By Kevin Zalanowski R U the school 4 me? Let’s chat… kevin ZalanowSki has been an undergraduate admission counselor at the University of Iowa Office of Admissions since 2004. Prior to this appointment, Kevin received a Master of Arts in Student Affairs Administration in Higher Education from Ball State University (IN), and a Bachelor of Arts in History from the Pennsylvania State University (PA). 20 | SUMMER 2007 JOURNAL OF COLLEGE ADMISSION WWW.NACACNET.ORG Instant Messenger in Enrollment Management: Evaluating Use and Effectiveness Abstract This study represented a formal quantitative evaluation of the potential for instant messenger (IM) technology as an outreach tool for undergraduate college admission. Conclusions focused on the popularity of IM, and student use in a formal counselor/ student relationship. Technology became an essential tool for enrollment management frequently than upperclassmen (Hallock & Aiken 2004). Within to meet student outreach and recruitment goals, as higher edu- these numbers, Hallock and Aiken (2004) found that 99 percent cation entered the 21st Century. Admission professionals turned of surveyed Millennial students were using IM to communicate to the Internet to simultaneously expand recruitment regions, with friends, and 30 percent utilized it for academic or studying individualize contact with prospective students and personalize purposes. Goldberg (2002) referred to Millennial students as the the admission funnel. This capitalized on a wave of literature “Instant Messaging Generation,” with current projections point- linking the Millennial student to Internet use (Goldberg 2002, ing toward increased activity on all levels, especially as students Knerr & Woosley 2003, Steele 2002, Whelan 2001, Williams entered the postsecondary setting (Lageese 2001, Plewes 2003, 2000). Online technologies, including email, Web sites, Weblogs, both as cited in Kindred & Roper 2004). etc. were implemented to help enrollment management profes- Critical to the purpose of this experiment was an array of sionals reach out to prospective students and help them explore literature, indicating that admission offices could benefit from colleges in unique and technologically-savvy ways. using IM; prospective high school and transfer students would Another of these Internet features, IM technology, allowed for have the ability to connect with an actual admission counselor or natural, real-time conversations between two individuals, similar student representative through a preferred technological medium to a telephone call; interaction took place through a computer (Hossler 1999, Kindred & Roper 2004, Steele 2002, Williams keyboard instead of a telephone receiver. Not limited to words, 2000). With this in mind, Williams (2000) elaborated on the 1:1 IM exchanges could also include Web links, music files, pictures, marketing theory, which explained that students were funneling and so on. Distance was of no concern, since users could con- colleges and universities just as those institutions were funneling verse on IM through any Internet connection and the appropriate them through the matriculation process. These students would software. The most popular commercial IM chat clients, America be more attracted to universities that best met their individual Online, Yahoo, MSN, and ICQ, could be downloaded and used at needs in personalized ways. Research also stressed employing no cost to users (America Online 2005, Yahoo! Messenger 2005, these new technologies in tandem with other established mar- Microsoft Corporation 2005, ICQ 2005). keting strategies to facilitate the building of relationships with IM chat clients represented a popular means of communica- prospective students (Hossler 1999, Williams 2000). tion among Millennial students (Goldberg 2002, Knerr & Woosley Existing research pointing towards the popularity of IM 2003, Whelan 2001). A study at Butler (IN) and Pepperdine (CA) and its potential in enrollment management proved to be well- universities indicated that more than 80 percent of enrolled stu- documented; however, hard data and case studies that applied dents used IM, with subsequent freshmen classes using it more IM in a nonsocial setting were rare or nonexistent. Hallock and WWW.NACACNET.ORG SUMMER 2007 JOURNAL OF COLLEGE ADMISSION | 21 Aiken (2004) represented a recent case study that focused on Trillian software; once logged into Trillian, the counselor would student-to-student interaction over IM at two private schools, simultaneously be online with these four different chat clients Pepperdine and Butler universities. Though the 30 percent of through a single program. The hours of counselor availabil- students who used IM for academic purposes was a low num- ity for instant messaging were advertised as Monday through ber, it was still a significant amount of activity in a realm other Thursday, 3:00 p.m.–5:00 p.m., Central Standard Time. This than social contact. Kindred and Roper (2004) concluded that time span was the best choice to balance normal working students were more comfortable using IM for social connections hours with the assumption that prospective students would and email or in-person contact for formal relationships. Green, et most likely use IM once home from school, particularly in the al. (2005) applied IM to the Ersatz Social Engagement Theory. Eastern and Central time zones. The counselor typically logged Ersatz interactions were technological substitutes for traditional onto to IM between 11:00 a.m.