1. CAL POLY’S ENROLLMENT PLAN (A PROPOSAL)
2. (Some components of the proposal represent no changes. They are included for completeness.)
THIS IS A PRESENTATION WHICH ARTICULATES THE INSTITUTIONAL ACTIVITIES WHICH RELATE TO THE ADMISSION OF NEW STUDENTS TO THE UNIVERSITY AND WOULD BE A COMPONENT OF A LARGER ENROLLMENT MANAGEMENT PLAN
IMPLEMENTATION OF ALL OR PART OF THE PROPOSAL WOULD BE A MULTI-YEAR PROJECT
Establish University/College Size (Academic Deans’ Council)
Filing Period (student applicants - CSU defined)
Build Initial Pool (admissions/database)
4. ESTABLISH UNIVERSITY/COLLEGE SIZE (FOR THE NEXT ACADEMIC YEAR) REQUIRED ACTION : Academic Deans’ Council
Determine university size
Determine the percentage of new students to be admitted by the MCA (multi-criteria approach to admission)
Determine the percentage of new students to be admitted as university interests
Determine the percentage of new international students to be admitted
5. AS REGARDS “DETERMINE UNIVERSITY SIZE”
BEST GUESS: In the absence of data to the contrary, the university and college sizes could be projected based on steady state funding. A method of scaling could be developed which would allow mid-course corrections (in January) based on the most recent budget information.
AS REGARDS “THE PERCENTAGE OF NEW INTERNATIONAL STUDENTS TO BE ADMITTED”
The decision could consider the state of the existing support system, quality of the applicant pool, and the willingness and ability of a college to admit additional international students
6. REQUIRED ACTIONS (college size): Academic Deans’ Council
Number of students in each college (Responsibility: to be determined)
Projected number of continuing students (Responsibility: to be determined)
Projected number of students to be readmitted (Responsibility: to be determined)
Projected number of students to be disqualified (Responsibility: to be determined)
Projected number of students to graduate (Responsibility: to be determined)
Development of simple mathematical model (“plug & chug”)
Outcome: The above information would result in a projected differential (delta) for each college (the delta, if enrolled the following Fall, would result in steady state enrollment in the college and university)
7. SOURCES OF ADJUSTMENTS TO COLLEGE SIZE
Adjustments resulting from a changing university size
Adjustments due to input/retention/output factors
Adjustments due to other factors (e.g., new programs)
Adjustments due to input/retention/output factors (as described below, basically for first-time freshmen with modification for transfers) would have the following objectives:
To link college size to comparisons using input/retention output factors and based on state and campus information
To have the campus student population reflect the population of California high school students interested in the academic programs available at the campus
Input: Evaluation of previously enrolled population based on factors that measure the quality of the enrolled college population versus state norms of students with similar interests, and versus norms of enrolled university population. Factors include GPA, test results, gender, ethnicity, etc. (Responsibility: to be determined)
Retention: Assessment of each college’s continuing students performance at the university versus comparable general student population on factors such as Cal Poly GPA, hours attempted and earned, and retention rates and progress towards degree objectives
Output: Graduation rates and timeliness of graduation
9. OPINION THE INPUT, RETENTION AND OUTPUT DATA SHOULD BE PRESENTED IN A SIMPLE, STRAIGHTFORWARD MANNER WITH SOURCES CITED. IT SHOULD BE RELEVANT, BUT UNDERSTANDABLE. IT SHOULD NOT BE WEIGHTED, MANIPULATED OR DISGUISED BY COMPLEX FORMULAS. A SIMPLE SCHEME COULD BE USED TO ARRIVE AT SOME OVERALL ASSESSMENT OF THE STUDENT BODY WITHIN A GIVEN COLLEGE. THE OBJECTIVE WOULD BE TO DETERMINE THE ADJUSTMENTS TO THE PROJECTED DIFFERENTIALS FOR EACH COLLEGE.
