Rethinking Enrollment Management

Transcription

1 Rethinking Enrollment Management Understanding Trends and Developing Models Stephen Riter, PhD Vice President for Information Resources and Planning

2 Enrollment Management Challenges Balancing access and excellence Manage enrollment to ensure access and student success Explore implications of different enrollment strategies on student success (adjust course-load to work responsibilities, increase course-load for students in Top 10 of high school class, explore enrollment options at EPCC for students who require developmental coursework, facilitate efficient transfer from EPCC through coadvising) Ensure sufficient resources to foster excellence Explore implications of different enrollment strategies on revenue Develop incentives for academic units to encourage retention and timely progress (e.g. revenue incentives to departments and colleges based on retention and progression) Focus recruiting in key fields (STEM disciplines, masters programs, doctoral programs) Maximize capacity (through hybrid courses and programs)

3 Fragmented Focus

4 Integrated Approach

5 Enrollment Management Activities Analysis / Model development Student success Net Revenue Student Demand

6 Student Success Lumina Funded Project Identify factors that explain graduation within six years Identify characteristics of at risk students Factors that predict graduation within six years Factors that identify at risk groups Factors that do not predict graduation or at risk groups High School Percentile Rank Number of dependents (children & ACT/SAT other family members) Math Placement Level (BANM) Personal perception that one will drop Age (standardized) out before graduation 1st Term GPA standardized Personal perception that it is important Educational level of parents to prepare for class Number of classes failed in 1st term Need (unmet financial need) Reading Placement Level (BANR) Gender Grant- Amount Paid Writing Placement Level (BANW) Hours worked per week Scholarship- Amount Paid English Placement Level (BANE) Student Loan- Amount Paid Personal perception that one will change majors at least once Failing Class Work-Study- Amount Paid Hours worked per week High School rank

7 Implications Student success - Modifications of admission standards (based on High School Rank) - Changes in advising strategies (limit course load for students with commitments - Changes in enrollment strategies (coenrollment with EPCC for students who require developmental math)

8 Exploring Solutions α EPCC βα E UTEP/LD + UD (1-α) γ 2 (1-α) βα+γ 2 (1-α)>γ 1

9 Admission Policy for New Students? Top Quartile: Unconditional admits Second quartile: Individual advising/counseling/assessment to determine likelihood of academic success. Student s admission may include one of the following: Advise into the EPCC-UTEP option Permit regular attendance (freedom of selection, etc), but select courses that will ensure success, based on students employment and personal commitments Other individually designed option based on student s perceived likelihood of success

10 Admission Policy for New Third quartile: Students? (Cont d) - Require full-time enrollment in a Summer Bridge Program (long summer session; 6 or 9 SCH) followed by unconditional admission if they pass all courses with at least 3.0 GPA - Intensive advising component: determine enrollment in Fall semester based on performance in summer courses, and students additional commitments such as employment and personal situation (e.g., number of dependents, etc);

11 Admission Policy for New Students? (Cont d) Third quartile (Cont d): - Develop financial package for students who take prescribed courses and show commitment to enroll fulltime (or part time, if they have major additional commitments) and; - Consider joint enrollment at both EPCC and UTEP.

12 Admission Policy for New Students? (Cont d) Fourth quartile: - If the student has placed into two or more developmental courses, register for 6-9 SCH at EPCC; - Register for an additional 3-6 SCH at UTEP selected in consultation with an advisor; - Intensive advising component with required compliance (e.g., holds on registration, regular meetings with advisors, prescribed course scheduling, etc.)

13 Exploring Solutions α EPCC βα E UTEP/LD + UD (1-α) γ 2 (1-α) βα+γ 2 (1-α)>γ 1

14 Marginal Revenue / Cost Analysis Understanding current patterns Formula funding (level and program) Yield per FTE student (level and program) SCH trends (level) Enrollment trends (student characteristics and level) Total cost (level and program) Total revenue (level and program) Scenarios Project funding based on historic data Analysis of likely conditions (immigration changes, economic downturn, changes in degree requirements, co-enrollment options for under-prepared students)

15 Model of Financial Impact Net Revenue= Formula Funding + Tuition and Fees - Cost FormulaFunding = $ 55.72*(1.1* UGLL _ T / TT * SM + UGLL _ T LD T + 1.1* UGUL _ T / TT * SM + UGUL_ UD NT * SM NT * SM T UD ) T LD Where: SM is a vector of state multiplier. UGLL and UGUL represent vectors of lower and upper level SCH taught by tenure/tenured track and non tenure track faculty, respectively. Tuition And Fees = Tuition* SCH + Fees Cost = Instructional Cost + Infrastructure Cost

16 Formula Funding Matrix Undergraduate: SCH x Teaching Experience Supplement for T/TT (10%) x State Multiplier x Flat Rate ($55.72) Graduate: SCH x State Multiplier x Flat Rate ($55.72) State Multipliers LD UD Masters Doctorate Liberal Arts Science Fine Arts Teacher Education Engineering Social Service Library science Vocational training Physical training Health service Business Administration Teacher Ed-Practice Teaching Technology Nursing Developmental Education

17 Net Revenue Model Health Sciences Business Administration Liberal Arts Science Education Engineering Additional LD Students Additional UD Students Additional Masters Students Additional Doctoral Students Total Additional Students Health Sciences Business Administration Nursing Liberal Arts Science Education Engineering Nursing 2006 Student/Faculty Ratio Desired S/F Ratio Fall 2006 Faculty Additional Faculty needed Total Faculty Added Revenue from state Added Revenue from Tuition Added Faculty Salary Added TA Salary Added Staff Salary Maintenance and Operation Travel Instructional Administration Net Change

18 Net Revenue Per Student (In Development) College Liberal Arts Science Education Engineering Health Sciences Business Administration Nursing Lower Division $768 $916 $736 $1,037 $877 $734 $856 Upper Division $1,271 $1,905 $1,244 $2,049 $1,647 $991 $2,641 Masters $1,503 $2,865 $952 $2,851 $3,240 $1,377 $1,683 Doctoral $4,584 $9,013 $2,629 $8,180 $0 $3,781 $0

19 Student Demand Analysis UTEP Tuition Competitor Tuition (EPCC & NMSU) UTEP Enrollment New Students New Freshmen New Graduate students Total Enrollment Continuing Students Transfer Students Exchange Rate (Dollar & Peso) Wages Income Unemployment Rate Economic factors associated with UTEP enrollment.

20 Factors Influencing Student Demand Dependent Variable Statistically Significant Predictors (P<0.05) Coefficient New Students UTEP Tuition Exchange Rate Wages 1.34 New Freshmen UTEP Tuition EPCC Tuition 0.54 Exchange Rate New Graduates Students Income 3.36 Exchange Rate Unemployment Rate Wages 2.23 Total Enrollment Exchange Rate Continuing Students Exchange Rate Transfer Students UTEP tuition NMSU Tuition 0.34

21 Next Steps Develop admission standards Increase yield from EPCC Identify new populations