–5:00 p.m., Monday through social engagement. Conclusions indicated that the information Friday, to monitor additional hours of potential activity. shared over IM in a social setting was less credible and less The first promotion for the IM feature was a flyer placed in meaningful than in-person contact. IM was not a positive cata- all folders distributed to prospective students during campus lyst in social relationships that were sustained solely through IM. visits, indicating when it could be used and the applicable No formal case studies were found on postsecondary institutions screen names. A Web page was also created within the under- that employed IM in their outreach efforts, nor in formal settings graduate admission Web site, which mirrored the visit folder like a student/counselor relationship. flyer in the second promotion; a month later the option was Building on research that established the popularity of IM with also advertised on the undergraduate admission Web site. The Millennial students, their increased use of IM in the postsecondary Web page placement had to be appropriately balanced––easy setting, and their desire for personalized messages from colleges for domestic students to find, but not so prominent as to invite and universities, this project explored the potential for IM as a popu- an overwhelming volume of activity for the single admission lar means of outreach for enrollment management. It also tested the counselor managing the project––and provided links for users behavioral patterns observed by Green, et al. (2005) and Kindred to download chat clients. and Roper (2004) in a formal setting to assess the effectiveness of The counselor logged onto Trillian each available weekday. IM in building relationships between counselor and prospective stu- Quantitative and qualitative data from each conversation was col- dent. The following represented an initial quantitative case study for lected over a 12-month period, June 16, 2005,–June 16, 2006. the employment of IM at a public, flagship university in the Midwest During each conversation, the counselor answered questions and that did not use IM prior to the start of this project. collected data along 12 variables: time the conversation began, day, date, month, screen name, type of student, new/repeat contact, Instrument residency, academic major, IM client, length of conversation, and Determining the proper instrument was essential to the fruition questions asked. Raw data was converted into a multi-page docu- of this project. Due to their characteristics of familiarity and ment of charts and matrices on a monthly basis for the purposes zero-cost factor, commercial IM chat clients were selected as the of analyzing emerging trends and compiling reports, which were medium through which conversations would take place. Readers given to supervisors at the conclusion of each academic semester. may recognize names like America Online, Yahoo, or MSN, all Sensitive information was deleted in the interest of student privacy. of which were utilized and were clearly the most popular chat In the event of all-day visit programs, regular office appoint- clients at the time; however, the researcher could not assume ments, and counselor travel, an Away Message indicated why one chat client would be more effective or popular over another. the counselor was not available, when to expect his or her return For the purposes of this project, the appropriate IM chat client, and referred students to other methods of contacting the ad- Trillian, allowed the admission counselor to efficiently field ques- mission office quickly and conveniently. For extended periods of tions from users of each major commercial program, because, unavailability in October and November due to seasonal travel unlike other commercial chat clients, Trillian acted as a hub for and recruitment, an undergraduate student intern staffed the IM the other major IM chat clients and could communicate with feature from 2:30 p.m.–4:30 p.m., Monday–Friday. This alter- them all (Cerulean Studios 2005). native allowed the feature to remain effectively active during a period of the calendar year when the counselor was not avail- Procedure able. As volume increased, a separate spreadsheet listed only Trillian supported the America Online, Yahoo, MSN, ICQ, and In- the screen names, making easy differentiation between new con- ternet Relay Chat (IRC) clients, but the latter was not utilized due tacts and those using IM for at least a second time. to a lack of familiarity and perceived popularity of the software. Accounts were created with these commercial chat clients Results using “IowaAdmissions” as the screen name for each. The sep- IM activity exceeded initial expectations. The large number of arate screen names and passwords were then loaded into the contacts from various types of prospective students added to the 22 | SUMMER 2007 JOURNAL OF COLLEGE ADMISSION WWW.NACACNET.ORG credibility of trends and observations. The following discussion Table 1 Number of Conversations by Residency of findings has been organized into nine categories: Residency, students (n = 335) students (n = 682) Type of Student, Day, Month, Time, IM Chat Client, Academic Major, Questions Asked, and Student Activity. Origin Individual Contacts % Total Conversations % Residency In-State Students 145 43 304 46 “Resident” referred to a student living in the same state as the university (Iowa). As seen in Table 1, the overall number of con- Nonresident 151 45 299 45 Students versations sent by nonresidents was nearly equal to the number International 24 7 63 9 sent by residents. Within these totals, the number of individuals using IM was also nearly identical at 151 nonresidents and 145 Unknown residents. Finally, 61 residents sent more than one IM and 64 nonresidents sent more than one IM. Conversation length was consistently longer for nonresi- Table 2 Average Conversation Length by Type of Student dents than for residents among overall conversations, first IM conversations, and conversations with students using IM more Overall Average (min) First iM Average (min) than once (see Table 2). In tracking overall conversation length Type of Student Length Minutes/Contacts Length Minutes/Contacts by month, nonresident conversations were significantly longer Overall 12.43 8475/682 14.06 4710/335 from