Jefferson Community and Technical College

Transcription

1 Jefferson Community and Technical College Fall 2009 Spatial Analysis of Students 8/15/2010 Jefferson Community and Technical College Vincent A. DiNoto, Jr.

2 Figure 1 Enrollment by Census Tracts... 4 Figure 2 Enrollment for Jefferson County, KY... 4 Figure 3 Enrollment Jefferson, KY without Student Locations... 5 Figure 4 Enrollment as a Percentage of Total 2000 Census Tract... 5 Figure 5 Enrollment by Campus and County... 6 Figure 6 Higher Education Attainment... 6 Figure 7 Median Family Income (P053001)... 7 Figure 8 JCTC Students Fall Downtown Campus... 7 Figure 9 JCTC Students Fall Southwest Campus... 8 Figure 10 JCTC Students Fall Bullitt Campus... 8 Figure 11 JCTC Students Fall Carrollton Campus... 9 Figure 12 JCTC Students Fall 2009 Shelby County Campus... 9 Figure 13 JCTC Students Fall Tech Campus Figure 14 Remedial Students shown as a percentage against total student population by Census Tracts 10 Figure 15 Median Income 2000 Census, with location of Remedial Students Figure 16 Percentage of Remedial Students as Compared to Total Student Population by County Figure 17 Remedial Student Density Figure 18 Remedial Clusters and 2000 Census Median Income Figure 19 HIgher Education Attainment with Remedial Student Clusters Figure 20 Student Population Density Figure 21 Oldham County, KY Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 2

3 Jefferson Community and Technical College Fall 2009 Spatial Analysis of Students The Jefferson Office of Institutional Research provided data on fall of 2009 enrollment and also students who were enrolled in remedial (developmental classes). The student addresses were provided but any other identifiable information was not received or requested. The initial task was to graphically represent the residential location for each student who was enrolled at Jefferson during the target semester, the results were geocoded against the ESRI Street Map at an 83% level with 1% tying which were also displayed, a total of 12,237 out of a total of 14,549 potential students were geographically referenced. A higher percentage of spatial representation could be possible by lowering the threshold percentage or manually matching student addresses. The largest problems resulted from student records having post office boxes, apartment numbers and non-existing roads, as well as typographic errors making coding impossible for a first analysis. A slightly higher percentage was obtained for students enrolled in developmental classes with 85% of the students geocoded and 1 % tying for a total of 2,858 displayed out of a possible 3,328 students. Upon initial observational review it was determined that most of the students lived near the Louisville area, so those students outside of Kentucky and those outside the following Kentucky and Indiana counties were eliminated from the study for Kentucky: Meade, Hardin, Bullitt, Nelson, Spencer, Jefferson, Shelby, Anderson, Franklin, Henry, Oldham, Owens, Carroll, Gallatin and Trimble and in Indiana: Harrison, Washington, Floyd, Clark, Scott, and Jefferson. Note Crawford and Switzerland counties in Indiana are displayed for the purpose of completeness, but not include in the analysis. It is important to note that the student data was from the fall of 2009 and the United States Census data was obtained in While the census information is somewhat dated it can show very important trends which are in general still valid. Note all maps are placed in an appendix so additional detail can be observed and can also be downloaded in a printer friendly format. Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 3

4 Figure 1 Enrollment by Census Tracts The initial analysis was to determine the number of students who lived within each 2000 Census tract; this was accomplished by doing a spatial join of the data with the geographical boundaries of each census tract 1. Each dot represents the location of an individual student; if more than one student resides at the same address they will be plotted on top of one another and cannot be individually discerned. Students residing in Jefferson County are grouped such that it is impossible to determine any information for the county due to sheer numbers of displayed points. Most of the census tracts in the remaining counties are visible. The small numbers in each census tract represents the number of students living within that geographic boundary. Figure 2 Enrollment for Jefferson County, KY This map represents the location of the students living within Jefferson County, KY. The numbers represent the number students within each census tract. The census tracts are color coded by number of people residing in the census tract 2. Near the Center of the map there appears a fairly open area, which includes the Kentucky Fairgrounds, Louisville International Airport and the Outer Loop Landfill, this area may today actually have less people than 2000 because of airport relocation programs. 1 A Census track is completely contained within a county and sub-divided into blocks and block groups. Census tracts have different populations and sizes. 2 This information is census attribute P001001, which represents people of any age. Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 4

5 Figure 3 Enrollment Jefferson, KY without Student Locations This map removes the student locations and just shows the census population represented by color and the numbers contained within each tract representing the student population. The number of students attending JCTC per Census tract is not uniform. Figure 4 Enrollment as a Percentage of Total 2000 Census Tract The map shows percentage of people enrolled in the college verses the total population of the census tract. The P data set represents total population which includes those who are not college age. Only those census tracts with at least 10 students are represented. The deepest red color shows where the penetration of students attending JCTC is the highest, representing over 2% of the total population enrolled in the college. Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 5

