Strategies and Metrics
Georgia’s future depends on a diversity of talents and thinking, and the adaptability and broad base of skills acquired through quality higher education. To properly set plan objectives, an analysis of workforce requirements will be conducted in order to inform completion goals as to the level of degree. System and campus-level goals will then be set and aligned based on participation from target populations and informed by Georgia’s workforce requirements.
The metrics setting process will be a continuing cooperative effort among the University System of Georgia, the Technical College System of Georgia, and each system’s institutions. Private colleges and universities will also be invited to partner in the effort. Measures of success and allocation of goals will be developed to best suit the mission and capabilities of each System and their campuses. Both Systems will deliver campus-level metrics during early 2012.
Institutions have requested more guidance from the System Office as to what should be included in Complete College Georgia progress reports/updates. As a part of this response, we are providing more explicit information linking goals, strategies, and metrics by which progress can be measured. This guide lists key CCG Goals, associated high-impact strategies to achieve those goals, and specific metrics to determine progress.
This guide is intended as a planning tool for institutions as they develop their updates. The System Office will be collecting information from institutions on their use of and experiences with the highlighted strategies and soliciting input on goal-oriented strategies that are not listed. Collecting some of this information will enable the aggregation of data across the system about strategies that are being implemented and impact they are having. We are also hoping that this compendium of completion goals and strategies will serve as inspiration for thinking about how institutions might refocus (if necessary) their goals and strategies in the coming year.
Goal 1: Increase in the number of undergraduate degrees awarded by USG institutions. |
|
Related Strategies |
Related Metrics |
|
Strategy: Target increases in completion for students traditionally underserved in post-secondary education. For example:
Students with disabilities |
Progress metrics 1.1: 5-year history of one-year retention rates for the institution as a whole. 1.2: 5-year history of one-year retention rates for students who begin as full-time students. 1.3: 5-year history of one-year retention rates for students who begin as part-time students. 1.4: 5-year history of one-year retention rates for students entering on federal financial aid (Pell-eligible). 1.5: 5-year history of one-year retention rates for students entering on Learning Support. Outcome Metrics 1.1: Number of college credits awarded to dual enrollment students or joint enrollment students in each of the past 5 academic years. 1.2: Number and percentage of students completing 15, 30, 60, and 90 or more collegiate credit hours as of the end of Spring 2014 term. 1.3: 5-year history of number of associate degrees conferred by institution 1.4: 5-year history of number of bachelor’s degrees conferred by institution 1.5: 5-year history of number of associate degrees conferred, by underserved population to include: (see list of underserved populations above) 1.6: 5-year history of number of bachelor’s degrees conferred, by underserved population. |
|
Strategy: Increase degree completion in STEM fields |
Outcome Metrics 1.7: 5-year history of % (and number) of students completing associate degrees in STEM fields (mathematics, physics, agricultural science, environmental science, chemistry, biology, engineering, engineering technology, architecture, computer science, geology, geography (B.S.), forestry, pharmacy, physical therapy, secondary science, or mathematics education). 1.8: 5-year history of % (and number) of students completing bachelor’s degrees in STEM fields (mathematics, physics, agricultural science, environmental science, chemistry, biology, engineering, engineering technology, architecture, computer science, geology, geography (B.S.), forestry, pharmacy, physical therapy, secondary science, or mathematics education). |
Goal 2: Increase the number of degrees that are earned “on time” (associate degrees in 2 years, bachelor’s degrees in 4 years). |
|
Related Strategies |
Related Metrics |
|
Strategy: Change institutional culture to emphasize taking full-time course loads (15 or more credits per semester) to earn degrees “on time.” |
Process Metrics 2.1: Does the institution have a well-defined program to encourage on-time graduation? Outcome Metrics: 2.1: 5-year history of % (and number) of students completing associate degrees in 2 years. 2.2: 5-year history of % (and number) of students completing bachelor’s degrees in 4 years. 2.3: 5-year history of % (and number) of students enrolling for 15 or more credit hours per semester (fall semesters) 2.4: 5-year history of % (and number) of students successfully completing between 15 and 29 collegiate credit hours in their first academic year. 2.5: 5-year history of % (and number) of students successfully completing 30 or more collegiate credit hours in their first academic year. |
|
