web agenda cover

MEETING AGENDA

January 23, 2009

David Tyson, Esq., Chair David Hendrickson, Esq., Vice Chair

John Estep, Secretary Bob Brown, Ex-Officio

Kathy Eddy Kay Goodwin, Ex-Officio

Cindy Largent-Hill J. Thomas Jones

Steven Paine, Ex-Officio

Brian Noland, Chancellor

WEST VIRGINIA HIGHER EDUCATION POLICY COMMISSION

January 23, 2009

Embassy Suites 300 Court Street

Charleston, West Virginia

SCHEDULE OF EVENTS

Friday, January 23, 2009 11:30 A.M. Lunch 1st Floor Atrium 12:30 P.M. Policy Commission Meeting 1st Floor Salon A

MEETING OF THE


JANUARY 23, 2009

Embassy Suites - Salon A Charleston, West Virginia

AGENDA

12:30 P.M.

I. Call to Order II. Approval of Minutes III. Chancellor’s Report IV. Presentations and Reports

A. Update on Nursing Education in West Virginia – Tab 1

B. 2008 Health Sciences Report Card – Tab 2

C. 2008 Higher Education Report Card – Tab 3

D. Presentation on From Higher Education to Work in West Virginia 2007 – Tab 4

E. Presentation on Class of 2008 High School Senior Opinions Survey – Tab 5

F. Final Report of the PROMISE Scholarship Ad-Hoc Advisory Committee – Tab 6 V. Academic Program Items

A. Approval of Institutional Compacts – Tab 7 B. Approval of Revised Mission Statement at Bluefield State College – Tab 8

C. Approval of Series 49, Accountability System, Legislative Rule – Tab 9

D. Approval of Master Plan at West Liberty State College – Tab 10

VI. Finance/Facilities Items

A. New Residence Hall Project at Glenville State College – Tab 11 B. Approval of the Ten-Year Campus Master Plan Update at West Virginia State

University – Tab 12

C. Approval of Fiscal Year 2010 Capital Bond Project Priorities – Tab 13

D. Approval of 403(b) Tax Deferred Retirement Savings Plan Document – Tab 14

E. Approval of West Virginia Higher Education Grant Program Distribution Plan for Fiscal Year 2010 – Tab 15

VII. Recognition VIII. Additional Board Action and Comments IX. Adjournment

MINUTES

HIGHER EDUCATION POLICY COMMISSION

November 21, 2008

1. Call to Order

Chairman David Tyson convened a meeting of the Higher Education Policy Commission at 1:00 P.M. in the Art Gallery at the State Cultural Center in Charleston, West Virginia. The following Commission members were present: Kathy Eddy, John Estep, Kay Goodwin, David Hendrickson, Nelson Robinson, and David Tyson. Absent: J. Thomas Jones, Cindy Largent-Hill, and Steven Paine. Also in attendance were institutional presidents, higher education staff, and others.

2. Approval of Minutes

Mr. Hendrickson moved approval of the minutes of the meetings held on August 1, August 20, August 23, and September 10, 2008 as provided in the agenda materials. Ms. Eddy seconded the motion. Motion passed.

3. Chancellor’s Report .

Dr. Brian Noland, Chancellor, provided information regarding the Chancellor’s Lecture Series, progress on implementation of the Commission’s master plan, and accomplishments during the year. Chancellor Noland thanked Nelson Robinson for his service on the Commission and Olen Jones for his service to the West Virginia School of Osteopathic Medicine.

4. Recognition

Chairman Tyson presented Commissioner Nelson Robinson with a sign of appreciation in honor of his service to the Commission, and thanked him for his commitment to the Commission from 2004 to 2008. Chairman Tyson also presented a formal resolution in Commissioner Robinson’s honor. Chairman Tyson presented Dr. Olen Jones, President of West Virginia School of Osteopathic Medicine, with a sign of appreciation and thanked him for his dedicated service to West Virginia School of Osteopathic Medicine from 1987 to 2008. Chairman Tyson also presented a formal resolution in President Jones’ honor.

1

5. Reports and Presentations

A. Annual Constituent Presentations

1. Advisory Council of Classified Employees (ACCE)

Chairman Tyson introduced Ms. Amy Pitzer, Chair of the Advisory Council of Classified Employees (ACCE) and Editorial Assistant at Concord University. Ms. Pitzer made the annual presentation on behalf of the ACCE, which highlighted progress regarding the on-going personnel study mandated by Senate Bill 603. The purpose of the legislation was to conduct a three-year personnel study on all public higher education personnel processes and practices in the State of West Virginia. Ms. Pitzer also discussed other issues including increased funding for higher education, increased cost and benefit reductions in Public Employees Insurance Agency (PEIA), lack of support for pay for performance, and full funding of the 2001 salary schedule.

2. Advisory Council of Faculty (ACF)

Chairman Tyson introduced Dr. Roy Nutter, Chair of the Advisory Council of Faculty (ACF) and Professor in the Department of Computer Science and Electrical Engineering and College of Engineering and Mineral Resources at West Virginia University. Dr. Nutter made the annual presentation on behalf of the ACF, which provided an overview of faculty responsibilities and focused on ways that faculty assist in providing for a better educated citizenry by increasing student access, retention, graduation rates, and funded research. Dr. Nutter discussed concerns about attracting and retaining qualified faculty and presented legislative recommendations which include increasing legislative funding, allowing faculty representation on the Commission and the Council, and allowing higher education employees the right to serve in the Legislature. The increased funding would provide yearly merit increases for full-time faculty and provide salary increases for adjunct faculty.

3. Advisory Council of Students (ACS) Chairman Tyson introduced Mr. Matt James, Chair of the State Advisory Council of Students (ACS) and student at Marshall University, who made the annual presentation on behalf of the ACS. The ACS presentation highlighted several student concerns including tuition increases, affordable textbook costs, sustainable energy policies, expanded online education, and increased health and wellness initiatives. Mr. James applauded the work of state officials in securing recent increases totaling over $3.5 million in both need-based and merit-based financial aid programs.

2

B. Fall 2008 Enrollment Report

Mr. Rob Anderson, Senior Director of Policy and Planning, presented an overview of enrollment trends from an institutional and system perspective. Fall 2008 enrollment figures show an increase over Fall 2007 enrollment figures. Total headcount at four-year and two-year public colleges and universities for the Fall 2008 semester was nearly 88,000 students.

Vice Chairman Hendrickson inquired about the impact of metro-rates on enrollment. President Capehart of West Liberty State College indicated that enrollment is up significantly in counties that have a metro-rate when compared with enrollment in the same counties before the metro-rate was implemented. Vice Chairman Hendrickson also inquired about students that have earned 90 hours or more with no degree. Mr. Anderson indicated that the issue will be a major focus of the Commission in the coming year and that staff is working to collect the relevant data and other information. Commissioner Robinson noted declining enrollment at some institutions and urged institutional officials to stop this alarming trend. He also expressed concern regarding the projected decrease in high school graduates. Commissioner Robinson also encouraged institutional officials to expand online course offerings and make information regarding online education easily accessible to students.

C. Report on Transfer Study

Mr. Anderson provided a presentation regarding student transfer trends across West Virginia postsecondary education. Results from the study indicate that West Virginia University (963 students), Marshall University (494 students), and Shepherd University (366 students) receive the largest number of transfer students. Additionally, results indicate that Bluefield State College (12.4 percent), West Virginia Northern Community College (10.7 percent), and the Community and Technical College at West Virginia University Institute of Technology (10.6 percent) have the largest percentage of overall enrollment comprised of transfer students.

D. Report on College Access Challenge Grant Program

Mr. Anderson provided information regarding funding from the U.S. Department of Education of approximately $450,000 for two consecutive years as part of the College Access Challenge Grant Program (CACGP). Mr. Anderson stated that the purpose of CACGP is to foster partnerships among federal, state, and local governments and philanthropic organizations through

3

matching challenge grants that are aimed at increasing the number of low-income students who are prepared to enter and succeed in postsecondary education. The Commission will utilize the funding to create a web portal as a one-stop shop for information and resources for planning, applying, and paying for college. Commissioner Eddy inquired about the projected launch date of the web portal. Mr. Anderson indicated that the Commission has contracted with the Xap Corporation and plans to launch the web portal in August 2009 before the beginning of the 2009-2010 academic year.

E. Report on GEAR UP Program Dr. Adam Green, Director of GEAR UP and P-20 Initiatives, provided an update on the progress of the Commission’s six-year, $18 million GEAR UP (Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs) grant. Dr. Green presented detailed information on staff hires, an implementation timeline, and the distribution of grant funds to counties and local schools.

F. PROMISE Scholarship Ad-Hoc Advisory Committee Progress Report

Mr. Anderson provided an update on the activities of the PROMISE Scholarship Ad-Hoc Advisory Committee and progress towards completion of the final committee report. Mr. Anderson stated that the committee has completed their deliberations and were in the final stages of completing the report. The final report will be presented at the next regular meeting of the Commission in early 2009.

G. Report on Master Plan Implementation

Dr. Bruce Flack, Director of Academic Affairs, provided a report on implementation of the Commission’s master plan. Dr. Flack presented a detailed overview of staff work in the areas of university research, international education, assessment, and student financial aid.

H. Update on West Virginia University Institute of Technology Chancellor Noland introduced Dr. Scott Hurst, Provost at West Virginia University Institute of Technology, who provided an update on West Virginia Institute of Technology including integration of databases and services, accreditation visits, update and improvement of engineering facilities totaling $3.2 million as provided by the Legislature. The Commission was provided a copy of an annual status report that was submitted to the Legislative Oversight Commission on Education Accountability (LOCEA) in late October 2008.

4

6. Academic Program Items

A. Approval of University Status at West Liberty State College Dr. Flack presented a request from West Liberty State College for the designation of university status. He indicated that the institution meets the criteria established by the Commission in 2002. Dr. Flack stated that the name of the institution is designated in West Virginia Code; therefore, the institution must secure statutory change to be recognized as a university in statute; however, the institution may utilized the word “University” in the institution’s name upon approval of the board of governors.

Mr. Robinson moved approval of the following resolution: Resolved, That the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission approves the designation of university status for West Liberty State College. Mr. Hendrickson seconded the motion. Motion passed.

7. Finance/Facilities Items

A. Approval of Fiscal Year 2009 Revised HEPC Budget

Mr. Terry Hess, Co-Interim Director of Finance and Facilities, provided information regarding the Fiscal Year 2009 revised budget. Mr. Hess indicated that when the budget was approved by the Commission on August 23, 2008, the West Virginia GEAR UP Grant Program and the College Access Challenge Grant had just received federal funding and budgets were being developed. As a result, the office budget has been revised to recognize the addition of $3,446,063 in federal revenues and expenditures. Mr. Hendrickson moved approval of the following resolution: Resolved, That the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission approves the revised FY 2009 budget for the Commission office as presented. Ms. Eddy seconded the motion. Motion passed.

B. Approval of Tuition and Fee Discount for Out-of-State Students at West Liberty State College

Mr. Hess presented a proposal from West Liberty State College to expand an existing metro rate to students residing in Carroll, Harrison, Stark, Tuscarawas, and Washington counties in Ohio; Butler and Westmoreland counties in Pennsylvania; Allegheny, Frederick, Garrett, Montgomery, and

5

Washington counties in Maryland; and, Clarke, Frederick, Loudoun, Shenandoah, and Warren counties in Virginia. The tuition and fee discount for out-of-state students would lower tuition rates by $2,000 per student from the aforementioned counties. Mr. Hess stated that West Liberty officials believe that significant opportunities exist for the institution to recruit more students from these counties and that any revenue reductions expected as a result of the imposition of the metro rate would be offset as a result of having a greater number of these students attend West Liberty State College. Mr. Robinson moved approval of the following resolution: Resolved, That the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission approves West Liberty State College’s modified out-of-state tuition rate for the 2009-10 academic year for students residing in numerous counties in Maryland, Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Virginia. Mr. Hendrickson seconded the motion. Motion passed.

C. Approval of Fiscal Year 2010 Capital Projects

Mr. Dennis Taylor, Vice Chancellor for Administration, provided an overview of the capital projects and requests for new construction received to date from the institutions. Mr. Taylor noted that the methodology utilized to prioritize projects was consistent with past practices at the Commission. Mr. Hendrickson moved approval of the following resolution: Resolved, That the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission approves the prioritized capital project lists in Table 6 for FY 2010 and directs the staff to report the capital project priorities to the Legislative Oversight Commission on Education Accountability as required by state law. Secretary Goodwin seconded the motion. Motion passed.

8. Presidential Search Procedures

A. Approval of Presidential Search Process at Fairmont State University

and West Virginia University Chancellor Noland presented detailed information regarding the presidential search process at Fairmont State University and West Virginia University including the chronology, search committee membership, confidentially oath, statement of desired characteristics, and utilization of search firm or consultant.

6

Ms. Eddy moved approval of the following resolution: Resolved, That the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission approves the presidential search process as presented by the institutional governing boards of Fairmont State University and West Virginia University.

Mr. Estep seconded the motion. Motion passed.

9. Proposed Rules

A. Approval of Series 5, Guidelines for Governing Boards in Employing and Evaluating Presidents, Emergency and Legislative Rules

Mr. Bruce Walker, General Counsel, provided an overview of the comments received during the formal thirty-day comment period for the rule. As a result of the comments received, Commission staff has clarified Sections 2.2.1 and 2.2.4. Vice Chairman Hendrickson made an objection to a provision in the rule that called for the Chancellor to serve as an ex-officio, non-voting member of all search committees. Vice Chairman Hendrickson expressed his belief that the Chancellor should be able to designate individuals to serve on search committees on his behalf. Questions were also raised by members of the Commission regarding provisions in the rule related to presidential compensation. As a result of the discussion, the item was tabled.

B. Approval of Final Proposed Series 42, Higher Education Grant Program, Legislative Rule

Mr. Taylor provided an overview of the comments received during the formal thirty-day comment period for the rule. As a result of the comments received, Commission staff has clarified Sections 8.4 and 9.2. Mr. Hendrickson moved approval of the following resolution: Resolved, That the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission approves amendments to Series 42, Higher Education Grant Program, legislative rule for filing with the Secretary of State and to the Legislative Oversight Commission on Education Accountability for approval and further legislative action. Mr. Estep seconded the motion. Motion passed.

7

C. Approval of Proposed Series 49, Accountability System, Legislative Rule

Dr. Flack indicated that no comments were received during the formal thirty-day comment period for the rule; however, discussion with legislative staff indicated that the Commission would be better served with a rule that provided a more detailed summation of the process by which the Commission and its institutions would develop, implement, and evaluate progression to achieve the goals and objectives set forth in Senate Bill 595. Dr. Flack stated that the revised draft of the rule gives greater attention to the processes the Commission and its institutions will utilize in carrying out major planning efforts, particularly the system master plan and institutional compacts.

Mr. Hendrickson moved approval of the following resolution: Resolved, That the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission approves Series 49, Accountability System, legislative rule for filing with the Secretary of State for a thirty-day public comment period. Further Resolved, That staff is instructed to forward the legislative rule to the Legislative Oversight Commission on Education Accountability for approval and further legislative action at the conclusion of the comment period if no comments are received during the comment period. Secretary Goodwin seconded the motion. Motion passed.

10. Possible Executive Session under the Authority of WV Code §6-9A-4 to

Discuss Personnel Issues Mr. Hendrickson moved to go into Executive Session under the authority of WV Code §6-9A-4 to discuss personnel issues. The motion was seconded by Mr. Estep. Motion passed.

Mr. Hendrickson moved to rise from Executive Session. Mr. Estep seconded the motion. Motion passed.

A. Approval of Presidential Appointment and Compensation at West

Virginia School of Osteopathic Medicine

Mr. Hendrickson moved approval of the following resolution: Resolved, That the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission approves the appointment of Dr. Richard Rafes as President of the WVSOM by the WVSOM Board of Governors, under the terms and conditions communicated to the Commission, and delegates to its Chancellor the authority to approve the contract with Dr. Rafes as to form.

8

Mr. Estep seconded the motion. Motion passed.

11. Additional Board Action and Comment There was no additional board action or comment. 12. Adjournment

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.

Chairman David R. Tyson Secretary John Estep

9

MINUTES

HIGHER EDUCATION POLICY COMMISSION

January 7, 2009

1. Call to Order

Chairman David Tyson convened a special meeting of the Higher Education Policy Commission at 1:00 PM in the 9th Floor Conference Room at 1018 Kanawha Boulevard East, Charleston, West Virginia, and by conference call. The following Commission members were present: Bob Brown, Kathy Eddy, John Estep, Kay Goodwin, David Hendrickson, Cindy Largent-Hill, J. Thomas Jones, Steve Paine, and David Tyson. Also in attendance were institutional presidents, higher education staff, and others.

At the request of Chairman Tyson, Ashley Schumaker conducted a roll call of Commissioners.

2. Oath of Office

Mr. Bob Brown, a new member of the Policy Commission, was sworn in and welcomed by Chairman Tyson.

3. Approval of Revision to Series 5, Guidelines for Governing Boards in

Employing and Evaluating Presidents, Emergency Rule and Legislative Rule

Mr. Bruce Walker, General Counsel, provided an overview of the comments received during the formal thirty-day comment period for the rule. As a result of the comments received, Commission staff has amended Sections 2.2.1 and 2.2.4. Vice Chairman Hendrickson expressed his dissatisfaction with the rule in its current form as noted during the November 21, 2008 Commission meeting, but withdrew any objection to the passage of the rule. Mr. Jones moved approval of the following resolution:

Resolved, That the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission approves amendments to Series 5 as emergency and legislative rules for filing with the Secretary of State and submission to the Legislative Oversight Commission on Education Accountability for approval and further legislative action. Mr. Hendrickson seconded the motion. Motion passed.

10

4. Possible Executive Session under the Authority of WV Code §6-9A-4 to Discuss Personnel Issues - Approval of Presidential Compensation Package at Marshall University

Chancellor Noland presented a request from the Marshall University Board of

Governors to amend the presidential compensation package of Dr. Stephen Kopp. Dr. Noland provided an overview of the contract and clarified the relationship between the institution and the Foundation as requested by the Commission during the November 21, 2008 meeting.

Commissioner Jones asked for confirmation that President Kopp’s base pay

would be funded by the state, while the remaining compensation would be funded by the Foundation. Chancellor Noland stated that was correct.

Vice Chairman Hendrickson explained that the request contained three parts

including a state-funded salary of $275,000, a Foundation-funded bonus of $50,000, and a deferred compensation plan, the details of which remain uncertain. Vice Chairman Hendrickson indicated that the Marshall University Board of Governors was to report to the Commission regarding the details of the deferred compensation plan; however, no such details have been provided. Vice Chairman Hendrickson expressed concern about voting on an item when all of the details were not available and questions remained unanswered.

Commissioner Eddy concurred with Vice Chairman Hendrickson and stated the need for the Commission to carefully examine the details of any compensation plan before taking action on such items.

Commissioner Brown expressed concern about the proposed increase, noting

that Marshall University trails peer averages with respect to faculty salaries. Mr. Brown also noted that the institution has not fully funded the 2001 classified staff salary schedule.

Mr. Hendrickson moved approval of the following resolution: RESOLVED, that the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission approves the changes in compensation for President Kopp adopted by the Marshall University Board of Governors and delegates to its Chancellor the authority to approve the contract for President Kopp as to form, however the Commission reserves the right to approve any deferred compensation until a final document detailing the deferred compensation is presented. Mr. Jones seconded the motion. Motion passed, 7 to 2, with Mr. Estep and Mr. Brown voting no.

11

5. Adjournment

There being no further business, the meeting was adjourned.

Chairman David R. Tyson Secretary John Estep

12

West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission Meeting of January 23, 2009 ITEM: Update on Nursing Education in West Virginia INSTITUTIONS: All RECOMMENDED RESOLUTION: Information Item STAFF MEMBER: Duane Napier BACKGROUND: Duane Napier, Executive Director of the West Virginia Center for Nursing, and Pamela Alderman, President for the West Virginia Board of Examiners for Registered Professional Nurses, will present an update on nursing education in West Virginia.

1-1

West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission Meeting of January 23, 2009 ITEM: 2008 Health Sciences Report Card INSTITUTIONS: Marshall University, West Virginia School of

Osteopathic Medicine, and West Virginia University

RECOMMENDED RESOLUTION: Information Item STAFF MEMBER: Robert Walker BACKGROUND: The 2008 Health Sciences Report Card was submitted to the Legislative Oversight Commission on Education Accountability on January 12, 2009. Dr. Bob Walker, Vice Chancellor for Health Sciences, will present to the Commission highlights from the report.

2-1

W E S T V I R G I N I A H I G H E R E D U C AT I O N P O L I C Y C OMM I S S I O N | HEA LTH S C I E N C E S AND RURA L H EA LTH

R E P O R T C A R D | 2 0 0 8

2-2

d e v e l o p e s t a b l i s h o v e r s e e c o o r d i n a t e

W E S T V I R G I N I A H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N P O L I C Y C O M M I S S I O N | H E A L T H S C I E N C E S A N D R U R A L H E A L T H

Health Sciences and Rural Health | 2008

2-3

R E P O R T C A R D 2 0 0 8

TAB L E O F CONT EN T S

HIGHLIGHTS OF 2008 2

REPORT ONMEDICAL EDUCATION 3-4

MEDICAL SCHOOL ENROLLMENT

West Virginia University School of Medicine 5

Marshall University School of Medicine 6

West Virginia School of Osteopathic Medicine 7

MEDICAL SCHOOL GRADUATES

Performance on Medical Licensure Exams 8

Graduates Choosing Primary Care Residencies 8

RETENTION

West Virginia Medical School Graduates from 1998-2003

Practicing in West Virginia 9

West Virginia Medical School Graduates Practicing in West Virginia 10

WV Medical Graduates, 1998-2003, In All Specialties 11

WV Medical Graduates, 1998-2003, In Primary Care 11

WV Medical Graduates, 1998-2003, In Non-Urban Areas 12

Health Sciences Graduates, 2004-2008 12

West Virginia Medical Graduates Completing West Virginia

Primary Care Residencies, 2004-2008 13

West Virginia Medical Graduates Completing Out-of-State

Primary Care Residencies, 2004-2008 13

MEDICAL SCHOOL INDEBTEDNESS 14

SCHOLARSHIPS AND LOANSHealth Sciences Scholarship Participants Practicing in Rural WV 15Medical Student Loan Program 15

WEST VIRGINIA RURAL HEALTH EDUCATION PARTNERSHIPS 16

TRAINING CONSORTIAInfrastructure 17Expenditures 18-19RHEP Field Faculty, Training Sites and Rotations 20

STUDENT ROTATIONSRHEP Rotations by Year/Discipline 21RHEP Student Weeks by Year/Discipline 21Rotations by School/Discipline: June 1, 2007 – May 31, 2008 22

COMMUNITY SERVICE CONTACTS

Contacts by Consortium: June 1, 2007 – May 31, 2008 23

RECRUITMENTHealth Professionals with RHEP Rotations Practicingin Rural Areas of the State 24Recruitment Incentives for Rural Practice 24Physicians with RHEP Rotations Practicing in Rural Areas,Ten-year Trend 25Physicians with RHEP Rotations Practicing in Rural Areas in 2008 25

p a g e1

2-4




p a g e2

H I G H L I G H T S O F 2008

• 37.8% of West Virginia’s medical school graduates from 1998 –2003 are practicing in the state after completing residency training.

• If state medical school graduates do their hospital residencytraining in West Virginia, retention is even higher – 70% inprimary care fields such as family practice. This year, 54 physicianscompleted their primary care residencies in West Virginia, thehighest number in the past five years, and 38 (70%) are nowpracticing in the state.

• Retention in other health sciences fields was 32 (58%) dentistrygraduates and 51 (67%) pharmacy graduates.

• In 1991, West Virginia began developing rural training sites forhealth professions students. Since then, 1,072 graduates inhealth fields have been retained and are currently practicing inthe state. These graduates include 289 physicians, 106 nursepractitioners, 181 physician assistants, 111 dentists, 199pharmacists, and 186 allied health personnel.

• State scholarships and loan repayment are helping to recruit ruralproviders – 35% of the physicians, 46% of the nurse practitioners,and 28% of the physician assistants who graduated since 1991and are currently practicing in rural West Virginia.

• In the past 10 years, the number of physicians who participatedin the RHEP program and are now in rural practice increasedfrom 88 to 289, an increase of 228%, or an average annual rateof 14.1%.

• This year, the Rural Health Education Partnerships (RHEP) madea total of 71,487 contacts with rural West Virginians to providecommunity services and education on topics such as healthylifestyles for children, fitness and nutrition, and oral hygiene.

• This year, RHEP dental and dental hygiene students provided13,942 clinical procedures and 402 outreach activities. RHEPdental sites, including dentists and students, provided almost$2.9 million in uncompensated care.

• The CARDIAC Project, which is administered locally throughRHEP, provides screening and intervention programs in all 55counties. Since 1998, the program has screened over 52,000fifth graders and 1,000 ninth graders for cardiovascular riskfactors. In recent years, the program has screened more than18,000 kindergarten students and 9,000 second graders.

2-5

R E P O R T C A R D 2 0 0 8

R E PORT ON MED I C A L E DU C AT I ONi n We s t V i r g i n i a

In April of 2008, Chancellor Brian Noland convened a meeting of theleaders of the state’s three medical schools to begin a dialogue on medicaleducation and training and retention of graduates. The Policy Commis-sion contracted with Dr. Michael Friedland to facilitate these discussionsand prepare a final report. During the meeting, Dr. Friedland presentedseveral reports and data sets. In the following months, the group requestedadditional data and responded to draft reports. Dr. Friedland presentedhis report of findings and recommendations to the Policy Commissionon August 1, 2008. A brief summary follows.

Policy CoordinationThe medical school leadership group should continue to meet ona routine basis to advise state policymakers. One goal would be toidentify innovative models to strengthen medical education andtraining in the state. Priority could be given to models in geriatrics,rural health, and other areas that meet the state’s health needs. Thenew Vice Chancellor for Health Sciences, Dr. Robert Walker, wouldcoordinate this effort.

EnrollmentEnrollment at the state’s medical schools has almost doubled in the past17 years – from 203 in 1990 to 391 in 2007. Although the number ofstate medical graduates who are practicing in the state has increasedsignificantly in the past 25 years, the proportion – 40% of all graduates– has remained the same. In recent years, a growing number of out-of-state students are being enrolled, which may have a negative impact onretention. The state must focus rural health education resources onthose who are most likely to practice in rural areas of West Virginia.

AccountabilityMedical school accreditation standards have changed. Expanded useof community-based clinical training sites has caused a tightening ofstandards over the content and delivery of all instruction, regardlessof where it occurs. More emphasis is placed on (1) assuring that medicaleducation occurs in an environment where faculty conduct researchand students have an opportunity to participate in research; (2) includ-ing competencies related to medical decision-making, patient safety,etc; and (3) using technology in instruction and clinical management.It is more critical than ever that medical schools have responsibility forall aspects of their educational programs and can direct their financialresources in the most cost-effective manner.

Post-graduate Residency TrainingWest Virginia must have adequate opportunities for physicians tocomplete residency training. Where a physician completes residencytraining is a stronger predictor of eventual practice location thanwhere a physician graduates from medical school. Although highereducation does not have authority over residency training – this isthe domain of teaching hospitals – access to residency training needsto be coordinated with increased medical school enrollment, orgraduates may be forced to go out of state.

p a g e3

2-6




International

U.S./Canada

West Virginia

Outside West Virginia Within West Virginia Urban West Virginia Rural West Virginia

p a g e4

R E P O R T O F M E D I C A L E D U C AT I O N2 5 - Ye a r T r e n d s i n S t a t e P h y s i c i a n S u p p l y

In 2008, the Policy Commission contracted with Dr. Donald Pathman,a nationally recognized researcher on physician retention, to conducttwo studies: (1) sources of physician supply in West Virginia and (2)practice locations of state medical graduates. Data for both studieswere reported in five-year intervals from 1981 to 2006 and includedphysicians active in patient care. The study findings were providedto Dr. Friedland and the medical school leaders. The results are striking.

The study of physician supply found that the number of state medicalgraduates practicing in West Virginia increased from 346 to 1,590physicians in 25 years, an increase of 360%. Stated another way, statemedical graduates grew from the smallest proportion of West Virginiaphysicians, 15.4% in 1981, to the largest proportion, 41.2% in 2006.The other sources of physicians were graduates from other states/Canada, 48.2% in 1981 compared to 28.1% in 2006, and inter-national graduates, 36.4% in 1981 compared to 30.7% in 2006.

The study of practice locations of state medical graduates focusedon alumni 7 to 10 years after graduation, when they would havecompleted their hospital residency training. Data were reported infour locations: outside the state, within the state, and in urban orrural areas of the state.

The study found that the number practicing in the state has steadilyincreased from 1981 to 2006. While the number of graduates hasincreased, the proportion of West Virginia medical graduates whopractice in the state has remained relatively flat – about 40%, whichis approximately equal to the national average. Similarly, the numberof West Virginia medical graduates who practice in rural areas of thestate has increased, while the proportion has remained relatively flatfrom 1981 to 2006 – about 11%.

81 86 91 96 01

450

400

350

300

250

200

150

100

50

006

139

190

334

427 415375

95

143159

202

281

225

65102 109

155191

161

3041

50 47

9064

Practice Location of State Medical Graduates7 to 10 Years After Graduation

81 86 91 96 01

450

400

350

300

250

200

150

100

50

006

139

190

334

427 415375

95

143159

202

281

225

65102 109

155191

161

3041

50 47

9064

Percentage of GraduatesNumber of Physicians

Practice Location of State Medical Graduates7 to 10 Years After Graduation

The data source was the American Medical Association’s Physician Masterfile listing of U.S. physicians, whichincludes both allopathic (M.D.) and osteopathic (D.O.) physicians.

81 86 91 96 01

1800

1600

1400

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

006

1,0831,125

1,0361,123

1,1641,084

819921

346498

728

992

1,102

1,190 1,184

1,035

1,329

1,590

Changes in West Virginia Physicians Supply1981 -2006

Number of Physicians

2-7

R E P O R T C A R D 2 0 0 8

MED I C A L S C HOO L ENRO L LMENT

We s t V i r g i n i a U n i v e r s i t y S c h o o l o f M e d i c i n e

Source: Association of American Medical Colleges.

Average scores for the Medical College Admission Test (MCAT)are reported as “means” for the multiple-choice sections and“medians” for the Writing Sample. Test scores on the multiple-choice are on a scale of 1-15 and on the Writing Sample, a scaleof J-T. The national averages for students entering allopathicmedical schools in 2007-08 were the following:

Biological Sciences: 10.6

Physical Sciences: 10.3

Verbal Reasoning: 9.9

Writing Sample: P

The national mean GPA was 3.65.

p a g e52003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08

Applicants

In-State 228 189 187 204 212Out-of-State 617 865 933 1,629 2,454

Total 845 1,054 1,120 1,833 2,666

Acceptances Issued

In-State 116 90 88 94 94Out-of-State 48 73 79 84 62

Total 164 163 167 178 156

First Year New EnrollmentIn-State 82 66 43 62 82Out-of-State 28 35 55 48 26

Total 110 101 98 110 108

Entering Class Data

Mean GPA 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7 3.7

Mean MCAT Scores

Biology/Biological Sciences 9.4 9.2 9.6 9.8 9.9

Physics/Physical Sciences 8.7 8.7 9.2 9.2 9.5

Reading/Verbal Reasoning 9.1 8.9 9.0 9.0 9.1

Median Writing Sample O N/A O O O

Total Medical Students 376 391 424 424 421

2-8




p a g e6

Average scores for the Medical College Admission Test (MCAT)are reported as “means” for the multiple-choice sections and“medians” for the Writing Sample. Test scores on the multiple-choice are on a scale of 1-15 and on the Writing Sample, a scaleof J-T. The national averages for students entering allopathicmedical schools in 2007-08 were the following:

Biological Sciences: 10.6

Physical Sciences: 10.3

Verbal Reasoning: 9.9

Writing Sample: P


Source: Association of American Medical Colleges.

MED I C A L S C HOO L ENRO L LMENT

M a r s h a l l U n i v e r s i t y S c h o o l o f M e d i c i n e

2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08Applicants

In-State 209 180 167 198 189Out-of-State 502 539 618 1,375 1,756

Total 711 719 785 1,573 1,945

Acceptances Issued


Total 96 96 102 123 123

First Year New Enrollment


Total 53 52 60 64 72

Entering Class Data

Mean GPA 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.5 3.6

Mean MCAT Scores




Median Writing Sample O M O O M


2-9

R E P O R T C A R D 2 0 0 8

p a g e7

We s t V i r g i n i a S c h o o l o f O s t e o p a t h i c M e d i c i n e

Average scores for the Medical College Admission Test(MCAT) are reported as “means” for the multiple-choice sec-tions and “medians” for the Writing Sample. Test scores on themultiple-choice are on a scale of 1-15 and on the Writing Sam-ple, a scale of J-T. The national averages for students enteringosteopathic medical schools in 2007-08 were the following:Biological Sciences: 8.8Physical Sciences: 8.2Verbal Reasoning: 8.6Writing Sample: J


Source: American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine.

2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08Applicants

In-State 156 138 123 151 136Out-of-State 1,276 1,362 1,512 2,170 2,634

Total 1,432 1,500 1,635 2,321 2,770

Acceptances Issued


Total 267 308 310 592 518

First Year New EnrollmentIn-State 50 53 50 61 56Out-of-State 53 52 61 135 155

Total 103 105 111 196 211

Entering Class DataMean GPA 3.4 3.4 3.4 3.5 3.4

Mean MCAT Scores




Median Writing Sample N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A


2-10




p a g e8

MED I C A L S C HOO L G RADUAT E S

N um b e r o f E x a m i n e e s / N um b e r P a s s i n g U S M e d i c a l L i c e n s i n gE x a m , S t e p 3

2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08

West Virginia University 71/68 (96%) 69/68 (99%) 81/79 (98%) 64/63 (98%) 77/74 (96%)Marshall University 46/43 (93%) 41/35 (85%) 44/40 (91%) 38/36 (95%) 38/38 (100%)

All data are for first-time test takers. Data for MD students are based on the US Medical Licensing Exam (USMLE),Step 3. Data for MD students become available two years after graduation, i.e., results for 2005 graduates are shownin 2007-08. The national average for this cohort was 97%.

N um b e r o f E x a m i n e e s / N um b e r P a s s i n g C OM L E X - L e v e l 3

2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08

WV School of Osteopathic 73/67 (92%) 72/70 (97%) 68/58 (85%) 62/62 (100%) 64/64 (100%)Medicine

All data are for first-time test takers. Data for DO students are based on the Comprehensive Osteopathic MedicineLicensing Examination (COMLEX), Level 3. Results are for year of graduation. The national average for the 2007-08cohort was not available for this report.

