Naviance Summer Institute

                       Rick Torres


                      CEO/President




                   July 12, 2012




                                        1

7/13/2012
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
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
Enrollment Reporting Participation
                                U.S. Enrollment      % with        % NSC
Institution 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
Clearinghouse Data
                Our data is
      Complete All enrolled students
                Data is received at least 4
        Current times each enrollment period
              Not bound by state boundaries
Comprehensive or institutional sponsorship
               Authentic, not survey or
    Conclusive anecdotal

                                          5/13/2009   5
StudentTracker

A cost effective way to replace
    survey and anecdotal
information with documented
 enrollment and degree data




           Confidential Copyright NSC 2010   6
• 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
 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
 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
Montgomery County Annual Report




                                  Confidential
                                    Copyright
                                   NSC 2010
                                          11
I.e.: Sample of Montgomery Cty Performance Targets




                                                 Confidential
                                                   Copyright
                                                  NSC 2010
                                                         12
• StudentTracker is Compliant with FERPA
  • (Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act)
• FERPA (privacy) blocks are respected




                                                  13
                    Confidential Copyright
NSC: Access to the data you
 need to provide the best
guidance 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
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
Accountability: One public example




                                     7/13/2012   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
Our second Signature Report dives into mobility behaviors




                                                7/13/2012   18
Our second Signature Report dives into mobility behaviors




                                                7/13/2012   19
One of the most interesting discoveries was the reverse
 transfer rate being higher then previously thought




                                                 7/13/2012   20
7/13/2012   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
The long term trend could be that a growing
number 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
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
Benchmarking Report




                      7/13/2012   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)
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)
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)
You can begin to look at trends and best practices among like schools. Connecting them
to 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
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)
 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
1. Data Owners (students) maintain privacy
 control of their data.
2. Cost effective public dollars spending
3. Sustainable platform
4. Non-Advocacy and neutrality
5. Innovative reporting capabilities
6. National benchmarking capabilities

                                             32
                Confidential Copyright
We look forward to working with you!

                     Thank you!
  Rick Torres CEO/President National Student Clearinghouse
  rtorres@studentclearinghouse.org




                                                             7/13/2012   33

NSI 2012: National Student Clearinghouse

  • 1.
    Naviance Summer Institute Rick Torres CEO/President July 12, 2012 1 7/13/2012
  • 2.
    Quick Facts  NationalStudent 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.
    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.
    Enrollment Reporting Participation U.S. Enrollment % with % NSC Institution 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.
    Clearinghouse Data Our data is Complete All enrolled students Data is received at least 4 Current times each enrollment period Not bound by state boundaries Comprehensive or institutional sponsorship Authentic, not survey or Conclusive anecdotal 5/13/2009 5
  • 6.
    StudentTracker A cost effectiveway to replace survey and anecdotal information with documented enrollment and degree data Confidential Copyright NSC 2010 6
  • 7.
    • Nationwide collegeenrollment 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.
     We ran13,233 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
  • 10.
     Baltimore CountySchools: 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
  • 11.
    Montgomery County AnnualReport Confidential Copyright NSC 2010 11
  • 12.
    I.e.: Sample ofMontgomery Cty Performance Targets Confidential Copyright NSC 2010 12
  • 13.
    • StudentTracker isCompliant with FERPA • (Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act) • FERPA (privacy) blocks are respected 13 Confidential Copyright
  • 14.
    NSC: Access tothe data you need to provide the best guidance 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
  • 15.
    Background: Higher EdAssociations 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
  • 16.
    Accountability: One publicexample 7/13/2012 16
  • 17.
    Students are increasinglymobile 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
  • 18.
    Our second SignatureReport dives into mobility behaviors 7/13/2012 18
  • 19.
    Our second SignatureReport dives into mobility behaviors 7/13/2012 19
  • 20.
    One of themost interesting discoveries was the reverse transfer rate being higher then previously thought 7/13/2012 20
  • 21.
  • 22.
    Full Sail Universityand 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
  • 23.
    The long termtrend could be that a growing number 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
  • 24.
    Summarizing… • Evolving completionand 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
  • 25.
  • 26.
    Divide schools/ districtsby 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)
  • 27.
    Within a cellone 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)
  • 28.
    These schools/districts canbe 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)
  • 29.
    You can beginto look at trends and best practices among like schools. Connecting them to 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
  • 30.
    This same studycan 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)
  • 31.
     Benchmarking withincells 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
  • 32.
    1. Data Owners(students) maintain privacy control of their data. 2. Cost effective public dollars spending 3. Sustainable platform 4. Non-Advocacy and neutrality 5. Innovative reporting capabilities 6. National benchmarking capabilities 32 Confidential Copyright
  • 33.
    We look forwardto working with you! Thank you! Rick Torres CEO/President National Student Clearinghouse rtorres@studentclearinghouse.org 7/13/2012 33