September through December, averaging five minutes Residents 11.33 3443/304 12.96 1879/145 longer than resident conversations (see Figure 1). During the Nonresidents 13.64 4052/297 15.70 2339/149 spring semester months, January through May, average con- versation lengths were essentially equal and steadily declining International 13.86 873/63 17.43 401/23 throughout the season. In general, initial conversations with Graduated Seniors 13.13 302/23 12.41 211/17 nonresidents lasted longest, while repeat conversations with Rising Seniors 17.24 431/25 19.89 358/18 residents were consistently shortest, averaging as low as 4.71 Seniors 11.27 2830/251 13.29 1462/110 minutes by June 2006. Juniors 15.58 413/26 18.72 337/18 In a state-by-state comparison of where students were IM- ing from, trends emerged that showed parallels with the overall Sophomores 12.20 61/5 15.67 47/3 student profile of the associated university. Of the 151 individual Transfers 13.41 3058/228 14.83 1453/98 nonresidents that used IM, 62 percent (93) were from Illinois, Current Students 7.73 85/11 7.26 51/7 the largest feeder state for this university. The next highest num- Parents 14.50 116/8 15.86 111/7 ber of individual contacts came from other contiguous states to Note: Data for repeat conversations is not shown. Iowa, including Wisconsin (7), Missouri (6), and Minnesota (5). Figure 1 Average Length of Conversations by Month 20 30 Seniors Nonresidents Transfers Residents 25 15 20 s e ut n Mi 15 10 10 5 5 S O N D J F M A M J J J A S O N D J F M A M J WWW.NACACNET.ORG SUMMER 2007 JOURNAL OF COLLEGE ADMISSION | 2 Table  Type of student Total J J A s O n D J F M A M J Total Conversations by Graduated Seniors 23 3 3 4 1 2 0 0 1 2 1 1 2 3 Type of Student and Rising Seniors 25 6 8 9 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 Month Seniors 251 0 0 13 12 19 42 22 34 12 33 21 29 14 Juniors 26 1 2 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 3 3 7 5 Sophomores 5 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 2 0 2 0 Transfers 228 0 7 11 25 22 32 17 29 18 20 28 14 5 International 63 1 4 12 8 3 1 4 3 6 5 6 6 4 Parents 8 0 1 0 1 1 0 0 2 1 2 0 0 0 Re-Entry 18 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1 5 3 3 3 1 Contacts from 23 additional states sent IM’s, none of which had Other domestic contacts yielded interesting patterns, but more than four individual contacts. This pattern continued when their numbers were lower and should be viewed as broad gen- looking at total conversations from each state. Residents of eralizations (see Table 3). Eighteen high school juniors used IM, Illinois sent 63 percent of all nonresident conversations, followed with only a third sending more than one conversation. Following by those from Missouri (23), Wisconsin (21) and Minnesota (14). the trend of high school seniors, 13 of these 18 juniors were No other state had more than five total conversations coming nonresidents. The number of contacts increased markedly in the from its contacts. Overall, 81 percent of all conversations came spring months, primarily between March and June. Contrast- from residents of Iowa or Illinois. ingly, three sophomores used IM; two of the three sent more In relation to the 2005 entering freshman class, 90 percent than one IM and each was a resident. Ten students used IM of all matriculating domestic students were from Iowa or Illi- that were looking to re-enter the university. Four of the 10 used nois, compared with 75 percent of individual IM contacts. (The IM repeatedly and nine of them were residents. Seven current University of Iowa, 2005). The contiguous states of Wisconsin, students sent an IM, with three of them being residents and half Missouri and Minnesota represented a nearly identical percent- of them sending more than one. Finally, seven parents sent an age of matriculants (4.8 percent) and IM contacts (5.6 percent). IM, but only one repeated. Four were nonresidents, with three Overall, a strong connection was made between states of origin of them residing in Illinois (the other from New Jersey). In addi- for IM contacts and matriculating students. tion to this variety of contacts were one or two of the following: an admission counselor from another university, Ph.D. students, Type of Student seventh graders, ninth graders, and alumni. “Type of student” referred to whether a prospective student was International prospects made up the final type of student a high school senior, junior, transfer, international prospect, etc. this project recorded. These 24 students hailed from 13 differ- Geography and length of conversation dictated trends. In gen- ent countries, with 14 of the 24 sending more than one IM (58 eral, high school seniors tended to be nonresidents and transfer percent). Yahoo and MSN chat clients were almost exclusively students tended to be residents. From the high school senior used. A total of 63 conversations were recorded from interna- pool, 109 of 110 students gave their state of origin. Of these, tional students and their questions were often settled much 67 percent (73) were nonresidents and 33 percent (36) were differently when compared with domestic students; counselor residents. A total of 250 conversations came from seniors; 68 unfamiliarity with pertinent information for international stu- percent (171) were from nonresidents and 32 percent (79) dents meant they were often sent contact information for the were from residents. With striking similarity, transfer students International Undergraduate Admission Office. This also served inversely mirrored the trend of high school seniors. Out of 98 to establish a link with the appropriate person with which this individuals, 96 gave their state of origin. Of these, 69 percent type of student should be closely working. International stu- (66) were residents and 31 percent (31) were nonresidents; dents were extremely receptive to using IM because of its quick from a total of 