M e d i c a l S c h o o l G r a d u a t e s C h o o s i n g P r i m a r y C a r e R e s i d e n c i e s *

2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 **

West Virginia University 32 (46%) 46 (61%) 55 (56%) 56 (53%) 43 (49%)Marshall University 29 (73%) 29 (66%) 28 (62%) 33 (67%) 26 (62%)WV School of Osteopathic 40 (56%) 36 (53%) 53 (68%) 66 (69%) N/A***Medicine

TOTAL 101 111 136 155

* Primary care includes family medicine, internal medicine, pediatrics, internal medicine/pediatrics,and obstetrics/gynecology.

** In 2008, the national average for choice of primary care residencies was 46.8% for all allopathic (MD)graduates.

***Osteopathic students generally enter a one-year rotating internship after graduation. In 2008, 66 (69%)of WVSOM 2007 graduates chose primary care residencies. The national average is not available.

2-11

R E P O R T C A R D 2 0 0 8

p a g e9

R E T EN T I ON

M e d i c a l S c h o o l G r a d u a t e s f r o m 1 9 9 8 - 2 0 0 3 P r a c t i c i n gi n We s t V i r g i n i a

Note: Excludes SREB contract students at WVSOM who have a contractual obligation to return to theirhome state following graduation.* Primary care is defined as family medicine, internal medicine, pediatrics, internal medicine/pediatrics,and obstetrics/gynecology.

** Non-urban areas exclude graduates practicing in: Beckley, Charleston (including South Charleston,Dunbar, Nitro, Institute, etc.), Clarksburg, Fairmont, Huntington (including Barboursville), Hurricane,Martinsburg, Morgantown (including Star City and Westover), Parkersburg (including Vienna),Weirton, and Wheeling.

A total of 1,141 graduates of the state’s three medicalschools between 1998 and 2003 have completed residencytraining. Of these graduates, 37.8% are practicing inWest Virginia. About 9.5% are practicing in rural areas.In tracking the retention of graduates, this report factorsin the additional 3 to 5 years of residency training thatphysicians complete in their specialty before beginningpractice.

Graduates with Completed TrainingNumber in Number in

Total Number Total Number in Primary Practice in Non-Institutions of Graduates Number Practice in WV Care in WV* Urban Areas in WV**

West Virginia University 514 481 176 (36.6%) 95 (19.8%) 34 (7.1%)Marshall University 289 273 112 (41.0%) 68 (24.9%) 20 (7.3%)WV School of Osteopathic Medicine 387 387 143 (37.0%) 109 (28.2%) 54 (14.0%)

TOTAL 1,190 1,141 431 (37.8%) 272 (23.8%) 108 (9.5%)

2-12




p a g e1 0

40%

20%

0%

36%40% 39% 38% 38% 39% 39% 37% 39% 39%39%

19%21% 22% 23% 24% 25% 25%26%

10% 10% 10% 11% 11% 10% 10% 11% 10%11%

28%

10%

87-92 88-93 89-94 90-95 91-96 92-97 93-98 94-99 95-00 96-01 97-02 98-03

38%

24%

10%

25%26%

500

400

300

200

100

0

317 350 360 357 360 377 386 382 407431431

168190

206 219 227 242263 262 272285

91 90 98 99 105 101 107 119 108117

293

89

87-92 88-93 89-94 90-95 91-96 92-97 93-98 94-99 95-00 96-01 97-02 98-03

435

280

117

Practicing in West Virginia All Specialties

Practicing in West Virginia Primary Care

Practicing in West Virginia Non-Urban Areas

0

R E T EN T I ON

We s t V i r g i n i a M e d i c a l S c h o o l G r a d u a t e s P r a c t i c i n g i n We s t V i r g i n i a

N um b e r o f G r a d u a t e s R e t a i n e d , 1 9 8 7 - 2 0 0 3

Retention is tracked annually for a 6-year cohort ofmedical school graduates who have completed residencytraining. The greatest change has been in retention ofgraduates in primary care fields. In the past 12 years, thenumber of graduates retained in primary care increasedfrom 168 (19%) to 272 (24%) although this year therewas a slight decline.

6 - Ye a r C o h o r t o f G r a d u a t e s

6 - Ye a r C o h o r t o f G r a d u a t e s

Pe r c e n t a g e o f G r a d u a t e s R e t a i n e d , 1 9 8 7 - 2 0 0 3

2-13

p a g e1 1

7

WETZEL

HANCOCK

BROOKE

OHIO

MARSHALL

MONONGALIA

PRESTONMARIONTYLER

PLEASANTS

HARRISON TAYLORDODDRIDGE

BARBOUR

WOOD

JACKSONUPSHUR

RITCHIE

GILMER

TUCKER

ROANE

GRANT

PENDLETON

HAMPSHIREMINERAL

HARDY

RANDOLPH

LEWIS

BRAXTON

CALHOUN

WIRT

KANAWHA

WEBSTERCLAY

NICHOLAS

WYOMING

GREENBRIER

POCAHONTAS

SUMMERS

FAYETTEBOONE

LINCOLN

PUTNAM

MASON

CABELL

WAYNE

MINGO

LOGANRALEIGH

MERCERMCDOWELL

MONROE

MORGAN

BERKELEY

JEFFERSON

3

1

1

160

0

2

0

7

1

0

15

0

2

2

17

6

2

84

3

1

4

0

8

5

1

6

1

79

5

0

2

24

1

0

2

1

9

18

8

1

3

0

0

2

2

3

3

1

0

1

21

2

3

WETZEL

HANCOCK

BROOKE

OHIO

MARSHALL

MONONGALIA

PRESTONMARIONTYLER

PLEASANTS


BARBOUR

WOOD

JACKSONUPSHUR

RITCHIE

GILMER

TUCKER

ROANE

GRANT

PENDLETON

HAMPSHIREMINERAL

HARDY

RANDOLPH

LEWIS

BRAXTON

CALHOUN

WIRT

KANAWHA

WEBSTERCLAY

NICHOLAS

WYOMING

GREENBRIER

POCAHONTAS

SUMMERS

FAYETTEBOONE

LINCOLN

PUTNAM

MASON

CABELL

WAYNE

MINGO

LOGANRALEIGH

MERCERMCDOWELL

MONROE

MORGAN

BERKELEY

JEFFERSON

3

6

1

1

140

0

2

0

6

1

0

13

0

0

2

13

3

2

47

3

1

3

0

5

5

0

3

1

32

4

0

2

13

0

0

2

1

4

10

6

1

3

0

0

2

2

3

3

1

0

1

15

2

3

We s t V i r g i n i a M e d i c a l G r a d u a t e s , 1 9 9 8 - 2 0 0 3 , i n A l l S p e c i a l t i e s

We s t V i r g i n i a M e d i c a l G r a d u a t e s , 1 9 9 8 - 2 0 0 3 , i n P r i m a r y C a r e

Total Graduates from Classes of 1998-2003

Practicing in Each County in 2008

This map portrays retention of the most recent medicalgraduates who have completed residency training inprimary care fields. Primary care is defined as familymedicine, internal medicine, pediatrics, internal medi-cine/pediatrics, and obstetrics/gynecology. A total of272 graduates in these fields are dispersed to 42 of thestate’s 55 counties.

Total Graduates from Classes of 1998-2003Practicing in Primary Care by County in 2008

This map portrays retention of the most recentmedical graduates who have completed residencytraining. A total of 431 graduates are dispersed to45 of the state’s 55 counties. Graduates from prioryears are not shown.

R E P O R T C A R D 2 0 0 8

2-14




p a g e1 2

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

West Virginia University

Dental Graduates 37 44 43 45 45Practicing in West Virginia 24 (65%) 22 (50%) 30 (70%) 26 (58%) 32 (71%)

Pharmacy Graduates 65 72 74 81 76Practicing in West Virginia 35 (54%) 48 (67%) 41 (55%) 52 (64%) 51 (67%)

Nurse Practitioner Graduates 35 25 22 20 29Practicing in West Virginia 31 (89%) 17 (68%) 13 (59%) 18 (90%) 17 (59%)

Marshall University

Nurse Practitioner Graduates 9 11 16 20 24Practicing in West Virginia 6 (67%) 8 (73%) 4 (88%) 15 (75%) 19 (79%)

WETZEL

HANCOCK

BROOKE

OHIO

MARSHALL

MONONGALIA

PRESTONMARIONTYLER

PLEASANTS


BARBOUR

WOOD

JACKSONUPSHUR

RITCHIE

GILMER

TUCKER

ROANE

GRANT

PENDLETON

HAMPSHIREMINERAL

HARDY

RANDOLPH

LEWIS

BRAXTON

CALHOUN

WIRT

KANAWHA

WEBSTERCLAY

NICHOLAS

WYOMING

GREENBRIER

POCAHONTAS

SUMMERS

FAYETTEBOONE

LINCOLN

PUTNAM

MASON

CABELL

WAYNE

MINGO

LOGANRALEIGH

MERCERMCDOWELL

MONROE

MORGAN

BERKELEY

JEFFERSON

3

1

1

0

13

0

2

0

7

1

0

13

0

0

2

2

4

2

1

3

1

4

0

1

5

1

6

1

0

5

0

2

0

1

0

2

1

2

1

8

1

3

0

0

2

2

3

3

1

0

1

0

2

3

This map portrays retention of the most recent medicalgraduates who have completed residency training and arepracticing in non-urban areas of the state. The “non-urban”definition excludes graduates practicing in Beckley, Charleston(including South Charleston, Dunbar, Nitro, Institute, etc.),Clarksburg, Fairmont, Huntington (including Barboursville),Hurricane, Martinsburg, Morgantown (including Star Cityand Westover), Parkersburg (including Vienna), Weirton,and Wheeling. A total of 108 graduates are dispersed to 40of the state’s 55 counties.

Total Graduates from Classes of 1998-2003Practicing in Non-Urban Areas by County in 2008

R E T E N T I O N

We s t V i r g i n i a M e d i c a l G r a d u a t e s , 1 9 9 8 - 2 0 0 3 , i n N o n - U r b a n A r e a s

H e a l t h S c i e n c e s G r a d u a t e s , 2 0 0 4 - 0 8

2-15

R E P O R T C A R D 2 0 0 8

p a g e1 3

51

6 (12%)

6267

7(10%)

81

13 (16%)

62

12(19%)9 (15%)

80

60

40

20

004 05 06 07 08

Completing Out-of-State Residencies

Practicing in West Virginia

Completing West Virginia Residencies

Practicing in West Virginia

Medical school graduates begin practice after completing 3 to 5years of residency training in a given specialty. Two factors areimportant in tracking their retention: (1) specialty choice, becauseprimary care fields are generally most needed in rural West Vir-ginia; and (2) location of the residency, because graduates whocomplete residencies in West Virginia are much more likely topractice in the state. This year, an increased number of medicalgraduates completed primary care residencies in West Virginiaand are now practicing in the state.

We s t V i r g i n i a M e d i c a l G r a d u a t e s C om p l e t i n g O u t - o f - S t a t eP r i m a r y C a r e R e s i d e n c i e s , 2 0 0 4 - 2 0 0 8

04 05 06 07 08

47

80

60

40

20

0

35(74%)

4842

31(74%) 2822 (70%)

54

38 (70%)38 (79%)

We s t V i r g i n i a M e d i c a l G r a d u a t e s C om p l e t i n g We s t V i r g i n i aP r i m a r y C a r e R e s i d e n c i e s , 2 0 0 4 - 2 0 0 8

2-16




p a g e1 4

MED I C A L S C HOO L I N D EB T EDN E S S

2 0 0 4 - 2 0 0 8

$ $40,000 $80,000 $120,000 $160,000 $200,000

$95,306

$127,718

$133,478

$96,034

$132,857

$137,825

$118,962

$151,991$152,572

$125,438

$147,902

$176,297

7

$126,739

$140,908

$167,718

$

08

07

06

05

04


Marshall University

West Virginia School of Osteopathic Medicine

This chart shows the average indebtedness of graduating medical students. As a point ofreference, the annual tuition and fees for the medical schools in 2007-08 are shown below.

Resident Non-ResidentWest Virginia University $19,204 $41,866Marshall University $18,114 $42,934WV School of Osteopathic Medicine $19,830 $49,073

The difference in graduate indebtedness may be attributed in part to differences amongthe schools in the proportion of students paying non-resident tuition and fees.

2-17

R E P O R T C A R D 2 0 0 8

p a g e1 5

M e d i c a l S t u d e n t L o a n P r o g r a m

26

454035302520151050

28

7

2932

8

34 34

7

3739

7

4240

8

2 3 3

04 05 06 0807

Physician

Nurse Practitioner/Nurse Educator

Physician Assistant

Physical Therapist

The Health Sciences Scholarship Program provides an incentivefor graduates to practice in underserved areas of the state.Medical students receive a $20,000 award for a two-yearservice commitment. Other disciplines receive $10,000.Nurse educators became eligible in 2003, and physicaltherapists became eligible in 2005. In 2008, the ViceChancellor for Health Sciences approved eligiblity forlicensed independent clinical social workers and doctoralclinical psychologists beginning in 2009. The chart showsgraduates who are fulfilling their service obligation.

The Medical Student Loan Program is a need-based program toassist state medical students. It is funded from fees charged to medicalstudents, and borrowers may earn loan forgiveness for practicing in anunderserved area or in a medical shortage field in West Virginia. Theunexpended funds include loan repayments. In 2005 the Legislatureapproved a rule change to allow the schools to increase loans from$5,000 to $10,000 per year so that these funds will be utilized. In 2008the Legislature amended the statute to increase the loan forgivenessamount to $10,000 per year. A committee of agency staff and campuspersonnel is implementing these changes and promoting the enhancedprogram to students. The loan forgiveness data show the number ofphysicians who began practicing in West Virginia each fiscal year.

1The loan forgiveness data show borrowers who began practicing inWest Virginia each fiscal year. Requests for loan forgiveness are expectedto increase in future years.

2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08

Loans Awarded in Fiscal Year 291 306 317 323 296

Total Amount Awarded $1,354,228 $1,586,700 $1,023,705 $1,349,155 $1,861,456

Amount of Unexpended Funds $2,296,022 $2,609,608 $3,157,511 $3,525,991 $3,145,311

Loan Forgiveness1 21 21 15 12 9

Default Rate on Previous Awards 2.5% 3.3% 3.0% 2.9% 2.8%

S C HO L A R SH I P S AND LOAN S

H e a l t h S c i e n c e s S c h o l a r s h i p P a r t i c i p a n t s P r a c t i c i n g i n R u r a l We s t V i r g i n i a

2-18




WETZEL

HANCOCK

BROOKE

OHIO

MARSHALL

MONONGALIA

PRESTONMARION

TYLERPLEASANTS


BARBOUR

WOOD

JACKSON UPSHUR

RITCHIE

GILMER

TUCKER

ROANE

GRANT

PENDLETON

HAMPSHIREMINERAL

HARDY

RANDOLPH

LEWIS

BRAXTON

CALHOUN

WIRT

KANAWHA

WEBSTERCLAY

NICHOLAS

WYOMING

GREENBRIER

POCAHONTAS

SUMMERS

FAYETTEBOONE

LINCOLN

PUTNAM

MASON

CABELL

WAYNE

MINGO

LOGAN

RALEIGH

MERCERMCDOWELL

MONROE

MORGAN

BERKELEY

JEFFERSON

Northern West Viginia Rural Health Education CenterEastern WV Rural Health Education CenterSoutheastern Education ConsortiumWinding Roads Health ConsortiumThe Gorge ConnectionWestern Valley Health Education Consortium - Fort GayWestern Valley Health Education Consortium - Pt. PleasantKanawha Valley Health ConsortiumSouthern Counties Consortium

Note: Clay County andWood County are shared bythe Northern andWinding Roads consortia

The West Virginia Rural Health Education Partnerships(RHEP) comprise nine training consortia statewide.The program has formed a partnership with the federallyfunded West Virginia Area Health Education Centers(AHEC) to provide community-based education andtraining in the northern, eastern, and central areas ofthe state. The AHEC grant is administered by theWest Virginia University Office of Rural Health,which also administers the RHEP program.

WEST V I RG I N I A RU RA L H EA LTHEDU C AT I ON PARTN E R SH I P S

p a g e1 6

2-19

R E P O R T C A R D 2 0 0 8

p a g e1 7

T RA I N I N G CON SORT I AI N F R A S T R U C T U R E

Consortium Counties Number of Number ofLead Agency and Sub-areas Training Sites Field Faculty

Eastern WV Rural Health EducationConsortium-- Martinsburg Berkeley, Jefferson, 33 71

and Morgan

--Petersburg Grant, Hampshire, Hardy, 53 85Mineral, Pendleton, and Tucker

The Gorge Connection Fayette, Raleigh, Nicholas, 29 64and Webster

Kanawha Valley Health Consortium Rural areas of Kanawha 19 31

Northern WV Rural Health Education Center-- Region 1 Brooke, Hancock, Marshall, 37 58

Ohio, and Wetzel

-- Region 2 Calhoun, Doddridge, Gilmer, 72 41Pleasants, Ritchie, TylerWirt, and Wood (partial)

-- Region 3 Braxton, Harrison, Lewis, 67 101Marion, Monongalia,and Clay (partial)

-- Region 4 Barbour, Preston, Randolph, 68 119Taylor, and Upshur

Southern Counties Consortium Boone, Logan, McDowell, 30 51Mingo, and Wyoming

Southeastern Education Consortium Greenbrier, Mercer, Monroe, 40 77Pocahontas, and Summers

Western Valley Health Education Consortium-- Ft Gay Cabell, Wayne, and Lincoln 17 26

-- Point Pleasant Cabell, Lincoln, Mason, 48 64Putnam, and Wayne

Winding Roads Health Consortium Clay(partial), Roane, Jackson, 20 53and Wood (partial)

TOTAL 533 841

841 Field Facultyby Discipline

2 Clinical Psychology 1 Occupational Therapy65 Dentistry 102 Pharmacy

339 Medicine 33 Physician Assistant25 Medical Technology 60 Physical Therapy

145 Nursing 5 Social Work8 Nurse-Midwife 1 Speech Therapy

55 Nurse Practitioner

2-20

T RA I N I N G CON SORT I AE X P E N D I T U R E SJ u l y 1 , 2 0 0 7 – J u n e 3 0 , 2 0 0 8




p a g e1 8

CONSORTIALead Agency

Salaries and Benefits

On-Site Clinical Director

Operating Costs

Staff Travel and Development

Annual Honorarium

Faculty Development

Interdisciplinary Sessions

Graduate Medical Education

Recruitment and Retention

Community Service/Health Promotion

Student/Resident Housing

Property and Equipment

Administrative Cost-Lead Agency

Subtotal

SPECIAL PROJECTS (Other Programs)

CARDIAC Program Expenses

WV Geriatric Education Center Grant Expenses

Oral Health Project Expenses

Subtotal

TOTAL PROJECT COST

LESS OTHER INCOME

Other RHEP Income Earned

Lead Agency Funds Contributed

CARDIAC Income

WV Geriatric Education Center Grant Income

Other Grants/Special Project Income

TOTAL RHEP GRANT EXPENDITURES

EASTERN WVRHECGrant Memorial

Hospital

165,800

-

25,508

7,982

26,775

3,005

9,540

-

59

7,131

43,334

17,337

22,195

$328,666

3,266

5,000

-

$8,266

$336,932

(1,498)

(2)

(6,150)

-

(5,184)

$324,098

GORGE CONNECTIONNew River Health

Association

95,677

19,900

27,189

21,851

52,208

5,668

6,239

-

7,028

4,372

30,104

995

14,700

$285,931

1,297

-

-

$1,297

$287,228

-

-

(2,046)

-

-

$285,182

KANAWHA VALLEYCabin Creek Health Center

51,936

12,938

17,246

9,455

4,578

7,322

3,397

-

-

13,941

660

-

9,742

$131,215

-

-

-

-

$131,215

-

-

-

-

-

$131,215

NORTHERN WVRHECTri-County Health Clinic

326,212

25,000

64,560

28,524

-

7,965

34,147

17,500

15,109

36,399

83,999

-

55,300

$694,715

10,344

8,214

744

$19,302

$714,017

(6,544)

-

(13,176)

-

(3,556)

$690,741

2-21

28%

12%

11%

6%7% 7%

12%

12%

5%

R E P O R T C A R D 2 0 0 8

E a s t e r nG o r g eK a n a w h aN o r t h e r nS o u t h e a s t e r n

SOUTHEASTERNEDUCATION

Rainelle Medical Center

106,723

35,417

51,407

19,203

30,100

1,116

248

-

-

4,893

35,230

-

12,000

$296,337

4,085

-

-

$4,085

$300,422

-

-

(4,014)

-

-

$296,408

SOUTHERN COUNTIESWVU ResearchCorporation

160,015

5,000

14,390

5,419

14,400

113

1,950

59

-

1,632

17,186

1,347

19,949

$241,460

3,097

-

-

$3,097

$244,557

(3,608)

-

(3,702)

(11,469)

-

$225,778

WESTERN VALLEY - FT GAYValley Health System

78,861

21,923

3,587

876

20,000

2,365

8,000

1,000

-

1,429

13,434

-

22,964

$174,439

1,144

-

-

$1,144

$175,583

-

(17,557)

-

(3,500)

-

$154,526

WINDING ROADSJackson General Hospital

89,986

-

25,487

8,209

14,400

-

300

-

-

5,103

10,720

-

-

$154,205

814

-

-

$814

$155,019

-

-

(1,462)

-

-

$153,557

TOTALS

1,178,642

120,178

244,491

106,949

172,461

27,554

64,421

35,059

22,196

74,946

241,280

19,679

164,850

$2,472,706

29,873

13,214

744

$43,831

$2,516,537

(11,650)

(17,628)

(36,376)

(19,469)

(8,740)

$2,422,674

WESTERN VALLEY -PT PLEASANT

Pleasant Valley Hospital

103,432

-

15,117

5,430

10,000

-

600

16,500

-

46

6,613

-

8,000

$165,738

5,826

-

-

$5,826

$171,564

-

(69)

(5,826)

(4,500)

-

$161,169

R H E P S TAT E G RANT EXP END I T U R E S$2,422,674

S o u t h e r nWe s t e r n Va l l e y - F t . G a yWe s t e r n Va l l e y - P t P l e a s a n tW i n d i n g R o a d s

2-22




T RA I N I N G CON SORT I A

640

1000

800

600

400

200

0

664 682750

841

04 05 06 07 08

367

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

442476 498

533

04 05 06 07 08

1150

1400

1200

1000

800

600

400

200

0

1247 1235 1234 1259

04 05 06 07 08

West Virginia RHEP field faculty are active rural practitioners whoalso teach students. In 2008, the Faculty Development Conferencewas held jointly with Area Health Education Centers. The themewas “Teaching and Assessing Essential Elements of Health CareCommunication.” A total of 158 field faculty, institutional staff,and others attended the conference in Morgantown.

p a g e2 0

RHEP F ie ld Facu l t y

RHEP Tr a in ing S i tes

R H E P S t u d e n t R o t a t i o n s

2-23

608

700

600

500

400

300

200

100

0

611559

498 492

164 168211 189

225178

234 238

318283

38 41 48 45 46

162193 180 184

213

2

Allied HealthDentistryPharmacyNursingMedicine

2736

3500

3000

2500

2000

1500

1000

500

0

2759

2579

2274226320722131

2422

2769

3057

726958 923

12981164

230 291 303 286 313

96211481070

1035

997

Allied HealthDentistryPharmacyNursingMedicine

R H E P S t u d e n t We e k b y Ye a r / D i s c i p l i n e

R E P O R T C A R D 2 0 0 8

p a g e2 1

S T UD EN T ROTAT I ON S2 0 0 4 - 2 0 0 8

2003-04

2004-05

2005-06

2006-07

2007-08

6

R H E P R o t a t i o n s b y Ye a r / D i s c i p l i n e

2-24




p a g e2 2

RHEP Other Rural SitesSchool/Discipline Student Rotations Student Weeks Student Rotations Student Weeks

Alderson-Broaddus CollegePhysician Assistant 81 332 10 38

Mountain State UniversityPhysician Assistant 69 277 4 16

Marshall UniversityMedicine 83 411 2 6Medical Resident 0 0 4 242Nursing 16 222 12 126Nurse Practitioner 0 0 4 30Social Work 0 0 3 12

West Liberty State CollegeDental Hygiene 1 3 0 0

WV School of Osteopathic MedicineMedicine 178 935 455 1,719Medical Resident 5 25 40 172

West Virginia UniversityDental Hygiene 16 96 0 0Dentistry 46 313 1 6Medical Resident 7 27 2 8Medical Technology 30 97 0 0Medicine -Morgantown 110 432 10 21

-Charleston 74 304 1 4-Eastern Panhandle 32 116 0 0

Nurse Practitioner-Morgantown 15 230 6 90-Charleston 6 76 6 81

Nursing 139 1,838 0 0Pharmacy 283 1,164 17 70Physical Therapy 16 192 1 1

West Virginia University Instituteof Technology

Nursing 48 673 1 14

Wheeling Jesuit UniversityNurse Practitioner 1 18 1 7

Out-of-State ProgramsMedicine 1 6 0 0Medical Resident 2 7 2 8

Total Rotations 1,259 7,794 582 2,671

R o t a t i o n s b y S c h o o l / D i s c i p l i n e :J u n e 1 , 2 0 0 7 - M a y 3 1 , 2 0 0 8

2-25

R E P O R T C A R D 2 0 0 8

p a g e2 3

C OMMUN I T Y S E RV I C E C ON TAC T SJ U N E 1 , 2 0 0 7 - M AY 3 1 , 2 0 0 8

Prevention and Education Prevention and Education Prevention and Education TotalConsortium for General Public for Adults for Children

Eastern WV Rural Health Education ConsortiumMartinsburg 30 818 8,981 9,829Petersburg 1,661 1,771 6,997 10,429

The Gorge Connection 1,605 2,488 3,833 7,926Kanawha Valley Health Consortium 680 635 4,980 6,295Northern WV Rural Health Education Center

Region 1 1,060 2,013 10,098 13,171Region 2 663 862 3,836 5,361Region 3 850 2,140 6,390 9,380Region 4 1,033 3,414 7,046 11,493

Southern Counties Consortium 250 610 2,601 3,461Southeastern Education Consortium 673 1,140 2,891 4,704Western Valley Health Education Consortium

Fort Gay 613 60 4,454 5,127Point Pleasant 621 478 3,483 4,582

Winding Roads Health Consortium 425 155 2,130 2,710

Total Community Service Contacts 10,164 16,584 67,720 94,468

RHEP provides community services (e.g., dental and vision screenings andimmunizations) and education on topics such as healthy options for publicschool children, wellness for women, depression and anxiety, and mealpreparation for diabetics. The program links its prevention and educationprograms to the West Virginia Healthy People 2010 objectives to ascertainwhere student efforts are being directed. RHEP strives to provide studentswith service-learning opportunities that are directly linked to their clinicaland educational learning.

The CARDIAC Project provides cardiovascular screening, intervention, andhealthy lifestyles education statewide. The project is carried out locally throughRHEP and the public school system. RHEP site coordinators provide localcoordination and testing supplies for the screening, and RHEP students, underlocal preceptor supervision, provide the manpower. Since 1998, CARDIAC hasscreened over 52,000 fifth graders and 1,000 ninth graders for cardiovascularrisk factors. In recent years, CARDIAC has expanded and is doing bodymass index (BMI) screening of younger children. To date, more than 18,000kindergarten and 9,000 second graders have been screened.

CARDIAC screening has increased awareness of children's heart disease riskfactors, provided interventions, and helped to change health behaviors.

In 2007-08, RHEP dental and dental hygiene students provided 13,942 clinicalprocedures. Students and faculty participated in 402 outreach activities, serving25,945 West Virginians. RHEP dental sites, including dentists and students,provided over $2.8 million in uncompensated care.

2-26




p a g e2 4

R E C RU I TMENT

H e a l t h P r o f e s s i o n a l s w i t h R H E P R o t a t i o n s P r a c t i c i n gi n R u r a l A r e a s o f t h e S t a t e

Recruitment Incentives for Rural Practice

West Virginia Higher Education Policy CommissionHealth Sciences Scholarship Program - 93

WV Rural Health Education PartnershipsSEARCHTraining Stipends - 43Community Scholarship Program - 7

Note: SEARCH and the Community Scholarship Program,which were federally funded, have been discontinued.

Bureau for Public Health, Division of Rural Health & RecruitmentRecruitment & Retention Community Project - 92State Loan Repayment Program - 30NHSC Loan Repayment Program - 13

TOTAL 278 Awards

State scholarships and loan repayment are coordinated by the RHEP Recruitment andRetention Committee to target financial incentives to students and physician residentswith rural training. Some practitioners have received awards from two or more pro-grams. As of 2008, 205 rural practitioners have received a total of 278 awards. Theagencies and programs shown above provided these awards. The National HealthService Corps (NHSC) Loan Repayment Program is included because the Bureaufor Public Health assists physicians in applying to this program.

Discipline Number in Rural Practice Number who ReceivedFinancial Incentives

Physicians (1991-2005 graduates) 289 101 (35%0Nurse Practitioners/Nurse Educators 106 49 (46%)Nurse-Midwife 1 .Physician Assistants 181 50 (28%)Nurses 89 .Dentists 111 2 (2%)Dental Hygienists 26 .Pharmacists 199 .Physical Therapists 59 3 (5%)Occupational Therapist 1 .Medical Technologists 8 .Masters in Public Health 1 .Social Worker 1 .

TOTAL 1072 205 (19%)

Data on physicians include graduates from 1991-2005 who have completed residency training.Data on all other disciplines include graduates from 1991-2008.

2-27

p a g e2 5

300

250

200

150

100

50

0

88 92 103124

99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08

142165

187213

264289

P h y s i c i a n s w i t h R H E P R o t a t i o n s P r a c t i c i n gi n R u r a l A r e a s o f We s t V i r g i n i a , 1 9 9 9 - 2 0 0 8

P h y s i c i a n s

From 1999 to 2008, the number of physicians who did RHEP ruralrotations and are currently practicing in rural areas has increased steadily.These numbers include physicians who did rural rotations under RHEPand the federally funded Area Health Education Program. Each of themedical (DO & MD) graduates is re-verified annually so the count eachyear reflects the loss of some rural practitioners to urban and out-of-statepractice. Despite this expected loss, the number of medical graduates inrural practice has increased dramatically in the past 10 years at an averageannual rate of 14.1%.

9

WETZEL

HANCOCK

BROOKE

OHIO

MARSHALL

MONONGALIA

PRESTONMARIONTYLER

PLEASANTS


BARBOUR

WOOD

JACKSONUPSHUR

RITCHIE

GILMER

TUCKER

ROANE

GRANT

PENDLETON

HAMPSHIREMINERAL

HARDY

RANDOLPH

LEWIS

BRAXTON

CALHOUN

WIRT

KANAWHA

WEBSTERCLAY

NICHOLAS

WYOMING

GREENBRIER

POCAHONTAS

SUMMERS

FAYETTEBOONE

LINCOLN

PUTNAM

MASON

CABELL

WAYNE

MINGO

LOGANRALEIGH

MERCERMCDOWELL

MONROE

MORGAN

BERKELEY

JEFFERSON

3

4

3

29

2

3

1

16

3

1

30

3

0

1

2

7

8

4

6

3

10

2

0

7

7

16

4

1

6

1

5

1

2

0

5

9

7

32

17

0

7

0

0

3

4

11

2

1

1

0

3

2

3

A total of 289 physicians with RHEP training were practicingin rural areas of the state in 2008. They include graduates from1991-2005. A total of 101 (35%) of these physicians receivedstate financial incentives. Placements are counted as rural ifthe physician is practicing in a location that qualifies as a sitefor a rural rotation or if the site is a federally qualifiedhealth center (FQHC) or free clinic.

P h y s i c i a n s w i t h R H E P R o t a t i o n s P r a c t i c i n gi n R u r a l A r e a s i n 2 0 0 8

01 - 34 - 78 - 1 71 8 - 3 2

R E P O R T C A R D 2 0 0 8

2-28




H I G H E R EDU C AT I ON PO L I C Y C OMM I S S I O N

H e a l t h S c i e n c e s1 0 1 8 K a n a w h a B l v d EC h a r l e s t o n , W V 2 5 3 0 1

2-29

West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission Meeting of January 23, 2009 ITEM: 2008 Higher Education Report Card INSTITUTIONS: All RECOMMENDED RESOLUTION: Information Item STAFF MEMBER: Rob Anderson BACKGROUND: Pursuant to West Virginia Code §18B-1B-8, the 2008 West Virginia Higher Education Report Card was submitted to the Legislative Oversight Commission on Education Accountability on January 12, 2009. Mr. Rob Anderson, Senior Director of Policy and Planning, will present to the Commission highlights from the report.

3-1

W E S T V I R G I N I A H I G H E R E D U C A T I O N P O L I C Y C O M M I S S I O N & C O M M U N I T Y A N D T E C H N I C A L C O L L E G E S Y S T E M

R E P O R T C A R D | 2 0 0 8

3-2


H i g h e r E d u c a t i o n R e p o r t C a r d

3-3

Higher Education Repor t Card 2008West Virginia Higher Education

Policy CommissionChancellor Brian Noland

West Virginia Council for Communityand Technical College Education

Chancellor James L. Skidmore

3-4



3-5

TAB L E O F CONT EN T S

INTRODUCTION 1

STATE 3

WEST VIRGINIA HIGHER EDUCATIONPOLICY COMMISSION 8

Economic Growth 8

Access 15

Cost and Affordability 27

Learning and Accountability 32

Innovation 39

COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL COLLEGE SYSTEM 43

Access 43

Workforce Development 46

Student Success 52

Improved Literacy 57

Transfer Education 60

3-6



3-7

I N T RODU C T I O N

This West Virginia 2008 Higher Education Report Card is the first ina revised series of accountability reports. Both the Higher EducationPolicy Commission and the Community and Technical College Systemare required by state code to report on system-wide progress towardachieving state and system goals and objectives. Because this report isfirst in the revised reporting mechanism, it provides baseline data, alongwith analysis and regional and national comparisons where available.Future reports will show progress from this baseline.

The report is divided into three sections. The first is an overarchingstate section which addresses outcomes that apply to all of postsec-ondary education, not just the individual sectors of the HigherEducation Policy Commission or the Community and TechnicalCollege System. This section demonstrates the state’s progress instudent academic preparation for and enrollment in college, allpostsecondary degrees awarded, and the financial aid available toassist students in paying for college. The second section of the reportcard is specific to the Higher Education Policy Commission and itsconstituent baccalaureate-granting (and above) institutions. Theindicators in this section are based on the goals set forth in Charting theFuture 2007-2012, a Master Plan for Higher Education. The indicatorsin this report card are divided into focal points consistent with the mas-ter plan: economic growth, cost and affordability, access, learning andaccountability, and innovation. The third section of the report cardreflects the progress of the West Virginia Community and TechnicalCollege System toward meeting the goals set forth in the system’s six-year strategic planning initiative entitled Target 2010. The indicatorschosen for the report are consistent with many of the data elementsthat institutions report to the system in the areas of access, workforcedevelopment, student success, improved literacy, and transfer education.

