, M. (2000). Reversing the plight of African American male college students.
Black Issues in Higher Education, 17(18), 175-176.

Whitehouse.gov. (2010). Recognizing What Historically Black Colleges and Universities
Mean to America. Retrieved January 10, 2011, from
http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2010/02/28/recognizing-what-historically-black-
colleges-and-universities-mean-america

Wilcox, P., Winn, S. Fyvie-Gauld,M. (2005). It was nothing to do with the university, it was
just the people: The role of social support in the first year experience in higher
education. Studies in Higher Education, 30(6), 707-722.

Wright, H.G. (2008). An Analysis of the Use of Continuous Quality Improvement in the
Retention of African American Males at Historically Black College and Universities.
Dissertation Abstracts International (70)01. (UMI No.AAT 3341876) Retrieved
August 8, 2008, from ProQuest Digital Dissertation Database.

Zhiming, X. (1999). Effective practices of continuous improvement in United States
colleges and universities. Dissertation Abstracts International, 59(07), 2294A. (UMI
No AAT 3010522) Retrieved August 21, 2006, form Dissertations and Theses
database.

208

Appendix A

Presidential Turnover 2000-2011

Presidential Turnovers Between 2000 - 2011 for Four -Year HBCU's
Tenure of Year of
Presidential Years on
Public Four Year HBCU Previous Last
Changes the Job
President Hired
Alabama A&M University 3 2 2009 2
Alabama State University 3 7 2008 3
Albany State University 2 9 2005 6
Alcorn State University 3 1 2010 6mths
Bluefield State College 2 11 2002 9
Bowie State University 2 6 2006 5
Cheyney University of Pennsylvania 3 3 2008 3
Central State University 0 still employed 1998 13
Coppin State University 2 4 2008 3
Delaware State University 3 2 2010 1
Elizabeth City State University 2 11 2007 4
Fayetteville State University 3 4 2008 3
Florida A&M University 3 2 2007 4
Fort Valley State University 3 5 2006 5
Grambling State University 2 5 2010 1
Harris-Stowe State University 0 still employed 1979 32
Lincoln University of Pennsylvania 0 still employed 1999 12
Lincoln University 2 9 2005 6
Jackson State University 1 10 2010 1
Langston University 1 25 2005 6
Kentucky State University 2 4 2004 7
Mississippi Valley State University 2 10 2008 3
Morgan State University 1 25 2010 1
North Carolina A and T State University 3 2 2009 2
North Carolina Central University 3 6 2007 4
Prairie View A&M University 2 6 2002 9
Savannah State University 2 9 2007 4
South Carolina State University 3 5 2008 3
Southern University System 3 4 2010 1
Southern University at New Orleans 3 2 2005 6
Southern University at Shreveport 2 2 2006 5
Tennessee State University 2 6 2011 3 months
Texas Southern University 2 7 2008 3
University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff 0 still employed 1991 20
University of Maryland, Eastern Shore 2 2002 9
University of the District of Columbia 3 5 2008 3
Virginia State University 0 still employed 1993 18
West Virginia State University 0 still employed 1987 24
Winston-Salem State University 2 6 2007 4

209

Presidential Turnovers Between 2000 - 2011 for Four-Year HBCU's
Tenure of Year of
Presidential Years on
Private Four Year HBCU Previous Last
Changes the Job
President Hired
Allen University 2 10 2004 7
Arkansas Baptist College 2006 5
Barber-Scotia College 3 2 2008 3
Benedict College 1 still employed 1994 17
Bennett College 4 5 2007 4
Bethune-Cookman University 2 23 2004 7
Concordia College, Selma 2 27 2009 2
Coppin State University 2 4 2008 3
Dillard University 2 7 2005 6
Edward Waters College 1 3 2007 Searching
Fisk University 3 2 2004 7
Florida Memorial University 2 3 2010 1
Hampton University 0 still employed 1978 33
Howard University 1 13 2008 3
Huston-Tillotson University 1 still employed 2000 11
Jarvis Christian College 0 17 2009 2
Johnson C. Smith University 1 13 2008 3
Lane College 0 still employed 1992 19
Lemoyne-Owen College 3 4 2008 3
Livingstone College 3 2 2006 5
Miles College 0 16 2006 5
Morehouse College 2 12 2007 4
Morris Brown College 2 2 2004 7
Morris College 0 still employed 1974 37
Oakwood University 1 14 2011 3mths
Paine College 2 13 2007 4
Paul Quinn College 4 5 2007 4
Philander Smith College 2 6 2004 7
Rust College 0 still employed 1993 18
St. Augustine's College 1 still employed 1999 12
Saint Paul's College 3 5 2007 4
Shaw University 4 6 2010 1
Shorter College 0 still employed 1975 26
Southwestern Christian College 0 still employed 1967 44
Spelman College 2 5 2002 9
Stillman College 0 still employed 1997 14
Talladega College 3 3 2008 4
Texas College 2 7 2008 3
Tougaloo College 2 6 2002 9
Tuskegee University 1 30 2010 1
University of the Virgin Islands 3 7 2009 2
Virginia Union University 3 6 2009 2
Voorhees College 3 4 2008 3

