State of the University Nariman Farvardin 1
Undergraduate Education Matters 2
Undergraduate Enrollment Undergraduate enrollment has become too large 26,000 25,500 25,000 24,500 24,000 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 3
Freshman Enrollments 4,500 4,250 4,000 3,750 3,500 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 4
New Transfer Enrollments We have also started new programs at Shady Grove 2,700 2,600 2,500 2,400 2,300 2,200 2,100 2,000 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 5
SAT Score of New Students 25th Percentile 75th Percentile 1,400 1,350 1,300 1,250 1,200 1,150 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 6
25-75% SAT Score Peer Comparisons ( 2006) 1,500 1,450 1,400 1,350 1,300 1,250 1,200 1,150 1,100 UMD Berkeley UCLA UIUC Michigan UNC 7
Freshman Admit and Yield Rates ( 2006) Admit Rate Yield Rate 65 60 55 50 45 40 35 30 25 20 UMD Berkeley UCLA UIUC Michigan UNC 8
Transfer Admit and Yield Rates ( 2006) Admit Rate Yield Rate 80 70 60 50 40 30 20 UMD Berkeley UCLA UIUC Michigan UNC 9
An Interesting Observation Of all high school graduates in the State of Maryland who score 1300 and above in SAT 25% enroll at UMD 8% enroll in all other universities in Maryland, public and private 67% leave of state Maryland is the 3 rd largest net exporter of students in the US. 10
Migration of New College-Bound Students into and out of Maryland Migrate out of MD Migrate into MD 16,000 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 11
2 nd Year Retention Rates Our progress has plateaued All Students African Americans Hispanics 100 95 90 85 80 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 Cohort 2004 2005 2006 12
2 nd Year Retention Rate Comparisons 100 ( 2006 Cohort) We need to intensify our efforts 98 96 94 92 90 UMD Berkeley UCLA UIUC Michigan UNC 13
4-5- and 6-Year Graduation Rates We have made excellent progress; 4-year 4 rates have plateaued 4-Year 5-Year 6-Year 80 70 60 50 40 1996 1997 1998 1999 Cohort 2000 2001 2002 2003 14
80 70 60 50 6-Year Graduation Rates All Students African Americans Hispanics 15 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 Cohort 1996
6-Year Graduation Rate Comparisons (2000 Cohort) We have a long way to go; need new ideas 95 90 85 80 75 UMD Berkeley UCLA UIUC Michigan UNC 16
Undergraduate Student Diversity Asian Unknown White American Indian African American Foreign Hispanic 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 17
Percentage Minority Enrollment ( 2006) 60 50 40 30 20 10 0 UMD Berkeley UCLA UIUC Michigan UNC 18
Percentage of African American Students 14 12 10 8 6 4 2 0 UMD Berkeley UCLA UIUC Michigan UNC 19
Percent of UG Credits Generated by Faculty Type ( 2006) 40% by T/TK Faculty 60% by non-t/tk faculty The T/TK faculty participation in teaching UG courses has been going down steadily 20
Undergraduate Issues 1. Reduce enrollment (# of transfers and # of freshmen) 2. Improve academic qualifications of incoming students 3. Improve distribution of students among colleges; revisit LEPs 4. Improve quality of education by engaging regular faculty, especially the best teachers 5. Revisit CORE to prepare students for the future 6. Increase student-faculty interaction 7. Improve academic rigor 8. Revisit living-learning programs to maximize the impact of resources 9. Improve overall student satisfaction with UG experience 10. Improve retention and graduation rates 21
Graduate Education Matters 22
Graduate Enrollment 11,000 10,500 10,000 9,500 9,000 8,500 8,000 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 23
Ave GRE Scores of New Doctoral Students Verbal Quantitative AW*100+200 750 700 650 600 550 500 FY 00 FY 01 FY 02 FY 03 FY 04 FY 05 FY 06 FY 07 24
Graduate Student Diversity Asian Unknown White American Indian African American Foreign Hispanic 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 25
Percent of Grad Credits Generated by Faculty Type ( 2006) 69% by T/TK Faculty 26% by non-t/tk faculty 5% by other 26
Time to Degree Masters PhD 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 FY 02 FY 03 FY 04 FY 05 FY 06 27
Graduate Issues 1. Recruitment of graduate students must become a university priority 2. The sizes of graduate programs (especially, PhD) appear to be a random process 3. There does not seem to be a good relationship between the magnitude of research programs and size of PhD program 4. Our financial aid packages are inadequate and unattractive Minimum graduate stipends are too low We don t use the existing resources (fellowships, GAships, tuition remission, health benefits) judiciously A small portion of our research expenditures support graduate students 5. Graduate student housing needs attention 6. Improve time-to-degree for PhD programs 7. Place emphasis on placement of PhD students 28
Research 29
Sponsored Research and Outreach Activities Expenditures Awards 450.00 400.00 350.00 300.00 250.00 200.00 150.00 FY00 FY 01 FY 02 FY 03 FY 04 FY 05 FY 06 FY 07 30
FY05 R&D Expenditures Peer Comparison (excludes medical school expenditures) Total in M$ Per Faculty FTE in K$ 600 500 400 300 200 100 0 UMD Berkeley UCLA UIUC Michigan UNC 31
Research Issues 1. Despite impressive research dollars, we do not enjoy a high level of visibility in research 2. We need to place more emphasis on recruitment and retention of star faculty 3. We need more signature research programs in crossdisciplinary areas with significant societal implications 4. We must place more emphasis on the quality and impact of research programs 5. We need to better distribute our research dollars on graduate students 32
Other Issues 33
Undergraduate Enrollment 40,000 30,000 20,000 10,000 0 UMD Berkeley UCLA UIUC Michigan UNC 34
Graduate Enrollment 14,000 12,000 10,000 8,000 6,000 4,000 2,000 0 UMD Berkeley UCLA UIUC Michigan UNC 35
Number of Faculty (there are differences of definition for non T/TK faculty between institutions) T/TK Non T/TK 4,500 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 500 0 UMD Berkeley UCLA UIUC Michigan UNC 36
Number of Staff Employees 12,000 11,000 10,000 9,000 8,000 7,000 6,000 5,000 4,000 3,000 2,000 1,000 0 UMD Berkeley UCLA UIUC Michigan UNC 37
FTE Student per Instructional Faculty Ratio ( 2006) 18 16 14 12 UMD Berkeley UCLA UIUC Michigan UNC 38
US News and World Report Ranking Among Public Universities Maryland Berkeley UCLA Ilinois Michigan UNC 0 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 5 10 15 20 25 39
Number of Graduate Programs Ranked in Top 15 (Most Current) 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 UMD Berkeley UCLA UIUC Michigan UNC 40
Final Remarks 1. We must place more emphasis on the substance, quality and impact of what we do, and be relentless in communicating our academic and scholarly achievements. 2. We must become more efficient in utilizing our embedded resources and align our resources with our priorities. 3. We should reduce our reliance on non T/TK faculty 41