The indicators in all three sections of the report card are at the heartof what recently released national reports have cited as the foremostchallenges the country faces in postsecondary education, and whatthe nation needs to improve upon to remain globally competitive andregain its status as leader in the proportion of the population with apostsecondary education. The 2006 report by the Spellings Commissionon the Future of Higher Education focused on preparation for andaccess to higher education, lowering the costs of education, increasingand simplifying financial aid, and making colleges more transparent andaccountable regarding cost, price, and student outcomes. Similarly, thelong-awaited reauthorization of the Higher Education Act earlier thisyear largely consisted of provisions regarding cost, increasing andsimplifying financial aid, and making more information about collegesavailable. Measuring Up 2008, a biennial state report card by theNational Center for Public Policy and Higher Education, finds that

p a g e1

3-8



p a g e2

improving on preparation for, participation in, and completion ofhigher education as well as the benefits that accrue to society fromhaving an educated populace, most states are failing and getting worsein affordability. Building on this theme, the College Board’s recentreport Coming to Our Senses: Education and the American Futurenotes the decline of the U.S. in comparisons with other developedcountries in educational attainment and sets forth an agenda to helpreach the goal of 55 percent of young Americans obtaining a commu-nity college degree or higher by 2025. While their recommendationsspan the K-20 pipeline, those that pertain specifically to higher educa-tion include; simplifying admissions; simplifying and providing moreneed-based aid; keeping college affordable; and increasing completionrates through reducing dropout, easing transfer, and other “data-based”approaches. Finally, the National Association of State Universities andLand-Grant Colleges (NASULGC) recently released a report on collegeaffordability that provides a series of relevant recommendations toenhance affordability through shared responsibility between: (1)institutions which must develop innovative and less expensive waysto deliver quality education; (2) the state which must restore statefunding to earlier higher levels in keeping with the benefits societyreaps from an educated populace; and (3) students who can minimizecollege costs through preparing well in high school, choosing affordableschooling options, applying for financial aid and scholarships, andcarefully planning and diligently pursuing their studies while in college.

This quick review of the recent national literature on the challengesthat face American higher education illustrates that the goals set forthby the Higher Education Policy Commission and the Communityand Technical College System in their strategic planning initiatives,and the indicators included in this report that track West Virginia’sprogress toward those goals, are on target with where the rest of thecountry needs to set its sights. And yet West Virginia’s state averageof 16.9 percent of adults with a higher education degree is below boththe SREB and national averages. Thus, it is all the more imperativethat the higher education community in West Virginia makes, anddocuments, progress toward these goals. This report card providesthat documentation of how the Higher Education Policy Commissionand the Community and Technical College System in West Virginiaare doing their part to expand the human capital potential of the state.

3-9

S TAT E

CO L L E G E - GO I N G RAT E S O F R E C EN T WE S T V I RG I N I AH I G H S C HOO L G RADUAT E SF a l l 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

West Virginia Highlights• The overall college-going rate declined 0.8 percentage point

between 2006 and 2007. The in-state college-going rate heldsteady at 48.9 percent.

• The overall college-going rate has declined 1.9 percentage pointsince 2003. The in-state college-going rate has decreased by 0.9percentage point.

National ContextNationally, 61.6 percent of 2006 high school graduates continueddirectly to college the following fall. This figure is 5.9 percenthigher than the 2004 reported level of 55.7 percent. The rate givenfor 2002 is 56.6 percent (Mortenson, 2008). According to 2006data, ten of sixteen SREB states had college-going rates higher thanthe national average. These rates are an important measure be-cause this direct transition from high school to college is generallyviewed as easier to address than the non-traditional enrollment ofstudents (NCHEMS, 2008).

A recent College Summit report addressed the need to makecollege going a component of state culture. In this report WestVirginia is highlighted as a state that is diligent in regards to tryingto present a full picture of its college going by examining in-state aswell as out-of-state enrollees. This group of policy leaders recom-mended three policy initiatives: (1) Make college enrollment,persistence, and completion rate data by high school reliable andpublicly available; (2) Make college proficiency rates a key successmeasure of high schools; and (3) Incentivize high schools to investin a college-going culture (College Summit, 2008).

About this MeasureThis measure provides the proportion of students who graduatedfrom a West Virginia high school in the past year and enrolled inpostsecondary education the following fall. The in-state figure isderived from our postsecondary enrollment report. Estimates ofenrollment in out-of-state higher education institutions are basedon surveys of West Virginia high schools. Current data limitationsprevent HEPC from examining these students at the individuallevel; however, a planned agreement with the National StudentClearinghouse will give West Virginia the capability to moreaccurately determine this out-of-state figure.

Year In-State Overall2003 49.8% 59.4%

2004 50.9% 60.6%

2005 49.7% 59.3%

2006 48.9% 58.3%

2007 48.9% 57.5%

F a l l 2003 - 2 007

70.0%

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

0%03 04 05 06 07

0

48.9%49.8% 50.9% 49.7% 48.9%

7

In-State03 04 05 06 07

Overall

57.5%59.4% 60.6% 59.3% 58.3%

03 04 05 06 07

48.9%49.8%

50.9%

49.7%48.9%

62.0%

60.0%

58.0%

56.0%

54.0%

52.0%

50.0%

48.0%

57.5%

59.4%60.6%

59.3%58.3%

In-State

Overall

5

rate

rate

p a g e3

3-10



p a g e4

OVERA L L C O L L E G E - GO I N G RAT E S B Y COUNTYF a l l 2 0 0 7

County In-State Overall

Barbour 53.1% 55.6%

Berkeley 44.6% 55.1%

Boone 50.2% 51.5%

Braxton 44.2% 46.8%

Brooke 48.5% 64.7%

Cabell 49.1% 61.0%

Calhoun 35.2% 36.6%

Clay 36.6% 37.4%

Doddridge 39.3% 45.2%

Fayette 41.8% 43.5%

Gilmer 50.7% 52.0%

Grant 45.7% 50.4%

Greenbrier 42.1% 51.3%

Hampshire 38.6% 57.5%

Hancock 48.7% 63.9%

Hardy 46.7% 54.6%

Harrison 55.6% 63.7%

County In-State Overall

Jackson 51.9% 58.1%

Jefferson 43.5% 59.7%

Kanawha 56.7% 64.1%

Lewis 51.2% 54.3%

Lincoln 41.5% 41.5%

Logan 50.2% 53.9%

Marion 56.9% 60.7%

Marshall 48.1% 63.2%

Mason 41.9% 53.2%

McDowell 32.2% 38.5%

Mercer 49.3% 52.8%

Mineral 47.6% 56.8%

Mingo 44.5% 47.2%

Monongalia 62.9% 73.9%

Monroe 50.4% 53.3%

Morgan 30.6% 51.8%

Nicholas 46.2% 49.6%

Ohio 48.7% 70.0%

Pendleton 52.3% 58.1%

Pleasants 48.8% 56.3%

Pocahontas 37.5% 45.8%

Preston 46.4% 54.3%

Putnam 54.8% 64.9%

Raleigh 41.1% 45.8%

Randolph 53.2% 58.7%

Ritchie 54.5% 68.3%

Roane 41.2% 48.4%

Summers 38.9% 43.2%

Taylor 52.5% 53.9%

Tucker 41.9% 47.7%

Tyler 54.5% 66.4%

Upshur 46.9% 54.3%

Wayne 50.6% 63.0%

Webster 40.6% 40.6%

Wetzel 46.5% 52.6%

Wirt 49.3% 56.7%

Wood 49.9% 64.9%

Wyoming 45.5% 48.2%

36.6% - 47.7%48.2% - 53.9%54.3% - 59.7%60.7% - 73.9%

WETZEL

HANCOCK

BROOKE

OHIO

MARSHALL

MONONGALIA

PRESTONMARIONTYLER

PLEASANTS


BARBOUR

WOOD

JACKSONUPSHUR

RITCHIE

GILMER

TUCKER

ROANE

GRANT

PENDLETON

HAMPSHIREMINERAL

HARDY

RANDOLPH

LEWIS

BRAXTON

CALHOUN

WIRT

KANAWHA

WEBSTERCLAY

NICHOLAS

WYOMING

GREENBRIER

POCAHONTAS

SUMMERS

FAYETTEBOONE

LINCOLN

PUTNAM

MASON

CABELL

WAYNE

MINGO

LOGANRALEIGH

MERCERMCDOWELL

MONROE

MORGAN

BERKELEY

JEFFERSON

3-11

A c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2003 - 2 007

p a g e5

12,000

10,000

8,000

6,000

4,000

2,000

0 03 04 05 06 07

0

4,2983,062 2,853

3,720

4,900

HEAPS03 04 05 06 07

PROMISE

9,415

6,634

8,725

10,153 9,726 10,194

H

03 04 05 06 07WVHEG

11,37210,071 9,970

10,992

4

03 04 05 06 07

4,298

3,062 2,8533,720

4,900

9,970

6,634

8,725

10,153

9,726

10,194

11,372

10,071

9,415

10,99212,000

10,000

8,000

6,000

4,000

2,000

NUMBER O F R E C I P I E N T S : H E A P S, P ROM I S E , & WVHEG PROGRAMA c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

West Virginia Highlights• The total number of Higher Education Adult Part-Time Student Grant, PROMISE

Scholarship, and West Virginia Higher Education Grant Program recipients duringthe 2007 academic year was 25,085, which is 2.1 percent lower than the total of25,618 in 2006.

• Two of the three programs noted in the chart above had fewer participants in 2007when compared to 2006. The HEAPS program had the largest percentage decrease(12.3 percent) and student decrease (602).

• All three programs experienced increases when compared to their 2003 student levels.The PROMISE Scholarship Program had the largest percentage increase (41.9percent) and student increase (2,781). This is because the program began in 2002and grew as it matured through 2005.

National ContextNationally, 92.6 percent of need-based state grant dollars go to in-state students, with62.6 percent of grant dollars being spent in the public sector and 30 percent being spentin the private, not-for-profit sector. In West Virginia, 82.2 percent of these need-basedgrant dollars go to West Virginians, with 72.2 percent of the need-based aid going tostudents in the public sector.

Fifty-two states or territories reported having primaryneed-based grant programs in 2006-07. These pro-grams combined to serve 1,819,563 students duringthis academic year. West Virginia’s program, the WestVirginia Higher Education Grant Program, accountedfor 0.6 percent of these students. West Virginia ranked11th among the 52 programs in regards to the averageaward size at $2,518 per student.

About this MeasureThese figures represent the number of students awardedfunding through one of three state financial aid awards:the Higher Education Adult Part-Time Student(HEAPS) grant, the Providing Real Opportunities forMaximizing In-State Student Excellence (PROMISE)Scholarship Program, and the West Virginia HigherEducation Grant Program. These data are presentedby year and by programmatic totals. Out-of-statestudents are excluded from these totals. Student head-count is unduplicated unless the student was awarded intwo different semesters at two different types of schools.Students fitting this category account for less than 0.1percent of all students awarded.

Number of Recipients: HEAPS, PROMISE, & WVHEG ProgramsProgram 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % ChangeHEAPS 3,062 2,853 3,720 4,900 4,298 -12.3% 40.4%

PROMISE 6,634 8,725 10,153 9,726 9,415 -3.2% 41.9%

WVHEG 10,194 10,071 9,970 10,992 11,372 3.5% 11.6%

TOTAL 19,890 21,649 23,843 25,618 25,085 -2.1% 26.1%

HEAPS

PROMISE

WVHEG

0

recipients

recipients

3-12

Amount Awarded: HEAPS, PROMISE, & WVHEG ProgramsProgram 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % ChangeHEAPS $3,403,029 $3,420,713 $4,418,014 $5,163,640 $5,458,365 5.7% 60.4%

PROMISE $20,587,780 $30,896,581 $38,258,487 $39,553,117 $40,265,503 1.8% 95.6%

WVHEG $20,247,832 $20,419,312 $20,220,864 $27,396,582 $30,312,498 10.6% 49.7%

TOTAL $44,238,641 $54,736,606 $62,897,365 $72,113,339 $76,036,366 5.4% 71.9%



p a g e6

AMOUNT AWARD ED : H E A P S, P ROM I S E ,& WVHEG PROGRAMSA c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

West Virginia Highlights• The total amount awarded to recipients of the HEAPS, PROMISE, and

West Virginia Higher Education Grant programs during the 2007academic year was $76,036,366, which is 5.4 percent higher thanthe figure of $72,113,399 in 2006.

• All three programs had greater totals for 2007 when compared to 2006.The West Virginia Higher Education Grant Program had the largestpercentage increase (10.6 percent) and monetary increase ($2,915,916).

• All three programs also increased when compared to their 2003 monetarylevels. The PROMISE Scholarship Program has experienced the largestpercentage (95.6 percent) and monetary increase ($19,677,723).

National ContextAll 50 states combined to award $9.3 billion in total state-funded studentfinancial aid during the 2006-07 academic year. This figure represents a10 percent increase in nominal dollars over the previous academic year.The majority of state aid is grant aid, representing $7.6 billion or 81.7percent of the total. When only considering this $7.6 billion in grant aid,72 percent was need-based while 28 percent was non-need-based. Thesefigures mirror the proportion from the previous year.

The SREB states collectively awarded $3.5 billion in aid, of which scholarshipsand grants represented 84 percent or $2.9 billion. Of this total, $1.3 billion,

or 42.7 percent, was scholarships and grantsbased on need whereas $1.7 billion, or57.3 percent, was not based on need.

About this MeasureThese figures represent the amount of statefinancial aid awarded through the HigherEducation Adult Part-Time Student (HEAPS)grant, the Providing Real Opportunities forMaximizing In-State Student Excellence(PROMISE) Scholarship Program, and theWest Virginia Higher Education Grantprograms. These data are presented by yearand by programmatic totals.

$50,000,000

$40,000,000

$30,000,000

$20,000,000

$10,000,000

$0 03 04 05 06 07

$5,4

58,3

65

$3,4

03,0

29

$3,4

20,7

13

$4,4

18,0

14

$5,1

63,6

40

HEAPS03 04 05 06 07

PROMISE

$40,

265,

503

$20,

587,

780

$30,

896,

581 $3

8,25

8,48

7

$39,

553,

117

$20,

247,

832

03 04 05 06 07WVHEG

$30,

312,

498

$20,

419,

312

$20,

220,

864

$27,

396,

582

amount awarded

HEAPS

PROMISE

WVHEG

3-13

A c a d e m i c Ye a r s 1998 - 2 007

p a g e7

DEGR E E S / C E RT I F I C AT E S AWARD ED I N PUB L I C I N S T I T U T I ON SA c a d e m i c Ye a r s 1 9 9 8 - 2 0 0 7

98 99 00 01 02

1

14,73315,04016,000

14,000

12,000

10,000

8,000

6,000

4,000

2,000

003 04 05 06 07

12,024 12,10812,264 12,302 12,839

F

13,14113,96314,206

1

14,733

15,040

12,024 12,10812,264

12,302

12,83913,141

13,96314,206

98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07

15,500

15,000

14,500

14,000

13,500

13,000

12,500

12,000

awards

awards

Degrees/Certificates Awarded in Public InstitutionsAward 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % ChangeAssociate's 2,170 2,112 2,079 2,066 2,252 2,333 2,749 2,579 2,697 2,698 0.0% 24.3%

Bachelor's 6,947 7,066 7,221 7,430 7,527 7,462 7,785 8,025 8,278 8,529 3.0% 22.8%

Master's 2,268 2,303 2,229 2,095 2,209 2,479 2,405 2,542 2,502 2,549 1.9% 12.4%

Ph.D. 141 134 133 146 162 169 169 179 172 221 28.5% 56.7%

Post-Master's Certificate 20 18 29 24 46 43 37 29 17 4 -76.5% -80.0%

Professional 389 376 434 404 471 453 448 476 539 491 -8.9% 26.2%

Undergraduate Certificate 89 99 139 137 172 202 370 376 528 548 3.8% 515.7%

TOTAL 12,024 12,108 12,264 12,302 12,839 13,141 13,963 14,206 14,733 15,040 2.1% 25.1%

West Virginia Highlights• The total number of degrees and credentials awarded by level at

any West Virginia public institution during the 2007 academicyear was 15,040, which is 2.1 percent higher than the figure of14,733 in 2006.

• Over the ten-year time period, the number of degrees andcredentials has increased by 25.1 percent from the 1998 levelof 12,024.

• The largest increase in proportion of degrees over this ten-yearperiod was in undergraduate certificates with an increase of515.7 percent. The largest increase in number of awards wasin baccalaureate degrees with a rise of 1,582.

National ContextAcross the SREB, the number of awards conferred at four-yearpublic colleges and universities was 479,721 for the 2005-06academic year. The total of awards conferred at two-year publicinstitutions was 271,224. The proportion of overall degrees thatwere bachelor’s degrees was 54.1 percent compared to 56.5 percentfor the state of West Virginia in that same year. Associate’s degreesmade up 24.5 percent of SREB degrees conferred compared to 18.2percent in West Virginia. Certificates represented 12.6 percent ofSREB degrees compared to 2.6 percent in West Virginia.

About this MeasureThis indicator provides the total number of awards conferred byWest Virginia public institutions: certificate, associate’s, bachelor’s,first professional, master’s, post-master’s, and doctoral. Most certifi-cates and associate degrees, however, are awarded within theCommunity and Technical College System. Each award conferredrepresents mastery of a set of skills or body of knowledge that isvaluable in the West Virginia labor market. Degrees and certificatesconferred represent the system’s human capital contribution tomoving the West Virginia economy forward. Furthermore, theproportion of the populace with higher education credentials isan important criterion in recruiting private industry to locate inthe state.

3-14




E CONOM I C G ROWTHTOTA L S C I E N C E AND ENG I N E E R I N G R E S E A R CH AND D EV E LOPMENTEXP END I T U R E S , F i s c a l Ye a r s 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

$200,000

$150,000

$100,000

$50,000

$0 03 04 05 06 07

$125,417$134,961

$146,489 $150,420

$167,208

$

$170,000

$160,000

$150,000

$140,000

$130,000

$120,000 03 04 05 06 07

$125,417

$134,961

$146,489

$150,420

$167,208

in thousands

in thousands

West Virginia Highlights• Total science and engineering related research and

development (R&D) expenditures at West Virginiacolleges and universities grew by 11.2 percent, from$150,420,000 in fiscal year 2006 to $167,208,000 in2007.

• Total expenditures for science and engineering relatedR&D have also grown over the five-year time periodexamined by 33.3 percent from their fiscal year 2003level of $125,417,000.

National ContextUniversities and colleges in the United States reportedscience and engineering related R&D expenditures of$49.4 billion in fiscal year 2007, which represents anincrease of 3.5 percent over the previous year ($47.7 billion).Adjusted for inflation, academic R&D rose by 0.8 percentin 2007. According to the National Science Foundation,from fiscal year 2003 to 2007, total research and develop-ment expenditures at academic institutions grew by 23.3percent from $40.1 billion to $49.4 billion.

About this MeasureThis indicator provides the total amount of revenuesexpended at West Virginia colleges and universities onscience and engineering related research and developmentregardless of revenue source. It includes spending at privateinstitutions, but it should be noted that private institutionsrepresent a small proportion of expenditures in the state.Thus, it includes government (all levels), institution, andprivate industry support of basic and applied research.Total R&D expenditures are a good indicator of the totalvolume of research being produced in postsecondaryeducation to support discovery, opportunity, economicgrowth, and diversification.

p a g e8

Total Science and Engineering Research and Development ExpendituresYear Total Expenditures

2003 $125,417,000

2004 $134,961,000

2005 $146,489,000

2006 $150,420,000

2007 $167,208,000

E conom i c G r ow th A c c e s s C o s t a n d A f f o r d a b i l i t y L e a r n i n g a n d A c c o u n t a b i l i t y I n n o v a t i o n

Source: National Science Foundation

3-15

$100,000

$80,000

$60,000

$40,000

$20,000

$0 03 04 05 06 07

$77,997$83,665

$88,512 $87,166$92,586

$

$95,000

$90,000

$85,000

$80,000

$75,00003 04 05 06 07

$77,997

$83,665

$88,512

$87,166

$92,586

in thousands

in thousands

F i s c a l Ye a r s 2003 - 2 007

F ED E RA L LY- F UND ED S C I E N C E AND ENG I N E E R I N GR E S E A R CH AND D EV E LOPMENT EXP END I T U R E SF i s c a l Ye a r s 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

West Virginia Highlights• The total amount of federally-financed science and engineering related

research and development (R&D) expenditures at West Virginia collegesand universities in fiscal year 2007 was $92,586,000, which was 6.2percent higher than the figure of $87,166,000 in 2006.

• Over the five-year time period, the amount of federally funded R&Dhas increased by 18.7 percent from its 2003 level of $77,997,000.

National ContextFederal funding of science and engineering related research and develop-ment in U.S. colleges and universities rose by 1.1 percent from $30.1billion in fiscal year 2006 to $30.4 billion in 2007. Adjusted for inflation,however, this represents a 1.6 percent decline from 2006. This is the firsttime since the National Science Foundation started collecting this data in1972 that the inflation-adjusted figure has declined two years in a row.The overall level of federally-financed research and development expendi-tures in the United States has grown by 22.9 percent from $24.8 billionin fiscal year 2003. The federal government has been the largest source ofR&D expenditures at colleges and universities since 1972, but its sharehas declined slightly in recent years.

About this MeasureThis indicator provides the amount of science and engineering relatedresearch and development expenditures at all West Virginia colleges anduniversities, including private institutions, that comes from grants andcontracts from the federal government. Many of these grants and contractsare competitive and provide a good indicator of both the quality andquantity of research being performed in the system.

Obtaining federal funds bolsters the revenue streams available for researchand development and demonstrates the increased national competitivenessof the state’s institutions in this highly competitive environment.

p a g e9

Federally-Funded Science and Engineering Research & Development ExpendituresYear Total Federally-Funded Expenditures2003 $77,997,000

2004 $83,665,000

2005 $88,512,000

2006 $87,166,000

2007 $92,586,000

Source: National Science Foundation

3-16



R E S E A R CH GRANT S AND CONTRAC T SA c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

$200,000,000

$150,000,000

$100,000,000

$50,000,000

$003 04 05 06 07

$158,867$171,618 $165,335

$154,257 $157,290

$

$180,000,000

$170,000,000

$160,000,000

$150,000,000

03 04 05 06 07

$158,867

$171,618

$165,335

$154,257

$157,290

in thousands

in thousands

West Virginia Highlights• The total amount of research grants and contracts at

West Virginia colleges and universities in fiscal year 2007was $157,289,664, which was two percent higher thanthe figure of $154,257,097 in 2006.

• Over the five-year time period, the amount of researchgrants and contracts has decreased by one percent fromits 2003 level of $158,867,266.

National ContextColleges and universities reported total research anddevelopment expenditures (which include other fieldsin addition to science and engineering) of $50.2 billionin fiscal year 2007. This figure was 30 percent higher thanthe fiscal year 2004 total of $38.6 billion. While thesedata include institutional spending in addition to outsidecontracts, they provide an indicator of growth in totalresearch effort. Public universities and colleges reportedtotal research and development expenditures of $33.8 billionin fiscal year 2007 which was 33 percent higher than $25.4billion in 2004.

About this MeasureThese funds include any externally-sponsored researchactivities, grants, or contracts procured by college anduniversity faculty and staff to produce, or advance, newknowledge in any field. It includes all funds from the federalgovernment, non-profit agencies, and private industrythat are channeled through university research corporationsor offices. It is an important indicator of the extent towhich the system is leveraging outside dollars to comple-ment state spending on research that increases WestVirginia’s capacity to attract new business and industry.


p a g e1 0

Research Grants and ContractsYear Funds for Externally-Sponsored Research2003 $158,867,000

2004 $171,618,000

2005 $165,335,000

2006 $154,257,000

2007 $157,290,000

3-17

14,000

12,000

10,000

8,000

6,000

4,000

2,000

0 03 04 05 06 07

12,20311,279 11,613 11,857

12,093

1

12,400

12,200

12,000

11,800

11,600

11,400

11,20003 04 05 06 07

12,203

11,279

11,613

11,857

12,093

# awarded

# awarded

A c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2003 - 2 007

D E G R E E S / C R E D EN T I A L S AWARD ED BYL E V E L S YS T EM -W I D E , A c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

West Virginia Highlights• The total number of degrees and credentials awarded at West

Virginia colleges and universities in fiscal year 2007 was 12,093,which was two percent higher than the figure of 11,857 in 2006.

• Over the five-year time period, the number of degrees and credentialshas decreased by 0.9 percent from its 2003 level of 12,203. Thereason for this slight decrease is the creation of a more robustcommunity and technical college system, which garnered themajority of associate’s and certificate programs beginning in 2004.

• The largest percentage increase in number of degrees over this five-year period was in doctoral degrees with an increase of 30.8 percent.The largest increase in number of awards was in baccalaureate degreeswith a rise of 950.

National ContextAcross the SREB, in the decade from 1995-96 to 2005-06, the numberof awards conferred at four-year public colleges and universities grewby 28.5 percent from 373,383 to 479, 721. The proportion of thesedegrees that were bachelor’s degrees remained virtually identical, but theproportion that were associate’s degrees and certificates declined from2.6 percent to 1.8 percent, while the proportion that were advanceddegrees increased from 26.6 percent to 27.8 percent. More recently inthe country as a whole, the number of degrees and certificates conferredat public four-year institutions increased by 6 percent from 2003-04 to2005-06 with about 5 percent receiving certificates or associate’s degrees,68 percent receiving bachelor’s degrees, and 27 percent receivingadvanced degrees in both years.

About this MeasureThis indicator provides the total number of awards conferred byWest Virginia public four-year institutions: certificate, associate’s,bachelor’s, first professional, master’s, post-master’s, and doctoral.Most certificates and associate’s degrees, however, are awarded withinthe Community and Technical College System. Each award conferredrepresents mastery of a set of skills and body of knowledge that isvaluable in the West Virginia labor market. Degrees and certificatesconferred represent the system’s human capital contribution to movingthe West Virginia economy forward. Furthermore, the proportion ofthe populace with higher education credentials is an important criterionin recruiting private industry to locate in the state.

p a g e1 1

Degrees/Credentials Awarded by LevelAward Type 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % ChangeCertificate 81 1 1 2 6 200.0% -92.6%

Associate 1,599 516 457 496 493 -0.6% -69.2%

Baccalaureate 7,379 7,703 7,929 8,129 8,329 2.5% 12.9%

First-Professional 453 448 476 539 491 -8.9% 8.4%

Master's 2,479 2,405 2,542 2,502 2,549 1.9% 2.8%

Post-Master's Certificate 43 37 29 17 4 -76.5% -90.7%

Doctoral 169 169 179 172 221 28.5% 30.8%

TOTAL 12,203 11,279 11,613 11,857 12,093 2.0% -0.9%

3-18



DEGR E E S / C R E D EN T I A L S AWARD ED BY I N S T I T U T I ON AND L E V E LA c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

p a g e1 2


Degrees/Credentials Awarded by LevelInstitution Award Type 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % ChangeBluefield State College Certificate 43 0 0 0 0 0 -100.0%

Associate 310 194 110 96 86 -10.4% -72.3%

Baccalaureate 222 197 204 224 220 -1.8% -0.9%

Total 575 391 314 320 306 -4.4% -46.8%

Concord University Associate 0 0 1 2 2 0.0% NA*

Baccalaureate 372 446 400 398 350 -12.1% -5.9%

Master's 0 16 9 25 27 8.0% NA*

Total 372 462 410 425 379 -10.8% 1.9%

Fairmont State University Associate 298 1 68 73 78 6.8% -73.8%

Baccalaureate 643 624 606 661 671 1.5% 4.4%

Master's 0 3 27 47 65 38.3% NA*

Total 941 628 701 781 814 4.2% -13.5%

Glenville State College Associate 91 50 31 32 30 -6.3% -67.0%

Baccalaureate 206 182 200 182 188 3.3% -8.7%

Total 297 232 231 214 218 1.9% -26.6%

Marshall University Associate 337 90 84 96 100 4.2% -70.3%

Baccalaureate 1,395 1,487 1,433 1,389 1,450 4.4% 3.9%

First-Professional 43 43 46 47 42 -10.6% -2.3%

Master's 937 871 861 945 872 -7.7% -6.9%

Post-Master'sCertificate 43 37 29 17 4 -76.5% -90.7%

Doctoral 9 10 11 25 17 -32.0% 88.9%

Total 2,764 2,538 2,464 2,519 2,485 -1.3% -10.1%

Potomac State College Certificate 0 1 1 2 6 200.0% NA*

of WVU Associate 157 143 133 164 166 1.2% 5.7%

Baccalaureate 0 0 0 2 6 200.0% NA*

Total 157 144 134 168 178 6.0% 13.4%

Shepherd University Associate 94 0 0 0 0 0 -100.0%

Baccalaureate 562 537 558 589 642 9.0% 14.2%

Master's 0 5 12 19 48 152.6% NA*

Total 656 542 570 608 690 13.5% 5.2%

WV School of OsteopathicMedicine First-Professional 72 68 79 96 94 -2.1% 30.6%

Total 72 68 79 96 94 -2.1% 30.6%

WVU Institute of Technology Associate 83 0 0 0 0 0 -100.0%

Baccalaureate 196 211 264 232 205 -11.6% 4.6%

Master's 9 11 8 4 1 -75.0% -88.9%

Total 288 222 272 236 206 -12.7% -28.5%

3-19

A c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2003 - 2 007

D E G R E E S / C R E D EN T I A L S AWARD ED BY I N S T I T U T I ON AND L E V E LA c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7 ( C O N T. )

p a g e1 3

Degrees/Credentials Awarded by Level (Cont.)Institution Award Type 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % ChangeWest Liberty State College Associate 34 38 30 33 31 -6.1% -8.8%

Baccalaureate 415 426 419 374 365 -2.4% -12.0%

Total 449 464 449 407 396 -2.7% -11.8%

West Virginia State University Certificate 38 0 0 0 0 0 -100.0%

Associate 195 0 0 0 0 0 -100.0%

Baccalaureate 431 438 473 464 442 -4.7% 2.6%

Master's 0 0 6 7 9 28.6% NA*

Total 664 438 479 471 451 -4.2% -32.1%

West Virginia University Baccalaureate 2,937 3,155 3,372 3,614 3,790 4.9% 29.0%

First-Professional 338 337 351 396 355 -10.4% 5.0%

Master's 1,533 1,499 1,619 1,455 1,527 4.9% -0.4%

Doctoral 160 159 168 147 204 38.8% 27.5%

Total 4,968 5,150 5,510 5,612 5,876 4.7% 18.3%

*Percent changes cannot be calculated where the beginning year value is zero.

West Virginia Highlights• Most institutions show an overall decrease in degree production over the last five years

as the number of associate’s degrees has fallen with the maturation of the two-yearpostsecondary system.

• Baccalaureate degree production is the largest degree category at each of West Virginia’spublic four-year institutions. Overall, the total number of bachelor’s degrees producedincreased by 12.9 percent over the five-year period.

• Marshall University and West Virginia University also produce a sizable number ofmaster’s degrees – 35 percent and 26 percent of 2007 totals respectively.

• As indicated in the chart below, while the number of post-master’s and professionalprograms has remained the same since 2003, the number of master’s and doctoralprograms in the state has grown. This count only includes programs with actualenrollment.

About this MeasureThis indicator provides the total number of awards conferred by West Virginia publicfour-year institutions at the institution level. Degrees and certificates conferred representthe system’s human capital contribution to moving the West Virginia economy forward.Furthermore, the proportion of the populace with higher education credentials is animportant criterion in recruiting private industry to locate in the state.

NUMBER O F G RADUAT E P ROGRAMSA c a d e m i c Ye a r 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

Number of Graduate ProgramsProgram Level 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007Master's 100 98 99 101 104

Post-Master's Certificate 2 2 2 2 2

Ph.D. 33 34 39 42 42

Professional 5 5 5 5 5

3-20



S C I E N C E , T E C HNO LOGY, E N G I N E E R I N G , A ND MATHEMAT I C S ( S T EM )AWARD S A S A P E R C EN TAG E O F A L L AWARD S BY D E G R E E L E V E LA c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

0% 03 04 05 06 07

0

24.8%21.4% 20.6% 22.4% 22.9%

7

Bachelor's03 04 05 06 07

Master's03 04 05 06 07

Ph.D.

14.0%16.0%18.5%

15.6% 14.5%

43.4%46.2%

43.8%45.3%

47.1%

03 04 05 06 07Total

22.7%20.5% 20.5% 21.2% 21.4%

% of total awards

West Virginia Highlights• The total number of STEM awards as a percentage of all degrees

at West Virginia colleges and universities in fiscal year 2007 was22.7 percent, which was 1.3 percentage points higher than thefigure of 21.4 percent in 2006.

• Over the five-year time period, STEM awards as a percentageof all awards increased 2.2 percentage points from its 2003 levelof 20.5 percent.

• The pipeline of STEM graduates has also grown (see graph belowat left). The number of students majoring in STEM fields has grownby 18.6 percent from 8,564 in 2003 to 10,159 in 2007.

National ContextOver the most recent available five-year window from 2001-02 to2005-06, the number of science and engineering degrees awarded inthe United States increased by 15.6 percent from about 539,000 to624,000. The proportion of overall degrees that were in science andengineering, however, remained constant at 30 percent. During thistime period, the proportion of bachelor’s degrees and associate’s degreesthat were in science and engineering remained constant at 32 percentand 21 percent, respectively, but the percent of doctorates in scienceand engineering rose from 62 percent to 66 percent.

About this MeasureThis indicator provides the proportion of graduates each year in STEMfields at the bachelor’s, master’s, and doctoral levels. The inset at leftprovides the number of students each fall who have a declared majorin a STEM field. These technical majors educate students to fill higherpaying jobs and attract business and industry that rely on workersskilled in these areas.

p a g e1 4


STEM Awards as a Percentage of All Awards by Degree LevelDegree Type 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Bachelor's 21.4% 20.6% 22.4% 22.9% 24.8%

Master's 16.0% 18.5% 15.6% 14.5% 14.0%

Ph.D. 46.2% 43.8% 45.3% 47.1% 43.4%

TOTAL 20.5% 20.5% 21.2% 21.4% 22.7%

10,500

10,000

9,500

9,000

8,50003 04 05 06 07

8,564

9,076

9,591

9,752

10,159

headcount

STUDENTS MAJORING INSTEM FIELDS

F a l l 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

3-21

Average ACT Scores of West Virginia and U.S. High School GraduatesTest 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008English WV 20.6 20.5 20.8 20.8 20.8

National 20.4 20.4 20.6 20.7 20.6

Math WV 19.4 19.3 19.6 19.5 19.6

National 20.7 20.7 20.8 21.0 21.0

Reading WV 21.1 20.9 21.2 21.2 21.4

National 21.3 21.3 21.4 21.5 21.4

Science WV 20.3 20.4 20.5 20.5 20.5

National 20.9 20.9 20.9 21.0 20.8

Composite WV 20.5 20.4 20.6 20.6 20.7

National 20.9 20.9 21.1 21.2 21.1

G r a d u a t i o n Ye a r s 2004 - 2 008

p a g e1 5

25.0

20.0

15.0

10.0

5.0

004 05 06 07 08

20.9 20.9 21.221.1 20.620.4 20.6 21.1 20.720.5

NationalWest Virginia

average compositescores

21.2

21.1

21.0

20.9

20.8

20.7

20.6

20.5

20.404 05 06 07 08

20.9

20.9

21.1

21.2

21.1

2

20.5

20.4

20.6

20.6

20.7

N

AC C E S S

AV E RAG E A C T S C O R E S O F WE S T V I RG I N I A H I G H S C HOO L G RADUAT E SG r a d u a t i o n Ye a r s 2 0 0 4 - 2 0 0 8

West Virginia Highlights• The composite score for West Virginians taking the ACT

exam has risen 0.2 points since 2004, which mirrors theincrease found at the national level.

