Morehead State University Diversity Plan - Ky. Council on

Morehead State University Campus Diversity Plan

2017 - 2021

Morehead State University

June 21, 2017

1

Introduction MoreheadStateUniversity(MSU)isacomprehensivepublicuniversitywithrobustundergraduateandgraduateprograms,emergingdoctoralprogramsandanemphasisonregionalengagement.MSUaspirestobethebestpublicregionaluniversityintheSouththroughacommitmenttoacademicexcellence,studentsuccess,buildingproductivepartnerships,improvinginfrastructure,enhancingresourcesandimprovingenrollmentandretention.

MSUislocatedinthefoothillsoftheDanielBooneNationalForestinRowanCounty,Kentucky.Foundedin1887asMoreheadNormalSchool,itwasaprivate,church-supportedinstitutionknownas“alighttothemountains.”In1926,itbecamepartofthestate-supportedsystemandwasrenamedMoreheadStateNormalSchoolandTeacher’sCollege.AnincreaseinenrollmentanddegreeprogramsresultedinsuccessiverenamingasMoreheadStateCollege(1948)anditscurrentdesignationasMoreheadStateUniversity(1966).Themissionstatement/purposeofMSUisasfollows:

Asacommunityoflifelonglearners,wewill

• Educatestudentsforsuccessinaglobalenvironment;• Engageinscholarship;• Promotediversityofpeopleandideas;• Fosterinnovation,collaboration,andcreativethinking;and• Serveourcommunitiestoimprovethequalityoflife.

MSUhasaneleven-memberBoardofRegentsthatservesbystatuteasthegoverningbodyoftheUniversity.TheboardisdedicatedtothepromotionofthemissionandgoalsoftheUniversity.TheboardisalsoresponsibleforthecreationordissolutionofdegreesuponapprovaloftheCouncilonPostsecondaryEducation.

MSUhas135undergraduateand70graduatedegreeprogramsinfourcolleges:CaudillCollegeofArts,HumanitiesandSocialSciences;CollegeofBusinessandTechnology;CollegeofEducation;andCollegeofScience.MSUoffersassociate,baccalaureate,masters,specialist,anddoctoraldegreesaswellasundergraduateandgraduatecertificates.

2

Inthefallof2016,MSUemployed408totalfacultymembers:333full-time(76.3%tenuredortenuretrack)and75part-timefacultymembersinadditionto730full-timestaffand127part-timestaff.

MSU’sannualoperatingbudget,approvedbytheBoardofRegentseachJune,isbasedonprojectedfundsfromtuitionandfees,stateappropriation,salesandservicesofeducationalactivities,andauxiliaryenterpriserevenue.TheUniversity’sindependentexternalauditorsconductanannualauditanddiscloseconcernsandrecommendationstotheBoardifneeded.MSUhasreceivednoauditconcernsorrecommendationsinrecenthistory.

MSUispartoftheKentuckypublicpostsecondaryeducationsystem.Ourserviceregionconsistsof22countiesineasternKentucky;however,ouroutreachextendsfarbeyondtheserviceregion.TheUniversity’smaincampusislocatedinMorehead,KentuckywithregionalcampusesinAshland,Mt.Sterling,PrestonsburgandWestLiberty.

DiversityPlanningProcess Inthefallof2016,MSUdevelopedaDiversity,EquityandInclusionTaskForcetodevelopthecampusdiversityplanunderthedirectionoftheChiefDiversityOfficeandtheProvost.Thetaskforcewaschargedwiththefollowing:

• ProposethenewMoreheadStateUniversitydiversity,equityandinclusionplan.

• Developaprocessthatconsidersinputfromcampusandcommunitystakeholdersindevelopingtheplan.

• FollowCPErequirementsassociatedwiththenewplan.• Considerotherelements/metricsforthenewplanuniquetoMoreheadState

thatarenotnecessarilyincludedinCPErequirements.• Proposehowtheplanmightbeimplementedandmaintained(see

Diversity• FollowtheestablishedtimelineprovidedbyCPE.

3

Thefollowingworkingcommitteeswerecreatedandtheirmembershipwaspurposefullydesignedtorepresentacross-sectionofcampusstakeholdersincludingfaculty,staff,andstudents:MSUAdhocCommittee:

StevenRalston,Provost

CharlesHolloway,ChiefDiversityOfficer

Laurie Couch, Interim Associate VP of Academic Affairs/Academic ProgramsChrisMiller,InterimDean,CollegeofEducation

SandraRiegle,AssociateProfessorofEducation

JamieThomas,AssistantDirectorofAthletics,

ShannonColvin,CoordinatorofStudentLeadershipandAdvocacy

JessicaThompson,TechnologyBusinessAnalystII

MSUWorkgroupCommittee:

MSUAdhocCommittee

DoraAdmadi,AssociateProfessorMathematics

BillRedwine,AuxiliaryServices

BernadetteBarton,ProfessorSociology

J.T.Blackledge,AssociateProfessorPsychology

ChristopherBlakely,MinorityRetentionCoordinator

OpheliaChapman,SystemsLibrarian

CoryClark,MinorityAcademicCoordinator

KristinaDurocher,AssociateProfessorHistory

ToriHenderson,Student–SGA

JamiHornbuckle,AssistanttothePresident/ChiefMarketandPublicRelationsOffice

4

MichelleHutchinson,Employment&TrainingManger

RobertSparks,AreaCoordinatorHousing

J.Marshall,ExecutiveDirectorRegionalEngagement

HopeMills,Student–StudentActivities

FatmaMohamed,AssociateProfessorManagement

DonnaMurphy,CommunityandAlumni

ShondrahNash,ProfessorSociology

DavidPeyton,ProfessorBiology

JillRatliff,AssistantVicePresidentforAcademicAffairsandInstitutionalEffect

TimRhodes,AssistantVicePresidentEnrollmentServices

LexiusYarbrough,Student–NPHC

CappYess,AssociateProfessorPhysics

OpportunityMembers:

DoraAdmadi,AssociateProfessorMathematics

OpheliaChapman,SystemsLibrarian

ToriHenderson,Student–SGA

MichelleHutchinson,Employment&TrainingManger

FatmaMohamed,AssociateProfessorManagement

TimRhodes,AssistantVicePresidentEnrollmentServices

ShondrahNash,ProfessorSociology

StudentSuccessMembers:

ChristopherBlakely,MinorityRetentionCoordinator

CoryClark,MinorityAcademicCoordinator

KristinaDurocher,AssociateProfessorHistory

5

HopeMills,Student–StudentActivities

RobertSparks,AreaCoordinatorHousing

CappYess,AssociateProfessorPhysics

ImpactMembers:

J.T.Blackledge,AssociateProfessorPsychology

BernadetteBarton,ProfessorSociology

JamiHornbuckle,AssistanttothePresident/ChiefMarketandPublicRelationsOffice

JillRatliff,AssistantVicePresidentforAcademicAffairsandInstitutionalEffect

J.Marshall,ExecutiveDirectorRegionalEngagement

DonnaMurphy,CommunityandAlumni

DavidPeyton,ProfessorBiology

SandraRiegle,AssociateProfessorofEducation

LexiusYarbrough,Student–NPHC

AfterteamsweredevelopedbytheAdhocCommittee,theVicePresidentofAcademicAffairsandtheChiefDiversityOfficermetwiththecommitteestoinformthemofthenecessarytaskstoassistwithdevelopingthecampusdiversityplan.

Eachsub-committeeheldtheirownindividualmeetingstodiscussanddevelopstrategiesrelatedtodiversity.Eachsub-committeealsohadauthorizationtoengageothercampusconstituentsifneeded.

Afterthesubcommitteeshaddevelopedstrategies,theyreportedtotheentiregroupwiththeirrecommendationsfordevelopingthediversityplan.Thestrategiesforthisplanwasdevelopedbythetaskforce,andtheotherinformationhasbeenprovidedasapartofthecampusstrategicplan.

KeyTermsAsapartofourplandevelopment,MSUbelievesthereisacampuscommunityneedtohaveagreementondefinitionsthatwillbeapartofourdiversityplan.

6

CulturalCompetence-Culturalcompetencerequiresthatorganizations:

• Haveadefinedsetofvaluesandprinciples,anddemonstratebehaviors,attitudes,policiesandstructuresthatenablethemtoworkeffectivelycross-culturally.

• Havethecapacityto(1)valuediversity,(2)conductself-assessment,(3)managethedynamicsofdifference,(4)acquireandinstitutionalizeculturalknowledgeand(5)adapttodiversityandtheculturalcontextsofthecommunitiestheyserve.

• Incorporatetheaboveinallaspectsofpolicymaking,administration,practice,servicedeliveryandinvolvesystematicallyconsumers,keystakeholdersandcommunities.

