A Model of Student College Choice Author(s): David W. Chapman Reviewed work(s): Source: The Journal of Higher Education, Vol.

52, No. 5 (Sep. - Oct., 1981), pp. 490-505 Published by: Ohio State University Press Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1981837 . Accessed: 11/03/2012 18:15
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at . http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Ohio State University Press is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to The Journal of Higher Education.

http://www.jstor.org

f-E David W. Chapman

A Model of StudentCollege Choice

The prospect a sharpdeclineincollegeapplicaof tionsand subsequent enrollments generated has tremendous pressure on college administrators findmoreeffective to ways to attractstudents[3]. The workshops, convention and programs, journal articles devoted thedilemmas collegerecruiting evidence administo of bear to trators' concernthattheir institutions or maintain competitive a gain for In edge in thescramble students. turn, manycollegesare commitsumsto developmoresophisticated stratetingsubstantial marketing moreappealingprograms, and better recruitment literature gies, [18, this intense for 27,9]. Within increasingly competition students, many in thatthey affect can students' choice collegeshavepersisted thebelief of collegemerely modifying theirinstitutional or by descriptions the of theirrecruiting. Few admissionsofficers froma targeting operate modeloftheinfluences student on systematic collegechoice. Lacking sucha model,collegesmayoverlookwaysto increase effectiveness the oftheir overestimate influence recruitthe of or, recruiting conversely, in ingactivities whichtheydo engage. This article a presents modeloftheinfluences affecting prospective students' choiceofwhich The modelis intended (1) to collegeto attend. assistcollegeadministrators for recruitment responsible setting policy to identify pressures influences the and in needto consider develthey institutional in research oping recruiting policyand (2) aid continued
The preparation thisarticlewas supported partbya contract of in from Fund the fortheImprovement Postsecondary of Education,no. G007804724.The opinionsexreflect thoseof thesponsor. presseddo not necessary David W. Chapman is assistant of professor education,State University New of Yorkat Albany. Press 0022-1546/81/0981-0490$00.50/0 ? 1981Ohio State University Journal HigherEducation,1981,Vol. 52, No. 5 of

StudentCollege Choice

491

is thearea ofstudent collegechoice.A secondpurposeofthisarticle to to research relevant one aspect of themodel,theinflureview recent on enceofprinted materials students' collegechoice.Giventhetightenand the rising of institutional budgets priceof admissionstravel, ing on manycollege admissionsofficers expect to relyincreasingly the to of students materials recruit to mailing printed [13]. According this mateits describes itself model,thewayan institution through printed infludirect rialsis one oftherelatively waysa collegecan exercise few For an institution ence on prospective students' choice. needingstuinformation of dents,then,the efficacy printed may hold important to thisresearch Moreover, consequences. responds an issueraisedbya thatcollegesshould number recent of federal contends which projects, students theinformation make available to prospective improve they [4, 9, 12]. WhytheLack of Research sturesearch factors on Whiletherehas been substantial affecting dents'levelof educationalaspirationand their decisionsto attendor choice of notattendcollege,less attention beengivento students' has whichcollegeto attend.Several reesonshelp explain thislack of recolweregrowing, search.(1) Duringthetimethatcollegeenrollments influworried about specific were administrators notparticularly lege enceson students' collegechoice. The emphasisin admissionswas on to than recruitment. There has been littletheory selectionrather (2) of college choice. The modelsthathave guide investigations specific the with beenposed havebeenconcerned mostoften predicting impact financial on institutional enrollment to changesin federal due student a aid. Tierney, presented modHouang,and Henson[30] haverecently deciel ofinfluences matriculation the private explaining publicversus decisionto maof sion. Theyproposethattheprobability a student's in of triculate a publicinstitution a function thestudent's ability, is sex, inthe distancefrom institution, income,institutional tuition, family Nolfiet al. [23] stitutional and selectivity, total financialaid offers. witha developeda model of college choice to providepolicymakers thatwouldresult behavior meansofforecasting changesinstudent the or from of anticipated changesin thestructure theeducationalsystem fromproposed modifications educationalpolicy.While certainly to relatedto themodel developedin thisarticle, workof Nolfiet al. the thaninstitutional is directed public policyformulation at rather [23] administration.

