View
215
Download
0
Category
Tags:
Preview:
Citation preview
1
Ensuring Affordability and Access at The University of Texas at El
Paso
Roy Mathew, PhD Director, Center for Institutional Evaluation,
Research and Planning University of Texas at El Paso
2
Presentation Outline• Mission and Regional Characteristics• Challenges to Providing Access• Challenges to Ensuring Affordability• Comparing UTEP to Other Institutions• Evidence of Achieving Success• Ongoing Institutional Research to Advance Mission • Commitment to Ensuring Access
3
UTEP’s Mission
. . . As a public university, UTEP is committed to providing access and educational opportunity to the people of the El Paso region and the State of Texas . . .
4
Characteristics of the Region El Paso, Texas
• El Paso County-3rd poorest large county in the US1
• Population: 724,000
• 81% Hispanic
• Border community, very dynamic flow of residents and students across the border
• Limited educational opportunities
1 2005 American Community Survey of the US Census
5
Texas Educational Attainment, by RegionSource: THEBC
Region PopulationOver Age 25
PercentageHigh School
Diploma(or GED)or Higher
PercentageAssociate’s
Degreeor Higher
PercentageBaccalaureate
Degreeor Higher
Central Texas 1,274,317 82.1 35.2 29.6
Gulf Coast 2,972,716 76.2 31.1 26.1
High Plains 607,037 75.0 24.1 18.8
Metroplex 3,416,273 79.8 33.4 27.8
Northwest 350,250 76.1 21.4 16.7
South Texas 2,304,306 68.0 22.7 17.8
Southeast Texas 476,816 75.2 18.4 13.9
Upper East Texas 665,553 75.1 20.8 15.3
Upper Rio Grande 406,613 65.6 21.7 16.7
West Texas 317,012 71.2 21.3 16.4
Statewide 12,790,893 75.7 28.5 23.2
6
Challenges of Providing Access
7
The federal government shifted the means of fulfilling the commitment to equal opportunity in postsecondary education from primarily using grants to mainly using loans (St. John, 1994).
State support for public colleges and universities decreased …(Callan & Finney, 1997).
. . .concerns about student enrollment have triggered the bidding war in recruiting and retaining academically well-prepared students (Hu and St. John 2001).
. . .minority students are competitively disadvantaged in access to higher education.. (Baker & Velez, 1996).
Major Challenges
8
UTEP’s Efforts to Ensure Access
K-12 Pipeline Admission Pathways Cost and Affordability
9
Building the Pipeline
El Paso Collaborative for Academic ExcellenceFounded in 1991; partners include the National Science Foundation, the U.S. Department of Education and The Pew Charitable Trusts, in addition to businesses and organizations in the community and throughout Texas
Goals of the Collaborative Ensure academic success for all
students, K-16 Ensure that all students
graduate from high school prepared to succeed in a four-year college or university
Close achievement gaps among different groups of students
10
New Admission PathwaysProposed Pathways to Admission
Admission to .........
Path #1
Place in the top 10% of your graduating class
After you are admitted you must:
Take ACCUPLACER to determinefirst-semester course placement
Register for these courses with approvalfrom advisor
Path #3
Take the ACCUPLACER test at your high school or atUTEP. If you qualify to take UTEP college-levelcourses in math & English you will be admitted.
After you are admitted you must:
Take ACCUPLACER to determine first-semestercourse placement
Register for these courses with approval fromadvisor
**If you do not meet these admission standards, you mayqualify for provisional admission through Individual Review.
Path #2
Meet any of the criteria listed in the table below:
After you are admitted you must:
Take ACCUPLACER to determine first-semester course placement
Register for these courses with approval from advisor
**If you do not meet these admission standards, you may qualify for provisionaladmission through Individual Review.
HS Rank in ClassMinimum SAT
Combined (V+M)Score
Minimum ACTComposite Score
Top 25%No minimum, butscores must be
submitted
No minimum,butscores must be
submitted
Second 25% 920 19
Third 25% 970 20
Fourth 25% 1010 21
No HS rank, GED,unaccredited HS, or
home school program1010 21
Key Initiatives that Shaped the New Admissions Policy •Research on Student Success Funded by Lumina Research•College Readiness Initiative
11
Cost and AffordabilityUTEP Fall 2007 Tuition and Fees for 12 SCH: $2291.00
UTEP Full-time Students with Need-Based Grant Aid Average Percent Discount: 100%
Percent Tuition and Fees Compared to Regional Median Income: 16.1%
Institutional Assistance Programs for Low Income Students
UTEP Promise: - Financial Aid Program for first time freshmen at UTEP with family income of $25,000 or less.
Guaranteed Tuition Plan: - Guarantees that tuition and mandatory fees will not increase for four consecutive year from the date of initial enrollment.