• The English, math, and science sub-scores have also increased0.2 points over this same time period, while reading hasincreased 0.3 points.

• West Virginia leads the national average on English sub-scores, is even on reading, and trails on math, science, andthe composite score.

National ContextApproximately 1.42 million students in the high school graduat-ing class of 2008 took the ACT exam. This figure representsa nine percent increase from the previous year. The ACT exam isadministered in all 50 states. West Virginia was one of 26 stateswhere over 50 percent of high school graduates took the examinationin 2008; however, the national percentage of graduates tested was 43percent, which increased from 40 percent in 2004. Nationally overthe past year, there has been increased diversity among test takerswith respect to race/ethnicity and academic preparation. With thisincrease in diversity, there was a slight decline in composite scores.

About this MeasureThe ACT exam is accepted for admission at all public four-yearinstitutions in the state and focuses on student readiness forpostsecondary education. Having more students take the examallows policymakers to effectively gauge student readiness. Thefact that a greater proportion of West Virginia high school seniorshas taken the exam in recent years, and scores have still risen, is anindication of increasing preparation and college readiness.

average compositescores

Source: ACT

3-22



UNDERGRADUAT E ENRO L LMENTF a l l 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

03 04 05 06 07

49,717 50,879 52,235 53,35353,44460,000

50,000

40,000

30,000

20,000

10,000

0

53,500

53,000

52,500

52,000

51,500

51,000

50,500

50,000

49.50003 04 05 06 07

49,717

50,879

52,235

53,35353,444

headcount

headcount

p a g e1 6

Undergraduate EnrollmentInstitution 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % ChangeBluefield State College 1,870 1,869 1,790 1,923 1,887 -1.9% 0.9%

Concord University 2,933 2,859 2,867 2,792 2,611 -6.5% -11.0%

Fairmont State University 3,847 4,039 4,500 4,255 4,091 -3.9% 6.3%

Glenville State College 1,382 1,313 1,393 1,387 1,444 4.1% 4.5%

Marshall University 9,958 9,859 9,841 9,723 9,586 -1.4% -3.7%

Potomac State College of WVU 1,329 1,305 1,303 1,510 1,601 6.0% 20.5%

Shepherd University 3,306 3,625 3,812 3,987 4,011 0.6% 21.3%

WVU Institute of Technology 1,697 1,646 1,525 1,486 1,430 -3.8% -15.7%

West Liberty State College 2,492 2,371 2,231 2,260 2,400 6.2% -3.7%

West Virginia State University 3,335 3,296 3,421 3,419 3,254 -4.8% -2.4%

West Virginia University 17,568 18,697 19,552 20,611 21,129 2.5% 20.3%

TOTAL 49,717 50,879 52,235 53,353 53,444 0.2% 7.5%

E c o n o m i c G r o w t h A c c e s s C o s t a n d A f f o r d a b i l i t y L e a r n i n g a n d A c c o u n t a b i l i t y I n n o v a t i o n

West Virginia Highlights• Students enrolled in for-credit classes increased 0.2 percent,

from 53,353 in 2006-07 to 53,444 in 2007-08.

• For-credit enrollment has increased 7.5 percent since 2003representing a growth in actual students of 3,727.

• Since the 2003-04 academic year, six four-year institutionshave realized gains in undergraduate enrollment while fivehave experienced decreases.

National ContextFall 2006 national data are the most recent available informationregarding undergraduate enrollment. During fall 2006, approxi-mately 15.18 million students were enrolled at Title IV institutionsin the United States. Fifty-seven percent of these students wereenrolled at four-year institutions (NCES, 2007). The proportionis 56 percent for undergraduate students at four-year institutionsin SREB states (SREB, 2008).

Undergraduate enrollment is projected to increase nationally by1.7 million students by 2016 (11.2 percent). The numbers areprojected to rise by 950,000 (11 percent) in the four-year sector.

About this MeasureUndergraduate headcount enrollment represents the number ofstudents who have paid fees and enrolled in classes according to fall,end-of-term data. This indicator includes students who might besimultaneously enrolled at more than one institution as well as highschool students who are dually enrolled. Increasing enrollments areeasier when high school graduation pools are expanding; however,with projected declines in these figures due to state demographicshifts, postsecondary institutions will need to diversify their enroll-ment base and pools of students in order to maintain currentenrollment levels.

3-23

03 04 05 06 07

11,540 11,619 11,790 12,158

12,701

1

14,000

12,000

10,000

8,000

6,000

4,000

2,000

0

12,800

12,600

12,400

12,200

12,000

11,800

11,600

11,40003 04 05 06 07

11,540

11,61911,790

12,158

12,701

headcount

headcount

F a l l 2003 - 2 007

GRADUAT E / F I R S T- P RO F E S S I O NA L ENRO L LMENTF a l l 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

p a g e1 7

Graduate/First-Professional EnrollmentInstitution 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % ChangeConcord University 93 121 133 124 104 -16.1% 11.8%

Fairmont State University 93 134 241 347 377 8.6% 305.4%

Marshall University 4,002 4,061 4,147 4,213 4,222 0.2% 5.5%

Shepherd University 27 66 96 122 156 27.9% 477.8%

WV School of Osteopathic Medicine 337 363 395 502 591 17.7% 75.4%

WVU Institute of Technology 25 29 15 7 2 -71.4% -92.0%

West Liberty State College 20 . 5 7 . -100.0% -100.0%

West Virginia State University 22 28 36 37 42 13.5% 90.9%


TOTAL 11,540 11,619 11,790 12,158 12,701 4.5% 10.1%

West Virginia Highlights• Graduate and first-professional students enrolled in for-credit classes

increased 4.5 percent, from 12,158 in 2006-07 to 12,701 in 2007-08.

• For-credit enrollment has increased 10.1 percent since 2003, repre-senting a growth in actual students of 1,161.

• Since the 2003-04 academic year, seven four-year institutions haverealized gains in graduate enrollment, while two have decreased.

National ContextFall 2006 national data are the most recent available regarding studentgraduate and first-professional enrollment. During fall 2006, approxi-mately 2.2 million graduate students were enrolled at Title IV institu-tions in the United States. Enrollment for first-professional studentswas 343,000 in 2006. Both of these figures represent increases fromthe 2000 enrollment levels. Graduate enrollment increased by 21percent while first-professional enrollment increased twelve percent(NCES, 2008).

Nationally, 54 percent of graduate student enrollment was located inpublic colleges in 2006 compared to 72 percent in SREB states and88 percent in West Virginia. Nationally, 41 percent of first-professionalstudents were located in public postsecondary institutions compared to55 percent in SREB states and 100 percent in West Virginia (SREB,2008).

About this MeasureGraduate and first-professional headcount enrollment represents thenumber of students who have paid fees and enrolled in classes accordingto fall, end-of-term data. The list of graduate programs totals 222 andincludes first professional, master’s, post-master’s and doctoral programs.These programs are spread throughout West Virginia postsecondaryinstitutions with the majority located at West Virginia University andMarshall University. The first-professional programs include dentistry,law, medicine, osteopathic medicine, and pharmacy.

3-24



UNDERGRADUAT E F U L L - T I M E EQU I VA L EN T ( F T E ) ENRO L LMENTF a l l 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

03 04 05 06 07

46,270 47,345 48,463 49,217 49,481

4

50,000

40,000

30,000

20,000

10,000

0

50,000

49,000

48,000

47,000

46,00003 04 05 06 07

46,270

47,345

48,463

49,217

49,481

FTE

FTE

p a g e1 8

Undergraduate Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) EnrollmentInstitution 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % ChangeBluefield State College 1,557 1,582 1,532 1,592 1,595 0.2% 2.5%

Concord University 2,757 2,748 2,727 2,581 2,513 -2.6% -8.9%


Glenville State College 1,282 1,201 1,279 1,221 1,209 -0.9% -5.7%

Marshall University 8,974 8,821 8,755 8,539 8,450 -1.1% -5.8%

Potomac State College of WVU 1,030 1,017 1,019 1,158 1,271 9.7% 23.4%

Shepherd University 3,021 3,166 3,293 3,428 3,463 1.0% 14.6%

WVU Institute of Technology 1,367 1,344 1,207 1,184 1,212 2.4% -11.3%

West Liberty State College 2,557 2,403 2,258 2,253 2,305 2.3% -9.9%

West Virginia State University 2,542 2,602 2,623 2,641 2,508 -5.0% -1.4%

West Virginia University 17,650 18,745 19,652 20,730 21,263 2.6% 20.5%TOTAL 46,270 47,345 48,463 49,217 49,481 0.5% 6.9%


West Virginia Highlights• Undergraduate FTE enrollment increased 0.5 percent,

from 49,217 in 2006-07 to 49,481 in 2007-08.

• FTE enrollment has increased 6.9 percent since 2003,representing a growth in actual students of 3,211.

• Since the 2003-04 academic year, five four-year institutionshave realized gains in FTE enrollment, while six haveexperienced decreases.

National ContextFTE enrollment is often used at the national level to determine ahost of outcomes including expenses by academic or administrativefunction per FTE, and revenues per FTE. Student credit hours areconsolidated into the equivalent number taking a full load to allowinstitutions and systems to plan strategically for future growth.

About this MeasureFTE enrollment indicates how many students takingfull study loads would generate a given number of measured oranticipated student credit hours. To convert a measured amountof instructional workload to FTE enrollment, divide student credithours by a full-time study load (15 hours) to determine how manyfull-time students would generate the same instructional workload.Student credit hours (SCH) are the sum of the units earned by allstudents enrolled in a class. FTE enrollment was calculated fromfall, end-of-term data.

3-25

03 04 05 06 07

8

7,683 7,664 7,926 8,2428,613

7

10,000

8,000

6,000

4,000

2,000

0

8,800

8,600

8,400

8,200

8,000

7,800

7,60003 04 05 06 07

7,6837,664

7,926

8,242

8,613

FTE

FTE

F a l l 2003 - 2 007

GRADUAT E / F I R S T- P RO F E S S I O NA L F U L L - T I M E EQU I VA L EN T ( F T E )ENRO L LMENT, F a l l 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

West Virginia Highlights• Graduate/First-Professional FTE enrollment increased 4.5

percent, from 8,242 in 2006-07 to 8,813 in 2007-08.

• Graduate/First-Professional FTE enrollment has increased12.1 percent since 2003 representing a growth in actualstudents of 930.

• Since the 2003-04 academic year, seven four-year institu-tions have realized gains in graduate/first-professional FTEenrollment while two have decreased.

National ContextFTE enrollment is often used at the national level to determinea host of outcomes including expenses by academic or adminis-trative function per FTE and revenues per FTE. Student credithours are consolidated into the equivalent number taking a fullload to allow institutions and systems to plan strategically forfuture growth.

About this MeasureFTE enrollment indicates how many students taking full studyloads would generate a given number of measured or antici-pated student credit hours. To convert a measured amountof instructional workload to FTE enrollment, divide studentcredit hours by a full-time study load (12 hours) to determinehow many full-time students would generate the same instruc-tional work load. Student credit hours (SCH) are the sumof the units earned by all students enrolled in a class. FTEenrollment was calculated from fall, end-of-term data.

p a g e1 9

Graduate/First-Professional Full-Time Equivalent (FTE) EnrollmentInstitution 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % ChangeConcord University 35 43 64 62 45 -26.4% 28.4%

Fairmont State University 34 68 112 158 202 27.5% 488.1%





West Liberty State College 5 . 1 2 . -100.0% -100.0%

West Virginia State University 11 19 24 23 25 6.8% 133.6%


TOTAL 7,683 7,664 7,926 8,242 8,613 4.5% 12.1%

3-26



F I R S T- T I M E F R E SHMEN HEAD COUNT ENRO L LMENTF a l l 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

03 04 05 06 07

10,470 10,151 10,225 10,445 10,683

1

12,000

10,000

8,000

6,000

4,000

2,000

0

10,700

10,600

10,500

10,400

10,300

10,200

10,10003 04 05 06 07

10,470

10,151

10,225

10,445

10,683

headcount

headcount

West Virginia Highlights• First-time freshmen students enrolled in for-credit classes increased

2.3 percent, from 10,445 in 2006-07 to 10,683 in 2007-08.

• First-time freshmen enrollment has increased 2.0 percent since2003 representing a growth in actual students of 213.

• Since the 2003-04 academic year, seven four-year institutions haverealized gains in first-time freshmen enrollment while four haveexperienced decreases.

National ContextBetween 1995 and 2005, first-time freshmen enrollment in the nationincreased 22.5 percent. The four-year public sector realized anincrease of 30.3 percent during this same time period. Over this timeperiod in West Virginia, statewide first-time freshmen enrollmentincreased by 8.7 percent. The four-year public system saw a declineof 5 percent largely due to the creation of the two-year system, whichresulted in numerous academic programs at the associate’s andcertificate levels being shifted to these institutions. Nationally,full-time students comprised 75.9 percent of first-time freshmenenrollment in 1995 compared to 82.4 percent in 2005.

About this MeasureThis first-time freshmen enrollment from fall, end-of-term dataconsists of the entering freshmen who have never attended college.It also includes those students enrolled in the fall term who attendedfor the first time in the prior summer term. This measure also in-corporates students who enter with advanced standing (college creditsearned before graduation from high school).

p a g e2 0

First-Time Freshmen EnrollmentInstitution 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % ChangeBluefield State College 321 287 256 270 314 16.3% -2.2%

Concord University 622 576 648 600 625 4.2% 0.5%

Fairmont State University 630 617 668 648 638 -1.5% 1.3%

Glenville State College 316 291 304 268 291 8.6% -7.9%

Marshall University 1,938 1,799 1,715 1,542 1,688 9.5% -12.9%

Potomac State College of WVU 440 433 459 537 616 14.7% 40.0%


WVU Institute of Technology 246 245 177 200 253 26.5% 2.8%

West Liberty State College 460 463 399 471 476 1.1% 3.5%

West Virginia State University 437 392 363 389 365 -6.2% -16.5%

West Virginia University 4,411 4,360 4,561 4,818 4,711 -2.2% 6.8%

TOTAL 10,470 10,151 10,225 10,445 10,683 2.3% 2.0%

E c o n o m i c G r o w t h A c c e s s C o s t a n d A f f o r d a b i l i t y L e a r n i n g a n d A c c o u n t a b i l i t y I n n o v a t i o n3-27

03 04 05 06 07

1

16,969 17,473 17,945 18,382 18,784

1

20,000

15,000

10,000

5,000

0

19,000

18,500

18,000

17,500

17,000

16,50003 04 05 06 07

16,969

17,473

17,945

18,382

18,784

headcount

headcount

F a l l 2003 - 2 007

ADU LT S T UD EN T ( 2 5 AND O LD E R ) ENRO L LMENTF a l l 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

West Virginia Highlights• Adult students enrolled in for-credit classes increased 2.2 percent,

from 18,382 in 2006-07 to 18,784 in 2007-08.

• Adult student enrollment has increased 10.7 percent since 2003representing a growth in actual students of 1,815.

• Since the 2003-04 academic year, eight institutions have realizedgains in adult student enrollment while four have decreased.

National ContextAccording to SREB data, from 1995 to 2005 in the nation as a whole,the number of students aged 25 and older, enrolled in institutions thatgrant associate’s or higher degrees, has increased by 571,286 or 9.4percent. In SREB states, the number has grown by 226,779 or 12.3percent. The comparable data in West Virginia show an increase of4,115 students or 14.4 percent.

Adult enrollment as a proportion of overall enrollment, however, hasdecreased over this time period from 42.6 to 38.1 percent in the U.S.,41.1 to 36.8 percent in SREB states, and 33.2 to 32.8 percent inWest Virginia.

About this MeasureThis fall, end-of-term adult enrollment data provide the number ofstudents aged 25 and older enrolled in classes in West Virginia’s four-year institutions. Given the fact that only 16.9 percent of adults inWest Virginia have a postsecondary degree, which is last among thefifty states, as well as the reality that the pool of high school graduatesis projected to start declining with the class of 2009, it is importantthat the system find ways to bring adults without degrees into thesystem and assist this unique population in persisting to degree.

p a g e2 1

Adult Student (25 and older) EnrollmentInstitution 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % ChangeBluefield State College 872 879 804 840 777 -7.5% -10.9%

Concord University 569 601 641 587 509 -13.3% -10.5%


Glenville State College 287 247 296 273 307 12.5% 7.0%


Potomac State College of WVU 171 192 194 245 241 -1.6% 40.9%

Shepherd University 787 1,041 1,120 1,176 1,211 3.0% 53.9%



West Liberty State College 422 376 348 346 333 -3.8% -21.1%

West Virginia State University 1,163 1,251 1,283 1,275 1,206 -5.4% 3.7%


TOTAL 16,969 17,473 17,945 18,382 18,784 2.2% 10.7%

3-28



ENRO L LMENT BY G END E RF a l l 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

40,000

35,000

30,000

25,000

20,000

15,000

10,000

5,000

0

33,104 33,607 34,550

03 04 05 06 07

35,137 35,481

28,153 28,891 29,475

03 04 05 06 07

30,374 30,664

36,000

35,000

34,000

33,000

32,000

31,000

30,000

29,000

28,00003 04 05 06 07

33,10433,607

34,550

35,137 35,481

28,15328,891

29,47530,374

30,664

FemaleMale

headcount headcount Fall 2007

Female53.6%

Male46.4%

p a g e2 2

Enrollment by GenderInstitution Gender 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % ChangeBluefield State College F 1,109 1,102 1,063 1,124 1,105 -1.7% -0.4%

M 761 767 727 799 782 -2.1% 2.8%Concord University F 1,763 1,751 1,773 1,700 1,606 -5.5% -8.9%

M 1,263 1,229 1,227 1,216 1,109 -8.8% -12.2%Fairmont State University F 2,175 2,307 2,669 2,590 2,514 -2.9% 15.6%

M 1,765 1,866 2,072 2,012 1,954 -2.9% 10.7%Glenville State College F 742 699 663 662 700 5.7% -5.7%

M 640 614 730 725 744 2.6% 16.3%Marshall University F 8,318 8,390 8,431 8,400 8,288 -1.3% -0.4%

M 5,642 5,530 5,557 5,536 5,520 -0.3% -2.2%Potomac State College of WVU F 702 692 717 832 861 3.5% 22.6%

M 627 613 586 678 740 9.1% 18.0%Shepherd Uiversity F 1,972 2,127 2,240 2,353 2,412 2.5% 22.3%

M 1,361 1,564 1,668 1,756 1,755 -0.1% 28.9%WV School of Osteopathic Medicine F 164 180 184 241 291 20.7% 77.4%

M 173 183 211 261 300 14.9% 73.4%WVU Institute of Technology F 676 655 650 638 572 -10.3% -15.4%

M 1,046 1,020 890 855 860 0.6% -17.8%West Liberty State College F 1,383 1,301 1,284 1,322 1,366 3.3% -1.2%

M 1,129 1,070 952 945 1,034 9.4% -8.4%West Virginia State University F 2,020 1,964 2,021 2,027 1,909 -5.8% -5.5%

M 1,337 1,360 1,436 1,429 1,387 -2.9% 3.7%West Virginia University F 12,080 12,439 12,855 13,248 13,857 4.6% 14.7%

M 12,409 13,075 13,419 14,162 14,479 2.2% 16.7%

TOTAL F 33,104 33,607 34,550 35,137 35,481 1.0% 7.2%M 28,153 28,891 29,475 30,374 30,664 1.0% 8.9%


West Virginia Highlights• Female enrollment increased one percent from 2006 to 2007 and 7.2 percent from 2003 to 2007.

• Male enrollment increased one percent from 2006 to 2007 and 8.9 percent from 2003 to 2007.

• Female enrollment has consistently been about 5,000 students higher over this five-year timeperiod.

3-29

03 04 05 06 07

2

1,789 1,7651,929

2,381 2,3132,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

0

2,400

2,300

2,200

2,100

2,000

1,900

1,800

1,70003 04 05 06 07

1,789

1,765

1,929

2,381

2,313

headcount

headcount

F a l l 2003 - 2 007

DUA L ENRO L LMENT O F H I G H S C HOO L S T UD EN T SI N H E P C I N S T I T U T I ON S, F a l l 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

West Virginia Highlights• Dual enrollment in the public four-year sector declined by

2.9 percent from 2006 to 2007; however, this enrollmentincreased by 29.3 percent since 2003.

• Dual enrollment numbers have fluctuated during this five-year span as evidenced by decreases between 2003-04 and2006-07, but increases between 2004-05 and2005-06.

National ContextNational collection of dual enrollment data has begun onlyrecently. A 2005 report from the United States Departmentof Education indicates that 71 percent of U.S. high schoolsand 51 percent of U.S. postsecondary institutions permittedhigh school students to take college courses during the2002-03 school year. During that academic year, approxi-mately 813,000 secondary students took a college credit class.

While these programs have gained in popularity, few studieshave been performed to measure their effectiveness. A recentstudy in Florida discovered that: (1) Participation in dualenrollment was positively related to enrollment in college;(2) Dual enrollment students were more likely to persist incollege to a second semester; (3) Their grade point averageafter two years of college was statistically significantly higherthan that of their peers; and (4) Dual enrollment students hadmade more progress towards a degree three years after highschool graduation.

About this MeasureThese figures represent the number of secondary students whohave enrolled in dual enrollment courses associated with four-year public postsecondary institutions in West Virginia. Dualenrollment courses allow high school students to enroll incollege courses and earn college credit. These courses wereonce largely limited to high achieving students, but are nowopen to a wider range of students as states have begun to viewdual enrollment as a means to support postsecondary prepara-tion. Counts include some students who enrolled at multipleinstitutions and are from fall, end-of-term data.

p a g e2 3

Dual Enrollment of High School Students in HEPC Institutions2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % Change

1,789 1,765 1,929 2,381 2,313 -2.9% 29.3%

3-30



HEP C I N - S TAT E ENRO L LMENT BY COUNTYF a l l 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

p a g e2 4

HEPC In-State Enrollment by County2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % ChangeNo County listed 448 498 443 459 468 2.0% 4.5%

Barbour 278 261 253 244 242 -0.8% -12.9%

Berkeley 1,684 1,826 1,836 1,848 1,992 7.8% 18.3%

Boone 329 356 332 314 307 -2.2% -6.7%

Braxton 341 305 322 358 335 -6.4% -1.8%

Brooke 505 538 502 504 779 54.6% 54.3%

Cabell 4,367 4,126 4,204 4,206 4,084 -2.9% -6.5%

Calhoun 175 186 186 164 149 -9.1% -14.9%

Clay 214 217 190 194 207 6.7% -3.3%

Doddridge 72 81 86 88 91 3.4% 26.4%

Fayette 992 934 918 861 805 -6.5% -18.9%

Gilmer 291 275 375 405 397 -2.0% 36.4%

Grant 257 264 277 275 271 -1.5% 5.4%

Greenbrier 683 663 613 588 567 -3.6% -17.0%

Hampshire 386 424 416 430 446 3.7% 15.5%

Hancock 677 678 695 637 392 -38.5% -42.1%

Hardy 286 282 290 292 274 -6.2% -4.2%

Harrison 1,945 2,001 2,112 2,016 2,077 3.0% 6.8%

Jackson 472 479 494 448 453 1.1% -4.0%

Jefferson 983 1,115 1,148 1,153 1,200 4.1% 22.1%

Kanawha 5,792 5,853 6,066 6,037 5,953 -1.4% 2.8%

Lewis 432 405 398 410 400 -2.4% -7.4%

Lincoln 325 293 264 287 289 0.7% -11.1%

Logan 462 443 441 437 422 -3.4% -8.7%

Marion 2,061 2,094 2,137 2,218 2,145 -3.3% 4.1%

Marshall 729 717 720 720 745 3.5% 2.2%

Mason 638 613 657 633 629 -0.6% -1.4%

McDowell 507 502 465 447 422 -5.6% -16.8%

Mercer 2,032 2,172 2,140 2,156 2,063 -4.3% 1.5%

Mineral 782 861 887 964 957 -0.7% 22.4%

Mingo 296 316 285 304 292 -3.9% -1.4%

Monongalia 3,999 4,206 4,317 4,390 4,382 -0.2% 9.6%

Monroe 255 286 292 278 241 -13.3% -5.5%

Morgan 173 188 219 218 233 6.9% 34.7%

Nicholas 503 477 488 507 456 -10.1% -9.3%

Ohio 1,363 1,353 1,354 1,358 1,408 3.7% 3.3%

Pendleton 142 165 181 172 163 -5.2% 14.8%

Pleasants 96 100 93 104 92 -11.5% -4.2%


F a l l 2003 - 2 007

H E P C I N - S TAT E ENRO L LMENT BY COUNTYF a l l 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7 ( C O N T. )

p a g e2 5

Pocohontas 129 122 110 120 143 19.2% 10.9%

Preston 703 680 714 682 696 2.1% -1.0%

Putnam 1,626 1,657 1,671 1,734 1,666 -3.9% 2.5%

Raleigh 1,775 1,552 1,488 1,481 1,445 -2.4% -18.6%

Randolph 491 503 537 545 541 -0.7% 10.2%

Ritchie 145 167 165 161 170 5.6% 17.2%

Roane 206 220 197 193 207 7.3% 0.5%

Summers 236 249 235 217 205 -5.5% -13.1%

Taylor 358 330 334 353 331 -6.2% -7.5%

Tucker 136 154 134 136 132 -2.9% -2.9%

Tyler 157 163 154 166 179 7.8% 14.0%

Upshur 410 412 396 383 361 -5.7% -12.0%

Wayne 975 952 954 981 1,078 9.9% 10.6%

Webster 171 146 139 142 131 -7.7% -23.4%

Wetzel 315 324 352 358 371 3.6% 17.8%

Wirt 60 76 98 104 96 -7.7% 60.0%

Wood 977 1,079 1,145 1,149 1,078 -6.2% 10.3%

Wyoming 392 415 379 368 347 -5.7% -11.5%

HEPC In-State Enrollment by County (Cont.)2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % Change

WETZEL

HANCOCK

BROOKE

OHIO

MARSHALL

MONONGALIA

PRESTONMARIONTYLER

PLEASANTS


BARBOUR

WOOD

JACKSONUPSHUR

RITCHIE

GILMER

TUCKER

ROANE

GRANT

PENDLETON

HAMPSHIREMINERAL

HARDY

RANDOLPH

LEWIS

BRAXTON

CALHOUN

WIRT

KANAWHA

WEBSTERCLAY

NICHOLAS

WYOMING

GREENBRIER

POCAHONTAS

SUMMERS

FAYETTEBOONE

LINCOLN

PUTNAM

MASON

CABELL

WAYNE

MINGO

LOGANRALEIGH

MERCERMCDOWELL

MONROE

MORGAN

BERKELEY

JEFFERSON

91 - 207233 - 392397 - 805957 - 5953

IN-STATE ENROLLMENT BY COUNTYFall 2007

3-32

UNDERGRADUAT E T RAN S F E R S TO H EP C I N S T I T U T I ON SA c a d em i c Ye a r s 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7



03 04 05 06 07

1,697

1,097

1,289 1,192

1,081

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

003 04 05 06 07

491 471638

8021,066

Public Two-Year Public Four-Year

1

1,800

1,600

1,400

1,200

1,000

800

600

40003 04 05 06 07

1,066

1,697

1,097

471

638

802

491

1,2891,192

1,081

From Public Two-Year

From Public Four-Year

headcount

headcount

West Virginia Highlights• Students transferring from four-year to four-year public

postsecondary institutions experienced a 9.3 percentdecline from 2006 to 2007. This lateral transfer categoryhas experienced a 36.3 percent decrease when comparedto 2003 figures.

• Students transferring from two-year to four-year publicpostsecondary institutions experienced a 32.9 percentincrease from 2006 to 2007. There was a 117.1 percentrise when comparing the 2007 dual enrollment numbersto 2003.

National ContextMulti-institutional attendance has become an increasinglycommon phenomenon. Between the high school graduatingclasses of 1982 and 1992, the number of students attendingonly one postsecondary institution declined from 46.9 percentto 43.5 percent. During this same time period, the proportionof students who attended two or more institutions increasedfrom 19.3 percent to 21.5 percent (Adelman, 2006). Morerecently, 53.2 percent of the 32,000 college seniors who tookthe National Survey of Student Engagement in 2000 indicatedthat they attended more than one institution (Kuh et al., 2001).

Transfer patterns have been found to be related to studentsuccess. Formal institutional transfer fosters success but lessdiscriminate institution hopping thwarts degree completion.Those students making a traditional transfer from a two-yearto a four-year college were 21 percent more likely to completea bachelor’s degree and those who transferred from one four-year institution to another were 15 percent more likely tocomplete their degree (Adelman, 2006).

About this MeasureThese data indicate the number of students in West Virginiabetween the years of 2003 and 2007 who either transferredfrom a public two-year to a public four-year institution(forward transfer) or who transferred from a public four-yearinstitution to another public four-year institution (lateraltransfer). The transfer data reported above include somestudents who enrolled in more than one institution.

p a g e2 6


Undergraduate Transfers to HEPC InstitutionsTransfer Type 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % ChangeFrom Public Four-Year 1,697 1,097 1,289 1,192 1,081 -9.3% -36.3%

From Public Two-Year 491 471 638 802 1,066 32.9% 117.1%

3-33

West Virginia Highlights• Average undergraduate tuition for in-state students increased 6.5 percent,

from $4,214 in 2007-08 to $4,487 in 2008-09.

• The five-year trend in tuition and fees shows an increase of 45.8 percentfor in-state students and 41.5 percent for out-of-state students.

• The ten-year trend in tuition and fees is an increase of 97.8 percent forin-state students and 93.1 percent for out-of-state students though theincrease in dollars was larger for out-of-state students.

• In-state tuition has increased by $2,219 since 1998 and out-of-statetuition has increased by $5,389.

National ContextAccording to SREB data, over the ten-year period from 1997-98 to 2006-07,median in-state tuition in SREB states increased from $2,210 to $4,636, anincrease of 124 percent. If these figures are adjusted for inflation, the figureis 75 percent. In the country as a whole during the same time period, medianin-state tuition increased from $2,850 to $5,264. This was a 102 percentincrease without adjusting for inflation, a 58 percent increase with inflationadjustment. West Virginia increases were smaller than SREB averages bothin dollars and percent.

Measuring Up 2008, the National Center for Public Policy and HigherEducation’s biennial report card, gave 49 states, including West Virginia,an F in affordability due to the increasing proportion of income neededto pay college expenses, even after financial aid. SREB data illustrates thattuition at four-year colleges in West Virginia represents 10.9 percent ofmedian income in the state; this is lower than the 11.7 percent for themedian SREB state, but equivalent to the national figure.

About this MeasureThis indicator provides the published price of tuition and mandatory feesfor in-state as well as out-of-state students across the system. It does notinclude the costs of books or room and board. It also does not include thefinancial aid, both state and institutional, that reduces the cost of attendancefor many students. Tuition and fees for in-state students at public four-yearcolleges are, on average, higher than at public two-year colleges but lowerthan at private four-year colleges and universities or at public four-yearuniversities at the out-of-state rate.

$4,500

$4,000

$3,500

$3,000

$2,500

$2,000$2,268 $2,383

$2,485$2,576

$2,816$3,077

$3,428

$3,706$3,965

$4,214

$4,487

98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08

$12,000

$11,000

$10,000

$9,000

$8,000

$7,000

$6,000

$5,000

$5,785 $6,015 $6,238$6,561

$7,171

$7,898

$8,629

$9,323

$9,982

$10,538

$11,174

O

Out-of-state

In-state

tuition & fees

A c a d e m i c Ye a r s 1998 - 2 008

C O S T & A F FORDAB I L I T Y

AV E RAG E UND E RG RADUAT E TU I T I O N & F E E S FORI N - S TAT E AND OUT- O F - S TAT E S T UD EN T SA c a d e m i c Ye a r s 1 9 9 8 - 2 0 0 8

Average Undergraduate Tuition & Fees1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2003-08 1998-08

% Change % ChangeIn-State $2,268 $2,383 $2,485 $2,576 $2,816 $3,077 $3,428 $3,706 $3,965 $4,214 $4,487 45.8% 97.8%

Out-of-State $5,785 $6,015 $6,238 $6,561 $7,171 $7,898 $8,629 $9,323 $9,982 $10,538 $11,174 41.5% 93.1%

p a g e2 7

3-34

West Virginia Highlights• The tuition and fees changes from 2007 to 2008 ranged from a 3.7 percent increase of $164 at

Concord University to an 8.0 percent increase of $378 at West Virginia University. Adjusting forinflation with the Consumer Price Index, these percentage increases were 1.2 percent and 5.4percent respectively.

• Looking over the five-year window from 2003 to 2008, the increases varied from a low of $534 or24.4 percent at Potomac State College of WVU to a 53.5 percent increase of $1,674 at FairmontState University. Adjusted for inflation, these increases were 7.7 percent and 32.9 percentrespectively.

• Ten-year increases varied from a 32.5 percent increase of $668 at Potomac State to a 128.1 percentincrease of $2,698 at Fairmont State. These increases are reduced to 1.6 percent and 75.0 percentwhen adjusted for inflation.

National ContextAs can be seen from the chart at left, tuition at WestVirginia public institutions is lower than the averagetuition at peer institutions for almost all HEPC institutions.Similarly, if the tuition among the twenty peer institutionsis ranked from highest to lowest, almost all West Virginiainstitutions rank in the bottom third.

About this MeasureThis indicator provides the published price of tuition andmandatory fees for in-state students at each institution.This does not include the costs of books or room andboard. It also does not include the financial aid, bothstate and institutional, that reduces the cost of attendancefor many students. Tuition and fees for in-state students atpublic four-year colleges are, on average, higher than atpublic two-year colleges but lower than at private four-yearcolleges and universities or at public four-year universitiesat the out-of-state rate.



