48
The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How CCCCIO Spring Conference Monterey, California March 24, 2010 Presentation by: David Longanecker President, Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE) The Case Again for Whopping Big Change With or Without Disruption

The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

  • Upload
    fiona

  • View
    43

  • Download
    1

Embed Size (px)

DESCRIPTION

CCCCIO Spring Conference Monterey, California March 24, 2010 Presentation by: David Longanecker President, Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE). The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How. The Case Again for Whopping Big Change - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Citation preview

Page 1: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

CCCCIO Spring Conference

Monterey, California

March 24, 2010

Presentation by:David LonganeckerPresident, Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE)

CCCCIO Spring Conference

Monterey, California

March 24, 2010

Presentation by:David LonganeckerPresident, Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE)

The Case Again for Whopping Big ChangeWith or Without Disruption

Page 2: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

Why Whopping Big Change Is RequiredWhy Whopping Big Change Is Required

Total Quality Management – Continuous Improvement

Booz-Allen: Stable State Management SystemNot a crisis management strategy

Your challenge50 percent productivity gain almost immediatelyProductivity gain = Quality improvement

Page 3: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

The Case for ChangeThe Case for Change

AASCU’s TOP ISSUES RevisedThe Fiscal Crisis: State Support, Tuition Policy & Prices, Student AidStudent Access & Success: Enrollment Capacity, Veterans Education, the Graduation InitiativeEducational Improvement: College Readiness, Focus on Community Colleges, & Teacher EffectivenessAccountability: Data Systems and Reporting Metrics.

Page 4: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

The Case for ChangeThe Case for Change

AASCU’s TOP ISSUES RevisedThe Fiscal Crisis: State Support, Tuition Policy & Prices, Student AidStudent Access & Success: Enrollment Capacity, Veterans Education, the Graduation InitiativeEducational Improvement: College Readiness, Focus on Community Colleges, & Teacher EffectivenessAccountability: Data Systems and Reporting Metrics.

Page 5: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

The Case for ChangeThe Case for Change

AASCU’s TOP ISSUES RevisedThe Fiscal Crisis: State Support, Tuition Policy & Prices, Student AidStudent Access & Success: Enrollment Capacity, Veterans Education, the Graduation InitiativeEducational Improvement: College Readiness, Focus on Community Colleges, & Teacher EffectivenessAccountability: Data Systems and Reporting Metrics.

Page 6: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

The Case for ChangeThe Case for Change

AASCU’s TOP ISSUES RevisedThe Fiscal Crisis: State Support, Tuition Policy & Prices, Student AidStudent Access & Success: Enrollment Capacity, Veterans Education, the Graduation InitiativeEducational Improvement: College Readiness, Focus on Community Colleges, & Teacher EffectivenessAccountability: Data Systems and Reporting Metrics.

Page 7: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

The Case for ChangeThe Case for Change

AASCU’s TOP ISSUES RevisedThe Fiscal Crisis: State Support, Tuition Policy & Prices, Student AidStudent Access & Success: Enrollment Capacity, Veterans Education, the Graduation InitiativeEducational Improvement: College Readiness, Focus on Community Colleges, & Teacher EffectivenessAccountability: Data Systems and Reporting Metrics.

Page 8: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

The Case for Whopping Big Change An Emerging Perfect Storm

The Case for Whopping Big Change An Emerging Perfect Storm

Wave One: Our Economic Competitiveness

Wave Two: Who We Are – Can We Be Competitive

Wave Three: What We Have in Resources

Page 9: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

The Liberal BorrowingsThe Liberal Borrowings

Knocking on the College Door (WICHE)

Beyond Social Justice (WICHE)

National Center for Higher Education Management Systems (NCHEMS) : www.higheredinfo.org.

State Higher Education Executive Officers (SHEEO), SHEF Report, February 2010.