UTEP Success: - Efforts to educate the El Paso community about various financial aid programs; the main message is that everyone qualifies for some form of financial aid
On Campus Employment Opportunity Program: - Subsidizes on-campus employment through non- tuition set asides: 75% supported by
Campus and 25% hiring departments
UTEP/EPCC Collaborations: - Common Admissions Application / Financial Aid Consortium
12
Challenges to Keeping
Cost Low at UTEP
13
UTEP Fall Enrollment TrendSource UTEP Factbook
18,542
18,918
19,268
19,842
20,154
17,500
18,000
18,500
19,000
19,500
20,000
20,500
Fall 2003 Fall 2004 Fall 2005 Fall 2006 Fall 2007
14
Expenditures vs. Legislative AppropriationsComparison of State Appropriations to Total UTEP Expeditures
Source Annual Financial Reports
125.6
273.8
54.1
79.9
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
2007
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
2001
2000
1999
1998
1997
1996
1995
1994
millions of dollarsTotal Expenditures Legislative Appropriations
15
UTEP Tuition And Fees 10yr trend
$0.00
$500.00
$1,000.00
$1,500.00
$2,000.00
$2,500.00
Fall94
Fall95
Fall96
Fall97
Fall98
Fall99
Fall00
Fall01
Fall02
Fall03
Fall04
Fall05
Fall06
Fall07
12-hr
16
How Does UTEP Compare?
• System and WAG4 Comparisons
17
UT System Total Academic Charges FALL 2006 Source THECB
$3,933
$2,555
$2,335
$2,299
$2,157
$3,665
$3,333
$3,200
$2,708
$0 $500 $1,000 $1,500 $2,000 $2,500 $3,000 $3,500 $4,000 $4,500
UT- Austin
UT- Dallas
UT- San Antonio
UT- Arlington
UT- El Paso
UT- Tyler
UT- Permian Basin
UT- Brownsville
UT- Pan American
Research Expenditures FY 2006 $34,865,068
Research Expenditures FY 2006 $43,085,236
Research Expenditures FY 2006 $41,933,182
Research Expenditures FY 2006 $32,316,849
18
Net Cost Comparison at UT System
Full-time Undergraduate Students
with Need-Based Grant Aid, AY 2006-07% Receiving
Grant Aid
Average % Discount of Total Academic Cost
Arlington 39.0% 94.8%
Austin 46.7 78.5
Brownsville 69.7 62.3
Dallas 33.6 57.2
El Paso 46.7 100.0Pan American 71.6 100.0
Permian Basin 46.9 79.4
San Antonio 43.7 62.8
Tyler 42.6 88.0Source: U.T. System Institutions
19
Undergraduate Financial Aid Awards FY 2006 and Recipients Source UT System Accountability Reports
Source of Funding Amount Awarded % of Total Expenditures
Arlington
Federal/State/Work Study $21,691,636 22.16%
Institutional $14,344,014 14.65%
Private $3,326,296 3.40%
Loans $58,546,440 59.80%
Dallas
Federal/State/Work Study $9,068,845 21.34%
Institutional $1,802,126 4.24%
Private $1,083,392 2.55%
Loans $30,546,554 71.87%
El Paso
Federal/State/Work Study $37,602,934 42.65%
Institutional $9,141,667 10.37%
Private $3,005,501 3.41%
Loans $38,409,415 43.57%
San Antonio
Federal/State/Work Study $35,745,359 23.28%
Institutional $7,936,893 5.17%
Private $7,707,727 5.02%
Loans $102,145,469 66.53%
20
Evidence of Achieving Success
21
Reflecting the Regions Demographics
UTEP Total EnrollmentResidence Fall 2007 Number Percent
El Paso County 16,705 82.90%
New Mexico 243 1.21%
Other International 432 2.10%
Mexico 1,801 8.90%
22
UTEP Enrollment by Race/Ethnicity Fall 2007
White Non-Hispanic 2,124 10.50%
Black Non-Hispanic 547 2.70%
Hispanic 14,826 73.60%
Asian American 226 1.10%
Native American 44 0.20%
Unknown 96 0.50%
Mexican International 1,635 8.10%
Other International 656 3.30%
23
Low Income • Number of UTEP students who applied for financial aid: 15,269
• Average family income of financial aid applicants: $30,856
• Percent of financial aid applicants with family income of $20,000 or less: 44%
• Percent of UTEP students with reported family income of 20,000 or less: 34%Percent of students with family income of less than $20,000 at large public research (doctoral) universities: 10%. Percent of students with family income of less than $20,000 at small and mid-sized private colleges and universities: 12%. (Council of Independent Colleges: http://www.cic.edu/makingthecase/data/access/income/index.asp )
Percent of students with family income less than $20,000 at community colleges: 29%. (Lumina Foundation Focus, Fall 2005, P.5)
First Generation Fall 2006 Fall 2007
Percent of freshmen who are first-generation college students 52% 52%
Socio-Economically Disadvantaged and First Generation Students
24
Ongoing Institutional Research that Advance UTEP’s Mission of
Providing Access
25
UTEP Enrollment•New Students•First-time Freshmen•New Graduate students•Total Enrollment•Continuing Students•Transfer Students
UTEPTuition
Unemployment Rate
Competitor Tuition
(EPCC & NMSU)
Exchange Rate (Dollar & Peso)
IncomeWages
Economic factors associated with UTEP enrollment.