Culturalcompetenceisadevelopmentalprocessthatevolvesoveranextendedperiod.Bothindividualsandorganizationsareatvariouslevelsofawareness,knowledgeandskillsalongtheculturalcompetencecontinuum.(NationalCenterforCulturalCompetence)Diversity–Individualdifferences(e.g.,personality,learningstyles,andlifeexperiences)andgroup/socialdifferences(e.g.,race/ethnicity,class,gender,sexualorientation,countryoforigin,andabilityaswellascultural,political,religious,orotheraffiliations).(AmericanAssociationofColleges&Universities)

Equity–Appropriateaccessandrighttoneededresources,processes,opportunities,and participation to provide for equal, successful outcomes. The term is oftenconfusedwithequality.Equityaimstoleveltheplayingfield.(Gorski,2013;Gorski&Pothini,2013;Gorski&Swalwell,2015)Equity-Mindedness – A demonstrated awareness of and willingness to addressequity issues among institutional leaders and staff. (Center for Urban Education,UniversityofSouthernCalifornia).Fidelity: Faithfulness in implementing programs or strategies as they weredesigned.Evidenceoffidelitymayinclude,butisnotbelimitedtothefollowing:

• Dedicatedstaff(i.e.,thenumberofstaff,theirlevelofexpertise,andtheamountofprofessionaldevelopment,mentoring,andcoachingprovidedtostaffresponsibleforimplementation).

• Specificexamplesofstudentorstaffparticipation.

7

• Datacollectedonstrategyinputsandoutputs.• Participationrateofstudents.• Dedicatedfunding.• Developmentofimplementationtimetablesandmilestonesachieved.• Narrativedescriptionsoftheimplementationprocess.

Identity - The social and historical construction of the self/individual/person thatcreates a sense of community, belonging, and uniqueness. Identity (-ies) mayintersectoroverlapandmostoftendo.Key facetsof identity include sex,gender,sexualorientation, race,ethnicity,socialclass,age,ability,andreligion/spirituality.(Capper&Young,2014;Gorski,2013;Griffiths,2003;Page,2007;Samuels,2014)

Inclusion – The active, intentional, and ongoing engagementwith diversity in thecurriculum, in the co-curriculum, and in the communities (intellectual, social,cultural,geographical)withwhichindividualsmightconnect–inwaysthatincreaseawareness, content knowledge, cognitive sophistication, and empathicunderstanding of the complex ways individuals interact within systems andinstitutions.(AmericanAssociationofColleges&Universities)InclusiveExcellence–The recognition thata communityor institution’ssuccess isdependentonhowwell it valuesdiversity andengagesdiversity, and includes therich diversity of students, faculty, administrators, and alumni constituents.(UniversityofDenver)Low-Income:Pellrecipientsatentryorduringspecificsemesters(variesdependingonthespecificmetric)Power and privilege –The institutional, systemic, systematic, and cyclical processthat bestow unearned rights, benefits, or privileges on some chosen groups orpopulations while exerting control over and manipulation of marginalized andoppressed groups. (Davis & Harrison, 2013; Irving, 2014; Loewen, 1995; Tochluk,2010)Social justice –The goal of social justice is both full and equal participationof allgroupsinsocietywhereinthatsocietybemutuallyshapedtomeettheneedsofallgroups. Social justice isbothindividualandcollective. Advocatesforsocial justiceworktoprovideaccessandopportunityforeveryone,particularlythoseingreatestneed. (Dantley, Beachum, & McCray, 2008; Davis & Harrison, 2013; Normore &Brooks,2014)

8

UnderrepresentedMinority (URM): – Studentswho categorized themselves asa)HispanicorLatino,b)AmericanIndianorAlaskaNative,c)BlackorAfricanAmerican,d) Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, or e) Two or more Races ormarginalized.Opportunity

• Inthefallof2015,MSUenrolled10,875students

• MSUretained65%offirst-timefreshmenfromfallof2014tofall2015(58%oftheunderrepresentedminorities).

• First-timefreshmenheadcountdecreasedby3.4%fromthefallof2014to1,461but99.4%ofthesestudentswerefull-time.

• TheaverageACTcompositescoreforfirst-timestudentswas22.4,1.4pointshigherthanthenationalaveragecompositescoreof21.

• Atotalof6,209(63.4%)undergraduatestudentsattendedMSUonafull-timebasiswhile3,574(36.5%)undergraduatestudentsattendedMSUpart-time.

• Themajorityofgraduatestudents,875(80.1%),attendedMSUaspart-timestudentswhile217(19.9%)attendedasfull-timestudents.

• The2015-16undergraduatestudentpopulationwas59.5%female,40.5%male.

• The2015-16graduatestudentpopulationwas64%female,35.7%male.

• Sixty-twopercentofMSU'sundergraduateswerebetweentheagesof18-24while15%ofMSUundergraduateswereolderthan24.

• MSU's22countyserviceregionattracted6,135(56.4%)studentstotheuniversityinthefallof2015,and3,504(32.2%)ofthosestudentscamefromcountiesnotincludedinMSU'sserviceregion.Accordingly,88.6%ofMSUstudentsoriginatedfromthestateofKentucky.

• Under-representedminorities(AmericanIndian,Black,Hispanic,NativeHawaiian/PacificIslander,andtwoormoreraces)represented7%oftheinstitutionalenrollment.

9

• MSUprovidedcommunityoutreachbyofferingasubstantialnumberofdual-creditcoursestohighschoolstudents.Therewere177dual-creditcoursesofferedat48differenthighschoolsacrossthestateofKentucky.

• Duringthe2015-16academicyear,MSUawarded20Doctoraldegrees,291Master'sdegrees,1,331Bachelor'sdegrees,28Specialistdegreesand168Associate'sdegrees.

SupportingDocumentationforMoreheadStateUniversityTargetSettingThetargetsselectedforeachofthemetricsthatfollowwerechosenbasedonextensiveanalysisofMoSUtrenddata,thepipelineforeachmetric,censusdatafortheserviceregionandbenchmarkdatawhenavailable.Tablesofdataalongwithabriefsummarydescribingtheirimpactarefollowedbythefinalselectionofatargetforeachmetric.

1A:FallUndergraduateEnrollmentofAfricanAmericanStudentsasaPercentofTotalFallUndergraduateEnrollment(DiversityPlan)

Recommended target: 2% annual growth

Thefollowingelementsinformedthistarget:

Table1:AfricanAmericanUndergraduateStudentsasPercentofUndergraduatePopulation

Institution 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 ChangeAfricanAmericanStudents

(UG)3.4% 3.2% 3.3% 3.3% 3.6% 3.4% 3.4% 0.0

• Table1showsthattheproportionofundergraduateAfricanAmericanstudentshasbeenstableovertime.Thisstabilityisdeceptivebecausethedataanalyzedinsuccessivetablesrevealsapictureofgrowthandperformance,despitethedemographicconstraintsofMoSU’sserviceregion.

10

Table2:AfricanAmericanUndergraduateStudentsatMoSUInstitution AfricanAmerican

StudentsTotalUGEnrollment

AfricanAmericanEnrollmentasPercentUG

CensusData

MoSU 330 9,873 3.4% 1.5%

• Table2showsthatMoSUisalreadyout-performing2outof3non-urbanpeerinstitutionsgiventhedemographicsoftherespectiveserviceregions.Inthebaselineyear,CensusdatashowedthatAfricanAmericansare1.5%ofMoSU’sserviceregion.Thebaselinenumberof3.4%revealsthatthecompositionofAfricanAmericanundergraduatestudentsismorethan2timeshigherthanthedemographiccompositionofMoSU’sserviceregion.

Table3:AfricanAmericanUndergraduateStudentsbyClassificationClassification 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 ChangeSince

2012Freshman 83 94 125 126 114 80 82 -34.4%Sophomore 34 47 51 55 74 61 41 -19.6%Junior 46 42 39 50 43 64 64 64.1%Senior 64 69 62 56 60 59 71 14.5%UGNon-Degree 12 9 12 8 16 24 33 175.0%EarlyCollege 10 34 29 33 45 40 43 48.3%Post-Bac,Degree-Seeking

3 6 7 5 4 1 1 -85.7%

CraftAcademy 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 100%Total 252 301 325 333 356 330 336 3.4%

• AsshowninTable3,theenrollmentoffreshmenAfricanAmericanstudentsdeclinedsubstantiallyinthefallof2015and2016.TheserecruitingshortfallswillweakenenrollmentinthecomingyearsasthelargergroupsofAfricanAmericanstudentsgraduateandleaveMoSU.Thecurrentnumbersofincomingfreshmenarebelowreplacementlevels.Asshownearlier,thedemographicsoftheserviceregionmakeitdifficulttoachieveacriticalmassofAfricanAmericanstudents,whichisachallengeforrecruitmentandretention.Despitethesebarriers,thedatainTable3showthatthenumberofAfricanAmericanstudentsincreasedremarkablysince2010;however,asdisplayedinTable1,thesebignumericalincreasesdidnotproduceasubstantialchangeintheproportionofAfricanAmericanstudents,duetothesmallsizeofthisgrouprelativetotheoverallundergraduatepopulation.

11

• MoSUhasbeencastingawidenettogenerateadditionalenrollment.Thismeansthatevenifthenumeratorincreases,(i.e.thenumberofAfricanAmericanstudents)thedenominatorisalsolikelytoincrease(numberofnon-AfricanAmericanstudents).Ifthedenominatorincreasesfasterthanthenumerator,therewillbelittlechangeintheproportionorevenadecrease.Thus,becausethenumeratorissuchasmallnumber,itwillbeextremelyhardtomove,especiallyifoverallenrollmentincreases.

