Promoting Access and Diversity in a Competitive Environment

Ted SpencerAssociate Vice Provost and Director of Admission

Chris LucierDirector of Recruitment and Operations

Agenda

• Demonstrate how Descriptor PLUS ™ can help identify underrepresented populations during the evaluation process

• Potential impacts of using DP• Next steps

– Descriptor PLUS™ for recruitment and outreach

• Employing other tools to simplify the application process to enhance access– Electronic submission of transcripts

Geodemography

• Drives consumer marketing• “people with similar cultural backgrounds, means,

and perspectives naturally gravitate toward one another or form relatively homogeneous communities.”

• Does not consider college-bound behavior

Source: Descriptor PLUS ™ : An Educationally Relevant Geodemographic Tagging Service. The College Board

Descriptor PLUS ™

• Educational Neighborhoods (EN)– Educationally relevant geodemographic clusters (30)– Begins with socioeconomic data and includes academic and

curricular interest data– Unique and relevant characteristics of prototypic college-

bound students and their behavior related to college-choice– 30 clusters =>180,000+ neighborhoods

• High School Clusters– College choice is driven by characteristics of the student

within their neighborhood, but also within the context of their high school

– Academic/curricular indicators, historical patterns of college choice, student interests, as well as socioeconomic and mobility factors

– 30 clusters =>27,000+ schools• 150 attributes, or individual pieces of information, now exist for both

Educational Neighborhoods and High SchoolsSource: Descriptor PLUS ™ : An Educationally Relevant Geodemographic Tagging Service. The College Board

Identify “represented” and “underrepresented” clusters

• Tag ’04 and ’05 enrolled classes• Enrolled because that defines your academic

community• Certain trends clear• Define the difference between represented and

underrepresented

Educational Neighborhoods

Educational Neighborhood

2005 Educational Neighborhood

2004

1 28% (1,477) 1 27.5% (1404)

7 25.1% 7 20.0%

4 9.9% 4 10.2%

23 6.1% 16 8.7%

16 5.6% (74.5%) 23 8.0% (74.5%)

13 3.7% (194) 22 3.4% (172)

25 3.5% 13 3.2%

22 3.3% 28 2.8%

20 2.7% 25 2.6%

2 1.9% 3 2.0%

3 1.8% 2 1.8%

High Schools

High School 2005 High School 2004

12 48% (2514) 12 46.9% (2607)

23 11.8% 23 10.8%

17 8.5% 17 9.4%

25 8.3% 25 8.7%

10 6.1% 10 6.8%

27 5.9% (88.6%) 27 5.9% (88.5%)

26 5.2% (270) 26 5.5% (305)

11 2.7% 11 2.4%

24 1.0% 24 0.9%

8 0.6% 8 0.6%

15 0.4% 15 0.6%

Do we treat all underrepresented clusters the same?

• Some underrepresented clusters reflect high SES – access and opportunity not a problem

• Define high priority underrepresented clusters– Access is important

– Socioeconomic factors

• Not the sole factor – should tie with other information about the student or school

High Priority Educational Neighborhood Clusters

ENIS CLUSTER UR AT UM?

PARENT'S AVG

INCOME

AVG PARENTAL

EDUC. LEVEL

% OF ADULTS IN PROF.

JOBSINTEREST IN FIN. AID COMMENTS

1 N 7 2 4 24 NEIGHBORHOOD IS YOUNG AND PREDOMINANTLY PROFESSIONAL

2 Y 8 4 8 27 PARENTS ARE WELL-EDUCATED AND MODERATELY AFFLUENT

3 Y 6 11 9 23INCOMES IS ABOVE AVERAGE AND INTEREST IN FIN. AID IS BELOW AVERAGE

4 N 1 1 3 30HIGHEST INCOME OF ANY CLUSTER. YOUNG, MOBILE, AND HIGHLY EDUCATED PROFESSIONALS

5 Y 24 20 23 5ALMOST HALF OF THE HS GRADS WILL GO DIRECTLY INTO THE WORK FORCE OR MILITARY

6 Y 22 17 23 14ED LEVEL FOR PARENTS IN AVG. BUT INCOME LEVEL IS BELOW AVG.

7 N 20 9 19 9PARENTS ARE TYPICALLY MIDDLE CLASS AND ARE INTERESTED IN FIN. AID

8 Y 28 26 27 4INCOME AND ED LEVELS FOR PARENTS ARE VERY LOW AND FIN. AID WILL BE REQUIRED TO SUPPORT COLLEGE ENROLLMENT

9 Y 16 12 14 18PARENTAL HAVE AVG. INCOME, ED. EXPERIENCES, AND INTEREST IN FIN. AID

10 Y 26 25 26 13PARENTS HAVE LOW INCOME AND ED. LEVELS. COST IS THE PRIMARY DRIVER BEHIND SELECTION OF A COLLEGE

11 Y 12 13 10 20PARENTS ARE TYPICALLY MIDDLE INCOME SUBURBANITES WITH A MODERATE LEVEL OF EDUCATION AND INTEREST IN FIN. AID

