4 ms·

2018 Cost of Recruiting an Undergraduate Student Report Benchmarking data for recruitment and admissions costs and enrollment staffing levels for four-year col

2018 Cost of Recruiting an Undergraduate Student Report Benchmarking data for recruitment and admissions costs and enrollment staffing levels for four-year colleges and universities, based on a poll of campus officials http://learn.ruffalonl.com/rs/395-EOG-977/images/RNL_2018_Cost_of_Recruiting_Report_EM-005.pdf http://learn.ruffalonl.com/rs/395-EOG-977/images/RNL_2018_Co... Median cost to recruit a single undergraduate student in 2017 was $2,357 for private 4-year institutions and $536 for public institutions. But there is a lot more data in the report. The institutions reported on do not seem to be the ones likely to have the most expensive recruiting campaigns, either academically or athletically.

jfengel 7y ago
Why on earth are they spending so much? Are seats going unfilled? Are the "best" students that more profitable for them?
- joncrane 7y ago
  They are trying to get students who can: 1) Pay 2) Stay the full 4 years So yes, the "best" students (the ones who will pay full price for 8 semesters) are very profitable for them.
  - dsfyu404ed 7y ago
    3) Take a semester or two of high margin 100 and 200 level classes (e.g. entry level classes that only require one professor and a lecture hall) before dropping out.
  - nataz 7y ago
    This is the right answer for many small colleges in the US. Rate of attrition and individual discount rate are what keep up the revenue and the lights on year over year.
- alteria 7y ago
  I think there is a demographic and/or preference shift occurring. The small liberal arts college I attended recently had a year where it could only fill 600 out of 700 potential seats. The college filled out all 700 seats the next year, but redoubled their targeting and recruiting and used more waitlist admits than usual.
- rjf72 7y ago
  We hit "peak university" in 2011. [1] In 2017 there were 1.25 million fewer enrolled students than in 2010. But this [2] is the zinger: in that same time frame, more than 300 new degree granting institutions opened up! It's becoming a hyper-competitive business. Good students not only are likely to stay on for the entire term of the institution, but also increase the prestige of your school which means more students, higher fees, and more profit. I think a big issue is that the regulations on loans are removing any and all notion of supply and demand, so costs just keep getting crazier and crazier. Living on campus at an average private nonprofit university now will run you more than $50k a year. [3] Spending $2,357 for what may likely be $200k+ for 4 years is a phenomenal return on investment. As usual, non-profit in practice and non-profit in connotation really don't mean the same thing. I attended a top 10 university only to see them constantly tear down perfectly functional buildings just to replace them with more aesthetically pleasing buildings that otherwise functioned just about identically. In some cases the new buildings had less room than the older ones. All it seemed to achieve was to 'Amazon' their profit figures. I don't really understand why they seem determined to waste so much money. The cynic in me imagines it's easier to justify a million dollar administrative salary when that's a much smaller fraction of your gross, and a "non-profit" institution would have difficulty justifying constant cost increases if they're showing a massive profit margin. [1] - https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d18/tables/dt18_105.30.asp https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d18/tables/dt18_105.30.a... [2] - https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=84 https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=84 [3] - https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cua.asp https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cua.asp
  - lotsofpulp 7y ago
    >I think a big issue is that the regulations on loans are removing any and all notion of supply and demand, There shouldn't be student loans from taxpayers in the first place. If voters want to give assistance to students, then pay all or a portion of their tuition. If the financial markets deem education to have a worthy return on investment, they will underwrite loans just like any other loan.
- extra88 7y ago
  The "best" students, those most likely to be successful within the school and after school, become walking advertisements. They're also more likely to be happy alumni who donate to the school. I wonder what the data would show if you compared the money invested in admissions to that invested in alumni affairs & development, and how much is brought in by tuition and fees and how much is brought in as donations. From what I've seen, development is definitely an area that operates on the "you have to spend money to make money" principle.
forinti 7y ago
I think colleges should just define a minimum SAT score and then select students through a lottery.

jfengel 7y ago

Why on earth are they spending so much? Are seats going unfilled? Are the "best" students that more profitable for them?

joncrane 7y ago
They are trying to get students who can: 1) Pay 2) Stay the full 4 years So yes, the "best" students (the ones who will pay full price for 8 semesters) are very profitable for them.
- dsfyu404ed 7y ago
  3) Take a semester or two of high margin 100 and 200 level classes (e.g. entry level classes that only require one professor and a lecture hall) before dropping out.
- nataz 7y ago
  This is the right answer for many small colleges in the US. Rate of attrition and individual discount rate are what keep up the revenue and the lights on year over year.
alteria 7y ago
I think there is a demographic and/or preference shift occurring. The small liberal arts college I attended recently had a year where it could only fill 600 out of 700 potential seats. The college filled out all 700 seats the next year, but redoubled their targeting and recruiting and used more waitlist admits than usual.
rjf72 7y ago
We hit "peak university" in 2011. [1] In 2017 there were 1.25 million fewer enrolled students than in 2010. But this [2] is the zinger: in that same time frame, more than 300 new degree granting institutions opened up! It's becoming a hyper-competitive business. Good students not only are likely to stay on for the entire term of the institution, but also increase the prestige of your school which means more students, higher fees, and more profit. I think a big issue is that the regulations on loans are removing any and all notion of supply and demand, so costs just keep getting crazier and crazier. Living on campus at an average private nonprofit university now will run you more than $50k a year. [3] Spending $2,357 for what may likely be $200k+ for 4 years is a phenomenal return on investment. As usual, non-profit in practice and non-profit in connotation really don't mean the same thing. I attended a top 10 university only to see them constantly tear down perfectly functional buildings just to replace them with more aesthetically pleasing buildings that otherwise functioned just about identically. In some cases the new buildings had less room than the older ones. All it seemed to achieve was to 'Amazon' their profit figures. I don't really understand why they seem determined to waste so much money. The cynic in me imagines it's easier to justify a million dollar administrative salary when that's a much smaller fraction of your gross, and a "non-profit" institution would have difficulty justifying constant cost increases if they're showing a massive profit margin. [1] - https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d18/tables/dt18_105.30.asp https://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d18/tables/dt18_105.30.a... [2] - https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=84 https://nces.ed.gov/fastfacts/display.asp?id=84 [3] - https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cua.asp https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator_cua.asp
- lotsofpulp 7y ago
  >I think a big issue is that the regulations on loans are removing any and all notion of supply and demand, There shouldn't be student loans from taxpayers in the first place. If voters want to give assistance to students, then pay all or a portion of their tuition. If the financial markets deem education to have a worthy return on investment, they will underwrite loans just like any other loan.
extra88 7y ago
The "best" students, those most likely to be successful within the school and after school, become walking advertisements. They're also more likely to be happy alumni who donate to the school. I wonder what the data would show if you compared the money invested in admissions to that invested in alumni affairs & development, and how much is brought in by tuition and fees and how much is brought in as donations. From what I've seen, development is definitely an area that operates on the "you have to spend money to make money" principle.

forinti 7y ago

I think colleges should just define a minimum SAT score and then select students through a lottery.