Higher Education in Focus 2017

Home , Education in Minnesota

20162017 ANNUAL HigherREPORT20162017 Education to the Member States inANNUAL Focus 2017 Selected Performance Indicators REPORT to the Member States MINNESOTA

MINNESOTA MHEC Est. 1991

ABOUT THE MIDWESTERN HIGHER COMPACT LEADERSHIP, 2017-2018 EDUCATION COMPACT Chair: Mr. Tim Flakoll, North Dakota Governor’s Designee; The Midwestern Higher Education Compact is a nonprofit Vice Chair: Dr. Ken Sauer, Indiana Commission for Higher regional organization, established by compact statute, to Education; Treasurer: Ms. Olivia Madison, Iowa State assist Midwestern states in advancing higher education University (retired). Immediate Past Chair: Mr. Richard through interstate cooperation and resource sharing. Short, Kansas Governor’s Designee Member states are Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, President: Mr. Larry Isaak Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, Ohio, South Dakota, and Wisconsin. Collectively, the © Copyright 2017 Midwestern Higher Education Compact. Compact creates solutions that build higher education’s All rights reserved. capacity to better serve individuals, institutions, and Correspondence concerning this report should be sent to states by leveraging the region’s expertise, ideas, and Aaron Horn, Director for Policy Research, experiences through multi-state convening, programs, [email protected]. contracts, and research. Updates to this report may be found at: http://www.mhec.org/research.

2 2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA Selected Performance Indicators

INCREASING EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT 5 Transfer-Adjusted Percentage of First-Time, Certificate/ Degree-Seeking Students in the Fall 2010 Cohort who Job Openings by Occupation and Education Level between Completed a Certificate or Degree within Six Years by 2010 and 2020 (in thousands) ...... 6 Starting Institution: Full-Time Students ...... 20 Percentage of Adults Aged 25-64 who have Attained a Institutional Effectiveness in Promoting Timely Degree Postsecondary Credential ...... 6 Completion ...... 21

PREPARATION 7 EQUITY 22 Percentage of Children Ages 3 to 4 Enrolled in Preschool . . 8 Percentage of Low- and Higher-Income Students in Grade 8 Scoring At or Above Proficiency on the National Percentage of Students in Grade 8 Scoring At or Above Assessment of Educational Progress in Math, Reading, and Proficiency on the National Assessment of Educational Science ...... 23 Progress in Math, Reading, and Science ...... 9 Public High School Graduation Rates among Low- and Public High School Graduation Rate Over Time ...... 9 Higher-Income Students ...... 24 Percentage of High School Graduates Taking the ACT Percentage of Dependent 18- to 24-Year-Old Residents during 2013 and 2016 ...... 9 Who Have Enrolled in or Have Completed Some College by Percentage of ACT-Tested High School Graduates Family Income ...... 24 Who Met or Exceeded College Readiness Benchmark Percentage of First-Time, Full-Time, Baccalaureate-Seeking Scores ...... 10 Students in the Fall 2007 Cohort who Graduated within Six Years at Public Four-Year Institutions: Pell Grant Recipients vs. Non-Pell Recipients ...... 25 PARTICIPATION 11 Percentage of High School Graduates Going Directly to College ...... 12 FINANCE 26 Percentage of Persons Aged 18-24 who are Currently State and Local Educational Appropriations for Higher Enrolled or Have Completed Some College ...... 12 Education per FTE Student ...... 27 Percentage of Persons Aged 25-49 without an State Fiscal Support for Higher Education per $1,000 of Associate Degree or Higher who are Currently Enrolled in Personal Income ...... 27 College ...... 13 State and Local Educational Appropriations and Net Tuition Revenue as a Percentage of Total Educational Revenue for Public Postsecondary Institutions ...... 28 AFFORDABILITY 14 Public Doctoral Universities: State and Local Percentage of Family Income Needed to Pay for Full-Time Appropriations Relative to Educational Expenditures per Enrollment at Public Two- and Four-Year Institutions: FTE Student during 2014-15 ...... 29 Families with Median Incomes ...... 15 Public Master’s Universities: State and Local Percentage of Family Income Needed to Pay for Full-Time Appropriations Relative to Educational Expenditures per Enrollment at Public Two- and Four-Year Institutions: FTE Student during 2014-15 ...... 30 Families in the Lowest Income Quintile ...... 16 Public Associate’s Colleges: State and Local Appropriations Relative to Educational Expenditures per FTE Student COMPLETION 17 during 2014-15 ...... 31 State Need-Based Grant Aid per FTE Undergraduate Percentage of First-Time, Full-Time, Baccalaureate-Seeking Student and Percent of Aid Defined as Need-Based . . . . 32 Students who Graduated within Four Years at Public Four- Year Institutions ...... 18 Percentage of First-Time, Full-Time, Baccalaureate-Seeking Students who Graduated within Four Years at Private Not- for-Profit Four-Year Institutions ...... 18 Transfer-Adjusted Percentage of First-Time, Certificate/ Degree-Seeking Students in the Fall 2010 Cohort who Completed a Certificate or Degree within Six Years by Starting Institution: Full- and Part-Time Students . . . . . 19

2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA 3 MINNESOTA

MINNESOTA

4 2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA Increasing Educational Attainment in Minnesota: An Imperative for Future Prosperity

In the United States, approximately 65 percent of all The ability of policymakers to reach a “70 percent” jobs in 2020 will require some level of postsecondary attainment goal carries significant implications for state education, and the demand will reach 74 percent in revenue. If the current rate of degree production remains Minnesota.1 The projected demand for postsecondary constant, state revenue in 2025 is projected to be nearly education in Minnesota spans all occupational $30 million less than it is today. Conversely, projections categories, including managerial, STEM, social sciences, suggest that if the attainment goal were fulfilled by 2025, community service, education, healthcare, and “blue over $1 billion in additional revenue would be generated collar” industries (see Figure 1).2 However, the projected through income tax, sales tax, property tax, Medicaid demand in Minnesota exceeds the current supply of savings, and corrections savings.5 Moreover, policies college-educated adults. Figure 2 indicates that 72 that effectively raise levels of educational attainment percent of adults in Minnesota have completed some will yield important civic and health benefits, including college coursework or a postsecondary credential. higher rates of voting, volunteerism, and healthful prenatal care.6 For example, health risk factors such as In order to meet future workforce demands, many states smoking are less prevalent among individuals who have have set ambitious goals to improve the educational a bachelor’s degree or higher.7 Residents of Minnesota attainment of their residents.3 Minnesota aims to also benefit from higher education in terms of higher raise the proportion of adults with a postsecondary earnings and lower unemployment, compared to those certificate or degree to 70 percent by 2025. Figure 2 with only a high school diploma.8 shows that progress has been made towards raising educational attainment in Minnesota, as the percentage This report seeks to inform public discourse on higher of adults with at least an associate degree increased education by providing key performance indicators from 35 percent in 1990 to 50 percent in 2016. (Data relevant to the goal of improving educational attainment on postsecondary certificate attainment are currently in Minnesota. Performance indicators are categorized limited, but some analyses indicate that accounting within six dimensions: Preparation, Participation, for educational certificates would increase the Affordability, Completion, Equity, and Finance. Most postsecondary attainment rate by two to four percentage indicators provide the MHEC regional average and U.S. points.)4 average or population proportion as lower performance benchmarks as well as the median of the top five states in the nation as an aspirational benchmark.