210

Tenure of Year of Years
Presidential
Private Four Year HBCU Previous Last on the
Changes
President Hired Job

Wiley College 1 still employed 2000 11
Xavier University of Louisiana 0 still employed 1968 43

Source: Various HBCU web pages as of May 2011

211

Appendix B
The Cost of First Year Students Who Fail to Return their Second Year

Millions ($)
Cost per student Cost of
Institution FTE Attrition
Alabama A&M University 12,076 3.4
Alabama State University 15,445 9.6
Albany State College 12,291 1.7
Alcorn State University 12,504 2.6
Allen University 22,326 2.8
Arkansas Baptist College N/A N/A
Barber-Scotia College N/A N/A
Benedict College 14,325 5.2
Bennett College 23,670 1.2
Bethune-Cookman University 11,284 3.4
Bluefield State College 10,404 1.3
Bowie State University 13,563 3.4
Central State University 18,153 5
Cheyney University of Pennsylvania 25,467 2.8
Concordia College, Selma 9,246 0.9
Coppin State University 17,635 4
Delaware State University 20,641 6.9
Dillard University 39,144 2.1
Edward Waters College 23,631 2.3
Elizabeth City State University 15,053 2.2
Fayetteville State University 13,288 3.8
Fisk University 20,983 0.9
Florida A&M University 14,360 4.3
Florida Memorial College 10,598 1.6
Fort Valley State College 13,215 2.4
Grambling State University 14,448 7
Hampton University 13,917 4.4
Howard University 40,578 8.8
Huston-Tillotson College 13,726 1.3
Jackson State University 12,846 3.1

212

Millions ($)
Jarvis Christian College 14,355 1
Johnson C. Smith University 20,219 3.7
Kentucky State University 14,809 5
Lane College 6,620 1.5
Langston University 9,204 1.9
Lincoln University 10,222 2.9
Lincoln University of Pennsylvania 18,065 3.4
Livingstone College 15,138 2.4
Meharry Medical College N/A N/A
Miles College 14,095 2.7
Mississippi Valley State University 14,153 2.8
Morehouse College 19,053 1.9
Morehouse School of Medicine N/A N/A
Morgan State University 14,544 6
Morris Brown College N/A N/A
Morris College 15,828 2.4
Norfolk State University 13,021 3.3
North Carolina A and T 13,468 5.5
North Carolina Central 17,413 6.7
Oakwood College N/A N/A
Paine College 15,756 1.8
Paul Quinn College 15,863 1
Philander Smith College 18,837 0.9
Prairie View A&M University 12,432 3.4
Rust College 12,666 1.9
St. Augustine's College N/A N/A
Saint Paul's College 11,642 1.6
Savannah State University 11,197 1.8
Selma University N/A N/A
Shaw University 12,878 3.1
Shelton State Community College N/A N/A
Shorter College 17,700 1.3
South Carolina State University 14,656 6.8

Millions ($)

213

Southern University and Agricultural and
Mechanical College 15,151 5.5
Southern University, New Orleans 12,383 2
Southern University, Shreveport N/A N/A
Southwestern Christian College N/A N/A
Spelman College 24,266 1.9
Stillman College 17,008 2.5
Talladega College 26,934 1
Tennessee State University 14,417 6.9
Texas College 11,100 1.9
Texas Southern University 13,300 6.2
Tougaloo College 15,665 0.8
Trenholm State Technical College N/A N/A
Tuskegee University 17,966 5.1
University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff 9,118 2.9
University of Maryland, Eastern Shore 12,644 3.8
University of the District of Columbia 21,734 6.7
University of the Virgin Islands 17,743 1.7
Virginia State University 14,113 4.7
Virginia Union University 12,552 2.2
Voorhees College 21,998 1.1
West Virginia State College 15,315 1.6
Wilberforce University 18,596 2.1
Wiley College 14,758 1.4
Winston-Salem State University N/A N/A
Xavier University of Louisiana 18,244 3.3

Cost of Attrition: Is the cost to the college to educate first-year undergraduate
students who did not return for the second year
Source: http://collegemeasures.org/page/About-Us.aspx