6 Figure 5 Enrollment by Campus and County This map shows the total number of students attending Jefferson by county. The individual students are color coded to designate what campus the students consider as their home campus. The largest number of students attending JCTC resides in Jefferson County, KY as would be expected 3. Bullitt, Oldham and Shelby counties of Kentucky represent the next largest concentration of students 4. Significant numbers of students reside in Clark and Floyd counties of Indiana and Trimble, Carroll, Henry, Spencer and Nelson counties of Kentucky 5. Each campus of Jefferson will be analyzed in this report as to the location of their student populations. Figure 6 Higher Education Attainment This map shows information contained within the 2000 Census in attribute P037xxx 6. For this study higher education attainment is defined as any 3 Jefferson is the largest county in the state of Kentucky and Jefferson has its three largest campuses within the county. 4 Between 201 and 1000 students 5 Between 76 and 200 students 6 P0037xxx is educational levels of people at least 25 years of age. Numerous attributes for males and females have been summed and divided by the total population, 25 and older for each tract. Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 6

7 person who has ever enrolled in a college to those that have obtained terminal degrees. The largest concentration of people meeting this criterion is in eastern Jefferson County, western Oldham County and northern Hardin County. Figure 7 Median Family Income (P053001) This map represents the median income of families based on the 2000 US Census, attribute P It is a representative of a trend and not specific income levels. The lowest incomes are found in the north central and north west parts of Jefferson County, KY and some small areas of southern Clark and Floyd counties of Indiana. The highest incomes are in eastern Jefferson and western Oldham counties of Kentucky. Figure 8 JCTC Students Fall Downtown Campus This map represents the locations of student which name the Downtown Campus of JCTC as their home campus. The density of students in Jefferson county makes it impossible to determine individual student locations. Most of the students 7 Note this is based on 1999 dollars and thus does not reflect the inflation which has occurred during the past 10 years. Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 7

8 attending this campus live in Jefferson County, KY or southern Indiana, but students do live in many other counties. Figure 9 JCTC Students Fall Southwest Campus The Southwest campus is the second largest of Jefferson s six campuses and is located in the southwest corner of Jefferson County, KY. Most of the students that attend Southwest live in Jefferson County or in northern Bullitt County and are a bit more regionalized. Figure 10 JCTC Students Fall Bullitt Campus The Bullitt County campus is the newest of JCTC. It currently is located in temporary facilities. Most of the students attending this campus live in Bullitt County. Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 8

9 Figure 11 JCTC Students Fall Carrollton Campus The Carrollton Campus has the second largest mean linear distance that students live away from campus. As can be seen on the map, many of the students live in Oldham County that attends this campus (175 students). Figure 12 JCTC Students Fall 2009 Shelby County Campus The Shelby County Campus has students coming from many different counties; the majority of the students live in Shelby and Oldham Counties. Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 9

10 Figure 13 JCTC Students Fall Tech Campus uniqueness of the offerings. Tech Campus has the farthest reach of all of the campuses of Jefferson. The majority of the students do live within Jefferson County, but students come from many of the surrounding counties including many from southern Indiana. This most likely is due to the Figure 14 Remedial Students shown as a percentage against total student population by Census Tracts The figure below shows the location of students who took remedial classes during the fall of While this does not represent all the students who may need to take remediation it is a snapshot of students who were enrolled. The areas which had the largest percentage of the students enrolling in remedial classes appears to be the northwestern part of Jefferson County, this is hard to determine because the student home location obscuring the color coded data. A threshold of at least 10 students was included so that erroneous data was excluded. Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 10

11 Figure 15 Median Income 2000 Census, with location of Remedial Students A large number of remedial students live in census tracts that are of the lowest income levels within Jefferson County and those in higher income census tracts appear to require less remediation, but few total students attend JCTC from the higher income levels census tracts as compared with the numbers attending from the lower income levels census tracts. Figure 16 Percentage of Remedial Students as Compared to Total Student Population by County The number of students enrolled by and the number students enrolled in remedial classes was determined for each county. Only counties with more than 10 remedial students were plotted in this analysis. Remedial student home location is displayed by campus they attend. The percentage was determined by dividing the total number of students in remedial classes by the total number of students attending the college by county. From this determination we can see that two Kentucky counties and two in Indiana have the highest percentage of students enrolled in remedial classes (Clark, Floyd in Indiana and Jefferson and Carroll in Kentucky). Nelson and Oldham counties of Kentucky had the lowest percentage of students in Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 11

12 remedial classes, about half the percentage as compared to those counties with the greatest percentage of remedial students. This is a review of only one semester and the number of students in each county has a wide variation, which could potential effect the results in future semesters. Figure 17 Remedial Student Density A cluster analysis was done to see if there are natural clusters of students needing remediation. One primary cluster can be seen in Jefferson County. Lesser clusters can be seen in Jefferson, Bullitt, Shelby, Carroll and Oldham Counties. The cluster density in northwestern Jefferson County has more than 70 students needing remediation per square mile. Figure 18 Remedial Clusters and 2000 Census Median Income A query was performed on the P Census attribute to display only the Census tracts in which the median income is less than $32,000 based on 1999 dollars. Displayed on the map is both the median income query as well as the remedial cluster pattern. The two major clusters in Jefferson County have very low incomes, as you can see with the overlaid census tracts. While not every location with low incomes have clusters of students needing remediation or Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 12

