THE FIRST-YEAR DECISION MODELENROLLMENT MANAGEMENT AT THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA - WILMINGTON

SESSION OVERVIEW

Session content connects to: Recruitment travel

Application review

Development of decision letters

Counselor training & supervision

The committee member role

Development of reading practices

Data analytics

Historical Numbers

Regional Goals

Reading Training

Reading Ratings

Admissions Committee

The Decision Letter

THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA - WILMINGTON

Quick overview :• 12,500 applications

• Early Action (non-binding) Deadline: Nov. 1

• Regular Decision Deadline: February 1

• 2,150 fall first year enrollment• 64% acceptance rate

• 1192 Old SAT Average

• 25 ACT Average

• 200 first year spring enrollment

USING NUMBERS TO DICTATE ACTIONSTAKE YOUR TIME AND ALWAYS BE PREPARED TO ADJUST

UNDERSTANDING YIELD: HOME STATE

Region Yield (3 yr avg)

Western 34%

Piedmont 34%

Northern 32%

Capital 32%

South Central

39%

Eastern 44%

Local 48%

UNDERSTANDING YIELD: OUT OF STATE

Region Yield (3 yr avg)

Far west 15%

Midwest 18%

Southeast & Southwest

17%

Mid-Atlantic 17%

Northern 17%

New England 15%

Developing a Fall Framework ExampleAction Items Year Number

1. Determine historical enrollment numbers

2015

2014

2013

2,024

2,159

1,939

2. Determine historical offers of admission

2015

2014

2013

6,952

6,739

6,155

3. Determine yield: (Enrollment/Offers) x 100

2015

2014

2013

29%

32%

31%

4. If applicable, run steps 1-3 for in state and out of state population.

1-Dec-15 Freshmen Admission Model Fall 2016ISY O SY CY ISE O SE Target ISO O SO TO TO IS Goal O S Goal Total Enr.

2016 Model 0.375 0.150 0.318 1763 387 2311 4700 2580 7280 1763 387 21502 YEAR AVG. 37.58% 15.59% 30.58% 1701 342 2043 4462 2012 64754 YEAR AVG. 38.16% 17.14% 31.63% 1679 345 2024 4317 1825 61475 YEAR AVG. 38.68% 18.45% 32.54% 1673 340 2013 4266 1769 60406 YEAR AVG. 38.97% 19.51% 33.15% 1683 338 2021 4239 1723 59668 YEAR AVG. 39.80% 20.24% 34.12% 1659 349 2007 4117 1667 578710 YEAR AVG. 40.46% 21.58% 35.00% 1644 349 1993 4072 1631 5706Total AVG. 41.88% 23.20% 36.64% 1600 338 1937 3855 1506 5363Actuals

2015 36.46% 13.27% 29.11% 1732 292 2024 4751 2201 6952

2014 38.71% 17.91% 32.04% 1772 387 2159 4578 2161 6739

2013 37.71% 17.53% 31.50% 1607 332 1939 4261 1894 6155

2012 39.77% 19.87% 33.86% 1694 356 2050 4259 1792 6054

2011 40.77% 23.68% 36.19% 1643 337 1980 4030 1423 5471

2010 40.39% 24.83% 36.17% 1625 367 1992 4023 1478 5508

2009 41.46% 21.43% 36.08% 1641 308 1949 3958 1437 5402

2008 43.11% 23.37% 38.04% 1746 327 2073 4050 1399 5449

Target Goal

2016 GoalsAC‐ 2014 IE‐ 2014 Yield‐2014 % 3 year Yield AVG

 AC goal IE‐2016  AC goal IE‐2016  AC goal IE‐2016Region 1 501 248 50 48% 519 249 526 253 529 254Region 2 438 207 47 44% 453 199 460 202 462 203Region 3 1093 378 35 32% 1131 362 1148 367 1153 369Region 4 626 252 40 39% 648 253 657 256 660 258Region 5 276 94 34 32% 286 91 290 93 291 93Region 6 929 319 34 34% 962 327 975 332 980 333Region 7 721 244 34 35% 746 261 757 265 761 266Region 16 26 10 38 41% 27 11 27 11 27 11Total 4610 1752 1754 1779 4864 1787