Page 10: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

The Converging WavesThe Converging Waves

Wave One: Our Economic Competitiveness

Wave Two: Who We Are – Can We Be Competitive

Wave Three: What We Have in Resources

Page 11: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

Relationship Between Educational Attainment, Personal Income, and Economic Strength

Relationship Between Educational Attainment, Personal Income, and Economic Strength

Source: NCHEMS

AL

AZ

AR

CA

CO

CT

DE IL

IN

IA

KY

LA

MDMA

MS

NJ

NY

NDOK

OR

SC

SD

UT

VA

WAMN

NH

TN TX

WV

WI

WY

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

$30,000

15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%

Pers

onal In

com

e P

er

Capit

a,

20

00

Percent of Adults Age 25-64 with a Bachelor’s Degree or Higher

MT

HI

AK

GA

KS

ME NE

NV

NC

OH PAVT

ID

MI

MO

NM

RIFL US

Low Income, High Educational AttainmentLow Income, Low Educational Attainment

High Income, High Educational AttainmentHigh Income, Low Educational Attainment

State New Economy Index (2002)

Top Tier

Middle Tier

Low Tier

Page 12: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

Percent of Population Ages 25-64 with a Bachelor’s Degree or HigherPercent of Population Ages 25-64 with a Bachelor’s Degree or Higher

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 American Community Survey. Via NCHEMS

Page 13: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

Percent of Population Ages 25-64 with an Associate DegreePercent of Population Ages 25-64 with an Associate Degree

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 American Community Survey. Via NCHEMS

Page 14: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

Differences in College Attainment (Associate and Higher) Between Younger and Older Adults - U.S. and OECD Countries, 2005

Differences in College Attainment (Associate and Higher) Between Younger and Older Adults - U.S. and OECD Countries, 2005

Source: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Education at a Glance 2007

Page 15: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

Differences in College Attainment (Associate and Higher) Between Younger and Older Adults - U.S., 2005

Differences in College Attainment (Associate and Higher) Between Younger and Older Adults - U.S., 2005

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2005 ACS

Page 16: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

The White Caps on the First WaveThe White Caps on the First Wave

We’ve Been A LeaderBut Slip-Sliding Away

Losing Ground:The West, and California in particular, are the U.S. ProblemFalling Internationally

Page 17: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

The Unique CCCCIO Challenges/Opportunities: Making Wave One, Wave Won

The Unique CCCCIO Challenges/Opportunities: Making Wave One, Wave Won

With Respect to College EntryNot so bad – clear state MissionPlacement has not been synchronized

But underwayThink Common Core

Low hanging fruit – Adults With Some College But No Degree

4.4 Million – 22.7% of Adults in California

Ramp up Production of High Value Certificates

Page 18: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

The Unique CCCCIO Challenges/ Opportunities:Making Wave One, Wave Won

The Unique CCCCIO Challenges/ Opportunities:Making Wave One, Wave Won

With Respect to Progression Through College

Need higher thru put: More Transfer and Terminal Associate DegreesThe Good News (or so it seems): Transfer and Articulation progressingConsider more aggressive remunerated coop work study programsFocus on being adult friendly – use CAEL’s ALFI assessment.Eliminate time as the enemy

Less is more – a default curriculumGuaranteed curriculum if full-time/on-time

Page 19: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

The Unique CCCCIO Challenges/ Opportunities:Making Wave One, Wave Won

The Unique CCCCIO Challenges/ Opportunities:Making Wave One, Wave Won

With Respect to CompletionSame/same as progressionPlus:

Accept legitimate Prior Learning Assessment (PLA)Better Yet: Encourages PLADo Degree Audits & Grant Degrees Where Appropriate (Win/Win Project)Intentionally partner with non-public institutions

(Yup; I mean private for and not for profit places)Triage almost demands this

Page 20: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

The Converging WavesThe Converging Waves

Wave One: Our Economic Competitiveness

Wave Two: Who We Are – Can We Be Competitive

Wave Three: What We Have in Resources

Page 21: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

Projections of California High School GraduatesProjections of California High School Graduates

Page 22: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

High School Graduation Rates - Public High School Graduates as a Percent of 9th Graders Four Years Earlier, 2006

High School Graduation Rates - Public High School Graduates as a Percent of 9th Graders Four Years Earlier, 2006

