Equity Scorecard q y Interim Report on Retention <Equity Scorecard Team> Chip Beal Eri Fujieda (Leader) E i F ji d (L d ) Vicki Hajew ski Greg Lampe (External Advisor) Jim Miller (Institutional Research) Ste e Rosenberg Steve Rosenberg Gloria Toivola
INTRODUCTION: WHAT IS THE INTRODUCTION: WHAT IS THE INTRODUCTION: WHAT IS THE INTRODUCTION: WHAT IS THE EQUITY SCORECARD? EQUITY SCORECARD?
What is the Equity Scorecard? • Evidence-based assessment of inequities that exist in educational outcomes, particularly for students of color color • Developed by Dr. Estela Mara Bensimon, Center for Developed by Dr. Estela Mara Bensimon, Center for Urban Education, University of Southern California
What is the Equity Scorecard? • Embedded in the Equity Model E b dd d i th E it M d l individuals at all levels of leadership, responsibility, and power can effect lasting p y, p ff g changes and bring about equitable educational outcomes to historically underrepresented students students • Purpose: Institutional Action individual institutions can become more effective at promoting equity and excellence in the educational outcomes of historically underrepresented students p
Four Perspectives in Equity Scorecard F P ti i E it S d • Equity Scorecard examines data from four perspectives: – Access : enrollment, majors, financial aid – Retention : persistence, course taking patterns, graduation – Excellence : achievement, academic opportunities – Institutional Receptivity : openness to diversity, campus climate
Project Timeline at UW-S j May 2008 UW-S decided to participate in the UW-System U S dec ded o pa c pa e e U Sys e Equity Scorecard Project and the Provost appointed the Equity Scorecard Evidence Team (May 2008) Fall 2008-Spring 2010 F ll 2008 S i 2010 Evidence Team met bi/monthly. Fall 2009 Fall 2009 Interim report on access released Spring 2010 p g Interim report on retention released Summer 2010 Final report to be released
Notes on Data • Data were drawn from the Peoplesoft database. • Data on race/ethnicity are based on students’ self- reporting, and excluding international students. • Multi-year data were used to address the problem of “small numbers ” “small numbers.” • • Interpretations were based on descriptive statistics Interpretations were based on descriptive statistics. (Statistical significance testing was not performed.)
More Notes on Data More Notes on Data • The second year retention data were derived from The second year retention data were derived from 2001-2008 cohorts. • The six-year graduation data were from 2001-2003 cohorts. • Course-level data were from Fall 2008, Spring 2009, and Fall 2009 All enrolled were counted Distance and Fall 2009. All enrolled were counted. Distance education courses were omitted for consistency of the analysis. y
One more note on Data One more note on Data • Data refer to fall-entry, full-time on-campus students. Data refer to fall entry, full time on campus students. • Due to the limitations of time and resources, , international students, part-time students, distance education students, and those who entered at other semesters than fall were excluded from the analysis semesters than fall were excluded from the analysis.
Key Questions on Retention Key Questions on Retention Overall Patterns What are the overall patterns of equity/inequity in retention by race/ethnicity? What difference, if any, do sex and age of students make to retention? What difference, if any, does the first-generation status or Pell Grants eligibility make to retention? What difference, if any, does living on campus make to ff f first-year entries’ second-year retention?
Key Questions on Retention Key Questions on Retention Academic Preparation and Retention Wh t diff What difference, if any, does high school rank and ACT if d hi h h l k d ACT scores make to retention? Academic Performance at UW-S and Retention A d i P f t UW S d R t ti Is there any equity gap in the GPA standing at the end of the first year? f th fi t ? What difference, if any, does GPA at the end of the first year make to retention? ear make to retention? Is there any equity gap in the course-level academic performance? performance?
OVERALL RETENTION OVERALL RETENTION OVERALL RETENTION OVERALL RETENTION PATTERNS PATTERNS
Overall retention patterns Overall retention patterns • Overall, students of color as a whole were retained at Overall, students of color as a whole were retained at a lower rate than white students. • The retention gap is greater for transfer students than for first-year entry students. y y • The retention gap between white students and g p students of color widened by the six-year graduation benchmark.