2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA 5 Figure 1. Minnesota Job Openings by Occupation and Education Level between 2010 and 2020 (in thousands)

Figure 1. Minnesota Job Openings by Occupation and Education Level 300 between 2010 and 2020 (in thousands) 250

200 Source: The Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce. (2013). Recovery: 150 Job growth and education requirements through 2020. 100

0 Managerial Healthcare Community Food and Sales and and Social Professional Healthcare STEM Services Education Personal Office Blue Collar Professional Sciences and Support and Arts Services Support Office Technical Graduate Degree 31 11 5 11 31 20 1 3 10 2 Bachelor's Degree 73 25 1 24 21 17 3 24 76 14 Associate's Degree 17 7 0 7 2 12 7 22 35 25 Some College 30 6 0 11 4 6 14 45 75 48 No College Required 19 3 0 3 3 1 11 73 68 107

Figure 2. Percentage of Adults Aged 25-64 in Minnesota who have Attained a Postsecondary Credential

Figure 2. Percentage of Some College Only Associate Only Bachelor's and Above Adults Aged 25-64 in Minnesota who have 50 Attained a Postsecondary Credential 40 37 Source: U.S. Census Bureau. 1990 34 Census, 2000 Census, 2010 ACS Three-Year Estimates, 2016 ACS 30 One-Year Estimates. 30 25 26 24 22 21 20

13 11 10 10 9

0 1990 2000 2010 2016

6 2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA

Higher Education in Focus 3 Preparation20162017

ABOUT THESE METRICS

Academic preparation constitutes a key leverage point for improving postsecondary outcomes. The extent to which studentsANNUAL are academically prepared for college predicts bachelor’s degree completion beyond the effects of race and ethnicity, socioeconomic status, institutional selectivity, attendance patterns, and academic performance during college.9 The cumulative nature of both academic competencies and deficits necessitates an assessment of academic preparedness that spans pre-K education, middle school, and high school. PreschoolREPORT enrollment. An early indicator of academic High school completion. Graduation rates are based on preparation is defined by the percentage of children the number of students who graduate in four years with ages 3 to to4 enrolled the in preschool. Member Early childhood aStates regular high school diploma.12 The completion of high education provides a critical foundation for successfully school or its equivalent is typically required for college managing subsequent academic challenges. Relative to admission. children in control groups, participants in high-quality, College readiness. The proportion of students taking educationally-focused programs have exhibited greater the ACT who meet college readiness benchmarks long-term gains in IQ, lower rates of grade repetition and provides one measure of the academic preparation of special education placements, and higher rates of high college-bound students. Benchmark scores in English, school graduation and college attendance.10 Moreover, mathematics, reading, and science delineate a 75 cost-benefit analyses of such programs have shown percent likelihood of attaining at least a “C” in first-year that benefits are 2.5 to 16.2 times greater than costs college-level courses.13 when accounting for such factors as adult earnings and cost savings in K-12 education, corrections, welfare, and healthcare.

Academic proficiency of th8 grade students. The percentage of students in grade 8 scoring at or above proficiency on the National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) provides a measure of whether students enter high school with foundational skills and knowledge in such areas as math, reading, and science. In fact, 8th grade academic achievement has been found to be a highly significant predictor of college readiness among 12th grade students.11

2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA 7 Figure 3. Percentage of Children Ages 3 to 4 Enrolled in Preschool

Figure 3. Percentage of Children Ages 3 to 4 Enrolled in Preschool Minnesota MHEC Average U.S. Top 5 States Median 65% Preschool enrollment. Figure 3 shows that the rate of enrollment 60% 60% in preschool among children ages 59% 3 to 4 has decreased over time and remains below the national 55% level. 50% 48% 48% Source: U.S. Census Bureau. (2009- 46% 47% 11, 2014-16). American Community 45% 45% Survey One-Year. Top 5 States, 2016: 45% CT, IL, MA, NJ, NY. 40%

35%

30% 2009‐2011 2014‐2016

Figure 4. Percentage of Students in Grade 8 Scoring At or Above Proficiency on the National Assessment of Educational Progress in Math, Reading, and Science

Figure 4. Percentage Source: U.S. Census Bureau. (2009-11, 2014-16). American Community Survey One-Year. Top 5 States, 2016: CT, IL, MA, NJ, NY. of Students in Grade Minnesota MHEC Average U.S. 8 Scoring At or Above 60 Proficiency on the National Assessment of Educational 50 Progress in Math, Reading, 48 45 and Science 43 40 40 38 th 40 Academic proficiency of 8 36 37 36 36 34 34 grade students. As indicated in 32 33 34 31 th 30 30 Figure 4, less than half of 8 grade 30 students scored at or above the proficiency level in math, reading, or science. However, performance 20 is above the regional and national benchmarks. 10 Source: National Center for Education Statistics. (2005, 2009,6 Higher Education in Focus 2015). National assessment of 0 educational progress. State-level 2005 2015 2005 2015 2009 2015 estimates for NAEP Science were Math Reading Science not available for 2005-2008.

Source: National Center for Education Statistics. (2005, 2009, 2015). National assessment of educational progress. State- level estimates for NAEP Science were not available for 2005-2008. 8 2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA

Higher Education in Focus 7 Figure 5. Public High School Graduation Rate Over Time

Figure 5. Public High

School Graduation Rate Minnesota MHEC Average U.S. Top 5 States Median Over Time High school completion. Figure 100% 5 shows that the percentage th of 9 grade students who 95% graduate from high school four years later has increased since 2010-11, but the current rate is 90% 89% below the regional and national 87% 86% benchmarks. 85% 83% 83% Source: U.S. Department of 82% 80% Education. (2011, 2015). ED Data 79% Express, ACGR. Top 5 States 2014-15: 77% AL, IA, NE, NJ, TX. 75%

70% 2010‐11 2014‐15

Figure 6a. Percentage of High School Graduates Taking the ACT during 2013 and 2016

Figure 6a. Percentage of Source: U.S. Department of Education. (2011, 2015). ED Data Express, ACGR. Top 5 States 2014-15: AL, IA, NE, NJ, TX. High School Graduates 2013 2016 Taking the ACT during 2013 100100 100 100 100 100 100 100 100 98 and 2016 90 88 College readiness. Figure 6a 84 indicates that 100 percent of high 78 80 76 75 74 74 74 73 school graduates in Minnesota 71 72 68 14 70 66 took the ACT. 64

60 Source: ACT. (2016). The Condition 54 of College & Career Readiness, 50 8 Higher Education in Focus 2016. 41 40 38

0 IL MI MN MO WI ND NE SD KS OH IA IN Nation

Source: ACT. (2016). The Condition of College & Career Readiness, 2016. 2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA 9

Higher Education in Focus 9 Figure 6b. Percentage of ACT-Tested High School Graduates Who Met or Exceeded College Readiness BenchmarkFigure Scores 6b. Percentage of ACT-Tested High School Graduates Who Met or Exceeded College Readiness Benchmark Scores College readiness. Figure 6b shows the percentage of ACT-tested high school graduates whose performance met or exceeded benchmark scores in English, mathematics, reading, and science. Minnesota exceeded average performance levels of states that require all high school students to take the ACT, though many students did not meet the performance benchmarks.

English Reading Minnesota MHEC Average Minnesota MHEC Average 100% Participation Average Top 5 States Median 100% Participation Average Top 5 States Median

70 65 61 60 53 47 45 42

2016 2016

Mathematics Science

Minnesota MHEC Average Minnesota MHEC Average 100% Participation Average Top 5 States Median 100% Participation Average Top 5 States Median

48 46 44 45 40 40 40 36

2016 2016

Source: ACT. (2016). The Condition of College & Career Readiness, 2016. The 100% participation average reflects performance in MHEC states that require all students to take the ACT. The median of the top 5 states includes only states that have a minimum of 65% of students taking the ACT. Top states (includes ties): 2016 English: IA, KS, NE, OH, SD; 2016 Reading: IA, KS, NE, OH, SD; 2016 Math: IA, KS, MN, OH, SD; 2016 Science: IA, KS, MN, NE, OH, SD.

Source: ACT. (2016). The Condition of College & Career Readiness, 2016. The 100% participation average reflects performance in MHEC states that require all students to take the ACT. The median of the top 5 states includes only states that have a minimum of 65% of students taking the ACT. Top states (includes ties): 2016 English: IA, KS, NE, OH, SD; 10 2016 Reading: IA, KS, NE, OH, SD; 20162017 Math: Higher IA, Education KS, MN, OH, in SDFocus:; 2016 MINNESOTA Science: IA, KS, MN, NE, OH, SD.

10 Higher Education in Focus Participation20162017

ABOUT THESE METRICS

A critical challenge for policymakers is to ensure that residents can access a college education compatible with their aspirationsANNUAL and abilities. Postsecondary participation rates provide a general indication of whether opportunities for higher education need to be improved for both younger and older adults.

Direct enrollment. The direct enrollment rate is Traditional age enrollment. Participation among defined as the percentage of high school graduates traditional-age students is defined as the percentage who enroll in a postsecondary institution during the of all 18- to 24-year-old adults in the state who are REPORT15 fall immediately following high school completion. currently enrolled in college or have completed some Postponed enrollment may lead to future obstacles to college. degree completion, to the such as the Member decay of academic skills States Older adult enrollment. Participation among older adults and knowledge as well as the adoption of competing is defined as the rate of enrollment among adults aged roles and obligations (e.g., work, family). Research has 25 to 49 who have not yet earned an associate degree. indicated that the odds of obtaining a bachelor’s degree decrease by 5 percent for every month that a student delays postsecondary enrollment after graduating from high school. 16

2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA 11 Figure 7. Percentage of High School Graduates Going Directly to College

Figure 7. Percentage of

High School Graduates Minnesota MHEC Average U.S. Median, Top 5 States Going Directly to College 85 Direct enrollment. As indicated in Figure 7, approximately 75 80 percent of high school graduates 74 76 in Minnesota directly enroll in 75 75 college, a rate that has increased over time and approximates the 70 performance of top states. 68 69 67 65 66 65 63 Source: Postsecondary Education Opportunity. (2012). College 60 62 Continuation Rates for Recent High 58 School Graduates. NCES IPEDS. 55 56 (2015). Fall Enrollment File. U.S. Department of Education. (2015). 50 ED Data Express, ACGR. NCES. (2013). Private School Universe Survey. WICHE. (2015). Knocking at 45 the College Door. Top 5 States, 2014: 2004 2008 2014 CT, MA, MN, MS, NY. Figure 8. PercentageSource: Postsecondary of Persons Education Aged Opportunity. 18-24 who (2012). are CollegeCurrent Continuationly Enrolled Rates or Havefor Recent Completed High School SomeGraduates. College NCES IPEDS. (2015). Fall Enrollment File. U.S. Department of Education. (2015). ED Data Express, ACGR. NCES. (2013). Private School Universe Survey. WICHE. (2015). Knocking at the College Door. Top 5 States, 2014: CT, MA, MN, MS, NY.

Figure 8. Percentage of Persons Aged 18-24 who Minnesota MHEC Average U.S. Top 5 States Median are Currently Enrolled or 100 Have Completed Some College 90 80 Traditional age enrollment. 72 74 75 70 69 68 Figure 8 shows that 74 percent 70 66 of adults aged 18 to 24 have 62 enrolled in college, which is 60 above the regional and national 50 benchmarks. 40 Source: U.S. Census Bureau. (2006, 30 2016). American Community Survey One-Year Public Use Microdata 20 Sample. Top 5 States, 2016 (includes ties): CT, MA, MN, NH, NJ, 10 NY, RI. 12 Higher Education in Focus 0 2006 2016

Source: U.S. Census Bureau. (2006, 2016). American Community Survey One-Year Public Use Microdata Sample. Top 5 States, 2016 (includes ties): CT, MA, MN, NH, NJ, NY, RI. .

12 2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA

Higher Education in Focus 1 3 Figure 9. Percentage of Persons Aged 25-49 without an Associate Degree or Higher who are Currently Enrolled in College

Figure 9. Percentage of Persons Aged 25-49 Minnesota MHEC Average U.S. Top 5 States Median without an Associate 10 Degree or Higher who are Currently Enrolled in 9 College 8

Older adult enrollment. Figure 9 7 7 6 shows that Minnesota meets the 6 regional and national benchmarks 5 5 5 5 in the proportion of older 5 5 4 residents enrolled in college. 4

Source: U.S. Census Bureau. (2006, 3 2016). American Community Survey One-Year Public Use Microdata 2 Sample. Top 5 States, 2016 (includes ties): CA, HI, NM, RI, UT. 1

0 2006 2016

Source: U.S. Census Bureau. (2006, 2016). American Community Survey One-Year Public Use Microdata Sample. Top 5 States, 2016 (includes ties): CA, HI, NM, RI, UT.

14 Higher Education in Focus

2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA 13 Affordability20162017

ABOUT THESE METRICS

Over the past few decades, college tuition and fees have increased at more than four times the rate of consumer prices,ANNUAL partly in response to reductions in state and local funding. Such precipitous increases in tuition have occurred while the incomes of many low- and middle-class families have stagnated or declined. This is potentially problematic since a higher net price of college has been associated with lower rates of college enrollment and completion, particularly among students from low-income families.17 AbilityREPORT to pay. College affordability is measured by the institutional, local, state, and federal grant aid. In order percentage of family income needed to pay the net to assess the degree of affordability for students of price of to full-time the enrollment Memberat public two- and four- Statesdifferent income levels, this indicator is presented for year institutions. The average net price is calculated as families with median income and families in the lowest the total cost of attendance (tuition and fees, books, income quintile. supplies, and room and board) minus the average

14 2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA 20162017 Figure 10a.Figure Percentage 10a. Percentage of Family Income of Family Needed Income to Pay Needed for Full-Time to Pay Enrollment for Full- atTime Public Enr Two-ollment and Four-Year at Institutions:Public Families Two- andwith Fou Medianr-Year Incomes Institutions: Families with Median Incomes Ability to pay: Median income. Figure 10a shows that the net price of college as a percentage of median family income recently decreased for public two-year enrollment and remained stable for four-year enrollment.

ANNUAL Minnesota MHEC Average U.S. Average Top 5 States Median 60

REPORT 50

to the Member States 40

30 23 23 22 21 22 22 22 22 19 20 18 18 16 16 17 17 17 15 14 15 14 14 10 11 11 10

0 2008‐09 2013‐14 2014‐15 2008‐09 2013‐14 2014‐15 Public Two‐Year Institutions Public Four‐Year Institutions

Source: NCES IPEDS. (2009, 2014, 2015). Net price. U.S. Census Bureau. (2009, 2014, 2015). American Community Survey One-Year Public Use Microdata Sample. Top 5 States Public 2-Year, 2014-15 (includes ties): CT, DE, IL, MD, MI, MS, NE, NJ, UT, VA, WY; Top 5 States Public 4-Year, 2014-15 (includes ties): AK, HI, ND, UT, WA, WY.

NCES IPEDS. (2009, 2014, 2015). Net price. U.S. Census Bureau. (2009, 2014, 2015). American Community Survey One-Year Public Use Microdata Sample. Top 5 States Public 2-Year, 2014-15 (includes ties): CT, DE, IL, MD, MI, MS, NE, NJ, UT, VA, WY; Top 5 States Public 4-Year, 2014-15 (includes ties): AK, HI, ND, UT, WA, WY.

2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA 15 16 Higher Education in Focus Figure 10b. Percentage of Family Income Needed to Pay for Full-Time Enrollment at Public Two- and Four-Year Institutions:Figur eFamilies 10b. P iner thecen Lowesttage o fIncome Famil yQuintile Income Needed to Pay for Full-Time Enrollment at Public Two- and Four-Year Institutions: Families in the Lowest Income Quintile Ability to pay: Low income. A comparison of Figures 10a and 10b indicates that college affordability in Minnesota is highly contingent on family income. Families with median incomes in Minnesota would need to allocate 23 percent of their incomes to pay for enrollment at a four-year college. In contrast, four-year college attendance for low-income students requires 38 percent of family income. However, college affordability for low-income students has recently improved, and affordability at four-year colleges exceeds the regional and national benchmarks.

Minnesota MHEC Average U.S. Average Top 5 States Median 60

52 50 50 48 50 46 44 45 44 43

40 36 37 38 38 35 34 34 33 34 33 32 30 25 23 21 20 17

0 2008‐09 2013‐14 2014‐15 2008‐09 2013‐14 2014‐15 Public Two‐Year Institutions Public Four‐Year Institutions

Source: NCES IPEDS. (2009, 2014, 2015). Net price. U.S. Census Bureau. (2009, 2014, 2015). American Community Survey One-Year Public Use Microdata Sample. Top 5 States Public 2-Year, 2014-15 (includes ties): CT, HI, MI, UT, WA, WY; Top 5 States Public 4-Year, 2014-15: AK, HI, IN, WA, WY.

NCES IPEDS. (2009, 2014, 2015). Net price. U.S. Census Bureau. (2009, 2014, 2015). American Community Survey One-Year Public Use Microdata Sample. Top 5 States Public 2-Year, 2014-15 (includes ties): CT, HI, UT, WA, WY; Top 5 States Public 4-Year, 2014-15: AK, HI, IN, WA, WY.

16 2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA

Higher Education in Focus 1 Completion20162017

ABOUT THESE METRICS

While many states have made significant gains in postsecondary enrollment, rates of degree completion across the nation remainANNUAL below expected levels. The failure to complete a degree program has negative consequences for both students and states. Since employers are more likely to demand an educational credential than a specific number of postsecondary credits, a premature departure from college can severely curb one’s prospects for future employment and earnings. For example, individuals who have attained a bachelor’s degree earn 26 percent more than those who have completed 16 years of schooling without graduating from college.18 In addition, when students fail to graduate, the state failsREPORT to optimize its investment in higher education through lost institutional appropriations and student grant aid as well to as lost therevenue from Member state income tax.19 States Traditional on-time graduation. The traditional on-time the performance of particular postsecondary institutions graduation rate represents completion of a bachelor’s but rather constitute an outcome of the totality of degree within four years at four-year institutions. It performances across the PK-16 educational system as accounts for first-time, full-time, baccalaureate-seeking well as the broader system of public policies that shape students who enter during the fall and graduate from postsecondary opportunities. In order to better assess their first institution. the value that institutions add to completion outcomes, an effectiveness indicator is defined as the difference Transfer-adjusted completion. Transfer-adjusted between the actual graduation rate and the rate that completion rates are defined by the proportion of first- would be expected given the institution’s structural, time, certificate/degree-seeking students in the fall 2010 demographic, financial, and contextual characteristics. cohort who completed a certificate or degree within six Scores that approximate or exceed zero indicate that, on years, while accounting for students who enroll part- average, institutional conditions are conducive to timely or full-time and graduate from their first institution or completion.20 elsewhere.

Institutional effectiveness. A major shortcoming of raw completion rates is that they do not necessarily gauge

2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA 17 Figure 11a. Percentage of First-Time, Full-Time, Baccalaureate-Seeking Students who Graduated within Four Years at Public Four-Year Institutions

Figure 11a. Percentage of First-Time, Full-Time, Minnesota MHEC Average U.S. Top 5 States Median Baccalaureate-Seeking 90 Students who Graduated within Four Years at Public 80 Four-Year Institutions 70 Traditional on-time graduation. Figure 11a shows that 37 60 percent of first-time, full-time, 53 baccalaureate-seeking students 50 graduated within four years at 42 public institutions in Minnesota 40 37 in 2015, which was higher than 35 the regional and national 32 30 benchmarks. 28 26 Source: NCES IPEDS. (2005, 2015). 20 22 Graduation Rate. Top 5 States (includes ties), 2015: DE, CT, MD, NH, 10 VA, VT. 2005 2015

Figure 11b. Percentage of First-Time, Full-Time, Baccalaureate-Seeking Students who Graduated within Four Years at Private Not-for-Profit Four-Year Institutions

Figure 11b. Percentage of First-Time, Full-Time, Minnesota MHEC Average U.S. Top 5 States Median Baccalaureate-Seeking 90 Students who Graduated within Four Years at 80 Private Not-for-Profit Four- Year Institutions Source:70 NCES IPEDS. (2005, 2015). Graduation Rate. Top 5 States (includes ties), 2015: DE, CT, MD, NH, VA, VT. 65 66 Traditional on-time graduation. 63 Figure 11b demonstrates that 60 59 the four-year graduation rate of 53 private not-for-profit colleges 50 50 48 and universities in Minnesota (6320 Higher Education in Focus percent) was above the regional 45 and national levels. 40

Source: NCES IPEDS. (2005, 2015). 30 Graduation Rate. Top 5 States, 2015: CT, MA, MD, MN, RI 20 2005 2015

18 2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA

Source: NCES IPEDS. (2005, 2015). Graduation Rate. Top 5 States, 2015: CT, MA, MD, MN, RI.

Higher Education in Focus 2 Figure 12a. Transfer-Adjusted Percentage of First-Time, Certificate/Degree-Seeking Students in the Fall 2010 Cohort who Completed a Certificate or Degree within Six Years by Starting Institution: Full- and Part-Time Students Transfer-adjustedFigure 12a. completion: Transfer-Adjusted All students. According Percentage to Figure of12a, First-Time, 55 percent of all Certifi studentscate/Degree- who started at a public two-year institution in MinnesotaSeeking completed Students a certificate in the or degree Fall 2010within six Cohort years, which who places Completed Minnesota among a Certificate the top states or in Degreethe nation. The transfer-adjusted completionwithin rate Six for Years students by at publicStarting four-year Institution: institutions was Full- 74 percent,and Part-Time which is above Students the regional and national benchmarks. The transfer- adjusted completion rate for students at private not-for-profit institutions (79 percent) is above the regional and national benchmarks.

Minnesota MHEC Average U.S. Top 5 States Median 100

90 85 79 80 77 74 74 72 70 68 62 60 55 55

50 47 39 40

0 2‐Year Public 4‐Year Public 4‐Year Private Not‐for‐Profit

Source: Shapiro, D., Dundar, A., Wakhungu, P., Yuan, X., Nathan, A & Hwang, Y., A. (2017, March). Completing College: A State-Level View of Student Attainment Rates (Signature Report No. 12a). Herndon, VA: National Student Clearinghouse Research Center. Top 5 States, 2-Year Public: FL, IA, MN, ND, SD; Top 5 States 4-Year Public (includes ties): CT, IA, MN, NH, NJ, VA; Top 5 States, 4-Year Private Not-for-Profit (includes ties): CT, MA, MD, PA, RI, WA.

College: A State-Level View of Student Attainment Rates (Signature Report No. 12a). Herndon, VA: National

Student Clearinghouse Research Center. Top 5 States, 2-Year Public: FL, IA, MN, ND, SD; Top 5 States 4-Year Public (includes ties): CT, IA, MN, NH, NJ, VA; Top 5 States, 4-Year Private Not-for-Profit (includes ties): CT, MA, MD, PA, RI, WA. 2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA 19

Source: Shapiro, D., Dundar, A., Wakhungu, P., Yuan, X., Nathan, A & Hwang, Y., A. (2017, March). Completing

22 Higher Education in Focus Figure 12b. Transfer-Adjusted Percentage of First-Time, Certificate/Degree-Seeking Students in the Fall 2010 Cohort whoFigure Completed 12b. a Transfer-Adjusted Certificate or Degree Percentage within Six Years of First-Time, by Starting CertifiInstitution:cate/Degree- Full-Time Students Transfer-adjustedSeeking Students completion: Full-timein the Fallstudents. 2010 A much Cohort larger whopercentage Completed of students acomplete Certificate a certificate or Degree or degree within six years after accountingwithin for Sixenrollment Years intensity. by Starting A comparison Institution: of Figures 12aFull-Time and 12b demonstrates Students that completion rates are highest among students who enroll full-time.

Minnesota MHEC Average U.S. Top 5 States Median 100 93 88 89 90 87 86 83 85 81 80 74 69 70 60 60 55

0 2‐Year Public 4‐Year Public 4‐Year Private Not‐for‐Profit

Source: Shapiro, D., Dundar, A., Wakhungu, P., Yuan, X., Nathan, A & Hwang, Y., A. (2017, March). Completing College: A State-Level View of Student Attainment Rates (Signature Report No. 12a). Herndon, VA: National Student Clearinghouse Research Center. Top 5 States, 2-Year Public (includes ties): FL, IL, MN, ND, SD, VA; Top 5 States, 4-Year Public (includes ties): CT, IA, MD, MN, NH, NJ, SC, VA; Top 5 States, 4-Year Private Not-for-Profit: CT, MD, OR, RI, WA.

Source: Shapiro, D., Dundar, A., Wakhungu, P., Yuan, X., Nathan, A & Hwang, Y., A. (2017,

March). Completing College: A State-Level View of Student Attainment Rates (Signature Report No. 12a).

Herndon, VA: National Student Clearinghouse Research Center. Top 5 States, 2-Year Public (includes ties): FL, IL, MN, ND, SD, VA; Top 5 States, 4-Year Public (includes ties): CT, IA, MD, MN, NH, NJ, SC, VA; Top 5 20 States, 4-Year Private Not-for-Profit: CT, 2017MD, OR, Higher RI, WA. Education in Focus: MINNESOTA

Higher Education in Focus 2 3 Figure 13. Institutional Effectiveness in Promoting Timely Degree Completion

Figure 13. Institutional Effectiveness in Promoting Minnesota MHEC Average U.S. Average Top 5 States Median Timely Degree Completion 1.00

Institutional effectiveness. 0.80 0.61 Figure 13 indicates that the 0.53 institutional effectiveness of 0.60 public 2-year institutions in 0.40 Minnesota is satisfactory. But public 4-year institutions have 0.20 0.07 a more limited impact on timely degree completion, as graduation 0.00 ‐0.04 ‐0.03 ‐0.02 rates are significantly lower than ‐0.20 ‐0.15 expected. ‐0.40 Source: MHEC. (2015). The ‐0.45 Effectiveness and Efficiency of ‐0.60 Postsecondary Institutions in the United States: 2010-2012 ‐0.80 Baseline Results. Minneapolis, MN: Midwestern Higher Education ‐1.00 Compact. Top 5 States, 2-year 2‐Year Public 4‐Year Public institutions: CA, FL, HI, ND, SD. Top 5 States, 4-Year Institutions: MI, NJ, VA, VT, WA.

Source: MHEC. (2015). The Effectiveness and Efficiency of Postsecondary Institutions in the United States: 2010-2012 Baseline Results. Minneapolis, MN: Midwestern Higher Education Compact. Top 5 States, 2-year institutions: CA, FL, HI, ND, SD. Top 5 States, 4-year institutions: MI, NJ, VA, VT, WA.

24 Higher Education in Focus

2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA 21 Equity20162017

ABOUT THESE METRICS

Equity in postsecondary education is partly assessed by the extent to which academic preparedness, college enrollment,ANNUAL and completion are contingent on family income.21 Nationally, lower-income students constitute 51 percent of public PK-12 enrollment,22 but they have been historically underrepresented in higher education. Moreover, many states will need to improve the college preparation and participation of low-income students to significantly raise postsecondary attainment rates. 8th gradeREPORT achievement gap. The academic preparedness College enrollment gap. The postsecondary enrollment gap is measured by 8th grade proficiency levels in gap is gauged by comparing college enrollment rates math, reading,to andthe science onMember the National Assessment Statesamong dependent 18- to 24-year-old residents by family of Educational Progress (NAEP) among low-income income in Minnesota.25 students who qualified for free- or reduced-price lunch College completion gap. The completion gap is and “higher”-income students who were not eligible to estimated by comparing six-year graduation rates among participate in the National School Lunch Program.23 Pell grant recipients and non-Pell recipients at public High school completion gap. Graduation rates are four-year institutions.26 The six-year graduation rate based on the number of students who graduate in accounts for first-time, full-time, bachelor’s degree- four years with a regular high school diploma.24 The seeking students who entered during the fall of 2007 and completion gap is measured by graduation rates among graduated from their first institution within six years. low-income students who qualified for free- or reduced- price lunch and “higher”-income students who were not eligible to participate in the National School Lunch Program.

22 2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA 20162017 FigureFig u14.re Percentage 14. Perce noft aLow-ge o andf Lo Higher-Incomew- and Highe Studentsr-Income in S Gradetuden 8ts Scoring in Gra Atde or 8 Above Scori nProficiencyg At or on the NationalAbove Assessment Proficienc ofy onEducational the National Progress Assessment in Math, Reading, of Educational and Science Progress in Math, 8th gradeReading, achievement and gap.Science Figure 14 shows that fewer than 30 percent of low-income students in Minnesota scored at or above the proficiency level in math, reading, or science on the National Assessment of Educational Progress, which is well below the achievement levels of higher- ANNUAL income students. Minnesota MHEC Average U.S. 70

59 REPORT 60 57

to the Member States 50 51 50 48 49 49 48 4747 47 44 45 41 40 41 40 39 39

30 27

22 2221 2222 20 19 20 20 18 19 19 18 20 17 15 13 14

0 2005 2015 2005 2015 2005 2015 2005 2015 2009 2015 2009 2015 Low‐Income Higher‐Income Low‐Income Higher‐Income Low‐Income Higher‐Income Math Reading Science

Source: National Center for Education Statistics. (2005, 2009, 2015). National assessment of educational progress. The NAEP in science was only administered in 2009, 2011, and 2015.

2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA 23

Higher Education in Focus 2 Figure 15. Public High School Graduation Rates among Low- and Higher-Income Students

Figure 15. Public High School Graduation Rates Minnesota MHEC Average U.S. among Low- and Higher- 100 90 91 90 Income Students 90

High school completion gap. 80 76 75 Figure 15 indicates that the high 72 70 school graduation rate of low- 70 67 income students has increased 58 over time but was more than 60 20 percentage points below the 50 graduation rate of higher-income students in 2014-15, compared to 40 the regional gap of 16 percentage points and the national gap of 14 30 percentage points. 20

Source: U.S. Department of 10 Education. (2011, 2015). ED Data Express, ACGR. Data for higher- 0 income students were not Low‐income students, 2010‐11 Low‐income students, 2014‐15 Higher‐income students, 2014‐15 available in 2010-11.

Figure 16. Percentage of Dependent 18- to 24-Year-Old Residents Who Have Enrolled in or Have Completed Some College by Family Income

Figure 16. Percentage of Dependent 18- to Minnesota U.S.

24-Year-Old Residents Who 83 Have Enrolled in or Have 80 Completed Some College

by Family Income Source: U.S. Department of Education. (2011, 2015). ED Data Express, ACGR. 63 61 College enrollment gap. According to Figure 16, the rates of college enrollment 44 among low- and middle-income 42 18- to 24-year-old residents in Minnesota are considerably lower28 Higher Education in Focus than the enrollment rate for 18- to 24-year-old residents from high-income families.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau. (2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015). Current Population Survey. Five-year Low Income Middle Income High Income estimates.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau. 2011-2015 Current Population Survey. Five-year estimates. 24 2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA

Higher Education in Focus 2 9 Figure 17. Percentage of First-Time, Full-Time, Baccalaureate-Seeking Students in the Fall 2007 Cohort who Graduated within Six Years at Public Four-Year Institutions: Pell Grant Recipients vs. Non-Pell Recipients

Figure 17. Percentage of First-Time, Full-Time, Minnesota MHEC Average U.S. Average Baccalaureate-Seeking 70 63 Students in the Fall 2007 61 62 Cohort who Graduated 60 53 48 within Six Years at Public 50 45 Four-Year Institutions: Pell Grant Recipients vs. Non- 40 Pell Recipients 30 College completion gap. Similarly, the graduation rate of 20 low-income students (i.e., Pell 10 grant recipients) lags behind the graduation rate of higher-income 0 students at public four-year Pell Recipient Non‐Pell Recipient institutions. However, the graduation rate of low-income students in Minnesota is higher than the regional and national Percent of undergraduate students enrolled in 2007 who received a Pell grant during 2007-08 benchmarks (see Figure 17). IL IN IA KS MI MN MO NE ND OH SD WI Source: The Education Trust. (2015). 37% 30% 22% 29% 33% 24% 32% 28% 22% 33% 28% 28% The Pell Partnership: Ensuring a Shared Responsibility for Low- Income Student Success.

Source: The Education Trust. (2015). The Pell Partnership: Ensuring a Shared Responsibility for Low-Income Student Success.

30 Higher Education in Focus

2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA 25 Finance20162017

ABOUT THESE METRICS

Substantial financial investments are required to create and sustain a PK-16 educational system that meets state needsANNUAL for economic and social development. States allocated 13 percent of their budgets to higher education in 2016,27 including general operating expenses (78 percent); research, agricultural extension, and medical education (11 percent); and student financial aid (10 percent).28 Various factors influence funding for education within any particular state, including the tax base and structure, enrollment, and state expenditures for other public services. Moreover, states differ in the strategies used to ensure that postsecondary education remains affordable. For instance, some concentrateREPORT funds into direct institutional appropriations, while others may focus more on need-based student aid. Funding to commitment. the Two indicatorsMember portray the Statesin relation to education and related expenditures, which state’s overall commitment to funding higher education: reflect the total amount spent on instruction, student state and local educational appropriations for higher services, and academic support. State appropriations education per FTE student 29 and state fiscal support for may influence the effectiveness and competitiveness of higher education per $1,000 of personal income.30 institutions as well as tuition rates.31

State and student cost share. The relative share of the Need-based aid. State funding for grant aid based on cost of higher education is represented by comparing financial need is measured by (a) the amount of need- educational appropriations and net tuition revenue based grant aid per FTE student and (b) need-based aid as a percent of total educational revenue for public as a percent of total grant aid allocations. The receipt postsecondary institutions. of grant aid has been linked with higher rates of college enrollment and degree completion.32 Institutional funding. State and local appropriations are examined for public two- and four-year institutions

26 2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA Figure 18a. State and Local Educational Appropriations for Higher Education per FTE Student 20162017 Figure 18a. State and Local Educational Minnesota MHEC Average U.S. Appropriations for Higher $14,000 Education per FTE Student Funding commitment. Figure 18a shows that public funding for $12,000 $11,031 ANNUAL higher education in Minnesota was slightly above the regional average in 2016. $10,000 $9,073 Source: SHEEO. (2017). State higher $8,240 education finance: FY 16.Estimates $7,805 $8,000 $8,752 $7,693 have been adjusted for inflation. $7,939 $7,292 $7,116 $7,294 REPORT $7,719 $6,615 $6,605 $6,977 $7,020 $6,158 $6,424 to the Member States $6,000 $5,766

$4,000 1994 1999 2004 2009 2014 2016

Figure 18b. State Fiscal Support for Higher Education Per $1,000 of Personal Income Source: SHEEO. (2017). State higher education finance: FY 16. Estimates have been adjusted for inflation.

Figure 18b. State Fiscal Support for Higher Minnesota MHEC Average U.S. $16.00 Education per $1,000 of $15.45 Personal Income

Funding commitment. According $14.00 to Figure 18b, state commitment $13.01 defined as funding per $1,000 of $12.21 personal income was below the $12.00 regional and national benchmarks $11.90 in 2015. $10.52 $10.37 Source: SHEEO. (2017). State higher $10.00 education finance: FY 16. Estimates $8.79 have been adjusted for inflation.Higher Education in Focus 3 $8.17 3 $8.00 $8.11 $7.86 $7.28 $7.21

$6.00 $5.42 $5.36 $5.47 $5.27 $5.30 $5.18

$4.00 1994 1999 2004 2009 2014 2015

2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA 27

Source: SHEEO. (2017). State higher education finance: FY 16. Estimates have been adjusted for inflation.

34 Higher Education in Focus Figure 19. State and Local Educational Appropriations and Net Tuition Revenue as a FigurePercentage 19. State and of LocalTotal Educational Educational Appropriations Revenue for and Public Net Postsecondary Tuition Revenue Institutions as a Percentage in of Total EducationalMinnesota Revenue (per forFTE Public Student Postsecondary) Institutions in Minnesota (per FTE Student) State and student cost share. The student’s share of the cost of enrollment currently exceeds the state’s share, as net tuition revenue constitutes a relatively larger proportion of revenue among public colleges and universities (see Figure 19).

Minnesota Net Tuition Revenue Minnesota Educational Appropriations U.S. Educational Appropriations

80%

74% 74% 73% 72% 71% 72% 71% 70% 71% 69% 70% 70% 70%

62% 62% 62% 59% 60% 58% 58% 58% 56% 56% 55% 55% 55% 53% 53%

50% 47% 47% 45% 45% 45% 44% 44% 42% 42% 42% 41% 40% 38% 38% 38%

31% 30% 30% 30% 29% 28% 29% 29% 30% 28% 27% 26% 26%

20%

Source: SHEEO. (2017). State higher education finance: FY 16.Estimates have been adjusted for inflation.

Source: SHEEO. (2017). State higher education finance: FY 16. Estimates have been adjusted for inflation. .

28 2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA Higher Education in Focus 3 Figure 20a.Figure Public 20a. Doctoral Public Universities: Doctoral UnivStateersities: and Local State Appropriations and Local Relative Appropriations to Educational Relative Expenditures to per FTE Student duringEducational 2014-15 Expenditures Per FTE Student during 2014-15 Institutional funding. Figures 20a-c depict state and local appropriations relative to educational expenditures for each type of institution in the MHEC states during 2014-15. State and local appropriations in Minnesota constitute 45 percent of education and related expenditures at public doctoral universities, which is above the national level of 42 percent.

State and Local Appropriations per FTE Student Education and Related Expenditures per FTE Student

$7,002 Illinois $25,448

$6,788 Indiana $19,293

$8,157 Iowa $19,812

$8,543 Kansas $19,028

$5,552 Michigan $20,211

$10,473 Minnesota $23,511

$6,702 Missouri $16,508

$9,807 Nebraska $14,157

$8,695 North Dakota $18,547

$5,373 Ohio $16,097

$6,345 South Dakota $12,945

$8,447 Wisconsin $19,853

$7,447 U.S. $17,794

IL IN IA KS MI MN MO NE ND OH SD WI U.S. Source: NCES IPEDS. (2015). Finance. Fall Enrollment. 28% 35% 41% 45% 27% 45% 41% 69% 47% 33% 49% 43% 42% AppropriationsAppropriations as Percentage of Expenditures as Percentage of Expenditures

IL IN IA KS MI MN MO NE ND OH SD WI U.S. 28% 35% 41% 45% 27% 45% 41% 69% 47% 33% 49% 43% 42%

Source: NCES IPEDS. (2015). Finance. Fall Enrollment. 2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA 29

36 Higher Education in Focus Figure 20b. Public Master’s Universities: State and Local Appropriations Relative to Educational Expenditures per FTE Student Figureduring 2014-1520b. Public Master’s Universities: State and Local Appropriations Relative to Educational Expenditures Per FTE Student during 2014-15 Institutional funding. At master’s universities, state and local appropriations reflect 40 percent of educational expenditures, which is below the national level of 45 percent.

State and Local Appropriations per FTE Student Education and Related Expenditures per FTE Student

$5,351 Illinois $18,456

$5,101 Indiana $9,506

$9,478 Iowa $13,803

$5,164 Kansas $10,486

$3,577 Michigan $12,590

$4,417 Minnesota $10,956

$5,385 Missouri $11,066

$6,771 Nebraska $10,222

$9,059 North Dakota $14,708

$3,621 Ohio $10,255

$4,334 South Dakota $11,197

$2,972 Wisconsin $11,425

$5,358 U.S. $11,880

IL IN IA KS MI MN MO NE ND OH SD WI U.S. Source: NCES IPEDS. (2015). Finance. Fall Enrollment. 29% 54% 69% 49% 28% 40% 49% 66% 62% 35% 39% 26% 45%

AppropriationsAppropriations as Perc as Percentage of Expendituresentage of Expenditures

IL IN IA KS MI MN MO NE ND OH SD WI U.S. 29% 54% 69% 49% 28% 40% 49% 66% 62% 35% 39% 26% 45%

Source: NCES IPEDS. (2015). Finance. Fall Enrollment.

30 2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA

Higher Education in Focus 3 Figure 20c.Figure Public 20c. Associate’s Public Associates Colleges: State Colleges: and Local State Appropriations and Local RelativeAppropr toiations Educational Relative Expenditures to per FTE Educational Expenditures Per FTE Student during 2014-15 Student during 2014-15 Institutional funding. At two-year colleges, state and local appropriations are equivalent to 47 percent of educational expenditures, which is below the national level of 70 percent.

State and Local Appropriations per FTE Student Education and Related Expenditures per FTE Student

$6,419 Illinois $7,960

$3,847 Indiana $5,624

$6,040 Iowa $8,564

$7,145 Kansas $8,156

$6,461 Michigan $9,532

$4,248 Minnesota $9,092

$4,237 Missouri $7,028

$8,736 Nebraska $9,228

$8,153 North Dakota $12,183

$5,119 Ohio $7,560

$3,214 South Dakota $9,533

$13,004 Wisconsin $15,398

$5,600 U.S. $7,945

IL IN IA KS MI MN MO NE ND OH SD WI U.S. Source: NCES IPEDS. (2015). Finance. Fall Enrollment. 81% 68% 71% 88% 68% 47% 60% 95% 67% 68% 34% 84% 70% Appropriations as Percentage of Expenditures Appropriations as Percentage of Expenditures

IL IN IA KS MI MN MO NE ND OH SD WI U.S. 81% 68% 71% 88% 68% 47% 60% 95% 67% 68% 34% 84% 70%

Source: NCES IPEDS. (2015). Finance. Fall Enrollment.

2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA 31 38 Higher Education in Focus Figure 21. 2 1.State State Need-Based Need-based Grant Gran Aid pert Aid FTE per Undergraduate FTE Undergradua Student teand Stu Percentdent aofnd Aid Percent Defined as Need-Based of Aid Defined as Need-Based Need-based aid. Figure 21 indicates that state need-based grant aid per FTE student in Minnesota increased over the past decade and was above the regional and national benchmarks in 2014-15. Minnesota allocates 76 percent of its grant aid based on financial need, which is above the regional average.

Minnesota MHEC Average U.S. Median, Top 5 States

$1,095

$920

$787 $681 $573 $467 $360 $375

2003‐04 2014‐15 54% 68% 51% 98% 76% 73% 48% 89% Percent of State Aid that is Need‐based

Source: National Association of State Student Grant and Aid Programs (2004). 35th annual survey report on state-sponsored student financial aid for 2003-04 academic year. National Association of State Student Grant and Aid Programs (2015). 46th annual survey report on state-sponsored student financial aid for 2003-04 academic year. The 2004 estimates have been adjusted for inflation.

Source: National Association of State Student Grant and Aid Programs (2004). 35th annual survey report on state- sponsored student financial aid for 2003-04 academic year. National Association of State Student Grant and Aid Programs (2015). 46th annual survey report on state-sponsored student financial aid for 2003-04 academic year. The 2004 estimates have been adjusted for inflation.

32 2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA Higher Education in Focus 3 9 Endnotes