Strategy: Create financial incentives (through tuition plans) to encourage students to take full course loads and finish on time. |
Process metric 2.2: Does the institution have a tuition structure that provides clearly defined financial incentives for full-time course-taking and on-time completion? |
Goal 3: Decrease excess credits earned on the path to getting a degree. |
|
Related Strategies |
Related Metrics |
|
Strategy: Provide “program maps” that plot the path to a degree and reduce choice through “choice architecture.” Program maps should define the appropriate mathematics pathway for each major and drive students to complete Area A1 English requirements in the first year and the Area A2 mathematics requirements in the first semester. |
Process Metric 3.1: % of programs of study (majors) for which programs maps (must include appropriate mathematics pathways) have been established. |
|
Strategy: Provide “meta-major” maps for students who have not decided on majors that provide them with courses that are likely to count toward their majors when chosen. Meta-major maps should define the appropriate mathematics pathway for each meta-major and drive students to complete Area A1 English requirements in the first year and the Area A2 mathematics requirements in the first semester. |
Process Metrics 3.2: Have meta-majors been defined for the institution? 3.3: Have meta-major maps been created for the first semester (associate degree institutions) or first year (bachelor’s degree institutions) for all meta-majors (must include appropriate mathematics pathways)? |
|
Strategy: Create default schedules for students in majors or meta-majors; students cannot register for other courses without permission. |
Process Metric 3.4: Does the institution have default schedules such that students must receive permission to deviate from the default schedule? |
|
Strategy: Offer block schedules for students in meta-majors or majors for the first semester or first year. |
Process Metric 3.5: Does the institution offer block scheduling in at least the first semester? Progress Metrics 3.1 What percentage of first-time first-semester students are enrolled in block schedules? |
|
Strategy: Require students to select majors or programs of study by the end of the first semester (two-year institutions) or first year (four-year institutions). |
Process Metric 3.6: Does the institution require students to select a major by the end of the first semester (associate degree programs) or first year (bachelor’s degree programs)? Progress Metrics 3.2: For the 2014-2015 academic year, percentage of students with declared majors by the beginning of the second semester (associate degree programs) 3.3: For the 2014-2015 academic year, percentage of students with declared majors by the beginning of the second semester second year (bachelor’s degree programs) |
|
Strategy: Provide students with exposure to majors and careers within the first semester or year of study to facilitate selection of appropriate programs of study or majors. |
Process Metric 3.7: Does institution have an operational mechanism to encourage career/major exploration in the first semester or first year? |
|
Strategy: Establish regional partnerships to provide degree pathways that match workforce needs. |
Process Metrics 3.: List and describe up to three important academic partnerships between your institution and other institutions in your region. 3.11: List and describe up to three important partnerships between your institution and businesses in your region. |
|
Outcome Metrics 3.1: 5-year history of number of collegiate credits earned at degree conferral for students earning associate degrees . 3.2: 5-year history of number of collegiate credits earned at degree conferral for students earning bachelor’s degrees |
|
Goal 4: Provide intentional advising to keep students on track to graduate. |
|
Related Strategies |
Related Metrics |
|
Strategy: Establish milestones as part of program maps to facilitate defining when students are “off track.” |
Process Metrics 4.1 Are milestones included in programs maps? |
|
Strategy: Use predictive analytics (EAB, D2L, Ellucian, or other) to help identify students who are off track and to help students understand their likelihood of success in particular programs. |
Process Metrics 4.2: Does the institution use predictive analytics to help students understand their likelihood of success in particular courses or programs of study? 4.2.1 What form of predictive analytics is available at the institution? (EAB, D2L, Ellucian, other) If “other” please explain. |
|
Strategy: Establish criteria for identifying students who may need special interventions in the semester (e.g., lack of attendance, poor performance on early assignments). |
Process Metrics 4.3: Does the institution have clear criteria for identifying students who are “off-track” in their programs? 4.3.1: If yes, what are the criteria for being off-track? 4.4: Does the institution have clear criteria for identifying students who are off-track in courses during the semester? 4.4.1: If yes, what are the criteria for being off-track in a course? |
|
Strategy: Use Degree Works to track student progress. |
Process Metrics 4.5: Number of times Degree Works is used by faculty, advisors, and students (track separately) in the 2014-2015 academic year. |