Economic Impact on EnrollmentStudent Demand Analysis
26
Factors Influencing Student Demand
Dependent Variable Statistically Significant Predictors (P<0.05) Coefficient
New Students UTEP Tuition -0.22 Exchange Rate -0.43 Income 1.16 First-time Freshmen UTEP Tuition -0.21 EPCC Tuition 0.42 Exchange Rate -0.59 New Graduates Students Income 3.78 Exchange Rate -0.94 Total Enrollment UTEP Tuition -0.21 Wages -0.42 Continuing Students UTEP Tuition -0.16 Exchange Rate -0.10 Transfer Students UTEP tuition -0.47
NMSU Tuition 0.84
27
Lumina Study
Research on understanding why students leave, return (re-enroll), and graduate on-time by tracking enrollment history, academic progress, and financial aid data.
The main questions the research tries to answer are: How can the institution identify, at the time of admission, students at-risk of
departure?What factors affect student departure, return and on-time graduation?
Explored the effect of demographic, academic preparation, academic performance and financial aid variables on student departure and graduation for student cohorts from fall 1999 and fall 2000.
28
Lumina Study FindingsFactors that predict
graduation within six years
Factors that affect student departure (identify at risk groups)
Factors that do not predict graduation or at risk groups
Female(+) Female (-) ACT/SAT score
Age 20 or older at first enrollment (-) Age 20 or older at first enrollment (+) Household Income
High School Percentile Rank: 2nd Quartile (-), bottom half (-)
High School Percentile Rank: 2nd Quartile (+), bottom half (+)
Enrollment in Developmental (after controlling for failing and time of enrollment)
Below college level Math Placement (-) Direct Matriculation (-) Educational level of parents
Intend to work more than 20 hpw (-) Below college level Math Placement (+) Reading Placement Level (BANR)
Number of failed Developmental courses (-)
Intend to work more than 20 hpw (+) Writing Placement Level (BANW)
Cumulative GPA (+) Grant Received (-) English Placement Level (BANE)
Number of semesters received Grant (+)
Work-Study Received (-)
Number of semesters received Loan (+) Student Loan Received (-)
Failing Developmental (+)
Part-time enrollment (+)
Withdrawing class (+)
Semester GPA (-)
29
Importance of Ensuring Access
30
If the policy changes have disproportionally negative effects on educational attainment of minority students, then the economic and social well-being of minority students and society as a whole will inevitably be imperiled (Hu and St. John 2001).
. . .it also seems incumbent on those who can influence public policy to work toward the construction of less costly forms of higher education and also toward the kinds of financial assistance and loan programs that can combine significant cost recovery with protection to those whose participation in higher education is most at risk from the inevitable need to share in the costs (Johnstone 2003).
31
Astin, Alexander W. and Leticia Oseguera. The Declining “Equity” of American Higher Education. The Review of Higher Education Spring 2004, Volume 27, No. 3, pp. 321–341.
Baker, T. L., & Velez, W. (1996). Access to and opportunity in postsecondary educationin the United States: A review. Sociology of Education, Extra Issue, 69, 82-101.
Callan, P. M., & Finney, J. E. (Eds.) (1997). Public and private financing of higher education: Shaping public policy for the future. American Council on Education and Oryx Press.
Hurtado-Ortiz, Maria T. and Mary Gauvain. Postsecondary Education Among Mexican American Youth: Contributions of Parents, Siblings, Acculturation, and Generational Status. Hispanic Journal of Behavioral Sciences 2007; 29; 181.
Hu, Shouping and Edward P. St. John. Student Persistence in a Public Higher Education System: Understanding Racialand Ethnic Differences. The Journal of Higher Education, Vol. 72, No. 3. (May - Jun., 2001), pp. 265-286.
Johnstone, D. Bruce. Cost Sharing in Higher Education: Tuition, Financial Assistance, and Accessibility in a Comparative Perspective. Sociologický časopis/Czech Sociological Review, 2003, Vol. 39, No. 3: 351–374
Kane, John and Lawrence M. Spizman. Race, Financial Aid Awards and College Attendance: Parents and Geography Matter. American Journal of Economics and Sociology, Vol. 53, No. 1. (Jan., 1994), pp. 85-97.
St. John, E. P. (1994). Prices, productiviv, and investment: Assessing,finuncial strategies in higher education. ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report No. 3. Washington, DC: The George Washington University.
Winston, Gordon C. Subsidies, Hierarchy and Peers: The Awkward Economics of Higher Education. The Journal of Economic Perspectives, Vol. 13, No. 1. (Winter, 1999), pp. 13-36.
Yun, John T. and Jose F. Moreno. College Access, K-12 Concentrated Disadvantage, and the Next 25 Years of Education. Educational Researcher, Vol. 35, No. 1, pp. 12-19.
Sources
UTEP, Center for Institutional Evaluation, Research and Planning. http://cierp.utep.edu
Recommended