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