Table4:FallAfricanAmericanEnrollmentTargetTarget Baseline 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 %UGEnrollment2%annualincrease 330 336 343 350 357 364 3.8%

AsshowninthetargetcalculationTable4,a2%annualincreasegeneratesanumericaldifferenceeventhoughthepercentagedoesnotincreaseasignificantly.A2%annualincreasewouldproducesubstantialnumericalimprovementandmoderateimprovementintheproportionoftheundergraduatepopulationthatisAfricanAmerican.

1B:FallUndergraduateEnrollmentofHispanicStudentsasaPercentofTotalFallUndergraduateEnrollment(DiversityPlan)



Table5:HispanicUndergraduateStudentsasPercentofUndergraduatePopulationInstitution 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 ChangeHispanic(UG) 0.9% 0.9% 1.2% 1.1% 1.5% 1.4% 1.9% 1.0

Table5demonstratesthatprogresshasbeenslowandsteadywithregardtotheproportionofHispanicstudentsinMoSU’sundergraduatepopulation.Bytheendoftheperiod,itisclearthattwoyears,2014and2016,accountformostofthechangethatoccurredonthismetric.

12

Table6:HispanicUndergraduateStudentsbyClassificationClassification 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 ChangeSince

2012Freshman 21 25 31 33 38 32 35 12.9%Sophomore 8 10 12 16 18 26 19 58.3%Junior 13 12 12 11 22 15 25 108.3%Senior 14 14 25 18 17 29 32 28.0%UGNon-Degree 0 3 5 2 5 6 5 0.0%EarlyCollege 6 18 31 30 46 31 66 112.9%Post-Bac,Degree-Seeking

2 2 1 3 2 2 2 100.0%

TotalHispanic 64 84 117 113 148 141 184 57.3%TotalNon-URM 7,046 8,960 9,162 9,481 9,282 9,111 9,005 -1.7%

• AsshowninTable6,theenrollmentoffreshmanHispanicstudentsincreased12.9%;however,thislargepercentageincreaseonlyrepresentsfourstudents.Since2012,thenumberofHispanicstudentsincreased57.3%,whichisanexceptionallystronggrowth.Thelargestnumericalincreasehasbeenearlycollegestudents,buttherehasalsobeenrobustgrowthacrossallstudentclassifications.

• Table6providesgreaterinsightintothechangesin2014and2016.In2014,thenumberofnon-URMstudentsdecreasedby2.1%andin2016thenumberofnon-URMstudentsdecreasedfromthe2015numberby1.2%.Concurrentlybetweenfallof2013andfallof2014,undergraduateHispanicstudentsincreasedby30.9%,andasimilarincreaseoccurredbetweenfallof2015andfallof2016.Thispatterndemonstrateshowdifficultitistomoveaproportionalmetricthathasasmallnumeratorandalargedenominator.Thus,thenumerator(undergraduateHispanicstudents)hadtoincreasebyalmost31%ANDthenasignificantportionofthedenominator(Non-URMstudents)hadtodecreasetoproducechangeof0.4%and0.5%for2014and2016.

Table7:HispanicUndergraduateStudentsatMoSUInstitution Hispanic

StudentsTotalUGEnrollment

HispanicEnrollmentasPercentUG

CensusData

MoSU 141 9,783 1.4% 1.0%

• Table7demonstratesthatMoSUiscurrentlyover-performingbasedonthedemographicsoftheserviceregion.Inthebaselineyear,Censusdatashowedthat

13

Hispanicsare1.0%oftheMoSUserviceregion.Thebaselinenumberof1.4%revealsthatthecompositionofHispanicundergraduatestudentsisslightlyhigherthanthedemographiccompositionoftheserviceregion.

• MoSUhasbeencastingawidenettogenerateadditionalenrollment.Thismeansthatevenifthenumeratorincreases(i.e.thenumberofHispanicstudents)thedenominatorisalsolikelytoincrease(numberofnon-Hispanicstudents).Ifthedenominatorincreasesfasterthanthenumerator,therewillbelittlechangeintheproportionorevenadecrease.Thus,becausethenumeratorissuchasmallnumber,itwillbeextremelyhardtomove,especiallyifoverallenrollmentincreases.Thisdynamicmustbetakenintoconsiderationwhensettingtargets.

Table8:FallHispanicEnrollmentTarget,MoreheadStateUniversity

Target 3YearMean

Baseline 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 %UGEnrollment

2%annualincrease

134 141 184 147 150 153 156 1.6%

*Threeyearaverageincludes2013,2014,and2015.

• AsshowninthetargetcalculationinTable8,a2%annualincreasecreatesquiteanumericaldifferenceeventhoughthepercentagedoesnotincreaseagreatdeal.Thus,inthiscase,a2%annualincreasewouldproducenumericalimprovementandmoderateimprovementintheproportionoftheundergraduatepopulationthatisHispanic.

• Themodeltrendwilllookabitoddbecausethetargetsettingbuildsofftheestablishedbaselineof141ratherthanthecurrentyearnumberof184.Thus,thecalculationofannualincreasesdiscountedthecurrent2016numberbecauseabigpartoftheenrollmentincreaseisduetoearlycollege.Thesestudentsarenotastablesourceofenrollment,soitisunwisetoassumethat2017willmaintainandcontinuethegrowththatwasmodeledin2016.

1C:FallUndergraduateEnrollmentofUnderrepresentedMinorityStudentsasaPercentofTotalFallUndergraduateEnrollment(DiversityPlan)

14


Thefollowingelementsinformedthetarget:

Table9:URMUndergraduateStudentsasPercentofUndergraduatePopulationInstitution 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 ChangeURM(UG) 4.8% 4.9% 5.8% 5.9% 6.7% 6.9% 7.7% 2.9

• Table9revealsthatthepercentageofURMstudentschangedbyalmostthreepercentagepointssince2010,when4.8%oftheundergraduatepopulationwasclassifiedasURM.In2016,7.7%,whichisgrowthof2.9%andrepresentsapercentchangeof60%.

Table10:FallUGEnrollmentTrendData

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 ChangeSince2012

ChangeSince2010

Black,Non-Hispanic

252 301 325 333 356 330 336 3.4% 33.3%

AmericanIndian

19 23 22 26 18 12 16 -27.3% -15.8%

NativeHawaiian

2 2 5 7 12 11 12 140.0% 500.0%

Hispanic/Latino

64 84 117 113 148 141 184 57.3% 187%

TwoorMoreRaces

16 50 94 116 136 178 201 113.8% 1,156%

URM 353 460 563 595 670 672 749 33.0% 112%

Non-URM 7,046 8,960 9,162 9,481 9,282 9,111 9,005 -1.7% 27.8%

TotalEnrollment

7,399 9,420 9,725 10,076 9,952 9,783 9,754 0.2% 31.8%

15

• Table10showsthatHispanic/LatinostudentswereonedriverofURMgrowth,butthebiggestdriverofURMgrowthistwoormoreraces.2010wasthefirstyearthatthiswasanethnicitycategoryinCPEreporting,soobviouslythegrowthhasbeentremendousduringthisperiod.Evensince2012,thiscategorygrewconsistentlyeveryyearincreasingby114%inthisperiod.

• 2014wastheyearinwhichtheproportionofURMstudentsstartedtoincrease,butthiswasonlypossiblebecausethenumberofnon-URMstudentsdeclinedwhileURMstudentswereincreasingandorstable.Thus,thefallof2014showedadecreaseof2.1%innon-URMstudents,andthedeclinecontinuedinto2015(1.8%)and2016(-1.2%).

Table11:UndergraduateFallURMEnrollmentbyClassificationClassification 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 ChangeSince

2012Freshman 119 140 194 219 198 177 168 -13.4%Sophomore 44 71 83 91 121 110 96 15.6%Junior 61 60 65 73 88 108 113 73.8%Senior 87 92 101 93 97 116 146 44.6%UGNon-Degree 10 15 20 14 23 31 41 105%EarlyCollege 22 70 87 93 136 122 175 101%Post-BacDegree 10 12 13 12 7 4 5 -61.5%CraftAcademy 0 0 0 0 0 4 5 NATotal 353 460 563 595 670 672 749 33.0%

• Table11showstotalURMenrollmentpeakedinyears2012-2014followedbyadeclinein2015thatcontinuedin2016.TheURMfreshmenpipelineisalsocollapsingsimilartowhatwesawwithAfricanAmericanfreshmen(Table3).Allothercategoriesyieldedincreases,buttheweaknessatthebeginningofthepipelineisaconcernbecausethischangewillreversethepositivetrendswithregardtosophomores,juniors,andseniors.Earlycollegegrowthhasbeenquitestrongandgrowthinthiscategoryisoneofthemainfactorsthatdrovetheincreasebetween2015and2016.

16

Table12:FallUndergraduateURMEnrollmentatMoSU

Institution URMEnrollment

TotalUGEnrollment

URMEnrollmentasPercentofTotal(2015)

CensusData

MoSU 672 9,783 6.9% 3.8%

• Table12showsthatMoSUisoutperformingthedemographicsofitsserviceregion.Inthecurrentyear,2016,MoSUhas7.7%oftheundergraduatepopulationintheURMcategory,whichistwicetherateofunderrepresentedminoritiesintheserviceregion.