492

Journalof HigherEducation

A Model of StudentCollege Choice Figure 1 presentsa generalconceptualmodel of studentcollege variablesetsand their interrelationthe choicethatspecifies important as a meansofguiding admissions bothfuture and current ships inquiry a The modelis longitudinal suggests and that,to understand practice. it to student's choice ofwhichcollegeto attend, is necessary take into and current characteristics thestudent, account both background of of thestudent's and thecharacteristics thecollege.The modelis family, of traditional limited describing pattern influences to the affecting age students. (18-21) prospective Componentsof themodel maybe releand vant to a widerage range;however, thereare special pressures in on influences olderadultsthatare not reflected themodel. The modelsuggests thatstudent by collegechoiceis influenced a set inof student witha seriesof external characteristics combination in influences be groupedintothreegeneral can fluences. These external characof (2) (1) persons; thefixed categories: theinfluence significant to own efforts comof teristics theinstitution; (3) theinstitution's and characteristics municatewithprospective Both the student students. to are and theexternalinfluences contribute and, in turn, shaped by ofcollegelife, students' Stern[28] something generalized expectations
SIUDENI CHARACTERISTICS ASPIRATION HIGHSCHOOL PERFORMANCE_ EXTERNAL INFLUENCES SIGNIFICANT PERSONS FRIENDS PARENTS HIGH SCHOOL PERSONNEL -I FIXED COllEGE | CHARACTERISTICS AID) COST(FINANCIAL LOCA1ION OF AVAILABILITY PROGRAM COLLEGE EFFORTS TO COMMUNICATE WITHSTUDENTS WRITTEN INFORMATION CAMPUSVISIT RECRUI1 ADMISSIONS/ ING ENTRY TO COLLEGE GES CHOICE OF STUDENTS |

LA-_ |APPrTUED

GENERAL < EXPECTATION iF OI COLLEGELIFE

STUDENT'S CHOICE OF COLLEGE(S)

on FIG. 1. Influences StudentCollege Choice

StudentCollege Choice

493

of has described the"freshman as Each ofthecomponents this myth." generalmodelwillbe described. StudentCharacteristics of in Socioeconomicstatus.The importance SES is manifest rather from of stafamilies different socioeconomic complexways.Students tusnotonlyenter educationat different also distribrates, higher they utethemselves acrosstypesofcollegesand universities differently [32, from to homeswithhigher SES are morelikely go to 33, 10]. Students homeswithavthanstudents from four-year collegesand universities erageor below averageSES [31]. an Familyincome, important aspectof SES, also operatesin a very cost direct withinstitutional and way on collegechoiceas it interacts aid realistic financial to limitwhatstudents believeare their options. thatupperincomestudents Indeed,Davis and Van Dusen [11] report tendto middleincomestudents appear to prefer privateuniversities, stateuniversities, lowerincomestudents apt to prefer and are prefer community colleges or state colleges and, to a lesser degree,state
universities.

Socioeconomicstatusacts as a backdropthatinfluences seriesof a other attitudesand behaviors that, in turn,are related to college relatedto educationalaspirachoice. For example,SES is positively to tionsand expectations [24] and GPA [1], bothofwhichare related choice. college influences and Aptitude.Aptitude highschool achievement perforexaminatestsassociatedwithcollegeentrance manceon theaptitude their tions.Sincebothoftheseareusedwidely collegesindescribing by as and, eventually, a basis forscreenrangeofcompetitive applicants the often self-select collegesto whichthey students apingapplicants, whattheybelievethecollegeswillconsider.Collegesenplyto reflect the couragethepractice publishing testscoresand classrankoftheir by class and, sometimes, directly entering discouraging applications by from students withlow testscoresor withpoor highschool records. with enrolled institutions Moreover studentstend to self-select of students similaraptitudeas themselves [22]. Work by Nolfi [22] infirst of indicatesthat"the attractiveness educationalalternatives enrolledin them, creaseswiththe average qualityof otherstudents of is averageability above theability thestudent peaksat a pointwhere As in increases averagequality." further inquestion, and then falls with is whoseaptitude do Nolfiargues,students notwantto be withothers different their than own. very