214

Appendix C
First to Second Year Retention and 2002 Cohort Graduation Rate

Freshman to Second Year Retention Rates and 2002 Cohort Graduation Rate
Began Studies in Fall 2007 and Returned in Fall 2008 Began Their Studies in 2002
Freshman to Sophomore Retention Graduation Rates
Full-
Institution Part-Time 4 yr 6 yr Male Female
Time

Alabama A&M University 68% 33% 11% 33% 27% 38%
Alabama State University 54% 40% 15% 21% 12% 28%
Albany State College 77% 80% 19% 50% 45% 53%
Alcorn State University 59% 22% 20% 39% 32% 43%
Allen University 49% 50% N/A 60% 0% 0%
Arkansas Baptist College 34% 17% 26% 10% 47%
Benedict College 59% 67% 15% 29% 20% 39%
Bennett College 77% 17% 38% 38% N/A 37%
Bethune-Cookman University 63% 71% 27% 41% 40% 41%
Bishop State Community College 40% 49% N/A 18% 25% 13%
Bluefield State College 58% 10% N/A 60% 50% 70%
Bowie State University 69% 36% 18% 41% 36% 45%
Central State University 51% 22% 13% 28% 19% 35%
Cheyney University of Pennsylvania 61% N/A 10% 22% 18% 25%
Coahoma Community College 50% 34% N/A 21% 19% 21%
Coppin State University 59% 34% 50% 16% 11% 18%
Delaware State University 58% 29% N/A 36% 29% 41%
Denmark Technical College 31% 25% 13% 11% 15%
Dillard University 69% 50% 33% 39% 34% 40%
Edward Waters College 52% 36% 40% 11% 50% 18%
Elizabeth City State University 77% N/A 24% 43% 29% 53%
Fayetteville State University 69% 36% 18% 38% 31% 42%
Fisk University 75% N/A 44% 53% 47% 56%
Florida A&M University 83% 60% 13% 45% 35% 45%
Fort Valley State College 75% 25% 16% 35% 24% 45%
Grambling State University 59% 50% 13% 35% 28% 42%
Hampton University 73% 39% 38% 51% 40% 58%
20%
Harris-Stowe State College 44% 11% N/A 19% N/A

215

Graduation Rates
Freshmen to Sophomore Retention
Full- Part-
Institution 4 yr 6 yr Male Female
Time Time
Howard University 85% 71% 45% 65% 52% 72%
Huston-Tillotson College 49% 67% 0% 17% 1% 29%
J.F. Drake State Technical College 34% 37% N/A 20% 15% 26%
Jackson State University 74% 86% 20% 43% 32% 50%
Jarvis Christian College 48% N/A N/A 10% 11% 1%
Johnson C. Smith University 63% N/A 26% 39% 28% 45%
Kentucky State University 49% 71% 10% 23% 10% 35%
Lane College 61% 100% 19% 32% 26% 38%
Langston University 59% 100% 19% 32% 1% 23%
Lawson State Community College 74% 72% N/A 16% 25% 10%
Lincoln University 51% 21% 11% 26% 21% 29%
Lincoln University of Pennsylvania 70% 33% 24% 37% 36% 38%
Livingstone College 51% N/A 10% 27% 21% 35%
Miles College 54% 77% 6% 18% 13% 23%
Mississippi Valley State University 59% 40% 14% 29% 26% 32%
Morehouse College 85% 36% 43% 67% 67% N/A
Morgan State University 68% 40% 11% 32% 24% 38%
Morris College 48% N/A 18% 31% 26% 35%
Norfolk State University 73% 44% 13% 32% 27% 37%
North Carolina A and T 74% 57% 15% 38% 30% 45%
North Carolina Central 69% 45% 23% 48% 40% 52%
Oakwood College N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A
Paine College 55% N/A 12% 25% 22% 27%
Paul Quinn College 37% N/A 6% 16% 7% 28%
Philander Smith College 35% N/A 10% 20% 26% 18%
Prairie View A&M University 79% N/A 16% 37% 31% 42%
Rust College 51% N/A 29% 73% 75% 71%
St. Augustine's College 73% 50% 6% 8% 8% 9%
Saint Paul's College 46% N/A N/A 13% 7% 27%
Savannah State University 73% 32% 10% 34% 30% 39%
Shaw University 58% 12% 13% 27% 24% 32%
Shelton State Community College 50% 100% N/A 10% 10% 11%
South Carolina State University 64% 27% 24% 45% 34% 53%