0

20

40

60

80

100

Source: Tom Mortenson, Postsecondary Opportunity Via NCHEMS

Page 23: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

College-Going Rates – First-Time Freshmen Directly Out of High School as a Percent of Recent High School Graduates, 2006

College-Going Rates – First-Time Freshmen Directly Out of High School as a Percent of Recent High School Graduates, 2006

0

25

50

75

Mississip

pi

New

Yo

rk

No

rth D

akota

So

uth D

akota

Massach

usetts

New

Mexico

Co

nn

ecticut

New

Jersey

Min

neso

ta

Geo

rgia

Virg

inia

Kan

sas

Marylan

d

No

rth C

arolina

Louisian

a

Mich

igan

New

Ham

psh

ire

Main

e

Nebraska

Delaw

are

So

uth C

arolin

a

Ten

nessee

Ind

iana

Co

lorado

Alabam

a

Pen

nsylvania

Natio

n

Ken

tucky

Wisco

nsin

Iow

a

Illino

is

Flo

rida

Oh

io

Haw

aii

Oklah

om

a

Mo

ntan

a

Wyo

min

g

West V

irgin

ia

Misso

uri

Arkan

sas

Califo

rnia

Texas

Verm

on

t

Rh

od

e Island

Nevad

a

Wash

ington

Oreg

on

Utah

Alaska

Idah

o

Arizo

na

Source: Tom Mortenson, Postsecondary Opportunity Via NCHEMS

Page 24: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

Difference Between Whites and Next Largest Race/Ethnic Group in Percentage of Adults Age 25-34 with an Associate Degree or Higher, 2000

Difference Between Whites and Next Largest Race/Ethnic Group in Percentage of Adults Age 25-34 with an Associate Degree or Higher, 2000

0

10

20

30

40

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, PUMS (based on 2000 Census), Via NCHEMS

Page 25: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

Not Much Happens After the Age of 24

Patterns of U.S. High School and College Participation and Completion by Age (Average Annual from 2005 to 2007)Patterns of U.S. High School and College Participation and Completion by Age (Average Annual from 2005 to 2007)

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2005-07 American Community Survey (Public Use Microdata Sample)

High School Participation

Undergraduate College Participation – Peaks at Age 19, Levels off at Age 30

Earn High School Diploma or Equivalent – Levels off at Age 21

Complete Undergraduate College Degree – Peaks and Levels off at Age 31

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40AGE

We are left with 13 percent of adults with no high school diploma, and 60

percent with no college degree.

Note: Includes associate and bachelor’s degrees, but not certificates.

Page 26: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

The White Caps on the Second WaveThe White Caps on the Second Wave

Those with whom we have succeeded are decliningThose with whom we have not succeeded are increasing“Average” won’t sustain us, and may not even be achievable

Page 27: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

The Unique CCCCIO Opportunities/ Challenges: Wave Two, Too, Being Won

The Unique CCCCIO Opportunities/ Challenges: Wave Two, Too, Being Won

With respect to College EntryMuch the same as with Wave Won

Improve Placement – build on Common CoreThink “Adults with some college, no degree”

Market research & intention works hereThink high-value certificates

Even post-bachelaureate – i.e. Red Rocks PA program

Demand evidence as basis for chage, butBe willing to adapt rapidly – tradition is your enemy here

Page 28: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

The Unique CCCCIO Opportunities/ Challenges: Wave Two, Too, Being Won

The Unique CCCCIO Opportunities/ Challenges: Wave Two, Too, Being Won

With respect to Progression

REINVENT REMEDIATIONProblem is not what we call it; it’s how we do itApproaches to consider

Technology blended (National Center for Academic Transformation)Replace prerequisites with co-requisitesModularized self-paced instructionNix Learning Communities for this purpose

Know thyself – get the evidenceBy: race/ethnicity, major, gateway courses, etc.

