September 14 2011 President John D Haeger Accomplishments FY 2011 Record enrollments 25 growth in FTE since fall 2008 Four Forest Restoration Initiative agreement 15 million for Charles ID: 297634
Download Presentation The PPT/PDF document "Systemic Change NOW: Performance Funding..." is the property of its rightful owner. Permission is granted to download and print the materials on this web site for personal, non-commercial use only, and to display it on your personal computer provided you do not modify the materials and that you retain all copyright notices contained in the materials. By downloading content from our website, you accept the terms of this agreement.
Slide1
Systemic Change NOW: Performance Funding and Student Success
September 14, 2011
President John D.
HaegerSlide2
Accomplishments - FY 2011
Record enrollments:
25% growth
(in FTE) since fall 2008Four Forest Restoration Initiative agreement$1.5 million for Charles Olajos and Ted Goslow Chair of Environmental Science and Policy for the SouthwestDr. Tom SiskDr. Keim helps researchers uncover source of Haitian cholera outbreakTop grant awards FY 2011:The Partnership for Native American Cancer Prevention: $1.7 millionMicrobial Forensics (Dr. Keim): $1.6 millionERI: $1.5 millionAmerican Indian Air Quality Training Program: $1.5 millionNorthern Arizona University Noyce Fellows Program: $1.5 million
2Slide3
Capital Projects
3
Completion 2012
San Francisco Parking Garage
Residence HallsArdrey
Auditorium
Classroom Upgrades
NAU “Foundation” building
Potential Future Projects
Multi-purpose
Facility
Science/ Health Facility
Completion Fall 2011
Health and Learning
Ce
nter
Skydome
Liberal Arts
North Plant
Native American Cultur
al Center
North Quad
Transportation Spine
Science Lab FacilitySlide4
Transportation
Transit spine connecting downtown, NAU campus, and Woodlands Village
$6.2 million in federal funding
Joint project of NAIPTA, the City of Flagstaff, and NAU4Slide5
National Economy
5
9.1%Slide6
STATE BUDGET
FY 2012 TOTAL
OPERATING
BUDGET: $ 8,355.4 BJLBC: The 3 Main Drivers of General Fund Spending Are Education, Health, and PrisonsSlide7
7Slide8
8Slide9
UNIVERSITY BUDGETSlide10
Enrollment Growth
10
Flagstaff
Community CampusesOnlineYuma
Fall 2010 Enrollment: 25,204
Fall 2011 Enrollment: Likely flatSlide11
FY11 Budget
11
Sage shaded pieces are the basic university expenditure supports
Yellow shaded pieces provide some university supportRed shaded pieces are not generally available for direct support
Estimated all funding sources total = $455 million
FY12 Budget Scenario
Estimated total = $430 millionSlide12
NAU Total Tuition, Fees, and State Appropriation/ FTE
12Slide13
FY 2012 Budget Plan Reduction of $198M
NAU Share is $30.1M
Strategy
Approx. AmtDiscussionTuition and Fee Collections$6-8M ($6 million with stable enrollment) Rebate new resident 2011-2012 Pledge students $350 (estimated $1.2M)
Additional financial aid (RSA and scholarships) to be provided estimated to be $3.5M Graduate Assistant Waivers from 75% to 100% of Tuition
Reduction
s, savings, revenue growth from Divisions, Debt Service,
Salaries
and Benefits (Employee Related Expenses – ERE)
$15M
FY 2011 Voluntary Retirement Program for Tenured Faculty should bring in $1,2-$1.6M with ERE Debt service reduction of $1.9M
Changes/increases in benefits prices for employees Utility reductions and other divisional and central reductionsOperating Efficiencies in all Divisions$0-$2M Innovations that reduce costs per FTEReduce state budget flexibility and one time expenditures, reserves, auxiliary accounts$4-7M
Diverting one-time funds for FY12 and FY13 knowing our base or structural deficit must be corrected by FY14Slide14
14
Cabinet Level
Target Reduction (Millions)
Provost
$3.8
EMSA (Enrl Mgmt & Student Aff)
1.1
Extended Campuses
1.0
Capital Assets
0.3
Information Technology Services
0.6
Advancement
0.4
Finance & Administration
0.3
President
0.3
Research
0.1
Institutional Effectiveness
0.1
Total
8.0Slide15
FY11-12 Significant Investments
Academic Building Repairs
Transportation Spine/NAIPTA support
Student Success/RetentionOracle/PeopleSoft, ePlanning, etc. software Technical Adjustments, Workforce Planning, and Minimum Wage100% Graduate Assistant WaiversClass Coverage and Undergraduate Support
Research and Compliance
15Slide16
Performance Funding
16Slide17
ABOR – Significant Changes
New Regents
Performance Metrics
Performance FundingDisparity Study
Financial Aid
Options:Performance based
Loan forgiveness
Financial literacy
Voucher programSlide18
Performance Funding (ABOR)
Base
+
Adjustment to the Base+Performance Funding=University Funding18Components of Performance Funding
Increases in SCH completed
Increase in number of
degrees
produced
Increases in
research
funding
Success in meeting the state’s economic development goalsMaintaining or enhancing quality
The
model will allocate monies approximately
as
follows
:
50%
in
support
of the
growth
of
degrees awarded
25%
in
support
of the
growth
of
completed student credit hour
s
25%
in
support
of the
growth
of
external funding
for
research and public serviceSlide19
The Carnegie Classification to differentiate between
ASU and UA (Very High Research)
and NAU (High Research). ASU and the UA will use weighting of 33.3% each for degrees, student credit hours (SCHs) and research.
NAU will use a weighting of 42.5%, 42.5% and 15%, respectively, for degrees, SCHs and research.