202 conversations with transfer students, 72 responses and no-cost value, and may continue to be a great percent (144) were from residents and 28 percent (58) were venue for this technology. from nonresidents. The similar number of overall and indi- When observed by type of student, conversation length vidual contacts between transfers and high school seniors between high school seniors and transfer students yielded defin- may reflect the tendency for Millennials to use IM more often able observations (see Figure 1). Throughout the fall semester, once in college (Hallock & Aiken, 2004; Kindred & Roper, average conversation lengths were virtually identical with matching 2004); however, activity comparisons between these two monthly fluctuations; however, in the spring semester begin- groups would likely relate to the general student profile of ning with February, the average conversation length for transfer the university. students averaged 4.50 minutes longer than with high school 2 | SUMMER 2007 JOURNAL OF COLLEGE ADMISSION WWW.NACACNET.ORG seniors. International student activity was more frequent with Table  Total Conversations by Month and Residency longer conversation lengths in the summer months and notice- Month Total Resident nonresident international ably shorter and less common during the academic year, which June 16, 2005 11 3 7 1 inversely mirrored the activity of domestic students. July 27 12 11 4 Day of Week August 49 17 21 11 The third variable considered activity by day of the week. Mondays, September 51 25 17 8 Tuesdays and Wednesdays were the most active. These three October 54 22 26 3 days collectively represented 484 of the 682 conversations November 80 37 40 1 (71 percent), with Mondays and Tuesdays each accounting for December 48 23 20 4 nearly a quarter of all IM’s and Wednesday another 22 percent. January 76 38 33 3 Factoring in time of day, 39 percent of all conversations took February 43 17 17 6 place 3:00 p.m.–5:00 p.m., Monday through Wednesday; this represented six hours of the work week. When looking at types March 72 36 27 5 of students, high school seniors were most active on Mondays April 65 33 25 6 and Wednesdays, with over 70 percent of their conversations oc- May 71 27 36 6 curring Monday through Wednesday; transfers were more active June 16, 2006 35 14 17 4 over the course of the calendar week, but 69 percent of their Note: Differences between monthly totals and residency sums were due to a conversations occurred between these three days. No additional small number of contacts where residency was unknown. patterns were observed when comparing conversation frequency between days of the week, aside from a general lessening of February; the number of nonresident repeat IM-ers peaked from activity on Thursdays and Fridays. November through January. New contacts with residents were also high throughout the year, with the highest number recorded Month in both January and March; similar to nonresidents, use by resi- A monthly comparison indicated identifiable trends between dent repeat IM-ers peaked in December and January, but also in seasonal activity and type of student. A consistent increase of March and April. use was charted throughout the initial summer months and the With respect to monthly comparisons, these trends were fall semester, rising from just 11 conversations in the final two at their most extreme in the fall and early spring. Additionally, weeks of June 2005 to 80 conversations by November (see Table high school senior (typically nonresidents) conversation lengths 4). The spring semester saw a consistent pattern of alternating between new contacts and repeat users mirrored each other high and low activity; December, February and April averaged throughout the year, peaking in October and November, then 52 conversations while January, March and May averaged 73 steadily decreasing throughout the spring semester months (see conversations. As the spring semester led into the 2006 sum- Figure 1). Transfer student (typically residents) conversation mer months, this initially extreme pattern leveled off to a relative lengths showed little pattern between first-time IM-ers and re- consistency between the months of March and June. peat users. High school juniors sparingly used IM over the course When comparing new contacts against conversations of this project, with only four contacts between September and with repeat IM-ers, one general pattern emerged. From June February. As the spring progressed, so did activity among this through October 2005, the number of conversations with new population with regards to new contacts, though only a third of contacts always outnumbered conversations with repeat users; them used the feature more than one time, most of whom were after October this occurred once, in February. No monthly pat- new contacts made between April and June 2006. terns were observed when considering day of the week or time Interpretation of data according to month was useful in de- of day, aside from more activity during normal school hours termining the overall activity trends of IM (see Table 3). Generally, over the summer months. that activity was highest in the fall, ebbed in December and Feb- Significant patterns emerged when looking at monthly ruary, and steadily increased through the spring. Conversations variations compared with type of student and conversation did not drop off to any significant degree among new contacts or length. With respect to residency, out-of-state student conver- repeat IM-ers regardless of month after August 2005, by which sations were an average of five minutes longer than resident time IM was an established communication option for students. conversations in the fall, but throughout the spring conversation lengths for both groups were nearly identical and consistently Time of Day declining (see Figure 1). The number of new nonresident con- Considering the time of day that conversations were initiated as tacts peaked in October and November, and was consistently an independent variable, only one pattern emerged. Referring observed at high levels with the exception of December and to Day of Week in this section, the most active hours of instant WWW.NACACNET.ORG SUMMER 2007 JOURNAL OF COLLEGE ADMISSION | 2 messenging were almost exclusively between 3:00 p.m.