Page 29: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

The Unique CCCCIO Opportunities/ Challenges: Wave Two, Too, Being Won

The Unique CCCCIO Opportunities/ Challenges: Wave Two, Too, Being Won

With respect to ProgressionMany of the same as with Wave Won

Improve transfer/articulation (under way)Coop work studyAdult friendlyGarner greater student commitment through incentives – incentivize full-time, continuity (again, time is everyone’s enemy)

Develop Cohort approach(and backup cohort)

Streamline curriculum – less is moreDefault curriculum STEM specific curriculum

Page 30: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

The Unique CCCCIO Opportunities/ Challenges: Wave Two, Too, Being Won

The Unique CCCCIO Opportunities/ Challenges: Wave Two, Too, Being Won

With respect to CompletionSame As Wave Won

Encourage PLADegree AuditsPartner with non-public sector institutions

Reward Steps Along The Way – Momentum Points.Mine your data

To prevent dropoutsTo re-attract recent dropouts

Page 31: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

The Converging WavesThe Converging Waves

Wave One: Our Economic Competitiveness

Wave Two: Who We Are – Can We Be Competitive

Wave Three: What We Have in Resources

Page 32: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

Life could have been worseLife could have been worsePublic FTE Enrollment, Educational Appropriations,

and Total Educational Revenue per FTE, U.S., Fiscal 1985-2010

Pu

bli

c F

TE

En

roll

me

nt

(mil

lio

ns

)

$12,000

Do

llars

pe

r FT

E

Educational Appropriations per FTE (constant $) Net Tuition Revenue per FTE (constant $) Public FTE Enrollment (millions)

1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009

Note: Net tuition revenue used for capital debt service is included in the above figures. All figures are adjusted by SHEEO Higher Education Cost Adjustment (HECA).Source: SHEEO SHEF 2010.

$10,000

$8,000

$6,000

$4,000

$2,000

$0

12.0

10.0

8.0

6.0

4.0

2.0

02010

$7,4

79

$7,8

55

$6,9

12

$6,9

94

$7,2

27

$7,3

11

$7,5

47

$7,7

70

$7,2

11

$6,7

40

$6,6

62

$6,9

86

$7,1

95

$7,3

25

$6,9

51

$6,4

54

$2,2

45 $2,3

41

$2,4

03

$2,4

69

$2,5

18

$2,5

75

$2,6

57

$2,8

66

$3,0

43

$3,1

46

$3,2

30

$3,3

43

$3,3

75

$3,3

87

$3,3

84

$3,2

93

$3,2

78

$3,2

88

$3,3

60

$3,5

24

$3,7

18

$3,8

91

$3,9

82

$4,0

27

$4,1

08

$7,9

93

$7,9

88

$7,8

69

$7,8

25

$7,6

07

$7,1

71

$7,9

61

$8,0

35

$7,9

79

$7,6

82

$2,2

74

$2,3

71

$2,4

34

$2,5

01 $2,5

50

$2,6

08

$2,6

91

$3,2

71

$3,3

87

$3,4

19

$3,4

31

$3,4

28

$3,3

37

$3,3

56

$3,4

31

$3,6

11

$3,7

60

$4,0

68

$4,1

16

$4,1

78

$4,3

21

$2,9

03

$3,0

82

$3,1

86 $3,3

48

$14,00014.0

$3,1

46

Page 33: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

Public FTE Enrollment, Educational Appropriations and Total Educational Revenue per FTE, California, Fiscal 1985-2010

Do

llars

pe

r FT

E

Educational Appropriations per FTE (constant $) Net Tuition Revenue per FTE (constant $) Public FTE Enrollment (millions)

1985 1986 1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010

Pu

bli

c F

TE

En

roll

me

nt

(th

ou

sa

nd

s)

Same trend; lower amounts in CASame trend; lower amounts in CA

$949 $9

74

$947

$949

$873

$917

$988

$1,6

87

$1,5

62

$1,4

67

$1,4

45

$1,4

19

$1,0

13 $932

$1,5

98

$1,1

98

$1,4

57

$1,6

49

$878

$7,6

82

$8,0

26

$6,6

90

$6,4

86

$7,1

32

$7,2

27 $8,3

02

$7,5

96

$7,0

95

$6,5

85

$7,2

04

$7,4

04

$7,3

93

$6,9

29

$6,0

65

$8,7

30

$8,5

34

$8,2

92

$7,7

41

$8,3

02

$7,5

46

$7,9

61

$7,7

73

$8,2

40

$8,2

93

$12,000

$10,000

$8,000

$6,000

$4,000

$2,000

$0

10.0

8.0

6.0

4.0

2.0

0

Note: Constant 2009 dollars adjusted by SHEEO Higher Education Cost Adjustment. 2009 Educational Appropriations include ARRA funds. (HECA) Source: SSDB

