Enrollment Management: Attracting and Retaining High Quality Students

1. Enrollment Management: Attracting and Retaining High Quality Students Meridith Wentz Cindy Gilberts

2. Statement of the issues • Shift from management of enrollment FTE targets to management of tuition revenue budget. Changes management at the campus level. • Relatively flat overall retention rates over past 5 years despite investment of significant resources. • Significant and growing gap in retention and graduation rates between white and minority students. • Significant financial and resource needs in an environment of limited resources.

3. Overview • Enrollment Management: What is our targeted enrollment for 2010 to 2015? How do we get there? • Retention: How do we retain students? • Diversity: How do we enroll and retain a diverse student body? • Resource Needs: What are the financial and resource implications for students and the university?

4. What is our targeted enrollment for 2010 to 2015? How do we get there?

5. Enrollment Management: Why it is important to ask the questions now • Enrollment management data influence: • Instructor needs • Need for additional faculty positions • Auxiliary operations • Access-to-learning allocations • Number of laptop computers

6. Enrollment Management:Why it is important to ask the questions now Change in how enrollment is managed at System level: • Institutions allowed to keep excess tuition revenue and can request additional budget authority • If a campus does not meet target, must return budget authority to System

7. Enrollment Management:Why it is important to ask the questions now • Changing national trends • New enrollment counting definition • Major UW-Stout initiatives

8. Enrollment Management:Current targets • 7,500 FTE by fall 2010 • 1,525 new freshmen target • If targets are met, estimate 7,519 total FTE in fall 2010

9. Enrollment Management:Revenue collected

10. Enrollment Management:Historical Enrollment Data

12. Enrollment Management:Next Steps Small subcommittee to address these questions: • Revenue projections should influence enrollment target setting. How can this be accommodated? • What is a reasonable process by which to manage enrollment? • How do we manage when enrollment fluctuates? • How do we maintain a healthy enrollment given current environment? • How do we manage when there is internal competition? • What is a strategic plan for recruitment and resource needs?

13. Enrollment Management:Additional resources Additional resources available on the retreat website: • Cancellation survey results • Total contacts • Campus visit questionnaire

14. Table discussion What input and thoughts do you have for the committee? What additional questions should they be considering?

15. How do we retain students?

16. Retention:Current targets • 80% retention by 2010 • Using the formal definition of retention, retention rates range from 71% to 73% • Using the informal definition of retention, retention consistently exceeds 90%

17. Retention:Enrollment projections

18. Retention:Resources Invested • Establishment of the first year experience program and learning communities • Establishment of the math teaching and learning center and writing center • Implementation of block scheduling • Implementation of a centralized advisement model • Implementation of Title III funded retention initiatives

19. Retention: Evaluation Data *includes non-freshmen

20. Retention:Evaluation Data Early Alert- Fall to Spring retention • Participants: 76% • Matched Control: 91%

21. Retention:Evaluation Data

22. Retention:Evaluation Data Positive Student evaluations of the First-Year advising program: • Over 95% satisfied or very satisfied with their First-Year advising experience. • Over 95% of freshmen students in 2007 reported their advisor was prompt about responding to e-mail messages and the advisor was sufficiently available to meet their needs. Approximately 80% reported fall orientation and Advisement day information as useful and 67% reported the Transition meeting was useful. • Freshmen in 2006 indicate that the quality of academic advising at Stout has remained about the same as last year.

23. Retention:Evaluation Data Mid-grant Title III evaluation results: • 1,764 undergraduate students and 281 faculty/staff have been touched by the grant. • Students report that their level of knowledge of career possibilities with a UW-Stout education has increased. • Over 170 student undergraduate students have created electronic portfolios. • Preliminary impact estimates on student retention for targeted groups have been encouraging.

24. Retention:Evaluation Data Math Lab • Served 1,231 students • 61% drop in failure/withdrawal in Math 010 and 23% drop in Math 110 Writing Lab • 104 tutorials • High satisfaction ratings

25. Retention: Overall Retention Rates

26. Retention:Transfers • Approximately 20% of students who start at UW-Stout (250 students) subsequently transfer to another institution. • Nationally, there is a trend for students to transfer multiple times before graduating.

27. Table Discussion • What do you consider to be the 1 or 2 most important retention initiatives for us to continue or start? • What retention initiatives should we stop doing?

28. How do we enroll and retain a diverse student body?

29. Diversity:Resources Invested • Many Plan 2008 initiatives underway: • Recruitment at Bradley Tech • Campus Preview Days for multicultural students • Academic Success Plans • Career Seminar • Minority Scholarships • Career Exploration Program

31. Diversity: Retention Gap • Retention gap for 2000 cohort is 33.1%

32. Diversity:Next Steps • Further planning for Plan 2008 will occur in 2006-07 • Will participate in Equity Scorecard Project

33. Table Discussion What input would you like to provide to the Plan 2008 planning group?

34. What are the financial and resource implications for students and the university?

35. Resource Implications:Tuition and Fees Average Tuition and Fees: • 4 year publics: $5,836 • WI 4-year publics: $6,044 • UW-Stout: $6,963 Includes tuition, segregated fees and laptop fee

36. Resource Implications:Declining State Support

37. Resource Implications:Data • Customized Instruction – programs that have been approved to charge “differential tuition” or market rates.  Expensive delivery methods or have high market demand. To reach target markets like non-traditional students.  • Distance Ed – Not face to face delivery.  Physical separation between instructor and student and also have live or “real time” two-way interaction between instructor and student. • Differential Tuition – customized instruction and access to learning are differential tuition.  A tuition rate higher than the Regent approved rate.  Access to Learning is 5% of the resident tuition charged to undergrads and grads. 

38. Table Discussion • Who should pay how much for what where? • Differentials • Customized • Distance Education • How do we advance quality in an environment of limited resources, when greater productivity is being demanded of us?

39. Thank You! Questions?