The Admission Process – About the Institution or Student?

I recently read a statement asserting the admission process is about the institution and not the student.  Thinking more about this, I referred back to the literature where Bob Bontrager defined enrollment management as, “a concept and process that enables the fulfillment of the institutional mission and student’s educational goals.”  So, from this perspective, while enrollment management is not solely admission, but the two intersect, admission is not can be about both the institution and student.  Going a step further, in talking with a colleague, he also asked, “why can’t the process be about both the institution and the student?”  Like most things in life, I think the answer depends. 

Some of the answer depends on institutional type.  I believe public and open access institutions, like community colleges, can be primarily about the student given the charter or public funding received in support of the institution’s operating budget.  That said, there still needs to be some level of fiscal responsibility requiring the institution to be financially solvent.  The institution should also serve the public good from a student outcomes perspective.  This means the institution should offer programs to help students achieve their educational goals that serve the public good of their region or community.

For private institutions, however, the question as to whether the admission process is about the student or institution is not as clear.  By accepting federal financial aid dollars, private institutions should be about serving the student and public good.  However, as a more meaningful portion of the institutional budget is not supported by public funds – from the federal government or state – the question about who the institution serves is more by order of magnitude.  Personally, even at private institutions, I believe the answer can be that the admission process is about both the student and institution. 

At private institutions, having admission about the student entails communicating a value proposition that is authentic such that students who enroll experience what was communicated – delivering on the brand promise.  The institution should be accessible to admitted students regardless of socioeconomics while also ensuring graduates do not experience excessive loan debt.  Regardless of selectivity, institutions that make admission about the student provide alternative paths for enrollment for qualified students via alternate enrollment periods or flexible transfer credit equivalencies.  For those institutions who practice Early Decision, making admission about the student involves not overinflating the percent of new students who enroll through this plan while still awarding financial aid equitably.  Dual enrollment for high school students should also be an opportunity.

From an institutional perspective, the admission process needs to ensure students who are admitted have the ability to be successful academically and personally such that they achieve their educational objectives – in most cases, graduating.  Similarly, from an admission decisioning perspective, the institutional mission or charter should be a consideration relative to priority student populations.  Institutions need to admit and enroll the number of students needed to ensure some level of financial sustainability via tuition revenue.  The level of financial aid awarded should ensure enrollment and access but should also adhere to some level of spending limit consideration.  Last, from an institutional perspective, institutions need to admit students that ensure Title IX equity compliance. 

Conflicts occur in considering the student versus the institution in admission relative to financial aid practices.  For example, some institutions do not have the financial resources to meet all admitted student’s demonstrated financial need.  In these cases, institutions sometimes practice need-aware admission.  Meaning, for some students, the family’s ability to afford the cost of attendance influences the admission decision.   In other cases, the institution may choose to admit students regardless of financial need, but they do not award financial aid that meets a student’s demonstrated financial need – hence leaving a gap between what the student receives in financial aid and the cost of attendance.  Additional considerations involve the amount of loans included in a student’s financial aid package.   

Similarly, conflicts may exist in the type of financial aid awarded – whether need-based or merit-based financial aid.  Given the price tag at some private institutions, a growing number of families may earn too much to qualify for need-based financial aid but still may not be able to afford the cost of attendance.  Middle or upper-middle income families in this situation, who have high achieving students, can sometimes afford high cost of attendance institutions that award merit-based financial aid.  Some may argue this practice is about the student.  Others may argue it is about the institution as awarding merit-based financial aid often reduces the amount of need-based financial aid awarded to lower income students.

Deciding how to award financial aid be it merit-based or need-based and to what order of magnitude is a decision grounded in the institutional mission or charter; which takes us back to the original question – is the admission process about the student or institution?  The answer again is – it can be both but often depends.