Comparison Peers: Distance of Peers from WT

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.6

Comparison Peers: Table

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.7

Technical Notes for Data Slides

• Data for WTAMU are represented by MAROON bars.• Data for all peers are represented by GRAY bars.• The vertical RED line on each slide represents the mean value

for that specific data point.

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.8

Comparison Peers: Full-time Equivalent (FTE) Enrollment

Indiana University−South Bend

University of Nebraska at Kearney

University of North Alabama

The University of Tennessee−Martin

Pittsburg State University

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

McNeese State University

Southern Utah University

Northern Michigan University

West Texas A&M University

Morehead State University

Austin Peay State University

University of Southern Indiana

Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne

University of Wisconsin−Whitewater

University of Central Oklahoma

0 2,500 5,000 7,500 10,000 12,500

Com

paris

on P

eers

Note: FTE enrollment is a measure of institutional sizethat normalizes the mix of full−time and part−time students.

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.9

Comparison Peers: Fall-to-Fall Retention (First-time, Full-time Students)

University of Central Oklahoma

Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne

Southern Utah University

West Texas A&M University

Indiana University−South Bend

Morehead State University

McNeese State University

Austin Peay State University

University of Southern Indiana

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

Northern Michigan University

Pittsburg State University

The University of Tennessee−Martin

University of North Alabama

University of Nebraska at Kearney

University of Wisconsin−Whitewater

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%

Com

paris

on P

eers

Note: This retention rate is a key performance indicator of institutionaleffectiveness used by many universities and organizations across higher education.

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.10

Comparison Peers: 6-year Graduation Rate (First-time, Full-time Students)

Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne

Indiana University−South Bend

University of North Alabama

Austin Peay State University

University of Central Oklahoma

McNeese State University

University of Southern Indiana

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

West Texas A&M University

Southern Utah University

Morehead State University

The University of Tennessee−Martin

Northern Michigan University

Pittsburg State University

University of Nebraska at Kearney

University of Wisconsin−Whitewater

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%

Com

paris

on P

eers

Note: Graduation rate is a key performance indicator of institutionaleffectiveness used by many universities and organizations across higher education.

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.11

Comparison Peers: Degrees Awarded per FTE

Indiana University−South Bend

Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

Northern Michigan University

Southern Utah University

McNeese State University

Morehead State University

The University of Tennessee−Martin

University of Southern Indiana

University of Nebraska at Kearney

Austin Peay State University

University of North Alabama

University of Wisconsin−Whitewater

University of Central Oklahoma

Pittsburg State University

West Texas A&M University

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

Com

paris

on P

eers

Note: This locally−created metric divides total degrees awarded bystudent FTE to make 'apples−to−apples' comparisons across institutions with differentsizes of enrollment.

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.12

Comparison Peers: Academic Program Similarity Score

West Texas A&M University

McNeese State University

Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne

Northern Michigan University

Austin Peay State University

Morehead State University

Southern Utah University

Pittsburg State University

Indiana University−South Bend

The University of Tennessee−Martin

University of North Alabama

University of Central Oklahoma

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

University of Southern Indiana

University of Nebraska at Kearney

University of Wisconsin−Whitewater

0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5

Com

paris

on P

eers

Note: This locally−created metric calculates how similar an institution'sacademic program mix is when compared to the target institution (WTAMU), which is whyWTAMU does not have a score. Score range is 0−100. Lower scores are better.

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.13

Comparison Peers: % of Adult Undergraduates (25-64)

University of Wisconsin−Whitewater

University of Nebraska at Kearney

University of Southern Indiana

Northern Michigan University

Pittsburg State University

University of North Alabama

Morehead State University

Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne

The University of Tennessee−Martin

McNeese State University

Indiana University−South Bend

West Texas A&M University

University of Central Oklahoma

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

Southern Utah University

Austin Peay State University

0% 10% 20% 30%

Com

paris

on P

eers

Note: This percentage provides a rough estimate of how many'non−traditional' students are enrolled at each institution.