494

Journalof HigherEducation

Level of EducationalAspiration/ Expectation Educational expectations and aspirationsboth influence students' refer collegeplans,though they operateindifferent ways.Expectations to whata personperceives or she willbe doingor willhave accomhe date. It involvesan estimate reality, judgof a plishedat some future mentabout future are wishesor desiresexperformance. Aspirations an pressing individual's hopesabout thefuture1]. Whileconsiderable [ research relatedlevelofeducationalaspirations has and expectations to students' decisionsto go to college,considerably research has less theseinfluences theirchoice of theparticular on instituinvestigated tionto attend.However,thefindings thatare available suggest these issuesare relatedto collegechoice. For example,Tillery [31] reports thatmore highschool students in who reporta definite confidence their to independent or Catholicuniversities. collegeability go private This also holds trueforstudents who aspireto graduatestudy. Educationalexpectations aspirations also moderately and are correlatedwithhighschool performance measured GPA [32]. Brookas by a betweenexpectaover,Erickson,and Joiner report correlation [1] tionsand eleventh GPA of0.30, and a correlation aspiration of grade and eleventh out GPA eventualgradeGPA of0.23. As pointed earlier, students willconsideror ly operatesto limittherangeof institutions thatwillconsiderthem. High School Performance is bases on which Highschool performance one ofthemoreexplicit describethetypeof collegesaccept or rejectstudents. Colleges often student theyattractin termsof those students' highschool GPA or rank in class. Prospectivestudents, turn,use this information in in a to judgingwhether particular collegewould be ofinterest them[23]; forexample,the level of competition the theyexpectto encounter, of students would meet,their chancesof admission. aptitude they a High school performance mayalso trigger whole set of otherresponses to the studentthat,in turn,help shape college choice. For withgood academic recordsreceivemoreencourexample,students agement to continue their education from teachers,family,and friends. They are moreapt to receivecollege advisingfromthe guidance counselor [6], and they are more apt to receive college scholarships. a are Significant persons.In selecting college,students strongly persuaded by the comments and advice of theirfriends and family. The influence thesegroupsoperatesin threeways: (1) theircomments of

StudentCollege Choice

495

of collegeis like;(2) shapethestudent's expectations whata particular shouldgo to coloffer advice as to wherethestudent direct may they themselves the where friends go lege;and (3) inthecase ofclosefriends, decision. to collegewillinfluence student's the first at conducted individual In severalstudies institutions, yearcolfriends and collegechoicesoftheir thecomments students lege report severowncollegedecision[7]. However, in weremostimportant their in al largestudiesof highschool students themidstofchoosinga colof impact.The lege suggestthe influence parentsis reallyof greater 1966 SCOPE seniors[31], asked to name the most helpfulperson whomtheyhad consultedabout the choice of college,indicated(in of responding): percent students
parents counselors otherstudents teachers collegeadmissionofficers 43 percent 22 percent 16 percent 10 percent 9 percent

due for apIndeed,evenafter controlling differences to SES, parents future influence students' on plans [33]. pear to exercisethegreatest educationalgoals are more Within withmoreextensive that,students out concerned about working withtheirparentswhichcollegeto atof tend[32]. Tillery and Kildegaard[32] also notethatperceptions the the of cost (affordability) the college affect parentswho thenreflect in influence thestudent. on thatfactor their Fixed College Characteristics Relatively of and Location,costs,campusenvironment, theavailability desired fixedcollegecharacare includedin thismodelas relatively programs Withthepossibleexceptionoflocation,thesecharacteristics teristics. and modify over the to are all within power of the institution effect stable. are but are that,in theshort-term, relatively time, they factors numerous a For example,implementingnewprogram usuallyinvolves stateapproval. and often, institutional reviews, committees, faculty othersourcesof inReducingcosts is usuallydependenton finding come or cutting The point hereis thattheseinstitutional programs. Even as in characteristics to define institution theshort-term. tend the it maytakea longtime are made (e.g., newprograms added), changes their forimage and reputation changewithprospective to students, and their parents, guidancecounselors.For thesereasons,thefollow-