UNDERGRADUAT E TU I T I O N & F E E S FOR I N - S TAT E S T UD EN T SB Y I N S T I T U T I ON , A c a d e m i c Ye a r s 1 9 9 7 - 2 0 0 8

p a g e2 8

Undergraduate Tuition & Fees for In-State Students by InstitutionInstitution 1997 2003 2007 2008 2007-08 2003-08 1997-08

% Change % Change % ChangeBluefield State College $2,110 $2,806 $3,984 $4,272 7.2% 52.2% 102.5%

Concord University $2,388 $3,198 $4,414 $4,578 3.7% 43.2% 91.7%

Fairmont State University $2,106 $3,130 $4,614 $4,804 4.1% 53.5% 128.1%

Glenville State College $2,016 $2,952 $4,174 $4,486 7.5% 52.0% 122.5%

Shepherd University $2,298 $3,270 $4,564 $4,898 7.3% 49.8% 113.1%

West Liberty State College $2,190 $3,138 $4,172 $4,464 7.0% 42.3% 103.8%

West Virginia State University $2,254 $2,970 $4,156 $4,466 7.5% 50.4% 98.1%

Marshall University $2,348 $3,260 $4,360 $4,598 5.5% 41.0% 95.8%

West Virginia University $2,662 $3,548 $4,722 $5,100 8.0% 43.7% 91.6%

Potomac State College of WVU $2,058 $2,192 $2,596 $2,726 5.0% 24.4% 32.5%

WVU Institute of Technology $2,518 $3,380 $4,598 $4,964 8.0% 46.9% 97.1%

E c o n o m i c G r o w t h A c c e s s C o s t a nd A f f o r d a b i l i t y L e a r n i n g a n d A c c o u n t a b i l i t y I n n o v a t i o n

Undergraduate In-State Tuition & Fees Peer Comparison, 2008Institution Tuition Peer Group Rank

& Fees AverageBluefield State College $4,272 $5,467 16

Concord University $4,578 $5,548 15

Fairmont State University $4,804 $5,424 13

Glenville State College $4,486 $6,440 17

Marshall University $4,598 $5,800 17

Potomac State College of WVU $2,726 $2,645 9

Shepherd University $4,898 $5,310 11

West Liberty State College $4,464 $5,678 14

West Virginia State University $4,466 $5,346 14

West Virginia University $5,100 $6,966 18

WVU Institute of Technology $4,964 $6,204 15

Source: Chronicle of Higher Education

3-35

Cost of Attendance for In-State Undergraduate Students Living On Campus2003 2008

Institution Tuition Average Total Tuition Average Total 2003-08 %& Fees Room & & Fees Room & Change in

Board Board Total CostBluefield State College* $2,806 $0 $2,806 $4,272 $0 $4,272 52.2%

Concord University $3,198 $4,838 $8,036 $4,578 $6,530 $11,108 38.2%

Fairmont State University $3,130 $4,883 $8,013 $4,804 $6,397 $11,201 39.8%

Glenville State College $2,952 $4,860 $7,812 $4,486 $6,250 $10,736 37.4%

Marshall University $3,260 $5,852 $9,112 $4,598 $7,397 $11,995 31.6%

Potomac State College of WVU $2,192 $4,424 $6,616 $2,726 $6,660 $9,386 41.9%

Shepherd University $3,270 $5,162 $8,432 $4,898 $7,221 $12,119 43.7%

WVU Institute of Technology $3,380 $4,476 $7,856 $4,964 $6,844 $11,808 50.3%

West Liberty State College $3,138 $4,648 $7,786 $4,464 $6,282 $10,746 38.0%

West Virginia State University $2,970 $4,200 $7,170 $4,466 $5,375 $9,841 37.3%

West Virginia University $3,548 $5,822 $9,370 $5,100 $7,635 $12,735 35.9%

*Bluefield State College has no on-campus housing.

West Virginia Highlights• The smallest percentage increase for cost of attendance between

2003 and 2008 is found at Marshall University where the totalrose from $9,112 in 2003 to $11,995 in 2008.

• The largest percentage increase, excluding Bluefield State whichhas no campus housing, is found at WVU Institute of Technology.The cost of attendance was $7,856 in 2003 compared to $11,808in 2008.

• The four-year public postsecondary institution with the lowest costof attendance in 2008 is Potomac State College of WVU. The institu-tion with the highest cost is West Virginia University.

National ContextIt is estimated that nationally, tuition and fees comprised approximately46 percent of the combined expense of tuition and fees plus room andboard in 2007-08. Average total charges of tuition, fees, room, andboard at four-year public institutions nationally were $13,589 in 2007-08 which was 5.9 percent higher than the prior year’s total of $12,837(College Board, 2007).

Over the last decade, average tuition, fee, room, and board at publicfour-year institutions have increased by 75 percent from their 1998-99level of $7,769. If these charges are adjusted for inflation, the increaseis 37 percent.

About this MeasureThis indicator provides the amount necessary to pay for tuition andmandatory fees, as well as average room and board, at each institution.Room and board costs vary, however, by where one chooses to live.In general, living off-campus with parents is less expensive than on-campus housing, while living off campus on one’s own is moreexpensive. These figures do not include books, transportation, andother expenses which were estimated nationally to be $3,747 for2007-08 (College Board, 2007).

A c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2003 & 2008

CO S T O F AT T ENDAN C E FOR I N - S TAT E UND E RG RADUAT ES T UD EN T S L I V I N G ON C AMPU SA c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2 0 0 3 & 2 0 0 8

p a g e2 9

3-36

AV E RAG E LOAN D EB T O F G RADUAT E SA c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

West Virginia Highlights• Average loan debt for graduates decreased 7.5 percent, from $23,134 in 2006-07 to $21,410 in

2007-08.

• The five-year trend in loan debt shows an increase of 12.2 percent from the $19,079 figure in 2003-04.

• The four-year public institution with the largest one-year decrease is West Liberty State College whichrealized a 21.3 percent decrease. Potomac State College of WVU had a decrease of 2.9 percent since 2003.

• The institution with the largest one-year increase is the West Virginia School of Osteopathic Medicinewhich had a 54.2 percent increase. It also had the largest five-year gain at 66.6 percent since 2003.

National ContextApproximately 55 percent of public four-year college students graduated with debt each year between2000-01 and 2006-07 (College Board, 2008). During this time period, the average debt of borrowersincreased by 8 percent after adjusting for inflation from $17,400 to $18,800.

While there has been a shift over the last decade in the ratio of loans to grants in total financial aidfunds, this has resulted not from a decline in grant aid, but rather a steep increase in loan uptake.From 1999-00 to 2007-08, total grant aid for undergraduates grew at an annual rate of 6.4 percentin inflation-adjusted dollars while total loans increased 8.2 percent per year. This has resulted in anincrease between 1997-98 and 2006-07 from 4.1 to 6.1 million undergraduate borrowers withaggregate loan debt rising from $41 billion to $85 billion (College Board, 2008).

From 1999-00 to 2007-08, total grant aid for graduate students grew at an average annual rate of3.4 percent while total loans increased an average of 7.9 percent per year.

About this MeasureThis indicator provides the average loan debt that West Virginia public institution undergraduate andgraduate students have accumulated during pursuit of their degrees. This debt includes all loans whetherthrough the government or from private lenders. Average loan debt is calculated only from studentswho have loans.



$25,000

$20,000

$15,000

$10,000

$5,000

$003 04 05 06 07

$19,079$20,560

$21,788$23,134

$21,410

$24,000

$23,000

$22,000

$21,000

$20,000

$19,00003 04 05 06 07

$19,079

$20,560

$21,788

$23,134

$21,410

average debt

average debt

p a g e3 0

E c o n o m i c G r o w t h A c c e s s C o s t a nd A f f o r d a b i l i t y L e a r n i n g a n d A c c o u n t a b i l i t y I n n o v a t i o n

Average Loan Debt of GraduatesInstitution 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % ChangeBluefield State College $13,219 $15,496 $16,078 $16,107 $13,291 -17.5% 0.5%

Concord University $15,599 $15,385 $17,727 $17,862 $17,898 0.2% 14.7%

Fairmont State University $16,400 $17,395 $18,345 $19,237 $17,683 -8.1% 7.8%

Glenville State College $13,897 $13,393 $15,527 $16,092 $14,919 -7.3% 7.4%

Marshall University $16,377 $17,554 $18,192 $19,328 $17,427 -9.8% 6.4%

Potomac State College of WVU $9,436 $11,819 $10,425 $10,629 $9,162 -13.8% -2.9%

Shepherd University $20,184 $21,157 $21,755 $23,241 $21,648 -6.9% 7.3%

WV School of Osteopathic Medicine $11,127 $14,261 $11,232 $12,018 $18,532 54.2% 66.6%

WVU Institute of Technology $16,741 $17,235 $17,570 $20,828 $20,571 -1.2% 22.9%

West Liberty State College $18,223 $18,766 $21,679 $22,914 $18,033 -21.3% -1.0%

West Virginia State University $16,844 $18,396 $20,509 $21,427 $21,259 -0.8% 26.2%

West Virginia University $23,351 $24,828 $26,166 $27,629 $25,639 -7.2% 9.8%

TOTAL $19,079 $20,560 $21,788 $23,134 $21,410 -7.5% 12.2%

3-37

A c a d e m i c Ye a r s 1997 - 2 006

CO L L E G E PART I C I PAT I ON RAT E O F LOW- I N C OME S TUD EN T SI N WE S T V I R G I N I AA c a d e m i c Ye a r s 1 9 9 7 - 2 0 0 6

p a g e3 1

College Participation Rate of Low-Income Studentsin West Virginia

Year Participation Rate1997 21.6%

1998 23.1%

1999 21.5%

2000 20.6%

2001 21.4%

2002 22.4%

2003 21.4%

2004 21.8%

2005 18.6%

2006 19.2%

Source: Mortenson, 2008

C O L L E G E PART I C I PAT I ON RAT E O F LOW -I N C OME S TUD EN T S I N S R E B S TAT E SA c a d e m i c Ye a r 2 0 0 6

College Participation Rate of Low-Income Studentsin SREB States

State Participation RateAlabama 20.4%

Arkansas 21.4%

Delaware 18.9%

Florida 24.4%

Georgia 21.0%

Kentucky 19.8%

Louisiana 17.2%

Maryland 26.3%

Mississippi 22.5%

North Carolina 24.5%

Oklahoma 17.4%

South Carolina 21.7%

Tennessee 21.6%

Texas 19.7%

Virginia 22.4%

West Virginia 19.2%

SREB AVERAGE 21.2%


West Virginia Highlights• The proportion of West Virginia

low-income students who enroll ina college or university anywhere hasdeclined by 2.4 percentage pointsfrom 21.6 percent in 1997 to 19.2percent in 2006, the most recentyear these data are available.

• The college-going rate of low-income students reached a peakof 23.1 percent in 1998.

National ContextIn the nation as a whole, the propor-tion of low-income students who enrollin college reached a peak of 27.7percent in 1998 and has declined sincethen to the 2006 figure of 23.8 percent.The college-going rate of students whoare not low-income, conversely, hasrisen by 6.2 percentage points and thegap in college-going between low-income and non-low-income studentsis the largest it has been since thesedata were first collected in 1993.(Mortenson, 2008).

Among the SREB states, the 2006college participation rate of low-incomestudents ranges from a high of 26.3percent in Maryland to a low of 17.2percent in Louisiana. West Virginiaranks 13th in college participation oflow-income students among the 16SREB states and is two percentagepoints below the SREB average.

About this Indicator:This indicator provides the proportionof low-income students from a statewho go on to college. This is measuredby dividing the number of studentsfrom a state who are attending collegewith a Pell grant by the number of 4thto 9th graders who were approved forfree or reduced price school lunchesnine years before. This method doesunderestimate the number of poorstudents in both college and gradeschool as not all needy students applyfor Pell grants or free and reducedlunch.

3-38


L E A RN I N G & AC COUNTAB I L I T Y

ONE - Y E A R R E T EN T I ON RAT E SPercent Returning in Fall from Previous Fall's Cohor t, 2003 - 2007

80.0%

70.0%

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

003 04 05 06 07

7

77.3% 77.5% 78.0% 77.8%76.2%

79.0%

78.0%

77.0%

76.0%

03 04 05 06 07

77.3% 77.5%

78.0%

77.8%

76.2%

West Virginia Highlights• First-year retention rates have declined 1.1 percentage point at four-year

public institutions from 77.3 percent in 2003 to 76.2 percent in 2007.

• The largest gain was at Shepherd University, with an increase of 1.6percentage point.

• The largest decrease was at West Virginia State University, with a declineof 11.4 percentage points.

National ContextThe national proportion of fall 2006 first-time freshmen who were retained attheir home institution the following fall was 78 percent. This figure is muchhigher than retention rates for part-time students during this same year, whichwas 48.9 percent. This measurement differs from the West Virginia calculationin that the national figure does not capture students who transfer within theirstate system and were retained in another school in the state’s public postsecondarysector. In the SREB, the median retention rate for all 16 states was 76 percent.West Virginia ranked 13 of 16 with a same-school retention rate of 71.5 percent(NCHEMS, 2007)

About this MeasureThis indicator provides the proportion of all first-time freshmen that areenrolled the following year at any West Virginia public college or university.Data capabilities at this point do not allow tracking of students who transferto private or out-of-state public institutions and complete their degrees there.Students are more likely to drop out during their first college year than at anyother time. The ability to provide the support that will assist with retentionduring this first year will greatly increase the likelihood of higher graduationrates.

p a g e3 2

One-Year Retention RatesInstitution 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Bluefield State College 65.5% 64.8% 63.0% 70.3% 65.1%

Concord University 71.3% 70.2% 73.7% 69.5% 70.8%

Fairmont State University 76.6% 76.8% 78.8% 74.8% 77.8%

Glenville State College 63.5% 65.9% 70.2% 66.8% 61.8%

Marshall University 80.6% 78.4% 79.8% 80.0% 78.6%

Potomac State College of WVU 63.7% 60.8% 58.6% 63.4% 56.9%

Shepherd University 70.2% 76.6% 72.8% 73.7% 71.8%

West Liberty State College 75.2% 74.7% 71.6% 77.1% 71.3%

West Virginia State University 69.1% 60.5% 63.4% 63.0% 57.7%

West Virginia University 81.9% 84.0% 84.4% 83.2% 82.0%

WVU Institute of Technology 77.3% 69.0% 66.4% 71.6% 75.3%

TOTAL 77.3% 77.5% 78.0% 77.8% 76.2%


rate

rate


3-39

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

098 99 00 01 02

4

46.0% 46.8% 47.7%45.6%

47.9%

4

48.0%

47.0%

46.0%

45.0%

98 99 00 01 02

46.0%

46.8%

47.7%

45.6%

47.9%

F a l l C o h o r t s 1998 - 2 002

GRADUAT I ON RAT E FOR S TUD ENT S S E E K I N G A BACH E LOR ' S D E G R E EFirst Time, Full-Time Freshmen in Fall Receiving a Bachelor’sDegree Within 6 Years

West Virginia Highlights• Graduation rates have improved 1.9 percentage points at

four-year public institutions from 46 percent for the 1998cohort to 47.9 percent for the 2002 cohort.

• The largest gain was at Marshall University, with anincrease of 5.7 percentage points.

• The largest decrease was at Glenville State College,with a decline of 4.1 percentage points.

National ContextThe national proportion of fall 2000 first-time, full-time degreeor certificate-seeking undergraduates who graduated withinsix years was 54.8 percent. The figure was higher for women(57.7%) than for men (51.3%) (IPEDS, 2007). In the SREB,for the cohort of 1998, the proportion of first-time, full-timebachelor’s seeking students who completed their degree at theinstitution of initial enrollment was 52 percent.

Graduation rates have been shown to vary widely by race/ethnicity in the nation with 59 percent of white students,47 percent of Hispanic students, 41 percent of African Ameri-can students, and 39 percent of Native American studentscompleting a bachelor’s within six years.

About this MeasureThis indicator provides the proportion of first-time freshmenwho are full-time students seeking a bachelor’s degree thatcomplete that degree within six years at any West Virginiapublic college or university. Data capabilities at this point donot allow tracking of students who transfer to private or out-of-state public institutions and complete their degrees there.

p a g e3 3

Graduation Rate for Students Seeking a Bachelor's Degree by Entering CohortInstitution 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Bluefield State College 26.5% 34.5% 35.0% 12.8% 24.1%

Concord University 40.0% 35.4% 37.3% 40.0% 36.5%

Fairmont State University 39.7% 40.0% 40.3% 38.0% 41.1%

Glenville State College 36.0% 37.0% 32.7% 29.2% 31.9%

Marshall University 40.3% 44.0% 48.2% 42.2% 46.0%

Shepherd University 43.3% 42.7% 45.4% 38.2% 40.4%

WVU Institute of Technology 37.7% 34.1% 33.9% 40.3% 42.6%

West Liberty State College 41.3% 44.4% 43.9% 45.0% 42.6%

West Virginia State University 30.9% 26.4% 22.7% 23.7% 28.1%

West Virginia University 55.6% 55.4% 55.6% 55.0% 56.9%

SYSTEM 46.0% 46.8% 47.7% 45.6% 47.9%

rate

rate

3-40

C E RT I F I C AT E S & D E G R E E S C ON F E R R ED BY MA J O RA c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

Certificates & Degrees Conferred by MajorMajor 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % ChangeAgriculture 125 132 127 155 213 37.4% 70.4%

Architecture 22 31 28 25 33 32.0% 50.0%

Biological & Biomedical Sciences 332 359 388 489 465 -4.9% 40.1%

Business 1,831 1,724 1,638 1,740 1,735 -0.3% -5.2%

Communication & Journalism 534 559 662 607 612 0.8% 14.6%

Communication Technologies/Technicians 45 17 13 17 29 70.6% -35.6%

Computer & Information Sciences 230 167 181 150 173 15.3% -24.8%

Education 2,009 2,047 2,060 1,963 1,894 -3.5% -5.7%

Engineering 578 602 634 621 624 0.5% 8.0%

Engineering Technologies/Technicians 281 152 125 146 138 -5.5% -50.9%

English Language & Literature/Letters 211 219 210 235 213 -9.4% 0.9%

Family & Consumer Sciences/Human Sciences 161 145 151 141 126 -10.6% -21.7%

Foreign Languages, Literatures, & Linguistics 91 72 85 92 99 7.6% 8.8%

Health Professions & Clinical Sciences 1,525 1,263 1,399 1,566 1,543 -1.5% 1.2%

History 149 162 145 171 162 -5.3% 8.7%

Legal Professions & Studies 211 147 141 166 151 -9.0% -28.4%

Liberal Arts & Sciences, General Studies& Humanities 283 196 157 169 156 -7.7% -44.9%

Mathematics & Statistics 66 90 71 53 78 47.2% 18.2%

Mechanic & Repair Technologies/Technicians 20 . . . . . .

Multi/Interdisciplinary Studies 342 228 303 355 358 0.8% 4.7%

Natural Resources & Conservation 117 141 137 142 183 28.9% 56.4%

Parks, Recreation, Leisure & Fitness Studies 158 154 166 234 223 -4.7% 41.1%

Personal & Culinary Services 7 . . . . . .

Philosophy & Religious Studies 8 17 8 10 15 50.0% 87.5%

Physical Sciences 152 131 145 133 178 33.8% 17.1%

Psychology 436 451 468 411 431 4.9% -1.1%

Public Administration & Social Services 295 194 251 214 289 35.0% -2.0%

Regent’s Bachelor of Arts 818 800 830 740 767 3.6% -6.2%

Science Technologies/Technicians 79 4 1 3 4 33.3% -94.9%

Security & Protective Services 332 288 280 297 328 10.4% -1.2%

Social Sciences 487 515 525 536 568 6.0% 16.6%

Transportation & Materials Moving 1 . . . . . .

Visual & Performing Arts 267 272 284 276 305 10.5% 14.2%

TOTAL 12,203 11,279 11,613 11,857 12,093 2.0% -0.9%



p a g e3 4


A c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2003 - 2 007

p a g e3 5

C E RT I F I C AT E S & D E G R E E S C ON F E R R ED BY MA J O RA c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7 ( C O N T. )

West Virginia Highlights• The number of certificates and degrees conferred has increased

by 2.0 percent at four-year public institutions from 11,857 in2006 to 12,093 in 2007. Degrees conferred have decreased by0.9 percent overall since 2003.

• The largest one-year percentage gain in number of graduates isfound in Communication Technologies with a 70.6 percentincrease. The largest numerical gain is found in Public Adminis-tration and Social Services with an increase of 75 graduates.

• The largest five-year percentage gain in number of graduates isfound in Philosophy and Religious Studies with a 87.5 percentincrease. The largest numerical gain is found in Biological andBiomedical Sciences with an increase of 133 graduates.

National ContextBetween 1994-95 and 2004-05, in SREB states and in the nationas a whole, the number of bachelor’s degrees conferred at both publicand private institutions increased by the largest percent for humani-ties (U.S. 44%, SREB 36%), followed by business and management(32%, 38%), social and behavioral sciences (22%, 25%), scienceand technologies (19%, 20%), and allied health and health sciences(0.6%, 9.4%). There was a decrease over this time period in educa-tion of 0.6 percent in the nation and 12 percent in the SREB.

The magnitude of master’s degree growth by field has been differentwith the largest growth in the fields of education (U.S. 64%, 45%),business and management (51%, 58%), and allied health and healthsciences (49%, 56%) followed by science and technologies (30%,35%), social and behavioral sciences (25%, 25%), and the humani-ties (19%, 12%). Growth in doctoral degrees has been largest inallied health and health sciences (185%, 148%), followed by socialand behavioral sciences (18%, 34%), education (19%, 30%),business and management (8%, 2%), and humanities (-2%, -2%).

About this MeasureThis measure provides the number of associate’s, bachelor’s, firstprofessional, master’s, post-master’s and doctoral degrees as wellas certificates awarded at HEPC institutions over the last five years.The majority of certificates and associate’s degrees are awarded inthe Community and Technical College System.

3-42

PA S S RAT E S O F BAC C A L AUR EAT E D E G R E E E A RN ER SON L I C E N SU R E / C E RT I F I C AT I O N EXAMSYe a r s E n d i n g J u n e 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

West Virginia Highlights• 2007 licensure pass rates increased in three of six areas when

compared to 2006 – Dental Hygiene, Medical Technology, andNursing. A comparison for Cytotechnology was not possibledue to a lack of data in 2006.

• 2007 licensure pass rates increased in one of five areas whencompared to 2003 – Praxis II (Learning & Teaching).Comparisons were not possible for the areas of Cytotechnologyand Dietetics due to a lack of data in 2003.

• No areas demonstrated an increase in pass rates for each of thefive years examined.

National ContextThe National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education’s latest editionof its biennial state report card entitled Measuring Up 2008 reports that WestVirginia is more than 61 percentage points above the national benchmark onprofessional licensure examinations. About 55 percent more of the state’sgraduates take these examinations than graduates nationwide and West Virginiagraduates’ pass rates match the national average.

Measuring Up 2008 also reports that West Virginia is almost 20 percentage pointsabove the national benchmark in pass rates on teacher licensure examinations.

Where national pass rates were available, West Virginia passed the national passrate for Dental Hygiene and was below it in Nursing and Social Work.

About this MeasureThis indicator provides the pass rate according to the individual test standardsof students finishing bachelor’s degree programs who sat for some type of licensureexamination. It provides an external indicator of how well colleges and universitiesare helping students acquire the knowledge and skills necessary to enter a licensedprofession.



p a g e3 6


Pass Rates of Baccalaureate Degree Earners on Licensure/Certification ExamsExam 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007Cytotechnology . 100.0% 100.0% . 100.0%

Dental Hygiene 96.6% 94.1% 100.0% 90.6% 94.6%

Dietetics . 75.0% 85.7% 72.7% 70.0%

Medical Technology 100.0% 64.3% 85.7% 64.3% 90.0%

Nursing 88.4% 89.8% 81.7% 79.6% 85.0%

Praxis II (Learning & Teaching) 82.2% 87.9% 89.1% 90.5% 88.8%

Social Work (State) 81.0% . 73.4% 70.2% 65.8%

3-43

Ye a r s E n d i n g 2003 - 2 007

p a g e3 7

PA S S RAT E S O F G RADUAT E / P RO F E S S I O NA L D E G R E E E A RN E R SON L I C E N SU R E / C E RT I F I C AT I O N EXAMSYe a r s E n d i n g J u n e 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

West Virginia Highlights• 2007 licensure pass rates increased in six of thirteen areas when compared

to 2006. Pass rates of 100 percent were maintained in two other areas.A comparison for Nursing Administration was not possible due to a lackof data in 2006 and 2007.

• 2007 licensure pass rates increased in eight of twelve areas and heldsteady in one other when compared to 2003 data. Comparisons werenot possible for the areas of Nursing Administration and CounselorLicensing due to a lack of comparable data in either 2003 or 2007.

• The areas of Family Nurse Practitioner, Occupational Therapy, andPhysical Therapy held steady or increased their pass rates each of thefive years examined.

National ContextWest Virginia institutions exceeded the national pass rate in all exams withan available national pass rate: COMLEX Level 3 (osteopathic medicine),Dentistry, Family Nurse Practitioner, National Certified Counselor, SpeechPathology and Audiology, Occupational Therapy, Pharmacy, PhysicalTherapy, and USMLE (medical) exams.

About this MeasureThis indicator provides the pass rate according to the individual teststandards of students finishing master’s or first professional degree programswho sat for some type of licensure examination. It provides an externalindicator of how well colleges and universities are helping students acquirethe knowledge and skills necessary to enter a licensed profession.

Pass Rates of Graduate/Professional Degree Earners on Licensure/Certification ExamsExam 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007Comlex Level 3 98.0% 91.8% 97.2% 95.0% 100.0%

Dentistry 93.9% 100.0% 100.0% 97.7% 97.8%

Dietetics 63.6% 60.0% 87.5% 100.0% 75.0%

Family Nurse Practitioner 82.8% 84.0% 88.5% 88.5% 94.4%

Law 71.9% 73.3% 80.2% 72.0% 66.3%

National Certified Counselor Exam 92.9% 100.0% 75.0% 93.8% 92.9%

National Exam in Speech Pathology & Audiology 95.2% 98.1% 97.9% 94.2% 97.9%

Nursing Administration 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% . .

Occupational Therapy 86.2% 95.5% 95.5% 100.0% 100.0%

Pharmacy (Pharm D) 100.0% 98.5% 95.5% 90.4% 97.2%

Physical Therapy 96.7% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%

Teacher Education-Praxis II 96.9% 94.8% 91.4% 94.9% 88.7%

USMLE Step 3 90.7% 94.9% 93.6% 95.2% 97.1%

WV Competency Exam for Counselor Licensing . 87.5% . 83.3% 75.8%

3-44

Average Nine-Month Salary of Full-Time Instructional Faculty by Rank, Fall 2008Institution Full Associate Assistant Instructor Lecturer Graduate Assistant All

Professor Professor Professor & Other RanksBluefield State College $66,936 $55,549 $51,670 $39,052 $37,584 $36,588 $57,750

Concord University $68,472 $58,562 $48,453 $41,270 . . $54,021

Fairmont State University $75,421 $63,073 $50,395 $41,413 . $34,571 $59,071

Glenville State College $65,885 $58,216 $46,100 $35,203 . $33,243 $48,997

Marshall University $73,652 $58,513 $48,586 $31,227 . . $60,802

Potomac State College of WVU $65,430 $48,606 $40,889 $37,585 . . $48,377

Shepherd University $73,499 $61,674 $52,812 $39,000 $46,944 . $59,461

WVU Institute of Technology $68,210 $54,193 $48,313 $44,049 $41,371 . $55,006

West Liberty State College $63,157 $54,861 $45,748 $41,920 $35,225 . $50,688

West Virginia State University $62,297 $56,989 $47,620 $38,692 . . $52,766

West Virginia University $102,298 $72,772 $60,349 $41,709 $49,782 . $75,564SYSTEM $83,413 $64,136 $53,725 $38,869 $46,319 $34,443 $64,304

AV E RAG E N I N E -MONTH SA L A RY O F F U L L - T I M E I N S T RU C T I ONA LFA C U LT Y BY RANKF a l l 2 0 0 4 - 2 0 0 8

West Virginia Highlights• Overall, faculty salaries rose 4.8 percent between 2007 and 2008. Salary gains since 2004 were 18.7 percent.

• The largest one-year percentage increase by faculty rank was for full professors who realized a 7.1 percent increase.The smallest gain during this time period was 4.1 percent for lecturers.

• The largest five-year percentage increase by faculty rank was for lecturers who realized a 29.9 percent gain. Thesmallest gain during this five-year span was 7.2 percent for graduate students and other miscellaneous categories.

National ContextIn the nation, the average salary of full-time faculty in 2006-07 was $96,194 for full professors, $69,694 for associateprofessors, $58,589 for assistant professors, and $41,509 for instructors which combined for an overall average salaryof $71,036.

In the SREB, the average salary of full-time faculty in 2006-07 was slightly lower than the nation as a whole at$94,459 for full professors, $68,545 for associate professors, $57,731 for assistant professors, and $40,829 forinstructors. The SREB had an overall average faculty salary of $68,583.

West Virginia ranks 14th among the 16 SREB states in faculty salary, which is one place above its ranking adecade earlier.

About this MeasureThis indicator provides the average salary for West Virginia’s baccalaureate and graduate full-time faculty from fall2004 to fall 2008. The data do not include medical school faculty. It is important that faculty salaries be competitivewith other institutions in order to attract and retain quality faculty. While this indicator provides only salaries of full-time faculty, there have been larger increases nationally in the number of part-time faculty than full-time faculty overthe last decade (NCES, 2008).



p a g e3 8


Average Nine-Month Salary of Full-Time Instructional Faculty by Rank, Fall 2004-2008Rank 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % ChangeProfessor $67,486 $68,724 $73,436 $77,879 $83,413 7.1% 23.6%Full Associate Professor $54,111 $55,608 $57,976 $60,320 $64,136 6.3% 18.5%Assistant Professor $44,670 $46,446 $48,624 $51,103 $53,725 5.1% 20.3%Instructor $33,182 $34,288 $34,951 $36,932 $38,869 5.2% 17.1%Lecturer $35,669 $37,565 $41,073 $44,509 $46,319 4.1% 29.9%Graduate Assistant & Other $32,138 $34,429 $59,517 $32,855 $34,443 4.8% 7.2%

ALL RANKS $54,169 $55,518 $58,291 $61,348 $64,304 4.8% 18.7%

$70,000

$60.000

$50,000

$40,000

$30,000

$20,000

$10,000

004 05 06 07 08

$

$54,169 $55,518 $58,291 $61,348$64,304

salary

3-45

A c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2003 - 2 007

p a g e3 9

Access• Gaining Early Awareness and Readiness for Undergraduate Programs

(GEAR UP) is a federally-funded program designed to better prepare

middle and high school students for college through academic

preparation programs, professional development activities for

educators, and college information for students and parents. The

Commission submitted a state GEAR UP application in December

2007 and was notified in July 2008 of receipt of the six-year, $18

million grant. Central and local staff have been hired and trained

and base-line data are already being collected for the program which

will help prepare students in ten of the state’s least affluent counties

for postsecondary education.

• The Higher Education Policy Commission was awarded a College

Access Challenge Grant by the U.S. Department of Education.

These grants foster partnerships between federal, state, and local

governments through matching challenge grants that are aimed at

increasing the number of low-income students who are prepared to

enter and succeed in postsecondary education. A key component of

this grant, which is approximately $450,000 each year for the 2008-09

and 2009-10 academic years, is the creation of a state higher education

web portal that will include college admissions applications, state and

federal student financial aid applications, electronic transcript options,

interest/career assessments, and a host of other features to enhance

academic preparation and the transition from high school to

postsecondary education.

• The Higher Education Policy Commission staff has taken on research

initiatives to better understand the college-going decision making of

West Virginia students. Findings from the High School Senior Opinions

Survey and PROMISE Scholarship Focus Groups have been used to

shape the PROMISE Ad-Hoc Advisory Committee deliberations as

well as the delivery of access and outreach activities in the state.

Cost and Affordability• Chancellor Noland appointed a PROMISE Ad-Hoc Advisory

Committee, chaired by Dr. Jerry Beasley, to evaluate the success

of the scholarship program and make recommendations for its future.

The Higher Education Policy Commission staff has provided

administrative and research assistance to this committee throughout

the year. The recommendations will be presented in early 2009.

West Virginia’s master plan for higher education, Charting the Future 2007-2012, envisions innovation as the

key to reaching the goals set forth in the other sections of the plan: access, cost and affordability, learning and

accountability, and economic growth. It states, “Innovation in all these areas is necessary to accommodate changing

population demographics, address the pressures of globalization, maximize use of existing resources and infrastruc-

ture, utilize new technologies, and communicate more effectively with our constituents.” Thus, while the outcomes

of innovation will be seen in the indicators already presented in this report card, this section sets forth some of the

many innovative initiatives underway this year to move the West Virginia higher education system toward the

goals Charting the Future establishes.

I N NOVAT I ON

3-46

• A Statewide Taskforce on Textbook Affordability was created to examine

the impact of this important influence on college affordability.

• The Constituent Group Workshop convenes the West Virginia Virtual

Learning Network (WVVLN), academic officers, and registrars to discuss

issues pertaining to a common registration form, inter-campus agreement,

Regents Bachelor of Arts (RBA) course development, the request for pro-

posal (RFP) process, and business and marketing plans. This workshop

helps institutions share best practices and collaborate to create efficiencies

for students and institutions.

Learning and Accountability• The Higher Education Policy Commission and the Council for Community

and Technical College Education cosponsor each spring the West Virginia

College Retention Conference. The conference provides professional

development in the areas of student services and academic affairs, sessions

about current issues and trends, a keynote presentation from a nationally

known retention consultant, and best practice poster presentations from

around the state. This conference helps make the linkages between new

interventions that facilitate persistence, broad implementation of best

practices, and state-wide improvement in keeping students in school making

progress toward a degree.

• The Higher Education Policy Commission requires its constituent colleges

and universities to renew institutional compacts that indicate progress

toward meeting the goals of the state master plan. The compacts, with

annual updates and revisions, are the basis for assessment of success in

carrying out institutional mission and in attainment of institutional and

state goals.

• The Higher Education Policy Commission is developing a series of reports

and report cards that present information for parents, students, staff, policy-

makers, and the general public on the quality and performance of public

higher education. These reports address various aspects of higher education

including preparation, participation, affordability, educational outcomes,

and staffing. The recent presentation to the Policy Commission on the

findings of a student transfer study performed by Commission staff is an

example of how research is being utilized to assess and guide the system.

• The Collegiate Learning Assessment is being implemented in four-year

colleges and universities to assess student critical thinking, problem solving,

and writing skills. This assessment is unique in its combination of skills

measured, value-added analytical approach, use of performance tasks, web-

based administration, and adjustments made to control for initial ability.

