230 likes | 347 Views
Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education. System Funding and FTE Enrollment History. 145,000. $857.0. 140,250 est. 140,000. $847.0. 134,874. 135,000. $837.0. 128,530. $829.1. $827.0. 130,000. $816.2. $817.0. 125,000. 121,111. $807.0. 119,115. 120,000. $797.0. $791.5.
E N D
Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education
System Funding and FTE Enrollment History 145,000 $857.0 140,250 est. 140,000 $847.0 134,874 135,000 $837.0 128,530 $829.1 $827.0 130,000 $816.2 $817.0 125,000 121,111 $807.0 119,115 120,000 $797.0 $791.5 115,000 $787.0 110,000 $767.8 $777.0 $772.2 105,000 $767.0 FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04 FTE Enrollment Appropriations Enrollment has increased; state appropriations have decreased.
Change in Resident Undergraduate Tuition (public four-year) and State Higher Education Appropriations, 1990-91 to 2003-04 15% 12% 9% 6% 3% 0% -3% -6% 90-91 92-93 94-95 96-97 98-99 00-01 02-03 91-92 93-94 03-04 95-96 97-98 99-00 01-02
Financial Outlook 2004 Tuition on the RiseOver the past decade, average tuition and fees, adjusted for inflation, increased $1,506 (or 47 percent) at public four-year colleges and $5,866 (or 42 percent) at private four-year colleges.
Oklahoma 48 20.4 Dist of Columbia 1 Maryland 2 Colorado 3 Virginia 4 Massachusetts 5 Connecticut 6 New Jersey 7 Vermont 8 Minnesota 9 New Hampshire 10 Rhode Island 11 Delaware 12 Kansas 13 New York 14 Washington 15 California 16 Illinois 17 Nebraska 18 Oregon 19 Utah 20 Hawaii 21 Missouri 22 Arizona 23 Texas 24 Pennsylvania 25 Florida 26 Alaska 27 New Mexico 28 North Dakota 29 Georgia 30 Wisconsin 31 Ohio 32 Maine 33 Indiana 34 Montana 35 South Dakota 36 South Carolina 37 Iowa 38 Alabama 39 Michigan 40 North Carolina 41 Nevada 42 Louisiana 43 Kentucky 44 Tennessee 45 Idaho 46 Mississippi 47 Oklahoma 48 Wyoming 49 Arkansas 50 West Virginia 51 44.4 37.6 35.7 34.6 34.3 32.6 31.4 30.8 30.5 30.1 30.1 29.5 29.1 28.8 28.3 27.9 27.3 27.1 27.1 28.8 26.8 26.4 26.3 26.2 26.1 25.7 25.6 25.4 25.3 25 24.7 24.5 23.8 23.7 23.6 23.6 23.3 23.1 22.7 22.5 22.4 22.1 22.1 21.6 21.5 20.9 20.9 20.4 19.6 18.5 15.9 State Population with Bachelor’s Degree or Higher Age 25 Years and Older, 2002
Enrollment Growth at For-Profit CollegesAlthough the biggest for-profit colleges enroll less than 3 percent of all postsecondary students, their enrollment is growing much faster than that of higher education as a whole.
