Concurrent Enrollment

Transcription

1 Concurrent Enrollment November 2016 Academic and Student Affairs Board of Trustees Academic and Student Affairs Committee

2 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Concurrent enrollment programs provide an important pathway from high school to postsecondary education. Increases access to postsecondary education Increases affordability of postsecondary education Serves an increasingly diverse student population Improves postsecondary success and completion 2

3 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (CONT D) Program quality is central to student success and program sustainability. Curricular rigor and high standards for student achievement are critical to appropriately prepare high school students for postsecondary education To ensure financial sustainability and the continued growth and strengthening of high-quality concurrent programs, pricing structures must reflect the cost of ongoing program development and delivery 3

4 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (CONT D) Faculty academic preparation and depth of content knowledge is central to program quality. Concurrent enrollment instructors provide education for which Minnesota State awards academic credit Like college and university faculty, their value to students lies in their advanced subject expertise Focused graduate education in the subject area is a necessity Mentorships with college and university faculty allow for exchange of creative ideas and best teaching practices 4

5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY (CONT D) Minnesota State is working collaboratively with faculty and administrative leadership across K-12 and higher education, and with local Concurrent Enrollment Advisory Committees to address important concurrent enrollment issues. Ensuring that all concurrent enrollment instructors meet the Higher Learning Commission s standards for minimum faculty qualifications Sustaining high quality programs through appropriate pricing structures 5

6 Draft comprehensive plan to sustain highquality concurrent enrollment 1. Create processes that support concurrent enrollment instructors to meet the credentialing standards by 2022, the anticipated HLC extension timeline. 2. Create pathways to support concurrent enrollment instructors to meet the minimum credentialing requirement. 3. Provide opportunities to award graduate-level credit to high school teachers who elect to demonstrate graduate-level learning and experience through a portfolio evaluation process. 6

7 Draft comprehensive plan to sustain highquality concurrent enrollment (cont d.) 4. Offer the option for concurrent enrollment instructors and college or university faculty members to teamteach concurrent enrollment courses. 5. Work collaboratively to address concurrent enrollment credentialing on an ongoing and sustainable basis. 6. Seek options and resources to support the long-term sustainability of concurrent enrollment programs and to support concurrent enrollment instructors in meeting the minimum faculty qualification standards. 7

8 Next Steps on Comprehensive Plan Draft to be shared with Minnesota State campuses, local concurrent enrollment advisory boards, and secondary stakeholders, November/December 2016 Final plan for implementation, January 2017 Implementation, Spring 2017 and ongoing 8

9 9 Questions on Background Materials?

10 STRATEGIC QUESTIONS FOR DISCUSSION 1. What additional strategic considerations would you suggest the colleges and universities consider relative to concurrent enrollment? 2. What specific policy questions would you suggest the colleges and universities consider relative to concurrent enrollment? 3. Are there additional ways you would suggest that concurrent enrollment be employed to help eliminate educational outcome disparities? 10

11 11 Background Materials

12 Dual Credit Options in MN Advanced Placement International Baccalaureate Postsecondary Enrollment Options (PSEO) Traditional PSEO On college campus or online; taught by college/university faculty Concurrent Enrollment In the high school; taught by high school instructors Examples: SMSU: College Now CLC: College in the Schools 12

13 Increased access to PSEO and Concurrent Enrollment over time th and 12 th graders only 1994 MnSCU Board Policy th graders PSEO CTE courses; CE open to 9 th and 10 th graders 2014 Students in alternative settings 2003 MnSCU System Procedure Increased access for 9 th and 10 th graders Upcoming Review of Policy 3.5 and Procedure

14 Legislative requirements for concurrent enrollment All postsecondary institutions offering concurrent enrollment programs to meet accreditation standards of the National Alliance of Concurrent Enrollment Partnerships (NACEP) by All postsecondary institutions offering concurrent enrollment programs to establish local advisory boards Concurrent enrollment programs must submit evaluative surveys annually