–5:00 p.m.; with this variable.) At this university, the most popular major the exception was on Friday afternoons, when the 4:00 p.m. for first-year students was the open (undecided) major, fol- hour was overshadowed by the 2:00 p.m. hour. Of 682 total con- lowed by business, engineering, pre-medicine, and nursing, versations, 53 percent took place between 3:00 p.m.–5:00 p.m., to round out the top five (M. Barron, personal communication, Monday through Friday. As for the other hours of the afternoon, June 26, 2006). Among IM contacts who were high school activity for the 12:00 p.m. and 1:00 p.m. hours was nearly equal seniors, 26 students expressed an interest in business, 14 at 77 conversations and 72 conversations, respectively; 104 were unsure, 11 stated nursing, nine mentioned engineering, conversations were logged in the 2:00 p.m. hour, followed by and five indicated pre-Medicine. Business was also the most the large escalation of 175 at 3:00 p.m. and 188 during the popular intended major for international students, transfer 4:00 p.m. hour. This trend was expected as classes for the day students, and rising seniors; graduated seniors and juniors finished for both transfer and high school students. were more likely to be undecided. Overall, 54 (16 percent) A comparison of activity time in relation to type of student contacts stated business as an academic interest, followed by yielded surprising results given the existence of a school day for 34 undecided, and 20 that listed engineering; 54 different most students. Considering total conversations, 75 percent of in- academic areas were cited in total, with several contacts list- ternational students, 55 percent of transfer students, 54 percent ing more than one academic interest. of high school juniors, and 30 percent of high school seniors used As far as national trends at the time of this project, the IM to contact undergraduate admission prior to 3:00 p.m., CST. Princeton Review (2006) ranked the most popular majors for In relation to month, time of day activity was consistently busiest first-year students in this order (Undecided was not considered): between 3:00 p.m.–5:00 p.m. during the school year, and more business, psychology, elementary education, biology, nursing, uniformed between hours of the day during summer months with education, English, communication, computer science, and po- the most active times still falling in the 2:00 p.m.–5:00 p.m. litical science. Six of these 10 academic areas fell within the top range. Nonresidents were most active between 3:00 p.m.–5:00 p.m., 10 indicated by matriculating first-year students at this univer- but only slightly more than residents, who showed increased ac- sity (M. Barron, personal communication, June 26, 2006). Eight tivity between 12:00 p.m.–2:00 p.m. Resident activity showed a of the most popular majors indicated by IM contacts correlated gradual increase of activity during the 1:00 p.m. and 2:00 p.m. with the Princeton Review’s top 10. From these observations, hours throughout the spring semester. matriculants and IM contacts were likely to express interest in the most popular majors for their generation, with IM-ers slightly Chat Client more likely to do so. This project was not meant to promote any commercial IM chat clients, however, these computer programs were used because Questions Asked of assumed user familiarity and because they were available at Specific questions asked by IM-ers were tracked according to no cost. America Online (AOL), Yahoo, MSN, and ICQ were the month to find seasonal patterns of inquiries and to observe advertised chat clients. Domestic students overwhelmingly used what students were most likely to ask over IM. The feature was AOL, while international students used Yahoo and MSN. Of 682 advertised to prospective students by undergraduate admis- total conversations, 79 percent were with AOL, 78 percent of all sion and correspondingly half of all questions asked pertained individual contacts used AOL, and 81 percent of all conversa- to university admission. This general category was broken into tions with repeat IM-ers were with AOL. Reviewing by type of 14 subdivisions that spanned everything from the likelihood of student, 15 of 17 graduated seniors used AOL, 16 of 18 juniors courses transferring to problems with the online admission pro- followed suit, along with 90 percent of high school seniors and file students could use to monitor their enrollment status. The 79 percent of transfer students. The reverse was true for the most popular area involved students asking if the university had international student pool, as 95 percent of their conversations received certain documents and about the student’s admission took place over MSN or Yahoo, and only one of the 24 interna- status. Questions about the admission process and admission tional contacts used AOL; this student was from Canada. Though criteria were also very popular. Housing and financial questions AOL proved the most popular, nearly a quarter of all conversa- each pooled approximately 10 percent of all questions asked, es- tions took place over Yahoo and MSN, combined. No contacts pecially those about scholarships, award notification letters, and were made with students using ICQ. housing assignments. Numerous questions were asked about specific majors and academics in general. The orientation pro- Academic Major cess for incoming students and campus visit options were other Intended major was tracked to see if students with certain aca- popular topics. demic interests