13 every remediation cluster have low income. It is significant that the two largest clusters (by population density and area) are in the lowest income census tracts. Figure 19 HIgher Education Attainment with Remedial Student Clusters Within the region there are lots of areas that have less than 35% of the population over the age of 25 that has ever attended college. The area of greatest population density of students enrolled in remedial courses in the region is also an area of low college attainment. But the degree of correlation of low college attainment and remediation is not directly correlated from the data available. 8 Figure 20 Student Population Density This map is a study of total student population density during the fall of The data is viewed in a cluster analysis. There are several clusters of students, mainly in Jefferson, Shelby, Bullitt, Oldham and Carroll counties. Jefferson County has two major clusters 8 College attainment is defined as those males and females that have attended college to those which have received terminal degrees Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 13

14 one in the central part of the county and the other in the western part of the county. There is a cluster of students in northern Bullitt county, Shelbyville in Shelby county appears to be a cluster of students, as well as the Carrollton are in Carroll county. Another cluster of students is in central Oldham County. Contained on the map is the location of the six campuses of JCTC. There appears to be two or three major areas of clustering of students which are a fair distance from one campus, these being central Jefferson County, northeastern Bullitt County and Oldham County. Spider diagrams were constructed for each of the six Jefferson campuses. Each line represents the linear distance that each student is away from the campus which they indicated as their home campus. The lines complete blend together as you get close to each campus location. The campus locations are Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 14

15 plotted on each map, at this scale the Downtown and Tech Campuses are nearly on top of each other. While it is clear that these linear distances are not road distance it is a good indication of the distance students are away from each of the college campuses. Campus Carrollton Southwest Downtown Shelbyville Tech Bullitt Mean Distance (Mi) Standard Deviation of Mean (Mi) The mean distance is determined by taking the length of each line from student to campus. The standard deviation of the mean distance is an indication of the variation in the travel distances. The greater the variation in travel distances the more diverse the population attending a campus. The college has four campuses in which the mean linear distance is less than 11 miles and the standard deviations are the smallest of the six campuses. The Tech and the Carrollton campuses have the largest mean linear distances and the greatest standard deviation. Figure 21 Oldham County, KY The analysis of the cluster data, spider diagrams and location students, show a significant population of students living in Oldham County, KY. Students living in Oldham County attend five of the six JCTC campuses (none attend Bullitt County Campus). The Oldham County map displays the location of the student, major geographical features, and classifies the students by their home campus. While this study is seen as a single snapshot in time and not meant to be a conclusive study. Conclusions drawn from this information is meant to only lead to addition study of multiple semesters to determine the accuracy of those statements. It is also recognized that students take classes on Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 15

16 multiple campuses and also online, while declaring a specific campus as their home campus. It also should be noted ethnic, racial, and gender was not considered in this study but may influence the conclusion drawn. Urban and Rural influences were also not studies in this report. Observed Conclusions: Students attending JCTC come from a diverse background and the service area is extremely diverse. The student population of Jefferson does have natural clustering of locations, which are determined by many factors including social, geographical and economic factors. That students enrolled in remedial classes also have natural clusters and median income appears to be a factor. That Oldham County has a significant number of students attending JCTC. The college does not have a uniform population from each census tract, there are many factors that influence such a determination with some of those being the average age of the population of the census tract, geographical distances from a campus and income levels. The census tracts show a considerable diversity in education attainment and median income levels according to the 2000 Census. The percentage of the students enrolled in remedial classes in the fall of 2009 is geographically diverse, while there are some natural clusters. Income levels appear to correlate with students enrolled in remediation. College attainment levels appear to be less of a factor on the geographical distribution of students enrolled in remediation. Carrollton and Tech Campus have students traveling larger distance to obtain their education than the other campuses of the college. Oldham County has a large number of students attending different college campuses this wide diversity of student campus is most significant in Oldham County, because students call five of the six campuses home and the size of the student population coming from Oldham; the students in Oldham County compose a natural cluster. Central Jefferson County has a significant cluster of students, while there distance from the Downtown and Tech Campuses is not large, there is a fairly high student population density. Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 16

17 Appendix Maps Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 17

18 Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 18

19 Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 19

20 Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 20

21 Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 21

22 Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 22

23 Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 23

24 Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 24

25 Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 25

26 Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 26

27 Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 27

28 Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 28

29 Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 29

30 Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 30

31 Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 31

32 Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 32

33 Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 33

34 Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 34

35 Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 35

36 Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 36

37 Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 37

38 Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 38

39 Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 39

40 Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 40

41 Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 41

42 Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 42

43 Spatial Analysis of Jefferson Community and Technical College Students for Fall 2009 Page 43