Minutes of the Admissions and Financial Aid Committee Meeting
October 8, 1998
This meeting of AFA was a special meeting to which representatives were invited from the Academic Program and Policy Committee, Off Campus Study Committee, and Academic Standing and Advising Committee and the Office of the Dean of the College. The purpose of the meeting was to speak with consultants Jim Scannell and Kathy Kurz to better understand their recommendations for changes in the Henry Wells Scholarship Program.
Present at the meeting were the following:
>From AFA-- Chair Victoria Muñoz, Bird Stasz, Miguel Gil, Abby Lawrence, Cathy Bellomo, Susan Ryan, Ellen Hall. Susan Sloan joined the meeting midway. Regular guest--Meredith Cook.
>From APPC and the Office of the Dean of the College--Diane Koester, Director of Academic Advising.
>From ASA--Cynthia Garrett--Chair of the Committee.
>From OCS--Lydie Haenlin, Director of Off-Campus Study.
Special Guests--Jim Scannell, Kathy Kurz (who joined the meeting midway) of Scannell and Kurz.
Chair Muñoz called the meeting to order, welcomed guests, and asked Jim Scannell to begin the discussion by introducing the rationale for changing the Henry Wells Scholarship Program.
Mr. Scannell reported that he and Ms. Kurz had been struck by Wells' commitment to experiential education and by the broad base of support by alumnae to provide opportunities and housing for current student internships. Wells is doing a lot in a significant way, but has not been talking about it in a compelling and convincing fashion. The kind of education Wells women receive makes every student here an honor student.
Clearly, the College's number one challenge is to building demand, to build a more critical mass of students. Everything the College does must build demand and retain students. One recommendation that will help build demand is already being implemented, that of reducing tuition.
However, the College's most important scholarship program, the Henry Wells program was not building demand. Most of those students were already in the inquiry pool. So the challenge for Scannell and Kurz was to think of how the Henry Wells Program could build demand.
When they asked themselves what Wells does very, very well, it was clear that experiential education was at the top of the list. They believed that Wells should magnify its ability to provide first rate experiential education.
Clear evidence began to emerge about how to shape the program to build demand:
· In recruitment of 17-year-olds, it is not meaningful to talk about the junior year; one must talk to these prospective students about the near term.
· Wells already had a structure in place to provide internships
· It was already clear how tuition reduction was going to work
· Even though most of the students in the Henry Wells Scholarship competition were "losers," that is to say did not get the full tuition scholarship, almost all of them got a $5,000 scholarship, exactly the amount of the tuition reduction. The logic was in place to turn the Henry Wells program into a different kind of program where students are winners. They were all already going to receive a $5,000 reduction in tuition and they were eligible for guaranteed internships if they applied for them, one of them would be a paid internship.
Discussion began at this point in the meeting.
QUESTION: Doesn't this new way of doing the program create a group of haves and have-nots? Why shouldn't everyone be guaranteed an internship?
In response Jim Scannell noted that this could become "universal signature program" 3-5 years from now. However, he believes it is wise to start small and to make sure it is really attractive to 60 and not to only 5 students. If it is "rolled out" properly, it can have both positive recruitment value and positive educational value. This recommendation is designed to bring attention to institutional strengths and to reinforce them positively. The challenge will be to create such an array of opportunities that students will be hard pressed to pick only one.
QUESTION: Why not name this program something other than the Henry Wells Program, and keep the Henry Wells Program as is for, say 3 students? That way we could avoid making this new program seem as if it is "a little of this, a little of that?"
Jim and Kathy were convinced that the Henry Wells Scholars Program had a meaning out in the market place. It was important to use the Henry Wells name for recognition of the new program as a special deal. Moreover an incredible amount of time and energy went into the former Henry Wells Scholars Program and it built no demand. The same energy should be put into this experiential program to build demand. The College should not be doing anything that does not build demand.
As time goes on, the College needs to measure what is working and what is not. This program needs to be a celebration not a competition. The financial side needs to work differently, so that people see it differently. This is not a one-year scholarship times four. Changes may need to be made in 3-4 years.
QUESTION: What exactly is the product we are trying to produce here?
In the discussion that followed, many issues were mentioned:
· Wells must build a group of product that will build demand
· To make the program work, the Career Services Office will need to do a great deal of work.
· The prototype is what we offer now: we already offere 110 or so per year, so we must add to that 50 or 60.
· This program provides opportunities in two stages: the first stage is an opportunity for the first year student that is unpaid, more of a shadow experience; the second is a directed opportunity for a more advanced student and it is a paid experiential, off-campus or internship opportunity. The array can be very broad.
· Since internships are credit-bearing, it is important to figure out the academic implications for faculty work load as the program is implemented.
QUESTION: We know the decision to change the program has been made, but we do not know what is untouchable.
Jim responded that nothing is untouchable, and that the program must be shaped over time. It should not affect the credit-bearing or non-credit bearing aspects of internships or off-campus programs. Everything is entertainable as long is there is a good educational experience involved. The point is for the academic side of the College to design a program that is really good so the admissions side will have an excellent program to market. The purpose is to create a program that is flexible enough for students to do what they need to do educationally over the summer, or during the semester.
QUESTION: How can we market it when it is not yet designed?
Admissions counselors have already received positive feedback from the ideas, and have been marketing it already.
QUESTION: The internship worth $3,000 is understandable, but the first year experience January opportunity is more nebulous. How can we guarantee the quality of those first-year experiences?
Although the first year experience internship will be harder to define, it is the guaranteed aspect of it that is different. And the first one must be tied to the more substantive second one. The link between two experiences is what makes this program different.
QUESTION: How do we get around the student comment that she will get a summer job anyway? What the students are hearing is that Wells is going pay for my summer job.
It is important that we create quality experiences not just summer jobs. To market effectively, it is important to find the stories, get the feedback from the internships that took place last year, find the quality stories to roll out the quality product.
At the meeting was drawing to a close, Dean Koester noted that we would need to have curricular choices available by the second Tuesday in February to take them to the faculty. There needs to be a coalition of >several faculty committees to create this program. As this work continues, Jim and Kathy offered their services. They meet with the Enrollment Management Team once a month and they are willing to give advice to those working with the curriculum
The meeting adjourned at 2:30 p.m. with thanks to Jim Scannell and Kathy Kurz and to all guests for the rich discussion, and a sense of urgency that there is much work to be done in a short time.
Ellen Hall, Recorder