Topbluebar

Enrollment Planning Team Year End Report 2004-05

Home > Discussions and Reports > Year End Report 2004-05 > Executive Summary

Executive Summary

This report documents the activities of the University of South Carolina Aiken’s Enrollment Planning Team (EPT) in 2004-05. The bulk of the report provides an overview of how seven action teams approached their respective charges by describing 1) major topics of discussion, 2) significant recommendations, 3) indicators used to monitor success, and 4) future plans. During the 2004-05 academic year, the Action Teams discussed 18 major topics related to enrollment planning, made two formal recommendations to the full EPT and pursued 12 informal recommendations or courses of action, identified 22 indicators and collected data for 16 (73%) of them, and outlined plans for 20 high priority activities for 2005-06.

Discussion Topics
Formal Recommendations
Forthcoming Recommendations and Planned Activities
Indicators
Future Plans

Return to End of Year Report Home

Discussion Topics

Action Teams had sustained discussions about the following topics in 2004-05:

·         Probation and Suspension Policy

·         Identifying the “Minority Student” Population

·         School of Education: Prospective majors with GPAs < 2.75

·         Communication to USCA Personnel about Enrollment Planning Issues

·         University Support for Minority Students

·         School of Business: Impact of Bulletin changes on advising

·         Communication to USCA Students about Being Successful

·         Campus Climate for Minority Students

·         School of Nursing: Available Seats in Prereq. Science Courses

·         Review of Institutional Scholarship Process

·         Success of Minority Students at USCA

·         School of Nursing: Advising

·         Low Performance and Retention of Students with Weak Test Scores

·         School of Education: Low Pass Rates on Praxis I

·         Surveys

·         Provisional Admission

·         School of Education: Advising

·         Strategic Planning

 

Top of page

Formal Recommendations

Through June 2005, two formal recommendations were submitted from Action Teams to the full Enrollment Planning Team for discussion and further action. One of these recommendations, submitted by the Freshman Admissions Action Team, was to raise admission standards by requiring entering freshmen to have a minimum combined SAT score of 800 (or equivalent ACT score of 17). This recommendation was approved by EPT, forwarded to the Faculty Scholastic Standing and Petitions Committee, approved by the Faculty Assembly, and implemented in the 2004-05 academic year for students entering in Spring 2005.

The other formal recommendation, also submitted by the Freshman Admissions Team, was to adopt a provisional admission category for students who meet all current requirements for admission (including the minimum 800 SAT score) but graduated in the bottom 40% of their high school class. This recommendation was endorsed by the full EPT pending development of a formal program and intervention strategy by the At-Risk Students Action Team.

The successful implementation of these items points toward a robust participatory process that involves all stakeholders in the promulgation of enrollment-related initiative that have an impact campus-wide. Nevertheless, there is still significant room for EPT to improve its efficiency and accelerate the pace at which initiatives are developed and enacted.

Top of page

Forthcoming Recommendations and Planned Activities

Action Teams also developed twelve informal or proposed recommendations, strategies, or activities that were not directed through the full EPT. These actions ranged from consultation with the Faculty Scholastic Standing and Petitions Committee on revisions of the probation policy, to planned development of a public relations campaign about enrollment planning for students, to a $1,000 increase in recruitment scholarships.

The low proportion of formal recommendations to proposed recommendations may simply indicate that a significant amount of time is required to research issues and formulate recommendations. However, another contributing factor may be a lack of clarity in EPT’s processes or expectations for Action Teams to submit written proposals for EPT to discuss and officially adopt or endorse, such as by a vote by EPT members. It is recommended for 2005-06 that EPT adopt a more formal process for receiving recommendations and making decisions. Such a process might include:

  1. Submission of a formal written recommendation from an Action Team for consideration at an upcoming meeting of the full EPT; the text of this recommendation should include the following elements:
    a. A statement of the recommendation;
    b. The intended impact of the recommendation that includes data gathered from USCA and some forecast of how these data will change following the adoption of the recommendation;
    c. An envisioned timeline for implementation (including next steps and proposed launch or starting date as well as to whom the recommendation should be forwarded);
  2. Discussion and evaluation of the recommendation by the full EPT, during which the recommendation may be amended or modified;
  3. A formal vote to adopt the recommendation and forward it to the relevant parties.

