I’ve
mentioned this before, but it interests me that the most read post on this blog
is the very first one, which followed an opening introduction. That post concerned branch campus characteristics,
and it has been viewed more than twice as often as any other. It can be seen at http://branchcampus.blogspot.com/2007/07/characteristics-of-branch-campus.html. Dating back to 2007, it continues to get
regular hits, which I assume means that I chose a good title that shows up on
Google searches.
Other
frequently and persistently viewed posts mostly relate either to some aspect of
branch characteristics, or to financial matters and revenue sharing. With regard to branch characteristics, in
presentations at NABCA and RBCA this year I discussed some emerging trends that
I believe are worth watching. (As usual,
what I have to say represents personal observation, rather than any sort of
systematic data collection.)
One
trend is to open branches at greater distance from the main campus than we’ve
typically seen in the past. Small
privates may cross neighboring state lines to place branches in areas they
believe are underserved, whereas some larger institutions (also usually private
nonprofit) may open branches that lie many states away. Within a state, I see both public and private
institutions opening branches that directly compete with other institutions in
a way that ignores explicit or implicit service boundaries established years
ago. (I’m not even going to get into the
issue of international branches, which I suspect has a dynamic all its own.)
Perhaps
related, more institutions seem to be opening single-program branches or
branches that tie only to one or two colleges at a university. Similarly, some institutions are developing
and delivering programs that specifically meet the needs of a major employer,
whether a corporation or, in some cases, state government. (Community and technical colleges have done
this for a long time, but it has been less common at universities.)
Not
unlike programs that target the military, these trends make good sense to me,
but I also think they stretch the “characteristics” of a typical branch, as I
described them in 2007. Frankly, whereas
long-established branches may have been developed to expand access or to block
competition, my guess is the newer trends are specifically intended to attract
new student audiences and increase revenue.
It
also appears to me that more institutions either are pursuing or considering separate
accreditation for their branch campuses, or are recognizing their branches as
part of a distinct college within the university. Both separate accreditation and college
status strike me as an attempt to give branches more autonomy around program
development, allowing them to create distinctive programs to serve their own
audience/market, without undue interference from main campus politics and
process.
All
of this is happening in a context where institutions consider multiple delivery
options, create certificate and badge programs that are less than a full
degree, or offer accelerated programs that shorten the time to a degree. Taken together, all these trends suggest a
need for targeted marketing/recruitment strategies, in order to make sure that
the message gets to the intended audience.
Unfortunately, however, I’m seeing more conflict than ever between
branch and main campus marketing and recruitment efforts. I urge institutional leaders to make sure
they have the right structure in place to support success at different campuses
serving radically different audiences.
