The undergraduate prospectus as a marketing tool for academic libraries

Article English OPEN
Brown, D.; Sen, B.A.;
(2010)
  • Publisher: Taylor & Francis

There is widespread use of the undergraduate prospectus as a decision-making tool for prospective university students. Surveys have examined factors that affect student decision-making; none have specifically examined the use of the prospectus as a marketing tool for ac... View more
  • References (11)
    11 references, page 1 of 2

    Gibbons, S. “Growing competition for libraries”. Library Hi Tech, 19.4 (2001): 363-367. Print.

    Hose, A. and I. Bhat, “Marketing of library and information services: a strategic perspective”. VISION: the Journal of Business Perspective, 11.2 (2007): 23-28. Print.

    Ivy, J. “A new higher education marketing mix: the 7Ps for MBA marketing”. International Journal of Educational Management, 22.4 (2008): 288-299. Print.

    Jack, I. “The subtext of the university brochure”. The Guardian, 11 July. 2009. Web <http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/jul/11/university-prospectusstudent-life >

    Keen, C. and T. Higgins, Young People's Knowledge of Higher Education: Findings of a Research Programme into the Perceptions of “Traditional Applicants”. Leeds: Heist, (1990). Print.

    Koontz, C.M et al. “Key publications in library marketing: a review”. IFLA Journal, 32.3 (2006): 224-231. Print.

    Kotler, P. “Strategies for introducing marketing into nonprofit organizations”. The Journal of Marketing, 43.1 (1979): 37-44. Print

    Lagerwerf, L. and E. Bossers, “Assessing business proposals: genre conventions and audience response in document design”. Journal of Business Communication, 39.4 (2002): 437-460. Print.

    Litten, L.H. “Marketing higher education: benefits and risks for the American academic system”. The Journal of Higher Education, 51.1 (1980): 40-59. Print.

    Maringe, F. “University and course choice: implications for positioning, recruitment and marketing”. International Journal of Educational Management, 20.6 (2006): 466-479. Print.

  • Metrics
Share - Bookmark