• The Programs of Distinction Committee is meeting to establish the criteria

to be used in recognizing excellence in academic programs. Each campus

will indicate at least two programs and how they have enhanced institutional

outreach, institutional mission, and service to the community. The Programs

of Distinction process assists in the master plan goal of refining institutional

missions and targeting finite resources.



p a g e4 0


I N NOVAT I ON ( C O N T. )

3-47

A c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2003 - 2 007

p a g e4 1

Economic Growth• The Research Trust Fund allows the state’s two research universities to

double private gifts that support expansion of research faculty and infra-

structure in key areas linked to economic development, health care, and

job growth. This “Bucks for Brains” fund supports research in energy,

biotechnology, biomedical identification technology, material science and

engineering, and environmental science. Private gifts are matched dollar-

for-dollar.

• Research Challenge Grants support large STEM (science, technology,

engineering and mathematics) research projects that can lead to research

centers and economic development. Projects assist the institution in its

ability to successfully compete for external funding on a national and

international basis by providing incentives to increase research capacity.

• The Research Challenge Fund provides the foundation for many of the

competitive research grant programs administered by HEPC. The fund

generates approximately $4 million annually from lottery proceeds as a

permanent source of continuing resources for West Virginia science and

technology.

• The Research Infrastructure Improvement (RII) award from the National

Science Foundation is a five-year grant of up to $3 million annually to

support academic research infrastructure improvements in areas selected by

the state as critical to its long-term science and technology competitiveness

and economic development. HEPC received its second RII award, “Next

Generation Biometrics: Achieving Strength in Molecular Recognition and

Transport,” in May 2006. Partners in this research and education opportu-

nity are HEPC's West Virginia EPSCoR, West Virginia University, Marshall

University, and West Virginia State University.

• International Innovation Grants support development of an international

component in one or more STEM programs. This program encourages

STEM faculty and students to think globally about research, collaboration,

grant opportunities, and exchange programs. Grant funds may be used for

a variety of innovative purposes and activities including curriculum,

scientific equipment, and travel.

• Innovation Grants fund improvements in scientific equipment, curriculum,

minor renovations, classroom instruction, delivery, and pedagogy. The

program targets innovative, cohesive and/or comprehensive projects in

laboratory/classroom settings that encourage undergraduate students to

continue careers in science, mathematics, and engineering.

• A number of other grants and programs have been implemented to

encourage students to major in STEM fields and to provide support

for faculty and businesses engaged in research and development.

3-48


A c c e s s W o r k f o r c e D e v e l o p m e n t S t u d e n t S u c c e s s I m p r o v e d L i t e r a c y T r a n s f e r E d u c a t i o n


p a g e4 2

3-49

20,000

15,000

10,000

5,000

003 04 05 06 07

2

19,157 19,091 19,384 19,310 19,875

20,000

19,800

19,600

19,400

19,200

19,000

03 04 05 06 07

19,157

19,091

19,384

19,310

19,875

headcount

headcount

F a l l 2003 - 2 007

WEST VIRGINIA COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL COLLEGE SYSTEM

A C C E S SC R ED I T H E AD COUNT ENRO L LMENTF a l l 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

West Virginia Highlights• Students enrolled in for-credit classes increased 2.9 percent,

from 19,310 in 2006-07 to 19,875 in 2007-08.

• For-credit enrollment has increased 4.1 percent since 2004– the year the Community and Technical College System(CTCS) developed into its current form.

• Over this five-year span from 2003-04 to 2007-08, seveninstitutions have realized increases in credit enrollmentwhile three have seen decreases.

National ContextAlthough two-year enrollment increased at a larger rate thanfour-year enrollment in the 1970s, undergraduate enrollment,overall, has been larger at four-year institutions than at two-year institutions. From 2000 to 2006, four-year enrollmentgrew at a rate twice as fast as two-year enrollment, from 55to 57 percent of total enrollment. These proportions areexpected to hold steady from 2007 to 2017 (NCES, 2008).

About this MeasureThis indicator tracks the number of students at each institutiontaking for-credit classes according to fall, end-of-term data. Thesefigures reveal the number of students working towards a degreeor a specific skill set in order to garner the credentials needed tomeet West Virginia’s workforce needs. It enables the state tolongitudinally track the flow of students through CTCSinstitutions.

In West Virginia, two-year students comprised 23 percent ofpublic postsecondary enrollment in 1970. This percentageincreased to 28 percent by 2006 (SREB, 2008).

p a g e4 3

Credit Headcount Enrollment

Institution 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07% Change % Change

Blue Ridge Community & Technical College 1,381 1,411 1,658 1,872 2,058 9.9% 49.0%

Community & Technical College at WVU Tech 658 643 649 667 717 7.5% 9.0%

Eastern WV Community & Technical College 331 340 420 389 382 -1.8% 15.4%

Marshall Community & Technical College 2,339 2,341 2,545 2,468 2,309 -6.4% -1.3%

New River Community & Technical College 1,801 1,549 1,617 1,604 1,841 14.8% 2.2%

Pierpont Community & Technical College 2,762 2,862 2,585 2,454 2,424 -1.2% -12.2%

Southern WV Community & Technical College 2,375 2,338 2,288 2,155 2,102 -2.5% -11.5%

WV Northern Community College 2,551 2,586 2,552 2,552 2,980 16.8% 16.8%

WV State Community & Technical College 1,589 1,556 1,575 1,592 1,624 2.0% 2.2%

WVU at Parkersburg 3,370 3,465 3,495 3,557 3,438 -3.3% 2.0%

TOTAL 19,157 19,091 19,384 19,310 19,875 2.9% 3.7%

3-50




NON - C R ED I T H E AD COUNT ENRO L LMENTA c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

40,000

35,000

30,000

25,000

20,000

15,000

10,000

5,000

003 04 05 06 07

3

26,83329,019

35,414

26,87128,502

36,000

34,000

32,000

30,000

28,000

26,000

03 04 05 06 07

26,833

29,019

35,414

26,871

28,502

headcount

headcount

West Virginia Highlights• Students enrolled in non-credit classes in career-technical

programs increased 6.1 percent from 26,871 in 2006-07to 28,502 in 2007-08.

• Non-credit enrollment has increased 6.2 percent since2003-04.

• Since 2003, non-credit enrollment has increased at sixinstitutions and declined at four. The largest increase was167 percent at WV Northern Community College andthe largest decrease was 46.9 percent at Marshall CTC.

National ContextNon-credit enrollment promotes and indicates the level ofeconomic competitiveness. Due to state-by-state variationsin definitions and counting students, no accurate nationaldata exist on non-credit enrollment. This type of enrollmentis funded in a variety of ways across states making it difficultto compare numbers.

The National Household Education Survey (NHES) indicatesthat non-credit student headcount grew from 90 percent ofcredit student headcount in 1995 to exceed credit headcountby 8 percent in 2000. Much of this growth comes fromcourse-work addressing workforce education.

About this MeasureNon-credit enrollment measures the level of activity in course-work or activity for which a student does not receive a degree,diploma, certificate, or other formal award. It is one of the mostversatile mechanisms that an institution has to respond to theneeds of business and industry. This type of enrollment allowsstudents to increase their job marketability as well as access tothe marketplace.

p a g e4 4

Non-Credit Headcount EnrollmentInstitution 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % ChangeBlue Ridge Community & Technical College 5,702 6,100 6,376 6,695 6,896 3.0% 20.9%

Community & Technical College at WVU Tech 822 1,043 1,818 1,981 758 -61.7% -7.8%

Eastern WV Community & Technical College 1,696 1,808 1,860 528 1,000 89.4% -41.0%



Pierpont Community & Technical College 1,665 1,260 1,753 1,904 2,087 9.6% 25.3%

Southern WV Community & Technical College 2,599 2,275 2,373 2,597 2,749 5.9% 5.8%


WV State Community & Technical College 5,175 5,851 3,282 2,914 2,776 -4.7% -46.4%

WVU at Parkersburg 2,618 2,831 8,794 810 3,332 311.4% 27.3%

TOTAL 26,833 29,019 35,414 26,871 28,502 6.1% 6.2%

3-51

8,000

7,000

6,000

5,000

4,000

3,000

2,000

1,000

003 04 05 06 07

7

7,433 7,3687,608 7,511 7,497

7

7,650

7,600

7,550

7,500

7,450

7,400

7,350

03 04 05 06 07

7,433

7,368

7,608

7,511

7,497

headcount

headcount

F a l l 2003 - 2 007

C R ED I T H E AD COUNT ENRO L LMENT, Adult Population(Age 24-44)F a l l 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

West Virginia Highlights• Adult students enrolled in for-credit classes decreased

0.2 percent, from 7,511 in 2006-07 to 7,497 in 2007-08.

• For-credit enrollment has increased 1.8 percent since 2004– the year the Community and Technical College Systemdeveloped into its current form.

• Over this five-year span from 2003-04 to 2007-08, sixinstitutions have realized increases in this credit enrollmentwhile four have decreased.

National ContextAccording to SREB data, 34.3 percent of all public postsec-ondary students enrolled nationally in 2005 were aged 25 to49. The percentage for SREB states is 33.7 percent and thefigure is 29.7 percent for West Virginia.

West Virginia has made gains, however, in the percentage of its25 to 49 year-old citizenry who are enrolled in postsecondaryeducation. While the national average remained steady at 5.6percent from 1995 to 2005, the SREB average dipped from5.0 to 4.9 percent of this age group and West Virginia sawan increase from 4.2 to 4.8 percent.

About this MeasureThis indicator tracks the number of non-traditional, working-agestudents at each institution taking for-credit classes as indicated byfall, end-of-term data. This age group is particularly importantsince national data indicate that the number of high school gradu-ates will decline in the next decade as this age group becomes asmaller proportion of West Virginia’s population. Currently, only25.8 percent of West Virginians aged 25 to 64 years-old haveacquired an associate’s degree or higher compared to the nationalaverage of 37.4 percent. Improvement is needed in this arenaby all postsecondary sectors in order to meet the state’s workforceneeds.

p a g e4 5

Credit Headcount Enrollment Adult Population (24-44)Institution 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % ChangeBlue Ridge Community & Technical College 614 568 726 784 850 8.4% 38.4%

Community & Technical College at WVU Tech 171 191 228 211 185 -12.3% 8.2%

Eastern WV Community & Technical College 159 145 194 180 183 1.7% 15.1%


New River Community & Technical College 745 648 671 674 764 13.4% 2.6%

Pierpont Community & Technical College 913 939 832 721 675 -6.4% -26.1%

Southern WV Community & Technical College 742 775 745 696 628 -9.8% -15.4%


WV State Community & Technical College 660 645 631 695 734 5.6% 11.2%

WVU at Parkersburg 1,302 1,328 1,346 1,370 1,293 -5.6% -0.7%

TOTAL 7,433 7,368 7,608 7,511 7,497 -0.2% 0.9%

3-52


A c c e s s Wor k f o r c e De v e l opmen t S t u d e n t S u c c e s s I m p r o v e d L i t e r a c y T r a n s f e r E d u c a t i o n


WORK FOR C E D E V E LOPMENT

C R ED I T H EAD COUNT ENRO L LMENT I N C A R E E R - T E C HN I C A L P ROGRAMSF a l l 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

p a g e4 6

West Virginia Highlights• If students seeking associate’s degrees and certificates are

combined, enrollment in for-credit classes in career-technicalprograms decreased 1.8 percent, from 11,218 in 2006-07to 11,128 in 2007-08.

• Combined for-credit enrollment in career-technical programs,however, increased 4.1 percent since 2003-04.

• Over the five-year time period, this enrollment has increasedat five institutions for students working toward an associate’sdegree but decreased at five institutions. Among those work-ing toward a certificate, enrollment has increased at seveninstitutions but decreased at two.

Credit Enrollment in Career-Technical ProgramsInstitution Program 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % Change

Blue Ridge Community & Technical College Associate 422 431 500 647 828 28.0% 96.2%

Community & Technical College at WVU Tech Associate 489 509 449 523 576 10.1% 17.8%Certificate . 2 1 9 14 55.6% .

Eastern WV Community & Technical College Associate 129 134 176 147 131 -10.9% 1.6%Certificate . . . . 2 . .

Marshall Community & Technical College Associate 1,918 2,017 2,167 2,072 1,734 -16.3% -9.6%Certificate 4 45 41 46 41 -10.9% 925.0%

New River Community & Technical College Associate 642 441 373 412 486 18.0% -24.3%Certificate 134 115 104 193 180 -6.7% 34.3%

Pierpont Community & Technical College Associate 2,215 2,305 1,822 1,764 1,761 -0.2% -20.5%Certificate 2 2 34 46 38 -17.4% 1800.0%

Southern WV Community & Technical College Associate 859 905 1,301 798 886 11.0% 3.1%Certificate 32 37 87 59 45 -23.7% 40.6%

WV Northern Community College Associate 1,280 1,420 1,336 943 941 -0.2% -26.5%Certificate 187 218 177 635 607 -4.4% 224.6%

WV State Community & Technical College Associate 978 910 965 930 941 1.2% -3.8%Certificate 47 38 28 32 22 -31.3% -53.2%

WVU at Parkersburg Associate 1,265 1,575 1,581 1,867 1,824 -2.3% 44.2%Certificate 86 80 95 95 71 -25.3% -17.4%

TOTAL Associate 10,197 10,647 10,670 10,103 10,108 0.0% -0.9%

Certificate 492 537 567 1,115 1,020 -8.5% 107.3%

3-53

F a l l 2003 - 2 007

1,200

1,000

800

600

400

200

003 04 05 06 07

1

492 537 567

1,115 1,020

7

11,00

1,100

1,000

900

800

700

600

500

40003 04 05 06 07

492537

567

1,115

1,020

certificate headcount

p a g e4 7

certificate headcount

10,200

10,000

8,000

6,000

4,000

2,000

003 04 05 06 07

1

10,19710,647 10,670

10,103 10,108

7

, ,

10,700

10,600

10,500

10,400

10,300

10,200

10,10003 04 05 06 07

10,197

10,64710,670

10,10310,108

associate headcount

associate headcount

National ContextFrom 1990 to 2004, there was a 16 percent increasenationally in the number of students seeking anassociate’s degree in career education from approxi-mately 3.8 million to 4.4 million. However, therewas a decrease of 52 percent during that same timeperiod in the number of students seeking certificatesin career education from about 2.1 million to 1million. During this time period, the share ofstudents enrolled in career education decreasedas shares of students in interdisciplinary studies,basic skills, other unspecified majors, and undeclaredmajors grew.

About this MeasureThis indicator tracks the number of students accordingto fall, end-of-term data at each institution takingfor-credit classes in career and technical educationprograms as opposed to academic programs. Careerand technical programs of study are those designedto prepare individuals for direct entry into the work-force. In contrast, academic education, which is alsooffered at CTCS institutions, is designed to impartknowledge and skills that represent the accumulatedknowledge base in a subject area (NCES, 2008).

3-54

500

400

300

200

100

003 04 05 06 07

5

115

363334

454 452

500

450

400

350

300

250

200

150

10003 04 05 06 07

115

363

334

454

452

headcount

headcount




West Virginia Highlights• The number of students completing career-technical

certificate programs declined by 0.4 percent from454 in 2006-07 to 452 in 2007-08.

• The number of completers increased at fourinstitutions but declined at six.

• Since 2003-04, however, when there were 115certificate program completers, there has beena 293 percent increase with gains at all but oneinstitution.

National ContextIn 2004-05, 94 percent of two-year public institutionsoffered certificate programs of more than one but lessthan two years in length. The number of studentscompleting certificate programs at two-year publicinstitutions across the country increased by 5.6 percentfrom the 2003-04 to 2005-06 school years. More recentnumbers are not yet available.

About this MeasureThis indicator provides the number of studentscompleting certificate programs which are designedto prepare the student to enter directly into employmentin a specific career and meet the documented workforceneeds of local employers. The certificate programs requireat least thirty credit hours of which six credit hours mustbe in general education.

p a g e4 8

C A R E E R - T E C HN I C A L C E RT I F I C AT E P ROGRAM COMP L E T E R SA c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

Career-Technical Certificate Program CompletersInstitution 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % ChangeBlue Ridge Community & Technical College . 61 36 105 62 -41.0% .

Community & Technical College at WVU Tech . 10 11 7 9 28.6% .

Eastern WV Community & Technical College . . . 4 1 -75.0% .

Marshall Community & Technical College . 16 12 17 56 229.4% .

New River Community & Technical College . 53 44 43 40 -7.0% .

Pierpont Community & Technical College . 79 81 90 111 23.3% .

Southern WV Community & Technical College 37 40 45 47 37 -21.3% 0.0%

WV Northern Community College 58 65 64 63 76 20.6% 31.0%

WV State Community & Technical College . 29 22 23 13 -43.5% .

WVU at Parkersburg 20 10 19 55 47 -14.5% 135.0%

TOTAL 115 363 334 454 452 -0.4% 293.0%

3-55

7,000

6,000

5,000

4,000

3,000

2,000

1,000

003 04 05 06 07

7

3,132

3,859

5,9586,269

6,848

7

7,000

6,500

6,000

5,500

5,000

4,500

4,000

3,500

3,00003 04 05 06 07

3,132

3,859

5,958

6,269

6,848

headcount

headcount

A c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2003 - 2 007

West Virginia Highlights• The number of students completing skill set

certificates increased 9.2 percent, from 6,269in 2006-07 to 6,848 in 2007-08.

• Skill set certificate completion has increased118.6 percent since 2003-04.

• Since 2003-04, eight institutions have realizedincreases in skill set certificate completionwhile two have decreased.

National ContextAbout 60 percent of two-year public institutions inthe U.S. offered skill set-length certificate programsin the 2004-05 academic year. From 2003-04 to2005-06 (the last year data are available), the numberof skill set-length certificate completers increased 4.4percent.

About this MeasureThis indicator provides the number of studentscompleting skill set certificate programs. Skill setsare a series of courses for competencies that prepareindividuals for a specific skill and carry a value of1 to 11 credit hours or the non-credit contacthour equivalent.

p a g e4 9

Skill Set Certificate Completers (Less Than One Year)Institution 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07


Community & Technical College at WVU Tech 81 90 46 52 24 -53.8% -70.4%

Eastern WV Community & Technical College 0 21 21 12 5 -58.3% .

Marshall Community & Technical College 931 1,094 1,985 2,105 685 -67.5% -26.4%

New River Community & Technical College 80 96 245 155 225 45.2% 181.3%

Pierpont Community & Technical College 584 651 1,655 1,633 1,287 -21.2% 120.4%

Southern WV Community & Technical College 78 113 249 825 1,117 35.4% 1332.1%

WV Northern Community College 36 128 286 379 1,943 412.7% 5297.2%

WV State Community & Technical College 1,194 1,491 1,254 874 1,328 51.9% 11.2%


TOTAL 3,132 3,859 5,958 6,269 6,848 9.2% 118.6%

S K I L L S E T C E RT I F I C AT E C OMP L E T E R S (Less Than One Year)A c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

3-56




West Virginia Highlights• The number of students completing career-technical

associate programs increased 0.8 percent, from 1,918in 2006-07 to 1,934 in 2007-08.

• Career-technical associate program completion hasincreased 277.7 percent since 2003-04.

• While the number of institutions experiencing gainssince 2006-07 was four, all ten Community andTechnical College System institutions have increasedtheir associate completions since 2003-04.

National ContextThe number of students who have completed associate’sdegrees in career education at any type of institutionacross the country increased 7.3 percent from the 2003-04 to the 2005-06 academic year. The figure for WestVirginia associate’s degrees in career and technicaleducation at CTCS institutions for this same timeperiod was 253 percent.

About this MeasureThis indicator provides the number of students whocompleted associate degree programs in the career-technical fields each academic year. Associate’s degreesrequire a minimum of sixty credit hours and indicate thatthe student has completed a program of academic devel-opment and has achieved a level of performance reflectedin student learning outcomes sufficient to progress toupper division collegiate work or to enter directly intospecific occupations in the workforce.

p a g e5 0

Career-Technical Associate Program CompletersInstitution 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % ChangeBlue Ridge Community & Technical College . 125 129 156 159 1.9% .

Community & Technical College at WVU Tech . 148 108 123 121 -1.6% .


Marshall Community & Technical College . 299 348 325 312 -4.0% .





WV State Community & Technical College . 161 127 205 226 10.2% .


TOTAL 512 1,868 1,808 1,918 1,934 0.8% 277.7%

C A R E E R - T E C HN I C A L A S SO C I AT E P ROGRAM COMP L E T E R SA c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

003 04 05 06 07

2

512

1,868 1,8081,918 1,934

2,000

1,800

1,600

1,400

1,200

1,000

800

600

40003 04 05 06 07

512

1,868

1,8081,918 1,934

headcount

headcount

3-57

A c a d e m i c Ye a r s 22 00 00 33 -- 22 00 00 77

West Virginia Highlights• The total number of training contact hours delivered

in the Community and Technical College System increased 14.9 percent, from 608,679 in 2006-07 to 699,549 in 2007-08.

• Since 2003-04, the number of training hours deliveredhas risen 72.9 percent.

• Between 2003-04 and 2007-08, eight institutions have increased their number of training contact hours and two institutions decreased their number of training hours.

National ContextTraining contact hours are difficult to ascertain nationally due to a lack of uniform reporting of this measure in any national publications. A recent report by the CommunityCollege Research Center regarding non-credit workforce education advocates that more information be collected on individuals’ and employers’ outcomes from non-credit workforce training to assess the contribution this type of education makes to students, employers, and the economy.

About this MeasureThis indicator provides the number of contact or clock hours delivered in training activities each academic year. It is a measure of instruction productivity determined by multiplying the number of students served by the numberof session hours. Training hours are largely non-credit, workforce development and implemented for specificemployers either at the work site or on campus.

p a g e5 1

T RA I N I N G C ON TAC T ( C L O C K ) H OUR S D E L I V E R EDA c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

Training Contact (Clock) Hours DeliveredInstitution 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % ChangeBlue Ridge Community & Technical College 19,164 20,255 21,600 22,680 23,540 3.8% 22.8%

Community & Technical College at WVU Tech 11,228 18,356 20,460 34,001 29,451 -13.4% 162.3%

Eastern WV Community & Technical College 9,176 23,624 10,712 7,200 17,014 136.3% 85.4%



Pierpont Community & Technical College 39,439 47,661 69,582 71,890 83,803 16.6% 112.5%

Southern WV Community & Technical College 15,839 13,726 32,528 40,485 63,503 56.9% 300.9%


WV State Community & Technical College 49,822 53,469 65,398 53,334 52,079 -2.4% 4.5%

WVU at Parkersburg 32,561 34,563 41,227 21,603 22,656 4.9% -30.4%

TOTAL 404,703 410,966 626,599 608,679 699,549 14.9% 72.9%

700,000

600,000

500,000

400,000

300,000

200,000

100,000

003 04 05 06 07

700,000

650,000

600,000

550,000

500,000

450,000

400,00003 04 05 06 07

699,549

404,703 410,966

626,599608,679

7,368 7,608 7,511 7,497 -0.2% 0.9%

404,703 410,966 626,599 608,679 699,549

699,549

404,703410,966

626,599

608,679

700,000

600,000

500,000

400,000

300,000

200,000

100,000

003 04 05 06 07

700,000

650,000

600,000

550,000

500,000

450,000

400,00003 04 05 06 07

699,549

404,703 410,966

626,599608,679

7,368 7,608 7,511 7,497 -0.2% 0.9%

404,703 410,966 626,599 608,679 699,549

699,549

404,703410,966

626,599

608,679

hours

hours

3-58




p a g e5 2

S T UD ENT S U C C E S S

PASS RATES OF UNDERGRADUATE CERTIFICATE AND ASSOCIATE’S DEGREE COMPLETERS ON L ICENSURE/CERTIFICATION EXAMINATIONSYe a r E n d i n g J u n e 2 0 0 7

Pass Rates of Undergraduate Certificate Completers on Licensure/Certification Examinations

Exam Examined Passed Pass RateEMT-EMT 65 54 83.1%

EMT-Paramedic NA* NA* NA*

Electrocardiography 29 28 96.6%

Medical Lab Assistant 18 18 100.0%

Practical Nursing 24 24 100.0%

Surgical Technology 13 7 53.8%

TOTAL 151 133 88.1%

National ContextA continuing issue for manycompetency areas is the fact that many educators believethe students they deem to be the most competent often do not pass their certification exam. Many educators, particularly in those areas involving a clini-cal component, are advocat-ing that the complexity of competency be determined through longitudinal data versus a “one-shot” test. These individuals suggest that multiple patient experi-ences and encounters with several evaluators would provide a broader picture ofwhat a student has learned.

About this MeasureThis indicator provides the number of students finish-ing either associate’s degree or certificate programs who sat for some type of licen-sure examination and the number who passed that test according to the indi-vidual test standards. It provides an external indica-tor of how well colleges are providing students with the knowledge and skills neces-sary to enter the workforce.

Pass Rates of Associate’s Degree Completers on Licensure/Certification Examinations

Exam Examined Passed Pass RateAviation/Avionics Technology 85 81 95.3%Dental Hygiene 72 64 88.9%EMT-Paramedic 34 26 76.5%Health Info Tech 10 7 70.0%Medical Lab Technology 22 15 68.2%Nuclear Medicine Technology NA* NA* NA*Nursing 374 344 92.0%Physical Therapy Asst. 29 26 89.7%Radiologic Technology 68 67 98.5%Respiratory Care Tech 55 52 94.5%Servsafe Food Safety Manager NA* NA* NA*Veterinary Technology 13 6 46.2%Welding 46 46 100.0%

TOTAL 818 744 91.0%

*Data not available where less than ten students took exam due to privacy issues.

West Virginia Highlights• Of all students completing certificates who took licensure examinations, 88.1 percent passed.

This ranged from a high of 100 percent pass rate for EMT-Paramedic, Medical Lab Assistant, and Practical Nursing students to a low of 54 percent for Surgical Technology Students.

• Compared with the previous year, the pass rates for three tests went down; one went up; and the rest remained the same.

• Of all students completing associate’s degrees who took licensure examinations, 91 percent passed the test. The exam pass rates ranged from 100 percent for Welding students to a low of 46 percent for Veterinary Technology students.

• While overall pass rates of associate’s degree completers declined one percent since last year, the pass rates were higher for nine of the exams, were lower for three of the exams, and stayed the same on one.

3-59

A c a d e m i c Ye a r s 22 00 00 33 -- 22 00 00 77

West Virginia Highlights• The number of students completing a certificate program

in the Community and Technical College System increased three percent from 526 in 2006-07 to 542 in 2007-08.

• In the five-year period from 2003-04 to 2007-08 there was a 347.9 percent increase in certificate completers.

• Since 2003, the number of certificates awarded has increased at nine institutions and stayed the same at one.

National ContextAcross the nation, the number of students completing certificate programs at postsecondary institutions rose 3.9 percent between the 2003-04 and 2005-06 academic years.

About this MeasureThis indicator provides the total number of certificates, whether career/technical or academic, awarded by institutions in each academic year. The certificate degree programs require at least thirty-credit hours of which six credit hours must be general education. The purpose of the certificate degree program is to prepare students to enter directly into employment in a specific career and meet the documented workforce needs of employers. Certificate programs also provide the foundation for the Associate in Applied Science (AAS) degree for occupational programs. Like the AAS degree, the goal of certificates is to achieve acceptance as an employment credential.

p a g e5 3

Certificates AwardedInstitution 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % ChangeBlue Ridge Community & Technical College . 61 67 162 145 -10.5% .

Community & Technical College at WVU Tech . 11 11 7 9 28.6% .

Eastern WV Community & Technical College . . . 4 1 -75.0% .

Marshall Community & Technical College . 16 12 17 56 229.4% .





WV State Community & Technical College . 29 22 24 13 -45.8% .


TOTAL 121 369 375 526 542 3.0% 347.9%

C E RT I F I C AT E S AWARD EDA c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

600

500

400

300

200

100

003 04 05 06 07

600

500

400

300

200

10003 04 05 06 07

542

121

369 375

526

7,368 7,608 7,511 7,497 -0.2% 0.9%

121 369 375 526 542 3.0% 347.9%

542

121

369

375

526

600

500

400

300

200

100

003 04 05 06 07

600

500

400

300

200

10003 04 05 06 07

542

121

369 375

526

7,368 7,608 7,511 7,497 -0.2% 0.9%

121 369 375 526 542 3.0% 347.9%

542

121

369

375

526

# awarded

# awarded

3-60

Associate’s Degrees AwardedInstitution 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2006-07 2003-07

% Change % ChangeBlue Ridge Community & Technical College . 139 135 167 169 1.2% .

Community & Technical College at WVU Tech . 155 117 130 125 -3.8% .


Marshall Community & Technical College . 314 368 343 326 -5.0% .





WV State Community & Technical College . 222 176 250 255 2.0% .

WVU at Parkersburg 293 312 359 345 352 2.0% 20.1%

TOTAL 734 2,233 2,122 2,201 2,205 0.2% 200.4%




West Virginia Highlights• The number of associate’s degrees awarded in the Community

and Technical College System increased 0.2 percent from 2,201 in 2006-07 to 2,205 in 2007-08.

• Over the five-year period since 2003-04, the number of associate’s degrees conferred increased by 200.4 percent.

• All institutions in the system have increased their associate’s degree output over the five-year period.

National ContextAcross the country, the number of associate’s degrees awarded at public institutions has been on the rise. From 1994-95 to 2004-05, the number of associate’s degrees conferred rose 24.4 percent. Focusing in on SREB states, the number of associate’s degrees awarded per year increased 34.9 percent over the same time period,and the number of associate’s degrees awarded in SREB states rose as a percent of these degrees awarded in the country as a whole. This is consistent with the large growth in associate’s degree awardsin West Virginia over the past five years.

About this MeasureThis indicator provides the total number of associate’s degrees, whether career/technical or academic, awarded by institutions in each academic year. Associate’s degrees require a minimum of sixty credit hours and indicate that the student has completed a programof academic development and has achieved a level of performance reflected in student learning outcomes sufficient to progress to upper division collegiate work or to enter directly into specific occupations in the workforce. There are three types of associate’s degrees: Associate in Arts (AA), Associate in Science (AS), and the Associate in Applied Science (AAS).

p a g e5 4

A S SO C I AT E ’ S D E G R E E S AWARD EDA c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

003 04 05 06 07

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

50003 04 05 06 07

2,205

734

2,233 2,122 2,201

7,368 7,608 7,511 7,497 -0.2% 0.9%

734 2,233 2,122 2,201 2,205 0.2% 200.4%

2,205

734

2,2332,122

2,201

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

003 04 05 06 07

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

50003 04 05 06 07

2,205

734

2,233 2,122 2,201

7,368 7,608 7,511 7,497 -0.2% 0.9%

734 2,233 2,122 2,201 2,205 0.2% 200.4%

2,205

734

2,2332,122

2,201

# awarded

# awarded

3-61

F a l l C o h o r t s 1998 - 2 0 0 2

West Virginia Highlights• The six-year graduation rate for students who began in

the fall of 2002 was 26.1 percent, a 2.1 percentage point decline from the rate for the fall 2001 cohort.

• Over the five-year time period studied, there was a 0.4 percentage point decline from the 26.5 percent rate for the fall of 1998 cohort.

• The graduation rate for the 2002 cohort ranged from 11.1 to 36.7 percent at different CTCS institutions with this being the first cohort of students for seven of the institutions.

National ContextAmong those who began at public two-year institutions in 1995-96 with the intention of obtaining an associate’s degree, 22.1 percent completed an associate’s degree within six years, 2.6 percent completed a bachelor’s degree, and 5.3 percent completed both for a total of 29.9 percent. (Berkner et al, 2003).

About this MeasureThis indicator provides the proportion of associate/certificate degree-seeking students who earned any award within six years at any institution in the system. Rates are provided for stu-dents’ starting institutions. Six-year rates are reported because measuring certificate and associate’s degree graduation rates within a three-year period fails to take into account the non-traditional nature of many community and technical college students.

p a g e5 5

S I X - Y E A R G R ADUAT I ON R AT E O F A S SO C I AT E /C E RT I F I C AT E - S E E K I N G S T UD ENT SF a l l C o h o r t s 1 9 9 8 - 2 0 0 2

Six-Year Graduation Rate of Associate/Certificate-Seeking StudentsInstitution 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002

Blue Ridge Community & Technical College . . . . 31.9%

Community & Technical College at WVU Tech . . . . 36.7%

Eastern WV Community & Technical College . . . . 11.1%

Marshall Community & Technical College . . . . 19.0%

New River Community & Technical College . . . . 28.0%

Pierpont Community & Technical College . . . . 31.3%

Southern WV Community & Technical College 23.2% 31.5% 28.4% 26.1% 24.4%

WV Northern Community College 31.9% 25.5% 26.0% 28.9% 26.2%

WV State Community & Technical College . . . . 18.3%

WVU at Parkersburg 29.2% 31.3% 33.4% 30.2% 26.1%

TOTAL 26.5% 30.2% 29.6% 28.2% 26.1%

35.0%

30.0%

25.0%

20.0%

15.0%

10.0%

5.0%

098 99 00 01 02

98 99 00 01 02

26.1%26.5%

30.2% 29.6% 28.2%

7,368 7,608 7,511 7,497 -0.2% 0.9%

26.5% 30.2% 29.6% 28.2% 26.1%

26.1%26.5%

30.2%

29.6%

28.2%

31.0%

30.0%

29.0%

28.0%

27.0%

26.0%Fall

Fall

35.0%

30.0%

25.0%

20.0%

15.0%

10.0%

5.0%

098 99 00 01 02

98 99 00 01 02

26.1%26.5%

30.2% 29.6% 28.2%

7,368 7,608 7,511 7,497 -0.2% 0.9%

26.5% 30.2% 29.6% 28.2% 26.1%

26.1%26.5%

30.2%

29.6%

28.2%

31.0%

30.0%

29.0%

28.0%

27.0%

26.0%Fall

Fall

rate

rate

3-62




West Virginia Highlights• The proportion of students who returned to a system

institution in the fall of 2007 after initial full-time enrollment in the fall of 2006 was 60.1 percent. This was 1 percentage point lower than the 61.1 rate for the previous year’s cohort.

• Over the five-year time span covered, the retention rate fell 0.8 percentage point from the 60.9 percent retention rate in the fall of 2003.

• Between the years of 2003 and 2007, the one-year retention rate of six institutions decreased while it rose at four institutions.

National ContextThe proportion of first-time, full-time, degree- or certifi-cate-seeking students at two-year public institutions in SREB states who remained enrolled at the same institution or who transferred to another institution rose from 60 percent for the fall 2002 students returning in fall 2003 to 65 percent of those who first enrolled in 2006 and returned in 2007. The national figure for first-time, full-time students at two-year public institutions returning in the fall of 2007 was 59 percent, for part-time students was 40 percent, combining for an overall one-year retention rate of 51.8 percent.