15 Minnesota State Concurrent Enrollment Programs Alexandria Technical and Community College Anoka-Ramsey Community College Bemidji State University Central Lakes College* Century College Fond du Lac Tribal and Community College Hibbing Community College Inver Hills Community College Lake Superior College Mesabi Range College* Minneapolis Community and Technical College Minnesota State Community and Technical College* Minnesota State College- Southeast* Minnesota State University- Mankato* Minnesota West Community and Technical College* Normandale Community College North Hennepin Community College Northland Community and Technical College* Northwest Technical College Rainy River Community College Ridgewater College* Riverland Community College* Rochester Community and Technical College Saint Paul College Southwest Minnesota State University* South Central College St. Cloud State University* St. Cloud Technical and Community College Vermillion Community College 15 *Accredited by the National Alliance of Concurrent Enrollment Partnership (NACEP)

16 DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE OF STUDENTS ENROLLED IN CONCURRENT ENROLLMENT 16

17 Concurrent enrollment student racial ethnic diversity is increasing Percent Students of Color and American Indian Students 15% 10% 5% 6.6% 6.9% 7.7% 10.7% White, 80.0% Other, 9.2% Am. Indian, 0.4% Asian & PI, 2.4% Black, 1.9% Hispanic, 3.3% Two or more, 2.7% 0% Total Concurrent Enrollment Headcount = 25,627 fiscal year Source: System Office Research Academic and Student Affairs

18 Increasing percentages of concurrent enrollment students are ninth to eleventh graders and females 100% Concurrent Enrollment Student High School Grade 1.1% 1.8% 0.5% 0.4% 0.3% 0.8% 3.6% 5.9% 100% Concurrent Enrollment Student Gender 0.8% 1.5% 0.5% 0.2% Percent by High School Grade 80% 60% 40% 20% 38.1% 40.2% 60.5% 57.2% 43.1% 43.0% 52.9% 50.8% Percent by Gender 80% 60% 40% 20% 40.2% 42.5% 42.0% 42.6% 58.9% 56.0% 57.4% 57.2% 0% 12th Grade th Grade 10th and 9th Grade Unknown 0% Female Male Unknown 18 Source: System Office Research Academic and Student Affairs

19 ENROLLMENT TRENDS IN CONCURRENT ENROLLMENT 19

20 PSEO student headcount has increased by 86% since 2007 primarily due to growth in concurrent enrollment 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 Fiscal Year 30,502 28,663 26,636 24,489 25,038 22,713 21,655 20,425 20,801 19,217 17,998 17,087 16,610 14,070 15,092 12,118 5,481 5,450 5,440 5,499 5,758 5,905 6,453 6,557 34,386 2,826 2,135 2,181 2,670 2,733 2,993 3,144 3,422 1,903 38,073 86% * 25,627 23, % * 41% * 7,333 7, ,726 67% * 20 * Increase since 2007 PSEO On-Campus PSEO Concurrent Enrollment PSEO Mixed Total PSEO

21 Almost one-half of concurrent enrollment students enroll in Minnesota State within 2 years after HS graduation 100% 80% 24.9% Percent PSEO Students by Sector 60% 40% 20% 0% 14.3% 13.6% 43.3% 3.9% Concurrent 47.2% 21 Same MN State Another MN State U of MN MN Private Other States Source: System Office Research Academic and Student Affairs

22 22 PERSISTENCE AND COMPLETION OF CONCURRENT ENROLLMENT STUDENTS

23 Colleges: Concurrent enrollment students who subsequently enroll at our colleges have substantially higher persistence rates and completion rates than other college students State Colleges: Persistence Rate (Second ) 100% State Colleges: Completion Rate (Third Spring) 100% Persistence Rate 80% 60% 40% 20% 81.7% 83.0% 80.1% 81.7% 80.4% 80.6% 81.0% 78.0% 69.1% 69.3% 68.8% 71.0% 68.3% 66.1% 65.7% 66.2% 12.6% 13.7% 14.3% 14.9% 14.8% 11.3% 10.7% 9.7% Completion Rate 80% 60% 40% 20% 66.1% 68.0% 65.5% 66.5% 65.8% 67.1% 66.9% 52.9% 52.5% 51.7% 51.5% 48.9% 47.0% 46.3% 13.2% 15.5% 13.8% 15.0% 16.9% 20.1% 20.6% 0% % Took Concurrent Did Not Take Concurrent Difference Persistence and completion rates for fall entering full-time undergraduate degree seeking students. 23 Source: System Office Research Academic and Student Affairs

