Loading in 2 Seconds...
Loading in 2 Seconds...
The Impact of Raising Admissions Requirements on Entering Freshmen Class Diversity at California State University, Long Beach. Presented by Vincent A. (Van) Novack, Ph.D. Director, Institutional Research California State University, Long Beach.
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.
The Impact of Raising Admissions Requirements on Entering Freshmen Class Diversity at California State University, Long Beach Presented by Vincent A. (Van) Novack, Ph.D. Director, Institutional Research California State University, Long Beach
CSU Eligibility Index(High School GPA * 800) + SAT Composite Score • Primary admission criteria (students must also meet course pattern requirements) • CSU minimum eligibility = 2,900 • With 2.50 GPA, SAT of 900+ required • Nearly 75% of freshmen applicants admitted prior to impaction
Impaction Methodology • Chancellor’s Office approval required • First implemented in fall 2002 • Only freshmen affected in first year • Local service area defined (index = 2,900) • “Extended” local service area defined (slightly higher index) • Considerably higher eligibility requirements for rest of California and non-residents • All admits must meet minimum CSU eligibility
Why Freshmen? • Freshmen represent largest and fastest growing new student cohort at CSULB • CSU Chancellor’s Office allows impaction for entire class as well as by academic program • California Master Plan designates community college transfers as first priority • Nearly 80% of freshmen applicants originate outside CSULB’s local area
Enrollment Management at Cal State Long Beach • Presidential Ad Hoc Committee composed of mostly administrators formed in 1999 • Standing Advisory Committee on Enrollment established by Academic Senate in 2002 • Advisory Committee is chaired by newly created Vice Provost for Enrollment • Includes six faculty members serving staggered three-year terms • Includes community, K-12, and community college representatives
Fall 2002 Enrollment After Impaction • Fall 2002 Freshmen class = 3,037 • Freshmen class reduced by 1,480 • Represents a reduction of 32.8% • Mean composite SAT increased from 979 in fall 2001 to 1018 in fall 2002 • Mean High School GPA increased from 3.21 in fall 2001 to 3.41 in fall 2002 • Highest SAT and HSGPA of any freshmen class in CSULB history • Three groups most affected by impaction: African Americans, Latinos, & Caucasians
Percent of First-Time Freshmen from Outside Local Service Tiers • 57.2% of all freshmen • 70.6% of Caucasians • 65.0% of Asians • 65.6% of “Other” ethnicity • 50.3% of African Americans • 46.0% of Latinos
Changes for Fall 2003 • Eliminated eligibility index differential between tiers one and two • Added selected tier three schools to tier two • Declared certain majors impacted for upper division transfers • Enforced admissions filing deadline for all first-time freshmen • Considered adjusting eligibility index for tier three • Targeted certain populations for recruitment efforts and admissions follow-up
Freshmen Enrollment Goals, Fall 2003 • Enrolled freshmen class target of 3,300 to 3,800 • Approximate fall 2001 ethnic distribution (last year before impaction)
Concerns Regarding Continuing Impact of Impaction Methodology • Bifurcation • Observed differences in pre-college performance of local versus non-local • Similar observations regarding Caucasians and minorities • Future implications regarding graduation and retention • The “Haves” and the “Have Nots” • Similar issues regarding transfer student impaction methodology (spring 2004)
Top Ten Institutions for CSULB Students Admitted but Not Enrolled, Fall 2002
Top Ten Institutions for CSULB Students Admitted but Not Enrolled, Fall 2003
Changes for 2004 and Beyond • Explore the possible use of non-quantitative admissions criteria • Monitor effect of impaction methodologies for upper division transfer students • Continue targeted recruiting to stimulate applications from selected populations • Continue more aggressive follow-up regarding admitted students
Perhaps More Important: Philosophical Considerations • What is the true mission of CSULB? • Who is our desired clientele? • What becomes of CSU-eligible students not admitted by CSULB? • How do we get “buy-in” from campus constituents if we endorse anything other than accepting only the most “qualified?”
Conclusion • Nothing is more important to any university than who we admit and how many • CSULB is facing unprecedented demand in a time of fiscal crisis • How do we adjust our impaction methodologies when demand decreases?
Conclusion (continued): • Increasing enrollment forecast through at least 2010 for entire CSU system • The CSU will accept a decreasing proportion of college-eligible high school graduates • Eligibility requirements must be found that do not disproportionately impact minorities or first generation students • Graduation and retention efforts must be an integral part of enrollment management
“Fairness is what Justice Really Is.” Potter Stewart Associate Justice, US Supreme Court October 1958