About this MeasureThis indicator provides the proportion of students from the previous fall’s cohort of first-time, full-time freshmen who returned in the fall of the indicated year to any institution in the state’s public system. Students were included whetherthey were degree or certificate seeking or not. This first-yearretention is an important milestone on the way to comple-tion of a degree or certificate.

p a g e5 6

ONE - Y E A R R E T EN T I ON R AT E SPe r c e n t Re t u r n i ng i n Fa l l f r o m P r e v io u s Fa l l ’ s C o h o r t , 20 0 3 - 20 0 7

One-Year Retention RatesInstitution 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Blue Ridge Community and Technical College 65.9% 47.9% 59.8% 62.3% 51.9%

Community and Technical College at WVU Tech 68.3% 63.0% 51.4% 60.0% 62.2%

Eastern WV Community and Technical College 20.0% 40.0% 40.0% 46.7% 57.1%

Marshall Community and Technical College 55.8% 60.9% 61.3% 63.8% 54.1%

New River Community and Technical College 62.1% 66.2% 62.0% 64.2% 62.6%

Pierpont Community and Technical College 63.4% 60.3% 64.1% 59.8% 62.1%

Southern WV Community and Technical College 58.6% 60.1% 63.6% 63.3% 64.5%

WV Northern Community College 57.6% 56.9% 54.3% 57.4% 59.1%

WV State Community and Technical College 59.9% 51.3% 57.5% 59.7% 56.3%

WVU at Parkersburg 63.6% 61.1% 59.8% 60.3% 62.5%

TOTAL 60.9% 59.2% 60.3% 61.1% 60.1%

70.0%

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

003 04 05 06 07

03 04 05 06 07

60.1%60.9% 59.2% 60.3% 61.1%

7,368 7,608 7,511 7,497 -0.2% 0.9%

60.9% 59.2% 60.3% 61.1% 60.1%

62.0%

61.0%

60.0%

59.0%

60.1%

60.9%

59.2%

60.3%

61.1%

70.0%

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

003 04 05 06 07

03 04 05 06 07

60.1%60.9% 59.2% 60.3% 61.1%

7,368 7,608 7,511 7,497 -0.2% 0.9%

60.9% 59.2% 60.3% 61.1% 60.1%

62.0%

61.0%

60.0%

59.0%

60.1%

60.9%

59.2%

60.3%

61.1%

rate

rate

3-63

p a g e5 7

I M P ROV ED L I T E R A C Y

P E R C EN TAG E O F F R E SHMEN PA S S I N G D E V E L O PMENTA L C O U R S E SA c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

Percentage of Freshmen Passing Developmental CoursesInstitution Subject 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

Blue Ridge Community & Technical College English/Writing 57.7% 59.5% 56.6% 64.4% 65.2%

Math 56.5% 57.8% 56.7% 58.2% 62.1%

Reading 87.0% 77.1% 77.2% 71.7% 64.6%

Community & Technical College at WVU Tech English/Writing 59.2% 56.1% 48.9% 42.2% 75.2%

Math 41.0% 33.8% 53.8% 47.2% 33.7%

Reading 50.9% 64.8% 84.2% 77.8% 64.5%

Eastern WV Community & Technical College English/Writing 60.6% 34.5% 64.3% 58.7% 84.9%

Math 55.0% 55.0% 55.3% 59.8% 62.3%

Reading 67.7% 60.0% 68.0% 52.6% 73.2%

Marshall Community & Technical College English/Writing 59.3% 60.2% 53.6% 58.8% 54.8%

Math 50.5% 54.9% 48.7% 46.9% 40.8%

Reading 60.9% 28.6% 15.4% 75.0% 35.6%

New River Community & Technical College English/Writing 68.3% 66.4% 60.4% 47.7% 62.8%

Math 66.8% 67.8% 65.8% 68.4% 59.7%

Reading 72.3% 81.3% 81.0% 70.1% 72.1%

Pierpont Community & Technical College English/Writing 57.7% 58.2% 49.6% 52.0% 45.0%

Math 48.2% 50.3% 49.4% 53.1% 47.9%

Reading 39.1% 61.3% . . .

Southern WV Community & Technical College English/Writing 63.1% 63.9% 61.9% 64.9% 58.6%

Math 65.1% 58.7% 61.6% 60.5% 51.7%

Reading 69.9% 67.0% 60.7% 70.8% 64.8%

WV Northern Community College English/Writing 53.7% 54.3% 35.9% 48.2% 45.5%

Math 51.4% 68.0% 49.7% 53.0% 51.9%

Reading 68.0% 68.3% 56.1% 56.2% 61.9%

WV State Community & Technical College English/Writing 65.3% 60.7% 60.2% 57.1% 59.6%

Math 55.0% 49.5% 50.7% 50.3% 48.4%

Reading 44.2% 34.7% 44.9% 33.9% 39.7%

WVU at Parkersburg English/Writing 54.8% 50.5% 47.8% 44.4% 54.5%

Math 52.9% 51.7% 48.5% 47.7% 43.1%

Reading 72.2% 67.2% 64.1% 70.0% 61.2%

TOTAL English/Writing 60.3% 58.6% 53.6% 54.2% 56.1%

Math 55.3% 55.8% 53.3% 53.7% 49.2%

Reading 68.3% 66.3% 62.7% 64.9% 60.7%

A c a d e m i c Ye a r s 22 00 00 33 -- 22 00 00 773-64

A c c e s s W o r k f o r c e D e v e l o p m e n t S t u d e n t S u c c e s s Imp r o v ed L i t e r a c y T r a n s f e r E d u c a t i o n


70.0%

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

003 04 05 06 07

03 04 05 06 07

56.1%60.3% 58.6%

53.6% 54.2%

7,368 7,608 7,511 7,497 -0.2% 0.9%

English/Writing 60.3% 58.6% 53.6% 54.2% 56.1%

Math 55.3% 55.8% 53.3% 53.7% 49.2%

Reading 68.3% 66.3% 62.7% 64.9% 60.7%

English/Writing03 04 05 06 07

Math03 04 05 06 07

Reading

49.2%

55.3% 55.8%53.3% 53.7%

60.7%

68.3%66.3% 62.7%

64.9%

56.1%

60.3%58.6%

53.6% 54.2%

49.2%

55.3% 55.8% 53.3% 53.7%

60.7%

68.3%66.3%

62.7%64.9%

70.0%

65.0%

60.0%

55.0%

50.0%

45.0%

40.0%

English/Writing

Math

Reading

70.0%

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

003 04 05 06 07

03 04 05 06 07

56.1%60.3% 58.6%

53.6% 54.2%

7,368 7,608 7,511 7,497 -0.2% 0.9%

English/Writing 60.3% 58.6% 53.6% 54.2% 56.1%

Math 55.3% 55.8% 53.3% 53.7% 49.2%

Reading 68.3% 66.3% 62.7% 64.9% 60.7%


Math03 04 05 06 07

Reading

49.2%

55.3% 55.8%53.3% 53.7%

60.7%

68.3%66.3% 62.7%

64.9%

56.1%

60.3%58.6%

53.6% 54.2%

49.2%

55.3% 55.8% 53.3% 53.7%

60.7%

68.3%66.3%

62.7%64.9%

70.0%

65.0%

60.0%

55.0%

50.0%

45.0%

40.0%

English/Writing

Math

Reading

70.0%

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

003 04 05 06 07

03 04 05 06 07

56.1%60.3% 58.6%

53.6% 54.2%

7,368 7,608 7,511 7,497 -0.2% 0.9%

English/Writing 60.3% 58.6% 53.6% 54.2% 56.1%

Math 55.3% 55.8% 53.3% 53.7% 49.2%

Reading 68.3% 66.3% 62.7% 64.9% 60.7%


Math03 04 05 06 07

Reading

49.2%

55.3% 55.8%53.3% 53.7%

60.7%

68.3%66.3% 62.7%

64.9%

56.1%

60.3%58.6%

53.6% 54.2%

49.2%

55.3% 55.8% 53.3% 53.7%

60.7%

68.3%66.3%

62.7%64.9%

70.0%

65.0%

60.0%

55.0%

50.0%

45.0%

40.0%

English/Writing

Math

Reading

percent passing

percent passing

West Virginia Highlights• The proportion of freshmen students passing the English/writing developmental

course has increased 1.9 percentage points from 54.2 percent in 2006-07 to 56.1percent in 2007-08. The percentage of students passing this test has declined by 4.2 percentage points since its 2003-04 level of 60.3 percent.

• The proportion of students passing the math developmental course declined from 53.7 percent in 2006-07 to 49.2 percent in 2007-08, a drop of 4.5 percentage points. The percent passing this test has also declined by 6.1 percentage points from its 2003-04 level of 55.3 percent.

• The reading developmental course was passed by 60.7 percent of students in 2007-08, which was 4.2 percentage points lower than the 2006-07 level of 64.9 percent. Pass rates have declined 7.6 percentage points on the reading course since 2003-04 as well from their 68.3 percent pass rate in that year.

National ContextIn the fall of 2000, 28 percent of entering freshmen at all institutions, and 42 percent of freshmen at two-year schools enrolled in one or more remedial courses in reading, writing, or mathematics (NCES, 2004). A 2004 study by the National Center for Development Education found that, among students who completed developmental courses, the percentage of students who earned a grade of C or better was 76 percent in reading, 73 percent in writing, and 68 percent in math.

About this MeasureThis indicator represents the percent of students passing developmental courses in the areas of English/writing, math, and reading. Students are assigned to develop-mental courses, which do not carry academic credit, based on their entrance exam scores. As recommended by SREB, West Virginia has a statewide standard for assessment and placement into developmental courses. Passing these courses is an indicator of being ready to do college-level work.

p a g e5 8

P E R C EN TAG E O F F R E SHMEN PA S S I N G D E V E L O PMENTA L C O U R S E SA c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7 ( C O N T. )


3-65

A c a d e m i c Ye a r s 22 00 00 33 -- 22 00 00 77

West Virginia Highlights• The proportion of students who took developmental education in English and

then passed the subsequent college-level course declined from 66.2 percent in 2006-07 to 65.5 percent in 2007-08. The proportion of students passing the entry level English course has fallen from 75.2 percent in 2003-04 by 9.7 percentage points.

• The proportion of students who passed the subsequent course following their developmental math course declined from 61.5 percent in 2006-07 to 60.3 percent in 2007-08. This number has also fallen by 2.6 percentage points fromits 2003-04 level of 62.9 percent.

National ContextA 2004 study by the National Center for Developmental Education found that among students who had passed the higest level developmental course, 69 percent of those in reading, 64 percent of those in writing, and 58 percent of those in math earned a grade of C or better in the first related college-level course. While some national research has shown that taking developmental courses decreases the likelihood of degree completion for students at two-year institutions, other studies clarify that it is the poor academic background that reduces chances of success, not the remediation itself (Attewell et al., 2006).

About this MeasureThis indicator provides the proportion of students who passed the entry-level college courses in English and math after having been enrolled in developmental courses in those areas. It is a good measure of how successful developmental courses are in achieving their goal of preparing students to do college-level work.

p a g e5 9

80.0%

70.0%

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

003 04 05 06 07

03 04 05 06 07

65.5%

75.2% 73.7%69.8%

66.2%

7,368 7,608 7,511 7,497 -0.2% 0.9%

English/WritingTotal English 75.2% 73.7% 69.8% 66.2% 65.5%

Math 62.9% 67.0% 62.4% 61.5% 60.3%


Math

60.3%62.9%67.0%

62.4% 61.5%

76.0%

74.0%

72.0%

70.0%

68.0%

66.0%

64.0%

62.0%

60.0%

English/Writing

Math

65.5%

75.2%

73.7%

69.8%

66.2%

60.3%

62.9%

67.0%

62.4%61.5%

80.0%

70.0%

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

003 04 05 06 07

03 04 05 06 07

65.5%

75.2% 73.7%69.8%

66.2%

7,368 7,608 7,511 7,497 -0.2% 0.9%

English/WritingTotal English 75.2% 73.7% 69.8% 66.2% 65.5%

Math 62.9% 67.0% 62.4% 61.5% 60.3%


Math

60.3%62.9%67.0%

62.4% 61.5%

76.0%

74.0%

72.0%

70.0%

68.0%

66.0%

64.0%

62.0%

60.0%

English/Writing

Math

65.5%

75.2%

73.7%

69.8%

66.2%

60.3%

62.9%

67.0%

62.4%61.5%

70.0%

60.0%

50.0%

40.0%

30.0%

20.0%

10.0%

003 04 05 06 07

03 04 05 06 07

56.1%60.3% 58.6%

53.6% 54.2%

7,368 7,608 7,511 7,497 -0.2% 0.9%

English/Writing 60.3% 58.6% 53.6% 54.2% 56.1%

Math 55.3% 55.8% 53.3% 53.7% 49.2%

Reading 68.3% 66.3% 62.7% 64.9% 60.7%


Math03 04 05 06 07

Reading

49.2%

55.3% 55.8%53.3% 53.7%

60.7%

68.3%66.3% 62.7%

64.9%

56.1%

60.3%58.6%

53.6% 54.2%

49.2%

55.3% 55.8% 53.3% 53.7%

60.7%

68.3%66.3%

62.7%64.9%

70.0%

65.0%

60.0%

55.0%

50.0%

45.0%

40.0%

English/Writing

Math

Reading

P E R C EN TAG E O F S T UD EN T S E N RO L L E D I N D E V E L O PMENTA L C O U R S E SPA S S I N G N E X T S U B S EQU EN T C O L L E G E - L E V E L C O U R S EWORKA c a d e m i c Ye a r s 2 0 0 3 - 2 0 0 7

Percentage of Students Enrolled in Developmental Courses Passing Next Subsequent College-Level CourseworkInstitution Subject 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007Blue Ridge Community & Technical College English 82.0% 100.0% 91.9% 80.8% 84.4%

Math 55.0% 88.0% 85.7% 89.6% 93.2%Community & Technical College at WVU Tech English 67.0% 70.0% 100.0% 90.0% 96.9%

Math 60.0% 79.0% 70.0% 83.3% 83.3%Eastern WV Community & Technical College English 100.0% 100.0% 90.0% 87.5% 61.5%

Math 75.0% 84.0% 85.0% 88.9% 92.6%Marshall Community & Technical College English 87.8% 80.9% 70.6% 70.0% 62.6%

Math 74.0% 78.7% 78.1% 77.7% 59.3%New River Community & Technical College English 66.9% 84.7% 72.3% 61.7% 65.6%

Math 83.7% 85.9% 61.9% 58.2% 58.7%Pierpont Community & Technical College English 86.7% 76.0% 70.1% 69.4% 71.1%

Math 71.8% 79.5% 77.2% 62.1% 71.7%Southern WV Community & Technical College English 71.0% 71.5% 70.0% 63.1% 68.9%

Math 59.0% 55.3% 59.1% 66.7% 66.7%WV Northern Community College English 68.9% 72.2% 64.3% 51.7% 53.6%

Math 63.0% 54.9% 43.3% 44.0% 51.7%WV State Community & Technical College English 69.7% 66.7% 65.8% 66.7% 69.9%

Math 55.7% 60.8% 67.1% 49.2% 58.9%WVU at Parkersburg English 52.1% 61.1% 61.3% 62.8% 53.9%

Math 31.5% 32.3% 32.1% 39.7% 38.7%

TOTAL English 75.2% 73.7% 69.8% 66.2% 65.5%Math 62.9% 67.0% 62.4% 61.5% 60.3%

percent passing

percent passing

3-66

A c c e s s W o r k f o r c e D e v e l o p m e n t S t u d e n t S u c c e s s I m p r o v e d L i t e r a c y Tr a n s f e r E d u c a t i o n



2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

0

2,132 2,060 1,987 1,644 1,640 -0.2% -23.1%

2,132 2,060 1,987 1,644 1,640 -0.2% -23.1%

2,200

2,100

2,000

1,900

1,800

1,700

1.600

02 03 04 05 05

1,640

2,1322,060

1,987

1,644

1,640

2,132

2,060

1,987

1,644

02 03 04 05 06

2,500

2,000

1,500

1,000

500

0

2,132 2,060 1,987 1,644 1,640 -0.2% -23.1%

2,132 2,060 1,987 1,644 1,640 -0.2% -23.1%

2,200

2,100

2,000

1,900

1,800

1,700

1.600

02 03 04 05 05

1,640

2,1322,060

1,987

1,644

1,640

2,132

2,060

1,987

1,644

02 03 04 05 06

headcount

headcount

West Virginia Highlights• The number of students entering bachelor’s degree programs or above the

following fall after enrollment in a community college in the fall of 2006 fell by 0.2 percent to 1,640 from 1,644 in the fall of 2005.

• Over the five-year time span reported from 2002 to 2006, the number of community college students entering bachelor’s degree programs the fall following community college enrollment declined by 23.1 percent from 2,132 students for 2002 to 1,640 for 2006.

• The number of students who entered a bachelor’s degree program the fall following 2006 varied widely by institution with four institutions showing increases over the time period and six showing decreases.

National ContextIn national data, 29 percent of students who entered community colleges in 1995-96 transferred to a four-year institution. Of those who had reported bachelor’s degree intentions, 51 percent had transferred. After six years, 35 percent of all transfers had earned a bachelor’s degree and 44 percent were still enrolled in a four-year institution. About one-fifth of those who transferred did so having earned an associate’s degree (NCES, 2003). Other research has shown that students who transfer after earning an AA are more likely to obtain their bachelor’s degrees than those who transfer without this credential (NCES, 1997). Transfer rates have also been shown to be higher for those who enroll full-time in their first year at the community college (NCES, 1997).

About this MeasureThis indicator provides the number of students who enroll in a bachelor’s degree program the following fall after having been enrolled at a CTCS institution in the year indicated. While many programs at the community college aim to prepare students for direct entry into an occupation, another function of community colleges is to provide general education that prepares students to pursue a bachelor’s degree.

p a g e6 0

Number of Community College Students Entering Bachelor’s Degree Program (or Above) the Next FallInstitution 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2005-06 2002-06


Community & Technical College at WVU Tech 55 79 95 83 81 -2.4% 47.3%


Marshall Community & Technical College 183 203 199 175 211 20.6% 15.3%

New River Community & Technical College 224 267 145 141 131 -7.1% -41.5%

Pierpont Community & Technical College 300 349 406 294 292 -0.7% -2.7%

Southern WV Community & Technical College 168 199 131 135 130 -3.7% -22.6%

WV Northern Community College 121 92 115 122 110 -9.8% -9.1%

WV State Community & Technical College 194 209 191 229 168 -26.6% -13.4%

WVU at Parkersburg 820 557 604 406 429 5.7% -47.7%

TOTAL 2,132 2,060 1,987 1,644 1,640 -0.2% -23.1%

T RAN S F E R E D U C AT I ON

COMMUN I T Y C O L L E G E S T UD ENT S E N T E R I N G BA C H E LOR ’ S D E G R E E P ROGRAM (or above) TH E N E X T FA L LF a l l 2 0 0 2 - 2 0 0 6

3-67

N o t e s :

3-68



West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission and Community and Technical College System 1018 Kanawha Blvd. EastCharleston, West Virginia 25301-2025

WVHI

GHER EDUCATIO

N

POLICY COMMIS

SION

WVHI

GHER EDUCATIO

N

POLICY COMMIS

SIONWVHI

GHER EDUCATIO

N

POLICY COMMIS

SION

3-69

West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission Meeting of January 23, 2009 ITEM: Presentation on From Higher Education to

Work in West Virginia 2007 INSTITUTIONS: All RECOMMENDED RESOLUTION: Information Item STAFF MEMBER: Brian Noland BACKGROUND: This report, prepared in late 2008 by the Bureau of Business and Economic Research in the College of Business and Economics at West Virginia University, summarizes West Virginia labor market experiences of graduates from the state’s public institutions of higher education during the last decade. The report explores work participation and wages of state higher education graduates.

4-1

From Higher Education To Work In West Virginia 2007 Summary Results For Work Participation And Wages With Analysis By Residency Status, Degree, Area of Concentration, Gender, And Race

December 2008 Prepared for the West Virginia Higher Education Policy

Commission By George W. Hammond, Associate Director J. Sebastian Leguizamon, Graduate Research

Assistant Bureau of Business and Economic Research College of Business and Economics West Virginia University © Copyright 2008 WVU Research

Corporation This research was conducted under contract with the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission. Opinions expressed herein are the responsibility of the authors.

4-2

Table of Contents Executive Summary ................................................................................................. 1 Employment Data Description ................................................................................. 3 Work Participation And Wages Of Public Higher Education

Graduates By Year, Residency, And Summary Degree ................................... 4 Work Participation and Wages of West Virginia Graduates

By Area Of Concentration ................................................................................. 11 Work Participation And Wages By Gender ............................................................. 17 Work Participation and Wages By Race .................................................................. 20

4-3

List of Tables 1. Graduates By Area Of Concentration From West Virginia Public Higher

Education Institutions During 1996-1997 To 2005-2006 12

2. Graduates From W.Va. Public Higher Education Institutions By Degree And Area Of Concentration In 2007 13

3. Graduates From W.Va. Public Higher Education Institutions By Degree And Area Of Concentration In 2007 14

4. Work Participation And Wages Of Graduates From West Virginia Public Higher Education Institutions By Degree And Area Of Concentration 16

5. Work Participation And Average Annualized Wages Of Graduates From W.Va. Public Higher Education Institutions In 2007 By Degree And Gender 19

6. Work Participation And Annualized Wages By Gender For Graduates From W.Va. Public Higher Education Institutions Working In The State In 2007 20

7. Work Participation And Average Annualized Wages Of Graduates From West Virginia Public Higher Education Institutions In 2007 By Race 21

8. Work Participation And Average Annualized Wages Of Graduates From West Virginia Public Higher Education Institutions In 2007 By Degree And Race 23

9. Work Participation And Annualized Wages Of Caucasian Graduates From W.Va. Public Higher Education Institutions Working In The State In 2007 25

10. Work Participation And Annualized Wages Of African-American Graduates From W.Va. Public Higher Education Institutions Working In The State In 2007 26

11. Work Participation And Annualized Wages Of Hispanic Graduates From W.Va. Public Higher Education Institutions Working In The State In 2007 27

12. Work Participation And Annualized Wages Of Asian-Pacific Or Islander Graduates From W.Va. Public Higher Education Institutions Working In The State In 2007 28

13. Work Participation And Annualized Wages Of American-Indian Graduates From W.Va. Public Higher Education Institutions Working In The State In 2007 29

4-4

iii

List of Figures 1. Three Measures Of West Virginia Employment ............................................................. 4 2. Percent Of Graduates From W.Va. Public Higher Education Institutions

Working In The State In 2007 .................................................................................. 5

3. Percent Of Graduates From W.Va. Public Higher Education Institutions Working In The State 2003-2007 ............................................................................. 6

4. Percent Of State Public Higher Education Graduates Working In W.Va. In 2007 By Residency For Fee Purposes .................................................................. 7

5. Shares Of State Public Higher Education Graduates Working In The State In 2007 By Degree .......................................................................................... 8

6. Quarterly Annualized Wages Of Graduates From W.Va. Public Higher Education Institutions In 2007 ................................................................................. 9

7. Annualized Wages Of Graduates From W.Va. Public Higher Education Institutions ... 9 8. Annualized Wages Of Graduates From W.Va. Public Higher Education

Institutions In 2007 By Residency ........................................................................... 10

9. Annualized Wages Of W.Va. Public Higher Education Graduates By Degree In 2007 ...................................................................................................................... 11

10. Work Participation And Average Annualized Wages Of First Professionals From W.Va. Public Higher Education Institutions Working In The State In 2007 ...................................................................................................................... 15

11. Shares Of Graduates During The Past Decade And Shares Of Graduates Working In West Virginia In 2007 By Gender ........................................................ 17

12. Work Participation Of Graduates From W.Va. Public Higher Education Institutions In 2007 By Gender ............................................................................... 18

13. Annualized Wages Of Graduates From W.Va. Public Higher Education Institutions In 2007 By Gender ................................................................................ 18

14. Work Participation Of Graduates From W.Va. Public Higher Education Institutions In 2007 By Race ................................................................................... 22

15. Annualized Wages Of Graduates From W.Va. Public Higher Education Institutions In 2007 By Race ................................................................................... 23

4-5

From Higher Education To Work In West Virginia 2007 1

Executive Summary Public universities and colleges are a crucial component of the system by which nations, states, and local areas generate human capital. Research in economics has shown that human capital accumulation (frequently measured by educational attainment) generates benefits both for individuals, through higher earnings, and for local economies, through faster average income growth, as well as other socio-economic benefits. Thus, the location decisions of college graduates become a critical concern for state and local policymakers. In particular, it is important to know the extent to which higher education graduates remain in the state to work and the wages they earn. This report summarizes West Virginia labor market experiences of graduates from West Virginia public institutions of higher education during the last decade. We analyze data which matches graduates with employment and wage data for calendar year 2007 and track trends in work participation and wages since 2003. This report provides summary and detailed information on the work participation and wages of graduates by selected degrees, residency for fee purposes, area of concentration (major), gender, and race. Highlights of the study include: Work Participation In 2007

• In 2007, 48.6 percent of graduates from public higher education institutions during the past decade were on the payrolls of establishments located in the state. That translates into 52,186 higher education graduates working in the state, out of the 107,455 graduates during the past decade.

• For recent graduates (2005-2006 academic year), work participation rates are higher, averaging 58.1 percent in 2007. Work participation rates fall to 40.5 percent for graduates during the 1996-1997 period.

• The work participation rate in 2006 was 46.4 percent, excluding federal government employees. Comparable data for 2007 indicates that the work participation rate rose to 47.1 percent (again excluding federal government employees).

• Work participation tends to be higher for in-state graduates than for out-of-state graduates. Indeed, of the graduates working in the state in 2007, 93.9 percent were in-state for fee purposes.

• Graduates with Associate’s degrees were most likely to work in the state (66.5 percent), followed by Master’s (51.1 percent), First Professional (Physicians, lawyers, at 46.2 percent), Bachelor’s (43.4 percent), and Doctoral (24.6 percent).

• Areas of concentration with high work participation rates and large numbers of graduates include interdisciplinary studies (60.7 percent), legal professions (59.2 percent), security and protective services (58.3 percent), health professions (58.3 percent), education (58.0 percent), and engineering technologies (54.6 percent).

• Areas of concentration with low work participation rates and large numbers of graduates include parks and recreation (25.5 percent), visual and performing arts (29.2 percent), engineering (29.7 percent), family and consumer sciences (32.0 percent), physical sciences (33.7 percent), and biological sciences (35.6 percent).

• Work participation rates for women exceeded those for men in 2007. Indeed, 52.7 percent of female graduates during the past decade were working in the state in 2007, compared to 43.1 percent for men.

4-6

2 WVU Bureau of Business and Economic Research

• West Virginia work participation rates were highest for Caucasian graduates (50.7 percent) in 2007, followed by American Indian (49.4 percent), African American (34.0 percent), Hispanic (25.2 percent), and Asian (12.5 percent).

Wages In 2007 • Public higher education graduates that worked in the state in 2007 earned $2.0 billion in

gross wages, not including fringe benefits. • That translates into an average annualized wage of $39,317 in 2007, after adjusting for

part-year work. • Annualized wages rise with experience. Indeed, graduates during the 2005-2006

academic year earned $28,634, while graduates during the 1996-1997 academic year (those with 10 years of experience) earned $49,786.

• Annualized wages were $36,954 in 2006, excluding federal employees. Comparable data for 2007 indicates that annualized wages were $38,607, again excluding federal employees. That translates into an increase of 4.5 percent in 2007.

• Graduates that were in-state for fee purposes initially earned higher annualized wages than out-of-state graduates. However, by the sixth year after graduation out-of-state graduates earned more.

• Graduates with First Professional degrees earned the highest wages in 2007, at $96,653, followed by Doctoral ($63,502), Master’s ($48,703), Bachelor’s ($34,539), and Associate’s ($32,071).

• Graduates with Associate’s and Bachelor’s degrees earned similar wages through the first five years after graduation. Thereafter, a Bachelor’s degree premium emerges and reaches $6,251 by the tenth year after graduation.

• Areas of concentration with the highest wages (and more than 1,000 graduates during the decade) in 2007 were engineering ($61,409), health professions ($53,867), legal professions ($51,799), engineering technologies ($46,353), and computer and information sciences ($44,267).

• Areas of concentration with the lowest wages (and more than 1,000 graduates during the decade) in 2007 were family and consumer sciences ($22,821), visual and performing arts ($22,982), english ($25,688), history ($25,704), and psychology ($27,507).

• Annualized wages for men averaged $46,146 in 2007, which was well above the $35,083 average annual wage for women. These wage differences arise from a variety of factors, including differences in degrees and majors across men and women, as well as differences in work participation decisions.

• Asian graduates posted the highest annualized wages in 2007, at $48,352, followed by Caucasian ($39,557), American Indian ($35,035), Hispanic ($34,812), and African American ($29,936).

The Data The data analyzed in this study come from the matching of demographic information on graduates from West Virginia public institutions of higher education with employment records maintained by Workforce West Virginia and the federal government. The bulk of this data is compiled by the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission (HEPC). Graduates reflect the highest degree earned during the 1996-1997 to 2005-2006 period. The self-employed, student workers, most church workers, and unpaid family workers are generally not covered by this data.

4-7


Employment Data Description The data analyzed in this study come from the matching of demographic information on graduates from West Virginia institutions of higher education (compiled by the HEPC1) with employment records maintained by Workforce West Virginia and the federal government. Graduates reflect the highest degree earned at the time of measurement (during the 1996-1997 to 2005-2006 period). The bulk of the employment data used is gathered from West Virginia unemployment compensation records. This is a well-known dataset which measures employment by place of work. It covers jobs and wages reported by firms participating in the West Virginia Unemployment Compensation system. As a general rule, any firm which employs one or more workers for some part of a day in at least 20 different weeks of a calendar year is required to contribute to the state’s unemployment insurance system. Major exceptions are railroad companies and the federal government, which contribute to separate systems. The self-employed, student workers, most church workers, and unpaid family workers are also generally not covered. We include civilian federal government employment and wages through the Federal Employment Data Exchange System at the Jacob France Institute at the University of Baltimore. The Jacob France Institute facilitates the matching of graduates with civilian government employment. Covered employment counts 708,313 jobs at establishments in West Virginia in 2007.2 As Figure 1 shows, this measure of employment is lower than two other major measures of employment: employment measured by the U.S. Bureau of Economic Analysis and employment measured by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics household survey. Differences arise because of the treatment of the self-employed, who are excluded from covered jobs but are included in the BEA measure and in the BLS household survey, as well as the exclusion of student workers, most church workers, and unpaid family members from the measure of covered jobs. Further, BLS household employment is measured by place of residence, which includes state residents working out of state. Finally, the wages documented in the report are an important source of compensation, but they are not the only source. Data on wage income is readily available, well understood, and is useful in the evaluation of returns to work of state higher education graduates. However, wage data does not include fringe benefits provided by firms, particularly employer-paid pension and health insurance. This source of income has accounted for an increasing share of work compensation during the last 30 years. Indeed, the share of other labor income to gross earnings by place of work has risen from 6.3 percent in 1969 to 13.3 percent by 2007 for West Virginia.

1 We would like to thank Larry Ponder of the WVHEPC for providing the bulk of the data used in

this study. 2 Federal government jobs are added in separately for completeness.

4-8


1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006400

500

600

700

800

900

1,000

BLS Covered JobsBEA EmploymentBLS Household Survey

Thou

sand

s

Figure 1Three Measures Of West Virginia Employment

Work Participation And Wages Of Public Higher Education Graduates By Year, Residency, And Summary Degree Work Participation By Year, Residency, And Summary Degree In 2007, 48.6 percent of the graduates from West Virginia public higher education institutions during the 1996-1997 to 2005-2006 period earned wages from establishments in the state. Thus, of the 107,455 graduates from West Virginia public higher education institutions during the ten year period, 52,186 of them worked in the state in 2007. Although West Virginia work participation reaches near 60 percent during the graduates’ first year in the job market, it falls substantially as the time from graduation increases. In fact, as Figure 2 shows, while 58.1 percent of the state’s most recent graduates were employed in West Virginia for at least one quarter in 2007, work participation of graduates during the 1996-1997 academic year was 17.6 percentage points lower at 40.5 percent.

4-9


40.541.642.943.146.747.7

50.852.455.758.1

1996-1997

1997-1998

1998-1999

1999-2000

2000-2001

2001-2002

2002-2003

2003-2004

2004-2005

2005-20060

20

40

60

80

100

Graduation Year

Perc

ent

Figure 2Percent Of Graduates From W.Va.

Public Higher Education Institutions Working In The State In 2007

Source: author calculations

However, there are a variety of reasons why graduates may not be counted as working in the state. Some may be continuing their education, some may be working in other states, some may not be working at all (stay-at-home spouses), others may be self-employed (and thus not counted in our data), and a few may be working in an industry not covered by the unemployment compensation system, such as railroad employees. Nonetheless, the data for 2007 does show that 48.6 percent of the states’ public higher education graduates over the last decade worked in West Virginia for some part of a day in at least 20 different weeks of the 2007 calendar year. Using data for the past four calendar years, we observe that work participation trends of West Virginia higher education graduates are very similar to the one described above. As Figure 3 shows, West Virginia work participation of graduates from West Virginia public higher education institutions decreases as the number of years after graduation increases. Note that the data for 2003-2006 excludes federal government employment, while data for 2007 includes civilian federal workers. Our data show that 1,996 graduates during the past decade worked for federal government employers in 2007. Including federal employees boosts West Virginia work participation rates. Indeed, if we again exclude federal government employment, the 2007 work participation rates are similar to those observed during 2003-2006.

4-10


987654321

Years After Graduation

0

20

40

60

80

100

Perc

ent

Work Year20032004200520062007

Figure 3Percent Of Graduates From W.Va.

Public Higher Education Institutions Working In The State 2003-2007


The 2007 data includescivilian federal employment

Family connections are likely to have an important influence on West Virginia work participation rates. That suggests that in-state graduates may be more likely to remain in the state to work. For this reason, we disaggregate the data by residency for fee purposes. In 2007, of the 52,186 state higher education graduates working in West Virginia, 49,026 (93.9 percent) were categorized as in-state for fee purposes. On the other hand, only 1,988 (3.8 percent) were recorded as West Virginia graduates from out-of state. Overall, the data show that in-state graduates have stronger preferences to work in the state than those from out-of-state. Figure 4 compares the work participation trends of in-state and out-of-state graduates in 2007. As the figure shows, work participation trends of both in-state and out-of-state graduates mirrors the overall trend observed above. However, Figure 4 also highlights a significant difference between the two. In 2007, work participation of in-state graduates during the 2005-2006 academic year was 56.7 percentage points higher than their out-of-state counterparts. As time from graduation increases, this difference falls to 48.9 percentage points for graduates during the 1996-1997 academic year. These results suggest that even though work participation of in-state graduates is consistently higher, it falls faster than that of out-of-state graduates as they gain experience.