While some flexibility may be inserted into this set of guidelines, the adoption of a more formal decision making process could assist in clarifying lines of responsibility and accelerating the implementation process.

Top of page

Indicators Used to Monitor Success

While 22 indicators were identified to monitor various aspects of enrollment management and data was collected for about three quarters of these, significant gaps still exist in the identification of indicators that can be used to monitor enrollment-related issues as well as in the area of data collection and dissemination. Two Action Teams did not collect any data, and in many cases the indicative value of various figures is not immediately transparent. The use value of some of these indicators may need to be reevaluated. Vigorous attention to the development of meaningful indicators is likely needed, and it will be essential for EPT to communicate both the status or current level of these indicators as well as their meaning to a wider audience.

Top of page

Future Plans

Action Teams submitted a proposed list of discussion topics and/or activities for 2005-06. These lists were prioritized and shaped by the Chair and Vice Chair of EPT in this final report. Top priorities for each Action Team are listed below.

Action Team Future Plans
At-Risk Students
  1. Define USCA students who are “At Risk”
  2. Develop programs, services, and interventions for (at risk) students in provisional admissions category
  3. Receive recommendation from Advising Staff about early warning process
Communication
  1. Develop an Ad/PR campaign geared toward students about campus expectations
  2. Include information about EPT in the Chancellor’s Campus-wide Update Meetings in the Fall and Spring
  3. Make more use of the EPT website as a communications tool to include charts/graphs to illustrate “dashboard indicator” progress on key issue
Financial Aid/Scholarship Strategy
  1. Provide annual report on:
    Scholarships -all scholarships distributed to USCA students, including the types, numbers awarded and distributed, average award amounts, and award and university retention rates.
    Need-based grants     - all recipients of all need-based grants, including the types; numbers awarded, unfunded, and distributed; average award amounts; and award and university retention rates
    Loans     - all recipients of all public and private educational loans, including the types, numbers awarded and distributed, average loan amounts, and university retention rates
  2. Project funding needs in the various areas to meet our scholarship goals.
  3. Discuss state scholarships as related to new regulations and how these scholarships should or should not have a direct impact on the development of scholarship policies and procedures for our campus.
Freshman Admission
  1. Set goals for the freshman class in terms of its size and shape, including diversity along lines of gender, race/ethnicity, socio-economic status, geography; and quality, including targeted proportions of students from high/low quality high schools, and those with high/low test scores, high/low HS grades or class rank, high/low other talents (athletics, fine arts, community service, etc.).
  2. Provide outreach to other USCA constituencies to both collect feedback in the goal setting process and fostering buy-in once goals are developed.
Minority Student Success
  1. Provide an annual report that provides a profile of minority students on campus, to include: Admission application numbers and profile, including admission scores, class rank, predicted GPA, retention and graduation rates, GPA distribution, Writing portfolio scores, professional program admission rates, housing GPAs, Gateway participants, participation in minority-directed programs.
  2. Provide annual report on initiatives designed to promote 1) minority student recruitment and 2) minority student retention.
  3. Increase awareness of issues facing minority students.
Program/Major Admission
  1. Divide Action Team into three separate teams to address School-specific issues (team members must be identified in early Fall 2005 in consultation with School Heads):

    Business -- Bulletin issues and lessen advisement burden

    Education -- Praxis pass rates

    Nursing -- poor performance in science courses
Strategic Planning/ Surveys
  1. Continue collection of items addressed by EPT Action Teams as they align with goals and objective from the Strategic Plan and report these findings both to the entire EPT and to the Strategic Planning Committee.
  2. Examine survey data more thoroughly to identify useful indicators for strategic enrollment management.
  3. Formalize recommendations for additional surveys.

Top of page