Comparison Peers: Distance of Peers from WT
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.6
Comparison Peers: Table
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.7
Technical Notes for Data Slides
• Data for WTAMU are represented by MAROON bars.• Data for all peers are represented by GRAY bars.• The vertical RED line on each slide represents the mean value
for that specific data point.
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.8
Comparison Peers: Full-time Equivalent (FTE) Enrollment
Indiana University−South Bend
University of Nebraska at Kearney
University of North Alabama
The University of Tennessee−Martin
Pittsburg State University
Northwestern State University of Louisiana
McNeese State University
Southern Utah University
Northern Michigan University
West Texas A&M University
Morehead State University
Austin Peay State University
University of Southern Indiana
Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne
University of Wisconsin−Whitewater
University of Central Oklahoma
0 2,500 5,000 7,500 10,000 12,500
Com
paris
on P
eers
Note: FTE enrollment is a measure of institutional sizethat normalizes the mix of full−time and part−time students.
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.9
Comparison Peers: Fall-to-Fall Retention (First-time, Full-time Students)
University of Central Oklahoma
Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne
Southern Utah University
West Texas A&M University
Indiana University−South Bend
Morehead State University
McNeese State University
Austin Peay State University
University of Southern Indiana
Northwestern State University of Louisiana
Northern Michigan University
Pittsburg State University
The University of Tennessee−Martin
University of North Alabama
University of Nebraska at Kearney
University of Wisconsin−Whitewater
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Com
paris
on P
eers
Note: This retention rate is a key performance indicator of institutionaleffectiveness used by many universities and organizations across higher education.
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.10
Comparison Peers: 6-year Graduation Rate (First-time, Full-time Students)
Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne
Indiana University−South Bend
University of North Alabama
Austin Peay State University
University of Central Oklahoma
McNeese State University
University of Southern Indiana
Northwestern State University of Louisiana
West Texas A&M University
Southern Utah University
Morehead State University
The University of Tennessee−Martin
Northern Michigan University
Pittsburg State University
University of Nebraska at Kearney
University of Wisconsin−Whitewater
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Com
paris
on P
eers
Note: Graduation rate is a key performance indicator of institutionaleffectiveness used by many universities and organizations across higher education.
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.11
Comparison Peers: Degrees Awarded per FTE
Indiana University−South Bend
Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne
Northwestern State University of Louisiana
Northern Michigan University
Southern Utah University
McNeese State University
Morehead State University
The University of Tennessee−Martin
University of Southern Indiana
University of Nebraska at Kearney
Austin Peay State University
University of North Alabama
University of Wisconsin−Whitewater
University of Central Oklahoma
Pittsburg State University
West Texas A&M University
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
Com
paris
on P
eers
Note: This locally−created metric divides total degrees awarded bystudent FTE to make 'apples−to−apples' comparisons across institutions with differentsizes of enrollment.
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.12
Comparison Peers: Academic Program Similarity Score
West Texas A&M University
McNeese State University
Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne
Northern Michigan University
Austin Peay State University
Morehead State University
Southern Utah University
Pittsburg State University
Indiana University−South Bend
The University of Tennessee−Martin
University of North Alabama
University of Central Oklahoma
Northwestern State University of Louisiana
University of Southern Indiana
University of Nebraska at Kearney
University of Wisconsin−Whitewater
0.0 2.5 5.0 7.5
Com
paris
on P
eers
Note: This locally−created metric calculates how similar an institution'sacademic program mix is when compared to the target institution (WTAMU), which is whyWTAMU does not have a score. Score range is 0−100. Lower scores are better.
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.13
Comparison Peers: % of Adult Undergraduates (25-64)
University of Wisconsin−Whitewater
University of Nebraska at Kearney
University of Southern Indiana
Northern Michigan University
Pittsburg State University
University of North Alabama
Morehead State University
Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne
The University of Tennessee−Martin
McNeese State University
Indiana University−South Bend
West Texas A&M University
University of Central Oklahoma
Northwestern State University of Louisiana
Southern Utah University
Austin Peay State University
0% 10% 20% 30%
Com
paris
on P
eers
Note: This percentage provides a rough estimate of how many'non−traditional' students are enrolled at each institution.
