admissions and registration consulting services st. louis ... stlcc representatives and current...

Admissions and Registration Consulting Services

St. Louis Community College

Wendy Kilgore, Ph.D., Director of Research and Managing Consultant

Michele Sandlin, Managing Consultant

Initial Visit Sept. 19th, Second Visit Oct. 9-11, Third Visit Oct. 23-25, 2013

St. Louis Community College Admissions and Registration Review, Sept. 19, Oct. 9-11, Oct. 23-25, 2013 2

Project Summary

St. Louis Community College (STLCC) engaged AACRAO Consulting to conduct a one-time comprehensive review and assessment of the STLCC’s admissions and registration procedures and operations. The review included an assessment of both the centralized and decentralized admissions and registration services at all four campuses (Meramec, Florissant Valley, Forest Park and Wildwood) and the Cosand Center. The review included:

– Veterans affairs

– International student services

– Policies and procedures

– Operations and processes

– Organizational structure and staffing levels


Project Summary

– Operations and processes

– Measurement of performance against benchmarks and best practices

– Compliance with ADA, FERPA

– Compliance with HLC accreditation criteria

– On-line student processes

– Ellucian Banner – business process review


STLCC Project Team

Jill Guyton - Manager, Transcript Evaluation/Degree Audit, Cosand Center

Kelli Burns - Director of Institutional Research, Cosand Center

Joan McCready - Student Lead, TESS, Cosand Center

Chris Fletcher - Manager, Admission and registration, Florissant Valley

Cheryl Fowler - Student Admission/registration Asst II, Selective Admission Programs, Forest Park

Karla Gable - Sr. Manager, Enrollment Processing Systems/College Registrar

Bertha Mooreland - Manager, Advising, Forest Park


STLCC Project Team

Holly Schuessler - Student Admission/registration Asst II, International Admission, Meramec

Sue Daniel - Coordinator Admission and registration, Meramec

Marilyn Taras - Director of Student Affairs, Wild Wood

Joanie Friend - Director of Enrollment Management, Cosand Center

Regina Blackshear - District Director of Financial Aid, Cosand Center

Teresa Huether - Professor/Achieving the Dream Coordinator, all sites


Pre-Visit Activities

As part of this multi-visit consultation, Michele Sandlin and Wendy Kilgore coordinated with STLCC’s Karla Gable to create a project team, organize discovery materials and coordinate a half-day project kick-off meeting. During the kick-off meeting the project team was introduced to the goals of the project and their role in the project. The project team was also invited to share their thoughts about what is working well and what needs improvement relative to admissions and registration. Thoughts were collected via sticky notes and these were grouped into themes with help from the project team. The themes identified by the project team carried throughout the engagement and will be addressed in the remainder of the report.

In addition to leading the kick-off meeting, the consultants reviewed all of the discovery materials and college website in advance of the first site visit.


On-Site Activities

Michele Sandlin and Wendy Kilgore met with approximately 266 STLCC representatives and current students over the course of the six days of on-site meetings. On-site visits were made to all four campuses and the Cosand Center. STLCC staff, faculty and administrators from all of those locations were invited to meet and speak with Michele and Wendy to discuss admissions and registration functions.

STLCC representation included:

– VPAA/VPSA

– CIO

– Two campus presidents

– Campus vice presidents of student affairs


On-Site Activities

– Department chairs

– Deans

– Faculty

– Financial aid director

– admissions managers

– admissions and registration staff

– Assessment staff

– Advising staff

– Counseling staff

– TESS staff

– Cosand Center admissions staff

– Marketing and public relations staff

– Financial aid staff

– Registrar

– Student accounts and bursar staff

– Transcript and degree audit staff

– International student services staff

– Veterans services staff

– Online learning director

– Students

– Institutional research staff


Executive Summary

AACRAO Consulting’s commitment to any project is to provide objective, clear, and frank observations and recommendations in a best practice, professional manner. By delivering observations paired with actionable recommendations, we will be able to best assist an institution to support student and institutional success. Our assessment is that STLCC overall faces several challenges related to admissions and registration. However we do not want to lose sight of the positives which include an emerging focus on student success among management and administration, the apparent success of the blended model of service at the Wildwood campus, and the project team’s expressed desire to improve service. These three key strengths can serve to help guide and lead the college in the right direction to make the necessary changes outlined in this report.


Executive Summary

Based on our assessment of STLCC’s admissions/registration practices compared to leading and similar institutions there are larger scale issues at play. If these are not addressed in a timely manner and systematically will negate any fine-grain changes to processes.

First and foremost, although STLCC has a motto of “One College” this is not apparent in practice, in staffing and in service to students. It was remarked that what “One College” means to one person is likely to be different for another which contributes to the differences in the application of policy to practice. The college does not appear to have made it clear what this motto means in terms of campus and district level responsibility, authority and accountability.


Executive Summary

The current organizational structure and position responsibilities which separate admissions and registration at all but Wildwood has led to deep silos and lack of cross-training between admissions and registration and among specialists within the teams. This structure may account for why admissions and registration customer service was reported as poor by several students and internal constituents.

Practices and the application of technology to support practices are at least 10-15 years behind common and leading practice. This current state is likely partly attributed to the fact that there have been few professional development opportunities in the last decade or so for functional leadership to stay current, and learn what and how other institutions are advancing to serve students and support student success.


Executive Summary

STLCC has been through this process of identifying needed process improvements at least twice in the last five years and both efforts resulted in very little change. It was reported that this was at least partially tied to frequent changes in and a lack of authority by leadership to hold others accountable for implementing the changes. It was also reported that some very long term employees basically dug their heels in and refused to change. They would just wait it out until leadership changed. Many of the recommendations in this report repeat what has already been recommended in the previous endeavors. The question STLCC must address this time, is:

“What will make the change happen this time?”


Executive Summary

In closing, STLCC must change now or face continued challenges with admissions, registration and customer service. This is not something we state lightly or without an understanding of the impact in receiving feedback of this nature. It is our belief that the magnitude of change needed requires a paradigm shift in culture, responsibility and accountability throughout the college and a shift in the role of the district office in supporting and leading admissions and registration functions.


Overarching Recommendations

To begin, there are ten overarching recommendations, based on interviews, research, and analysis of our findings:

– Define and embrace vision, mission and values related to the “One College” motto

– Define and implement a district office staffing structure to provide campuses with back office functions for admissions and registration.

