University of San Diego Equity Scorecard

Transcription

1 University of San Diego Equity Scorecard Background The Equity Scorecard (previously called the Diversity Scorecard), developed by Estela Mara Bensimon, is an opportunity for campuses to bring about institutional change. This process consists of three stages: awareness of the magnitude of inequities, analysis or interpretation of the meaning of identified inequities and finally acting upon the new information through changes in programs, policies, etc. It should be noted that the Equity Scorecard provides a snapshot of campus data and should be reviewed and revised periodically. During the Academic Year, the WASC Theme 2 Diversity and Inclusion Committee was introduced to the Equity Scorecard project by one of the committee members as a potential tool for assessing diversity performance indicators at the University of San Diego (USD). The model has four different dimensions: access, retention, excellence and institutional receptivity. The results in each area are described below. USD s version of the Equity Scorecard was revised on multiple occasions, first using national data as the comparison group. Whenever possible, USD now uses its peer institutions as the comparison group. A significant amount of the data was retrieved from the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System s (IPEDS) database. Access Access criteria reflect upon the opportunity for historically underrepresented students to enter the institution, select academic and socialization programs and access graduate and professional schools. USD used as measures of access: freshman enrollment, undergraduate enrollment and SAT scores. All of these factors were disaggregated by gender and ethnicity. Our findings indicate that our African American student population was underrepresented on all three of the measures. Our Asian students were underrepresented in our enrollment numbers. While our Native students had SAT scores below the USD average, USD s American Indian undergraduate population is more than twice that of our peer institutions. Retention Retention factors examine both freshmen retention rates as well as persistence to degree. Our retention and graduation rates indicate some areas of concern. Due to the small sample size of our Black and Native American student population, the variability in cohort graduation rates is significant. Therefore it maybe more useful to examine additional IPEDS data, specifically the three year average of six-year graduation rates. USD s six year graduation rate for White, Black, Asian and Hispanic Students is well in the bottom half of our peer institutions. Excellence Excellence measures include percent of students on the Dean s list (or First Honors at USD), percent of students in science, technology and mathematics (STEM) majors, etc. The Black student population was underrepresented on measures related to GPA, percentage of A grades, and percent of students in First Honors. Our Hispanic students were also underrepresented in the percentage of students receiving A Grades and First Honors as well as percentage of students in STEM majors. Not surprisingly, the University Honors Program is significantly underrepresented by all minority groups, which admits students with the highest high school GPAs and SATs. Institutional Receptivity Finally institutional receptivity criteria examine the measures of institutional support found to be influential in creating a welcoming environment for historically underrepresented students including whether or not the diversity of the faculty is reflective of the diversity within the student body and whether or not underrepresented students are involved in activities such as

2 Greek Life. Women, Asian, Hispanic and American Indian tenure and tenure track faculty are underrepresented when compared to our current undergraduate student population. In comparison to our peer institutions, however, while we are underrepresented in our Black and American Indian faculty, we fair better than our peers with regards to recruiting tenure and tenure track Asian and Hispanic faculty. Greek Life attracts approximately 25% of the undergraduate population to fraternities and sororities. Unfortunately, however, all minority groups are underrepresented in Greek Life. USD does not currently have any multicultural fraternities and/or sororities of any type. Bensimon, E. M. (2004). The diversity scorecard: A learning approach to institutional change. Change (January/February 2004),

