1 / 18

Mānoa Peer and Benchmark Groups

Mānoa Peer and Benchmark Groups. Office of the Vice Chancellor for Academic Affairs Mānoa Institutional Research Office (Faculty Congress) March 14, 2012. This document is available online at: http :// manoa.hawaii.edu/ovcaa/mir/pdf/peer.pdf. Function of Peers and Benchmarks.

nevina
Download Presentation

Mānoa Peer and Benchmark Groups

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Mānoa Peer and Benchmark Groups Office of the Vice Chancellor for Academic AffairsMānoa Institutional Research Office (Faculty Congress) March 14, 2012 This document is available online at: http://manoa.hawaii.edu/ovcaa/mir/pdf/peer.pdf

  2. Function of Peers and Benchmarks • Current Peer List • Developed in 1994 by Peter Ewell of The National Center for Higher Education Management Systems (NCHEMS) • Revised in 1998 • Current Benchmark List • Pre-dates institutional records (created sometime before 1994) • Uses • Faculty Salaries • Teaching Loads • Tuition Schedules • Budget Alignment • Accreditation • External Funding (i.e. Grant Applications) • IPEDS Data Feedback Report • Used by other institutions for comparison • Surveys supply peer data to prospective students and parents to compare cost, graduation rates, and student indebtedness

  3. Current Peer and Benchmark Groups

  4. Research Question What are the 10 (or n) most similar institutions to UH Mānoa?

  5. Categorical Selection of Institutions • Data Collection from IPEDS • > 7,000 Institutions in IPEDS • Over 175 variables to choose from • 2010 Data Used

  6. 64 Public Institutions to Select From

  7. Methodology • Statistical Clustering

  8. Clustering According to Student Characteristics • 8 IPEDS variables based on student characteristics were selected:

  9. Y Axis Factors: Transfer-In Undergraduate Enrollment, Doctoral degrees awarded MANOA X Axis Factors: SAT Scores, Graduation Rate, Retention Rate, Revenues from Tuition and Fees

  10. Cluster Membership

  11. Clustering According to Research Characteristics • Repeat process for Mānoa’s Cluster (Green Group), Benchmarks (Orange Group), and High Benchmarks (Blue Group). • 4 IPEDS variables related to research were selected:

  12. North Carolina UC San Diego Washington UCLA UC Berkeley MANOA Y Axis Factors: Research Revenues Pittsburgh UC Davis Wisconsin X Axis Factors: Research Expenses

  13. Cluster Membership

  14. Next Step • Clustering on research alone shows that Mānoa stands out • Combine Research + Student Characteristics through a descriptive analysis

  15. Proposed Peer Group

  16. Proposed Benchmark Group High Student Characteristics Very High Student Characteristics

More Related