Table13:FallURMUndergraduateEnrollmentTargetTarget Baseline 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 %UGEnrollment2%annualincrease 672 749 699 713 727 742 7.6%

• AsshowninthetargetcalculationinTable13,a2%annualincreaseyieldsarobustnumericaldifferenceeventhoughthepercentagedoesnotincreasesignificantly.A2%annualincreasewouldproducenumericalimprovementandmoderateimprovementintheproportionoftheundergraduatepopulationthatisURM.

1C:FallGraduateandProfessionalEnrollmentofUnderrepresentedMinorityStudentsasaPercentofTotalFallGraduateandProfessionalEnrollment(DiversityPlan)



Table14:FallGraduateURMEnrollmentasPercentofTotalFallGraduateEnrollment 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 ChangeSince

2012URMGrad.andProf. 4.0% 6.2% 5.7% 5.6% 6.8% 8.1% 6.5% 2.5

• AsshownintheTable14,thepercentofURMgraduatestudentsatMoSUrose2.5percentagepointssincefallof2010.2015wasapeakyear,and2016suggestsareturntothemean,whichis6.1%.

17

Table15:FallGraduateEnrollmentTrendData

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 ChangeSince2012

AfricanAmerican 41 57 49 41 53 48 44 -10.2%

AmericanIndian 5 4 5 5 2 3 2 -60.0%

Hispanic/Latino 9 21 15 16 14 23 12 -20.0%

TwoorMoreRaces 3 14 13 10 6 12 6 -53.8%

NativeHawaiian 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 NA

URM 58 96 82 72 75 88 65 -20.7%

TotalEnrollment 1,443 1,551 1,447 1,282 1,101 1,092 994 -31.3%

• Table15showsthatgraduatestudentenrollmentatMoSUhasdeclinedsubstantiallysince2012decreasing11.4%from2012to2013and14%betweenfall2013andfall2014.Fallof2016wasanotherdeclineof9%.URMgraduatestudentenrollmentshavenotdeclinedasquicklyasthetotalgraduatestudentpopulation,whichaccountsfortherelativelystronggrowthinURMgraduatestudentsasaproportionofthepopulation.However,itisimportanttonotethatURMgraduatestudentenrollmentdiddeclinebyabout1.5percentagepointsin2016.

Table16:FallGraduateURMEnrollmentatMoSU

Institution URMEnrollment

TotalGREnrollment

URMEnrollmentasPercentofTotal

CensusData

MoSU 88 1,092 8.1% 3.8%

• Onceagain,Table16demonstratesthatMoSUisoverperformingwithregardtothedemographicsoftheserviceregion.WehavemorethantwicetheproportionofURMinourgraduatestudentsastheserviceregionasawhole.

18

Table17:FallGraduateURMEnrollmentTargetTarget 3Year

MeanBaseline 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 %GR

Enrollment1%annualincrease

78 88 65 90 91 92 93 9.4%

3-yearaverageincludes2013,2014,and2015.

• AsshowninthetargetcalculationinTable17,a1%annualincreasecreatesanumericaldifferenceeventhoughthepercentagedoesnotincreaseagreatdeal.Giventhepopulationofourserviceregion,thatthebaselineyear(2015)ishigherthanour3-yearaverage,andwearestartingbehindbecauseourproportionofURMgraduatestudentsdeclinedto6.5%in2016,the1%annualincreaseisrealistic.

StrategiesTactics Measures Lead/

Accountability Internal Collaborators

External Collaborators

Timeline

Strategy 1: Increase First-Time Freshmen Enrollment of Diversity Population. 1.1Focusonhigh-priorityareassuchasLouisville,Lexington,andNorthernKentuckymarket

-Numberofstudentswhoenrollfromyeartoyearincreases

EnrollmentServices

WebMarketingDirector,ChiefDiversityOfficer,EnrollmentCounselors

-Schools,-Alumni-Students,-Community

Fall2017

1.2PromoteDiversityOpportunityScholarshipsandBlackAchieversScholarships

-Numberofstudentswhoenrollfromyeartoyearincreases

EnrollmentServices

WebMarketingDirector,ChiefDiversityOfficer,EnrollmentCounselors

-Schools,-Alumni-Students,-Community

Fall2017-S

Strategy2:Createamorediversecampus,meaningmorediversityamongfacultyandstaff,morediversityamongstudentgroups,andacampusenvironmentthatismore“friendly”todiversity,sothatitbecomeseasiertorecruitandretainamorediversestudentbody.2.1ImplementationofDiversityTrainingfornewemployees

-JoinNAME-UseNAMEresourcesandcurriculuminprogramming

ChiefDiversityOfficer,HumanResources,

AcademicAffairs

-MoreheadCivicOrganizations;

Fall2018

19

Success 6B:Six-yearGraduationRateofFirst-time,Full-timeBaccalaureateDegree-seekingUndergraduateStudents–LowIncome(DiversityPlan)


Thefollowingelementsinformedthisselection:Table24:Six-YearGraduationRatesofFirst-Time,Full-TimeBaccalaureateDegree-seekingLowIncomeStudents

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

LowIncomeCohort

27.8% 33.3% 34.5% 34.7% 31.0% 34.1%

• Table24showsthatMoSUlow-incomecohortgraduationrateshaveincreasedfrom27.8%in2005to34.1%in2010.Theseratesarewhatwouldbeexpectedasthelow-incomecohorthasaconfidenceintervalof29.9-35.3.

Table25:StatusofLowIncomeCohortasofJanuary27,2017

Cohort AdjustedCohort

EnrolledFall2016

RegisteredforSpring2017

CurrentGraduation

Rate

MaximumGradRate

2011 650 6.8%(n=44) 4.6%(n=30) 28.5% 33.1%

2012 791 22.0%(n=174) 14.2%(n=112) 27.3% 41.5%

2013 805 45.0%(n=362) 40.4%(n=325) 2.7% 43.1%

2014 751 44.7%(n=336) 42.1%(n=316) 0.4% 42.5%

2015 698 67.5%(n=471) 57.8%(n=403) 0.0% 57.8%

2016 509 100%(n=509) 85.9%(n=437) 0.0% 85.9%

20

• Table25showsthatthemaximumgraduationrateforallMoSUlowincomecohortsisbelow50%exceptthe2015and2016cohortbaseduponthenumberofstudentscurrentlyenrolledattheendofthelastadvanceregistrationperiod.Retentionofthe2014low-incomestudentswasespeciallypoor.Thepercentageof2013cohortstudentsthatarestillactivelyenrolledintheirfourthyearisaboutthesameasthe2014cohortmidwaythroughtheirthirdyear.

Table26:GraduationProjectionsforBachelor’sGRSCohort,LowIncomeStudents

2007 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015FalltoFall 65.8% 63.3% 68.0% 59.2% 66.8% 66.3% 59.2% 67.5%

Year1toYear3

51.6% 50.3% 52.2% 46.2% 53.4% 51.7% 44.7% 51.4-55.4

Year1toYear4

44.9% 42.8% 47.1% 39.2% 47.1% 45.0% 36.6-39.7 45.3-48.4

4YearGradRate

15.3% 14.7% 18.4% 15.3% 21.6% 15.4-17.9 12.1-14.6 16.5-19.0

5YearGradRate

13.8% 13.2% 11.7% 11.8% 11.3-16.2 11.4-13.2 8.9-10.7 12.1-14.0

6YearGradRate

5.3% 3.1% 4.0% 1.4-4.6 2.8-4.0 3.7-4.3 2.9-3.5 4.0-4.6

TotalGradRate

34.4% 31.0% 34.1% 28.5-33.1 32.9-37.8 30.8-35.7 23.9-28.8 32.6-37.5

• UnliketheMoSUtotalbachelor’scohort,wheretherehasbeenimprovementintimetograduation,therehasnotbeenobservableimprovementwithlow-incomestudents.Theyarenotgraduatingfaster,andMoSUisnotgraduatingmoreofthem.Eventhe2008cohort,whichisnotincludedinthetable,hadextremelyhighfalltofallretentionof72.0%andslightlyhigherfirsttothirdretention(55%),bytheendofthesixyears,the34.7%graduationrateisaverage.

• Aconfidenceintervalwasconstructedanditshowsthattheexpectedgraduationrateforthelow-incomecohortis30-37.5%basedonhistoricalaverages.Basedoncurrentretentionpatternsandusingpastperformanceasaguide,thecurrent

21

cohortsshowthatthetrajectoryhasnotchangedandallprojectedsix-yeargraduationratesfallwithintheconfidenceinterval.

Table27:Six-YearGraduationRateofLowIncomeCohortTarget

Target 3YearAverage

Baseline 2011Cohort

2012Cohort

2013Cohort

2014Cohort

2015Cohort

Cumulativeincrease

1.0%annualincrease

33.2% 34.1% 34.4% 34.7% 35.0% 35.3% 35.7% 4.7%

• Basedonthedatathatisavailable,EKUhasafour-yeargraduationrateforlow-incomestudentsof28.5%.NKU’sfour-yearaverageisabout26.4%,Murray’sgraduationrateis41.2%andWKU’sisabout37.4%.MoSUisperformingslightlybelowMuSUandWKUbutaboveNKUandEKUonthismetric.