$1,8

14

$1,4

45

$1,5

06

$1,4

87

$1,4

04

$1,2

30$899

$6,8

15

Page 34: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

Revenues Per Student from Net Tuition, State, & Local Appropriations Public Research

Revenues Per Student from Net Tuition, State, & Local Appropriations Public Research

$2

9,1

72

$2

4,1

84

$2

3,2

63

$2

2,0

95

$2

1,6

40

$2

1,3

84

$2

0,0

10

$1

9,8

65

$1

9,7

83

$1

9,7

21

$1

9,5

45

$1

9,2

27

$1

8,9

89

$1

8,8

43

$1

8,7

73

$1

8,6

57

$1

8,5

37

$1

7,6

10

$1

7,3

60

$1

7,2

67

$1

6,9

74

$1

6,7

74

$1

6,2

75

$1

6,1

95

$1

6,1

72

$1

6,1

55

$1

6,0

92

$1

6,0

59

$1

6,0

57

$1

5,8

37

$1

5,7

74

$1

5,7

14

$1

5,5

68

$1

5,5

41

$1

5,4

06

$1

5,1

80

$1

5,1

25

$1

5,0

93

$1

5,0

03

$1

4,8

65

$1

4,7

77

$1

4,0

18

$1

4,0

06

$1

3,6

75

$1

3,1

21

$1

2,6

66

$1

2,4

49

$1

2,3

24

$1

1,6

20

$1

1,2

43

$9

,682

$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

$30,000

$35,000

Alaska

Min

ne

sota

Haw

aiiC

on

ne

cticu

tN

ew

York

Ve

rmo

nt

No

rth C

arolin

aM

assachu

sett

sK

en

tucky

Wyo

min

gM

aryland

Ne

braska

Alab

ama

Califo

rnia

Iow

aD

elaw

areN

ew

Jerse

yTe

nn

esse

eW

ashin

gton

Sou

th C

arolin

aM

aine

Pe

nn

sylvania

Ne

w M

exico

Nati

on

Idah

oIn

dian

aM

ichigan

Misso

uri

Rh

od

e Islan

dK

ansas

Virgin

iaG

eo

rgiaU

tahW

iscon

sinO

klaho

ma

Ne

vada

Oh

ioW

est V

irginia

Arizo

na

Arkan

sasIllin

ois

Florid

aN

orth

Dako

taN

ew

Ham

psh

ireTe

xasLo

uisian

aM

ississipp

iO

rego

nSo

uth

Dako

taM

on

tana

Co

lorad

o

Sources: NCES, IPEDS 2006-07 Finance Files; f0607_f1a and f0607_f2 Final Release Data Files. NCES, IPEDS 2007-08 Institutional Characteristics File; hd2007 Final Release Data File. NCES, IPEDS 2006-07 Enrollment Files; ef2006a, effy2007, and efia2007 Final Release Data Files. Via NCHEMS

Page 35: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

Revenues Per Student from Net Tuition, State, & Local Appropriations Public Masters and Baccalaureate

Revenues Per Student from Net Tuition, State, & Local Appropriations Public Masters and Baccalaureate

$17,984 $16,148 $14,587$14,440$14,426

$13,683$12,929

$12,324$12,105$12,011$11,862

$11,443$11,443$11,389$11,284$11,266$11,249$11,063$10,836$10,788$10,778$10,721$10,464$10,405$10,370$10,343$10,312$10,275$10,251$10,179$10,162$10,039