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.14
Comparison Peers: Research Expenditures per FTE
University of North Alabama
Southern Utah University
University of Wisconsin−Whitewater
University of Southern Indiana
Northwestern State University of Louisiana
The University of Tennessee−Martin
Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne
Northern Michigan University
Indiana University−South Bend
Morehead State University
University of Nebraska at Kearney
Austin Peay State University
Pittsburg State University
University of Central Oklahoma
McNeese State University
West Texas A&M University
$0 $200 $400
Com
paris
on P
eers
Note: This metric shows how much an institution spends per FTE student to produceresearch outcomes. This is an outcome that will need to increase as WTAMUworks toward becoming a Regionally Responsive Research University.
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.15
Comparison Peers: Graduate Enrollment as Percentage of Total Enrollment
Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne
The University of Tennessee−Martin
Indiana University−South Bend
University of Southern Indiana
Austin Peay State University
McNeese State University
Southern Utah University
Northern Michigan University
University of Wisconsin−Whitewater
Morehead State University
University of Central Oklahoma
Northwestern State University of Louisiana
University of North Alabama
Pittsburg State University
West Texas A&M University
University of Nebraska at Kearney
0% 10% 20%
Com
paris
on P
eers
Note: This percentage shows the proportion of graduate students in the student body.
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.16
Comparison Peers: % Undergraduates Enrolled Only in Distance Courses
Northern Michigan University
Pittsburg State University
Southern Utah University
University of Wisconsin−Whitewater
Indiana University−South Bend
Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne
University of Central Oklahoma
University of Nebraska at Kearney
University of Southern Indiana
McNeese State University
University of North Alabama
The University of Tennessee−Martin
Morehead State University
West Texas A&M University
Austin Peay State University
Northwestern State University of Louisiana
0% 10% 20% 30%
Com
paris
on P
eers
Note: This is an important metric as WTAMU explores potential growthin distance education at the undergraduate level.
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.17
Comparison Peers: % Graduate Students Enrolled Only in Distance Courses
University of Central Oklahoma
Indiana University−South Bend
Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne
McNeese State University
Northern Michigan University
Southern Utah University
Pittsburg State University
University of Wisconsin−Whitewater
Austin Peay State University
University of North Alabama
West Texas A&M University
University of Southern Indiana
Northwestern State University of Louisiana
Morehead State University
The University of Tennessee−Martin
University of Nebraska at Kearney
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Com
paris
on P
eers
Note: This is an important metric as WTAMU explores potential growthin distance education at the graduate level.
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.18
Comparison Peers: % of Undergraduate Students who are Women
Pittsburg State University
University of Wisconsin−Whitewater
Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne
Northern Michigan University
West Texas A&M University
Southern Utah University
Austin Peay State University
The University of Tennessee−Martin
University of Central Oklahoma
University of Nebraska at Kearney
University of North Alabama
McNeese State University
Morehead State University
Indiana University−South Bend
University of Southern Indiana
Northwestern State University of Louisiana
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70%
Com
paris
on P
eers
Note: This metric indicates the gender distribution at each institution.
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.19
Comparison Peers: % of Undergraduate Students who are White
Northwestern State University of Louisiana
University of Central Oklahoma
West Texas A&M University
Austin Peay State University
Indiana University−South Bend
McNeese State University
University of North Alabama
Pittsburg State University
Southern Utah University
The University of Tennessee−Martin
University of Nebraska at Kearney
Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne
University of Wisconsin−Whitewater
Northern Michigan University
University of Southern Indiana
Morehead State University
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90%
Com
paris
on P
eers
Note: This metric provides a rough estimate of diversity at each institution.
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.20
Comparison Peers: Average Salary of Assistant Professors (9-month equated)
Austin Peay State University
Indiana University−South Bend
Northwestern State University of Louisiana
Southern Utah University
University of Central Oklahoma
McNeese State University
University of Nebraska at Kearney
Morehead State University
University of Southern Indiana
Pittsburg State University
The University of Tennessee−Martin
University of North Alabama
Northern Michigan University
Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne
West Texas A&M University
University of Wisconsin−Whitewater
$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000
Com
paris
on P
eers
Note: Salary comparisons across institutions in different states/regionsshould be made with caution.
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.21
Comparison Peers: Average Salary of Associate Professors (9-month equated)
Indiana University−South Bend
Northwestern State University of Louisiana
Austin Peay State University
McNeese State University
Pittsburg State University
Morehead State University
The University of Tennessee−Martin
Southern Utah University
University of Wisconsin−Whitewater
University of Nebraska at Kearney
University of Central Oklahoma
University of Southern Indiana
University of North Alabama
Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne
Northern Michigan University
West Texas A&M University
$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000
Com
paris
on P
eers
Note: Salary comparisons across institutions in different states/regionsshould be made with caution.