496

Journalof HigherEducation

fixedcharacteringvariablesare includedin the model as relatively istics. Cost.Tillery and Kildegaard[32] suggest thatcostis probably more of an influence whether not a student on to collegethan on or goes whichparticular college he or she attends.Researchby Mundy [21] tends support to and tendto claim.Whilestudents Tillery Kildegaard's sortthemselves be sorted)among collegeson the basis of family (or inbetweenfamily lack of relationship income,thereis a surprising comeand costofcollegeattended [21]. Thismaymeanthatthestratifyor ingvariableis not thecost ofcollegebut social background family incomeof thestudents who attend. in other research that However, suggests costdoes makea difference For example,Davis and Van Dusen [11] foundthat collegeselection. cost was one of the major reasons whystudents did not attendthe or institution collegeoftheinstitutional they particular type preferred. Ihlanfeldt estimates of thatat least70 percent all collegestudents [15] are receiving financial assistanceto help offset cost and thatwithout thisassistance,a high percentage students reof would be severely in stricted college choice. Indeed, in studiesof students' reasonsfor at students institutions, collegechoiceconducted individual frequently cost as important their in decision. identify research about theinfluence cost (1) of Thoughthereis conflicting costneedsto be considered thelarger in modelofcollegechoiceand (2) itcannotreally considered be from influence financial the of separately aid. Financialaid. The influence financial is one ofthemostwidely of aid researched issues in college choice,largely because it has such direct for state,and federal implications institutional, policy.Theseresearch efforts wereaccentuated further thepassage of the HigherEducaby tionAmendments 1976,whichreorganized of financial to channel aid funds to rather thantheinstitution. Hence,identidirectly thestudent the of influence financial incollegechoicehas been aid fying particular a primary interest manyof thepreviousmodels. of Ifcostspose an obstacleto collegegoing, financial is supposedto aid reduceoreliminate problem. the confinancial Ideally,oncethefamily tribution has been determined througha financialaid formula,it should not varyfromcollege to college. Differences costs among in shouldbe absorbedbytherespective from financial offers aid colleges those schools. The expectedfamily contribution would be the same whether student the of goesto Yale orthelocal branch thestatecollege.

StudentCollege Choice

497

aid Hence,financial is supposedto increasestudents' collegechoices, at leastso faras cost was theconstraining factor. Much oftheresearch financial has examinedissuesofequity on aid and adequacy in the computationof financialneed. More recently, severalstudieshave examinedthepackagingoffinancial (i.e., the aid relative of as loan, and campusemployment) proportion scholarship, itaffects in of persistence collegeorthelikelihood theindividual pursuseveralresearchers ing graduateeducation[2, 26, 25]. Additionally, havetried predict to howenrollment shift from patterns might changes in federalaid policy[23, 30]. For example, in 1974 Leslie and Fife frominstitutional directstudentsupport to anticipatedthat a shift would (1) increasethenumberof personsgoingon to collegeand (2) redistribute students theprivate, non-two to the year,and thesmaller institutions [19]. Withthe passage of the HigherEducation Amendof ments 1976,muchof theirexpectation was bornout in fact.More fedrecently, Houang,and Henson[30] arguethatincreasing Tierney, eralstudent formales,increases likelihood their the of enrollment aid, inprivate The collegesand universities. authorsare lessclearabout its impacton femalestudents. Location.Over50 percent entering of attend freshmen collegeswithin fifty miles of theirhome; 92 percentattendcollege withinfive hundred milesof theirhome [15]. Indeed, in the SCOPE analysisof highschool seniorsin California,50 percentregardedlocation as a to in choiceofa college[3 1]. However, proximity majorinfluence their homeis, in turn, influenced thenumber educationalalternatives of by in thegeographical in area. Hence, prospective students an area with manycolleges are less apt to travelas far to college as prospective in students a ruralarea without manycolleges.Students' geographical financial is affected further academic abilityand family mobility by need considera withno financial students strength [15]. High ability aswiderrangeof collegesthanless able students who need financial sistance.High need,low ability students leastmobile. are selectcollegesin Availability desiredcoursesprogram.Students of which to enter believethey getthecoursesthey can need they graduate school or to getjobs. Indeed, the coursesthatare available and the benefits theywill derivefromthose courses are the most important characteristics students look forin choosinga college[7, 11]. This is truein professional othersomewhat and particularly specializedareas of training and areas thatare (e.g., architecture) least truein content available (e.g., liberalarts). widely

