Upload
stephen-hensley
View
216
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
California State University, Sacramento
Financing Community Colleges: Policies, Incentives, and
Language Matter
Nancy ShulockAchieving the Dream State Policy Meeting
Atlanta, GAFebruary 5, 2008
California State University, Sacramento
Overview
The California context
Finance policy and incentives matter for student success
A new approach: “Invest in Success”
California State University, Sacramento
California’s Performance is Lagging
Preparation- 35th and 49th in high school students taking advanced math
and science
- Bottom 1/5 in 8th graders scoring “proficient” in all subject areas of the NAEP
Participation- 40th in direct to college from high school
- 48th in full-time college enrollment
Completion- 47th in BA degrees per 100 undergraduates enrolled
- 46th in degrees/certificates awarded per 100 students enrolled in 2-year colleges
California State University, Sacramento
Percent of Adults with an Associate Degree or Higher by Age Group—Leading OECD Countries, the U.S., and
California
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Canada Japan Korea Spain France U.S. California
Per
cent
of
Adu
lts w
ith A
ssoc
iate
Deg
ree
or H
ighe
r
Age 55-64 Age 45-54 Age 35-44 Age 25-34
Source: Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development, Education at a Glance 2007; Not shown on the graph are Belgium, Norway, Ireland and Denmark, which also rank ahead of the U.S. on attainment among young adults (attainment is increasing for younger populations as in the other countries)
California State University, Sacramento
California Is Becoming Less Educated Than Other States
(Rank Among States in % with College Degrees)
Age Group: AA or Higher BA or Higher
>64 2nd 5th
45-64 11th 10th
35-44 21st 16th
25-34 30th 23rd
California State University, Sacramento
California Community College Facts
Size and Governance: 109 community colleges in 72 districts 2.5 million students per year Over 70% of public undergraduates Locally elected boards Collective bargaining – local contracts Highly regulated Highly politicized
Finance-Related: Lowest fees in the nation Low funding per student High participation rates Low completion rates
California State University, Sacramento
Tuition/Fees in 50 States
$-
$1,000
$2,000
$3,000
$4,000
$5,000
$6,000
California State University, Sacramento
Our Student Success Research
Rules of the Game – February, 2007 Policies are impeding completion – especially finance
policy Beyond the Open Door – August, 2007
We know what works: student success strategies Patterns that are more/less successful in the CCC
Invest in Success – October, 2007 Finance policies are misaligned with priorities A new funding approach can reward performance fairly
It Could Happen – Forthcoming, February, 2008 Reform is possible but requires finance policy reform
and external pressure on system to change
California State University, Sacramento
520,407 Students
Policies toPromote Access
314,034 Students
206,373 Students
Policy Barriers to Completion
Incoming CCC Students
1999-2000
238,352 Students
75,682 Students
Non-Degree-Seekers, 40%
Degree-Seekers, 60%
Job Skills, 49%
Basic Skills, 9%
Personal Enrichment, 42%
Complete Certificate, Degree or Transfer within 6 Years, 24%
Do Not Complete within 6 Years, 76%
California State University, Sacramento
Age and Race/Ethnicity Matter
Rates of completion: 27% for students age 17-19 at enrollment 21% for students in their 20s 18% for students in their 30s 16% for students age 40 or older
33% for Asian students 27% for white students 18% for Latino students 15% for black students
California State University, Sacramento
Enrollment Patterns Matter – Especially Full-Time
Figure 8: Certain Enrollment Patterns are Related to Higher Completion
0%5%
10%15%
20%25%30%
35%40%
45%50%
Full T imeMajority of
Terms
ContinuousEnrollment
OrientationCourse
Drop <20%Courses
Register Late<20% Courses
Perc
ent C
ompl
etin
g C
ert/D
egre
e/T
rans
fer
Followed Pattern Did not Follow Pattern
California State University, Sacramento
Community College Reaction
“This is another typical ‘university view’ of our community colleges written by people who have no experience in our institutions.”
Authors seek to “remake community colleges into another elite university system.”
“It is clear that the authors have little or no understanding of our colleges or our students and their work is not helpful….”
“The study is insulting to community colleges.”
California State University, Sacramento
Support Emerges
“The resistance you're experiencing is an indication of how badly the message needed be delivered.”
“There are a number of us who resent the defensive manner in which the system responded to your report. You have put critical issues on the table that we have ducked for a long time because of political timidity.”
“Please accept my commendation for your courage in thinking out loud about issues that have for years been repressed and avoided by the systematic work of institutional defensive routines.”
