NEW CHALLENGES: NEW METRICS Drexel University

Today’s Discussion The Continuing Need to Demonstrate Results in Our Academic Programs Eight Trends in Using Metrics in Higher Education A New Scoring Rubric for Assessing Program Effectiveness, Efficiency and Essentiality

Why Do We Need to Demonstrate Results? Drexel External Pressures Economic Uncertainty Strategic Initiatives Demand for Quality Pace of Technological Change Internal Realities

External Pressures Shifting Market Demand for Programs Accreditation Focus on Learning Outcomes New and Growing Federal Reporting Requirements Donor, Corporate and Foundation Expectations

Economic Uncertainty Economic Meltdown: Impact on Endowment Return Economic Meltdown: Impact on Tuition-Setting and Affordability Economic Meltdown: Impact on Bond Ratings Moody’s Five Key Factors (2013): – 1. Depressed Family Incomes and Net Worth – 2. All Revenue Sources are Strained – 3. Rising Student Debt and Defaults – 4. Public and Political Scrutiny = More Regulations – 5. Need for Strong Leadership and Better Governance

Strategic Initiatives Academic Excellence Student Experience Global Impact Innovation Nexus Enrollment Growth

Demand for Quality Three Reports in the Last Two Years: What Will They Learn? (ACTA) – Decries the malaise in the core – lack of rigor in General Education requirements. Academically Adrift: Limited Learning on College Campuses (Arum and Roksa) – More than a third of college seniors were no better at writing and reasoning than at their first semester of college. Degree Qualifications Profile (Lumina) – Identifies five spheres of learning, based in part on the Bologna Process in Europe.

Pace of Technological Change Students coming to campus with heightened expectations for advanced technology New, technology-driven delivery systems, academic and non- academic Technology and relationships, including pervasive use of social networking Students who learn online tripled in a decade (from 9.6% to 29.3% )

Internal Realities Funding reductions Focus on Evidence-Based Learning Pressures to Keep Tuition in Check Undernourished Programs Need to reinvest in our future

Summary of Forces Meeting Increased National and Global Expectations Coping With Economic Pressures Achieving Strategic Priorities Responding to Demands for Demonstrating Quality Keeping Up With Technological Changes Managing Resources Strategically

How to Reconcile All These Forces? – Integrate Planning Efforts – Make Institutional Mission Operational – Focus Realistically on Resources – Reallocate Resources from Lower to Higher Priorities – Demonstrate Drexel’s Culture of Evidence

Eight Trends: Higher Education Metrics The Forces Behind Better Metrics: – Public Policymakers – Accrediting Agencies – Governing Boards – Donors – Higher Education Leaders

Eight Key Changes in Metrics 1. From Budgeting as Objects of Expenditure TO: Budgeting as Programs

Eight Trends (Cont’d) 2. From Seat Time TO: Competencies Acquired

Eight Trends (Cont’d) 3. From Quality as Inputs TO: Quality as Outcomes

Eight Trends (Cont’d) 4. From Internal Validation (Grades, e.g.) TO: External Validation (National Norms)

Eight Trends (Cont’d) 5. From Curriculum as Closely-Held TO: Curriculum as Open & Shared

Eight Trends (Cont’d) 6. From Enrollment Success – TO: Student Success

Eight Trends (Cont’d) 7. From Management Around Administrative Structure TO: Management Around Program Effectiveness

Eight Trends (Cont’d) 8. From Funding Needs TO: Funding Opportunities

Metrics in Action: A New Scoring Rubric Assesses Relative Academic Program Worth – Criteria (Ten) – Weighting (0 to 100) – Inter-rater Reliability – Differentiation by Scoring (1,3,9) – Ranking by Quintiles Source: Robert C. Dickeson, 2013

Implications for the Future 1. Building and Maintaining New Databases 2. Shifting Accountability Through Cost Accounting, By Program 3. Focusing on IT and IR 4. Strengthening the Nexus: CAO and CFO 5. Anticipating, Not Reacting, to New Demands

For Further Discussion Robert C. Dickeson, Drexel University, September 11, 2013