10. Outcome: Adjustments would be made to the projected differential for each college to arrive at differential targets for the next cycle
Role: Adjustments would be restricted to less than or equal to 5% annually (i.e., new college size would be in the 95% to 105% range of existing size)
12. SEPARATE APPLICATIONS AND PROCESSES FOR:
FINANCIAL AID AND SCHOLARSHIP STUDENTS
METHODS OF APPLICATION:
(PREFERRED) ELECTRONIC APPLICATION (DOS or MAC)
(OPTIONAL) PAPER APPLICATION
13. NEAR TERM OBJECTIVE:
ELIMINATION OF ASQ (Admissions Supplemental Questionnaire) AND COMPLETE AUTOMATION IN THE DATA COLLECTION REQUIRED FOR POPULATING THE ADMISSIONS DATABASE
INCLUSION OF FINANCIAL AID ELEMENTS WITH ELECTRONIC ADMISSIONS APPLICATION
DEVELOP A “CAL POLY” LOOK TO ALL PUBLICATIONS ASSOCIATED WITH THE ENROLLMENT PLANNING EFFORTS
ELECTRONIC TRANSMISSION OF HIGH SCHOOL AND COMMUNITY COLLEGE TRANSCRIPTS AND AUTOMATION OF ARTICULATION PROCESS RESULTING IN BUILDING THE INITIAL ACADEMIC PROFILE OF EACH APPLICANT
ELIMINATION OF ASQ WILL RESULT IN FASTER PROCESSING AND TIMING FOR ADMISSION DECISIONS. AUTOMATION OF DATA COLLECTION WILL PROVIDE MORE ACCURATE AND TIMELY DATA, REQUIRE LESS HUMAN INTERVENTION AND RESULT IN BETTER SERVICE SINCE THE RESOURCES COULD BE REDIRECTED TO OTHER SERVICE ISSUES.
EARLY DATA COLLECTION WILL PERMIT DELIVERY OF FINANCIAL AID AND SCHOLARSHIP AWARDS WITH ADMISSION NOTICES.
18. The Venn diagram raises several issues; however, the most important of these relate to the size and location of the University Interests category. Issues include:
1. WHAT IS A REASONABLE IDEAL SIZE FOR UNIVERSITY INTERESTS?
5% < % to be admitted for University Interest < 10%
Note: Clearly there is an assumption that diversity scoring will permit the shift of significant numbers of students historically admitted under university interests into one of the two MCA categories
19. 2. WHERE SHOULD THE UNIVERSITY INTEREST CATEGORY BE PHYSICALLY LOCATED IN THE DIAGRAM?
SPECIFICALLY, SHOULD IT BE COMPLETELY WITHIN THE POOL MEETING MINIMUM ACADEMIC QUALIFICATIONS, OR CAN ADMITTED STUDENTS COME FROM THE INITIAL POOL, OR EVEN OUTSIDE THE INITIAL POOL?
IT IS ASSUMED THAT ALL STUDENTS (EXCEPT INTERNATIONAL STUDENTS) WILL BE SCORED BY THE MCA
20. STEP 1: DETERMINATION OF QUALIFIED POOL USING MINIMUM ACADEMIC SCORE NOTE: IT WOULD BE RECOMMENDED THAT NO MORE THAN TWO FRESHMAN MODELS AND SIX TRANSFER MODELS BE BUILT AROUND A GENERAL DESIRED ACADEMIC PROFILE (COLLEGES/DEPARTMENTS WOULD SELECT FROM THE VARIOUS MODELS)
21. ISSUE: STEP 1 ASSUMED THAT THE CURRENT NUMBER OF MODELS WOULD BE REDUCED TO EIGHT OR LESS. HOW COULD THIS BE ACHIEVED? BEST GUESS: Each Dean nominates an individual who can serve as an effective spokesperson for the various departments and who understands the need to serve as a two-way communicator. In addition, the Academic Senate would find a similar representative and the Admissions Office would provide professional support. The committee would review the Enrollment Plan together with any specific instructions the Academic deans’ Council would care to transmit. After the committee had completed its task, the entire committee would give a verbal report to the Academic Deans’ Council, the Academic Senate, and each College.