California State University, Sacramento
What Finance Policies Impede Student Success?
Appropriations Enrollment-driven funding
Restrictions on college use of resources Fee policy
Low fees for all Fee revenue is an offset to state funding
Financial aid Low use of financial aid No incentives for students
California State University, Sacramento
Readiness Access Affordability Completion Workforce Efficiency
Proposition 98 - - - - - Apportionments - +/- - - - Growth - +/- - - - Categoricals: Matriculation - +/- - - - EOPS + + + + - DSPS + - - PT Faculty +/- - - Fin Aid Admin + + - +/- Expenditure restrictions: 50% instruction - +/- - - - 75% / 25% - +/- - - 60% part time - - - - 2 semester temporary - - - - Student employment - - - Fees: Lack of policy - - - Low fees +/- +/- - - - Waivers + +/- - - - Revenue offset - - - - No fee non-credit + +/- + +/- + - Prohibit fees - - - - Financial Aid: BOG waivers - +/- + - +/- - Cal Grant +/- +/- +/- + +/- +/- No integration - - - -
California State University, Sacramento
Base Appropriations (Enrollment-Driven)
Readiness - Disincentive to stress readiness because it could reduce FTES
Access +/- Incentive to increase enrollment; no incentive to favor enrollment of degree-seekers over personal enrichment
Completion - No incentive for course completion; incentive to allow late registration and to minimize prerequisites
Workforce +/- Disincentive to meet workforce needs in high-cost and new fields
Efficiency - Focus on inputs does not direct funds where they would have the most impact on outcomes
California State University, Sacramento
Categorical Program: “Matriculation”
Readiness - Discourages readiness with 109 definitions of readiness (109 local assessment practices)
Access +/- Promotes broad access but not necessarily by degree-seeking students
Completion - Formula is richer for new students than continuing and remedial and based on enrollment, not services provided
Workforce - No incentive for students to obtain, or colleges to provide, advising about academic pathways and careers
Efficiency - Complex approval and validation process; 95 percent prior year funding guarantee
California State University, Sacramento
Restrictions on Spending: 50% Law
Readiness - Discourages time spent by faculty and staff on K-12 alignment and readiness
Access - Limits spending on functions supportive of access (outreach, financial aid administration, orientation)
Completion - Discourages investment in support services that are critical to persistence and success
Workforce - Disincentive for faculty to participate in curriculum development crucial for workforce education
Efficiency - Imposes artificial constraints on use of resources
California State University, Sacramento
Financial Aid Focus on Fees, Instead of Affordability
Access - Impedes access because students do not maximize available financial aid
Affordability - Students get too little aid for major costs of college
Completion - Leaving aid unused leads to too many work hours and lower completion
Efficiency - State funds used for costs that the federal government would cover
California State University, Sacramento
Key Reforms Require Changes to Funding: From FTES to Success
Mandatory assessment/placement Mandatory orientation Enforced prerequisites Integrated academic/student services Remove spending requirements Increase fees for non-needy students
California State University, Sacramento
The Question that Continues to Perplex American Higher Education
How can we best incorporate measures of success into funding decisions?
California State University, Sacramento
How Traditional Performance Budgeting Has Typically (Not) Worked
Make no changes in basic funding incentives Create a small performance pot – preferably new
money of 2-5% of total Select measures (usually controversial) Select targets (necessarily arbitrary and
controversial) Mete out rewards (or not - what to do with low
performers?) Performance problems not solved Performance funds get cut Everyone is frustrated (or worse)
California State University, Sacramento
What’s Wrong with this Picture?
Performance has become marginalized - an “add on” responsibility to basic operations
Set up to fail – how can 2-5% of total funding solve performance problems?
Performance
Operation
California State University, Sacramento
Invest in Success
Not AFTER colleges are funded “to operate” Incentives for success are built into core funding Re-think what is “workload”
Enroll students for a full term Serve disadvantaged students Get students to threshold # units Get students to complete, or advance in, remedial work Get students to complete programs
California State University, Sacramento
Trade-offs and Challenges
Design Issues: Which workload factors to include – new incentives Importance of each factor – the “stability” question How to use the factors fairly Phase-in time period
Institutional Culture: Focus on funding students, not institutions Ideological resistance to rewarding performance Baggage from failed performance budgeting
California State University, Sacramento
Lessons We Have Learned
Incentives are powerful – we get exactly what we design through policy
Changing policies – needs external support Performance funding needs a new language “Invest in Success” – so far, so good
Copies of reportsOnline: www.csus.edu/ihe Request hard copies: [email protected]