Question for the MTCers
First-years, second-years, and alumni (and anyone else), I need your help.
Applications are way down this year and I don't know why (it is, after all, very difficult to figure out why someone doesn't apply).
Facts:
This year, we received 70 applications for the first deadline.
We have received 10 applications going into Monday's second deadline.
At this time last year we had received 310 applications.
Last year, 32 of the 310 applications were reactivations (applicants did not need to resubmit a new applications, they merely replied to an email I sent). We did not offer reactivations this year.
We changed the application website. Last year, you had to click on the MTC Application Page and then click through to another website that hosted the actual application. This year the application is embedded directly in the MTC page (which, theoretically, should make it easier since it is one less click).
We added a second essay question: What qualities do you posses that would make you an effective teacher? Otherwise the application is the same.
We have received two internship applications, also very low.
We have not changed our recruiting strategy significantly. Selected career fairs and info sessions. Email and blog updates every two weeks. I did switch all of the email addresses over to the Constant Contact website. This site allows people to subscribe or unsubscribe as they wish, rather than sending me an email.
The turnout for info sessions (St. Johns, Smith, Amherst, Williams) has been higher this year.
The turnout for career fairs (UM, Harvard, Texas, Georgetown) has been lower.
The number of "hits" the website receives is down slightly. About 10 fewer people visit the website daily this year as compared to last year.
The ration of "high quality" applications to "low quality" applications is much higher this year, about a 1 to 1 ratio. In years past it has been a 1 to 4 ratio of high to low (meaning we are receiving, in my opinion, a lot of high quality applications and not a lot of low quality applications as compared to last year).
Theories:
"High Quality" applicants are self-selecting out of applying because they think they won't get in. We do, after all, highlight the competitiveness of the program.
"Low Quality" applicants are self-selecting out of applying because they know they won't get in.
This is part of an overall trend for all service programs like Peace Corps and TFA (I have not checked with either).
There is some technical glitch with the application process (every test application I have submitted has gone through).
There is a glitch with the email updates I send out.
So there are the facts and theories I have. I turn it over to you. Why is the application count so low?
My Groups
-
Mississippi Teacher Corps Updated: May 9, 2008
-
Peace Corps Updated: Nov 28, 2007
-
Mississippi Teacher Corps (host) Updated: May 15, 2007
Comments
One thing -- you might find that applications will be higher for the later deadlines-- I imagine those people who think they might not make it simply applied to first TFA deadlines. If they don't get in there, MTC might be worth a try again.
(Also, talking to the TFA recruiter at Williams -- he says that there is MUCH less interest this year on campus than last year, but I can't imagine that could be a multi-school trend...)
Your theories are interesting. I will add my 2 cents here....
Some alternate theories:
1. -People who are service oriented may be looking more towards
environmental concerns (maybe)
2. - It is just a bum year, no worries.
3. - People are more concerned about money and the economy and are
looking to higher paying jobs since the economy is scary and very
unpredictable with no real promise of security... which leads me into
my next shpeal about Teach For America, which offers much of what MTC
does (I of course think MTC is better) and offers the brand name. The
stamp on the resume (much like the Williams or Amherst stamp) that
will serve the person well in their later job market.
A few things... I know you want numbers up to be competitive and to
say you are competitive, but if you have just as many qualified
applicants as last year, the program will not suffer... I guess it is
just its "competitiveness/stats" which then would make it hard to
recruit later....
More about TFA. I have a friend who works as a manager of alumni
relations there. They are the biggest non=profit in history in terms
of getting applicants - 17,000 last year, and they take people from
Fidelity and Pepsi to be in the top positions. They are recruiting
machines.
- TFA is way up this year.... hmm.... maybe you could look into
that...... first deadline 4000 apps (again info from friend who works
in alumni management there.... ) They are really marketing hard
nationally, and it could be eclipsing any competitive programs. They
are using digital media (yahoo, facebook, etc....) sort of corporate
for a non profit.
In light of this, my main reaction is that MTC should not be too much
like TFA..... in other words, you need to figure out what it is that
makes MTC distinct and be ready to answer this question in an
irrefutable way, "How is MTC different from TFA?" And it may not just
be about the Delta... the longest standing exec director in TFA is in
the Delta and the culture of the Delta is embedded deep within the TFA
program.... I really do think MTC is a better program, and we have to
be able to say distinctly and succinctly how we are different.
We also need to think about our target audience. Who do we want to
recruit? Can we redefine/narrow that? How can we distinguish from
TFA, who may very well take over the market?
I think one of the things MTC did well when we involved was recruiting
a lot from within MS and from mid career change people, although TFA
is doing more of that now... (the mid career folks I mean.)
Maybe it is not about TFA, but they are really getting out there and
taking a lot of people.
What do you think?
Shara
And while I often say the goal of recruiting is to cast as wide a net as possible, that is not exactly accurate. The goal is really to cast as wide a net as possible among people who fit our recruiting profile: outstanding students with a commitment to service and experience working with kids. Leadership or teaching experience a plus. So we have always tried to target that audience.
Shara's email, copied in the comment above, is interesting because that indicates TFA's applications are way up.
Do we already contact athletic departments at any schools to get our name out there among student-athletes. One of the characteristics that we seem to look for are people who are ambitious, willing to adapt, and able to handle multiple responsibilities. The school districts want teachers who will wear many hats, especially coaching, which would stem from knowledge of a sport ideally. I had a job already when I was in college, but our athletic department held information sessions with specific employers, and blocks of interview time specifically for athletes. Even if we couldn't arrange info sessions, we could contact athletic departments to spread the word (email fliers that could be printed and put on bulletin boards or forwarded to the teams?)
MTC is compared to the Peace Corps on its homepage though I do not believe that MTC and Peace Corps have too much in common besides the 2-year commitment. I feel that MTC should be compared to TFA on the homepage. The comparisons page should also be expanded to highlight more differences between MTC and TFA.
I like the TFA homepage better than the MTC homepage. After reading just the TFA Homepage, a potential applicant is presented with the challenge that they can help change education in America. The page is actively recruiting.
The MTC homepage is a great starting place to get more information on MTC, but the homepage does not actively recruit. The first text visible could be a shocking and provocative statistic about education in Mississippi and a link to our application. Other text on the page should mention the connection to Teach for America but emphasize our Master's program and other distinct differences. The picture is great, but it does not show anything about how MTC teachers are impacting education. The TFA homepage has 4 pictures of student-teacher "learning" action shots.
Another angle: Our blogs aren't accessible to the Internet surfer because of the privacy controls most of us have. I read a lot of the blogs last year before applying.....just a thought.
I agree that we need to highlight the differences between TFA and MCT more convincingly. The TFA brand is powerful, but there may be quite a few more good candidates who would consider MTC a better option if they really understood the differences.
I would like to mention a key difference I see between the organizations that should not be understated: size. To the applicant, one of the not-so-subtle differences between TFA and MCT is that TFA seems to focus somewhat mechanically on undergraduate GPA (to the extent of year-by-year breakdowns to two decimal places) as its primary means of weeding through applicants, whereas MCT actually seems to read the application submission in totality. That is just one example of the size difference. MCT is a small and flexible organization. You will personally know everyone involved in the organization, from top to bottom. TFA is a large, presumably efficient machine, but probably not very personal. You will not get a phone call from the founder. You will not debate with the program manager the very goals and missions of the organization, etc. That is a pretty profound difference, and one that MTC should advertise, in my opinion.