24 Universities: Concurrent enrollment students who subsequently enroll at our universities have higher persistence rates and completion rates than other university students State Universities: Persistence Rate (Second ) State Universities: Completion Rate (Sixth Spring) 100% 92.3% 92.5% 92.2% 92.4% 91.4% 91.3% 90.6% 89.7% 100% 80% 80% Persistence Rate 60% 40% 69.1% 69.3% 68.8% 71.0% 68.3% 66.1% 65.7% 66.2% 23.2% 23.2% 23.4% 21.4% 23.1% 25.2% 24.9% 23.5% Completion Rate 60% 40% 60.5% 59.5% 59.1% 55.3% 53.1% 52.1% 52.2% 51.0% 20% 20% 8.4% 7.3% 8.1% 0% % 2.2% Took Concurrent Did Not Take Concurrent Difference Persistence and completion rates for fall entering full-time undergraduate degree seeking students. 24 Source: System Office Research Academic and Student Affairs

25 CURRENT CHALLENGES IMPACTING CONCURRENT ENROLLMENT 25

26 Background on Higher Learning Commission faculty qualifications The Higher Learning Commission (HLC) establishes Criteria for Accreditation quality standards and articulates Assumed Practices for those criteria. In , HLC conducted a national study on dual enrollment practices, including a focus specifically on concurrent enrollment. In 2015, HLC approved clarifications to Assumed Practices, including language on faculty qualifications. 26

27 Background on Higher Learning Commission faculty qualifications (cont d) In November 2015, HLC allowed for postsecondary institutions with concurrent enrollment programs to apply for an extension that, if approved, could defer the implementation date up to In spring 2016, Minnesota State completed a systemwide review of all concurrent enrollment instructor credentials. Of approximately 1,400 concurrent enrollment instructors, 24 percent currently meet the HLC faculty qualifications requirements. 27

28 Higher Learning Commission allowance for use of tested experience to meet faculty qualifications The Higher Learning Commission allows for the use of experiences outside the classroom in real world situations, known as tested experience, to qualify faculty members to meet qualifications requirements. In spring 2016, a Minnesota State workgroup developed a draft framework for tested experience. 28

29 Current steps for addressing faculty qualifications Minnesota State will submit an application on behalf of all Minnesota State colleges and universities to request a five year extension of the September 1, 2017 compliance timeline. Minnesota State universities are designing graduate coursework and graduate programs that will provide for discipline-specific content offered in formats that meet the needs of working professionals across the state (online, cohorts, summer, etc.). 29

30 Background on Minnesota State pricing structure In response to concerns expressed by colleges and universities about a variety of pricing structures and to ensure that concurrent enrollment programs are financially sustainable, Minnesota State agreed to resolve inconsistencies in concurrent enrollment pricing and pursue a common pricing structure or structures to meet the direct costs of concurrent enrollment. 30

31 Background on Minnesota State pricing structure (cont d.) Systemwide workgroup was formed to develop recommendations: The workgroup gathered and analyzed data from concurrent enrollment programs. The workgroup recommended separate pricing structures for colleges and universities. 31

32 Pricing structures for colleges and for universities Beginning in fiscal year 2018, all colleges will begin a five-year phase-in period with the outcome of reaching a uniform charge of $3,000 per mentor-mentee relationship per course per term by fiscal year Beginning in fiscal year 2018, all universities will begin a three-year phase-in period with the outcome of reaching a uniform price of $3,300 per mentor-mentee relationship per course per term, with the option to charge $110 per additional student if more than 30 students are enrolled in the course and/or students are enrolled in additional sections of the same course, by fiscal year

33 Current steps for addressing the pricing structure changes Minnesota State campuses will compile questions and comments and the Leadership Council will review and consider feedback. If there are any changes to the pricing structures as a result of that feedback, Minnesota State will communicate these changes with campuses to share with their programs, advisory boards, and secondary partners. 33

34 Current steps for addressing faculty qualifications, tested experience, and pricing structures changes Advisory board discussions will help shape how Minnesota State and our K-12 partners will work together to ensure faculty qualifications meet the Higher Learning Commission s requirements, and how tested experience and the pricing structures will be approached. 34