Knocking at the College Door

1. Knocking at the College Door Projections of High School Graduates Lunch with The Lawlor Group February 9, 2013 ~ Chicago, IL

2. Background • Eighth edition of Knocking at the College Door going back to 1979 • Projections of high school graduates by state and race/ethnicity, including nonpublic graduates • Actual data through 2008-09; projections spanning 2009-10 through 2027-28 • Audience • Federal, state, and local policymakers • State educational agencies and school districts • Institutions: colleges and universities, public and private schools • Media • Researchers • Others

3. Caveat Emptor • Assumed existing patterns continue indefinitely • Policy changes not explicitly modeled • Changes in accountability policies (i.e., high-stakes tests) • Variations in funding levels that affect progression • Underlying data • Reflect the 2008 recession but not all years of continued economic slump • May reflect spurious impacts resulting from the federal race/ethnicity data collection and reporting changes • Focus is on the traditional pipeline exclusively

4. Projections of Postsecondary Enrollmentof Adults 25 and Older • Adult enrollment is projected to grow by 22 percent between Fall 2010 and Fall 2021. Source: National Center for Education Statistics, Projections of Education Statistics to 2021, Table 21.

5. Admissions Hysteria!!!!!! “There are few experiences short of death, disease, injury or divorce that have as much potential for trauma for American families as the college admissions process. The first great rite of passage for young humans once was killing a wild animal. That was replaced by getting married, or getting a job. These days it is getting into college.” (Jay Mathews, washingtonpost.com, 5.23.2010) “The [admissions] process is far too important to the nation to be left solely in the hands of a few college administrators who are reluctant to explain their selections standards or model.” (Andy Pettis, editorial in The Washington Post, 5.16.2010)

6. The Principal Themes • Changes in overall production • Continuing rapid diversification along racial/ethnic lines Both with substantial geographic variation

7. U.S. Public and Nonpublic High School Graduates, 1996-97 to 2027-28 Peaked in 2010-11 at 3.4 million following 17 straight years of growth averaging 2.3% annually

8. U.S. Public and Nonpublic High School Graduates by Region, 2003-04 to 2027-28 South West Midwest Northeast

9. Contributions to the Nation’s Change in Total High School Graduates (Relative to 2008-09), by Region

10. Percent Change Between 2008-09 and 2019-20 in Total High School Graduates, by State AK WA NH ME VT MT ND MN OR MA WI ID SD NY RI MI WY CT PA IA NJ NV NE OH MD IL IN UT DE WV CO VA CA KS DC MO KY NC TN -15% or less 5 to 15 -5 to -15 15% or more 0 to 5 -5 to 0 OK SC AZ AR NM GA AL MS Growth Decline TX LA FL HI

11. U.S. Nonpublic High School Graduates, 1996-97 to 2008-09 (Estimated); 2009-10 to 2027-28 (Projected)

12. U.S. Public High School Graduates by Race/ Ethnicity, 2008-09 (Actual); 2009-10 to 2019-20 American Indian/Alaska Native Asian/Pacific Islander Black non-Hispanic Hispanic White non-Hispanic

13. Cumulative Percent Projected Change in U.S. Public High School Graduates Relative to 2008-09, by Race/Ethnicity

14. Cumulative Change in Percentage Points in non-White non-Hispanic Share of Public High School Graduates, by Region

15. 20 to 30 10 or less 40 to 50 10 to 20 50 or more 30 to 40 Proportion of Minority Public High School Graduates, 2019-20 (Projected) ≤ 10% 50% + AK WA NH ME VT MT ND MN OR MA WI ID SD NY RI MI WY CT PA IA NJ NV NE OH MD IL IN UT DE WV CO VA CA KS DC MO KY NC TN OK SC AZ AR NM GA AL MS TX LA FL HI

16. Total Production vs. Diversification of Projected Public High School Graduates by 2020 Slowing production, Rapid diversification Increasing production, Rapid diversification Slowing production, Incremental diversification Increasing production, Incremental diversification

17. Some Recent Phenomena Impacting the Projections • Fertility rates declining across the board • Slowing immigration among Latinos (Pew, Census Bureau) • Impacts of the recession shifting students around Notes: Fertility rates measure the number of live births per 1,000 women aged 15 to 44. Birth and fertility rates for 2001–2009 shown in this report were revised using (intercensal) population estimates based on the 2000 and 2010 census. The revised rates may differ from the rates published previously, which were based on 2000 (postcensal) population estimates. Source: National Vital Statistics Report, Volume 61, Number 1, August 2012, Tables 1 and 5.

18. Implications

19. Converging Pressures in Fulfilling Society’s Needs • Serving a more diverse population • Pressure to produce well-educated talent to meet workforce needs • Ongoing fiscal challenges

20. Education Requirements for Workforce Participation 100 Graduate/Professional 7 10 10 11 9 19 Bachelor’s 80 21 23 12 8 10 Associate’s Percent of Jobs by Level of Education Required 12 60 19 40 17 Some College 17 40 High School 34 30 28 20 32 Less than High School 11 10 10 0 1973 1992 2007 2018 Note: In 1973, some college and associate degrees were in the same category. Source: Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce.