$9,957$9,945$9,933$9,702$9,701$9,630$9,622$9,410$9,185$8,959$8,846$8,748

$8,414$8,400

$7,964$7,877

$7,209$6,311 $5,105

$0

$2,000

$4,000

$6,000

$8,000

$10,000

$12,000

$14,000

$16,000

$18,000

$20,000

De

laware

Haw

aiiC

on

ne

cticu

tN

orth

Caro

lina

Alaska

Ne

w Je

rsey

Ne

w M

exico

Iow

aM

aryland

Massach

use

tts

Main

eV

erm

on

tV

irginia

Rh

od

e Islan

dA

labam

aM

on

tana

Illino

isW

ashin

gton

Ne

w Yo

rkFlo

rida

Mich

iganSo

uth

Caro

lina

Ke

ntu

ckyO

hio

Mississip

pi

Nati

on

Id

aho

Misso

uri

DC

Kan

sasP

en

nsylvan

iaC

aliforn

iaN

ew

Ham

psh

ireM

inn

eso

taTe

xasIn

dian

aTe

nn

esse

eO

rego

nN

orth

Dako

taA

rkansas

Ne

braska

Wisco

nsin

Ne

vada

Oklah

om

aLo

uisian

aG

eo

rgiaW

est V

irginia

Sou

th D

akota

Arizo

na

Utah

Co

lorad

o

Sources: NCES, IPEDS 2006-07 Finance Files; f0607_f1a and f0607_f2 Final Release Data Files. NCES, IPEDS 2007-08 Institutional Characteristics File; hd2007 Final Release Data File. NCES, IPEDS 2006-07 Enrollment Files; ef2006a, effy2007, and efia2007 Final Release Data Files. Via NCHEMS

Page 36: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

Revenues Per Student from Net Tuition, State, & Local Appropriations Public 2-Year

Revenues Per Student from Net Tuition, State, & Local Appropriations Public 2-Year

$14,793$11,197

$10,683$10,287

$9,964$9,953

$9,125$8,844$8,801$8,705$8,625$8,480$8,449$8,411$8,378$8,214$8,067$8,044

$7,772$7,633$7,566$7,509$7,507$7,448$7,432$7,416$7,403$7,329$7,239$7,222$7,117$7,018$6,918$6,895$6,844$6,823$6,714$6,676$6,630$6,510$6,465$6,353

$6,082$6,028$5,970$5,945$5,939$5,712$5,517$5,297

$3,369

$0

$2,000

$4,000

$6,000

$8,000

$10,000

$12,000

$14,000

$16,000

Wisco

nsin

Haw

aiiW

yom

ing

Marylan

dD

elaw

areC

on

ne

cticu

tV

erm

on

tK

ansas

Ore

gon

Ne

w Yo

rkN

ew

Ham

psh

ireId

aho

Massach

use

tts

Ne

w M

exico

Alaska

Mich

iganP

en

nsylvan

iaN

orth

Dako

taM

inn

eso

taA

rizon

aR

ho

de

Island

Oh

ioU

tahN

orth

Caro

lina

Texas

Nati

on

Mo

ntan

aC

aliforn

iaW

ashin

gton

Main

eN

evad

aA

labam

aIllin

ois

Ne

braska

Misso

uri

Lou

isiana

Ten

ne

ssee

Iow

aA

rkansas

Ne

w Je

rsey

Oklah

om

aSo

uth

Caro

lina

Florid

aG

eo

rgiaM

ississipp

iV

irginia

Sou

th D

akota

Co

lorad

oIn

dian

aK

en

tucky

We

st Virgin

ia

Sources: NCES, IPEDS 2006-07 Finance Files; f0607_f1a and f0607_f2 Final Release Data Files. NCES, IPEDS 2007-08 Institutional Characteristics File; hd2007 Final Release Data File. NCES, IPEDS 2006-07 Enrollment Files; ef2006a, effy2007, and efia2007 Final Release Data Files. Via NCHEMS