• Ourbaselinecomesfromthe2010cohortanditis34.1%.Unfortunately,withthe2011cohort,wewouldnotbeabletomeetthetargetfora1%annualincreasebasedonthestudentswhoremainenrolled.Theremainingcohortsdohavepotential,butthe2014cohorthasbeenanexceptionallypoorperformingcohort.

• A1%annualincreasetargetwassuggested

6B:Six-yearGraduationRateofFirst-time,Full-timeBaccalaureateDegree-seekingUndergraduateStudents–URM(DiversityPlan)


Thefollowingelementsinformedthisselection:Table28:Six-YearGraduationRatesofFirst-Time,Full-TimeBaccalaureateDegree-seekingURMStudents

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

URMCohort

37.7% 32.8% 31.6% 42.9% 22.4% 32.6%

• Table28showsthatMoSUURMcohortgraduationrateshaveexperienced

significantvolatility.Confidenceintervalsforthisgroupare24.7to37.6.Thus,the

22

onlyyearthatexceedsthisthresholdisthe2008URMcohort,whichonlyhad28students.

Table29:StatusofURMCohortasofJanuary27,2017

TotalCohorts

AdjustedCohort

EnrolledFall2016

RegisteredforSpring2017

GradRate

MaximumGradRate

2011 96 7.3%(n=7) 5.2%(n=5) 28.1% 33.3%

2012 141 27.0%(n=38) 17.0%(n=24) 23.4% 40.4%

2013 152 50.0%(n=76) 46.1%(n=70) 0.0% 46.1%

2014 128 49.2%(n=63) 46.1%(n=59) 0.0% 46.1%

2015 121 67.8%(n=82) 58.7%(n=71) 0.0% 58.7%

2016 76 100%(n=76) 82.9%(n=63) 0.0% 82.9%

• Table29documentsthestatusofeachofthecurrentMoSUcohortsattheendofthemostrecentadvanceregistrationperiod.Thisdataenablesustofigurethecohortretentionandthemaximumgraduationrateifeverycurrentlyenrolledstudentgraduatedontime.Forthe2011cohort,thedatasuggestsagraduationrateof33.3%orless.Areviewoftheremainingcohortsindicatesthatnonehasmorethan50%ofthestudentsstillenrolleduntilwegettothe2015and2016cohortsthathave58.7%and82.9%respectivelyofstudentsstillenrolled.

Table30:GraduationProjectionsforBachelor’sGRSCohort,URMStudents

2005 2006 2007 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015FalltoFall 60.0% 56.7% 54.2% 63.8% 66.3% 64.6% 66.2% 69.7% 62.5% 67.8%

Year1toYear3

48.3% 46.7% 37.3% 41.4% 46.5% 44.8% 51.4% 55.3% 49.2% 45.4-57.8%

Year1toYear4

43.3% 40.0% 35.6% 36.2% 40.7% 38.5% 45.8% 50.0% 42.5-47.5% 44.9-49.9%

Year4GradRate

9.7% 9.8% 10.2% 6.9% 12.8% 9.8% 17.7% 12.2-15.2% 10.3-13.2% 11.2-14.1%

23

Year5GradRate

17.9% 19.7% 14.0% 12.1% 17.4% 18.3% 14.3-18.6% 18.3-22.8% 15.7-20.1% 17.0-21.4%

Year6GradRate

9.7% 3.3% 6.8% 3.4% 2.3% 2.3-5.2% 2.6-3.8% 5.7-7.1% 4.9-6.3% 5.3-6.7%

TotalGradRate

37.3% 32.8% 31.6% 22.4% 32.6% 30.4-33.3% 34.6-40.4% 36.2-45.1% 30.9-39.6% 33.5-42.2%

Table31:Six-YearGraduationRateofURMCohortTarget

Target 3YearAverage

Baseline 2011Cohort

2012Cohort

2013Cohort

2014Cohort

2015Cohort

Cumulativeincrease

2.0%annualincrease

32.6% 34.1% 34.8% 35.5% 36.2% 36.9% 37.6% 10.3%

• TherehasbeenapparentvolatilityinthegraduationrateofMoSUURMstudentsbecauseofthesmallnumberofstudents.Duetotheapparentinstability,thereisawideconfidenceintervalof23%to42%usingallvalues,includingtheextremelyhigh2008figureinwhichtherewere28URMstudentsandtheextremelylow2009-graduationrateof22.4%.Thus,theproblemisalargestandarddeviation,whichcreatesawideinterval.

• Becausethisintervalissowide,wecan’tuseaconfidenceintervalasaguidetodefine“improvement”becauseMSUwouldhavetoshowconsistentincreasesofmorethan4%peryear.

• A2.0%annualincreasewasselectedforthismetric.Giventhesmallnumberofstudentsandthesupportstrategiesinplace,wethinkitmaybepossibletoachievethistargetbeginningwiththe2012cohort.

6C:First-toSecond-YearRetention–LowIncome(StrategicAgenda,DiversityPlan)

24


Thefollowingelementsinformedthisselection:Table34:First-toSecond-YearRetentionofLowIncomeBachelor’sGRSCohort

CohortType

2009Cohort

2010Cohort

2011Cohort

2012Cohort

2013Cohort

2014Cohort

2015Cohort

LowIncome

62.2% 68.0% 59.2% 66.6% 66.3% 59.2% 67.4%

• Table34demonstratesthattheretentionofMoSUlow-incomestudentshashadquiteabitofvolatility.A95%confidenceintervalwas-calculatedtoassesshowretentionhasbeenandtodeterminewhatnumberswouldyieldastatisticalimprovement.

• Theaverageretentionrateforthelow-incomecohortsis64%.Theconfidenceintervalis60.6-67.4.Usingthesenumbers,wecanseethat2011and2014cohortshadretentiondeclinesthatareoutsidetheconfidenceinterval.Thismeansthedeclinesareunlikelytobetheresultoferrorandgeneralfluctuationinthedata.The2015cohortisnearthetopoftheconfidenceinterval,butitdoesnotfalloutsideit.Thissuggeststherehasnotbeenastatisticalimprovementinretentionforthe2015cohortbecauseitstayedwithintheparametersexpected.

Table35:First-toSecond-YearRetentionofLowIncomeBachelor’sGRSCohortTarget

Target 3YearMean

Baseline

2016-17

2017-18

2018-19

2019-20

2020-21

Cumulativeincrease

1%annualincrease

64.2% 67.4% 68.1% 68.8% 69.5% 70.2% 70.9% 5.1%

• MoSu’sbaselineof67.4%retentionishigherthanthethree-yearmean.Thisispartlybecausethethree-yearmeanispullbytheretentionofthe2014cohort.

25

• A1%annualincreasewasselectedforthismetric.Thiswillbeastatisticalincreasethatwillmovetherateoutsideoftheconfidenceinterval.

6C:First-toSecond-YearRetention–URM(StrategicAgenda,DiversityPlan)


Thefollowingelementsinformedthisselection:

Table36:First-toSecond-YearRetentionofURMBachelor’sGRSCohort

CohortType

2009Cohort

2010Cohort

2011Cohort

2012Cohort

2013Cohort

2014Cohort

2015Cohort

URMCohort

63.8% 66.3% 64.6% 66.2% 69.7% 62.5% 67.8%

• Table36showsthatretentionofURMstudenthasbeenmorestablethanretentionoflow-incomestudents(Table34).Theaverageretentionrateacrossthisperiodis65.8%,andthe95%confidenceintervalis63.6%to68.0%.Havingcalculatedtheconfidenceinterval,wecanseethatthe2015cohortiswithinthatinterval,whichsuggeststhatthebaselineofdataisnotanimprovementfrompasthistoricaldata.

• Thecurrentfalltospringretentionispreliminaryforthe2016cohort,andshowsthat82.8%ofthecohortenrolledforthespringsemester.Thisislowerthanfalltospringretentionforboththe2015cohortandthe2013cohort,bothofwhichhadURMfalltospringretentionrateshigherthan90%.Thefalltospringretentionratecloselymatchestheretentionforthefall2014cohort.

Table37:First-toSecond-YearRetentionofURMBachelor’sGRSCohortTarget

Target 3YearMean

Baseline 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 Cumulativeincrease

1%annualincrease

66.8% 67.8% 68.5% 69.2% 69.9% 70.6% 71.3% 5.2%

26

• Table37modelsa1%annualincrease.Retentionforthe2016cohortisclosetothefalltospringretentionforthe2014cohort.Ifthistrendcontinues,MoSUwouldnotreachthe16-17goalwitha1%annualincrease.

• Asdiscussedwiththeconfidenceintervals,anythingabove68%wouldbedurableimprovement,butgiventhehighstartingbaseline,evena1%annualincreasewouldresultinaretentionrateinexcessof71%,whichwouldbeasignificantincreasefromourcurrentrate.

9B:Bachelor’sDegreesAwarded–LowIncome(StrategicAgenda,PerformanceFunding,DiversityPlan)



Table46:LowIncomeBachelor’sDegrees

2010-11

2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16

LowIncomeBachelor’sDegrees 619 617 666 703 702 779

• Table46showsthatthethree-yearchangesince2012-13variedenormouslyfrom5.5%,0%and11%.Theaverageannualrateofchangeis5.5%.