OK Per Capita Income State Per Capita Personal Income v. Share of Adult Population with Bachelor’s Degree or Higher Population with Bachelor’s Degree or higher
State Per Capita Personal Income v. Share of Adult Population with Bachelor’s Degree or Higher DC CT $30,000 NJ MA $28,000 MD $26,000 NH VA NY MN CO AK IL $24,000 CA DE Per Capita Income WA RI MI HI NV VT WI $22,000 PA OH OR FL IN GA KS MO SC ME WY NE TX IA $20,000 AZ NC SD TN ND UT AL OK KY $18,000 NM ID LA MT AR WV MS $16,000 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45% Population with Bachelor’s Degree or higher
Oklahoma 25 years of age and over U.S. 25 years of age and over Percent of Population with Bachelor’s Degree by Age and Individual Income Quartile for the State of Oklahoma and U.S. 69.2% 60.7% 57.7% 52.0% Percent of Population with a Bachelor’s Degree 37.5% 34.8% 15.1% 14.3% 0 - $34,999 $35,000 – $64,999 $65,000 - $99,999 $100,000 and above Income Quartile
Number of Public Higher Education Institutions Compared to Total Population(Actual vs. Predicted)
Projected Change in Employment by Education and Training, 1998-2008 Education and PercentTraining Category Increase Doctoral Degree 23 Master’s Degree 19 Bachelor’s Degree 24 Associate Degree 31 Vocational Training 14 Work Experience 12 On-Job Training 7 All Occupations 14 Source: Monthly Labor Review, U.S. Bureau of Labor
Legislators Less Sure of Quality and Value Employers (Business Leaders) Less Satisfied With Graduates Bigger Classes Empowered, Informed, Self-Directed Life Long Learners Stable or Less State Funding Lecture = Most Economical Approach More Students Alternative Approaches, Remedies Reduced Student Learning Experience Course Redesign Shared Resources
Skills and Attributes of a Nation of Learners • Leadership • Teamwork • Problem Solving • Time Management • Self-management • Adaptability • Analytical Thinking • Global Consciousness • Basic Communications The Business-Higher Education Forum, Spanning the Chasm: Corporate and Academic Cooperation To Improve Workforce Preparation, 1997.
Course Redesign ProjectCarol Twig, RPI Active Student Learning Learning Assistance Technologies http://www.center.rpi.edu/pewgrant/rd2less.html http://www.center.rpi.edu/pewgrant/rd2award.html
Today’s World • Continuing conditions of tight budget. • College degrees important to self, state and beyond. • Think differently about teaching and learning.
Teaching for Tomorrow • Teach collaboratively • Advisory boards for every department • Content important, but new focus on learning • Students expect technology • Strategic investment for teaching
Technology Intensity of Business Base TECHNOLOGY INTENSITY OFBUSINESS BASE RANK %Established in high-tech businesses 32 %Employed in high-tech 35 % Percent payroll in high-tech 36 % Established births in high-tech35 2003 U.S. Department of Commerce report “The Dynamics of Technology-Based Economic Development.”
Funding In-Flows FUNDING IN-FLOWS RANK R&D expenditures/$1000 of GSP 43 Industry R&D/$1000 of GSP 40 Federal R&D/$1000 of GSP 28 University R&D/$1000 of GSP 31 SBIR awards/$1000 of GSP 41 STTR awards/$1000 of GSP 19 2003 U.S. Department of Commerce report “The Dynamics of Technology-Based Economic Development.”
800 700 US 600 KS 500 TX $ Per Capita 400 300 MO 200 OK 100 AR 0 2000 1997 1999 1998 Year Industrial R&D Per Capita Source: OCAST
80 70 60 50 US $ Per Capita 40 TX 30 KS MO 20 OK 10 AR 0 1994 1995 1999 2000 2001 1996 1997 1998 Year Federally Funded University R&D Source: OCAST
State R&D Profile • Oklahoma’s Fed R&D funding capture rate $55 per capita • National Fed R&D funding capture rate $269 per capita Leave $738,000,000 in federally-sponsored R&D funding on the table each year
INSTRUCTIONAL SPENDING PER FTE, BY STATE Percent Change and Current Position Relative to U.S. Average 50% low and MD high and increasing increasing 40% KY IL NJ DE 30% TX NY (66%) WV GA RI, MA KS MO 20% NH MI AL SD MN TN CO PA 10% FL ME U.S. NE OH VA MT NM ID WI VT NC Percent Change, FY91 - FY02 0% IA AZ NV IN MS LA CA OR UT AR WY -10% ND OK AK -20% SC WA -30% HI -40% low and high and decreasing decreasing -50% -50% -40% -30% -20% -10% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% Percent Over/Under the U.S. Average, FY02 Source: State Higher Education Finance (SHEF) Survey 1990-91 through 2001-02 - SHEEO
Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education