12 Y 23 24 25 10PARENTS HAVE LOWER INCOME AND ED. LEVELS AND STRONG INTEREST IN FIN. AID

13 Y 5 3 1 29PROFESSIONAL FAMILIES. INCOME AND ED LEVELS ARE HIGH AND FIN. AID IS NOT A SIGNIFICANT FACTOR IN COLLEGE CHOICE

14 Y 15 22 18 11 PARENTS HAVE MODERATE INCOME AND ED. LEVELS

15 Y 11 15 11 12PARENTAL INCOME IS SLIGHTLY ABOVE AVG. AS IS INTEREST IN FIN. AID

High Priority High School Clusters

HS

IS CLUSTER

UR AT UM?

% GRADS ENTERING COLLEGE

AVG PARENTAL

EDUC. LEVEL

PARENTS AVG.

INCOMEINTEREST IN FIN. AID COMMENTS

1 Y 29 29 30 10PARENTS HAVE LOWEST INCOME AND SECOND LOWEST ED LEVEL OF ANY HS CLUSTER. INTEREST IN FIN AID IS HIGH

2 Y 2 3 18 21 PARENTS HAVE ABOVE AVG ED LEVELS AND HIGHER INCOME

3 Y 28 20 26 14 PARENTS TEND TO HAVE LOWER INCOME AND ED LEVELS

4 Y 9 16 11 20 PARENTAL INCOME IS ABOVE AVG.

5 Y 12 17 16 13PARENTS HAVE A MODERATE INCOME LEVEL AND ARE INTERESTED IN FIN AID

6 Y 23 30 29 3PARENTS TEND TO HAVE A VERY LOW INCOME AND ED LEVEL. FIN AID INTEREST IS VERY HIGH

7 Y 27 26 22 10

ONLY ABOUT HALF OF ALL GRADUATES WILL PURSUE POST-SECONDARY EDUCATION. PARENTS HAVE A LOW INCOME LEVEL

8 Y 7 22 24 8PARENTS HAVE A LOWER THAN AVERAGE INOCME LEVEL. INTEREST IN FIN AID IS HIGH

9 Y 15 21 23 15HIGH SCHOOLS TEND TO BE PUBLIC AND OFFER LIMITED SUPPORT FOR POST SECONDARY PREPARATION

10 N 17 18 13 18 TARGET A VARIETY OF REGIONAL INSTITUTIONS, INCLUDING CCs

11 Y 25 27 28 2

PARENTS HAVE LOWER INCOME AND ED LEVELS AND WILL REQUIRE FIN. AID TO SUPPORT THEIR CHILDREN'S COLLEGE ENROLLMENT

12 N 16 11 8 13THEY WILL TARGET INSTITUTIONS KNOWN FOR GRAD AND PROFESSIONAL SCHOOL PREPARATION

13 Y 5 15 27 1PARENTS HAVE BELOW AVERAGE INCOME BUT HIGHER ED LEVELS

14 Y 20 14 9 25PARENTS TYPICALLY HAVE AN ABOVE AVG. INCOME LEVEL AND LESS INTEREST IN FIN. AID

15 Y 18 23 19 4PARENTS HAVE SLIGHTLY BELOW AVG. INCOME AND ED LEVELS, AND ABOVE AVG. INTEREST IN FIN. AID

EN and HS Cluster Tagging available to reviewer

Ties together with 1st gen., low SES

Potential Impacts of utilizing Descriptor PLUS ™

• Yield – Their behavior will have to be different than other

students in that cluster – “going against the grain”

– Increase number of admitted students with financial need

• Does not replace affirmative action– Treat high priority clusters the same

• Public Relations– Enroll more students in underrepresented areas

– Change perceptions

Next Steps

• Tag prospects– Tagging strategy - timing

– Null files

– Inaccuracies – student generated errors

• Recruitment – Targeted communications at underserved populations

– Focused programming

– Financial aid information

Link to electronic transcript

• GPA recalculated

Electronic Transcripts - Make it easier to apply and speed decision

Display by year

Display by course