• 11%annualgrowthisunlikelytocontinue.Historically,2010-11and2011-12showednorateofchangeasdid2013-14and2014-15.8%changeoccurredbetween2011-12and2012-13.

Table47:PipelineofTotalLowIncomeBachelor’sSeekingStudentEnrollment

Year Freshmen Sophomores Juniors Seniors

SeniorsGraduatewithinYear

SeniorsGraduatedTotal*

2009-10 1,198 698 801 1,234438(35.5%)

979(79.3%)

27

2010-11 1,107 734 846 1,355585(43.2%)

1,102(81.3%)

2011-12 1,254 752 900 1,383595(43.1%)

1,129(81.6%)

2012-13 1,376 762 911 1,391611(43.9%)

1,125(80.9%)

2013-14 1,384 827 896 1,387658(47.5%)

1,096(79.0%)

2014-15 1,206 879 938 1,315660(50.5%)

1,000(76.0%)

2015-16 1,002 766 950 1,304703(53.9%)

813(62.3%)

2016-17 786 639 845 1,238638(51.5%)

638(51.5%)

*Includesunofficialgraduatesfromfall2016andwinter2016.Alsoincludesapplicationstograduateinspring2017

• ThepercentageofMoSUseniorsqualifyingaslowincomehasbeendeclining.In2009-10,thepercentagewashigherthan60%.MoSUreachedamaximumof67%ofseniorsin2013-14and2014-15.In2015-16,thenumberofseniorsdeclinedto63%andin2016-17,itdeclinedfurtherto60%.Thus,low-incomestudentsaredeclininginnumberandinpercentageofthestudentpopulation.Thispresentsachallengetogrowthasthedemographicsareshifting.

• ThetrendsaremoreconcerningamongMosulfreshmenwithonly54%of2015-16freshmenbeinglowincomeand49%of2016-17freshmenbeinglowincome.From2007-08to2012-13,therewasrelativelyparityinthepercentageoffreshmenandseniorswhowerelowincome.Forexample,in2011-12,64%offreshmenwerelowincomeand63%ofseniorswerelowincome.Beginningin2013-14,thenumbersbegintodivergewiththepercentageoflow-incomeseniorsrising,andthepercentageoflow-incomefreshmendeclining.In2015-16,54.4%offreshmenwerelowincomewhereas63.2%ofseniorswere.

28

• Table47showsthatMosulhasseensubstantialincreasesinseniorswhograduatewithintheyear.In2009-10only35.5%oflowincomeseniorsgraduatedin2009-10,whereasin2015-16,almost54%did.

• Thenumberoflow-incomeseniorshasbeenaround1300-1400since2010-11,butitbegandecliningin2014-15andreachedanewlowin2016-17.Thepeakwas1,391and1,234isadeclineof11.3%.

Table48:LowIncomeFirst-TimeTransfersbyClassification

Classification 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16 2016-17*

Freshman 74 100 96 89 76 58 49

Sophomore 99 129 117 107 117 109 88

Junior 185 238 242 220 211 184 171

Senior 123 131 100 94 84 82 60

Total 481 598 555 510 488 433 368

*AYisSUR,fall,winter,andspringterm.Datafromspring2017ispreliminaryandtheclassificationnumbersmaychangeastransfercreditisprocessed.Studentsfrom16-17havehadlittleopportunitytogetaPellgrantduringtheirtimeatMSU.Thus,thenumberofPellrecipientsisverylikelytogrowovertime,especiallyforthisgroup.

• Table48showsthetrendswithregardtolow-incometransferstudents.The2016-17numbersarelikelylowbecausesomeofthesestudentswillreceivePellastheycontinueatMoSU.Despitethiscaution,thetrendsuggestsadeclineinthenumberoflow-incometransferstudents.Aswiththetotaltransferstudents,thelow-incometransferstudentsdonotappeartograduatequickly.Fortheseniorswhotransferredin2010-11and2011-12,about50%ofthelow-incometransfersgraduated.Thisisincontrasttothelow-incometransferswhocameduringthoseyears,whohaveanaveragegraduationrateof27%.

• Regardinglowincome,since2010-11,about62%offirst-timetransferstudentsarelowincome.ThisissimilartotheMoSUpopulation,andliketheMoSUpopulation,thepercentageoflow-incomestudentshasdeclinedinrecentyears,particularly2015-16and2016-17.

• Historically,thelargestnumberoflow-incometransfershavecomefromfiveoftheKCTCSinstitutions:BigSandy,Ashland,Maysville,Bluegrass,andHazard.ThisisbothgoodandbadnewsinthattherehavebeenenrollmentdeclinesinAshland,Bluegrass,andMaysville.Hazardshowedsmallincreasesinenrollment,andBigSandyincreasedenrollmentin2015-16byabout600.

29

Table49:LowIncomeBachelor’sDegreesTarget

Target 3YearMean

Baseline

2016-17

2017-18

2018-19

2019-20

2020-21

CumulativeIncrease

1.0%annualincrease

690 779 787 795 803 811 819 5.1%

*3yearmeanincludes2012-13,2013-14,and2014-15

• Giventhedataavailable,thisseemsasifitwillbeahardmetrictomove,especiallywithanewhighbaseline.Thethree-yearmeanof690issubstantiallylowerthanthebaselineof779.Thisisespeciallytruesincethenumberandpercentageoflow-incomestudentsisdeclining.Thenumberoflow-incomeseniors,1,238issmallerthantheprevioustotalof1,304.

• Table49modelsa1%annualincreaseasthetargetforthismetric.

9B:Bachelor’sDegreesAwarded–URM(StrategicAgenda,PerformanceFunding,DiversityPlan)



Table50:UnderrepresentedMinorityBachelor’sDegrees

2010-11 2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16

URMBachelor’sDegrees

49 53 46 51 63 69

• Table50showsthatthenumberofMoSU’sbachelor’sdegreesawardedtoURMstudentsincreasedby40.8%since2010-11.However,therehasbeenagoodbitofinstabilityintheseincreases.Forinstance,from2011-12to2012-13,URMdegreeproductiondecreasedby13.2%,whereasin2013-14to2014-15degreeproductionincreasedby23.5%.

30

Table51:PipelineofTotalURMBachelor’sSeekingStudentEnrollment

Year Freshmen Sophomores Juniors SeniorsSeniorsGraduatedwithinYear

SeniorsGraduatedTotal*

2009-10 97 62 51 85 33(38.8%) 73(85.9%)

2010-11 125 40 61 92 43(46.7%) 75(81.5%)

2011-12 145 69 62 105 43(40.9%) 81(77.1%)

2012-13 200 82 62 107 44(41.1%) 76(71.0%)

2013-14 226 96 72 97 45(46.4%) 73(75.3%)

2014-15 203 123 88 97 54(55.7%) 73(75.2%)

2015-16 178 112 111 118 61(51.7%) 77(65.2%)

2016-17 137 98 115 149 58.4%(n=87)* 58.4%(n=87)

*Includesgradapplications

• Table51showsthatthenumberofURMfreshmenatMoSUincreaseddramaticallyreachinganewhighin2013-14,butsincethen,thenumbershavebeendecliningalongasimilartrajectorytotheirrise.Aswithotherbachelor’sdegrees,thepercentageofseniorswhograduateduringtheyearhasbeenrising.Basedonthepreliminarygraduatesandgraduateapplications,itisverylikelythatMoSUwillsurpassthe69URMdegreesproducedin2015-16.ThiswouldalsobeanewhighwithregardtothepercentageofURMseniorswhograduatedduringtheyearwith58.4%

Table52:URMFirst-TimeTransfersbyClassification

Classification 2010-11

2011-12

2012-13

2013-14

2014-15

2015-16

2016-17*

Changefrom2010-11

Freshman 4 16 17 14 7 12 14 250%

31

Sophomore 6 11 15 11 11 15 16 167%

Junior 15 21 14 23 17 16 18 20.0%

Senior 16 14 18 6 8 13 9 -43.7%

Post-Bac 6 6 5 4 1 2 3 -50.0%

Total 47 68 69 58 44 58 60 27.6%

*AYisSUR,fall,winter,andspringterm.Datafromspring2017ispreliminaryandtheclassificationnumbersmaychangeastransfercreditisprocessed.

• Table52showsthatfirst-timetransferstudentsprovideanaverageof58URMstudentsayearandarenotahugesourceofURMstudents.ThesourceforthemostURMtransfersisBluegrassTechnicalCollege,whichprovided53transfersfrom2010-11through2016-17.ThenextclosestsourcesareMaysvillewith25andAshlandwith23.

• Ofthe404URMtransfers,92completedtheirbachelor’sdegreeatMSU,whichisabout22.7%.Areviewoffirsttimetransfersfrom2010-11to2013-14revealsthat81outof242orapproximately33.5%graduatedincludingallclassifications.Freshmenagainhadthelowestrateofgraduationat21.6%andseniorshadthehighestgraduationrateof46.3%.Juniorsgraduatedatabout37%.

Table53:UnderrepresentedMinorityBachelor’sDegreesTarget

Target 3YearMean

Baseline 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21 CumulativeIncrease

4.0%annualincrease

53 69 72 75 78 81 84 21.7%

*Threeyearmeanincludes2012-13,2013-14,and2014-15.