498

Journalof HigherEducation

to withStudents CollegeEfforts Communicate So far,themodelhas identified thatinfluence factors students' color lege choice but are eitherhighlyresistent impossibleto change. Costs can be loweredor theavailability financial increased, of aid but this usually requiresnew sources of revenuefor the institution or financial policies.New academicprograms aid can changesin federal be implemented, seldom quickly.Consequently, but one of the first ofa collegeconcerned about itsenrollment to reviewthe is responses and students. way it identifies recruits prospective One reflection thismoreintense of is use competition thegrowing of a marketing approachinadmissions 15,20, 18].Severalauthors [ argue the a that, through systematic applicationofmarketing principles, colstudents whomight otherwise consider not thatinstitulegecan attract tion.The marketing on and approach advocates (1) research current students and on theinstitution's market prospective position(e.g., its relative its competition such things program to on as offerstanding and of ings,qualityoffacilities, campusambience);(2) development a marketplan; and (3) development new strategies of both involving programsand the communication process [15]. The application of to higher educationhas beendiscussedinconsidmarketing principles erabledetailby Ihlanfeldt [15] and Kotler[18]. The applicationof marketing thathave workedin other principles sectors theeconomy of offer for about enrollpromise collegesworried ments.Still,thereis verylittleresearchthatactuallydocumentsits effectiveness attracting in students makecollegechoicesthey to might not otherwise have made. Whatresearch available has centered theinformation is on seeking activities college-bound of students alternatively, effectiveness the or, ofspecific in For students. excollegerecruiting techniques attracting and Kildegaard[32] report thatinformation ample,Tillery gathering on thepartof highschool seniorsis positively relatedto their educationalaspirations. That is,students who expectto go on to collegeare moreapt to actively seekout collegeinformation. theotherside of On theequation,highschool visitsby collegeadmissionsrepresentatives and campusvisitsbyprospective are the students considered mosteffective and recruiting activity bothcollegeadmissionsofficers high by school guidancecounselors [13]. GeneralExpectations College Life of A substantial amountofresearch investigated has students' expectationsofcollege.WorkbyStern[28] indicates thatmanystudents enter

StudentCollege Choice

499

a college with unrealistic expectationsof the college environment, to high phenomenahe refers as the"freshman College-bound myth." schoolseniors, of share regardless theinstitution expectto attend, they a highly idealizedimageof collegelife,an imagenot restereotyped, of presentative any actual institution 28]. As Sterndescribesit: [5, are colabout theextent whichtheir to "[Students] badlymisinformed to it legeis organizedrationally achieveitsvariousends,expecting to be a lot moreconsistent thananycollegein factis. And theyare even morepoorlyinformed of about the compositecharacter the school" [28, p. 173] Whilesome authorshave speculatedon theorigin theseunrealisof ticexpectations, research notat all clearas to their the source[5, 31, is 28]. However,collegeinformation gained through highschool expethe of other riences, influence significant people,and thecolleges'own to efforts communicate with students appearto getfiltered prospective evenavailidealizedexpectations. bythesegeneralized, Consequently, accurateinformation be ignored distorted thestudent. or able, by may disrather thancareful Collegedecisionsmaybe based on stereotypes crimination the likelystudentexperience different of at institutions. The influences collegechoicedescribed thismodelmaybe affecton by as ed bythis"freshman it needsto be considered a mehence, myth," in diatinginfluence themodel. Summary theModel of in of identified this The combinedand interactive effects thefactors modelinfluence shape students' and collegechoice.CollegechoicedeThe influences. external characteristics external and pendson student in characteristics are influences, turn, composedofsignificant persons, with of the college,and the institution's to own efforts communicate the As of students. a result theseinfluences, college-bound prospective individwill student applyto one or moreinstitutions. other, Certainly influences also operateon students' ual, idiosyncratic collegedecimay but of sions.The modeldoes notexhaustthepossibilities influence, it the does identify major factorsto be considered.Colleges reviewing influences their recruitment thesemultiple needto understand strategy withcollege the concerned Researchers student. affecting prospective choice mustrecognizethe complexity college choice in deciding of whichvariables theywill investigate, which theywill control,and whichtheywillignore. in described of underthecombinedinfluence thefactors Operating thismodel,students selectand make applicationto a college.The col-