– Maximize technology to support services and student success

– Optimally deploy human resources

– Ramp up customer service

– Strengthen policies and streamline procedures

– Improve communication

– Adopt project management methods

– Enhance professional development and training

– Enhance reporting and data warehouse solutions to support strategic and operational needs for admissions and registration.


Define and Embrace the “One College” Motto

The framework to define and embrace the “One College” motto exists within several of the College publications including the core values document. However, it needs more development, emphasis and several administrative champions to change the culture. Renewed commitment could energize admissions and registration in reaching the next level of service.

1. Implement vision, mission and values at the district and campus levels.

2. Develop plans, goals, and assessment cycles, headed by administrative champions.

3. Build a special focus on student success with college-wide engagement.


Define and Implement District Office Support Model

The campuses continue to operate autonomously with regards to District Office (DO) oversight and guidance. This leads to process drift and variation between the campuses for these services which contributes to student dissatisfaction and confusion.

1. Implement a DO staffing model where there is clear functional leadership for both admissions and registration.

– If the college decides to embrace the blended service model at Wildwood college-wide, it is recommended that a single administrative position be created to oversee admissions and registration.

• Expand staffing and service in this unit to support all operational functions for admissions and registration including but not necessarily limited to:



Transcript evaluation (should be under the same organizational umbrella as registration, records and admissions)

Recruitment and Outreach

admissions processing

Records management

Degree audit

Graduation processing

FERPA

Related compliance reporting

All three National Student Clearinghouse processes (NSC)

Functional lead and technology power-user(s) for Banner, etc.

Academic calendar development

Class scheduling

registration processes



2. Clearly define, communicate and support the purpose, responsibility, authority and accountability for this unit throughout the college.

3. Reexamine the role, function and reporting structure for the enrollment management division.


Assumptions for Proposed Organizational Changes

1. It is a phased process.

2. The “One College” motto is the direction STLCC wishes to proceed.

3. There is value in mirroring peer institutions’ centralized support models.

4. There will be a need to redeploy existing campus positions to build a complete DO staff.

5. Recommended policy changes are complete and universally adopted.


Assumptions for Proposed Organizational Changes

6. Recommended process and scope changes are implemented.

7. The use of technology has been maximized to support services.

8. There is a blending of admissions and registrar functions at all campuses.


Possible Model of Central Services

VC Enrollment Management

(Separates SA from AA)

Director of Enrollment Services/Registrar

AD Recruiting (EM) and

admissions

AD registration

and Records

AD Systems and

Reporting

Director of Financial Aid and Scholarships

District Office financial aid

processing staff


AD Recruiting, Outreach and Admissions Responsibilities

1. Coordinate recruiting initiatives college-wide.

2. Coordinate K-8 outreach and high school relations.

3. Supervise recruiting and outreach staff.

4. Coordinate NSRW and Orientation programs.

5. Develop annual recruit through admissions communication plan.

6. Oversee staff responsible for admissions processing including selective admissions programs.


AD Registration and Records Responsibilities

1. Program the degree audit system and education planning system.

2. Coordinate graduation ceremony and program.

3. Supervise transfer articulation staff.

4. NSC processes.

5. Supervise student services staff responsible for all back office support for registration and records processing including:

– Graduation checks using the degree audit system

– registration and records management and corrections

– Document and records management

– Incoming transcript entry (not transfer articulation)

– Releasing official transcripts through the NSC process


AD Systems and Reporting

1. Serve as the Banner Internet Native Banner (INB) and Self-Service Banner (SSB) student module power user.

2. Complete all term start up and shut down responsibilities for admissions and registration.

3. Support the rolling and building of the schedule of classes.

4. Coordinate with AD registration and Records to support degree audit system.

5. Develop and support admissions and registration strategic and operational reports including enrollment dashboards and exception reports.


Maximize Technology

Significant advancements in efficiency and effectiveness, as well as student and staff satisfaction, can materialize if latent functions in Banner and other applications are implemented. More functionality will leverage other transformations.

1. Implementations such as those indicated in the remainder of this report should be considered, prioritized and acted upon in the near future.

2. Grant appropriate and complete access to Banner and related technology to all staff which will enable all stakeholders to provide the appropriate level of service to a student (i.e., limit runaround).


Maximize Technology

3. Uniform conventions and renewed/continuous staff training are essential for the appropriate and maximized use of the applications.

4. Implement a student lifecycle Contact Relationship Management (CRM) solution with built in admissions application and prospect portal functionality.

5. Re-engineer or redeploy the current Self-Service Banner (SSB) environment to take advantage of unused functionality and user interface (UI) changes.

6. Redeploy the U-Achieve degree audit solution to take advantage of the improved UI and education planning functions (may need to purchase U Plan for full functionality).


Optimally Deploy Human Resources

1. While many staff appeared committed to student service, three of the four campuses have an admissions and registration staffing model which is extremely siloed and maintains a fragmented focus on tasks and accountabilities.

2. Assess paths toward converting all admissions and registration staff to a blended model.

– Sample position descriptions from other institutions have been loaded into the project folder.

3. Restructure staffing to prioritize customer service as the number one focus and expand self-service kiosks.

4. Develop technology power-users for each functional area.


Optimally Deploy Human Resources

4. Update and modify all existing admissions and registration related position descriptions to match the professionalization of the fields.

5. Maximize utilization of student employees.

– Student employees can be used at the campuses and district office to support many routine functions.

6. Eliminate knowledge and skill silos for the general student population across the college.

– For special populations and services strengthen or develop “Knowledge and Transaction Teams.”

• e.g., disability services, transfer articulation and degree audit, transfer-out services, initial process for veterans, and international services.


Ramp Up Customer Service

The increasing complexity of systems/services, external pressures and the necessity for better retention/completion rates demands that STLCC perform excellent customer service.

1. Redesign customer service points and reduce student runaround by enabling staff to answer questions and process transactions where appropriate.

– Develop and expect cross-functionality.

– Provide view access to Banner.

2. Hold staff accountable for delivering quality service in all channels: phone, online, e-media, face to face (F2F), and print.


Ramp Up Customer Service

– Develop and implement service standards for internal and external customers.

– Improve responsiveness in both timeliness and accuracy.

3. Develop a college campaign to focus on better customer service through better information.

4. Require externally facilitated customer service training for all admissions and registration staff.

– Establish annual customer service training refreshers for all front line staff.


Strengthen Policies and Streamline Procedures

Incomplete, absent, contradictory and ponderous policies and procedures are generating routines that depress service, efficiency, and threaten institutional integrity. A number of desired software implementations rely on carefully developed policies and procedures to function properly.