• Table53showsthatMosulisstartingataveryhighbaseline.ThissubstantialimprovementhasbeenpartiallydrivenbyenrollmentincreasesinURMstudents.Improvementsinthepipelinecanbeseenforjuniorsandseniors;however,thenumberoffreshmanenrolleddeclinedsignificantlyin2015-16and2016-17.ThiswillaffectthepipelinemovingforwardbecauseMoSUwillnothaveanyslackthatwouldallowthelossofstudents.MoSUwillhavetoretainandgraduatetheenrolledstudents,orelsereplenishthenumbersbyenhancingtransferstudents.Inthe

32

currentyear,itlooksasifMoSUissettoestablishanewhighforURMbachelor’sdegrees.

• URMtransferstudentshavebeenrelativelystableoverthisperiodwiththeexceptionsof2010-11and2014-15,whichshowedsubstantialdips.TheotherconcernistheweaknessintheKCTCSpipelinegoingforward,especiallywithregardtodeclinesinenrollmentatBluegrassCommunityandAshland,bothofwhichhavebeenthelargestsourcesofURMfirst-timetransferenrollmentduringthistime.

• Thedataprovidedsuggestsshort-termimprovementandpotentialriskoverthelongterm.Thus,ifallgraduationapplicationswereapprovedMoSUwouldlikelyachievegrowthof33.3%thisyearbyhitting92URMbachelor’sdegrees,whichisthe2020-21targetfor6%annualincrease.However,unlessthepipelineisreplenishedwithtransfersorimprovementsoccurintheretentionandprogressionofthecurrentfreshmenstudents,MoSUwillnotbeabletomaintainthecurrentpaceofdegreeproduction.Thus,ifweexcludethe149seniorsthatwehavein2016-17,MoSU’saveragenumberofURMseniorsisaround100.

• Thetargetselectedforthismetricisa4%annualincrease.

StrategiesWhilemaintainingadiversestudentbodyisessential,institutionsmustcommittohelpingenrolledstudentsbe.Unfortunately,certaindiversestudentpopulationshistoricallyhaveexhibitedlowergraduationandretentionratesthantheoverallstudentpopulation.Inordertoimprovethesuccessofthesestudents,MSUwillimplementstrategiesdesignedtoaddresstheissues.

Tactics Measures Lead/ Accountability

Internal Collaborators


Timeline

Strategy 1: TheplanutilizeshighimpactpracticestocreatestrategiesdesignedtosupportincreasedstudentsuccessforBlack/AfricanAmerican,Hispanic,low-income,andunderrepresentedminoritystudents. 1.1InstitutionalizetheEagleDiversityEducationCenter(EDEC)programsandservices

-CreationofCommunityConversations-Numberofstudentprogramscreatedforstudents

MinorityAcademicServicesCoordinator,MinorityRetentionCoordinator

ChiefDiversityOfficer,OfficeofStudentActivities,Inclusion&Leadership,Counseling&HealthServices,CareerServices,AcademicAffairs,Undergraduate

Fall2017

33

Research,CenterforRegionalEngagement

Strategy2:Identifyannualgoalsforunderrepresentedminoritystudentsandlowincomeforthestudentsuccessmetricof1stto2ndyearretention.

2.1TheDedicationtoRetention,Education,andAcademicSuccessatMoreheadStateprogram(DREAMS)isacomprehensiveacademicsupportandretentionprogramcenteredonfirstyeartransition,mentoring,andleadership.

-Providedirectandsupplementalacademicsupporttostudentswhoareinjeopardyconcerningacademicperformanceandheightenedrenditionrisk.

DirectorofAcademicAdvising&Retention

MinorityAcademicServicesCoordinator,MinorityRetentionCoordinator,ChiefDiversityOfficer

Fall2017

Strategy3:Identifyannualgoalsforunderrepresentedminorityandlowincomestudentsforthestudentsuccessmetricofgraduationrates(6yearforfouryearinstitutions)3.1CreateaplantoidentifyunderrepresentedminoritystudentswhohaveleftMSUandattempttore-enrollthemtocompletetheirprograms

-Numberofstudentsreclaimed

EnrollmentServicesDeanGraduateSchool

EnrollmentCounselors,AcademicAdvisors,ProgramCoordinator

Fall2017

3.2Createandimplementplantoincreasediverseinternationalstudentenrollment,especiallytargetingBlackandHispanicpopulation

-Numbersofinternationalstudentsenrolledandmaintained

EnrollmentServices,AcademicAffairs

EnrollmentCounselors,AcademicDepartments,FirstYearExperience

-SACAM-ForeignCountries

Fall2018

Strategy4:Identifyannualgoalsforunderrepresentedminorityandlow-incomestudentsandforthestudentsuccessmetricofdegreesconferred.4.1Assessincreaseinpercentageofdegreesawarded

-Compareratesfromyeartoyear

DirectorofAcademicAdvising&Retention

UndergraduateResearchFellowshipProgram

Fall2018

34

4.2HavetheappropriateunitswithinAcademicAffairsandStudentSuccessreviewthedataannuallyanddevelopstrategiestoaddressareasofconcern

-Reviewgraduationmetrics

VicePresidentofAcademicAffairs/VicePresidentofStudentSuccess

AcademicAdvising&Retention,InstitutionalResearch,ChiefDiversityOfficerAcademicAffairs

Fall2018

Impact WorkforceDiversity:URMTenuredandTenureTrackFaculty(DiversityPlan)



Table61:WorkforceDiversity-URMTenuredandAllTenure-TrackFacultyincludingAcademicChairsandProgramDirectorsInstitution 2013 2014 2015 2016 CensusData Change

MoSU 7.7% 7.2% 7.0% 7.5% 3.8% -0.2

*InformationfromIPEDSHRreportandincludestenuredandtenure-trackfacultymembers.

• Table61showsthatMoSUhasexperiencedaslightdeclineof.2%since2013,butcontinuestooutperformthedemographicsoftheserviceregionwithregardtothepercentageofURMtenuredandtenure-trackfacultyemployed.ThepercentageofURMtenuredandtenure-trackfacultyatMoSUin2016isalmosttwicethatoftheserviceregiondemographicsbaseduponCensusdata.

35

Table62:WorkforceDiversity–URMTenuredandTenure-TrackFacultyincludingAcad.ChairsandProgramDir.Target

Targets3YearMean

Baseline 2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21CumulativeIncrease

%Faculty

2.0%annualincrease

20 19 19 20 20 21 21 10.5% 7.8%

*Percentagesbasedonastablenumberof270totaltenured/tenure-trackfacultymembersasshowninIPEDSHR2015.

• Table62modelsa2%annualincreaseinthenumberofURMtenuredandtenure-trackfacultyemployedatMoSU.Thisissomewhatambitious,giventhecontinuedbudgetcutsthataffectthehiringoffacultypositions.

WorkforceDiversity:URMManagementOccupations(DiversityPlan)



Table63:WorkforceDiversity:URMManagement-Executive&Professional-Presidents,Deans,Directors,Etc.Institution 2013 2014 2015 2016 CensusData Change

MoSU 5.0% 8.1% 6.9% 2.6% 3.8% -2.4

*InformationfromIPEDSHRreportandincludesallfull-timepeopleinSOCcode11

• Table63showsthatMoSUhasexperiencedadeclineof2.4%since2013butcontinuestooutperformthedemographicsoftheserviceregionwiththepercentageofURMmanagersemployed.

36

Table64:WorkforceDiversity:URMManagementTarget

Target3YearMean

Base-line

2016-17

2017-18

2018-19

2019-20

2020-21

CumulativeIncrease

%Management

4.0%annualincrease

5 5 5 5 5 5 6 20.00% 8.30%

*Percentagesbasedonastablenumberof72totalfull-timemanagementpositionsasshowninIPEDSHR2015.

AsshowninthetargetcalculationTable64,4%annualincreasewillresultinanincreaseinthenumberofURMmanagersbyone.Inordertorealizethepositiveeffectsofdiversity,Kentucky’spublicinstitutionsmustbecomecommunitiesthatprovideaninclusiveandsupportiveenvironmentforadiversegroupofstudents.Campusclimaterepresentsthecurrentattitudes,behaviorsandstandardsoffaculty,staff,administratorsandstudentsconcerningthelevelofrespectforindividualneeds,abilitiesandpotential.1Inorderforstudentstobesuccessfulandreceivethefullbenefitsofdiversity,thecampusclimatemustbeonethatissupportiveandrespectfulofallpeople.Furthermore,inordertoliveandthriveonadiversecampusandinanincreasinglydiverseworld,studentsmustbecomemoreculturallycompetent.If“diversity”referstothevariationinpopulationsasdefinedinthispolicy,then“competency”referstotheabilitytounderstandandappropriatelyaddressthesevariations.Culturalcompetencyprovidesindividualswiththeknowledge,skills,andattitudestoincreasetheireffectivenessinrelatingacrossculturaldifferencesandpreparesthemforlifeinincreasinglydiversedomesticandinternationalenvironments.Becauseoftheknowledgeandskillsobtained,studentswillgainanappreciationoftheirownculturalidentitiesandbecomecriticallyself-reflectiveintheirorientationtowarddifferencesintheidentitiesofothers.