500

Journalof HigherEducation

Failureto be decideswhether notto admitthestudent. or lege,inturn, selection admitted sometimes notalwaysmeansthatthestudent's but ofthecollegewas inappropriate unwarranted. or Indeed,students may fromcollegesin whichtheywould be well suited.Admisbe rejected sionsdependson who and how manyothers applyin thesame yearto of thesame college.It depends,also, on theidiosyncracies theadmissionsreview substantial decisions(fortheapprocessin whichrather The essential ofthe test scantevidence. plicant)maybe made on rather modelis notwhether the students accepted,but,rather, get given open wheretheychoose to attendcollege. opportunity, The Influence PrintedRecruitment Materials of releThe second purposeof thisarticleis to review recent research vantto one aspect of themodel:the influence printed of recruitment on conliterature student's collegechoice. This topic is of particular cernbecause thesematerials criticism have come underconsiderable frombotheducatorsand the federalgovernment The concernis [9]. thatstudents or maybe basingcollegechoiceson incomplete inaccunewmandates rateinformation from colleges.This has prompted the in federallegislation information and regulations colleges specifying in mustsharewithstudents [4]. It also has resulted severalnational to to the they projects assistcollegesinimproving information provide are students While manybelievetheseactivities prospective [12, 9]. on to disclosure havea right full justified ethical grounds (e.g.,students ina contract services), for about thelikemanyeducatorsare skeptical actual college ly impactof improvedprintedmaterialson students' decisions.Many questionwhether students evenread the prospective material receive from based on muchlessmakedecisions they colleges, it. Beforemovingto improvea college's printed information, many want to know if printedmaterialsmake any college administrators in difference student's collegechoice. on Studiesthathave investigated influence printed of materials the students' college choice have generally employedsurveyprocedures and aregenerally three of view (1) professionals types: howadmissions theeffectiveness accuracyofprinted and materials, theimportance (2) and (3) evaluationsof the college students assignto thesematerials, materials A an themselves. fourth typeofinvestigation, experimental design in which colleges would randomlyassign different printed to materials students, was proposed but provedunworkable [8]. Recentstudieswithin each of thefirst willbe reviewed. threecategories

StudentCollege Choice

501

Studies of admissions professionals. During 1978-79, Project CHOICE, in cooperationwiththe National Associationof College Admissions officers high and Counselors, surveyed collegeadmissions school guidancecounselorsin overthirteen hundred institutions [13, 14, 17]. Bothgroupsratedtheeffectiveness commonly of used recruitstudentsreceived ing activities,the accuracy of the information thoseactivities, whichactivities and students rethrough they thought lied on mostin choosinga college.Amongthefindings: 1. The mailingof catalogsto interested students the is prospective used recruitment singlemostwidely activity. 2. College catalogs are ratedby both admissionsofficers guiand dance counselors be thesinglemostaccuratesourceofcollege to information students. for 3. The mailingof catalogs and informational brochures, upon reis considered bothgroupsto be amongthefiveadmisby quest, sionspractices students on mostinmaking collegedecision. a rely 4. Duringthe nextten yearscollege admissionsofficers expectto on in materials rerelyincreasingly thedirect mailingofprinted students. cruiting prospective Theimportance students materials. Most studies of assigntoprinted theimportance printed of materials the students to who actuallyreceivethem havebeensingle institution studies thatvaryinbothquality and scope. One study, conductedbyChapmanand Johnson inter[7], viewed freshmen one stateuniversity Indiana.Whileitwas a small at in theirresultsare similarto the resultsof otherstudieson this study, indicated did topic.Students they notselecta collegebased on reading its printed information. Rather,theywere more persuadedby cost, where their friends decidedto go to school,and theavailability deof siredprograms. Students readtheprinted thatthey materials reported to primarily confirmdecisions they had made already on other This maystillbe important sincemanycollegeslose students grounds. between timethestudents acceptedand mustactually the are arrive on campus. However, studentsdo not describethe impact of printed materials be as positive did theadmissions to as In professional. addiin examination tion,students theupperthirdof the collegeentrance scoresare aptto receive unsolicited from to materials fifty seventy-five do colleges.Students report they notknowhowto processor evaluate thatmuchinformation. Much ofitendsup inthewastebasket, unread. Evaluationof theprinted A and materials. recent study Johnson by