1. Clarify, create, update, map, streamline, and/or document key policies and procedures.

– STLCC may benefit from a complete redesign of ideal services from scratch rather than remapping existing processes and attempting to modify those processes. The latter has not been successful to-date.

2. Bring stakeholders to the table to identify issues and develop solutions.

– Continuous staff training is essential for adherence to policies and procedures.


Strengthen Policies and Streamline Procedures

1. The processes listed below should be addressed first:

– Web application for admission

• Domestic

• Visiting

• International

– Credit for prior learning (military, etc.)

– Definition, purpose and method for determining a Regular vs. General student

– Document and records management

– SSB not being used by advisors, department chairs, etc. for overrides Transfer articulation rules not built in Banner

– Web registration

• Drop-add deadlines and withdrawal process

– College web page update


Improve Communication

Aggressive attention to communication with students, with the community, and between and among staff is a vital ingredient in making advances in technology, customer service and more.

1. Using stakeholder groups (including students), assess current communication strategies and develop plans for implementation.

– Special focus on communication sequences for inquiries, admits and continuing students.

– Special emphasis on internal communications to improve performance.

– Utilize ad-hoc brown bag lunches, internal webinars, insta-trainings, focus groups, Survey Monkey, clicker response, and other spot strategies to engage staff and students.



1. Hold all staff accountable for delivering quality service in all channels: phone, online, web, e-media, F2F, and print.

2. Ensure consistency of processes and access to information across all platforms beginning with the web.

– It is recommended that all communication to students be written at no more than an eighth grade reading level.

– Information should be distributed to students as needed and not all at once.

– The web-page redesign should be outsourced to be completed in the next year.



3. Develop strong procedures for disseminating changes in policy and/or practice to all stakeholders in the college in a timely manner.

– Provide a means for addressing any questions about the changes.


Adopt Project Management Methods

STLCC will need to implement several large projects in order to make the necessary changes. The recommendations in this report imply several transformations. STLCC would be well-served by a more formal, facilitated approach to project planning and management.

1. Utilize formal methods of project management for new and revised programs and initiatives.

2. Involve key stakeholders – faculty, staff, students.

3. Appoint project champions and facilitators.

4. Commit to a prioritization and time-to-completion process.


Enhance Professional Development and Training

The ability for STLCC to develop and maintain a competing position in the local, regional and global education market depends on professional development and training. Several gaps in STLCC’s service quality and programs may be traced to limited professional development and training.

1. Enable broader staff access to state, regional and national professional conferences either in-person or through webinars.

2. Implement an internal leadership development program for staff that supports pathways for recognition and advancement.

3. Strengthen internal training programs, with special attention to continuous training and improvement.

4. Build systems for staff goal-setting and feedback.


Enhance Reporting and Data Warehouse Solutions

Access to accurate and well-defined data is imperative to successful and efficient admissions and registrations operations.

1. Develop a data dictionary for all fields associated with admissions and registration functions.

2. Develop operational reports based on this data to eliminate the need for paperwork as a means of communicating data changes to various departments.

3. Implement the Operational Data Source/Enterprise Data Warehouse (ODS/EDW) solution to replace the homegrown and reportedly fragile data warehouse.

4. Assign and train functional leads to develop strategic and operational reports to support operations.


Compliance – HLC and FERPA: Observations

1. The current interpretation and application of FERPA is incorrect, incomplete and holds the college to a stringent and hard to manage definition of what is included in a student record.

– For example:

• The current FERPA handout for faculty talks about how to post grades in a public setting. This practice has not been supported for several years.

• It also advises faculty that they are not able to share FERPA protected information over email or by phone. This is also not correct in particular when this information is conveyed to a college issued email account or steps have been taken to identify the student over the phone.

• None of the materials we viewed contain anything about health and safety emergencies.

We did not have access to the online FERPA training.



– An education record has been defined in a student handbook as including “notes taken during an advising session,” “class list on desktop” and “electronic document or email” among other components.

• By defining these as part of the student record the college is obligated to produce all of these documents upon request of the student or subpoena. It is likely that the college does not really intend to keep all email or have access to handwritten advisor notes.

– The current interpretation of allowing access based on a student’s IRS status relies heavily on staff determining what that status is.

• This practice is not required by FERPA and many have chosen to opt out of this option particularly when technology has enabled students to grant proxy access to their records through the web.



2. There is no non-proctored online assessment solution.

– STLCC online delivery designated courses currently require exams to be proctored onsite.

• Labeling of online courses is not accurate and misleading.

– Online course delivery is compliant with HLC guidelines at 75% minimum online.

– This causes confusion and is an additional hardship for online students to come to campus.

• It was reported that the highest number of complaints from online students is due to not being aware of or able to travel to campus for F2F requirements.

• It was reported that STLCC is losing enrollments due to incorrect labeling of online course delivery not being 100% online.



– The NSRW PowerPoint presentation explains the types of distance delivery, but courses are not labeled as such.

• “Online = activities, content, and assessment delivered entirely or nearly entirely online”.

• “Hybrid = combination of face-to-face and online”.

3. Course substitutions and waivers have become routine, and are not being appropriately used as an atypical exception.

– The substitution process has been misused repeatedly as an approval process for transfer equivalency or to suffice for the lack of updating program requirements.

– Too many signatures are required on the substitution waiver form.



– The process is manual, requiring students to run around campus and chase signatures.

• No online web form.

• The form originates in Advising. Once completed is scanned, indexed and paper copies are retained in admissions and registration.


Compliance – HLC and FERPA: Recommendations

1. Strengthen and correct the current FERPA information for students. Create and update the FERPA training for faculty, staff and administrators, differentiating by audience.

– An example of a strong FERPA web page is included on the next slide.

2. Course waivers and substitutions should be limited in use and only for the purpose intended.

– The process should be in SSB and advisors able to complete the full process for the student.

3. An online examination solution needs to be explored for 100% online delivery courses.

– If this is not possible, online courses should be correctly labeled as hybrid as per HLC guidelines.


Sample FERPA Page – Michigan Tech

Note: This webpage does not yet reflect the most recent changes in the regulations regarding the relaxation of some of the reporting rules.


Compliance – HLC and FERPA: Recommendations

HLC Commission Definitions for Distance-Delivered Courses and Programs:

• Distance-delivered courses are those in which all or the vast majority (typically 75% or more) of the instruction and interaction occurs via electronic communication, correspondence, or equivalent mechanisms, with the faculty and students physically separated from each other.”