Page 37: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

Projected State and Local Budget Surplus (Gap) as a Percent of Revenues, 2016

Projected State and Local Budget Surplus (Gap) as a Percent of Revenues, 2016

Source: NCHEMS; Don Boyd (Rockefeller Institute of Government), 2009 Via NCHEMS

-2.1

-2.2

-2.3

-2.3

-2.4

-2.6

-2.7

-2.9 -3

-3.3

-3.5

-3.5

-3.8

-4.1

-4.6

-4.7

-4.8

-4.9 -5

-5.1

-5.2

-5.4

-5.7

-5.7

-5.8

-5.8

-6-6

.2-6

.3-6

.3-6

.7-6

.7-6

.8-7

.2-7

.4-7

.8-8

-8.1

-8.1

-8.5

-8.5

-8.5

-8.7

-8.9

-9.1

-9.4

-9.5

-9.7

-10

.6-1

0.8

-10

.9

-12

-10

-8

-6

-4

-2

0

Mar

ylan

dM

ain

eV

erm

on

tN

ew

Je

rse

yC

on

ne

cticu

tN

ew

Ham

psh

ire

Rh

od

e Is

lan

dN

ort

h D

ako

taW

isco

nsi

nM

assa

chu

sett

sM

ich

igan

Wyo

min

gC

alif

orn

iaO

hio

De

law

are

Kan

sas

Ore

gon

Vir

gin

iaN

ew

Yo

rkM

inn

eso

taW

est

Vir

gin

iaP

en

nsy

lvan

iaIll

ino

isA

lask

aN

eb

rask

aM

on

tan

aU

nit

ed

Sta

tes

Lou

isia

na

Ind

ian

aH

awai

iO

klah

om

aN

ew

Me

xico

Mis

sou

riK

en

tuck

yIo

wa

Sou

th D

ako

taW

ash

ingt

on

Flo

rid

aSo

uth

Car

olin

aA

rkan

sas

Ge

org

iaC

olo

rad

oTe

nn

ess

ee

No

rth

Car

olin

aId

aho

Uta

hA

rizo

na

Ne

vad

aA

lab

ama

Texa

sM

issi

ssip

pi

Page 38: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

State Tax Capacity & EffortIndexed to U.S. AverageState Tax Capacity & EffortIndexed to U.S. Average

Source: State Higher Education Executive Officers (SHEEO)

AL

AK

AZ

AR

CACO

CT

DE

GA HI

IL

IN IAKS

KYLA

ME

MD

MA

MS

MT

NE

NV

NJ

NY

NC

ND

OH

OK

PA

RI

SC

SD

UT

VT

VA

WA

FL

ID

MI

MN

MO

NH

NM

TNTX

WV

WI

WY

0.6

0.7

0.8

0.9

1.0

1.1

1.2

1.3

1.4

1.5

1.6

1.7

0.6 0.8 1.0 1.2 1.4

Sta

te T

ax C

apacity

(Tota

l Taxable

Reso

urce

s Per C

apita

)

State Tax Effort (Effective Tax Rate)

US

OR

Page 39: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

Productivity: Total Funding per Degree/Certificate (Weighted*, 2006-2007)

Productivity: Total Funding per Degree/Certificate (Weighted*, 2006-2007)

29,0

75

30,6

19

33,2

73

33,7

56

34,3

30

34,5

94

36,4

98

37,8

23

38,3

64

38,3

65

39,5

16

39,5

16

39,9

18

42,1

77

42,1

98

42,4

08

42,6

93

42,8

47

42,8

73

42,9

48

43,8

20

44,2

72

44,3

71

45,8

33

45,9

04

46,5

22

46,8

80

47,4

53

47,6

72

47,7

49

48,6

11

49,8

94

52,4

91

52,5

72

52,8

88

53,5

35

54,5

53

56,0

90

56,2

80

56,8

88

56,9

60

59,4

20

59,4

65

63,8

22

64,9

34

65,9

75

66,6

23

72,8

46

75,7

44

79,7

94

86,0

09

-

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

90,000

100,000

FloridaC

oloradoW

ashingtonU

tahN

orth Dakota

Oklahom

aW

est Virginia

Montana

South Dakota

KansasG

eorgiaLouisianaW

isconsinIdahoN

ew H

ampshire

IllinoisM

ississippiA

rizonaA

rkansasM

innesotaO

regonKentuckyIow

aV

irginiaM

issouriN

ation

Ohio

IndianaN

ebraskaTexasSouth C

arolinaN

orth Carolina

Michigan

TennesseeN

ew M

exicoC

aliforniaM

ainePennsylvaniaA

labama

New

YorkN

evadaM

arylandVerm

ontN

ew Jersey

Massachusett

sH

awaii

Connecti

cutR

hode IslandD

elaware

Wyom

ingA

laska

Tuition and FeesState and Local

Sources: SHEEO State Higher Education Finance Survey 2008; NCES, IPEDS Completions Survey; U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey (Public Use MicrodataSamples)

