| dc.description | The 2008 NASFAA Conference offered a variety of sessions in different formats that provided essential information for professional development of participants and timely sharing of best practices, from which this university can benefit.
Swil Kanim, a professional entertainer, kicked off the conference with the telling of a tale that stressed the importance of telling/obtaining/contemplating issues from various diverse perspectives. Kanim’s message for financial aid administrators was that although it might be easy to think the job is all about money, what student loan officers promote is much bigger – it’s about students and lives.
The opening session—a panel discussion in which the participants (John Dean, a principal in the Washington, D.C. public affairs firm of Washington Partners, LLC; Brett Lief, President, National Council of Higher Education Loan Program, Inc.; Kathleen Smith, President, Education Finance Council; and Robert Moran, Senior Advisor, Office of the Undersecretary, U.S. Department of the Education ) answered questions about, and debated the effects of, the current U.S. economy in combination with recent U.S. Bills and Legislation that have had the effect of reducing the availability of student loans. Some lenders have unwillingly pulled out of the student loan business resulting in education becoming less accessible for some students. The lenders that have stayed are left with the challenge of determining how to cut costs and become more efficient without affecting student service.
The key points of the session were:
• Budget cuts have changed the face of student loans in the U.S.
• Funders (banks) have to examine their models in order to continue participating in the student loan business
• Sub prime affects liquidity
• Need for government, students, loan officers, and other stakeholders to work together to provide guidance regarding investment in education
I found the opening session to be a lively and understandable exchange between the various panelists about the credit crunch that has resulted due to the current state of the U.S. economy. Interesting to me was the fact that although all sides seemed to agree the next president of the United States needs to be lobbied about reinvesting in education; the panelists did not get into why the government did not see student loans/education as a priority when compared to the priority of funding the war in Iraq or Afghanistan. ( . . . and no, I didn’t ask!)
Why wouldn’t a person go to college? The presenters of session two, “College Goal Sunday – What Has Worked and What Hasn’t in Increasing College Access to Underserved Populations” suggest this is the question that really needs to be asked when trying to find the barriers preventing potential students from pursuing post secondary education. All too often, Universities ask a question for which they already know the answer. That is, “Why would a person go to college,” instead of getting to the heart of the real issue – barriers to enrolment.
This session provided information/statistics about:
• The College Goal Sunday program, which piloted in Indiana when research made it apparent the availability of student loans or other funding was not enough to get students into post secondary education. It became a statewide volunteer program that provided free information and assistance to students and families who were applying for financial aid for post secondary education. College Goal Sunday brings together financial aid professionals from colleges and universities along with other volunteers to help college-bound students and their families complete the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) form, which is required for any student seeking federal and state financial aid, including grants and loans at all colleges in the United States.
• The populations who were finding access to college a challenge such as persons with disabilities, individuals from low income families, visible minorities, and those children that came from families with no tradition of attending post-secondary;
• The various costs of College Goal Sunday publicity and outreach.
• The strategies/interventions that worked best to get students to attend a College Goal Sunday session.
The presenters shared with the audience their tips for a successful College Goal Sunday program:
1. Go to the people, not people to a room to do a “sell” on them.
2. Make use of social marketing principles.
3. Use volunteers to spread the word about the program and/or to help at the College Goal Sunday sessions.
4. Partner with organizations serving targeted populations such as libraries to increase effectiveness and reduce program costs.
5. Collect statistics and do some research to get a picture of the current state. From this strategies can be created and best practices developed.
I attended this session because there was a fit with AU’s mission statement (access) and the current SUP regarding enrolment strategies, goals and objectives. The question of, “Why wouldn’t a person attend Athabasca University,” is worth pursuing.
This session also brought home the point of how social marketing and traditional advertising methods can create a winning equation:
Social marketing principals such as the use of volunteers + A simple ad campaign such as “SHOW UP. CASH IN.” = Successful enrolment strategy.
Session three, “Why Can’t We Be Friends – How to be Administratively Capable without Making Enemies on Campus” presented processes for increasing the profile of Student Financial Aid on campuses in a positive way to counter being portrayed as the “bad guy”.
The session started by explaining why communication and compliance are important to meet regulatory requirements, improve customer service and enhance the goals of the institution. Issues that require campus-wide coordination were identified, as were the key communication issues (information sharing, identifying/resolving conflicting information and the importance of collaboration) and compliance issues (satisfactory academic progress, retention of records, verification). Best practices for blending compliance and customer service matters were discussed such as using focus groups, creating a financial aid awareness day, asking others to test materials, campus-wide information and training sessions, etc. This was followed by communication strategies to get positive word out about SFA such as working through institutional committees, networking, policies and procedures, training, informal face-to-face, print materials, creative communications (lunch ‘n learn), and meeting with student organizations.