– HLC does state that any online course must clearly define requirements that are not 100% online and should be labeled appropriately. Courses should be stated as hybrid.

• HLC online course guidelines state that “any required face-to-face, on–the-ground work is clearly stated”.

– http://www.ncahlc.org/Information-for-Institutions/distance-delivery.html

– This issue is also addressed in registration and records, recommendation number five.

http://www.ncahlc.org/Information-for-Institutions/distance-delivery.html










1. There is no central admissions leadership in the district office.

2. Enrollment management (Recruiting and Outreach) and admissions are disconnected.

– Both units are unclear about their roles, work in silos, and are not functioning as a cohesive admissions unit.

– This is negatively affecting yield from inquiry to enrolled.

3. Marketing and recruitment communications are haphazard, reactionary, disjointed, and not strategically planned.

– There is no formal communication plan based on target markets.

– There is no annual publications calendar planning.

Admissions: Observations


– The District Office of Public Information and Marketing is trying to pull all recruitment mediums into the central office for consistency.

– There are representatives for public information on the campuses.

• They frequently cross directions and duplicate efforts.

• At times the STLCC brand becomes lax due to individual campus practices.

4. Admissions application.

– The application is cluttered with unnecessary information and requests for student information.

– Residency questions on the application are open ended complicating the residency process.

– It was reported that some of the campuses are printing off the online application and hand loading into Banner.



5. Admissions status.

– The admissions classifications are confusing and require unnecessary processes and documentation.

• General student and visiting non-degree applicants are basically the same classification with the same process, requirements, and documentation.

It was reported that the Visiting Student status is not used.

• General student is not degree seeking status and is not eligible for financial aid. But the student is required to complete a full application for admission and submit all required transcripts. The same is true for visiting non-degree status.

• The NSRW explains the classifications to new students as “degree seeking” (Regular) and “non-degree seeking” (general, visiting). The same terminology is not being used consistently.

6. There is no “absolute” cut off admission deadlines per term.




– Students are being admitted well into the start of the term, too late to be successful. They are behind before they have even started, particularly at risk students.

7. Admissions processing.

– The admission offices are not using the Banner checklist.

– Admissions is not using the auto admit process in Banner.

– Admissions is not providing an auto response to the student (splash page).

– All applicants receive the same letter of admission (LOA) regardless of student or status type.

• admissions is requesting duplicate copies of the LOA from the Cosand Center to have paper copy in file at the campus.



9. The New Student Workshop and Red Carpet Days were reported to be working well.

10. STLCC admissions requirements are being interpreted differently on each campus.

11. There is a training deficit.

– Lack of cross training and depth in A&R positions.

– Standing informational meetings are routinely cancelled.

11.The handoff from admissions to assessment is not streamlined.

– Students have not received necessary information once admitted. They don’t come prepared with the necessary materials to take the placement test. The assessment staff spend a lot of time explaining the test process.



12.Lack of student success focus in recruitment and admissions.

– There are no student surveys, focus groups, data, regular student feedback mechanisms to measure success and make improvements in strategy and process.

– Retention rate first to second year was reported at approximately 60%.

• There are no recruitment strategies to address retention.

– There is no first year experience strategy.


1. There needs to be a designated admissions leader in the central Cosand Center office.

2. EM and admissions need to be more closely aligned in order to ensure consistency, accuracy, and continuity as future students move through the funnel.

– Quarterly meetings at minimum should be established to share goals, communications, planning, and training in order to meet enrollment objectives.

3. The district level public information and marketing office will need to take a more direct approach to align all recruitment and marketing efforts centrally and on the campuses.

– A detailed communication strategy needs to be implemented.

Admissions: Recommendations


– All marketing mediums need to be planned well in advance of the next recruitment cycle (usually 12-18 months in advance).

4. The application needs to be thoroughly reviewed and only require information that is needed to admit the applicant based on their admit status.

– As noted in the technology section of this report the residency questions should be corrected for yes or no responses via radio buttons.

– The online application should upload into Banner.

• Cease any printing or creation of a back-up paper file. All information is in Banner.



5. General or visiting student status is designed for students who are typically part-time and do not plan to pursue a degree or credential from STLCC.

– Basic demographic information is all that is needed to admit a student under general status.

• Combine general and visiting student status under one classification.

Add language to the general status description to include visiting, non-degree, non-credential seeking at STLCC.

• This status does not require a full, formal admissions process.

No documentation or transcripts are required.

There are no minimum entrance requirements.

• A quick admit application process is all that is required to upload the student in Banner.

Basic contact information is needed in order to communicate with the student and to create the general student record, the academic record.



• Most institutions charge a reduced application fee (if there is one) due to minimal processing of the application and no documentation review.

• Non-degree students are part-time students and usually are allowed to enroll in no more than eight or nine credits per term under this status.

• If a general/visiting/non-degree admissions student wishes to enroll in more than the eight or nine credit limit, most campuses have a policy that the student must complete the full admissions process and be fully admitted to the institution.

• No placement exams are needed or should be required under this status.

• Some students will opt to be in a regular degree-seeking admissions status to the institution in order to obtain financial aid and be considered a fully admitted student.

– No transcripts or exam credit reports should be required.

– General/visiting/non-degree status does not qualify for financial aid.

– This status does not guarantee regular admission to the institution.




6. Establish term deadlines with an absolute final date that STLCC will accept applications and process admission.

– End the practice of admitting students after the term has started.

– Establish a final deadline date no later than the Friday before the first day of classes.

– Applications received for the current term after the deadline will be rolled to the next applicable term.

• Students who start late are less likely to be successful.

• By changing the practice and encouraging students to wait for late start or next term courses STLCC is setting those students up for a greater possibility of success and retention than the current practice.



7. Improve admissions processing by implementing the following procedures as soon as possible:

– Create the admissions checklist and train all campuses users on consistent application.

– Develop automation rules for admission and web splash pages to support auto admission for most applications.

– Cease printing and distribution of LOAs to campuses for paper files.

– LOAs need to be customized by student and application type.

8. The STLCC district office should instruct and train the campuses on STLCC admissions requirements and ensure each campus is applying admissions requirements accurately.

– Only the single, district approved, STLCC admissions materials should be distributed.



9. The admitted student communication strategy and transition process to enrolled student needs to be more fully developed and consistently implemented in order to increase student success.

– Provide an email response to the student.

• Assess the next steps piece and NWSR for gaps in information.

• Review and update content where language or verbiage isn’t easily understandable or clear to students.

• Review information about the placement test.

Consult the assessment staff about the most frequent questions received from students, how students are unprepared, and what would help students perform better.