1 The Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce. (2013). Recovery: Job growth and education requirements through 2020. 2 Job categories were defined by the Georgetown University Center on Education and the Workforce: Managerial and Professional (e.g., management, business operations, finance, and legal); STEM (e.g., computer and mathematical science, architects and technicians, engineers and technicians, life and physical scientists); Social Sciences (psychologists, market research analysts, urban planners, survey researchers, economists, anthropologists, archeologists, sociologists, political scientists, historians, geographers); Community Service and Arts (e.g., social services, arts, design, sports, entertainment, media); Education; Healthcare (professionals and support); Food and Personal Services (e.g., protective services, food preparation and serving, personal care); Sales and Office Support; and Blue Collar (e.g., farming, fishing and forestry, construction and extraction, installation, maintenance and equipment repair, production, transportation and material moving). The Georgetown Center describes “Some College, No Degree” as an amorphous category in which some people with high school diplomas self-report their highest level of education in the “Some College” category. The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics defines “Some College, No Degree” as the “achievement of a high school diploma or equivalent plus the completion of one or more postsecondary courses that did not result in a degree or award.” It is generally accepted that this category includes completion of 1- and 2-year certificates. 3 Lumina Foundation. (2014). States with higher education attainment goals. Retrieved from http://strategylabs.luminafoundation.org/wp-content/ uploads/2013/10/State-Attainment- Goals.pdf 4 Lumina Foundation. (2017). A stronger nation. Retrieved from http://strongernation.luminafoundation.org/report/2017/#nation Ewert, S., & Kominski, R. (2014). Measuring alternative educational credentials: 2012. Retrieved from https://www.census.gov/prod/2014pubs/p70-138.pdf 5 National Center for Higher Education Management Systems. (2017). Calculating the economic value of increasing college credentials by 2025. 6 College Board. (2010). Education pays 2010. Retrieved from http://trends.collegeboard.org/ downloads/Education_Pays_2010.pdf 7 U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. (2011). Health, United States, 2010. Retrieved from http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/hus/hus10. pdf#010 8 MHEC. (2013). Advancing Postsecondary Opportunity, Completion, and Productivity. Retrieved from http://www.mhec.org/research 9 Adelman, C. (2006). The toolbox revisited: Paths to degree completion from high school through college. Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/ rschstat/research/pubs/toolboxrevisit/toolbox.pdf 10 Pianta, R. C., Barnett, W. S., Burchinal, M., & Thornburg, K. R. (2009). The effects of preschool education: What we know, how public policy is or is not aligned with the evidence base, and what we need to know. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 10(2), 49-88. 11 American College Testing. (2008). The forgotten middle. Retrieved October 19, 2011, from http://www.act.org/research/policymakers/pdf/ ForgottenMiddle.pdf 12 This report uses the four-year adjusted cohort graduation rate, which is defined as “the number of students who graduate in four years with a regular high school diploma divided by the number of students who form the adjusted cohort for the graduating class. From the beginning of 9th grade (or the earliest high school grade), students who are entering that grade for the first time form a cohort that is “adjusted” by adding any students who subsequently transfer into the cohort and subtracting any students who subsequently transfer out, emigrate to another country, or die” (U.S. Department of Education, 2012). Retrieved from http://eddataexpress.ed.gov/dataelementoverlay.cfm/deid/127/states/XX/ 13 American College Testing. (2010). What are ACT’s college readiness benchmarks? Retrieved from http://www.act.org/research/policymakers/pdf/ benchmarks.pdf 14 The percentage of high school graduates taking the ACT is calculated from the actual number of ACT takers and the projected number of high school graduates. 15 The number of graduates from private high schools in 2014 was estimated as the average of 2011 graduates and the projected number of graduates estimated by WICHE. The Private School Universe Survey does not provide data beyond 2011. 16 Bozick, R., & DeLuca, S. (2005). Better late than never? Delayed enrollment in the high school to college transition. Social Forces, 84(1), 527-550. 17 Hossler, D., Ziskin, M., Gross, J. P., Kim, S., & Cekic, O. (2009). Student aid and its role in encouraging persistence. In J. C. Smart (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (pp. 389-425). Netherlands: Springer Netherlands. Bowen, W. G., Chingos, M. M., & McPherson, M. S. (2009). Crossing the finish line: Completing college at America’s public universities. Princeton, NY: Princeton University Press. Heller, D. E. (Ed.). (2001). The effects of tuition prices and financial aid on enrollment in higher education: California and the nation. Rancho Cordova, CA: EdFund. MHEC (2014). Campus-based practices for promoting student success: Financial aid. Retrieved from http://www.mhec.org/research.

2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA 33 18 Jaeger, D. A., & Page, M. E. (1996). Degrees matter: New evidence on sheepskin effects in the returns to education. The Review of Economics and Statistics, 78(4), 733-740. See also Liu, V. Y., Belfield, C. R., & Trimble, M. J. (2015). The medium-term labor market returns to community college awards: Evidence from North Carolina. Economics of Education Review, 44, 42-55. 19 Schneider, M., & Yin, Lu. (2011). The high cost of low graduation rates: How much does dropping out of college really cost? Retrieved from http:// www.air.org/sites/default/files/downloads/report/AIR_High_Cost_of_Low_Graduation_Aug2011_0.pdf 20 In the case of four-year institutions, overall institutional effectiveness scores were computed as the average of scores based on the four- and six-year graduation rate models. The graduation rate is based on the percentage of full-time, first-time bachelor’s degree-seeking students who graduate within four or six years (2004, 2005, and 2006 cohorts). Overall effectiveness for two-year colleges was computed as the average of scores based on models for graduation within 150% of program time and graduation or transfer within 150% of program time. In addition, the average performance scores of public institutions weighted by FTE undergraduate enrollment were calculated for each state. A state’s institutional effectiveness score reflects the average standardized difference between actual and predicted completion rates at public institutions (rates predicted from institutional and state attributes). See Horn, A. S., & Lee, G. (2016). The reliability and validity of using regression residuals to measure institutional effectiveness in promoting degree completion. Research in Higher Education, 57(4), 469-496. See also Horn, A. S., Horner, O. G., & Lee, G. (2017). Measuring the effectiveness of two-year colleges: a comparison of raw and value-added performance indicators. Studies in Higher Education, 1-19. 21 Family income and race and ethnicity are highly correlated, but they also form unique sources of advantage and disadvantage in educational opportunity and attainment. Additional equity indicators by race and ethnicity will be available at http://www.mhec.org/research 22 Southern Education Foundation. (2015). A new majority. Retrieved from http://www.southerneducation.org/getattachment/4ac62e27-5260-47a5- 9d02-14896ec3a531/A-New-Majority-2015-Update-Low-Income-Students-Now.aspx 23 Higher income is defined as any level of income that did not qualify the student for free or reduced price lunch. Income thresholds for eligibility differ by household size. For example, the annual income limit to qualify for reduced-price meals for a household of four is $44,863. See USDA. (2016). Income eligibility guidelines. Retrieved from https://www.fns.usda.gov/school-meals/income-eligibility-guidelines. 24 See endnote 12. 25 Dependent is defined as age less than 25, not married with spouse present, with the household role of sibling, child, step child, family other, foster child or grandchild. The sample excludes individuals currently enrolled in high school but includes individuals without a high school diploma or certificate who are not currently enrolled in high school. Family income quartiles are based on all households in the state: low income is delineated by the bottom quartile; middle income is delineated by the middle quartiles; and high income is delineated by the top quartile. College enrollment is defined as current postsecondary enrollment or any level of college attainment, including some college or a specific credential. Sample sizes are too small to produce single-year estimates. 26 Not all institutions in all states are accounted for as many did not report Pell data, which affects the U.S. and MHEC averages. Coverage for MHEC states is as follows: IL (100%), IN (91%), IA (100%), KS (92%), MI (100%), MN (74%), MO (84%), NE (100%), ND (100%), OH (95%), SD (95%), and WI (100%). Graduation rates for private institutions were not calculated due to excessive missing data. 27 NASBO. (2017). 2014-16 state expenditure report. Retrieved from https://www.nasbo.org/mainsite/reports-data/state-expenditure-report 28 State Higher Education Executive Officers. (2017).State higher education finance. Retrieved October 19, 2017, from http://www.sheeo.org/sites/ default/files/project-files/SHEEO_SHEF_2016_Report.pdf. Expenditure figures do not include capital or debt service. 29 State and local educational appropriations refer to “state and local support available for public higher education operating expenses, defined to exclude spending for research, agricultural extension, and medical education, as well as support for independent institutions or students attending them” (SHEEO, 2015, p. 11). State and local support refer to “state tax appropriations and local tax support plus additional nontax funds (e.g., lottery revenue) that support or benefit higher education, and funds appropriated to other state entities for specific higher education xpenditures or benefits (e.g., employee fringe benefits disbursed by the state treasurer)” (SHEEO, 2015, p. 11). 30 State fiscal support is defined as “state and local tax and non-tax support for public and independent higher education, including special purpose appropriations for research-agricultural-medical” (SHEEO, 2017, p. 55). 31 Mumper, M., & Freeman, M. L. (2005). The causes and consequences of public college tuition inflation. In J.C. Smart (Ed.),Higher Education: Handbook of Theory and Research, Vol. XX, 307–361. Norwell, MA: Springer. 32 See endnote 17.

34 2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA 2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA 35 MIDWESTERN HIGHER EDUCATION COMPACT 105 Fifth Avenue South, Suite 450 Minneapolis, MN 55401 PHONE: (612) 677-2777 FAX: 612-767-3353 E-MAIL: [email protected]

VISIT MHEC’S WEBSITE AT: WWW.MHEC.ORG

36 2017 Higher Education in Focus: MINNESOTA