Segmenting student markets with a student satisfaction and priorities survey
- Victor M. H. Borden Ph.D.
- … show all 1 hide
Rent the article at a discountRent now
* Final gross prices may vary according to local VAT.Get Access
A market segmentation analysis was conducted on students at a large midwestern urban university using two forms of hierarchical cluster analysis on student characteristics: an agglomerative procedure using a matching-type association measure and a divisive chi-square-based automatic interaction detection (CHAID). The resulting segments were compared for their ability to distinguish among students according to six satisfaction scales and measures of students' priorities for college study derived from a general satisfaction survey. As expected, the CHAID clusters discriminated better among students according to their several measures of satisfaction, one of which was the criterion variable for the analysis. However, both procedures produced differences across only two of six satisfaction scales. The matching-type measure clusters resulted in significant differences on 11 of 18 college study priority items compared to only 6 of 18 for the CHAID clusters. Final discussion describes the usefulness of market segmentation strategies for planning, evaluating, and improving academic and student support programs.
- Aldenderfer, M. S., and R. K. Blashfield (1984).Cluster Analysis. Quantitative Applications in the Social Sciences, No. 44. Beverly Hills: Sage.
- Astin, A. W. (1985).Achieving Educational Excellence. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
- Beder, H. (1986). Basic concepts and principles of marketing. In H. Beder (ed.).Marketing Continuing Education. New Directions for Continuing Education, No. 31, pp. 3–17.
- Bonoma, T. V., and B. P. Shapiro (1983).Segmenting the Industrial Market. Lexington, MA: D. C. Heath & Company.
- Borden, V. M. H., and K. Gentemann (1993). Campus community and student priorities at a metropolitan university. Paper presented at the 33rd Annual Forum of the Association for Institutional Research. Chicago, Illinois, May 16–19 (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED 360 290).
- Cowles, D., and F. Franzak (1991). Divide and conquer: Applying the marketing concept of “segmentation” to the placement function.Journal of Career Planning and Employment 51(3): 59–63.
- Dillon, W. R., and M. Goldstein (1984).Multivariate Analysis: Methods and Applications. New York: Wiley.
- Goldgehn, L. A. (1989). Admissions standards and the use of key marketing techniques by United States colleges and universities.College and University 65(1): 44–55.
- Grabowski, S. M. (1981).Marketing in Higher Education. AAHE-ERIC Research Report, no. 5. Washington, DC.
- Grunig, J. E. (1990). Focus on your audience.Currents 16(2): 36–39.
- Hartigan, J. A. (1975).Clustering Algorithms. New York: John Wiley & Sons.
- Jacoby, B. (1990). Adapting the institution to meet the needs of commuter students.Metropolitan Universities, Summer 1990, pp. 61–71.
- Lay, R. S., and J. J. Maguire (1983). Computer aided segmentation analysis: New software for college admissions marketing.Journal of College Admissions 101: 32–36.
- Merante, J. A. (1982). Successful student recruitment using direct marketing and information technology.CAUSE-EFFECT 5(1): 18–22.
- Muffo, J. A. (1987). Market segmentation in higher education: A case study.Journal of Student Financial Aid 17(3): 31–40.
- Rickman, C. A., and G. Green (1993). Market segmentation differences using factors of college selection.College and University 8(1): 32–37.
- Sokal, R., and P. Sneath (1963).Principles of Numerical Taxonomy. San Francisco: W. H. Freeman.
- Sonquist, J. A. and J. N. Morgan (1964).The Detection of Interaction Effects. Monograph No. 35, Institute for Social Research, University of Michigan.
- Tinto, V. (1975). Dropout from higher education: A theoretical synthesis of recent research.Review of Educational Research 45: 89–125.
- Wakstein, J. (1987). Identifying market segments. In R. S. Lay and J. J. Endo (eds).Designing and Using Market Research, New Directions for Institutional Research, No. 54. San Francisco Jossey-Bass, pp. 91–101.
- Ward, J. (1963). Hierarchical grouping to optimize an objective function.Journal of the American Statistical Association 58: 236–244.
- Zemsky, R., and P. Oedel (1983).The Structure of College Choice. New York: College Entrance Examination Board.
- Segmenting student markets with a student satisfaction and priorities survey
Research in Higher Education
Volume 36, Issue 1 , pp 73-88
- Cover Date
- Print ISSN
- Online ISSN
- Kluwer Academic Publishers-Human Sciences Press
- Additional Links
- Author Affiliations
- 1. Office of Information Management and Institutional Research, Union Building G003, 620 Union Drive, 46202-5167, Indianapolis, IN