Work with the assessment office to implement quick surveys of students in order to improve communications.


Registration and Records: Observations

1. The centralization of transcript evaluation has reportedly improved the process. However, there is still room for further streamlining to bring the process and use of technology in line with other institutions.

– The transfer articulation tables in Banner are not populated, leaving articulation decisions a manual process which introduces human error and slows the process.

– Course equivalencies are not made based on the year the course was taken, leaving some specialized courses to be evaluated as equivalent to today’s courses when the learning outcomes and content have changed over time.

– Credits are evaluated only based on the program of study at the time of admission.

• There is no trigger to reassess the transcript if a student changes programs.



– Further, students are now able to run “what-if” analyses through the degree audit solution.

• Without a complete credit evaluation, these analyses can be wrong and when used to self-advise result in a student taking classes he already has completed and could have been applied as transfer credit.

2. Many of the registration and records processes unnecessarily require a paper form when Banner functionality exists to replace the paper form. For example:

– Student course withdrawal

– Address changes

– Returning student update information

– Application for graduation

– Official transcript request



3. Staff in financial aid, admissions, enrollment management, advising and registration all use a different method or form for storing student notes.

4. It was reported that the degree audit programming is incomplete and as such contributes to inaccurate advising and the high volume of substitutions and waivers.

5. The current practice of labeling online courses that require proctored exams as “online” in the schedule of classes is misleading to students and is not a best practice.



6. Current documented procedures include phone procedures which are used to verify a student’s identity before answering questions about the student’s record. However, this is not used in practice. Students are required to show or fax a picture ID to reset the personal identification number for self-service Banner.

7. It was reported that STLCC has never engaged in a study to measure if students can complete any degree offered in a reasonable timeframe based on class offerings term to term.

– Anecdotal evidence from staff familiar with the schedule and programs offered at STLCC and the number of waivers and substitutions processed would indicate that there are several programs that are offered but cannot be completed in a reasonable timeframe because of the class schedule offerings.



– The class schedule offerings do not appear to be driven by student demand and educational plans.

8. The current document management practices negatively impact the staff by requiring them to dedicate a great deal of time to scan transactional documents which are most often already translated into data in Banner.

– What has been observed elsewhere is staff “never” return to a scanned document.

• Essentially the practice of document imaging has been placed in front of the process of determining what really needs to be kept and why.

• This is particularly true when the vast majority of the student record data resides in the student information system (Banner) which it is already keeping.



• Imaging forms that have already been processed is often an unwise use of time.

– The practice also means that staff are working to the exception not the norm.

• Images are kept for everything just in case there is a rare human error in data input so that the image of the form can be viewed to prove what happened and what was requested.

• It was reported that the official guide from the state indicates that permanent records must be paper or microfiched, so the current use of technology (Banner or BDMS) in either case is non-compliant with this requirement.

STLCC is seeking clarification on this requirement and seeking permission to have Banner be the repository of all official records.



9. The late registration and course scheduling management practices do not support student success.

– Waiting until the first week of classes to cancel or change course times and days is not conducive to student success and satisfaction.

– Current practice has been described to include rescheduling the student for the same class on a different day and time without first checking with the student.

– Students reported that they were not notified in a timely manner about the schedule changes.

10.There are at least a couple of dozen paper forms that students are required to use and are only accessible on paper.

– These forms are on an intranet page inaccessible to students.



11.Most of the paper forms ask a student to indicate which campus they attend or wish to attend.

– Campus information should not be requested on any forms since STLCC is one college and a student is a student of the college, not the campus.

12.The current course withdrawal practice is one of the paper based processes and was reported by some registration staff to be required by financial aid to process R2T4.

– The DO financial aid director confirmed that this is a misunderstanding of the practice and that paper forms are not needed.

• Financial aid uses reports to determine who has withdrawn.



13.Although the functionality exists in Banner to support registration waitlists, it is not currently being used.

14.STLCC uses the NSC degree verify and enrollment verify service but does not use NSC service for official transcript ordering.

– In addition the available Banner functionality for this purpose is also not being used leaving current and former students only a paper based process.

15.There is functionality in Banner which allows students to assign other users access to their FERPA protected information through the web (web proxy). This function is not being used by the college and currently requires a paper form.


Registration and Records: Recommendations

1. In the next two to four months confirm the accuracy of the existing transfer equivalency spreadsheets and use this data to populate the articulation tables in Banner for the top 10 transfer institutions.

– Train transfer articulation staff on how to use all of the functionality in Banner to support articulation rule building and auto articulation decisions.

– Implement a year to year equivalency for course articulation.

– Ensure that all transfer articulation tables are updated as needed on an annual basis.

– Evaluate all transfer credits on each transcript as it is received.

• This will need to be coordinated with degree audit processing to ensure that no more than 40 transfer credits are applied to any STLCC degree per stated catalog requirements.



– No longer require students to submit a transfer articulation request form.

• If the student is admitted process their transcript.

– Automate the transfer articulation completed letter process and implement a transcript received automated process.

– Disable the “what-if” degree audit analysis until the transfer credit practice is changed for all existing students or in the short term, create a warning message that tells the student the audit may not be accurate if the student has previously unevaluated transfer credit.

2. As soon as possible and coinciding with the improvement of SSB recommended in the technology section of this report, enable students to complete the following through SSB:



– Student course withdrawal

– Address changes

– Returning student update information

– Application for graduation

– Official transcript request (through NSC)

3. Initiate a college-wide practice of using SPACMNT as the student record comment form for all admissions, registration, financial aid and advising comments.

– Grant access to view SPACMNT to any staff who work with students on a regular basis.

– This change in practice will enable anyone who is working with a student to see what the student has been advised to do or not do based on a previous transaction with any of these departments.



4. Form a working group to determine where the degree audit programming gaps reside and update all degree audits to reduce the volume of substitutions and waivers to less than five percent annually.

– Once the degree audit programming has been confirmed to be accurate use the degree audit as the only check as to whether or not a student has met graduation requirements.

5. It is recommended that any online course that requires proctored exams or work be labeled as a hybrid course.

– STLCC is attempting to expand its online offering and although the HLC allows a course to be labeled online even if up to 25% of the grading content required a proctored assessment this practice is misleading to students and counter to leading practice.



– Today’s students expect that an online course is 100% online and they will select a course from another institution that meets this definition.

6. Retrain staff to use the phone verification procedures to reset PINs and release FERPA protected information over the phone.