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.22
Comparison Peers: Average Salary of Professors (9-month equated)
Indiana University−South Bend
Northwestern State University of Louisiana
The University of Tennessee−Martin
Morehead State University
University of Wisconsin−Whitewater
Austin Peay State University
University of Central Oklahoma
Pittsburg State University
Southern Utah University
McNeese State University
University of North Alabama
University of Nebraska at Kearney
Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne
Northern Michigan University
University of Southern Indiana
West Texas A&M University
$0 $25,000 $50,000 $75,000
Com
paris
on P
eers
Note: Salary comparisons across institutions in different states/regionsshould be made with caution.
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.23
Comparison Peers: Student-to-Faculty Ratio
Indiana University−South Bend
University of Nebraska at Kearney
The University of Tennessee−Martin
Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne
Austin Peay State University
Morehead State University
Pittsburg State University
Southern Utah University
University of Southern Indiana
University of Central Oklahoma
McNeese State University
Northwestern State University of Louisiana
Northern Michigan University
University of North Alabama
West Texas A&M University
University of Wisconsin−Whitewater
0 5 10 15 20
Com
paris
on P
eers
Note: This ratio shows the number of FTE students to FTE instructionalstaff. WTAMU's ratio was 22:1 in 2014−2015. Lower ratios indicate the institutionemploys more faculty per student.
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.24
Comparison Peers: Instructional, Research, and Public Service (Faculty) FTE
University of North Alabama
McNeese State University
Indiana University−South Bend
Northwestern State University of Louisiana
Southern Utah University
Pittsburg State University
The University of Tennessee−Martin
West Texas A&M University
Northern Michigan University
University of Nebraska at Kearney
Morehead State University
Austin Peay State University
University of Southern Indiana
Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne
University of Wisconsin−Whitewater
University of Central Oklahoma
0 200 400 600
Com
paris
on P
eers
Note: This metric shows how many FTE staff have dutiesprimarily related to instruction, research, and public service.
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.25
Comparison Peers: Total Faculty and Staff FTE
Indiana University−South Bend
McNeese State University
University of North Alabama
Southern Utah University
Northwestern State University of Louisiana
West Texas A&M University
University of Nebraska at Kearney
The University of Tennessee−Martin
Pittsburg State University
Austin Peay State University
Northern Michigan University
University of Wisconsin−Whitewater
Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne
University of Southern Indiana
Morehead State University
University of Central Oklahoma
0 500 1000 1500
Com
paris
on P
eers
Note: This metric shows how many total FTE staff are employed by eachinstitution. This count includes all occupational categories (administrative staff,instructional/research/public service staff, etc.).
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.26
Comparison Peers: Total Price for In-State Students Living on Campus
University of North Alabama
University of Wisconsin−Whitewater
University of Central Oklahoma
Pittsburg State University
University of Southern Indiana
Indiana University−South Bend
The University of Tennessee−Martin
Southern Utah University
West Texas A&M University
Northwestern State University of Louisiana
McNeese State University
Morehead State University
University of Nebraska at Kearney
Northern Michigan University
Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne
Austin Peay State University
$0 $5,000 $10,000 $15,000 $20,000
Com
paris
on P
eers
Note: This total price calculation allows inter−institutionalcomparisons of the average annual cost for students who qualify for in−state tuitionand live in on−campus residence halls.
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.27
Comparison Peers: Core Revenues (Total Dollars)
Indiana University−South Bend
McNeese State University
University of North Alabama
Northwestern State University of Louisiana
The University of Tennessee−Martin
University of Nebraska at Kearney
Pittsburg State University
West Texas A&M University
University of Southern Indiana
Austin Peay State University
Morehead State University
Northern Michigan University
Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne
University of Wisconsin−Whitewater
Southern Utah University
University of Central Oklahoma
$0 $50,000,000 $100,000,000 $150,000,000 $200,000,000
Com
paris
on P
eers
Note: Core revenues include tuition and fees; government appropriations; governmentgrants and contracts; private gifts, grants, and contracts; investment income;other operating and nonoperating sources; and other revenues and additions.
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.28
Comparison Peers: Tuition and Fees as Percent of Core Revenues
Morehead State University
University of Nebraska at Kearney
Pittsburg State University
The University of Tennessee−Martin
University of Southern Indiana
Indiana University−South Bend
Austin Peay State University
Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne
West Texas A&M University
Northern Michigan University
Southern Utah University
Northwestern State University of Louisiana
University of Central Oklahoma
University of North Alabama
McNeese State University
University of Wisconsin−Whitewater
0% 20% 40%
Com
paris
on P
eers
Note: This percentage provides an estimation of how reliantan institution is on student tuition and fees as a source of revenue.
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.29
Comparison Peers: State Appropriations as Percent of Core Revenues
University of Wisconsin−Whitewater
Northwestern State University of Louisiana
Southern Utah University
McNeese State University
Austin Peay State University
The University of Tennessee−Martin
West Texas A&M University
Morehead State University
Northern Michigan University
Pittsburg State University
University of Central Oklahoma
University of North Alabama
Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne
Indiana University−South Bend
University of Nebraska at Kearney
University of Southern Indiana
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
Com
paris
on P
eers
Note: This percentage provides an estimation of how much supportan instituion receives from the state.
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.30
Comparison Peers: Core Expenses (Total Dollars)
Indiana University−South Bend
McNeese State University
University of North Alabama
University of Nebraska at Kearney
Northwestern State University of Louisiana
Pittsburg State University
The University of Tennessee−Martin
University of Southern Indiana
West Texas A&M University
Austin Peay State University
Northern Michigan University
Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne
Southern Utah University
Morehead State University
University of Wisconsin−Whitewater
University of Central Oklahoma
$0 $50,000,000 $100,000,000 $150,000,000
Com
paris
on P
eers
Note: This total includes expenses for instruction, research, public service, academic support,student services, institutional support, operation and maintenance of plant, depreciation,scholarships and fellowships, interest, and other operating and non−operating expenses.
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.31
Comparison Peers: Instruction Expenses as a Percent of Core Expenses
Morehead State University
Northern Michigan University
Northwestern State University of Louisiana
University of Wisconsin−Whitewater
West Texas A&M University
University of Southern Indiana
Austin Peay State University
McNeese State University
University of North Alabama
Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne
Pittsburg State University
Southern Utah University
The University of Tennessee−Martin
University of Central Oklahoma
University of Nebraska at Kearney
Indiana University−South Bend
0% 20% 40% 60%
Com
paris
on P
eers
Note: This percentage provides an estimation of how much an institution spendson instructional expenses compared to other core expenses.
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.32
Comparison Peers: Research Expenses as a Percent of Core Expenses
Southern Utah University
The University of Tennessee−Martin
University of North Alabama
University of Southern Indiana
University of Wisconsin−Whitewater
Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne
Morehead State University
Northern Michigan University
Northwestern State University of Louisiana
Austin Peay State University
Indiana University−South Bend
University of Nebraska at Kearney
Pittsburg State University
University of Central Oklahoma
McNeese State University
West Texas A&M University
0% 1% 2% 3% 4%
Com
paris
on P
eers
Note: This percentage provides an estimation of how much an institution spendson research expenses compared to other core expenses. Not all institutions in thisComparison Peer group reported research expenses in 2014−2015.
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.33
Comparison Peers: Student Service Expenses as a Percent of Core Expenses
West Texas A&M University
Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne
University of Nebraska at Kearney
McNeese State University
University of Southern Indiana
Indiana University−South Bend
University of North Alabama
Northwestern State University of Louisiana
Southern Utah University
Pittsburg State University
Morehead State University
University of Central Oklahoma
Northern Michigan University
Austin Peay State University
The University of Tennessee−Martin
University of Wisconsin−Whitewater
0% 5% 10% 15% 20%
Com
paris
on P
eers
Note: This percentage provides an estimation of how much an institution spendson student service expenses compared to other core expenses.
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.34
Comparison Peers: Core Expenses as a Percent of Core Revenues
University of Nebraska at Kearney
Indiana University−South Bend
Pittsburg State University
McNeese State University
University of Central Oklahoma
University of Southern Indiana
Indiana University−Purdue University−Fort Wayne
Southern Utah University
Northern Michigan University
Austin Peay State University
Northwestern State University of Louisiana
The University of Tennessee−Martin
West Texas A&M University
University of Wisconsin−Whitewater
University of North Alabama
Morehead State University
0% 25% 50% 75% 100%
Com
paris
on P
eers
Note: This percentage provides a rough estimate of institutional efficiency. An institutionthat is close to 100% on this metric is investing most of their core revenuesin core areas essential to the successful operation of the university.
Developmental Draft -- Not For PublicationDevelopmental Draft -- Not For Publication 5.35