502

Journalof HigherEducation

level Chapman[ 16]investigated thereading (1) difficulty ofa national literature (2) theabilityof collegeand sampleof collegerecruitment bound highschool students understand terminology to the frequently used in collegeadmissions.The authors'foundthattheaveragereadfor ing level of the materials theyexaminedwas appropriate an advancedcollegestudent collegegraduate.Further, or in differences the typeof information presented (admissions,financialaid, acabeing demicpolicy)did not appear to resultin differences readingdiffiin all of colLikewise, culty. catalogsfrom types institutions (community research lege, liberalarts college,comprehensive college/university, werewritten a leveltoo difficult theirclientele. at for The university) resultsof an admissionsterminology to administered collegequiz bound highschool students thatstudents had considerable suggested the use foundin secdifficulty identifying correct ofterms commonly tionsof collegecatalogs. These studies, considered thatadmissionsprofestogether, suggest sionalsare considerably remorepositive about theimpactofprinted cruitment materials thanstudents students appear to be. Prospective do tendto readtheprinted materials the receive, though impactof they thosematerials comesrather inthecollegeselection late usualprocess, a ly to confirm decision made on othergrounds.It is possible, of materials would have greater course,thattheserecruitment impactif for at theywerewritten a leveland in a vocabularymoreappropriate of the intended audience. As suggested earlierin the description the model,perhapsthe enthusiasm expressedby the admissionsprofessional is because the printed within their materialsare mostdirectly control.In relationship the otherfactorsin the model of college to students materials choice,theprinted collegessendto prospective apto have onlymoderateinfluence students' on pear college selection. The impactmight increasedby improving targeting matebe and the rialsthemselves usingthe printed or a that materials within strategy and builds on the otherinfluences also understood imto recognizes decisions. pingeon students' Summary Ata timeofintense for collegeadminiscompetition students, many are from incomplete of trators operating an understanding themultithat resultstudents' ple influences affect collegechoice.Thishas often ed inunduefaith theability a collegeto attract in of students merely by the institutional or thetargeting its reof modifying self-description

StudentCollege Choice

503

a This article presented model ofcollegechoiceapplicableto cruiting. The choice of whichcollege to students. traditional prospective age characterisand current thebackground attendis influenced, first, by and thestudent's ticsofthestudent and, second,bya seriesof family of These includetheinfluence significant external influences. persons, own of thefixed characteristics thecollege,and theinstitution's efforts of A to communicate withprospective students. fuller understanding chart recan help college administrators these multipleinfluences for The model also providesa framework concruitment strategy. tinuedresearchon college choice. The second portionof the article of on reviewed recent research one aspect ofthemodel,theinfluence do on recruitment students' collegechoice.Thesematerials inprinted or students' fluence collegedecisions,butnotto theextent in theway believe. officers highschoolguidancecounselors or collegeadmissions at often notwritten a levelor in a are the materials Moreover, printed students understand. vocabulary
References
"Educational Aspirations W. 1. Brookover, D., E. L. Erickson,and L. M. Joiner. and SES." The and Educational Plans in Relation to Academic Achievement School Review,75 (1967), 392-400. 2. Brown,K. G. "Dropout Rates: A Longitudinal Analysisof StudentLoan Users Paper presented ComparedWithUsersofOtherFormsofFinancialAssistance." of Research,1980. at theannual meeting theAssociationforInstitutional 3. CarnegieCouncil forPolicyStudies. ThreeThousandFutures:The Next Twenty 1980. Yearsin HigherEducation.San Francisco:Jossey-Bass, for Information StudentChoice: The National Ef4. Chapman,D. W. "Improving 23 fort." NationalA CA C Journal, (1979), 25-26. Freshof 5. Chapman,D. W., and B. Baranowski."College Expectations Entering menWho CompletedCollege Courses DuringHigh School." Journalof College StudentPersonnel,18 (1977), 188-94. Future Current 6. Chapman,D. W., and S. J. Gill. "College Advising: Perceptions, Mich.: ProjectCHOICE, School ofEducation,UniversiAnnArbor, Directions." tyof Michigan,1980. on "Influences Students' 7. Chapman,D. W., and R. H. Johnson. CollegeChoice: A Case Study."AnnArbor,Mich.: ProjectCHOICE, School ofEducation,Universityof Michigan,1979. D.C., mentof PostsecondaryEducation, grantno. G007804724. Washington, 1980. 9. Chapman,D. W., and J. S. Stark."Does TruthHave Consequences?Improving for Information Better College Choice." Liberal Education,65 (1979), 453-61.
8. . Project CHOICE: Final Report. Submitted to the Fund forthe Improve-

