• Encourages continuous quality improvement • Motivates change • Visualizes progress toward goals • Identifies peer models and competitors • Clarifies goals • Encourages transparency and
Trang 1Assessment: Benchmarking ASU Chris Smith, Misha Cummings, Kasey Kellums, Brandi Stehle
Introduction
Why Benchmark?
• Provides realistic and achievable targets
• Encourages continuous quality improvement
• Motivates change
• Visualizes progress toward goals
• Identifies peer models and competitors
• Clarifies goals
• Encourages transparency and accountability
• Unveils strengths for marketing purposes
• Uncovers weaknesses for planning interventions
Results
The following metrics would be useful for gauging progress toward ASU’s goals as identified through the 2010-2014 strategic plan:
• Existing data published on ASU’s website include:
• Diversity
• Tuition
• Yearly Student Retention Rates
• New Student Applications
• ASU currently compares itself to a select few schools
in the state and across the nation Benchmarking Institutions listed on ASU’s website include:
• University of Central Arkansas
• University of Arkansas at Little Rock
Conclusion
• Our current choice of benchmarks is not allowing us
to clearly see where we stand or help us define steps needed to reach our goal of becoming a
research-intensive institution
• For a realistic image of where we stand and where
we need to go, ASU needs to have a more diverse yet reasonable comparison group
Suggestions
*What to Benchmark?
• Funding for Graduate Programs
• Faculty hires, diversity, and scholarship
• State and Extramural Funding
• Trends in Quality, Persistence, and Retention
*Against Whom? For comparative data:
• Southern Public Universities
• 4 Year and Above
• Master’s Large and Above
*Against Whom? For goal setting:
• Research Intensive
• Public
• “DRU” Doctoral/Research Carnegie Classified
What to Benchmark?
We examined ASU’s Strategic Plan to identify possible
metrics for each of 7 ASU institutional priorities
Benchmark Against Whom?
• We examined benchmarking data of other Carnegie
classified Master’s Large Universities to identify possible schools against whom ASU might benchmark
• We searched ASU’s website to identify publicized
comparative data
Priority Metric
Research-intensive Classification Increased Enrollment of
Well-Qualified Students
Graduate program funds, degrees, extramural research/awards,
Graduation/Retention Trends Financial Aid Retention
Engagement and Service
Financial Aid Distribution and Associated Default Rate
National Survey - NSSE Diverse, Excellent Faculty
Transparency
Ranked Faculty – Number, Demographics, and Productivity Shared Governance Involvement Expand Resources/Reform
Budget
Revenue/Spending per FTE student
Excellence in Teaching Faculty Development and Awards
ASU’s 2010-2014 Institutional Priorities and Select Goals
Priority: Refine ASU’s mission and identity as an emerging global
research institution
• Continue to Promote the Transformation of ASU Into a
Research‐Intensive Institution
• Promote Outcome‐Based Decision Making
• Increase Undergraduate and Graduate Enrollment of Well‐Qualified
Students
Priority: Create a service and support culture that is focused on
student learning, retention, and
academic success
• Enhance student persistence and academic success
• Manage the use of financial aid to help attract and retain students
Priority: Create learning experiences through student engagement,
service to our region, and partnerships with our community
• Promote safety, environmental responsibility and stewardship
Priority: Create a collaborative decision-making environment that
is based on effective shared governance, open communication,
and mutual respect of all members of our teaching and learning
community
• Create transparency in planning and decision making
Priority: Adopt polices and models that continuously promote,
grow, and reward all modes of effective teaching and learning
experiences
• Refocus excellence in teaching and learning
Priority: Increase our diversity and expand our globalization
• Attract, employ, retain, and advance greater numbers of university
faculty and staff from underrepresented groups
Priority: Continually improve our institutional efficacy and
alignment of resources with our priorities
• Enhance recruitment and retention initiatives of faculty and staff
• Expand resources and refine budget procedures
Research Question
How can benchmarking be used to gauge
success as ASU seeks to fulfill the goals of its 2010-2014 Strategic Plan?
Abstract
Accreditation of ASU by the Higher Learning Commission
is tied directly to evidence of campus-wide commitment to
institutional priorities Although ASU makes public its data
on institutional effectiveness, benchmarking data are
notably absent Analyzing institutional planning
documents and data currently publicized on ASU’s
website, we conclude that intentional benchmarking
against similar and model institutions would advance
ASU’s progress toward fulfillment of its 2010-2014
strategic plan
Colleges and Universities Similar to ASU – Master’s L
Research Intensive Public Universities -