37

Strategies

Tactics Measures Lead/

Accountability Internal Collaborators


Timeline

Strategy 1: Establishabaselineofcommunitymembers’perceptionsofdiversity,equity,inclusionandculturalcompetenceatMoreheadStateUniversityanddeterminehowtheinstitutionmayadvanceitsgoalsfordiversityandinclusion. 1.1Createabiasreportingandresponsemechanismforstudents,staffandfacultytoaddressissuesthatmayaffecttheenvironmentoratmospherenegatively.

-Creationofbiasreportingandresponsemechanism/system-Numberofincidentsreported-Natureofincidents(populationsimpacted)reported

CoordinatorStudentLeadershipandAdvocacy

WebMarketingDirector,MSUPolice;DeanofStudents,ChiefDiversityOfficer,OfficeofStudentActivities,Inclusion&Leadership,Counseling&HealthServices,HumanResources

MoreheadPolice;RowanCountySheriff;Pathways(othercommunitymentalhealthagencies)

Fall2017

1.2Developanexpandedinstitutionaldefinitionofdiversityandinclusionthatacknowledgesandsupportsintersectionalityi.e.supportandadvocacyforequityregardlessofrace,ethnicity,veteranstatus,orientation,identity,genderexpressionorsocio-economicstatus

-Establishexpandeddefinition-Receiveinstitutionalapprovalthroughsharedgovernance-Distributetocampuscommunity-Replaceinprinted/electronicplans,publications,etc.

ChiefDiversityOfficer

HumanResources,GeneralCounsel,StudentActivities,Inclusion&Leadership,StudentGovernmentAssociation,FacultySenate,StaffCongress

Fall2017-Spring2018

1.3Systematicallyadminister,analyze,andusefeedbackfromacampusclimate

-Assessmentinstrumentselected-Surveyadministered

OfficeofInstitutionalResearch&Analysis

HumanResources;GeneralCounsel;Student

AdministeredinFall2017toestablishbaseline;administered

38

survey. tofaculty,staffandstudents-Feedbackanalyzedandutilizedtoimprovecampusclimate

Activities,Inclusion&Leadership;ChiefDiversityOfficer

everythreeyearsthereafter

Strategy2:Createandsupportanemphasisthatwouldserveasacross-divisional,interdisciplinaryorganizationtofacilitateadvocacy,education,andresearchrelatedtosocialjustice,diversity,inclusion,equality,andequity.

2.1JoinNationalAssociationofMulticulturalEducationandrenewasaninstitutiononanannualbasis

-JoinNAME-UseNAMEresourcesandcurriculuminprogramming


Fall2018

2.2Createadatabaseofinformationaboutofficesandindividualswhoaredoingprogramming,education,advocacy,andresearchrelatedtodiversityandinclusiononcampus.

-Creationofdatabase-Numberofprograms-Typesofprogramsoffered-Programsofferedperpopulation-Alignmentofprograms/researchtocampusclimatesurveyfeedback


OfficeofStudentActivities,Inclusion&Leadership;ChiefDiversityOfficer;EagleEducationDiversityCenter,AcademicAffairs

Spring2019

Strategy3:Increaserepresentationofdiversefaculty,professionalstaff,andadministratorsthroughstrategicrecruitmentandretentionefforts.3.1UtilizerecruitmentnetworkssuchasKentuckyAssociationofBlacksinHigherEducation,BlacksinHigherEducation,SREB,DiverseEducation,etc.

-Jobsadvertisedin/withdiversityrecruitmentnetworks/publications

HumanResources

Hiringsupervisors,AcademicAffairs

ProfessionalAssociations

Ongoing

39

3.2Facilitatethedevelopmentofandprovidesupportforfaculty/staffassociationsbasedondiversebackgrounds;andembedmentorshipdimensionswithinthemforknowledgedevelopmentandorganizationaleffectiveness.

-Creationofassociations-Numberoffaculty/staffparticipatingcomparedtonumberemployed-Surveytoalldiversefaculty/stafftodeterminewhytheywere/werenotinvolved

HumanResources

VicePresidents;Facultyandstaffofdiversebackgrounds;FacultySenate;StaffCongress

ProfessionalAssociations

Fall2018

Strategy4:Identifyvarioussettings(integratingartworkandsignageincommonareas)thatreflectthediversityofthecampuscommunity.Developcommunicationinvenuesthatpromotediversity,inclusion,culturalcompetence,andDiversityPlanactionstepsinwaysthatmotivatethecommunitytoengageinimplementingtheactions(e.g.,thewebsite,socialmedia,on-andoff-campuscommunityforums,blogs,printedpublications,exhibits,TVandradiointerviews,presentationsatconferences).4.5ConceptualizeanddevelopavideoduringNewStudentDayshighlightingthediversityandcommonalitiesamongtheincomingfreshmanclass–"WhatWeShare"

-Completionofvideo-Distributionofvideoonwebandsocialmedia

ChiefMarketingandPublicRelationsOfficer

VicePresidentforStudentSuccess;FirstYearPrograms;ChiefDiversityOfficer;WebMarketingDirector;Videographer;Students

Fall2017;Updatedannually

BarriersInorderfortheDiversityPlantobesuccessful,theappropriateresourcesneedtobeinplace,relatedtostudentsuccessandemployment.Theinternalandexternalcollaboratorswillneedtoworktogethertoensurethatpropercommunicationchannelsareinplaceandthateachgroupunderstandstheexpectationsortherequirementsneededtoadvancetheplanforward.Ifresourcesareremoved(otherprojectsorleaveforotherjobs),therewillneedtobeotherstostepinandcompleteorimplementthestrategiesthatareapartoftheplan.Theinformationneededtomakedecisionswillneedtobeaccurateandavailableinatimelymannertoadjusttotheplanifneeded.

40

PlanAssessmentAssessmentoftheplanwillbeperformedannually,withprogressionandfeedbackconducted.InstitutionalResearchwillcoordinatethedatacollectionandanalysis.Thetargetsthatareapartofthestrategicagendaandcontainedinthediversityplanwillneedtobereviewedconcurrently.Anyadjustmentstotheplanwillbedoneaftercarefulreview.Moreover,theefficacyofthestrategiesoutlineintheproposaltoachievesuccessarecurrentlybeingdeveloped.ConclusionMoreheadStateUniversityhasanunwaveringcommitmenttopromotingdiversityandinclusiononcampus,andintheRegion,weserve.Accordingly,theplanproposediscompletewithcampus-wideenthusiasmandsupport.WelookforwardtocollaboratingwiththeKentuckyCouncilforPostsecondaryEducationtoimprove,implementandassesthisimportantplan

ImplementationPlanOnceapprovedtheMSUDiversityPlanwillbesubjecttotwosequentialcommittees.First,animplementationcommitteewillensurethattheplanisplaceandadjustmentsmadeasnecessarythroughoutthecomingyear.Followinginitialimplementation,anoversightcommitteethereaftertoensureannualreviewandupdatesasnecessary.

41

ReferencesAmericanAssociationofColleges&Universities

Capper,C.,&Young,M.(2014).Ironiesandlimitationsofeducationalleadershipforsocialjustice:Acalltosocialjusticeeducators.TheoryintoPractice,53(2),158-164.

CenterforUrbanEducation,UniversityofSouthernCalifornia

Dantley,M.E.,Beachum,F.D.,&McCray,C.R.(2008).Exploringtheintersectionalityofmultiplecenterswithinnotionsofsocialjustice.JournalofSchoolLeadership,18(2),124-133.

Davis,T.L.,&Harrison,L.M.(2013).Advancingsocialjustice:Tools,pedagogies,andstrategiestotransformyourcampus.SanFrancisco,CA:JohnWiley&Sons.

Gorski,P.C.(2013).Reachingandteachingstudentsinpoverty:Strategiesforerasingtheopportunitygap.NewYork,NY:TeachersCollegePress.

Gorski,P.C.,&Pothini,S.G.(2013).Casestudiesondiversityandsocialjusticeeducation.NewYork,NY:Routledge.Gorski,P.C.,&Swalwell,K.(2015).Equityliteracyforall.EducationalLeadership,72(6),34-40.

Griffiths,M.(2003).Actionforsocialjusticeineducation:FairlyDifferent.Maidenhead,England:OpenUniversityPress.

Irving,D.(2014).Wakingupwhite,andfindingmyselfinthestoryofrace.Cambridge,MA:ElephantRoomPress.

Loewen,J.W.(1995).Liesmyteachertoldme.NewYork,NY:Touchstone.

NationalCenterforCulturalCompetence

Normore,A.H.,&Brooks,J.S.(Eds.).(2014).Educationalleadershipforethicsandsocialjustice:Viewsfromthesocialsciences.Charlotte,NC:InformationAge.

Page,S.E.(2007).Thedifference:Howthepowerofdiversitycreatesbettergroups,firms,schools,andsocieties(3rdEd.).Princeton,NJ:UniversityPress.

Samuels,D.R.(2014).Theculturallyinclusiveeducator:PreparingforaMulticultural

42

world.NewYork,NY:TeachersCollegePress.

Tochluk,S.(2010).Witnessingwhiteness:Theneedtotalkaboutraceandhowtodoit.Lanham,MD:Rowman&Littlefield.nbcvxUniversityofDenver

Documents

Morehead State University Diversity Plan - Ky. Council on