were more likely to use IM. (The reader should Seasonal patterns emerged surrounding some of these catego- bear in mind that every university has different academic ries. Questions about a student’s admission and document status, strengths which may lead to case-by-case variation, particularly the most popular subject area, did not appear until mid-August 26 | SUMMER 2007 JOURNAL OF COLLEGE ADMISSION WWW.NACACNET.ORG 2005, which was when students typically began applying. They prospective students. Since the anonymity factor of IM prohibited steadily increased to a peak of 13 questions in January, then the tracking of a ratio between IM users and matriculants, this fac- tailed off in a nearly perfect bell curve by May 2006. General tor became the next most highly-regarded pool of information. housing inquiries came steadily throughout the year at two or three per month, however spikes of eight and nine questions Limitations came in November, March and April. Questions about specif- Limitations for this project were organized into six areas. ic majors and Orientation were also steady at three to five per The first related to the employed chat clients. Unfortunately, month with a spike of 16 and 12, respectively, in the month of only one counselor could sign in and actively use each com- March before dropping back to heightened and consistent numbers mercial chat client at a time as a privacy protocol. Outside the in April and May. Areas that saw limited, abrupt activity included work place and for personal use, this was ideal; but in a set- registration concerns, orientation, student organizations, and ting where it would be beneficial for more than one person to AP test scores, all of which occurred in the spring semester. log-on with the same screen name, it was a significant barrier. Focusing on consistency, questions about admission criteria, the Additionally, IM was done amidst normal office responsibili- admission process, scholarships, residency criteria, honors, and ties, which included presentations, appointments, meetings, visit options were asked in virtually every month. and so on. Online advertisement methods were adjusted to regulate Student Activity the volume of potential activity. At minimum, a prospective user The above sections listed the variables tracked in this project would have to click through three Web pages to view the link and an array of trends associated with them, but they offered advertising the IM feature. The buddy-list feature of IM, which little in expressing how effective IM was in building relationships showed when the counselor was online regardless of what Web with prospective students and how receptive they may be to such page the user was browsing, made the Web page location a non- a relationship with a formal contact like an admission represen- issue for sending additional IM’s. Without question, placing the tative. No follow-up was done with IM-ers to ask them what they IM Web page closer to the front of the admission homepage would thought of the interaction; but the activity of every contact was have likely led to a higher level of activity, but limited staffing tracked, which may lead to inferences about the preference of required this restriction. students to use IM to keep in touch with the admission office of A third limitation related to advertising the feature as ac- a university in which they are interested. tive during specific times of the day on certain days of the week. In total, 42 percent of residents, 42 percent of nonresi- IM was advertised as active from 3:00 p.m.–5:00 p.m., Monday dents, and 58 percent of international students used IM more through Thursday. This was done for three reasons: first, so the than once, amounting to 42 percent of all individuals sending counselor could address other daily office responsibilities; sec- more than one IM. These numbers were encouraging in evaluat- ond, so students had a reliable window of time in which to IM ing the popularity of IM for college admission, but the numbers the counselor; third, to funnel student activity to an after-school were less impressive when looking at consistency of use. Only period that correlated with normal workday hours. Friday was not 21 (15 percent) of the 139 individuals that sent more than one included in this time span because prospective students were not IM used the feature for three consecutive months, over half of expected to actively look into future colleges at the end of the which were residents. Viewing these consistent IM-ers by type school week, and the admission counselor often had large visit pro- of student, nine were transfer students, seven were high school gram responsibilities on those days. This being said, the counselor seniors, four were international students, and one was look- was actually available from approximately 12:00 p.m.–5:00 p.m., ing to re-enter the university. No pattern emerged to show that Monday through Friday, nearly everyday for the duration of this students used IM on a consistent basis by time of year, as an project. Though a potential compromise to the integrity of this equal number of three-month groupings were found in the fall experiment according to the advertised timeframe, the counselor and spring semesters. Eight (six percent) individuals used IM logged onto IM more often in the interests of customer service for any five or more of the 12 months this project encompassed; and to explore the possibility of significant activity during other five of these eight prospective students were residents and an hours of the day. equal number were transfers or high school seniors. Perhaps the The anonymous nature of IM created another limitation, most telling statistic was that 47 percent of these repeat IM-ers because students initially shared only a screen name with the totaled all of their conversations within one or two months and counselor. Additional information, and the accuracy of