Summary of AAS Retreat

May 9, 2006, at Pearland

 

 

The retreat was focused on the first two steps of the “Process and Time Frame for Review of Teaching Centers” previously shared with the Provosts’ Council.  These steps were “Information gathering” and “Recruitment.”  Below is a summary of the meeting.  Supporting information developed is attached. 

 

Supporting information provided:

 

  1. Trend data on type of course offerings and enrollments overall and by institution.
  2. Room utilization at peak hours in Sugar Land.
  3. Survey data on student perceptions of needs and preferences; also on staff perceptions.
  4. Marketing plan and supporting budgets
  5. Description of major variables affecting enrollment
  6. Also – physical tour of Pearland site.

 

Some conclusions evident from the above information:

 

  1. Rapid growth of online course offerings.
  2. Leveling off of overall enrollments--with a decline on site at Sugar Land.
  3. No appreciable increase in number of course offerings on site at Cinco Ranch.
  4. Heavy reliance on ITV and online delivery, especially at Cinco Ranch.
  5. Stated preference for F2F (in-person) courses; evident dissatisfaction with ITV.
  6. Continued concentration of enrollments in the evening hours at the centers.
  7. The obvious limitations imposed by the number of rooms and labs available at peak enrollment times.
  8. The fact that students can complete their degrees within three years through available offerings (though not entirely by in-person, on-site delivery).
  9. The lack of evident interest in 8-week formats (though the sampling may not be conclusive).
  10. A well-developed marketing plan is in place.
  11. Impressive availability of facilities at Pearland.

 

Some basic principles and practices that emerged from discussion:

 

Delivery basics:

  1. Ensure availability on-site instruction and faculty.
  2. Provide effective on-site advising.
  3. Provide a responsive array of program offerings—in relation to evident demand.
  4. Provide a clear and predictable rotation of courses for each program.
  5. Ensure student opportunity to complete a degree program within reasonable time.
  6. Ensure students are realistic in their expectations and informed about the trade-offs—e.g., students who want to make more expeditious progress may have to go online or to another location for some of their courses.
  7. Deliver what is promised.

 

Marketing/recruitment basics:

 

  1. Focus most resources on targeted marketing rather than broad-spectrum efforts.
  2. Rely on direct contact with corporate markets rather than participation in corporate-sponsored recruitment events (but must ensure reasonable coordination of UHS contacts to prevent excess and overlap).
  3. Establish consistent dates for center recruitment events—well in advance.
  4. Get a dean in place—possibly as a System position with responsibility toward all the centers.
  5. Get the 290 center underway somehow and soon.
  6. Promote realization and buy-in on the campuses with regard to the importance of the centers in contributing to the visibility, accessibility, and overall enrollment growth of the UHS institutions.
  7. Don’t promise more than can be delivered.

 

Some issues remaining to be addressed:

 

  1. Getting a center underway on 290:
    1. Location and importance of co-location or near-location to community college.
    2. Facilities and means of providing them.
    3. Faculty resources and how to deliver the programs.
    4. Time frame.
  2. Collaboration in, strategic use of, and marketing of online and blended delivery to serve more fully the greater metro area.
  3. Increasing participation and graduation rates in Houston area.
  4. Making the most of co-location with WCJC in Sugar Land.
  5. Questions about policy directions:
    1. Should programs offered with no supporting on-site classes be listed as center offerings?
    2. Is it reasonable for online courses offered as part of center-based programs to require students to come to the home campus to take tests?.
    3. Should degree programs that are inactive be deleted from marketing materials?

 

Offerings and Enrollments:

Surveys:

Marketing:

Variables:

Map: