Read Liaison’s stance on solidarity and fighting systemic racism Read our message to our clients during the Coronavirus (COVID-19) outbreak

Home News

March 23, 2020April 28, 2020

Tomlinson: Texas Business Schools Overhauling Degree Plans

Houston Chronicle columnist Chris Tomlinson, who covers the enrollment challenges facing business schools in Texas, quotes BusinessCAS Advisory Board member Dr. Shannon Deer. Read More

March 19, 2020March 20, 2020

6 Considerations for Moving Admissions Processes Online: How Enrollment Can Benefit from the Cloud

The all-encompassing coronavirus crisis is causing professionals and institutions across industries to shift gears. My recent experience at the Conference of Southern Graduate Schools (CSGS) was no different. Read More

March 4, 2020March 8, 2020

Keith Mock, Ed.D., Joins Liaison as Associate Vice President for Enrollment Marketing Consulting

Experienced admissions and marketing professional will help colleges and universities across the country identify and achieve key goals using Liaison's proven strategies and tactics. WATERTOWN, Mass. (March 3, 2020) – Liaison International, the leader in admissions management and enrollment marketing solutions for higher education, today Read More

March 3, 2020

Opinion: Coronavirus’ implications for higher ed and innovation

While much discussion surrounding China’s coronavirus outbreak has centered on the fallout for America’s public health, trade relationships, and corporate giants, the deep implications for higher education are also impossible to ignore. Read More

March 3, 2020March 8, 2020

Dale Seipp, Jr., DBA, Joins Liaison as Associate Vice President for Enrollment Marketing Consulting

Experienced higher-ed enrollment leader will help colleges and universities develop collaborative class-building solutions using Liaison’s technology and services. WATERTOWN, Mass. (March 3, 2020) – Liaison International, the leader in admissions management and enrollment marketing solutions for higher education, today announced that it has welcomed Dale Read More

February 29, 2020March 1, 2020

Reader Comment: Tackling the Mountain West’s uphill climb on higher education enrollment

Higher education institutions in Idaho and throughout the Mountain West are grappling with not only the challenge of attracting students from across the country, but also boosting in-state enrollment. Read More

February 25, 2020

Flashpoint: Engineering education not immune to international enrollment crisis

As an international application and enrollment crisis continues to sweep higher education in the United States, engineering programs seem to have weathered the storm. But that shouldn’t lull the field into a false sense of security. Read More

February 21, 2020February 24, 2020

ASEE/EngineeringCAS™ Contest to Award $3,000 for Best Video Telling the Story Behind a Student’s Engineering Career

Registration closes February 28 for the 2nd annual video contest organized by the American Society for Engineering Education and sponsored by Liaison International. The second- and third-place cash prizes are $1,500 and $500, respectively. WATERTOWN, Mass. (February 21, 2020) — The American Society for Engineering Read More

February 6, 2020February 21, 2020

Influential Author Dr. Anthony Jack and Civic Engagement Thought Leader Dr. Andrew Seligsohn to Keynote the 2020 Liaison User Conference

Leading commentators on socioeconomic challenges and civic engagement will serve as keynote speakers at the annual two-day gathering of admissions and enrollment professionals in Boston WATERTOWN, Mass. (January 6, 2020) — Liaison International today announced that award-winning author and educator Dr. Anthony Jack, whose book Read More

January 31, 2020February 1, 2020

Op-ed: Coronavirus hits home for business schools

Although my office in Watertown is situated thousands of miles away from the epicenter of the coronavirus outbreak, the business school leaders I work with are feeling the ripple effect of this week’s cancellation of several exams that Chinese students need to take in order Read More

The Role of Race in Admissions Policies: More Questions Than Answers?

September 5, 2017October 16, 2017

The role affirmative action may be able to play in future university admissions policies is back in the news, and the unanswered questions about strategies for ensuring diversity on campus are likely to have significant implications for applicants and admissions professionals alike.

Although the U.S. Supreme Court in 2016 upheld the legality of race-based admissions policies, a recent New York Times article has revealed that the Department of Justice may now be preparing to look at legal maneuvers to challenges such guidelines. As a result, schools and potential students may need to consider new ways to ensure that their efforts to foster diverse and inclusive student bodies stand up to future scrutiny.

That, in turn, has cast new light on the importance and benefits of relying on more “holistic reviews” of candidates during the admissions process.

Under New Scrutiny

According to the August, 1, 2017 New York Times report, the administration of President Donald Trump, “is preparing to redirect resources of the Justice Department’s civil rights division toward investigating and suing universities over affirmative action admissions policies deemed to discriminate against white applicants.”

The article, based on an internal Justice Department document obtained by the newspaper, described the civil rights division’s plans to seek lawyers “interested in working for a new project on ‘investigations and possible litigation related to intentional race-based discrimination in college and university admissions.’” The Justice Department declined to comment on the report.

A Supreme Test

The revelation of the Justice Department’s apparent plans to scrutinize race-based admissions policies comes in the wake of a 2016 U.S. Supreme Court ruling that affirmed the constitutionality of a University of Texas affirmative action policy that includes the consideration of applicants’ race.

Abigail Fisher, a white applicant who had been denied admission to the University of Texas at Austin in 2008, filed a lawsuit alleging that the school discriminated against her because of her race.

Under the university’s so-called “Top Ten” plan, the majority of available incoming freshman slots are reserved for Texas high school students who graduated in the top 10% of their class. The rest of the university’s incoming freshman are then selected based on a variety of factors, including race. Fisher did not graduate in the top 10% of her high school class, and subsequently asserted that she was denied entry because she is white.

Before the case was finally settled by the Supreme Court, a lower court had also ruled against Fisher, citing the university’s right to consider race in an effort to support diversity on campus. The highest court in the land echoed that decision, albeit with a warning that such policies still need to be scrutinized and potentially updated.

In spelling out the Court’s split (4-3) ruling, Justice Anthony Kennedy wrote:

“A university is in large part defined by those intangible ‘qualities which are incapable of objective measurement but which make for greatness’… Considerable deference is owed to a university in defining those intangible characteristics, like student body diversity, that are central to its identity and educational mission. But still, it remains an enduring challenge to our Nation’s education system to reconcile the pursuit of diversity with the constitutional promise of equal treatment and dignity.”

Justice Kennedy also stated that, “[a]lthough admissions officers can consider race as a positive feature of a minority student’s application, there is no dispute that race is but a ‘factor of a factor of a factor’ in the holistic review calculus.”

In a dissenting opinion, however, Justice Samuel Alito wrote:

“The University has still not identified with any degree of specificity the interests that its use of race and ethnicity is supposed to serve. Its primary argument is that merely invoking ‘the educational benefits of diversity’ is sufficient and that it need not identify any metric that would allow a court to determine whether its plan is needed to serve, or is actually serving, those interests.”

Despite the ruling in favor of the University of Texas, the issue is likely to arise again. In delivering the Supreme Court’s majority opinion, Justice Kennedy also warned that the affirmation of the school’s policy, “does not necessarily mean the University may rely on that same policy without refinement. It is the University’s ongoing obligation to engage in constant deliberation and continued reflection regarding its admissions policies.”

That caveat — and the Justice Department’s recently reported intention to scrutinize race-based admissions policies — seems to indicate that university professionals as well as potential students may still lack the clarity they need in order to achieve their admissions-related goals.

Focusing on Goals, Finding the Tools

One thing remains clear, however: The debate over the future of race-based admissions policies has probably not been settled — and will likely continue to have significant repercussions on the role of diversity on campus.

For example, an ongoing investigation by the Justice Department is looking into allegations made by a coalition of Asian-American organizations that Harvard University has employed racial quotas that discriminate against students of Asian descent.

Elsewhere, there have been discussions about responding to perceived threats against affirmative action by implementing new policies to help ensure diversity in universities, such as admissions policies that give preference to students based on income rather than race.

Regardless of future judicial or administrative decisions affecting the outlook for diversity in the world of higher education, now is the time for admissions professionals to ensure that they have all the tools necessary to make the most well-informed decisions regarding which applicants they admit. For example, tools that allow you to holistically review applicants by streamlining and maximizing your application process are likely to support your ongoing diversity initiatives in the most efficient manner possible.

Of course, that involves looking at factors including, but not limited to, race. After all, diversity initiatives may take into account more than just skin color, embracing factors such as ethnicity, nationality, sexuality identity, and “real-world” work and academic experience.

Holistic Review is Easier with CAS™

“When it comes to holistic admissions, some factors are easier than others to integrate into your review,” shared Robert Ruiz, Liaison’s VP of strategic enrollment and a former director of admissions. “During my nearly three decades in admissions, I found metrics to be simple — they’re represented by test scores and GPAs. Experiences are easy to collect, but harder to quantify. For instance, how much value do you give an applicant’s work experience in an unrelated field?” Attributes, on the other hand, are difficult to quantify and difficult to communicate as well. “After all, what signifies leadership?”

Segmenting applications for review isn’t necessarily innovative. “Many paper-driven offices print PDFs and make liberal use of whiteout to help remove bias, but technology built for the admissions process offers a much more efficient way,” added Ruiz.

Specifically, Liaison’s Centralized Application Service (CAS™) provides flexibility around what data is displayed for each user or for user groups. While all of the standard application data is collected through CAS, a group of users can be assigned to metrics, another group can be assigned to experiences and another can be assigned to attributes — there’s no limitation on how much information you display or hide throughout your application review process.

By making it easy for applicants and schools to achieve their entire range of educational and societal goals, CAS will help your campus thrive regardless of any uncertainty that may linger regarding the future of race-based admissions and on-campus diversity.

APPIC’s Ten Year Partnership with Liaison Inspired by Tech Company’s People

September 5, 2017May 28, 2020

Ten years ago this year, the Association of Psychology Postdoctoral and Internship Centers (APPIC) began a partnership with Liaison International that it continues to expand upon to this day. On paper, the partnership began in 2007, but in reality APPIC’s relationship with Liaison began even before then.

In 2002, APPIC was ahead of its time, seeking an innovative way to enhance the process through which psychology students and professionals apply to internships and postdoctoral training. “In the early 2000s, APPIC coordinated placements for about 500 or 600 internships,” shared Jeff Baker, Ph.D., ABPP, executive director of APPIC. “The admissions process included digital and print submissions. Multiple pieces — the standard application, transcripts, letters of reference and other supplemental materials like demonstrations of the ability to administer psychological tests — were sent over in separate emails or mailed in separate envelopes. This was manageable for the first five or six applications, but on average, each internship receives around 200 to 300 applications each year. That adds up quickly.”

By then, George Haddad’s 1990-founded technology company was steadily working towards offering a comprehensive way to streamline admissions. “At the time, Liaison could take on our print components. We could reroute applicant mail to Liaison, having their processing team take over our administrative work so that we could reallocate the time that had been spent sorting and organizing materials. This was a valuable offer, but we were set on moving completely online.”

Flash forward a few years and Liaison was ready to deliver. George came back to APPIC with what his team had developed. “He showed us what we had asked for, we requested a few tweaks and in 2007, we implemented Liaison’s Centralized Application Service (CAS™).” Each year since, APPIC and Liaison have collaborated to refine the solution, with Liaison bringing best practices that it has learned from over two decades of working with other health associations to the table as well. Now, APPIC leverages Liaison’s technology and services to process applications for joining the association, applications for internships and applications for postdoctoral programs.

Stable technology, combined with the flexibility to innovate, were major inspirations for APPIC’s choosing Liaison, but what led the association to continue its relationship with the company is its people. “We’re driven by George Haddad’s involvement, his understanding of the company’s solutions. Our board trusts him to help us move forward with initiatives. What’s more, every person at Liaison who we’ve worked with — Deb Erdner [Liaison’s vice president of CAS operations], Sibu Thomas [director of software development], Joni Yaris [customer solutions manager], Tomas Young [business analyst] and the countless other hands-on developers and customer service representatives — helps to solidify a feeling of excitement about what our partnership has brought and will continue to bring to the psychology field. We look forward to continuing our collaboration with Liaison for many years to come.”

Leveraging the “Why” to Recruit Best-Fit Students

August 22, 2017May 28, 2020

Why does what works work?

We know there’s more than one “W” to consider when crafting an effective graduate student engagement strategy. We’re familiar with the role of the What. Next up: the Why.

These days there are so many social media tools, apps and resources available that it’s easy to fall into the trap of thinking that you should be using all of them, all the time. Instead, as you craft your engagement strategy, ask why you use the tools you’re using.

As an example, take a look at Snapchat. According to a 2014 report by Sumpto based on 1,650 responses, 77% of college students use Snapchat daily — and that was in 2014. It’s still the most popular app currently in use by millennials. However, it’s not enough for institutions to use it simply because a large percentage of their prospective applicant pool does. If we don’t look at why we want to use a particular tool, we run the risk of using it in ways that aren’t effective.

It’s time to get personal

In a report by CKSyme Media Group called “Your Guide to Advanced Snapchat Marketing Strategy”, the author looked at the way the Saints, New Orleans’ football team, drove engagement with fans through calculated use of the popular app. The team’s social media manager, Alex Restreppo, points out that, “Snapchat isn’t a regular social media outlet. When you send a snap, it’s perceived as a direct message from the brand or team… if it’s a snap, they see it as more of a personal touch.” (emphasis added)

So how could this work in higher education? One great example is the University of Wisconsin, which started using Snapchat to send acceptance notifications to students before mailing their official packet. U.S. News & World Report recently highlighted the University of Wisconsin for using Snapchat to send acceptance notifications to students before mailing their official packet. Students responded with excitement, often replying back with a selfie and also sharing the news with friends.

