For the past several decades, graduate enrollment has been a secondary consideration for most institution-level planning. With demand from students on the undergraduate level decreasing and a recognition of the growth opportunities in graduate education, graduate enrollment management (GEM) professionals are increasingly getting what many have long sought–attention. While grad programs deserve the attention due to their ability to generate additional revenue for institutions which typically devote most of their resources to undergrad, with attention comes scrutiny.
Understandably, when trying to address a challenge, we go to what we think we know. Since the vast majority of enrollment management (EM) literature and strategy is dedicated to undergraduate students, those methods are treated as the general EM strategy or baseline. One example is the perspective that application fees are a barrier. That may be the case for potential undergraduate students; however, on the graduate side of the fence, application fees should be viewed through a different lens.
In the undergraduate EM space, application fees may be viewed primarily as a mechanism to provide a source of revenue for schools to support necessary administrative functions. This source of support also is true in GEM. However, in the graduate space, the fees play a more complex role, and the contribution of fees goes beyond the simple provision of resources for support.
Application fees can serve two functions as a management tool. First, including a fee can guard against spending valuable time processing applications likely to have a low yield. Indeed, when Missouri State University (the home institution of one of the authors) eliminated the undergraduate fee, the number of annual applications increased by 34%; however, the yield decreased by 13%.
With limited resources devoted to GEM at many institutions and a prospective student population already experienced at applying to higher education institutions, it is preferable to create pipelines of prospective students who are highly motivated to apply to that specific institution. It is possible, perhaps likely, that a free application could fill a pipeline with “empty calories,” students who have little intention to attend but have applied because there was no cost to them. In many cases, graduate applicant reviews and decisions are made by program faculty, who have primary commitments in research, teaching, and service. Ensuring serious interest and high potential for fit is particularly important when asking faculty to perform admissions duties, which may not be viewed as valuable in their progress toward tenure or reappointment.
Those who pay the application fee are willing to put some “skin in the game” by signaling their intent and higher interest as well as a willingness to invest what is usually a nominal fee in the advancement of enrollment candidacy. Paying the fee shows that an applicant is engaged with specific graduate programs, has done some preliminary research, and has sufficient interest in attending the program; in many ways, the application fee can be viewed as akin to a candidate’s first deposit. Longtime NAGAP board member and grad enrollment leader Keith Ramsdell has seen the conversation about eliminating fees as a barrier play out before. “I agree… that application fees are one of the only tools that we really have to gauge an applicant’s interest. I’ve seen many attempts to eliminate the fee as a barrier, and the result is typically the same: higher apps and lower yield,” Ramsdell said in the recent GEM Horizons webinar.
Second, the application fee also can serve as a proxy for another indicator: the capacity to financially support attendance in the program. The average application fee for GradCAS programs in the 2022-23 cycle was $56. Contemporary wisdom suggests that an inability to pay the application fee itself highlights potential challenges with an applicant’s future ability to pay the tuition of a graduate program. Enrolling students who will not be able to successfully perform in or complete a graduate program because of financial pressures is not only emotionally devastating, but also contributes to the national crisis regarding student debt in the absence of earning a credential.
The provision of application fee waivers for students with financial need continues to serve an important purpose, provided that they are part of a whole package of financial support that will continue throughout enrollment. Also, giving application fee waivers can be an effective recruiting strategy. We have seen them used successfully to incentivize prospects who have already taken some sort of proactive action such as doing a campus visit or attending an open house. Giving waivers in these circumstances increases the likelihood that you have viable candidates willing to invest in the application process in hopes of becoming a student.
In an era when market disruptions have driven more schools to emphasize enrollment growth in graduate programs, GEM leaders are not just seeking more applications, they are seeking more students—particularly those who are best fits for niche programs. The strategic use of an application fee in this space allows programs not only to support the funding of administrative functions in their enrollment offices, but also gives GEM leaders data and insight into applicants’ intent and interest in a program. Colleges and universities do not simply need to fill pipelines, they need pipelines of interested and capable prospective students that will allow them to forecast—and grow—enrollment.
Written by:
Julie Masterson, Ph.D. – Associate Provost and Dean of the Graduate College, Missouri State University
Art Munin, Ph.D. – Associate Vice President for Enrollment Marketing Solutions, Liaison
Stephen Taylor – Vice President, Enrollment Strategy, Liaison