Cultivating Graduate Enrollment Best Practices Through Faculty-Staff Collaborations

Presented

R. Ford, PhD;

In this fast-paced session, Channing Ford and Ashlee Hanvey made sure to cover a lot of ground on how to create buy-in between faculty reviewers and graduate admissions staff to create a more effective and efficient application process. They opened the session with a think, pair, share session to engage the room immediately. Participants were able to share what works well and what could be improved upon with their process. This immediately drew the attention of many who wondered how to speed up the faculty review process.

Channing and Ashlee brought a few considerations to the forefront:

• Creating a holistic review process. Consider a review process that strips away items that create unremovable barriers or unintentional biases

• Develop a rubric to measure the value of supporting documents

• When using letters of recommendation, have the committee use an agreed-upon scoring method

• Using a “bucket system” for review – “accepted,” “waitlisted,” and “denied” groups

• Provide guiding principles to your applicants as to why each item is used toward their application

The presenters recommended a continued evaluation of admissions and including a team who will be familiar with any state standards if your school is meeting state accreditations (such as education). They shared:

• Make the process clear

• Explain the process to faculty, often

• Open lines of communication with faculty

Because of their evaluation process, they streamlined admissions decisions and took on some decisions within the office, such as unconditional or denied (applicants who do not meet the minimum); they removed extra items, such as scores that have no bearing on the outcome, and added in communications to applicants which included a “Connect with Faculty” message.

With this evaluation, they introduced some accelerated pathways to their undergraduate students: Accelerated Senior Privilege and Faster Master’s.

YES! They surveyed the faculty and program directors impacted by these changes. They heard positive feedback and other feedback related to adjusting to something new. Still, overall, the graduate admissions office saw that the changes increased the applicant pool, including completed applications, opened communication between admissions and the programs, and now produced a timely admissions decision from the program. n