NSI 2012: National Student Clearinghouse


Published on

The Clearinghouse helps educational institutions improve efficiency, reduce costs and workload, and enhance the quality-of-service they provide to their students and alumni, lending institutions, employers, and other organizations.

Published in: Education
  • Be the first to comment

  • Be the first to like this

No Downloads
Total views
On SlideShare
From Embeds
Number of Embeds
Embeds 0
No embeds

No notes for slide

NSI 2012: National Student Clearinghouse

  1. 1. Naviance Summer Institute Rick Torres CEO/President July 12, 2012 17/13/2012
  2. 2. Quick Facts National Student Clearinghouse founded in 1993 – 501(c)(6) non-profit organization – 15 member Board of Directors comprised of leaders in postsecondary education, K-12 education, research and education finance National Student Clearinghouse Research Center created in 2010 – 501(c)(3) non-profit organization – 11 member Board of Directors comprised of research experts from postsecondary education, K-12 education, and multistate organizations Advisory Committees – Data Access Advisory Committee • Provides guidance on use of data and research – Clearinghouse Advisory Committee • Provides guidance on institutional burdens and how NSC can help 7/13/2012 2
  3. 3. The Non-Profit Philosophy – NSC’s Mission We serve the education community by facilitating the exchange and understanding of student enrollment, performance and related information. 7/13/2012 3
  4. 4. Enrollment Reporting Participation U.S. Enrollment % with % NSCInstitution Type by Sector per NSC Active* IPEDS (in millions) Contracts*2 Year Public 7.1 99.1% 97.5%4 Year Public 7.8 99.6% 98.8%Total Public 14.9 99.3% 98.2%2 Year Private 0.05 45.7% 33.0%4 Year Private 3.9 96.7% 92.3%Total Private 3.9 96.1% 91.6%Total Private and Public 18.8 98.7% 96.8%4 Year For-Profit 1.5 87.8% 70.6%2 Year For-Profit 0.3 41.9% 18.3%Total For-Profit 1.8 79.5% 61.2%Total 20.7 97.0% 93.6% *Percentages based upon enrollment of institutions, not number of institutions 7/13/2012 4
  5. 5. Clearinghouse Data Our data is Complete All enrolled students Data is received at least 4 Current times each enrollment period Not bound by state boundariesComprehensive or institutional sponsorship Authentic, not survey or Conclusive anecdotal 5/13/2009 5
  6. 6. StudentTrackerA cost effective way to replace survey and anecdotalinformation with documented enrollment and degree data Confidential Copyright NSC 2010 6
  7. 7. • Nationwide college enrollment and graduation totals for your high school or district• Summaries by high school of your alumni’s initial college choices after graduation, current college enrollment, and college graduation• All types of post-secondary institutions: in-state, out-of-state, two-year, four-year, public, private, trade school, vocational, etc.• Eight years of enrollment and graduation history at no additional cost 7 Confidential Copyright
  8. 8.  We ran 13,233 files all in. HS originated files covered 12,365,700 students PSED Colleges originated reports: 48,290,777 All other: States, Systems etc.: 105,808,957 Total students researched: 166,465,434 7/13/2012 8 Confidential NSC 2011
  9. 9.  Baltimore County Schools: Dr Joe Hairston Montgomery County Schools: Jerry D. Weast Chicago Public Schools : Arne Duncan College Summit: Changing college going rates in low income areas. Naviance: Helping schools identify appropriate education pathways for their students 10 Confidential Copyright
  10. 10. Montgomery County Annual Report Confidential Copyright NSC 2010 11
  11. 11. I.e.: Sample of Montgomery Cty Performance Targets Confidential Copyright NSC 2010 12
  12. 12. • StudentTracker is Compliant with FERPA • (Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act)• FERPA (privacy) blocks are respected 13 Confidential Copyright
  13. 13. NSC: Access to the data you need to provide the bestguidance for your students It’s getting increasingly more complicated to keep track of what students are doing once they leave HS and move into higher education
  14. 14. Background: Higher Ed Associations The Completion Agenda • The top challenge ahead for many provosts is improving retention and completion rates, but this is much more a priority in two sectors that have been the focus of criticism on this issue (community colleges and for- profit higher ed) than it is in other sectors. • Very strong majorities of provosts applaud the "completion agenda" -- the push to get colleges and universities to increase efforts to retain and graduate students. But there are also minorities of provosts who -- while applauding the agenda overall -- fear that it is discouraging them from admitting "at risk" students, and who worry that too much attention has shifted to short-term programs.7/13/2012 Confidential Jan12 Board Meeting 15
  15. 15. Accountability: One public example 7/13/2012 16