7. In the next six months complete a degree progression analysis of the ability for a student to complete any program offered by the STLCC in a reasonable timeframe according to the current schedule of classes practices.

– If it is confirmed that students are in fact not able to complete some programs in a timely manner based on current scheduling practices, revise the schedule practices to meet the needs of students.



8. As soon as possible cease the practice of imaging documents which are purely transactional in nature and used to indicate to staff what information to input into Banner.

– This change in practice needs to coincide with a change to the records retention and disposition schedule.

– Where the document imaging practice is in place solely for the purpose of addressing exceptions, clarify both policy and procedure to empower staff to make decisions based on the information available to them in Banner.

– If paper forms continue to be used, place a statement at the bottom of the form that is it is the responsibility of the student to retain the document for their records.

• No longer use carbonless copy forms.

• Return the form to the student once processed and if processed in person.



9. Update the college-wide records retention and disposition policy as soon as possible.

– Seek and gain permission from the state to identify Banner as the official record.

– Post the new policy in a readily accessible location such as an internal web page or internal wiki, share the policy with all faculty and staff and offer training for the implementation of the policy.

– The policy should address all academic records regardless of form and location.

– The Registrar is typically responsible for the academic document retention and destruction.

– Where possible the policy should be consistent in its defined purge cycle across student and document types so as to make the purge process as easy as possible.



– Thoughtful attention should be given to which records are created, the format they are retained in, and the business and/or compliance need for the retention and the destruction cycle for those records.

– The retention of e-mail communication regarding a student’s academic record should also be addressed in this policy.

– The policy should also contain a component for addressing inactive students.

– Records purging also applies to electronic records so how this is accomplished should be addressed as well.



10. End the practice of making changes to the schedule of classes during the first week of the term.

– A change of this nature will also require that STLCC revisit its late registration and admissions practices.

• As the evidence will support, students who start late are less likely to be successful. By changing the practice and encouraging students to wait for late start or next term courses STLCC is setting those students up for a greater possibility of success and retention than the current practice.

11.Until all of the paper forms are converted to electronic practices or web enabled forms, create an easy to find public web page to store the PDF copies of all of the forms.



12.Eliminate the campus identification from all forms and from the student Banner record.

13. As soon as possible, enable students to withdraw from courses through SSB.

14.Within the next academic year, pilot the Banner waitlist process for the most high demand courses.

15.As soon as possible engage the NSC to provide students and alumni access to their official transcripts.

– Eliminate the paper process.



16.Enable the web-proxy functionality in SSB and start directing students to that process instead of requiring a paper form.


1. There is a disconnect in communications between the Cosand Center and the campuses.

– Roles are not defined between Cosand and the campuses.

• There is no direction from or to the central office.

• At times there are two sets of “marching orders,” one from Cosand and one from the campuses.

• There are no written guidelines.

• Students are asking the same questions at different campuses and offices and are getting different answers.

Staff reported that they are frustrated.

Students aren’t necessarily gaming the system; it’s more that they don’t know who to ask or where to get answers.

– The campuses are not consistent in policies, processes, and information.

Communications: Observations


Communication: Observations

2. There is no consensus or firm policy about the use of the student’s college email as the uniform means of communication.

– This means that students receive official college email from many sources to their personal accounts, through BlackBoard and hard-copy.

3. Students report a great deal of “runaround” issues, which was echoed by staff.

– This may be the result of poor training across each of the campuses of the different services and inaccurate referrals.

– It was reported that this may also be the result of unwillingness to respond to students for whom English is the second language.


Communication: Observations 4. Banner letter generator is not the best method for student

communication.

– It was reported that no one outside of TESS can generate mass emails to students.

– The letters are clunky, complicated, not very personalized and hard to change if needed.

– This feature does not support text messaging.

5. STLCC does not have a student portal to support a single sign on location for all student related technology and communication.

– Students must know how to log on to BlackBoard, email and SSB.

– A portal would enable a much easier student user interface.

– It would also support a more diverse communication platform including targeting messaging, announcements and other features.


Communication: Recommendations

1. Update the STLCC student communication policy to identify the college issued student email account as the official means of communication with enrolled students.

– Train all staff, faculty and administrators on how to use student email through BlackBoard and SSB.

– Create exception reports to monitor for areas where retraining might be needed.

– Offer quick training guides to all students on how to forward their STLCC issued email account to a preferred personal email account if so desired.

• Information should be included during NSRW.

2. Much of the student runaround can be tied to current processes and lack of cross training and accountability for frontline staff.


Communication: Recommendations

– Provide customer service and cultural sensitivity training to all staff.

– Provide cross training to help reduce the runaround.

– Implement a wider use of Instant Messaging across functional areas to help eliminate the student runaround.

– Require that managers regularly observe staff in their interactions with students to help identify areas for additional training.

– Seek regular and ongoing feedback from students and other college constituents on how to continue to improve customer service.

3. In the next year, select and implement a student lifecycle CRM.

4. In the next year, implement a student portal that supports a single sign on solution and the updated web interface for UAchieve.


Veteran’s Benefits Services: Observations

1. There is a lack of visibility of Veterans Services and a lack of resources to serve veterans on the campuses.

– The three larger campuses are presently trying to locate visible, adequate space to serve veteran students.

– Each campus has a School Certifying Official (SCO), and there is a veterans central district coordinator established.

– The Wildwood campus hasn’t been as successful with a veterans’ club for students as the other three campuses have to support veterans.

– STLCC has access to two Veterans Affairs (VA) Education Liaison Representatives (ELR). It was reported that the ELRs are accessible to the district office, but not so to the campus SCOs.

– Veteran’s services is an add-on responsibility for assigned A&R staff.

• During registration periods, serving veterans consumes 75-95% of an assigned staff members time. There is no back up staff relief.



2. Lack of training is an issue.

– Forest Park has a VA advisor, but the other campuses haven’t assigned a VA advisor due to a lack of official training.

– The newest A&R Veteran’s representative is the only staff member reported to have completed the online training.

– SCOs are scheduled to complete the online training.

3. Currently the campuses are doing a good job with Chapter 31 Vocational Rehabilitation certifications and also with filing twice monthly exception reports.



4. STLCC is not evaluating military experience and education.

– Advanced standing credit for acceptable, transferrable prior learning according to the American Council of Education (ACE) recommended guidelines is not established or being awarded.

• STLCC is planning to move forward with a policy to award advanced standing credit according to ACE guidelines for prior learning.

– Army transcripts (AARTS), Navy/Marine transcripts (SMARTS), or Air Force credit on college transcripts are optional and highly encouraged, but not required.