Equity Gaps in Overall Retention Students of White Equity color students Gaps First-Year Second year 68.5% 70.8% 2.3% Entries retention rate (n=111) (n=2006) 2 nd year (% refers to the retention rate.) (2001-2008) retention gap was Six-year 32.6% 43.9% 11.3% greater graduation rate (n=46) (n=741) for (2001-2003) transfers. transfers. Transfer Transfer Second year Second year 65 1% 65.1% 73 3% 73.3% 8.2% 8 2% Entries retention rate (n=126) (n=1502) (2001-2008) The gap widened by widened by Six year Six-year 46 7% 46.7% 58 0% 58.0% 11 3% 11.3% graduation. graduation rate (n=30) (n=548) (2001-2003)
Widening Retention Gap g p in the course of 6 years • For the 2001-2003 cohort, the share of the students of color declined by 1.4% for first-year entries and 2.0% for transfers. • The widened retention gap reduced the diversity of UW-S student body by the time of the 6-year grad ation graduation.
Shrinking Diversity by the time of Graduation – First-Year Entries 2001-2003 First-Year Entries: Change in Share by Race/Ethnicity African American SE Asian Asian Hispanic/ White American Indian American American Latino(a) YR1 0.6% 2.9% 0.8% 1.1% 0.4% 94.2% (n=5) (n=23) (n=6) (n=9) (n=3) (n=741) YR2 YR2 0 5% 0.5% 2 9% 2.9% 1 1% 1.1% 0.7% 0 7% 0.4% 0 4% 94 4% 94.4% YR3 0.9% 2.5% 0.9% 0.7% 0.5% 94.6% YR4 0.5% 2.1% 1.1% 0.3% 0.5% 95.4% YR6 0.6% 1.8% 1.2% 0.3% 0.6% 95.6% Graduation (n=2) (n=6) (n=4) (n=1) (n=2) (n=340) Change in 0.0% -1.2% +0.4% -0.8% +0.2% +1.4% group share group share The overall share of students of color declined by 1.4%, in total from from 5.8% in YR1 to 4.4% at YR6 graduation. YR1 to YR6 Graduation
Shrinking Diversity by the time of g y y Graduation - Transfers 2001-2003 Transfer Entries: Change in Share by Race/Ethnicity African American SE Asian Asian Hispanic/ White American Indian American American Latino(a) YR1 1.9% 2.2% 0.2% 0.3% 0.5% 94.6% (n=11) (n=13) (n=1) (n=2) (n=3) (n=548) YR2 YR2 1 9% 1.9% 1.9% 1 9% 0.0% 0 0% 0 2% 0.2% 0 7% 0.7% 95 1% 95.1% (n=8) (n=8) (n=0) (n=1) (n=3) (n=407) YR6 1.8% 1.5% 0.0% 0.0% 0.9% 96.8% Graduation (n=6) (n=5) (n=0) (n=0) (n=3) (n=318) Change in -0.1% -0.7% -0.2% -0.3% +0.4% +2.2% group share The overall share of students of color declined by 2.0%, in total from from 5.2% in YR1 to 4.2% at YR6 graduation. g YR1 to YR6 YR1 to YR6 Graduation
Widening Retention Gap Widening Retention Gap in the course of 6 years • Students went missing throughout the six years. • A greater gap was found in: – the 4 th year retention among the first-year entry American Indians – the 1 st year retention among the first-year entry Asian Americans – the 1 st year retention among the transferred American Indians
When did they go missing? 2001-2003 First-Year Cohorts 900 25 800 30.1% went Total Fall 2001- missing. 20 2003 Cohorts 700 29.3% went 12.1% went missing missing. missing. 15 600 Retained Fall of Year 2 14.0% went 11.9% went missing. missing. 10 500 55.6% 8.7% went Retained Fall of Retained Fall of missing. Year 3 5 400 0 Retained Fall of 300 African American Southeast Asian Hispanic Year 4 American American Indian Indian Asian Am Asian Am American American Latino/a Latino/a 200 Graduated within 6 years 100 0 African American Southeast Asian Hispanic White Overall All Students American Indian Asian Am American Latino/a of Color
When did they go missing? 2001-2003 Transfer Cohorts 700 14 600 12 38.5% went missing. 10 25.7% went 500 missing. missing Total Fall 2001- T t l F ll 2001 8 23.0% went 2003 Cohorts missing. 16.3% went 6 missing. 400 4 2 Retained Fall of 300 Year 2 0 200 Graduated within 6 years 100 0 African American Southeast Asian Hispanic White Unknown Overall All Students American Indian Asian Am American Latino/a of Color
Overall retention patterns: Conclusion • Overall, students of color were retained at a lower rate O ll t d t f l t i d t l t than white students. • The retention gap between white students and The retention gap between white students and students of color widened by the six-year graduation benchmark benchmark. • Different retention patterns were observed between racial/ethnic groups. Strategies to improve retention racial/ethnic groups. Strategies to improve retention among students of color must be sensitive to the diversity among them.
Recommend
More recommend