This distinction will ensure that
NAU is not penalized
for having a relatively small share of current and anticipated research spending.
Performance
Funding: university Mission-Specific WeightingSlide20
Change in Major Metrics—
Average
Annual Change for Three Years Ending in 2010-11: Degrees Awarded: ASU—791, U of A—220, NAU—274 SCH’s: ASU—70,737, U of A—30,029, NAU—33,319
Research Spending (millions):
ASU--$20.45, U of A--$28.43,
NAU--$1.95
At 100% State Funded, this = $24M for NAU
Performance Funding: What if Proposed Funding Was Used in the FY 2013 Budget Request?
Using a 3-year
moving average growth for performance
metrics:Slide21
FY 2013 Budget Request
21
Request
$Disparity Funding (Base)3,302,600Student Success through Instructional Innovation -- one time (non-base) funds11,600,400Performance Based Funding – If the formula was used, depending on State Share requested, our performance would have produced a
$12-$24M requestSlide22
Systemic Change Inevitable
22Slide23
Meeting the Goals
+ More students
+ Fewer Faculty per FTE
+ Performance Funding+ Restriction on Tuition ___________________How does NAU succeed in this environment?23
Accountability
Performance Funding
TechnologySlide24
U
. of Texas Adopts Plan to Publish Performance Data on Professors and
Campuses
(8/25/2011)Ohio Board of Regents moves forward with Enterprise University Plan (8/25/2011)Traditional Universities Considering New Approaches (8/24/2011)How to Fix Our Math Education (8/24/2011) State Officials Say Difficult Changes Are Needed to Help More Students Graduate (
8/10/2011)Postdocs Can Be Trained to Be More Effective Than Senior Instructors, Study Finds
(5/11/2011)
Governing
Boards Turn to Technology to Reinvent the University
(4/5/2011)
Restructuring
Is Key to Turning Freshmen Into Graduates (11/12/2010)Hard Times Require Better Planning and More Online Offerings, Speakers Tell Public-University Leaders (11/15/2010)
24Slide25
Disruptive Change in Higher Education – a National View
Public demands accountability:
poor performance vs. high tuition
National Governor’s Association: complete to competePresident Obama’s agendaLumina Foundation, Bill and Melinda Gates FoundationWestern Governor’s UniversityTexas, Florida, Ohio…251950s delivery system will not work in 2011 environmentSlide26
Systemic Change in the Academic Division
Retention and graduation rates:
Made progress over the years
BUT still MUST improveCohort YearSlide27
High-Enrollment Classes With DFW% >= 25%, FY11
(
FTFT Cohort)
27Slide28
High-Enrollment Classes With DFW%<=15%, FY11
(FTFT Cohort)
28Slide29
Average Student Credit Hours Taken And Completed For Credit, Fall, 2010 (FTFT Cohort)
29
Initial Credits
# StudentsAverage Credits Completed% Students Completing All Credit Hours Attempted
12
183
8.7
52%
13
423
10.7
63%1476812.573%15
1,076
13.6
83%
16
932
14.3
69%
17
392
15.2
71%
18
91
15.4
58%
19
25
17.5
72%
OVERALL
15
3,865
13.9
69%
On average, students in the FTFT Freshman cohort take 15 credit hours and complete just under 14.
Over 30% of all students complete fewer credit hours than they undertake
Students who take fewer than 15 credit hours, complete a lower proportion of their initial credit hours than do those who take 15 or more credit hoursSlide30
Student Success is Everyone’s Agenda
Responsibility to help students succeed
Implications:
Cost to students, taxpayers, and universityFunding tied to successful credit hour completionGraduation delayed—funding impact70% of the FTFT cohort with 12 to 18 credit hours do not succeed in completing their load30Slide31
Why Students Do not Progress
University policies encouraging contrary behavior
Unstructured curriculum
Students are unprepared – the Millennial GenerationFaculty cultureDelivery system31Slide32
Faculty’s Changing Role
New normal: faculty composition
Growth of non-tenure track positions from ‘99 to ’09:
46%Percentage of tenured faculty at public research institution in ‘09: 23% (NAU still at 49%)32
Student success as institutional
value reflected
in hiring, promoting,
rewarding
Tenured/tenure-track
faculty focus on higher order analytical and interpretative presentation, work closely with
studentsLecturers with strong teaching background, staff, and coaches complement work of tenured/tenure-track facultyCommitment to augment the new student generation learning style/ Millennial generation
N=708; FTE Students per Faculty = 24:1Slide33
Technology to Change the System
Higher ed. is where IT was 10 years ago
NAU
always an early adopter of technology More effective course delivery: focused, 5-week formats, more interactive, one-on-one with faculty augments web, rich contentTools to use faculty time effectively and efficientlyOpen courseware—Berkeley, MIT, Carnegie-MelonNBC LearnMcGraw HillPearson Soultions…iPod/ smart phone apps33Slide34
Systematic and comprehensive reform of freshman learning
Coaches
Instructional innovation
University policiesFinancial aid-related policies and their impact/ administrative dropFreshman mandatory attendance
+
University College
Dedicated group of faculty
Reward and compensations structure
Standardized, multi-section courses
More structure to the freshman yearSlide35
Student Success in Mathematics
Math Emporium (technology + redesigned courses + faculty):
Students
spend the bulk of their course time working on specific competency skill deficiencies, spend more time on things they don't understand and less time on things they have already mastered, get assistance when they encounter problems, and are required to participate in scheduled learning activities and assessments.Standardized coursesSelf-paced modules—five-week segmentsSelected faculty on multi-year contracts 35Slide36
Next Steps
Robert
Zemsky
on September 27Discussions with colleges and facultyDevelop implementation plansBroad scale of curricular improvements36Slide37
Questions?
Thank
you.37