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.14

Comparison Peers: Research Expenditures per FTE

University of North Alabama

Southern Utah University

University of Wisconsin−Whitewater

University of Southern Indiana

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

The University of Tennessee−Martin

Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne

Northern Michigan University

Indiana University−South Bend

Morehead State University

University of Nebraska at Kearney

Austin Peay State University

Pittsburg State University

University of Central Oklahoma

McNeese State University

West Texas A&M University

$0 $200 $400

Com

paris

on P

eers

Note: This metric shows how much an institution spends per FTE student to produceresearch outcomes. This is an outcome that will need to increase as WTAMUworks toward becoming a Regionally Responsive Research University.

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.15

Comparison Peers: Graduate Enrollment as Percentage of Total Enrollment

Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne

The University of Tennessee−Martin

Indiana University−South Bend

University of Southern Indiana

Austin Peay State University

McNeese State University

Southern Utah University

Northern Michigan University

University of Wisconsin−Whitewater

Morehead State University

University of Central Oklahoma

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

University of North Alabama

Pittsburg State University

West Texas A&M University

University of Nebraska at Kearney

0% 10% 20%

Com

paris

on P

eers

Note: This percentage shows the proportion of graduate students in the student body.

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.16

Comparison Peers: % Undergraduates Enrolled Only in Distance Courses

Northern Michigan University

Pittsburg State University

Southern Utah University

University of Wisconsin−Whitewater

Indiana University−South Bend

Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne

University of Central Oklahoma

University of Nebraska at Kearney

University of Southern Indiana

McNeese State University

University of North Alabama

The University of Tennessee−Martin

Morehead State University

West Texas A&M University

Austin Peay State University

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

0% 10% 20% 30%

Com

paris

on P

eers

Note: This is an important metric as WTAMU explores potential growthin distance education at the undergraduate level.

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.17

Comparison Peers: % Graduate Students Enrolled Only in Distance Courses

University of Central Oklahoma

Indiana University−South Bend

Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne

McNeese State University

Northern Michigan University

Southern Utah University

Pittsburg State University

University of Wisconsin−Whitewater

Austin Peay State University

University of North Alabama

West Texas A&M University

University of Southern Indiana

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

Morehead State University

The University of Tennessee−Martin

University of Nebraska at Kearney

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

Com

paris

on P

eers

Note: This is an important metric as WTAMU explores potential growthin distance education at the graduate level.

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.18

Comparison Peers: % of Undergraduate Students who are Women

Pittsburg State University

University of Wisconsin−Whitewater

Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne

Northern Michigan University

West Texas A&M University

Southern Utah University

Austin Peay State University

The University of Tennessee−Martin

University of Central Oklahoma

University of Nebraska at Kearney

University of North Alabama

McNeese State University

Morehead State University

Indiana University−South Bend

University of Southern Indiana

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%

Com

paris

on P

eers

Note: This metric indicates the gender distribution at each institution.

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.19

Comparison Peers: % of Undergraduate Students who are White

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

University of Central Oklahoma

West Texas A&M University

Austin Peay State University

Indiana University−South Bend

McNeese State University

University of North Alabama

Pittsburg State University

Southern Utah University

The University of Tennessee−Martin

University of Nebraska at Kearney

Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne

University of Wisconsin−Whitewater

Northern Michigan University

University of Southern Indiana

Morehead State University

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%

Com

paris

on P

eers

Note: This metric provides a rough estimate of diversity at each institution.

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.20

Comparison Peers: Average Salary of Assistant Professors (9-month equated)

Austin Peay State University

Indiana University−South Bend

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

Southern Utah University

University of Central Oklahoma

McNeese State University

University of Nebraska at Kearney

Morehead State University

University of Southern Indiana

Pittsburg State University

The University of Tennessee−Martin

University of North Alabama

Northern Michigan University

Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne

West Texas A&M University

University of Wisconsin−Whitewater

$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000

Com

paris

on P

eers

Note: Salary comparisons across institutions in different states/regionsshould be made with caution.

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.21

Comparison Peers: Average Salary of Associate Professors (9-month equated)

Indiana University−South Bend

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

Austin Peay State University

McNeese State University

Pittsburg State University

Morehead State University

The University of Tennessee−Martin

Southern Utah University

University of Wisconsin−Whitewater

University of Nebraska at Kearney

University of Central Oklahoma

University of Southern Indiana

University of North Alabama

Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne

Northern Michigan University

West Texas A&M University

$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000

Com

paris

on P

eers

Note: Salary comparisons across institutions in different states/regionsshould be made with caution.