that infor- 58 percent of all individuals that used IM once, never used the mation, was at the discretion of the individual to share. Asking feature again. these students for their names would compromise the anonymity When determining the effectiveness of IM in enrollment factor, lead to privacy issues or lead to false information. This made management, this variable took precedence because it alone shed tracking students through the admission funnel from prospect to light on the potential of IM in building formal relationships with matriculant an impossible task using commercial chat clients. WWW.NACACNET.ORG SUMMER 2007 JOURNAL OF COLLEGE ADMISSION | 27 200 Figure 2 Number of Conversations by Interval Lengths 198 193 n) Note: Though the average conversation length was 12.43 minutes, nearly 75 per- mi 3 cent of all conversations lasted 15 minutes or less. N=682, with the number of 2.4 conversations per interval listed above the shaded portion of the graph. This chart of Conversations 110500 ge Conversation Length (1 113 wwaesig hn otth ere tfiemreen ccoemd mini ttmhee ntte xotf; thhoewire svtearf ft htoe avnis uIMal iczaotnivoenr sias tciornu.cial as supervisors mber Avera 71 u n 50 36 22 17 12 5 7 4 0 4 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 + 0- –1 –1 –2 –2 –3 –3 –4 –4 –5 –5 –6 60 6 1 6 1 6 1 6 1 6 1 6 1 1 2 2 3 3 4 4 5 5 Length of Conversations by Five-Minute intervals Privacy concerns were a significant limitation––the Fam- Conclusions ily Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) stated that The two main questions at the outset of this project dealt with uti- “schools must have written permission from the parent or lizing IM to maximize its potential as an outreach tool for college eligible student in order to release any information from a admission, and how effective IM would be in a formal relation- student’s education record” (34 CFR § 99.31). Higher educa- ship for Millennial students. This case study addressed these tion offices that worked with the public, such as admission, and provided insight on the popularity and way in which most pro- financial aid and housing, typically had established policies spective students may use IM during the college search process. and procedures to comply with FERPA for telephone calls, Overall, conclusions on Millennial student use of IM in formal email, and in-person conversations; however, IM was a new relationships by Green, et al. (2005) and Kindred and Roper area for FERPA consideration. Throughout this project, students (2004) were partially disproved by the unexpected popularity of requesting to alter specifics about their academic record, such IM in this formal setting, but also supported by the way in which as change of major or orientation date, were asked to call the students utilized the feature. university and speak with a specific office or staff member. The popularity observed with IM in this project over the Referring to Questions Asked, many questions fell under course of a calendar year strongly indicated that Millennial stu- FERPA regulations and could not be shared in any detail. dents were willing to use IM as a point of contact in a formalized General advice was always given instead of sensitive or pri- setting. As expected, initial activity was low and increased with vate information. time. Two factors contributed to the dramatic increase observed Finally, IM as a conversation tool itself became a limitation during the first half of this experiment, specifically with the fall to helping students with their questions. Particularly with stu- semester months: first, most high school seniors began their col- dents looking to transfer, typing out how courses would transfer, lege search process and many transfer students began looking how degree audits would be altered, how specific policies would at new schools in which to enroll at that time; second, more apply, and so on, were better handled via telephone. In these students were exposed to the IM option as they browsed the Web cases, the counselor informed the individual that these details page and visited campus. This study was unable to separate the could best be explained over the telephone and gave the toll-free impact of one from the other. In looking for consistency of use, number for admission. two seasonal comparisons best supported the potential for IM. The above limitations shaped the necessary compromises First, the initial two weeks of use, in June 2005, yielded 11 con- that took this project from concept to one that was practical for versations; while 35 conversations were recorded during the final implementation. They also made it possible for a single counselor two weeks of this experiment in June 2006. Second, the average to successfully maintain the IM feature and track its activity number of conversations recorded in the fall semester was 58 per for an entire year. Despite them, the level of activity quickly month, while the spring semester averaged 64 per month. escalated throughout the initial summer months and remained These trends alone were not conclusive enough to disprove constant for the remainder of the project. Kindred and Roper’s (2004) assertion that Millennials “preferred 2 | SUMMER 2007 JOURNAL OF COLLEGE ADMISSION WWW.NACACNET.ORG to use IM in their social relationships, and e-mail for more formal it out or if they were comfortable using it as their primary connec- situations… (p. 51),” but they did not confirm it. Additionally, tion with the university, IM worked in tandem with everything else Green, et al.’s (2005) Ersatz Social Engagement Theory study in- admissions did to build a relationship with each individual student. dicated that students considered information conveyed in an IM This project was based on a wealth of research that expressed conversation to be less-valid and less meaningful than person-to- the importance for enrollment management to continually test person