ADD 3.5% ADD 5% Add 5.5%

Region‐  AC‐ 2014 IE‐ 2014 Yield‐2014 %3 year Yield AVG  AC goal IE‐2016  AC goal IE‐2016Region 08 ‐ Mid‐Atlantic 627 120 19 17% 658 112 671 114Region 09 ‐ Northeast 581 100 17 17% 610 104 622 106Region 10 ‐ SW and SE 215 46 21 17% 226 38 230 39Region 11 ‐ Midwest 215 40 19 18% 226 41 230 41Region 12 ‐ Farwest 89 8 9 15% 93 14 95 14Region 13 ‐ New England 303 61 20 15% 318 48 324 49Region 14 ‐ International 88 24 27 26%Total 2118 399 19 2132 356 2172 363

NUMBERS APPLICATION REVIEWLET THE NUMBERS GUIDE THE PROCESS

APPLICATION READING TRAINING

Staff Size

10 First Year Counselors that review applications

On average 5 Graduate Student Readers

Help to read applications for larger regions

Read 43% of applications in 2016

All First Year Counselors + Director of Admission = Admissions Committee

Training

All Counselors train in September/October around travel schedule for Early Action applications This occurs each year, even for veteran counselors

All Counselors train again in January for Regular Decision applications

All Grad Readers train for one week and spend one week of observed readings

APPLICATION READING TRAINING

What Works

Providing reading guidelines for each separate applicant type (Early Action & Regular Decision)

Inviting successful Grad Readers back year after year

Holding multiple training opportunities

Holding a de-brief at the end of the reading season

What Does Not Work

Short term Grad Readers

Grad Readers from certain academic disciplines

Reading too fast

A loud reading environment

APPLICATION ITEMS

Grad Reader Review Counselor Review

Transpose courses, rigor, grade trends to information sheet

Review information sheet and institutional priorities

Read and rate:• Essay• Short answer• Letter of recommendation

Suggest decision for Committee

Suggest reading rating

Submit for Counselor review-do not make decision

Time elapsed avg: 10-12 min Time elapsed avg: 2-4 min

Application

$75 Application Fee

Official Transcript

SAT and/or ACT

Letter of Recommendation (1)

Essay (1)

Short Answer Question (1)

READING RATINGS

How UNCW Utilizes

Established to give readings a numerical guideline when reviewing an application. Allowed readers to categorize applications by number rating to help suggest an admissions decision.

Bonus features:

Track students during their first year

Identify “at-risk” students for retention

READING RATINGS

READING RATINGSAssign a PURE NUMERICAL RATING BEFORE making a decision.

1 = Stellar student Excellent SAT CR & M scores 1400 or higher. Writing score consistent

with other scores. ACT composite 32-36 top five% of class if rank is provided or strength of the school is

noteworthy GPA among the strongest in that high school’s applicant pool, Maximum level of rigor offered by HS Excellent involvement in HS and community

2 = Strong student Strong SAT CR & M scores 1200 -1390. Writing score consistent with

other scores. ACT composite 27-31 top 15% of class if rank is provided, or GPA considered strong by HS’s standards academic program that includes good challenge for that HS

very good level of involvement

3 = Solid student Solid SAT’s 1100 to 1190 CR & M. Writing score consistent with other

scores. ACT composite of > 24-26 top 30% of class if rank provided, or GPA considered solid by HS’s standards (> 3.5 in state, 3.25 out of

state, >3.0 stronger privates in or out of state) Some level of extra-curricular involvement or work

READING RATINGSAssign a PURE NUMERICAL RATING BEFORE making a decision.

4 = Low average student SAT’s less than 1100. Writing score consistent with other scores. ACT between 19 and 23 top half of class if rank is provided GPA of 3.0 or higher in state, 2.75 out of state, 2.5 stronger privates Possibly less involvement

5. = Weaknesses in all criteria low scores, low GPA and rank, weak program

6 = High scores, low GPA >1200, decent program, ranked below 50%

7= Low scores, high GPA, high rank, appealing

READING RATINGS

Tips to Develop

Identify your middle 50% of admits (GPA, Rank, Test) and build upon this

Determine what you review on the application and add those categories to the ratings:

For example:

Maximum level of rigor offered by HS

Some level of extra-curricular involvement or work

Develop explanation for staff- how will they use them?

Develop way to track the information

READING RATINGSAssign a PURE NUMERICAL RATING BEFORE making a decision.