23. STEP 3: DETERMINATION OF COMPONENTS FOR DIVERSITY
24. REQUIRED ACTION (Academic Deans’ Council):
1. CREATE UP TO TWO FRESHMAN MODELS AND SIX TRANSFER MODELS (COMMITTEE ACTION)
2. ADOPT A MINIMUM ACADEMIC SCORE (FOR EACH MODEL). THIS DEFINES THE QUALIFIED ACADEMIC POOL (ACADEMIC DEANS’ COUNCIL)
3. DETERMINE THE PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS TO BE ADMITTED USING THE ACADEMIC RANKINGS DETERMINED BY THE MODELS (ACADEMIC DEANS’ COUNCIL)
4. REQUIRE EVERY APPLICANT TO HAVE AN ACADEMIC SCORE
25. RECOMMENDED RANGE (to be admitted using academic rankings):
50% < % to be admitted on academic rankings < 70%. In fact, the objective should be to “enroll” this percentage, not merely admit (Academic Deans’ Council)
5. DETERMINE THE DIVERSITY POINTS BASED UPON APPROPRIATE DATA (Admissions and Evaluations Office) AND ADD DIVERSITY POINTS TO THE BALANCE OF THE QUALIFIED POOL
6. DETERMINE THE PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS TO BE ADMITTED USING THE COMBINATION OF ACADEMIC AND DIVERSITY POINTS (Academic Deans’ Council)
ONCE THE PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS TO BE ADMITTED USING ACADEMIC QUALIFICATIONS AND THE PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS BEING ADMITTED AS UNIVERSITY INTERESTS ARE DETERMINED, THIS GROUP WILL BE ESTABLISHED (TOTAL EQUALS 100%)
ADJUSTMENTS TO THE DIFFERENT ADMISSION ROUTES SHOULD BE LIMITED TO 5% ANNUALLY
SEVERAL YEARS WOULD BE REQUIRED TO TRANSITION TO A NEW MIX
27. 7. JANUARY 15 (STEP 5) ADMIT STUDENTS: TOP PERCENTAGE OF STUDENTS IN BOTH THE ACADEMIC AND ACADEMIC/DIVERSITY CATEGORIES WOULD BE ADMITTED WITH DISTINCTION. EACH DEAN’S OFFICE WOULD SEND CERTIFICATES TO THE TOP 10-15% OF THE RANKINGS. STUDENTS WOULD RECEIVE MAXIMUM FA PACKAGE FROM ALL SOURCES (NO-NEED AND NEED-BASED).
28. FEBRUARY....MARCH....APRIL UNIVERSITY EFFORTS ARE FOCUSED AND COORDINATED TO ENSURE ADMITTED STUDENTS ENROLL. PARTICIPANTS INCLUDE:
OTHER SUPPORT GROUPS
29. FEBRUARY 1ST HOME -TOWNER CAMPAIGN BEGINS. UNIVERSITY RELATIONS ARRANGES FOR LOCAL NEWSPAPERS TO CARRY ITEMS ON STUDENTS ADMITTED TO CAL POLY AND AWARDED SCHOLARSHIPS.
30. FEBRUARY 15TH FINANCIAL INCENTIVE CAMPAIGN BEGINS. NO-NEED FUNDING GRANTED FROM UNIVERSITY, COLLEGE AND PRIVATE SOURCES IS DIRECTED TOWARDS STUDENTS ADMITTED WITH DISTINCTION (ACADEMIC AND DIVERSITY)
31. MARCH PRIORITY NEED BASE PRE-PACKAGED FINANCIAL AID ESTIMATES. TARGETED GROUPS INCLUDE TOP PERCENTAGE ADMITTED (BOTH ACADEMIC AND DIVERSITY).
32. MARCH/APRIL RECRUITMENT CAMPAIGN
FACULTY TELEMARKETING AND DIRECT-MAIL ACTIVITIES (ADMITTED STUDENTS)
ADMISSION OFFICERS VISIT ADMITTED STUDENTS
FINANCIAL AID AND SCHOLARSHIP FOLLOW-UP
ADMITTED STUDENTS VISITING CAMPUS RECEIVE SPECIAL ATTENTION
STAFF/ALUMNI/STUDENTS TELEMARKETING AND DIRECT-MAIL ACTIVITIES (E.G., BLACK CAUCUS, MECHA CLUB, ETC.)