contact. Despite these authors’ conclusions, this case study new technologies and employ them as a complement to other indicated hard data to the contrary; implementation in this formal outreach strategies (Hossler 1999, Steele 2002, Whiteside & university setting resulted in contact with over 300 students, 42 Mentz 2003, Williams, 2000). With higher than anticipated percent of which used the feature more than once, and resulted in popularity among individuals using IM but a lower than expected either increasing or consistent activity for a full calendar year. frequency of conversations with them, the suspicion by Kindred Looking at student behavior, or how often IM was used, the and Roper (2004) that Millennial students were curious about same data puts a much different light on Millennial student ac- using IM in formal academic settings was supported, but en- tivity. A majority of prospective students (58 percent) used IM rollment management officials must be cognizant that students just once and only 15 percent of repeat IM-ers used the feature would likely view conveyed information as potentially inaccurate. with any frequency (three or more consecutive months). Assum- IM has the potential to be a great outreach tool, but the mes- ing that many students saw the Web page or advertisement and sages shared must correlate with other informational resources decided to try it out, the conclusions by Green, et al. (2005) ap- in order for it to be a valid and effective feature. peared better supported; if students found IM to be useful and credible, they should use it more often than just once or twice Future Research over the course of an entire calendar year. Furthermore, the use of IM could be employed in enrollment management offices in commercial instant messengers meant that prospective students a variety of additional ways, all of which should be tested to could add the screen name “IowaAdmissions” to their buddy list enrich and explore this body of research. Would IM in admis- after the first contact, see when the counselor was online along sion be as popular or effective at private colleges, or those with with all their friends, and send an IM if anything was on their a lower volume of activity than a flagship university? Would mind. Most students did not use IM in this way with admission. activity levels be higher if the feature were offered later in the Relating these findings to the specific nature of the relation- evening? What would be the impact of staffing IM with current ship between admission office and prospective student, IM was not students instead of a counselor, and how would those findings employed for an entire year in a vacuum of communication media. fit within the Ersatz Social Engagement Theory as the nature of That students used IM as an option amidst alternatives like the uni- contact became more social and less formal (Green, et al. 2005)? versity Web site, campus mailings, emails, telephone, campus visits, Finally, what would be the impact on activity if purchased IM guidance counselors, parents, etc., must be considered a successful chat software was implemented instead of the commercial IM utilization of this technology. In the end, if students were just testing clients used in this project? REFERENCES A profile of students enrolled at the Univer- Hallock, Jeff, and Damon Aiken. 2004. Bling, Knerr, Amanda R., and Sherry A. Woosley The ten most popular majors. 2006. The sity of Iowa: Fall semester 2005. The Uni- instant messages and student communica- 2003. Computer use among residence hall Princeton Review. http://www.princeton- versity of Iowa, Office of the Registrar. tion: Looking at use and the future. Paper students. The Journal of College and Uni- review.com/college/research/articles/ma- presented at the annual conference for the versity Student Housing, 32 no. 2: 28-33. jors/popular.asp (accessed August 16, America Online, Inc. 2005. Starting Out. http:// National Association of Student Personnel 2006. www.aim.com/ (accessed June 1, 2005). Administrators, March, in Denver, CO. LaGeese, David. 2001. Instant message phenom is, like, way beyond e-mail. U.S. Whelan, David. 2001. The instant messag- Cerulean Studios. 2005. Learn About Tril- Hossler, Don. 1999. Effective admissions News and World Report, March, 54. ing market. American Demographics, 23 lian. http://www.trillian.cc/learn/, (accessed recruitment. New Directions for Higher no. 12: 28-32. June 12, 2005). Education, 27 no. 4: 15-30. Microsoft Corporation. 2005. Features. http://messenger.msn.com/download/ (ac- Williams, Brian G. 2000. To the personal- Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act, ICQ, Inc. 2005. What is ICQ? http://www. cessed June 1, 2005). ized go the prospects. Journal of College The (FERPA) (20 U.S.C. § 1232g; 34 CFR icq.com/products/whatisicq.html (accessed Admission, (Winter): 12-21. Part 99). June 2, 2005). Plewes, Anthony. 2003. Where the growth of IM will take your business. (March), Yahoo! Inc. 2005. New to Instant Mes- Goldberg, Matt. 2002. Generation IM. Ya- Kindred, Jeanette, and Shannon Roper. http://www.silicon.com/research/special- saging. http://messenger.yahoo.com/ (ac- hoo! Internet Life, (April): 68-75. 2005. Making connections via instant reports/im/0,39024995,39116561,00.htm cessed June 1, 2005).AS messenger (IM): Student use of IM to (accessed March 23, 2004). Green, Melanie C., Jessica Hilken, Hayley maintain personal relationships. Qualita- Friedman, Karly Grossman, Josephine Gas- tive Research Reports in Communication, Steele, Jonathan. 2002. The media omni- iewski, Rob Adler, et al. 2005. Communi- 5: 48-54. vores: Understanding college-bound cation via instant messenger: Short-and- students and communicating with them long-term effects. Journal of Applied Social effectively. Journal of College Admission, Psychology, 35, no. 3: 445-462. (Spring): 10-19. WWW.NACACNET.ORG SUMMER 2007 JOURNAL OF COLLEGE ADMISSION | 29