1 = Stellar student Excellent SAT CR & M scores 1400 or higher. Writing score consistent

with other scores. ACT composite 32-36 top five% of class if rank is provided or strength of the school is

noteworthy GPA among the strongest in that high school’s applicant pool, Maximum level of rigor offered by HS Excellent involvement in HS and community

2 = Strong student Strong SAT CR & M scores 1200 -1390. Writing score consistent with

other scores. ACT composite 27-31 top 15% of class if rank is provided, or GPA considered strong by HS’s standards academic program that includes good challenge for that HS

very good level of involvement

3 = Solid student Solid SAT’s 1100 to 1190 CR & M. Writing score consistent with other

scores. ACT composite of > 24-26 top 30% of class if rank provided, or GPA considered solid by HS’s standards (> 3.5 in state, 3.25 out of

state, >3.0 stronger privates in or out of state) Some level of extra-curricular involvement or work

ADMISSIONS COMMITTEE

Holds each region accountable to goals

Counselors have ownership of the process

Ensures the best decision goes out the first time

ADMISSIONS COMMITTEEHS‐School Name Name‐First Name‐Last SAT SATW ACT ACTW GPA % LOI STATUS Decision QUAL TYP ETH REASONSchool ONE Student One 1070 520 25 23 4.76 1 3 AUD Admit EA Asian/Asian AmericanSchool ONE Student Two 1280 570 29 28 4.44 6 4 DEC Admit HIAF EA Caucasian/WhiteSchool ONE Student Three 4.43 7 INC EA Caucasian/WhiteSchool ONE Student Four 24 22 4.38 10 1 AUD Admit EA HispanicSchool ONE Student Five 4.35 11 0 INC EA HispanicSchool ONE Student Six 1020 450 22 20 4.31 12 1 AUD Admit EA Caucasian/WhiteSchool ONE Student Seven 1160 470 24 19 4.27 14 5 AUD Admit ACL EA Caucasian/WhiteSchool ONE Student Eight 1030 440 21 18 3.88 23 2 AUD Admit ACL EA Caucasian/WhiteSchool ONE Student Nine 970 450 22 19 3.83 24 4 AUD Admit EA Caucasian/WhiteSchool ONE Student Ten 940 380 19 16 3.74 31 INC RG Caucasian/WhiteSchool ONE Student Eleven 840 410 22 3.34 52 3 AUD Defer EA Hispanic 1F, wrong schSchool ONE Student Twelve 18 14 2.86 66 INC RG Caucasian/White

School TWO Student One 26 25 4.62 1 0 AUD Admit EA Caucasian/WhiteSchool TWO Student Two 25 26 4.6 1 2 AUD Admit EA Caucasian/WhiteSchool TWO Student Three 22 23 4.32 4 1 AUD Admit EA Black/African AmericanSchool TWO Student Four 1000 490 22 20 4.23 6 2 AUD Admit EA Caucasian/WhiteSchool TWO Student Five 1050 490 4.07 9 1 AUD Admit EA Caucasian/White high rankSchool TWO Student Six 1110 500 25 23 4.06 10 0 INC EA Caucasian/WhiteSchool TWO Student Seven 3.86 14 INC EA Black/African AmericanSchool TWO Student Eight 880 400 19 18 3.86 15 2 AUD COM EA Hispanic mi casa connectSchool TWO Student Nine 970 430 22 20 3.75 19 2 AUD Admit EA Caucasian/White

ADMISSIONS COMMITTEE

What Works

Holding a pre-committee

Having snacks available

Encouraging each staff

Providing comfortable seating

Forcing difficult conversations

Taking a break after “emotional” discussions

Having a thorough audit process

What Does Not Work

Committee without the Director

Committee with sick staff

Poor lighting

Long afternoon committees

THE DECISION LETTER

Targeted Fall admit letters:

Legacy

“High Ability”

Admit after Defer

Targeted Spring admit letters:

First Year Spring Admit (FYSA) with Fall waitlist option

Targeted Deny letters:

Legacy

Recommend transfer

Waitlist

Could be offered Fall or Spring

With fall and spring as an option, we can move this group to where the most need occurs.

The materials and correspondence from the Admissions Office was among (if not the) most

sincere, genuine and, well written of all the letters he received.

-Father of admitted student 2015

UNCW is the most well written-compelling acceptance letter I believe Mark has received so far!

-Mom of “Mark”, admitted student 2016

QUESTIONS?

Historical Numbers

Regional Goals

Reading Training

Reading Ratings

Admissions Committee

The Decision Letter

THE FIRST-YEAR DECISION MODELENROLLMENT MANAGEMENT AT THE UNIVERSITY OF NORTH CAROLINA - WILMINGTON

C. Lauren ScottAssociate Director of AdmissionsUniversity of North Carolina Wilmingtonscottc@uncw.edu910-962-7876