“Of course you want the prestigious acceptance letter, but I think students also enjoy having the wall brought down and being able to communicate with the institution that they have chosen,” said Brittany Shope, the Web Coordinator at Tennessee Wesleyan College (TWC), in a 2014 Time.com article.

Next up: determining “when” to engage prospective students.

Creating an Effective Graduate Student Engagement Strategy

August 8, 2017May 28, 2020

Leveraging the 4 Ws to Recruit Best-Fit Students

For-profit businesses, nonprofit organizations, schools and graduate programs have one goal in common: Finding and implementing new — and better — ways to engage their target audience.

As proof, look no further than the seemingly endless array of whitepapers, presentations, think pieces and studies devoted to exploring the nature and metrics of engagement. Clearly, engagement is a force to be reckoned with.

But what does engagement really mean? And what are the specific challenges faced by institutions of higher education who want to engage prospective graduate students?

DEFINING THE PROBLEM

When it comes to current students, engagement is relatively easy because they already have a relationship with the institution they are attending. They’re invested in the ongoing story of the university because now it’s their story, too.

Throughout our over two decades of powering admissions and enrollment marketing solutions for higher education, Liaison has recognized that prospective students, on the other hand, present a greater challenge.

It’s not that prospects aren’t interested in engagement; it’s simply that they are interested in developing connections with people they already know. Because they don’t know us yet, institutions have to work harder at reaching out consistently and in ways that feel personal — without crossing the line into invasive — to our prospective students.

The Golden Circle

In 2009, author and motivational speaker Simon Sinek gave a TED Talk titled “How Great Leaders Inspire Action.” While his message was tailored for the business community, it’s just as relevant for anyone trying to run a successful graduate program. Let’s start with his primary concept, which he calls “The Golden Circle.”

The Golden Circle illustrates how businesses and organizations think, act and communicate. The outermost ring represents the “What” which would be your graduate program.

Moving into the next ring, we encounter the “How,” or ways and means by which you get your your “What” out into the world.

Finally, we get to the innermost heart of the circle, which is where we locate our “Why” — also known as our purpose and reason for being.

Communicating from the Inside Out

In his talk, Sinek points out that many companies, organizations and schools work from the outside of the circle in: They start with the “What”, the product or program that they’re offering.

What’s wrong with that, you might ask. Isn’t the “What” important? Absolutely — but research and real-life experience have proven time and again that human beings are not nearly as guided by logic and reason as we like to believe. Whether we like it or not, humans tend to make decisions based on emotional motivations — and then use our rational brain to construct a reasonable justification for whatever decisions we’ve made.

In an abstract for their academic paper titled “Emotion and Decision Making”, a team of researchers proclaimed, “A revolution in the science of emotion has emerged in the last few decades, with the potential to create a paradigm shift in thinking about decision theories. The research reveals that emotions constitute powerful, pervasive, and predictable drivers of decision making.”

At this point you may be thinking, “Interesting stuff, but what does any of it have to do with creating a meaningful engagement strategy for my program’s prospective students?”

Understanding the driving forces behind how people — including your prospective students — decide to interact with you is an important part of crafting an effective engagement strategy.

In the end, engagement is actually much more than a strategy. It’s a natural outcome of relationships that have been nurtured over time. Engagement with our prospects is more likely when we are able to emotionally inspire them to connect.

So, how do we do that?

The Four Ws of Engagement

Your institution is unique, which means your reason and purpose for being will be, too. So how you define the metrics of successful engagement will depend on factors that are unique to your program and institution — in other words, there is no such thing as a one-size-fits-all engagement strategy. What works for another program may not work for yours, and vice versa.

Which isn’t to say that there’s not much to be learned from how other institutions have managed to connect with their respective audiences. There’s a wide array of best practices that can apply in almost any situation, so we should definitely seek to learn from the experiences of our peers.

What’s important to keep in mind is that just because a certain tool is being used effectively for another program doesn’t mean it’s the exact right one for your needs and goals.

Who? What? Why? When?

In order to create and maintain an effective engagement strategy, we need to know more than just who we’re trying to reach — we also need a deep understanding of what tools are best to use, why an engagement strategy that drives how we use these tools is key and when it’s best to use them.

Defining the “Who” of engagement is actually the easy part — it’s your prospective students! But building a strategy on only one W is a little like trying to drive a car with three flat tires. The other Ws — What, Why and When — need to be equally balanced.

Over the next few weeks, we’ll go over each of these in turn. Follow Liaison on Facebook and Twitter for updates about the next installment in this blog series.