Institutional indicators benchmarking
Download
1 / 20

Institutional Indicators Benchmarking - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 159 Views
  • Uploaded on

Institutional Indicators & Benchmarking. Presentation to AQIP Quality Check-up Team March 2008. Where have we been? The Impetus. Ohio Partnership for Excellence First done in 2001- 02 Provides external review Served as point of entrance to AQIP

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Institutional Indicators Benchmarking' - Audrey


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Institutional indicators benchmarking

Institutional Indicators & Benchmarking

Presentation to AQIP Quality Check-up Team

March 2008


Where have we been the impetus
Where have we been?The Impetus

  • Ohio Partnership for Excellence

    • First done in 2001- 02

    • Provides external review

    • Served as point of entrance to AQIP

    • Impetus for 3 AQIP Action Projects, including Institutional Indicators of Effectiveness

    • Subsequent OPE, Baldrige, AQIP processes provided the impetus for the refinement and the benchmarking phase of this process


Purpose of indicators process
Purpose of Indicators Process

To develop an institutional effectiveness model including mission priorities, indicators, benchmarks/targets, and data sources

To identify and organize key data and information to measure institutional progress against the mission


Framework
Framework

  • Broad Components—Mission Areas/ Emphasis, Critical Success Factors, Key Success Factors

  • Indicators—Indicators, Key Performance Indicators, Core Indicators

  • Measures—Measure, Performance Standards

  • Targets—Targets, Goals, Benchmarks


Initial changes refinements
Initial Changes/Refinements

  • Indicator Process

    • Initially—4 Groups:

      • District Board of Trustees (DBT)

      • Administrative Leadership Team (ALT)

      • Faculty

      • Students

  • What we learned—

    • Four frameworks created alignment challenges

    • Collapsed into one document

    • DBT selects indicators and IEP works with the appropriate committees and/or organizational units to develop and implement actions—and report back to the President and DBT


Indicator timeline
Indicator Timeline

July Report on progress

Identify key indicators to monitor

Develop action plans for continuous improvement

Update data and select/remove indicators

August/ Review and discuss indicators of

December effectiveness

Monitor progress of key indicators

Report on progress

January/ Monitor progress of key indicators

June



Number to college

The graph on the left shows the total number of graduates as well as the proportion of all who attend LCCC and other Ohio colleges, and those who did not enroll in post secondary education subsequent to graduation.

5 of the 6 high schools with the largest graduating classes send a higher proportion of their college bound students to LCCC than to other Ohio colleges

Half of these are also among the schools with the lowest proportion of first year college students. In fact, Admiral King, Southview, and Elyria rank 3rd, 4th, and 5th from the bottom, respectively, in proportion of graduates who attend college after graduation

North Ridgeville, Firelands, Keystone, and Clearview also send more students to LCCC than to other Ohio institutions

Number To College


Recent high school graduates action highlights examples
Recent High School Graduates well as the proportion of all who attend LCCC and other Ohio colleges, and those who did not enroll in post secondary education subsequent to graduation.ActionHighlights/Examples

  • Develop a committee that would meet regularly to coordinate and align recruitment efforts

  • Target 4-6 high schools to increase the number of recent high school graduates who enroll directly to LCCC

  • KnowHow2Go—Campaign focuses on preparing and education 7th through 10th graders (aligned with Lorain P-16 Council)


Remediation rates action highlights examples
Remediation Rates well as the proportion of all who attend LCCC and other Ohio colleges, and those who did not enroll in post secondary education subsequent to graduation.Action Highlights/Examples

  • DBT Community Connection Session with Superintendents and School Board Members

    • Focus on incoming students

    • Implementing the Ohio Core Initiative (February 22, 2007)

  • Planning Sessions with the Academic Foundations Division (Fall 2006)

    • Focus on currently enrolled students

    • The development of rubrics for grading all courses in all areas (MTHM, ESLG, ENGL, RDST) of the Academic Foundation Division

    • Determine the viability of distance education for Academic Foundation course offerings