504

Journalof HigherEducation

10. Cross, K. P. "Access and Accommodation HigherEducation." In The White in House Conference Youth.Berkeley: in on CenterforResearchand Development HigherEducation, 1971. 11. Davis, J. S., and W. D. Van Dusen. "A SurveyofStudent Values and Choices: A Pilot Studyof theRelationships StudentValues, Perceptions, Choices of of and Institutions." New York: College EntranceExaminationBoard, 1975. 12. El-Khawas,E. Better for Information StudentChoice: Reportofa National Task Force. Washington, D.C.: AmericanAssociationforHigherEducation,1977. 13. Dominick,C. A., R. H. Johnson, W. Chapman,and J. V. Griffith. D. "Effective Admissions Practices:A National Survey."NationalA CA C Journal, (1980a), 24 19-24. (1980b), 2-7. 15. Ihlanfeldt, Achieving W. and OptimalEnrollments TuitionRevenues.San Francisco: Jossey-Bass, 1980. 16. Johnson,R. H., and D. W. Chapman. "An Assessment College Recruitment of Literature: Does theHighSchool SeniorUnderstand Researchin HigherEdIt?" ucation,11 (1979), 309-19. 17. Johnson,R. H., D. W. Chapman, C. A. Dominick,and J. V. Griffith. "Admissions OfficeStaffing and Policies: How Do You Compare?" National A CAC 24 Journal, (1980), 10-13. 18. Kotler, P. Marketing for NonprofitOrganizations.Englewood Cliffs,N.J.: 1975. Prentice-Hall, 19. Leslie,L. L., and J. D. Fife."The College StudentGrantStudy:The Enrollment and Attendance Grant and Scholarship Journal ImpactsofStudent Programs." of HigherEducation,45 (December 1974),651-71. 20. Litten, H. "MarketStructure Institutional L. and PositioninGeographicMarket Researchin HigherEducation, 11 (1979), 59-83. Segments." 21. Mundy,L. A. "Impact of Educational Development,Family Income, College in Choice and Enrollment College."Research Costs,and FinancialAid in Student Report77. Iowa City:AmericanCollege Testing,1976. 22. Nolfi, J."In Transition: G. School Experiences American of Youth."In Post-High Data in CareerCounseling, editedbyL. C. Solmonetal. New UsingLongitudinal Directions EducationWorkand Careers.San Francisco:Jossey-Bass, for 1979. 23. Nolfi,G. J., W. C. Fuller,A. J. Corazzini,W. H. Epstein,R. B. Freeman,C. F. Manski,V. I. Nelson,and D. A. Wise.Experiences RecentHighSchool Graduof ates. Lexington, Mass.: D.C. Heath, 1978. R. 24. Rehberg, A. "AdolescentCareerAspirations and Expectations: Evaluationof Two Contrary Stratification Hypotheses." PacificSociologicalReview,10(1967), 81-90. T. 25. Sanford, R. "Residual Effects Self-HelpAid on theLives ofCollege Graduof ates." Journal StudentFinancialAid, 9 (1979), 3-10. of HigherEducation, 12 (1980), 227-43. 27. Stark,J. S. The Many Faces of Educational Consumerism. Lexington,Mass.: D.C. Heath, 1977.
26.
_

14.

. "College Recruiting in the Next Ten Years." National A CA C Journal, 24

. "The Effectsof Student Aid on Recent College Graduates." Research in

StudentCollege Choice

505

28. Stern,G. G. People in Context.New York: Wiley,1970. 29. Tierney, L. "The Impact of Financial Aid on Public/Private M. Postsecondary Education:Some PolicyImplications." of at Paper presented theannual meeting theAssociationfortheStudyof HigherEducation,Washington, D.C., 1979. 30. Tierney, L., R. Houang, and J. Henson. "Alternative M. Estimation Procedures forStudiesof StudentCollege Choice Behavior:A Cross-Validation Analysis." at of Paper presented the annual meeting the AmericanEducational Research San Francisco,1979. Association, 31. Tillery,D. Distribution and Differentiation Youth:A Study of Transition of From School to College. Cambridge, Mass.: Ballinger, 1973. 32. Tillery, and T. Kildegaard.Educational Goals, Attitudes and Behaviors:A D., Mass.: Ballinger, 1973. Studyof High School Seniors.Cambridge, Comparative 33. Trent,J. W., and L. L. Medsker.BeyondHigh School. San Francisco:JosseyBass, 1969.