21. Differences in College Attainment (Associate & Higher) Between Younger and Older Adults – U. S. & OECD Countries, 2009 Source:Organisationfor Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD), Education at a Glance 2011 (via NCHEMS)

22. Differences in College Attainment (Associate & Higher) Between Younger and Older Adults – U.S. and States, 2009 Source: NCHEMS

23. Differences in College Attainment (Associate & Higher) Between Younger and Older Adults by Race/Ethnicity – U. S., 2008-2010 American Indian/ Alaska Native Asian/Pacific Islander Black non-Hispanic Hispanic White non-Hispanic Note: All differences between age groups of the same racial/ethnic group and between racial/ethnic groups are statistically beyond the 90% margins of error except for American Indians/Alaska Natives. 90% margins of error range from+/- 1% for American Indians/Alaska Natives aged 25-34 to +/- 0.1% for White non-Hispanics aged 45-54. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2008-10 American Community Survey (ACS) Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMS). Via NCHEMS.

24. Average Math Scores of 12th Graders on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) by Race/Ethnicity 21 20 27 26 33 40 Black Hispanic White Source: NCES, Status and Trends in the Education of Racial and Ethnic Minorities, 2007; NAEP.

25. Percent of 18-24 Year-Olds Enrolled in Postsecondary Institutions by Race/Ethnicity 12.1 18.4 8.0 11.4 Source: NCES, Status and Trends in the Education of Racial and Ethnic Minorities, 2010. Black Hispanic White

26. Percent of Working-Age Adults (18 to 64) Employed in Each Occupational Category by Race/Ethnicity – U.S. (2005-06) Source: NCHEMS (from U.S. Census Bureau, 2005 and 2006 American Community Survey PUMS)

27. Public Institutions’ Growing Dependence on Net Tuition Revenue Source: SHEEO SHEF

28. Pressure to Devote Additional Resources to Recruitment

29. Composite NAEP Reading and Math Scores for 12th Graders in 2009, by Race/Ethnicity Note: Composite scores are the average of the Math and Reading scores for 12th graders tested in 2009; Math scores (0 to 300) were converted to fit the Reading scale of 0 to 500. Source: National Center for Education Statistics, NAEP Data Explorer

30. Average Annual Wage/Salary Income Distribution by Race/Ethnicity, 2006-2010 Percentiles Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey (via NCHEMS)

31. Voices From the Enrollment Management Trenches “None of us would ever want to see the day when we had to choose whether to spend our resources on excellence or access. Put more starkly: We never want our values to depend on the markets.” - RaynardKington, President of Grinnell College “A lot of institutions are asking, ‘Can we afford our values?’ And the answer is: We can’t.”- a vice president at a private non-profit college “How do we back away from students who are least likely to succeed, and replace them with students who are most likely to succeed?”- an enrollment management consultant

32. Percent of Dependent Students Receiving Grants and Average Amount Received by Source of Grant and Income Quartile, 2007-08 Source: NPSAS

33. First-Time Undergraduate Enrollment of Racial/Ethnic Groups by Sector, 2010-11 Note: Figures represent degree/certificate-seeking students at degree-granting Title IV-eligible institutions. Source: NCES IPEDS.

34. Student Mobility is an Increasingly Significant Phenomenon Source: Hossler, D. et al (2012). Transfer and Mobility: A National View of Pre-Degree Student Movement in Postsecondary Institutions. National Student Clearinghouse Signature Report #2.

35. Policy Responses • State goals that include targets for underrepresented populations • Consumer information • Disclosures • Reporting requirements • Market-oriented, incentives-driven finance policies • Demand-side completion incentives in financial aid • Performance funding • Longitudinal data systems including workforce information • Standards alignment and equal expectations for all • Regulation to preserve quality and promote transferability of credits • Disruptive innovation (i.e., MOOCs, prior learning assessment)

36. Distractions • Rankings • Mission creep • Faculty complaints about student quality • Alumni • Redefining diversity • Confusing two kinds of “fit”

37. Discussion • How is the enrollment management business changing? Will traditional measures of success in enrollment management operations be adequate for meeting society’s need for a well-educated population? • How can we ensure that financial barriers do not prevent capable students from accessing and succeeding in college? In particular, how do we deal with the increasing pressure to maximize net tuition? • How can we balance institutional interests with societal interests when they aren’t in perfect alignment, and what does that mean for leadership in the higher education industry?

38. Institutional Responses • Contribute to a more productive dialogue about college more aligned to society’s needs and less about institutional distinctiveness. • Enrollment management policies and practices. • Attract URM students and help ensure their success. • Create more opportunities for community college students. • Consider a framework for aid packaging that is transparent with clear incentives. • Integrate enrollment management efforts with student success activities and measure results. • Understand and highlight the Common Core and its relationship to college prep expectations. • Embrace the evidence – look for ways to leverage your data for student success.