The strategies presented at this session are transferable to other university departments and units. For instance, they could be used to increase the profile and function of the student awards unit at Athabasca University. As an example, although the student awards unit targets students for certain awards and do advertise on certain Centre website, the profile of awards could be increased by letting all staff know where and when a recipient list has been posted so awards, in general, are never far from the minds of the academic, professional and support staff.
The National Chair’s Reception and Opening of Exhibit Hall was one of four opportunities (the other times being the breakfasts July 7th and 8th, as well as the grab ‘n go lunch) to wander about the vendor booths (approximately 80 in total) and network with other conference participants doing the same thing.
I found this part of the conference to be disappointing as the volume of people navigating the aisles made it difficult to have any meaningful conversation. Most of the vendors were either lenders (banks) or software companies specifically wanting to sell their product, which was entirely geared to the American student loan process. The flow of people through the food lineups resulted in delays. Also, if one was unfortunate enough to either not find a roving waiter with hor d'oeuvres or be at the back of a food line-up, there was every possibility of going hungry.
Beyond Document Imaging – A Smart Approach to Workflow Management covered the process Nova Southeastern University followed to implement a whole new enrollment management system by using document imaging and workflow to centralize enrollment processing services, gain control over lost and misplaced documents, automate admissions processes, set up a centralized document repository, and provide a mechanism by which to share documents university-wide.
Each stage of the project to set up the new enrollment processing services unit was covered from stating the project action items, setting up the operational structure and support, determining the vendor selection process, staffing the unit, and setting standards for operations. The second part of the presentation explained the Enrollment Processing Services document trail by following a document from the time it is received in the mailroom through mail, research, scanning, indexing/validation, and quality control areas to the manual entering of data in BANNER due to the lack of interface between BANNER and Document Imaging to the university’s program office where records are populated with pertinent information.
I found this session to be very informative and timely considering the Office of the Registrar at AU will soon be replacing microfilming with document imaging. The presenters, Stephanie Brown and Isa Peguero, of Nova Southeastern University, were intimately acquainted with every aspect of the document imaging project at their university and were able to relay the information in a non-geek/non-technical way.
The session increased my understanding of document imaging and of the potential benefits that AU will enjoy once a similar process is implemented in the Office of the Registrar. The possibilities of using document imaging throughout the University are endless. The institutional restructuring that effectively created an Enrollment Processing Services department to handle the front end admissions seemed to be an efficient and effective approach and might work well with the planned one-stop shop general operations model for AU’s Office of the Registrar.
The one-stop shop approaches that three universities (U of Alaska, Utah Valley State College, and U of San Francisco) have taken as the answer to improve student services were the focus of the “A Consolidated Service Model – Combining Admissions, Registrations, Financial Aid, and Student Services” session. Representatives for each institution spoke about their experiences when combining units to present one public face. The physical layouts of employee work spaces and student interaction areas were prominent features of each presentation. Other commonalities of each discussion were:
• Involve the staff from the get-go with every aspect of the planning;
• Ensure new staff were hired at least nine months in advance of going “live” with the new model;
• Ensure new staff were paired with experienced staff for training purposes;
• Second experienced staff from each specialty area to work in the one-stop shop;
• Have experienced staff create training manuals;
• Empower staff to do such things as waive late fees, etc.;
• Increase salaries and position ranking of the one-stop staff; and,
• Rotate staff regularly throughout the day or week to ensure everybody gets a break from the public and to ensure everybody keeps their skills up in all areas.
The Office of the Registrar is planning a consolidated service model approach so this session was valuable in terms of learning from others about their experiences in setting up a “one-stop” shop approach. I found it interesting that student awards and scholarships were not considered part of the services that should be combined into this type of model. When queried about this, all panelists stated/agreed it would be too much information for the generalist staff to learn. That made me wonder whether the reverse was true. That is, would it be too much for an experienced scholarships person to learn the other areas?
The Monday sit down, served Lunch with Speaker provided an opportunity to meet and enjoy a meal with seven other Financial Aid Advisors from various universities and a couple of bankers (US Credit Union). Congressman Ric Keller of Florida addressed the audience by giving a speech that reflected on his own personal experience to obtain higher education. Being from a low income family, he did not have the financial means to go on to post secondary schooling. This all changed when the CEO of a company for which his mother worked “sponsored” him by providing a private scholarship to get him started. As a past recipient of a Pell Grant, Congressman Keller is well acquainted with student finance matters and educational issues, in general.
I enjoyed the speech—the delivery was sincere and humorous. The Congressman was well-informed, and willing to answer questions from the audience.
Leadership Issues Facing Our Diverse Profession was a discussion about the proficiencies that were needed to be a leader and an examination of future opportunities in the student financial aid business. The session began with each panelist reflecting on their personal journey as they made their way “up” in an organization. The speakers offered a roadmap to involvement (participate in professional activities, get started, avoid roadblocks, become a leader, handling the hazards) and advice for succeeding as a leader. They addressed the qualities found in successful people, things to do to succeed, and management issues such as:
Educational qualifications,Passion, Bringing people along that have the desire, Balance, Being professional, Giving back, Collegial, Taking advantage of opportunities to shine or show your stuff, Give all staff an opportunity to shine, Choose your people wisely, Know your stuff, Remember to say “thank you,”, Job shadowing, mentoring, Be honest, Don’t set people up for failure, Succession planning, Keep an “ear” with students and staff.