|
Strategy: Ensure that students who meet off-track criteria receive timely and targeted advising intervention. |
Process Metrics 4.6: What number and percentage of students were off-track on their programs of study in Fall 2014? 4.7: Please list up to five types of interventions your institution has in place for student in need of additional support as indicated by predictive analytics data. 4.8: Of those off-program-track students, what number and percentage were seen by an advisor within one semester of going off track? 4.9: What number and percentage of students were off-track in one or more of their courses in Fall 2014? 4.10: Of the students who were off-track in their semester course work, what number and percentage received interventions within one week of the off-track notification? |
|
Outcome Metric Percentage of credits successfully completed (A, B, C, P, S) versus attempted (A, B, C, D, F, U, W, WF) each fall semester for the past 5 years. |
|
Goal 5: Award degrees to students who may have already met requirements for associate degrees via courses taken at one or more institutions. |
|
Related Strategies |
Related Metrics |
|
Strategy: Add information at matriculation about automatic degree award for all institutions, with opt-out option (so that degrees may be awarded when earned). |
Process Metric 5.1: Does institution require students to sign document at matriculation indicating that associate degrees may be awarded automatically when requirements are met? |
|
Strategy: Eliminate requirements to apply for associate degrees. (Could still be required to apply to participate in graduation ceremony.) Strategy: Eliminate graduation application fees for associate degrees. (Could wrap into another fee OR charge only for students who wish to participate in graduation ceremony.) |
Process Metric 5.2: Does the associate degree institution require students to apply to graduate? 5.3: Does the associate degree institution charge a fee to graduate?? If yes: 5.3.1: Fee charged to all students for award of degree? 5.3.2: Fee charged only to student who wish to participate in graduation ceremony? |
|
Strategy: Automatically conduct degree audits of all students with 60 or more credit hours at associate degree institutions to see whether they have met requirements for degrees. If so, an associate degree would be awarded unless students have opted out or did not have the opportunity to sign off on the initial permission for automatic award of degree. |
Process Metric 5.4: Does associate degree institution automatically audit all students with 60 or more credit hours to determine degree eligibility? |
|
Strategy: Add information about “reverse transfer” opportunities when students matriculate at transfer institutions. Students must “opt-in” to have their information sent back to associate degree institutions and to have degree awarded, if eligible. |
Process Metric 5.5: Does institution ask students transferring in to opt-in to allow receiving institution to send academic information back to the sending institution for the purpose of awarding associate degrees? |
|
Strategy: Publicize the idea of degree completion via “reverse transfer” within the institution and locally. |
Process Metric 5.6: Does the institution publicize the possibility of earning associate degrees via reverse transfer to its students and the community? |
|
Outcome Metrics 5.1: Number of students enrolled at associate-degree-granting institution with 60 or more collegiate credits and no degree in 2014-2015 (Applicable only to institutions that grant associate degrees.) 5.2: Number of students that transferred 15 or more credits from an associate degree institution that had accumulated 60 or more collegiate credits and no degree in 2014-2015. 5.3: 5-year history of number of associate degrees awarded through reverse transfer of credit. |
|
Goal 6: Shorten time to degree completion through programs that allow students to earn college credit while still in high school and by awarding credit for prior learning that is verified by appropriate assessment. |
|
Related Strategies |
Related Metrics |
|
Strategy: Participate in dual enrollment or joint enrollment programs for high school students. |
Process Metric 6.1: Does the institution award credit to high school students via dual enrollment or joint enrollment? |
|
Strategy: Sponsor an Early College. |
Process Metric 6.2: Does the institution sponsor an Early Learning Academy or Early College? Outcome Metrics 6.1: Number of college credits awarded to Early College or Early Learning Academy students in each of the past 5 academic years. 6.2: Number of Early College students that have graduated from high school in each of the past 5 academic years. 6.3: Number of Early College students that have graduated from your institution as part of their Early College experience in each of the past 5 academic years. |
|
Strategy: Award credit based on Advanced Placement scores/exams. |
Process Metric 6.3: Does the institution award credit for Advanced Placement scores/exams? Outcome Metric 6.4: Number of credits awarded by institution awarded based on AP exams in each of the past 5 academic years. |
|
Strategy: Award credit based on International Baccalaureate scores/exams. |