216

Freshmen to Sophomore Retention Graduation Rates
Full- Part-
Institution 4 yr 6 yr Male Female
Time Time
Stillman College 57% 45% 11% 19% 16% 23%
Talladega College 70% 42% 43% 80% 60% 88%
Tennessee State University 61% 67% 12% 36% 27% 41%
Texas College 20% 50% 6% 12% 12% 12%
Texas Southern University 59% 37% 5% 13% 9% 16%
Tougaloo College 74% N/A 26% 47% 37% 51%
Trenholm State Technical College 54% 34% N/A 26% 31% 21%
Tuskegee University 64% 100% 23% 46% 33% 55%
University of Arkansas at Pine Bluff 60% 13% 9% 28% 19% 36%
University of Maryland, Eastern Shore 66% 45% 22% 38% 37% 39%
University of the District of Columbia 39% 53% 3% 8% 5% 10%
University of the Virgin Islands 73% 29% 7% 32% 24% 34%
Virginia State University 68% 33% 21% 39% 35% 42%
Virginia Union University 53% 20% 17% 31% 20% 38%
Voorhees College 56% 50% 13% 28% 15% 36%
West Virginia State College 40% 33% N/A 27% 26% 29%
Wilberforce University 55% N/A 19% 33% 24% 39%
Wiley College 54% 5% 6% 27% 14% 36%
Winston-Salem State University 73% 43% 18% 39% 34% 41%
Xavier University of Louisiana 73% 100% 31% 44% 41% 44%
Source: Fall 2008 Enrollment
http://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/

217

Index
Academic Quality Improvement program Deming, 8, 67, 68, 69, 78, 80, 88, 90, 104, 261
(AQIP), 72 Deming, 1986, 67
Accountability, 43 Deming, 1993, 67
accreditation, 23 Direct Loan Program (DLP),, 199
Administration of the Assessment Process, 96 Diversity, 46, 50
Admission and Imaging Technology, 188 Efficiency measures, 129, 130
Admission Assessment, 127 Evaluation Instruments, 130
African American Male Students, 168 FAFSA, 193, 195
AGB, 61, 91, 92, 94, 255 Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act
Assessment in Students Affairs, 86 (FERPA),, 134
Assessment Instruments and Dashboards, FERPA, 134, 160, 162, 174, 175, 178
97 Financial Aid Assessment, 205
Assessment of Dean and Unit Heads, 95 Financial Challenges, 33
assessment of student learning, 82, 91 First Year Advising, 155
Assessment of the President and Cabinet, First Year Assessment, 176
93 Georgetown University assessment manual,
Assessment Relationships, 90 83
Assessment Strategy, 80, 100, 101 HBCU online programs, 238
Baldrige Criteria, 70, 71, 75, 82 Institutional Effectiveness, 7, 28, 66, 80
Baldrige Criteria, 2006, 70 Junior Year, 221
Benchmark, 55, 64, 86, 89, 96, 97, 105, 113, Juran (1989), 69
114, 117, 122, 124, 125, 126, 127, 145, Learning and Living Communities, 163
146, 149, 152, 164, 168, 174, 186, 190, Mentoring, 5, 167
195, 208, 210, 213, 219, 221, 225, 226, Middle States Commission on Higher
228, 234, 236, 245, 247, 249, 250, 257 Education, 83, 265
Benson (2000), 254 Millette, 2004, 54
Board of Trustee and President relationships, msche.org, 81, 265
23 Noel Levitz, 41, 112, 113, 177
Board of Trustees, 1, 4, 26, 28, 45, 54, 60, 65, online Environment, 243
66, 78, 90, 93, 252, 254, 255, 268 Online Programs, 238
Career Services Assessment, 229 Outcome metrics, 98
CIRP, 87, 100, 135, 136, 139, 177 Penn State IMPROVE, 69
College Completion Metrics, 98 Plan- Do-Check-Act Cycle (PCDA), 67
Communication Cycle, 182 Plan-Do- Check-Act Cycle, 68
Competition, 61 presidential stability, 23
Complete to Compete, 19 Presidential Stability, 51
Continuous Quality Improvement, 7, 66, 67, Progress metrics, 98
74, 267, 270 progress towards graduation, 19
Continuous Quality Improvement at Quality Improvement Plan (QEP), 72
HBCUs, 74 remedial, 13, 19, 21, 99, 100, 101, 144, 146,
Crosby’s (1979), 69 147, 148, 149, 158, 176, 180
remedial courses, 144, 148, 149
Residential Hall Assessment, 212
customer service, 1, 3, 5, 57, 64, 76, 87, 109, Residential Life Experience, 207
132, 135, 140, 150, 152, 168, 184, 187, retention and graduation rates, 23
192, 195, 204, 205, 206, 211, 230, 236, Retention Workflow, 185
243, 253, 259 SACS, 25, 26, 27, 28, 45, 72, 74, 86, 89, 261

Process Improvement at HBCUs

More Related Content

Similar to Process Improvement at HBCUs (20)

Recently uploaded (20)

Process Improvement at HBCUs