– The STLCC transcript evaluation form is required for an evaluation of military credit, which is the same as any transfer credit.

– College Level Examination Program (CLEP) and Defense Activity for Non-Traditional Education Support (DANTES) test credit policies are not posted on the website.



• STLCC has been in communication with the Texas model for awarding military credit. There is a planned strategy to partner with and follow the Texas community college model.

5. STLCC is moving forward to centralizing Veterans student services at the district level.

– Scholarship opportunities are being researched.

6. There is a lack of military deployment refund procedures.

7. The number of students who are under the Veterans Retraining and Assistance Program (VRAP) has increased by fifty percent.

– This has created serious implementation, retention, and drop out

issues.



– Similar to other community college campuses, ad hoc feedback seems to be confirming that many students are using VRAP for the income.

– STLCC does plan to implement a March 31, 2014 deadline to clean out any abuse.

– VRAP applicants struggle with the online application process and it was reported that most end up coming on campus to complete the process in paper.

8. The website information for veterans is unclear and confusing.

– VA students who are paying out of pocket for their tuition receive information that requires them to sign up for an automatic payment plan. This is unnecessary.

• One student commented that they didn’t need this option but were told they had to sign up when they already paid tuition in full.



– The new student checklist for veterans states that a down payment must be made in order to not be dropped from classes, but it doesn’t specify when or how the student is informed that this is necessary.

– The checklist requires a print copy of the veteran’s schedule of classes be submitted to the School Certifying Official (SCO).


Veteran’s Benefits Services: Recommendations

1. Each campus should move forward with plans to secure a visible office space in order to better serve veteran students.

2. Semi-annual meetings with the SOCs from each campus and the VA ELRs assigned to STLCC should be established for updates and questions and answer sessions.

3. All SCOs should complete the VA Training and Performance Support System (TPSS) School Certifying Official training online.

4. Back up and relief staffing needs to be identified, trained, and scheduled during registration periods.



5. STLCC needs to establish a policy to award advanced standing credit for military service and education based on ACE guidelines.

– http://www.acenet.edu/higher-education/topics/Pages/College-Credit-for-Military-Service.aspx

– Guide for colleges and universities: http://www.acenet.edu/news-room/Pages/Resources-for-Colleges-and-Universities.aspx

– This should include instructions on ordering AARTS, SMARTS and prior learning transcripts.

6. A clear process needs to be outlined for students that are deployed in order to process refunds, dis-enroll, and be eligible to reinstate upon return. Example college sites that articulate a clear process:

http://www.acenet.edu/higher-education/topics/Pages/College-Credit-for-Military-Service.aspx













http://www.acenet.edu/news-room/Pages/Resources-for-Colleges-and-Universities.aspx














– Johnson County Community College: http://www.jccc.edu/veterans/call-active-duty.html

– University of Alaska Fairbanks: http://www.uaf.edu/finserv/bursar/studentinfo/militarydeployment/

7. An assessment of student retention and any financial abuses for VRAP students should be conducted to inform the process and plan by the March 2014 goal.

– As a part of this review, the special application needs for an online application solution (within a CRM) for VRAP applicants should be considered. This is also addressed in the technology section of this report.

http://www.uaf.edu/finserv/bursar/studentinfo/militarydeployment/










8. The veterans information on the website needs to be reviewed, corrected, and edited so veteran students understand the information.

– Verbiage on the site should be focus group tested with veteran applicants, students, and staff.

– SCO and VA processing staff must be able to have view access in Banner to all student information required for VA processing.

– CLEP and DANTES test credit policies need to be posted to the website with a link from the veterans website since these two exams serve a high percentage of veterans.


International Student Services: Observations

1. International admissions and student services are not visible on the campuses; there are no designated international offices. This is a top complaint heard from international students.

– International admissions and services is an add on responsibility for assigned staff at the three larger campuses; Meramec, Forest Park, and Florissant Valley.

• There is no back up relief staffing and there is a lack of resources to support function.

– Each of the three campuses have a different international student admissions requirement application packet.

– Orientations are done individually with each student on each campus.

– Currently if a student wishes to take a class at another STLCC campus, the DSO at the campus offering the course has to sign off on an approval as a separate campus. This is confusing to students.



– Each of the three campuses DSOs have recently been recertified.

– The current online application requires a social security number (SSN) which prohibits international students from completing the application online.

• Applicants have to contact the campus and have an application packet sent via email attachments.

– STLCC is using World Education Services (WES) or AACRAO EDGE for credit assessment, with required English translations.

2. International English Language Testing Service (IELTS) and International Test of English Proficiency (iTEP) are currently not offered as alternative TOEFL tests.

– IELTS: http://www.ielts.org/

– iTEP: http://www.itepexam.com/en/

http://www.ielts.org/

http://www.itepexam.com/en/




3. Communication between Cosand and the campuses is an issue. – Information from Cosand to the campuses on international

admissions requirements and other issues does not filter down.

– There is a lack of communication with the departments on campus and across campuses regarding international student status.

– There no international admissions training for the EM staff.

– A cross training session did occur this summer at Meramec for all STLCC international staff.

4. STLCC is moving forward to centralizing the three SEVIS units at Meramec, Forest Park, and Florissant Valley as one district at the Cosand Center.

– Another recertification will be required for centralization as one district.



• The Primary Designated School Official (PDSO) will be at Cosand.

• Designated School Officials (DSO) will remain at the three campuses to serve students.

– The plan is to move to one online international application when STLCC recertifies as a district.


International Student Services: Recommendations

1. Greater visibility on each of the campuses for international admissions and student services needs to occur.

2. As international admissions and student services becomes district centralized, focus should be on:

– Training and back up staffing across campuses and as a district.

• This should include training for the EM (recruit) staff.

– One consistent orientation program for all STLCC international students; online and in-person formats.

– One application process (online solution and in print) for STLCC that meets the needs of international applicants and the institution. This is also addressed in the technology section of this report.

• Require what is necessary and applicable to international applicants.


International Student Services: Recommendations

– The certifying approval issues for students taking a cross campus course should be resolved with the recertification as a district.

– Communication with the departments on campus and across campuses regarding international student issues and status is necessary.

• Monthly meetings should be held at the district level for all campuses.

– Annual training should occur for all campuses at the district level.

– Evaluation of international transcripts should be a back office function and aligned with the credit evaluation at the district level.

3. Accept the IELTS and the iTEP as TOEFL alternative exams to increase international access. For more information and how to set minimum exam results based on TOEFL equivalent see IELTS: http://www.ielts.org/ or iTEP: http://www.itepexam.com/en/.