This session was okay; however, I did not learn anything new. I should have read the synopsis more carefully as I thought the session was going to be about management issues such as communication challenges, staffing, etc. On the other hand, this session was enlightening as it was geared towards minorities and their success, so I was able to audit frank discussions and experience the support being extended and given to future leaders from those who have “been there”.
Campus Based Awards – FISAP and Community Service explained the formulas for determining campus based aid for schools wanting to access funds from the FEDS. This classroom-like session taught administrators provided hints to institutions for successful community service programs, how to request supplemental awards, and the rules regarding carrying forward/back options of funds prior to the US Treasury fiscal year-end. The “teachers” (federal employees) emphasized to its students (financial aid administrators) about practicing proactive approaches to budgeting decisions and to get information in prior to year end (or year start).
I found this session fascinating, despite the dry nature of the topic, as it was eye-opening to witness the interaction between the US Department of Education employees and the student financial aid administrators. The ability of all conference attendees to have access to federal policy makers, program specialists, etc. was amazing. There was even a room where one could go to “ask a fed” questions or discuss other issues. This was an excellent forum for information sharing and exchange.
Learn how to view service from the perspective of the customer was the main message of Customer Service: The Magic of People, Places, Processes and Products. Ask, “What do students want from a particular service unit?” The answer to this question as it pertains to student financial aid is money and service. Excellence in service from a financial aid unit is one that makes financial aid efficient and manageable, instead of being bogged down in bureaucratic red tape. Excellence in service removes the frustration of financial aid processes by helping students navigate through the forms, etc. Excellence in service in about empowering students to achieve their objectives. It’s important to take away the image of the financial aid office as being the “controller of the purse strings”. Never promise something you can’t achieve.
The above session offered advice that was practical. It drove home a message to the audience to dissect the basic elements of customer service in a unit so it can be determined how best to strategically meet the needs of students. This same approach can be used in every Centre and Department at AU to provide better customer service, just as it has been used by Southwest Airlines, Disney, and Nordstrom to become known for their customer service.
Performance management applications available with BANNER Web were the focus of the “SunGard Higher Education – Meeting New Expectations for Performance and Accountability” session. Participants were given a demonstration of the software that included different types of business information such as scorecards, analysis, and detailed reports to help measure and monitor performance across an organization. The performance management software can be used with COGNOS, Excel, etc. For instance, a user can extract any page of BANNER into Excel.
The demonstration of the software was interesting to observe and could be useful in measuring the success of University wide goals. The BANNER Web application seemed very user friendly and interactive. I would like to have found out more, but must admit I was embarrassed to get too involved in the discussion, as every institution represented in the room, with the exception of AU, was on version 7 of BANNER or higher.
Creating, Managing, and Making the Most of Web-Based Training was a session about the use of video conferencing to train staff across various campuses. The University of Phoenix (Apollo Group) and Northeastern University have successfully implemented this mode of staff training and shared their experiences of using a Learning Management System: MyLearning, Captivate, Element K and Adobe Connect. Both presenters agreed:
• Web based training is an emerging trend;
• Tutorials should be kept to less than 1 hour in length; and,
• The addition of audio and video in the tutorials increases the interest of participants.
I attended this session as training of staff will be a key element for the successful transition of the specialist model to the proposed generalist model in the Office of the Registrar. The Internet provides several opportunities for AU to reach staff quickly with new information. Web based training reduces the issue of distance when training a dispersed workforce and can allow for real-time interaction between a trainer and staff.
The final session of the conference was the Closing Breakfast and Department of Education Federal Update. The sit down breakfast was tasty, but unorganized, as not enough tables were set or food ordered to match the number of participants. Despite this, the National Department of Education managed to smooth over the issue of the lack of food with a presentation that communicated federal intent about budget ($95 Billion in grants, FWS), policy, legislature, College Cost & Reduction Act, Higher Ed Authorization, 2006-2007 Authorization, 2006-2007 Regulation, 2007-2008 Authorization, 2007-2008 Regulation, General Provisions, ACG and National SMART Grants, FFEL loans, TEACH grants, and upcoming FSA conferences. Although most of this was “Greek” to me with regards to the specifics of each type of grant, I was impressed by the involvement of government with the national association of student financial aid administrators and vice versa.
Overall, the interest sessions were worthwhile and pertinent to AU and its student awards unit. The U.S. student loan and grant processes are mind boggling, but I’m appreciative of the opportunity I was given to experience the American system and the NASFAA conference. | en |