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.22

Comparison Peers: Average Salary of Professors (9-month equated)

Indiana University−South Bend

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

The University of Tennessee−Martin

Morehead State University

University of Wisconsin−Whitewater

Austin Peay State University

University of Central Oklahoma

Pittsburg State University

Southern Utah University

McNeese State University

University of North Alabama

University of Nebraska at Kearney

Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne

Northern Michigan University

University of Southern Indiana

West Texas A&M University

$0 $25,000 $50,000 $75,000

Com

paris

on P

eers

Note: Salary comparisons across institutions in different states/regionsshould be made with caution.

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.23

Comparison Peers: Student-to-Faculty Ratio

Indiana University−South Bend

University of Nebraska at Kearney

The University of Tennessee−Martin

Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne

Austin Peay State University

Morehead State University

Pittsburg State University

Southern Utah University

University of Southern Indiana

University of Central Oklahoma

McNeese State University

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

Northern Michigan University

University of North Alabama

West Texas A&M University

University of Wisconsin−Whitewater

0 5 10 15 20

Com

paris

on P

eers

Note: This ratio shows the number of FTE students to FTE instructionalstaff. WTAMU's ratio was 22:1 in 2014−2015. Lower ratios indicate the institutionemploys more faculty per student.

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.24

Comparison Peers: Instructional, Research, and Public Service (Faculty) FTE

University of North Alabama

McNeese State University

Indiana University−South Bend

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

Southern Utah University

Pittsburg State University

The University of Tennessee−Martin

West Texas A&M University

Northern Michigan University

University of Nebraska at Kearney

Morehead State University

Austin Peay State University

University of Southern Indiana

Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne

University of Wisconsin−Whitewater

University of Central Oklahoma

0 200 400 600

Com

paris

on P

eers

Note: This metric shows how many FTE staff have dutiesprimarily related to instruction, research, and public service.

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.25

Comparison Peers: Total Faculty and Staff FTE

Indiana University−South Bend

McNeese State University

University of North Alabama

Southern Utah University

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

West Texas A&M University

University of Nebraska at Kearney

The University of Tennessee−Martin

Pittsburg State University

Austin Peay State University

Northern Michigan University

University of Wisconsin−Whitewater

Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne

University of Southern Indiana

Morehead State University

University of Central Oklahoma

0 500 1000 1500

Com

paris

on P

eers

Note: This metric shows how many total FTE staff are employed by eachinstitution. This count includes all occupational categories (administrative staff,instructional/research/public service staff, etc.).

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.26

Comparison Peers: Total Price for In-State Students Living on Campus

University of North Alabama

University of Wisconsin−Whitewater

University of Central Oklahoma

Pittsburg State University

University of Southern Indiana

Indiana University−South Bend

The University of Tennessee−Martin

Southern Utah University

West Texas A&M University

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

McNeese State University

Morehead State University

University of Nebraska at Kearney

Northern Michigan University

Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne

Austin Peay State University

$0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000

Com

paris

on P

eers

Note: This total price calculation allows inter−institutionalcomparisons of the average annual cost for students who qualify for in−state tuitionand live in on−campus residence halls.

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.27

Comparison Peers: Core Revenues (Total Dollars)

Indiana University−South Bend

McNeese State University

University of North Alabama

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

The University of Tennessee−Martin

University of Nebraska at Kearney

Pittsburg State University

West Texas A&M University

University of Southern Indiana

Austin Peay State University

Morehead State University

Northern Michigan University

Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne

University of Wisconsin−Whitewater

Southern Utah University

University of Central Oklahoma

$0 $50,000,000 $100,000,000 $150,000,000 $200,000,000

Com

paris

on P

eers

Note: Core revenues include tuition and fees; government appropriations; governmentgrants and contracts; private gifts, grants, and contracts; investment income;other operating and nonoperating sources; and other revenues and additions.