Process Metric 6.4: Does the institution award credit for International Baccalaureate scores/exams? Outcome Metric 6.5: Number of credits awarded by institution awarded based on International Baccalaureate exams/degree completion in each of the past 5 academic years. |
|
Strategy: Award credit based on assessment of prior learning via CLEP scores. |
Process Metric 6.5: Does the institution award credit based on CLEP scores? Outcome Metric 6.6: Number of credits awarded by institution awarded based on CLEP scores in each of the past 5 years. |
|
Strategy: Award credit based on assessment of prior learning via DSST scores. |
Process Metric 6.6: Does the institution award credit based on DSST scores? Outcome Metric 6.7: Number of credits awarded by institution awarded based on DSST scores in each of the past 5 years. |
|
Strategy: Award credit based on ACE credit recommendations. |
Process Metric 6.7: Does the institution follow ACE recommendations for awarding credit (including those based on CLEP or DSST scores)? |
|
Strategy: Award credit based on portfolio review. |
Process Metric 6.8: Does the institution award credit based on portfolio review? |
Goal 7: Increase the likelihood of degree completion by transforming the way that remediation is accomplished. |
|
Related Strategies |
Related Metrics |
|
Strategy: Enroll most students in need of remediation in gateway collegiate courses in English and mathematics, with corequisite Learning Support. Strategy: Combine remediation in English and reading. Strategy: Ensure that all remediation is targeted toward supporting students in the skills they need to pass the collegiate course. Strategy: End the practice of requiring students to withdraw from all collegiate courses when they withdraw from Learning Support courses. Strategy: Students have unlimited “attempts” to complete corequisite remediation. |
Process Metric 7.1: Number of students requiring remediation in Fall 2014 in English (or combined English/reading), reading, and mathematics. 7.2: Number of students receiving corequisite remediation in Fall 2014 in English (or combined English/reading), reading, and mathematics. Outcome Metrics 7.1: Number of students starting in Fall 2014 that were placed in remediation/learning support. 7.2: % and number of students starting in corequisite remediation in Fall 2014 that complete the college course within 1 semester; 2 semesters, 3 semesters, more than 3 semesters in English (or combined English/reading), reading, and mathematics. 7.3: % and number of students starting in stand-alone (not corequisite) remediation in Fall 2014 that complete the entry-level college course within 2 semesters; 3 semesters, 4 semesters, more than 4 semesters in English (or combined English/reading), reading, and mathematics. Outcome Metrics to be used in the future as data becomes available: 7.4: % of students that start in corequisite remediation that complete degrees on time. 7.5: % of students that start in corequisite remediation that complete degrees within 150% of time. 7.6: % of students that start in stand-alone (not corequisite) remediation that complete degrees on time. 7.7: % of students that start in stand-alone (not corequisite) remediation that complete degrees within 150% of time. |
Goal 8: Restructure instructional delivery to support educational excellence and student success. |
|
|
Related Strategies |
Related Metrics |
|
Strategy: Expand completely online opportunities. |
Process Metric 8.1: Are fully online courses offered to students at the institution? Outcome Metric 8.1: Number of credits successfully completed in Fall 2014 (A, B, C, P, S grade) for courses offered completely online. 8.2: Number of credits attempted in Fall 2014 (A, B, C, P, S, F, U, W, WF grade) for courses offered completely online. 8.3: Number and % of degrees conferred in which at least one course has been fully online in the 2014-2015 academic year. 8.4: Number and % of degrees conferred in which 50% of more of the instruction has been via fully online courses in the 2014-2015 academic year. 8.5: Number and % of degrees conferred on time in which 50% of more of the instruction has been via fully online courses in the 2014-2015 academic year. |
|
Strategy: Implement alternative delivery models, such as hybrid instruction, flipped classrooms, and emporium-model instruction. |
Process Metric 8.2: Are alternative delivery models implemented at the institution? Outcome Metric 8.6: Number of credits successfully completed in Fall 2014 (A, B, C, P, S grade) for courses offered via alternative delivery models (e.g., hybrid instruction, flipped classrooms, and emporium-model instruction). 8.7: Number of credits attempted in Fall 2014 (A, B, C, P, S grade) for courses offered via alternative delivery models (e.g., hybrid instruction, flipped classrooms, and emporium-model instruction). |
Goal 9: Improve access for underserved and/or priority communities. |
|
Related Strategies |
Related Metrics |
|
Strategy: Target recruitment and enrollment for priority communities. |
Access Metrics 9.1: 5-year history of number of entering students, by underserved population to include:
9.2: Number of students enrolled in dual enrollment or joint enrollment programs at the institution in each of the past 5 academic years. |