Technology: Observations

This section will expand on the general technology observations made in the report.

1. The current configuration of SSB is overly complex, incomplete and does not support the needs of admissions and registration functions in a manner appropriate for the typical community college population.

2. The Banner application for admission does not currently support the needs of the special admissions programs and will likely not be able to do so even by implementing currently unused functionality.

– As a result there is a high level of manual processes associated with special admissions programs.



3. All online applications need to be “touched” because the auto load rules are not currently set up properly to push applications through the matching and decision insertion rules.

4. Current residency questions are built as open ended questions within the SSB application; this often results in the applicant providing information that does not enable the residency checkers to make a residency decision without contacting the applicant first.

5. BDMS supports both web enabled forms and the Banner workflow solution but neither have been implemented to support admissions and registration.



6. Not all SSB functionality is being used which as a result requires many who are not regular users of INB to use it instead of the easier UI of SSB.

– Some infrequent INB users remarked how they are reluctant to use it because it does not inform them when they make a mistake.

• SSB use would eliminate this concern.

– Unused functionality includes:

• Several functions mentioned earlier that support admissions and registration

• Advising functions

• Department chair functions

• Faculty functions



7. Student intent is not currently being captured and there is no way to confirm that the program on record is the program the student really intends to complete.

– Lack of accurate degree intent information can hobble any practice that automatically awards degrees and certificates without requiring a student to apply for graduation.

8. Responsibility for data integrity is not assigned to any particular functional lead outside of Institutional Research (IR).

9. Banner supports mobile functionality which has not yet been implemented.

10.Functional users and TESS staff both identified that Information Technology (IT) project and issue resolution management is weak.


Password Reset

http://www.stlcc.edu/SelfService/Index.html

Password reset

instructions on the

website instruct the

student to come

into the office.

Reset is not

available online or

over the phone.

http://www.stlcc.edu/SelfService/Index.html


Website typographical errors example:

http://www.stlcc.edu/admissions_and_registration/Financial_Aid/

Content should be

spell checked and

reviewed by the

content developer.

http://www.stlcc.edu/Admissions_and_Registration/Financial_Aid/

http://www.stlcc.edu/Admissions_and_Registration/Financial_Aid/


Technology: Recommendations

This section will expand on the general technology observations made in the report.

1. SSB needs to be reconfigured to support students. Based on previous experience with other colleges in similar situations, it is often best and easiest to install a clean instance of SSB and reconfigure from there than to try and undo current configurations and move forward.

2. As part of the CRM selection process, select one that supports a complete application solution as well as meets the needs of all student types.



3. As soon as possible create the admissions checklist, automation rules and web splash pages to support auto admissions for most applications.

4. Simplify the residency questions to yes or no questions only using radio buttons.

5. Develop a comprehensive implementation plan to support web forms and workflow for admissions and registration.

6. Develop a comprehensive technology implementation plan that encompasses all of the technology related recommendations in this report.



7. Implement additional SSB functionality for all users including students and provide regular and ongoing training for all.

8. Outsource the upgrade of the college website. See slides 109 to 113 for examples of good websites.

9. Assign data integrity responsibility to the functional leads.

10.As time permits, create or implement a mobile app for student services for both the android and iOS platforms.



11.Revisit project management strategies; strengthen the outline of the steps to successful implementation.

– Develop a rubric or other formal evaluation method to prioritize all projects within the unit and across this college.

– Develop a master projects calendar.

– These will help reduce the likelihood that projects will fall off the list of active projects or get pushed down in priority.

– It will also allow staff in the unit and college-wide to view the breadth and depth of initiatives currently in progress and planned.

– In addition to strengthening project management strategies, strengthen change management strategies with clear and frequent communication, inclusion of all staff in discussion, recognition of barriers, etc.


Resources

1. STLCC should consider sending representatives to AACRAO’s Strategic Enrollment Management (SEM) Conference held each year in November.

2. SEM Quarterly – SEMQ bridges the gap between theory and practice with articles by thought leaders and practitioners who address the emerging dynamics of SEM, including: executive-level leadership, leading strategies, internationalization, research, academic orientation, and current trends.

– This requires an AACRAO membership to view.

3. Strategic Enrollment Management: Transforming Higher Education an AACRAO Book.

http://aacrao.org/Professional-Development/meetings.aspx

http://aacrao.org/publications/sem_quarterly.aspx

http://www4.aacrao.org/publications/catalog.php?item=0134


Resources

4. AACRAO 2013 FERPA Quick Guide

5. AACRAO Annual Conference – March 30-April 1, 2014 in Denver, Colorado.

6. AACRAO Online Courses including Registrar 101, Managing the admissions Office, admissions Counselor Recruiter 101

7. A Handy Guide to Facilitation (2010) NHS institute for improvement and innovation http://www.institute.nhs.uk/images/documents/No_Delays/2010%20Handy%20Guide%20to%20Facilitation%20FINAL%20%28low-res%29.pdf





http://www.institute.nhs.uk/images/documents/No_Delays/2010 Handy Guide to Facilitation FINAL (low-res).pdf






Resources

8. Balzer, W. K. (2010). Lean Higher Education: Increasing the Value and Performance of University Processes. New York: CRC Press.

9. Holman, P., Devane, T., & Cady, S. (2006). The Change Handbook: The Definitive Resource on Today's Best Methods for Engaging Whole Systems. Berrett-Koehler.

10.American Council on Education. College Credit for Military Service: http://www.acenet.edu/higher-education/topics/Pages/College-Credit-for-Military-Service.aspx

11.Williams, D., Baxton, M., & Watkins, R. (2010). The AACRAO International Guide: A Resource for International Education Professionals. Washington, D.C.: AACRAO.














Further Assistance

We recognize that there are several recommendations in this report which will take time and both fiscal and human resources to implement. At the discretion of STLCC we are available to assist with the implementation of those recommendations. More specifically, AACRAO Consulting can assist with business process improvement, technology implementation plans, developing position description and revised organizational structures. We are also available to assist with developing policy and procedures associated with admissions and registration functions.

Please do not hesitate to contact us should you have any questions or wish to discuss any further assistance we could provide.


Respectfully Submitted,

Wendy Kilgore, Ph.D. Director of Research and Managing Consultant

[email protected]

Michele Sandlin

Managing Consultant [email protected]

consulting.aacrao.org

admissions and registration consulting services st. louis ... stlcc representatives and current...

Documents