*Adjusted for value of degrees in the state employment market (median earnings by degree type and level)

Sources: SHEEO State Higher Education Finance Survey 2008; NCES, IPEDS Completions Survey; U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey (Public Use Microdata Samples)

Page 40: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

The White Caps on the Third WaveThe White Caps on the Third Wave

Prospects look bleak for much more in the short termNew Normal suggests a very different future than past.Triage often sacrifices the most vulnerable

Page 41: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

The Unique CCCCIO Challenges/Opportunities: Wave Three – Show me the money

The Unique CCCCIO Challenges/Opportunities: Wave Three – Show me the money

With respect to Entry into CollegeTuition revenue, done smartly, is most of the answerBalanced by financial aid is key

With respect to Progression through College

Tuition and financial aid remain keyRevise the rewards to focus on student success

Pay only for successful remediation – regardless of modality usedPay only for completed courses -- tough love

Page 42: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

The Unique CCCCIO Challenges/Opportunities: Wave Three – Show me the money

The Unique CCCCIO Challenges/Opportunities: Wave Three – Show me the money

With respect to Completion Know thyself – focus on gaps, not successes Clearly articulated pathways reduce student

and state costs Don’t enroll students in course that don’t

articulate to their degree goals Price by priority

Currently in place for resident/non-residentWhy not for core vs luxury/high vs low-value

Streamline programs – dropping the duds Where academic success is too low to justifyWhere ROI is too low to justify

Outsourcing or Pairing

Page 43: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

The California story – Three Huge Converging Waves -- The Makings of A Perfect Storm

The California story – Three Huge Converging Waves -- The Makings of A Perfect Storm

Demographics present a challenge, all else being equal

The finances are perilous

We have been educationally competitive, which has made us economically competitive and comparative just, but:

Were slipping And the good life has not been equitably distribute

Page 44: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

Creating a New Business Model – What I Hear & SeeCreating a New Business Model – What I Hear & See

Who Will Lead – Academic Leaders or Other Leaders?

From the Community College “Community”ACCT: Governance Institute for Student Success. Foundations:

Achieving the Dream – top down through data driven reform, and limited success to dateCompletion by Design – still in design

____________ -- meet the goal

Page 45: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

Creating a New Business Model – What I Hear & SeeCreating a New Business Model – What I Hear & See

TRIAGE happens, whether intentional or not.Lack of course availabilityLow success rates

In remedial/developmentalIn college level coursework

Particularly in STEM fieldAnd indefensibly biased by race/ethnicity

Justifiable within current business modelCan’t afford more coursesCan’t support resources necessary for course success

But unjustifiable in support of MissionSo must create a new business model

Is that possible?Disruptive technologies theory says noWe can’t live with that

Page 46: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

Creating a New Business Model – Dave’s Nine Tenets of A New Way

Creating a New Business Model – Dave’s Nine Tenets of A New Way

Evidence based – data drivenImprovement imperative – Whopping big in the short term, continuous improve-ment, on benchmarks achieved.Well, nearly continuous improvement. Recognize periodic perturbations.Take reasonable risk & expect some failure.

Page 47: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

Creating a New Business Model – Tenets of A New WayCreating a New Business Model – Tenets of A New Way

Eliminate what can’t be done well enough.Be genius – borrow generously.

Follow the CASE study approach

Reward success and champions of success (make performance count for regular folk).

Make this work funWe work live, not live to work.

Don’t have too many tenets

Page 48: The Evidence on Student Success in California Higher Education –What, Why, & How

That’s all there isThat’s all there is

Enough Already