Graduate tracking survey action highlights examples
Graduate Tracking Survey well as the proportion of all who attend LCCC and other Ohio colleges, and those who did not enroll in post secondary education subsequent to graduation.Action Highlights/Examples

  • Convened a group of Ohio AQIP institutions to begin discussions around the development of a common graduate tracking survey to collect comparative data and information

  • To submit a plan to the OBOR and seek funding to support endeavor—advocacy


Indicators of effectiveness

Indicators of Effectiveness well as the proportion of all who attend LCCC and other Ohio colleges, and those who did not enroll in post secondary education subsequent to graduation.

The Next Evolution


What did we learn
What did we learn? well as the proportion of all who attend LCCC and other Ohio colleges, and those who did not enroll in post secondary education subsequent to graduation.

  • External Feedback—AQIP, Baldrige, and OPE reports recommended alignment with Vision 2015 and better cohort comparison groups (benchmarking)

  • Internal feedback—suggested the reduction and revision of indicators from 36 to about 12


Measuring institutional effectiveness
Measuring Institutional Effectiveness well as the proportion of all who attend LCCC and other Ohio colleges, and those who did not enroll in post secondary education subsequent to graduation.

Indicators of Effectiveness

There were 36 indicators for the following three areas: Promote Education, Stimulate Community Development, and Enhance Institutional Effectiveness

Charge

Revise framework around the four cornerstones of the new mission: Education, Economy, Community, Culture

Reduce the number of indicators to 12.

Goals

To develop one document with about 18 indicators that reflect the indicators of effectiveness and Vision.

Vision 2015 Score Card

Consists of 6 Priorities with 32 Initiatives. Create a “scorecard” to measure and monitor the short/long-term progress of the strategic vision.

Feedback

The College would select 12 indicators of success for Vision 2015. The suggestion would be to select 2 indicators (major outcomes) for each of the six strategic priorities


Education
Education well as the proportion of all who attend LCCC and other Ohio colleges, and those who did not enroll in post secondary education subsequent to graduation.


Aqip benchmarking action project

AQIP Benchmarking well as the proportion of all who attend LCCC and other Ohio colleges, and those who did not enroll in post secondary education subsequent to graduation.Action Project


Purpose
Purpose well as the proportion of all who attend LCCC and other Ohio colleges, and those who did not enroll in post secondary education subsequent to graduation.

  • To enhance and sustain an institutional culture that uses a defined benchmarking process to systematically compare LCCC against other colleges, universities, and organizations

  • To address feedback from various feedback reports

  • To enhance the comparison groups for various projects such as the indicators of effectiveness


Yes well as the proportion of all who attend LCCC and other Ohio colleges, and those who did not enroll in post secondary education subsequent to graduation.

Yes

Yes

Are There Curriculum-Based Characteristics to Identify Cohort Groups?

Is there a Specified Default Group?

No

No

No

Review the Key Questions for Each Group and Characteristic Area

Selecting a Cohort Group to Benchmark Against

Do You Want to Select a Cohort Group by Institutional Type?

Institutional

Type

Curriculum-Based Cohorts

Default Group

Institutional Characteristics

Curriculum Characteristics

Institutional Characteristics

Review Data Questions

Reference: McCormick & Cox, 2003


Application and usage
Application and Usage well as the proportion of all who attend LCCC and other Ohio colleges, and those who did not enroll in post secondary education subsequent to graduation.

  • Key Institutional Processes

    • Institutional Indicators

    • Academic program and cluster review

    • Operation systems review

  • Institutional Effectiveness and Planning

    • A guiding protocol for related work


Next steps
Next Steps well as the proportion of all who attend LCCC and other Ohio colleges, and those who did not enroll in post secondary education subsequent to graduation.

  • February - March—Make any revisions or adjustments to the proposed institutional indicators

  • March—Present revised framework to the District Board of Trustees

  • July—Present framework with the data publication along with updates on current projects and recommendations for any new indicators that might need attention or monitoring


ad