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.28

Comparison Peers: Tuition and Fees as Percent of Core Revenues

Morehead State University

University of Nebraska at Kearney

Pittsburg State University

The University of Tennessee−Martin

University of Southern Indiana

Indiana University−South Bend

Austin Peay State University

Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne

West Texas A&M University

Northern Michigan University

Southern Utah University

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

University of Central Oklahoma

University of North Alabama

McNeese State University

University of Wisconsin−Whitewater

0% 20% 40%

Com

paris

on P

eers

Note: This percentage provides an estimation of how reliantan institution is on student tuition and fees as a source of revenue.

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.29

Comparison Peers: State Appropriations as Percent of Core Revenues

University of Wisconsin−Whitewater

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

Southern Utah University

McNeese State University

Austin Peay State University

The University of Tennessee−Martin

West Texas A&M University

Morehead State University

Northern Michigan University

Pittsburg State University

University of Central Oklahoma

University of North Alabama

Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne

Indiana University−South Bend

University of Nebraska at Kearney

University of Southern Indiana

0% 10% 20% 30% 40%

Com

paris

on P

eers

Note: This percentage provides an estimation of how much supportan instituion receives from the state.

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.30

Comparison Peers: Core Expenses (Total Dollars)

Indiana University−South Bend

McNeese State University

University of North Alabama

University of Nebraska at Kearney

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

Pittsburg State University

The University of Tennessee−Martin

University of Southern Indiana

West Texas A&M University

Austin Peay State University

Northern Michigan University

Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne

Southern Utah University

Morehead State University

University of Wisconsin−Whitewater

University of Central Oklahoma

$0 $50,000,000 $100,000,000 $150,000,000

Com

paris

on P

eers

Note: This total includes expenses for instruction, research, public service, academic support,student services, institutional support, operation and maintenance of plant, depreciation,scholarships and fellowships, interest, and other operating and non−operating expenses.

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.31

Comparison Peers: Instruction Expenses as a Percent of Core Expenses

Morehead State University

Northern Michigan University

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

University of Wisconsin−Whitewater

West Texas A&M University

University of Southern Indiana

Austin Peay State University

McNeese State University

University of North Alabama

Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne

Pittsburg State University

Southern Utah University

The University of Tennessee−Martin

University of Central Oklahoma

University of Nebraska at Kearney

Indiana University−South Bend

0% 20% 40% 60%

Com

paris

on P

eers

Note: This percentage provides an estimation of how much an institution spendson instructional expenses compared to other core expenses.

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.32

Comparison Peers: Research Expenses as a Percent of Core Expenses

Southern Utah University

The University of Tennessee−Martin

University of North Alabama

University of Southern Indiana

University of Wisconsin−Whitewater

Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne

Morehead State University

Northern Michigan University

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

Austin Peay State University

Indiana University−South Bend

University of Nebraska at Kearney

Pittsburg State University

University of Central Oklahoma

McNeese State University

West Texas A&M University

0% 1% 2% 3% 4%

Com

paris

on P

eers

Note: This percentage provides an estimation of how much an institution spendson research expenses compared to other core expenses. Not all institutions in thisComparison Peer group reported research expenses in 2014−2015.

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.33

Comparison Peers: Student Service Expenses as a Percent of Core Expenses

West Texas A&M University

Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne

University of Nebraska at Kearney

McNeese State University

University of Southern Indiana

Indiana University−South Bend

University of North Alabama

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

Southern Utah University

Pittsburg State University

Morehead State University

University of Central Oklahoma

Northern Michigan University

Austin Peay State University

The University of Tennessee−Martin

University of Wisconsin−Whitewater

0% 5% 10% 15% 20%

Com

paris

on P

eers

Note: This percentage provides an estimation of how much an institution spendson student service expenses compared to other core expenses.

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.34

Comparison Peers: Core Expenses as a Percent of Core Revenues

University of Nebraska at Kearney

Indiana University−South Bend

Pittsburg State University

McNeese State University

University of Central Oklahoma

University of Southern Indiana

Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne

Southern Utah University

Northern Michigan University

Austin Peay State University

Northwestern State University of Louisiana

The University of Tennessee−Martin

West Texas A&M University

University of Wisconsin−Whitewater

University of North Alabama

Morehead State University

0% 25% 50% 75% 100%

Com

paris

on P

eers

Note: This percentage provides a rough estimate of institutional efficiency. An institutionthat is close to 100% on this metric is investing most of their core revenuesin core areas essential to the successful operation of the university.

Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.35