3 EQUITYSCORECARD Dimensions EquityIndicators Female White Black Asian Hispanic American Indian 1a FreshmanEnrollmentFall2008(n=1260) 61.3% 64.3% 1.5% 9.7% 14.0% 1.03% 1b FreshmanEnrollment2008vs.USDPeerSchools a Full timeseekingundergradenrollmentfall % 63.1% 2.2% 9.8% 14.3% 1.42% Access Retention >1.00isaboveaverage/overrepresented 1.00isaverage+/ 0.05 <1.00isbelowaverageaverage/underrepresented (n=4904) 2b Full timeseekingundergradenrollmentfall2008 vs.usdpeerschools a SATscoresFall2009freshmen b SATscoresFall2009vs.1207averageforall freshmen a USDFull TimeFreshmanSix YearGraduation Rates2008end,3YearAverage 76% 55% 1 75% 72% 77% 4b FordhamUniversityFull TimeFreshmanSix Year GraduationRates2008end,3YearAverage 81% 76% 77% 72% 43% 4c LMUFull TimeFreshmanSix YearGraduation Rates2008end,3YearAverage 78% 71% 79% 81% 91% 4d PepperdineFull TimeFreshmanSix Year GraduationRates2008end,3YearAverage 80% 82% 85% 81% 73% 4e SantaClaraFull TimeFreshmanSix Year GraduationRates2008end,3YearAverage 85% 79% 85% 86% 74% 4f SeattleUFull TimeFreshmanSix Year GraduationRates2008end,3YearAverage 71% 79% 72% 75% 70% 4g SetonHallFull TimeFreshmanSix Year GraduationRates2008end,3YearAverage 64% 52% 59% 53% 100% 4h UnivofDaytonFull TimeFreshmanSix Year GraduationRates2008end,3YearAverage 77% 64% 75% 63% 67% 4i USFFull TimeFreshmanSix YearGraduation Rates2008end,3YearAverage 64% 59% 73% 70% 46% 4j USCFull TimeFreshmanSix YearGraduation Rates2008end,3YearAverage 87% 79% 90% 87% 72% 4k VillanovaFull TimeFreshmanSix Year GraduationRates2008end,3YearAverage 88% 88% 92% 82% 100% 5a DegreesConferred (n=1264) 60.0% 68.0% 8.3% 9.5% 13.6% 0.0% 2 5b DegreesConferred08 09vs.USDPeerSchools DuetosmallN,thisnumberishighlyvariable( %, %) 2 Nodegreesconferredforthiscohort

4 Excellence EquityScoreCardContinuedFemale White Black Asian Hispanic American Indian 6a CumulativeGPAFall Institutional Receptivity 6b CumulativeGPAvs.3.05averageforallUSD undergraduates a Percentage A Grades % 37% 25% 35% 31% 35% 7b Percentage A Gradesvs.36%averageforall USDundergraduates 8a Percentage FirstHonors studentsfall2009 (CumulativeGPA>3.65for12unitsormore) 8b Percentage FirstHonors studentsvs.19% averageforallusdundergraduates 9a PercentageofallSTEMstudentsFall2009 (n=443) 9b PercentageofallSTEMstudentvs.All UndergraduatesFall a PercentofFreshmanHonorsStudents2008 (n=114) 10b PercentofFreshmenHonorsStudents2008vs. FreshmenEnrollmentFall a PercentageofGreekLifeStudents (n=1218) 11b GreekLifeStudents vs.AllUSD UndergraduatesFall c PercentageofFraternityStudents (n=442) 11d PercentageofFraternityStudents vs. MaleUSDUndergraduateEnrollmentFall f PercentageofSororityStudents (n=776) 11g PercentageofSororityStudents vs. FemaleUSDUndergraduateEnrollmentFall a TenureandTenure TrackFacultyFall2008 (n=328) 12b TenureandTenure TrackFaculty2008vs.USD PeerSchools 13a TenureandTenure TrackFacultyFall2008 (n=328) 13b TenureandTenure TrackFacultyFall2008vs. USDundergraduatestudentpopulation % 22% 8% 18% 11% 20% % 59% 3% 15% 13% 2% % 72.8% 0.1% 7.0% 7.0% % 72% 1.3% 8.6% 10.5% 0.8% % 3.4% 7.5% 12% 0.7% % 0.1% 9.3% 9.7% 0.9% % 78.0% 3.7% 7.6% 7.0% 0.3% % 78.0% 3.7% 7.6% 7.0% 0.3%

5 USDUndergraduatePeerSchoolsinCalifornia LoyolaMarymountUniversity PepperdineUniversity SantaClaraUniversity UniversityofSanFrancisco UniversityofSouthernCalifornia USDUndergraduatePeerSchoolsOutsideofCalifornia FordhamUniversity SeattleUniversity SetonHallUniversity UniversityofDayton VillanovaUniversity