  16. 16. Students are increasingly mobile creating a logistical issue for schools, systems and policy makers College Board SAT test takers who enroll out of state 2010 (source NSC) DC 83.40% Vermont 51.50% New Hampshire 50.80% Connecticut 48.40% Alaska 45.80% New Jersey 41.50% Hawaii 40.30% Delaware 37.10% Rhode Island 36.80% Idaho 36.50% Minnesota 35.50% Maine 34.80% Massachusetts 34.80% Maryland 34.50% Illinois 34.40% 7/13/2012 17 US TOTAL 21.17% Confidential Jan12
  17. 17. Our second Signature Report dives into mobility behaviors 7/13/2012 18
  18. 18. Our second Signature Report dives into mobility behaviors 7/13/2012 19
  19. 19. One of the most interesting discoveries was the reverse transfer rate being higher then previously thought 7/13/2012 20
  20. 20. 7/13/2012 21
  21. 21. Full Sail University and University of Florida endorse educational collaboration ….blending of learning. The University of Florida and Full Sail University boards have endorsed a collaboration to create more educational and career opportunities for students at both schools in media, technology and entertainment…with the aim of establishing Central and North Central Florida as a national leader for entertainment business and technology. “It just makes sense for institutions to share their assets in order to benefit their students,” Machen said. “UF and Full Sail each have fields in which they excel. Why not make it easier for students to have the best of both worlds?” 7/13/2012 22 Confidential Jan12
  22. 22. The long term trend could be that a growingnumber of students adopt a non-traditional model UNIV OF PHOENIX FOR PROFIT UNIV OF PHOENIX LAUNCHES ON- “CRACK DOWN” PERCENT OF PSED ENGAGED IN FOUNDED LINE EDUCATION DISTANCE LEARNING 15%-20% Coursera, 1989 ? Stanford, 1976 MIT BRICKS AND MORTAR BASED LEARNING BRICKS AND MORTAR BASED ? LEARNING 60’s 70’s 80’s 90’s ’00 ’10 ‘20 DECADES 7/13/2012 23 Confidential Jan12
  23. 23. Summarizing…• Evolving completion and success definitions…shouldn’t K-12 outcomes and guidance reflect what is happening in PSED…at a minimum?• Increasing student mobility Evolving student• Multi-institutional collaborations educational pathways• Distance learning NSC solves for All outside SLDS but integral all of these to the outcomes discussion issues 7/13/2012 24
  24. 24. Benchmarking Report 7/13/2012 25
  25. 25. Divide schools/ districts by appropriate factors that make comparisons within cells relevant Socio-economic indicator These axis (i.e.: Percent of class on free or reduced lunch) are only examples to help illustrate the concept ??? Rural/urban? $ spent per student (Low$ to High $) Size of Freshman Class (small to large)
  26. 26. Within a cell one can then look to populate with 25 to 30 districts/schools (at a minimum) Socio-economic indicator (i.e.: Percent of class on free or reduced lunch) ??? Rural/urban? $ spent per student (Low$ to High $) Size of Freshman Class (small to large)
  27. 27. These schools/districts can be compared across different criteria and broken into deciles,quintiles or whatever works best) Socio-economic indicator Assume a (i.e.: Percent of class on free or reduced lunch) comparison of college access rates over time ??? Rural/urban? 90% 80% 70% 60% School A 50% School B 40% School C$ spent per student 30% School D (Low$ to High $) 20% School E 10% School F 0% School G Class of 2006 Class of 2007 Calss of 2008 Class of 2009 Class of 2010 Class of 2011 Class of 2012 School H Size of Freshman Class (small to large)
  28. 28. You can begin to look at trends and best practices among like schools. Connecting themto each other in a private manner Assume a comparison High of college 90% performing access rates 80% over time 70% On the decline 60% School A School B 50% School C On the rise School D 40% School E 30% School F Can the low School G 20% and high School H performers 10% get together Low 0% and compare Class Class Calss Class Class Class Class performing of of of of of of of 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
  29. 29. This same study can be conducted cell by cell…. Socio-economic indicator (i.e.: Percent of class on free or reduced lunch) ??? Rural/urban?$ spent per student (Low$ to High $) Size of Freshman Class (small to large)
  30. 30.  Benchmarking within cells is critical to discover best practices that are relevant given district/school constraints The Clearinghouse can enable this interaction cost effectively The ability to define best practices by cell is the first step to creating a sustainable roadmap to improving educational outcomes
  31. 31. 1. Data Owners (students) maintain privacy control of their data.2. Cost effective public dollars spending3. Sustainable platform4. Non-Advocacy and neutrality5. Innovative reporting capabilities6. National benchmarking capabilities 32 Confidential Copyright
  32. 32. We look forward to working with you! Thank you! Rick Torres CEO/President National Student Clearinghouse rtorres@studentclearinghouse.org 7/13/2012 33