4-11


1996-1997

1997-1998

1998-1999

1999-2000

2000-2001

2001-2002

2002-2003

2003-2004

2004-2005

2005-20060

20

40

60

80

100

In-StateOut-of-StateOther

Graduation Year

Perc

ent

Figure 4Percent Of State Public Higher Education Graduates

Working In W.Va. In 2007By Residency For Fee Purposes


Percent of graduates by residency status.Other: SREB Academic Common Market,Reciprocity Agreement, Metro Agreement

The degree a graduate earns also influences West Virginia work participation. The data show that graduates with Associate’s degrees had the highest work participation rate in 2007 at 66.5 percent. In contrast, graduates with Doctoral degrees are the least likely to work in West Virginia, with 24.6 percent of the graduates on the payrolls of state establishments and federal agencies operating in the state in 2007. Graduates with Master’s, First Professional, and Bachelor’s degrees recorded work participation rates between 43.4 and 51.1 percent during the same year, with Bachelor’s being the second lowest and Master’s graduates the second highest. Overall, this ranking tends to persist after breaking down the data by graduation year. As Figure 5 shows, graduates with Associate’s degrees post the highest work participation rates. Similarly, graduates with Doctoral degrees remain at the bottom, while Master’s, First Professionals, and Bachelor’s stay in between for all graduation years. As the figure also shows, we observe the usual decline in state work participation as the time from graduation increases. Work participation of graduates with Associate’s degrees falls from 74.1 percent for graduates during 2005-2006 to 58.3 percent for graduates during the 1996-1997 academic year. This represents a 15.8 percentage-point difference between recent graduates and those with Associate’s degrees obtained a decade before. However, this difference is larger for graduates with Bachelor’s degrees. In 2007, Bachelor’s degree graduates during the 1996-1997 academic year experienced a work participation rate 19.3 percentage points lower than those that graduated during the 2005-2006 academic year with the same degree. While First Professionals experience a similar work participation decline as graduates with Bachelor’s degrees (20.7 percentage points), the effect of time after graduation on work participation rates is less severe for graduates with Master’s (12.4 percentage points) and Doctoral (2.1 percentage points) degrees.

4-12


1996-1997

1997-1998

1998-1999

1999-2000

2000-2001

2001-2002

2002-2003

2003-2004

2004-2005

2005-20060

20

40

60

80

100

Perc

ent

Figure 5Shares Of State Public Higher Education Graduates

Working In The State In 2007 By Degree

Graduation Year

Associate's

Master's

Bachelor's

Doctoral

First Professional

Source: author calculations Wages By Year, Residency, And Summary Degree After adjusting for part-year work, wages of state graduates during the past decade averaged $39,317 per graduate in 2007. 3 Compared to wages averaged across all workers, state graduates’ wages were $5,317 higher than the West Virginia average wages per worker, but $5,141 lower the nation’s average wage per worker.4 In other words, on average, annualized wages of West Virginia state graduates in 2007 were between the state and national average, though slightly closer to the nation’s average. As Figure 6 shows, average annualized wages increase as the workers’ graduation date becomes more distant. In 2007, those who graduated from state public higher education institutions during the 1996-1997 academic year averaged annualized wages equal to $49,786, which is $9,964 higher than the average annualized wages of graduates during the 2001-2002 academic year, and $21,153 higher than the wages of the most recent graduates.

3 The adjustment is to divide a worker’s total wages for the year by the number of quarters worked. The resulting quarterly wage is then ‘annualized’ by multiplying by four. Thus, a worker with total wages of $33,000 for the year, with three quarters worked, will have an average annualized wage of $44,000 (=($33,000/3)*4). 4 According to estimates from Workforce WV and the Bureau of Labor Statistics, average wages per worker in 2007 were $34,000 in West Virginia and $44,458 for the United States.

4-13


1996-1997

1997-1998

1998-1999

1999-2000

2000-2001

2001-2002

2002-2003

2003-2004

2004-2005

2005-2006$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

$60,000

Graduation Year

Wag

es P

er W

orke

r

Figure 6Quarterly Annualized Wages Of Graduates From W.Va.

Public Higher Education Institutions In 2007

Source: author calculations As Figure 7 illustrates, annualized wages of West Virginia graduates show similar trends over the past 5 years. While it is clear that wages increase steadily with experience, the figure also shows that average wages tend to rise every year. The upward shift of average wages can be partly explained by inflation, but also partly reflects productivity gains.

9 yr

s ou

t

8 yr

s ou

t

7 yr

s ou

t

6 yr

s ou

t

5 yr

s ou

t

4 yr

s ou

t

3 yr

s ou

t

2 yr

s ou

t

1 yr

s ou

t

Years After Graduation

$20,000

$25,000

$30,000

$35,000

$40,000

$45,000

$50,000

Wag

es P

er W

orke

r

Wage Year20032004200520062007

Figure 7Annualized Wages Of Graduates From W.Va.

Public Higher Education Institutions


The 2007 data includescivilian federal employment

In addition, note that the data for 2007 show an unusually large increase over previous years. In part, this reflects the inclusion of civilian federal government workers, who tend to have higher-than-average wages. Indeed, the inclusion of the federal government workers boosts the average for all graduates from $38,607 to $39,317.

4-14


Like work participation, average annualized wages vary by residency status. As Figure 8 shows, on average, in-state graduates earned higher annualized wages during the first five years after graduation. However, as work experience increases wages for out-of-state graduates start rising and even exceeding the wages of in-state graduates. Indeed, in 2007, out-of-state graduates during the 2001-2002 to 2005-2006 academic years earned average annualized wages of $31,741, $2,702 lower than resident graduates during the same period. In contrast, annualized wages of out-of-state graduates during the 1996-1997 to 2000-2001 period averaged $48,366 in 2007, while those of in-state graduates during the same period averaged $46,686.

1996-1997

1997-1998

1998-1999

1999-2000

2000-2001

2001-2002

2002-2003

2003-2004

2004-2005

2005-2006

Graduation Year

$20,000

$25,000

$30,000

$35,000

$40,000

$45,000

$50,000

$55,000

$60,000

Wag

es P

er W

orke

r

In-StateOut-of-StateOther

Figure 8Annualized Wages Of Graduates From W.Va.

Public Higher Education Institutions In 2007 By Residency

Source: author calculations Similarly, annualized wages vary significantly among degrees. Indeed, First Professionals that graduated during the past decade from public colleges and universities in West Virginia and received wages in the state in 2007 averaged annualized wages equal to $96,653. On the other hand, annualized wages of graduates with Associate’s degrees from a state higher education institution during the same years averaged $32,071 in 2007. Annualized wages of graduates with Bachelor’s, Master’s, and Doctoral degrees range in between with $34,539, $48,703, and $63,502 respectively. As Figure 9 illustrates, experience brings different results to different degree holders. While workers with Associate’s, Master’s, or Doctoral degrees do not observe huge wage increases due to experience, First Professional degree earners increase their annual incomes very rapidly. In 2007, annualized wages of the most recent state graduates with Associate’s degrees were $12,653 less than those of graduates during the 1996-1997 academic year with the same degree. Also, the difference in annualized wages between graduates from 1996-1997 and 2005-2006 academic years was $14,315 for earners with doctoral degrees, $15,839 for those with Master’s degrees, and $20,939 for graduates with Bachelor’s degrees. First Professionals, however, observe a wage differential of $99,982 between recent and most distant graduates for which data are available.

4-15


1996-1997

1997-1998

1998-1999

1999-2000

2000-2001

2001-2002

2002-2003

2003-2004

2004-2005

2005-2006

Graduation Year

$20,000

$40,000

$60,000

$80,000

$100,000

$120,000

$140,000

$160,000

Wag

es P

er W

orke

r

Associate'sBachelor'sFirst Professional

Master's Doctoral

Figure 9Annualized Wages Of W.Va. Public Higher Education

Graduates By Degree In 2007

Source: author calculations Figure 9 also highlights some of the wage differences given by experience between specific types of degrees. In West Virginia, Doctoral and First Professional graduates earn approximately the same average annualized wages during the first year of employment. However, as First Professionals degrees start accumulating years of experience, they also start earning much higher annualized wages than Doctoral degree earners. This pattern is similar for graduates with Associate’s and Bachelor’s degrees, with the exception that in this case the graduates with Bachelor’s degrees start up with lower wages during the first year, but end up earning more after 4 or 5 years.

Work Participation And Wages Of West Virginia Graduates By Area Of Concentration Work participation rates and annualized wages of graduates from West Virginia public colleges and universities vary by area of study. According to the data, we find that some areas of concentration appear to be more appealing to a large number of West Virginia students. Using the Classification of Instructional Programs (CIP) system provided by the U.S. Department of Education, which summarizes degree and area of concentration data at the eight-digit level, we find that almost half (46.9 percent) of the graduates during the last decade obtained degrees in Education; Business, Management, and Marketing; or Health Related fields. The Classification of Instructional Programs codes are decomposed as follows: the first two digits from the left indicate the degree level. The following two digits represent the area of concentration (i.e. social science), and the last four digits record the individual major of study. For instance, CIP 24450601 indicates a Bachelor’s degree (CIP 24) in Social Sciences (CIP 45), general economics (CIP 0601). As Table 1 shows, the data provided by the HEPC for 2007 contains information on 34 different areas of concentration.

4-16


Area of Concentration

Total Number of Graduates From

1996-1997 to 2005-2006

Number of Graduates

with Associate's

Number of Graduates

with Bachelor's

Number of Graduates

with Master's

Number of Graduates

with DoctoralAgriculture, Agriculture Operations 1,053 55 748 220 30Architecture and Related Services 255 n/a 255 n/a n/aBiological and Biomedical Sciences 2,890 n/a 2,302 381 207Business, Management, Marketing, and Related 17,863 3,264 11,710 2,662 49Communication, Journalism, and Related Programs 4,354 89 3,220 1,045 n/aCommunications Technologies 320 160 160 n/a n/aComputer and Information Sciences 1,675 388 867 394 18Education 16,965 103 8,066 8,209 448Engineering 4,774 28 3,084 1,447 215Engineering Technologies/Technicians 2,709 1,227 1,049 421 n/aEnglish Language and Literature/Letters 1,540 n/a 1,169 344 27Family and Consumer Sciences/Human Sciences 1,450 152 1,192 106 n/aForeign Languages, Literatures, and Linguistics 637 64 245 316 n/aHealth Professions and Related Clinical Sciences 15,624 5,590 4,410 2,456 44History 1,180 n/a 1,011 125 44Legal Professions and Studies 1,625 342 n/a 19 n/aLiberal Arts and Sci., Gen. Std., and Humanities 9,657 2,292 7,287 60 n/aLibrary Science n/d n/a n/a n/d n/aMathematics and Statistics 534 n/a 304 202 28Mechanic and Repair Technologies/Technicians 195 186 n/a n/a n/aMulti/Interdisciplinary Studies 1,575 731 708 134 n/aNatural Resources and Conservation 1,081 142 686 191 62Parks, Recreation, Leisure and Fitness Studies 1,666 n/a 1,501 165 n/aPersonal and Culinary Services 171 163 n/a n/a n/aPhilosophy and Religious Studies 67 n/a 67 n/a n/aPhysical Sciences 1,230 n/d 909 222 96Precision Production 199 169 n/a n/a n/aPsychology 3,577 n/a 2,822 474 182Public Administration and Social Service Prof 2,431 185 1,017 1,221 n/aScience Technologies/Technicians 356 208 n/a n/a n/aSecurity and Protective Services 3,401 877 2,276 226 n/aSocial Sciences 4,017 n/a 3,604 377 36Transportation and Materials Moving n/d n/d n/a n/a n/aVisual and Performing Arts 2,376 87 1,882 366 41Total 107,455 16,511 62,551 21,784 1,527n/a: no data available for this area of concentrationn/d: data not disclosed

Table 1Graduates By Area Of Concentration From West Virginia Public Higher Education Institutions

During 1996-1997 To 2005-2006

Degree

Table 1 shows the total number of graduates from West Virginia public higher institutions during the last ten years by area of concentration. As the table shows, of the 107,455 graduates, 58.2 percent have Bachelor’s degrees as their highest degree earned. Again, large parts of the total graduates with Bachelor’s degrees are concentrated in areas such as business related majors (11,710 graduates), education (8,066 graduates), liberal arts (7,287 graduates), and health related fields (4,410 graduates). Additionally, during the 1996-1997 to 2005-2006 academic years there were 3,946 First Professionals (lawyers, physicians, dentists, and pharmacists), 900 graduates with Undergraduate Certificates, and 236 graduates with Master’s Certificates. Table 2 displays the areas of concentration with the highest and lowest work participation rates in West Virginia in 2007. Having graduates at the Master’s level only, library science graduates show the highest participation rates in 2007 (these data are not disclosed due to the small number of graduates). Precision production (80.4 percent), science technologies (80.3 percent), and

4-17


mechanic technologies (65.6 percent) are among the five highest work participation rates. Table 2 also shows that education and health professions are not only among the most preferred areas for West Virginia students, but they are also among the top ten areas in which a high percentage of graduates stay in the state to work.

Area Of Concentration

Work Participation

Annualized Wages Per

WorkerAssociate's Bachelor's Master's Doctoral

Top Ten Library Science n/d n/d n/a n/a n/d n/aPrecision Production 80.4% $43,760 81.7% n/a n/a n/aScience Technologies/Technicians 80.3% $30,779 78.4% n/a n/a n/aMechanic and Repair Technologies/Technicians 65.6% $44,677 66.7% n/a n/a n/aMulti/Interdisciplinary Studies 60.7% $32,832 71.0% 49.6% 62.7% n/aLegal Professions and Studies 59.2% $51,799 64.6% n/a 63.2% n/aSecurity and Protective Services 58.3% $31,283 71.4% 55.8% 31.9% n/aHealth Professions and Related Clinical Sciences 58.3% $53,867 68.7% 57.2% 55.5% n/dEducation 58.0% $36,573 58.3% 52.6% 63.8% 45.3%Engineering Technologies/Technicians 54.6% $46,353 67.7% 47.5% 34.0% n/a

Bottom Ten Architecture and Related Services 9.8% $37,294 n/a 9.8% n/a n/aTransportation and Materials Moving n/d n/d n/d n/a n/a n/aParks, Recreation, Leisure and Fitness Studies 25.5% $31,874 n/a 24.5% 34.5% n/aForeign Languages, Literatures, and Linguistics 25.9% $20,646 71.9% 26.5% 14.6% n/aMathematics and Statistics 26.8% $38,070 n/a 32.6% 19.8% n/dVisual and Performing Arts 29.2% $22,982 41.4% 28.7% 30.6% n/dEngineering 29.7% $61,409 57.1% 33.0% 24.0% 17.2%Family and Consumer Sciences/Human Sciences 32.0% $22,821 67.1% 26.4% 44.3% n/aPhysical Sciences 33.7% $42,498 n/d 37.1% 28.4% 14.6%Biological and Biomedical Sciences 35.6% $36,966 n/a 37.6% 33.6% 17.4%n/a: no data available for this area of concentration.n/d: data not disclosed.

Table 2Graduates From W.Va. Public Higher Education Institutions

By Degree And Area Of Concentration In 2007Ranked By Work Participation In 2007

All Degrees Degree

As Table 2 shows, most of the architects coming out of state colleges and universities tend to find employment outside the state, become self-employed, or simply decide not to work for private or federal employers in West Virginia. Similarly, the areas of concentration with the lowest in-state work participation include mathematics and statistics (26.8 percent), foreign languages (25.9 percent), and engineering (29.7 percent). Table 3 summarizes the top and bottom ten areas of concentration based on average annualized wages in 2007. The area of concentration with the highest average annualized wages was engineering with $61,409. As the table shows, health and legal professionals are amongst the best remunerated areas of concentration in West Virginia. As noted, health professionals rank second with annualized wages of $53,867, and legal professionals third with $51,799. The table also shows how Precision Production graduates, an area of concentration at the Associate’s degree level only, not only ranks at the top of the work participation rates, but it is also one with high returns at $43,760 per graduate per year.

4-18


Area Of Concentration

Work Participation


WorkerAssociate's Bachelor's Master's Doctoral

Top Ten Engineering 29.7% $61,409 $22,923 $58,197 $70,817 $78,126Health Professions and Related Clinical Sciences 58.3% $53,867 $39,122 $47,139 $60,649 n/dLegal Professions and Studies 59.2% $51,799 $25,254 n/a $42,898 n/aEngineering Technologies/Technicians 54.6% $46,353 $40,086 $51,836 $63,628 n/aMechanic and Repair Technologies/Technicians 65.6% $44,677 $45,566 n/a n/a n/aComputer and Information Sciences 45.2% $44,267 $28,141 $47,533 $64,910 n/dPrecision Production 80.4% $43,760 $45,381 n/a n/a n/aPhysical Sciences 33.7% $42,498 n/d $39,724 $54,983 $55,363Business, Management, Marketing, and Related 48.8% $39,099 $25,531 $37,924 $69,852 n/dMathematics and Statistics 26.8% $38,070 n/a $34,924 $43,341 n/d

Bottom Ten Transportation and Materials Moving n/d n/d n/d n/a n/a n/aPhilosophy and Religious Studies 35.8% $20,373 n/a $20,373 n/a n/aForeign Languages, Literatures, and Linguistics 25.9% $20,646 $19,275 $20,952 $23,623 n/aPersonal and Culinary Services 53.8% $22,546 $22,219 n/a n/a n/aFamily and Consumer Sciences/Human Sciences 32.0% $22,821 $16,262 $22,987 $35,943 n/aVisual and Performing Arts 29.2% $22,982 $18,328 $21,483 $30,728 n/dEnglish Language and Literature/Letters 36.0% $25,688 n/a $22,833 $34,698 n/dHistory 36.3% $25,704 n/a $24,935 $28,839 $34,647Communications Technologies 52.2% $26,155 $22,674 $31,351 n/a n/aPsychology 43.6% $27,507 n/a $24,704 $35,452 $64,607n/a: no data available for this area of concentration.n/d: data not disclosed.

Table 3Graduates From W.Va. Public Higher Education Institutions

By Degree And Area Of Concentration In 2007Ranked By Annualized Wages In 2007

All Degrees Degree

Table 3 also shows the bottom ten areas of concentration sorted by annualized wages in 2007. Transportation and materials moving had the lowest returns with annualized wages below $20,373 per graduate. Foreign languages, culinary services, and visual arts were also at the bottom with average annualized wages of $20,646, $22,546, and $22,982 respectively. Figure 10 shows work participation and annualized wages of First Professionals. Following up on the results displayed in Table 3, we note much higher returns to education in the health sector than in the legal professions. On average lawyers earn $17,545 more than the graduates with Master’s degrees in legal professions. On the other hand, the wage difference between health professionals and health practitioners with Master’s degrees averages as much as $59,793. Figure 10 also shows work participation of lawyers versus that of health professionals. As the figure shows, work participation of graduates with law degrees is 16.8 percentage points higher than health professionals.

4-19


57.6%

40.8%$60,443

$120,442

Lawyers Health Professionals*

First Professionals

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

Wor

k Pa

rtic

ipat

ion

$0

$30,000

$60,000

$90,000

$120,000

$150,000

Annualized W

ages Per W

orker

AnnualizedWages

AnnualizedWages

Figure 10Work Participation and Average Annualized Wages Of First

Professionals From W.Va. Public Higher Education Institutions Working In The State In 2007

*Health Professionals Include: Physicians, Osteopathic Physicians, Dentists, and Pharmacists

Work Participation

Source: Author Calculations

Finally, Table 4 shows in-state work participation rates and annualized wages of graduates from West Virginia public colleges and universities during the past decade, organized by area of concentration and degree. As expected, among the four summary degrees listed, graduates with Doctoral degrees generally average higher annualized wages. While annualized wages of Doctoral graduates working in the state ranged from $34,647 for historians and $78,126 for engineers in 2007, those of graduates with Associate’s degrees varied between $15,354 (education) and $45,566 (mechanics and repairs). As it has been noted before, the table confirms that in most of the areas of concentration described by the data there exist significant returns to higher levels education. On the other hand, note that most of the results on Table 4 suggest that increases in the levels of education of West Virginia graduates result in decreases of in-state work participation rates. However, note that this is not necessarily true for all areas of concentration. For instance, Table 4 shows that 63.8 percent of the graduates with Master’s degrees in education from West Virginia public institutions earned wages in the state in 2007. This is 5.5 percentage points higher than graduates with Associate’s degree in education, and 11.2 percentage points higher than those with Bachelor’s. Similarly, work participation rates for communications and liberal arts are higher for graduates with Master’s degrees than those with either Associate’s or Bachelor’s degrees.

4-20


Area

of C

once

ntra

tion

Wor

k Pa

rtic

ipat

ion

Annu

aliz

ed

Wag

es P

er

Wor

ker

Wor

k Pa

rtic

ipat

ion

Annu

aliz

ed

Wag

es P

er

Wor

ker

Wor

k Pa

rtic

ipat

ion

Annu

aliz

ed

Wag

es P

er

Wor

ker

Wor

k Pa

rtic

ipat

ion

Annu

aliz

ed

Wag

es P

er

Wor

ker

Acad

emic

And

Occ

upat

iona

lly-S

peci

fic P

rogr

ams

Agr

icul

ture

, Agr

icul

ture

Ope

ratio

ns61

.8%

$21,31

835

.2%

$35,41

535

.9%

$40,48

3n/d

n/d

Arc

hite

ctur

e an

d R

elat

ed S

ervi

ces

n/a

n/a

9.8%

$37,29

4n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

Bio

logi

cal a

nd B

iom

edic

al S

cien

ces

n/a

n/a

37.6%

$33,15

233

.6%

$54,94

517

.4%

$64,79

1B

usin

ess,

Man

agem

ent,

Mar

ketin

g, a

nd R

elat

ed66

.3%

$25,53

144

.5%

$37,92

446

.1%

$69,85

2n/d

n/d

Com

mun

icat

ion,

Jou

rnal

ism

, and

Rel

ated

Pro

gram

s57

.3%

$19,38

330

.3%

$27,00

261

.6%

$46,68

5n/a

n/a

Com

mun

icat

ions

Tec

hnol

ogie

s62

.5%

$22,67

441

.9%

$31,35

1n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

Com

pute

r and

Info

rmat

ion

Sci

ence

s61

.1%

$28,14

143

.4%

$47,53

333

.8%

$64,91

0n/d

n/d

Edu

catio

n58

.3%

$15,35

452

.6%

$28,70

763

.8%

$41,73

745

.3%

$64,11

5E

ngin

eerin

g57

.1%

$22,92

333

.0%

$58,19

724

.0%

$70,81

717

.2%

$78,12

6E

ngin

eerin

g Te

chno

logi

es/T

echn

icia

ns67

.7%

$40,08

647

.5%

$51,83

634

.0%

$63,62

8n/a

n/a

Eng

lish

Lang

uage

and

Lite

ratu

re/L

ette

rsn/a

n/a

36.4%

$22,83

335

.8%

$34,69

8n/d

n/d

Fam

ily a

nd C

onsu

mer

Sci

ence

s/H

uman

Sci

ence

s67

.1%

$16,26

226

.4%

$22,98

744

.3%

$35,94

3n/a

n/a

Fore

ign

Lang

uage

s, L

itera

ture

s, a

nd L

ingu

istic

s71

.9%

$19,27

526

.5%

$20,95

214

.6%

$23,62

3n/a

n/a

Hea

lth P

rofe

ssio

ns a

nd R

elat

ed C

linic

al S

cien

ces

68.7%

$39,12

257

.2%

$47,13

955

.5%

$60,64

9n/d

n/d

His

tory

n/a

n/a

35.9%

$24,93

541

.6%

$28,83

929

.5%

$34,64

7Le

gal P

rofe

ssio

ns a

nd S

tudi

es64

.6%

$25,25

4n/a

n/a

63.2%

$42,89

8n/a

n/a

Libe

ral A

rts a

nd S

ci.,

Gen

. Std

., an

d H

uman

ities

59.3%

$24,01

148

.0%

$34,20

166

.7%

$40,70

9n/a

n/a

Libr

ary

Sci

ence

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/d

n/d

n/a

n/a

Mat

hem

atic

s an

d S

tatis

tics

n/a

n/a

32.6%

$34,92

419

.8%

$43,34

1n/d

n/d

Mec

hani

c an

d R

epai

r Tec

hnol

ogie

s/Te

chni

cian

s66

.7%

$45,56

6n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

Mul

ti/In

terd

isci

plin

ary

Stud

ies

71.0%

$31,17

849

.6%

$30,17

662

.7%

$54,23

5n/a

n/a

Nat

ural

Res

ourc

es a

nd C

onse

rvat

ion

81.7%

$33,80

340

.2%

$33,88

737

.7%

$53,75

621

.0%

$72,64

8P

arks

, Rec

reat

ion,

Lei

sure

and

Fitn

ess

Stu

dies

n/a

n/a

24.5%

$29,58

334

.5%

$46,62

7n/a

n/a

Per

sona

l and

Cul

inar

y Se

rvic

es53

.4%

$22,21

9n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

Phi

loso

phy

and

Rel

igio

us S

tudi

esn/a

n/a

35.8%

$20,37

3n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

Phy

sica

l Sci

ence

sn/d

n/d

37.1%

$39,72

428

.4%

$54,98

314

.6%

$55,36

3P

reci

sion

Pro

duct

ion

81.7%

$45,38

1n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

Psy

chol

ogy

n/a

n/a

43.4%

$24,70

458

.9%

$35,45

28.8%

$64,60

7P

ublic

Adm

inis

tratio

n an

d So

cial

Ser

vice

Pro

f53

.5%

$16,53

451

.9%

$27,09

649

.5%

$40,23

1n/a

n/a

Sci

ence

Tec

hnol

ogie

s/Te

chni

cian

s78

.4%

$38,15

4n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

Sec

urity

and

Pro

tect

ive

Ser

vice

s71

.4%

$28,55

155

.8%

$32,02

131

.9%

$42,01

3n/a

n/a

Soc

ial S

cien

ces

n/a

n/a

38.1%

$26,32

936

.6%

$39,82

230

.6%

$56,59

5Tr

ansp

orta

tion

and

Mat

eria

ls M

ovin

gn/d

n/d

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

n/a

Vis

ual a

nd P

erfo

rmin

g A

rts41

.4%

$18,32

828

.7%

$21,48

330

.6%

$30,72

8n/d

n/d

Tota

l66

.5%

$32,07

143

.4%

$34,53

951

.1%

$48,70

324

.6%

$63,50

2*I

nclu

ding

onl

y th

e ar

eas

of c

once

ntra

tion

for w

hich

ther

e is

dat

a av

aila

ble.

n/a: no data available for this area of con

centratio

nn/d: data no

t disclosed

Tab

le 4

Wor

k Pa

rtic

ipat

ion

And

Wag

es O

f Gra

duat

es F

rom

Wes

t Vir

gini

a Pu

blic

Hig

her

Edu

catio

n In

stitu

tions

By

Deg

ree

And

Are

a O

f Con

cent

ratio

n*

Deg

ree

Asso

ciat

e's

Bac

helo

r'sM

aste

r'sD

octo

ral

4-21


Work Participation And Wages By Gender According to the data provided by the HEPC, during the last ten years West Virginia public higher education institutions graduated approximately 1.3 times as many women as men. Figure 11 shows that not only more women graduated from state colleges and universities during the 1996-2006 period, but also a higher share of them were in the West Virginia payrolls in 2007. Of the 52,186 graduates from state institutions during the last decade receiving wages in the state in 2007, 32,215 were women and 19,971 were men. As the figure shows, that translates into 61.7 percent females and 38.3 percent males.

43.138.3

56.961.7

Graduates Graduates Working In W.Va.0

20

40

60

80

100MalesFemales

Perc

ent

Figure 11Shares Of Graduates During The Past Decade And

Shares Of Graduates Working In West Virginia In 2007 By Gender


Figures 12 and 13 show the changes in work participation rates and annualized wages of males and females as the time from graduation increases. As Figure 12 shows, we find that work participation rates of both males and females follow the same falling trend observed for the general case. Additionally, the figure shows that work participation rates for women are consistently higher that men’s. For instance, in 2007, work participation of the most recent female graduates was 10.5 percentage points higher than the work participation of recent male graduates. Work participation of graduates from the 1996-1997 academic year is higher for females (44.2 percent) than males (36.0 percent).

4-22


36.0 37.4 39.0 37.5 41.8 42.6 45.3 45.8

49.3 51.9

44.244.946.047.450.551.7

54.957.060.462.4

1996-1997

1997-1998

1998-1999

1999-2000

2000-2001

2001-2002

2002-2003

2003-2004

2004-2005

2005-20060

20

40

60

80

100

MaleFemale

Perc

ent

Graduation Year

Figure 12Work Participation Of Graduates From W.Va. Public

Higher Education Institutions In 2007 By Gender

Source: Author Calculations As Figure 13 shows, annualized wages of female graduates rise at a lower rate than the annualized wages of male graduates. Additionally, the figure shows that annualized wages of male graduates were consistently higher for all graduation years. In 2007, male graduates from the 2005-2006 academic year earned average annualized wages of $30,818, $3,478 more than their female counterparts. Yet, this wage gap widens as the time from graduation increases. For example, the average annualized wages of male graduates was $11,960 higher than annual wages of female graduates during the 2000-2001 academic year, and $17,981 for the 1996-1997 year graduates.

1996-1997

1997-1998

1998-1999

1999-2000

2000-2001

2001-2002

2002-2003

2003-2004

2004-2005

2005-2006$25,000

$30,000

$35,000

$40,000

$45,000

$50,000

$55,000

$60,000

$65,000

Males

Females

Figure 13Annualized Wages Of Graduates From W.Va. Public

Higher Education Institutions In 2007 By Gender

Graduation Year

Wag

es P

er W

orke

r


4-23


Work Participation And Wages By Gender, Degree, And Area of Concentration The level of education and the area of study are major determinants of work participation and wages of male and female graduates. As Table 5 shows, higher levels of education have a higher negative impact on work participation rates of male graduates. Work participation rates of graduates with Associate’s degrees are almost identical for men and women, at 66.4 percent and 66.5 percent respectively. As both groups increase their levels of education, from Associate’s to Bachelor’s, Bachelor’s to Master’s, and Master’s to Doctoral, male graduates experience greater declines in work participation. Overall, we find that the work participation of male graduates falls from 66.4 percent at the Associate’s level, to 20.9 percent at the Ph.D. level. Instead, work participation of female graduates goes from 66.5 percent to 29.6 percent.

Degree

Work Participation

Average Annualized

Wages

Work Participation

Average Annualized

Wages

Work Participation

Average Annualized

Wages

Associate's 66.4% $38,195 66.5% $29,134 66.5% $32,071Bachelor's 39.5% $39,504 46.9% $30,803 43.4% $34,539Master's 42.1% $58,351 56.6% $44,374 51.1% $48,703First Professional 45.7% $108,639 46.7% $82,500 46.1% $96,653Doctoral 20.9% $64,339 29.6% $62,709 24.6% $63,502

Table 5Work Participation And Average Annualized Wages Of Graduates From W.Va.

Public Higher Education Institutions In 2007 By Degree And Gender

Males Females Total

Similarly, the wage gap between male and female graduates varies by degree. For the whole sample, male graduates earn higher annualized wages. As Table 5 shows, the smallest wage difference is observed at the Doctoral level, where women earn $1,630 less than men. This was not the case for First Professionals where men earned annualized wages as much as $26,139 higher than women. The second largest wage gap between male and female graduates is in Master’s degrees ($13,977), followed by Associate’s ($9,061), and Bachelor’s ($8,701). We now focus on the results for work participation and wages of male and female graduates by area of concentration. As mentioned before, areas of concentration are aggregations of specific majors. We use the 8-digit CIP codes (described above) and we calculate the work participation rates and the average annualized wages of West Virginia male and female graduates during the past ten years, according to their area of study. Table 6 summarizes the work participation, annual wages, and number of total male and female graduates by area of concentration. While the area of concentration with the largest number of male graduates during the last decade was business, marketing, and management, health related fields represented the top area (in terms of number of graduates) for women. Yet, in terms of work participation, the areas with the largest percentage of people working in West Virginia in 2007 were precision production for men (81.0 percent) and science technologies for women (82.0 percent). As Table 6 also shows, in 2007, health professions provided the highest returns for male graduates working in West Virginia ($84,989), followed by engineering ($62,182), and legal

4-24


professions ($60,578). The lowest returns for men were in the philosophy and religious studies with average annual wages per graduate $20,671.


Total Graduates From 1996-1997

To 2005-2006

Work Participation


Worker


To 2005-2006

Work Participation


WorkerAcademic And Occupationally-Specific Programs

Agriculture, Agriculture Operations 562 40.2% $40,527 491 31.8% $27,933Architecture and Related Services 202 7.9% $42,616 53 n/d n/dBiological and Biomedical Sciences 1,335 35.1% $43,141 1,555 36.1% $31,804Business, Management, Marketing, and Related 8,734 43.3% $46,664 9,129 54.1% $33,315Communication, Journalism, and Related Programs 1,728 33.7% $34,193 2,626 41.5% $34,435Communications Technologies 182 52.7% $30,916 138 51.4% $19,717Computer and Information Sciences 1,275 46.0% $45,842 400 42.5% $38,832Education 4,906 49.4% $40,018 12,059 61.6% $35,449Engineering 4,001 30.5% $62,182 773 25.4% $56,593Engineering Technologies/Technicians 2,348 55.5% $47,997 361 48.8% $34,180English Language and Literature/Letters 530 35.3% $27,052 1,010 36.3% $24,993Family and Consumer Sciences/Human Sciences 77 31.2% $37,225 1,373 32.0% $22,036Foreign Languages, Literatures, and Linguistics 175 21.1% $27,499 462 27.7% $18,665Health Professions and Related Clinical Sciences 3,480 51.2% $84,989 12,144 60.3% $46,286History 789 34.6% $27,779 391 39.6% $22,050Legal Professions and Studies 715 57.3% $60,578 910 60.7% $45,278Liberal Arts and Sci., Gen. Std., and Humanities 4,406 45.9% $36,852 5,251 55.1% $27,589Library Science n/a n/a n/a n/d n/d n/dMathematics and Statistics 292 26.7% $42,878 242 26.9% $32,299Mechanic and Repair Technologies/Technicians 187 64.7% $44,153 n/d n/d n/dMulti/Interdisciplinary Studies 698 55.2% $44,346 877 65.1% $25,069Natural Resources and Conservation 868 46.7% $38,774 213 33.8% $33,130Parks, Recreation, Leisure and Fitness Studies 1,050 23.4% $34,355 616 28.9% $28,445Personal and Culinary Services 79 51.9% $23,854 92 55.4% $21,495Philosophy and Religious Studies 49 34.7% $20,671 18 n/d n/dPhysical Sciences 793 31.0% $43,212 437 38.7% $41,459Precision Production 195 81.0% $44,118 n/d n/d n/dPsychology 953 41.3% $29,429 2,624 44.4% $26,857Public Administration and Social Service Prof 446 47.3% $39,474 1,985 51.7% $31,205Science Technologies/Technicians 139 77.7% $45,827 217 82.0% $21,649Security and Protective Services 1,927 58.6% $36,204 1,474 57.8% $24,757Social Sciences 2,158 32.6% $31,733 1,859 44.0% $24,362Transportation and Materials Moving n/d n/d n/d n/a n/a n/aVisual and Performing Arts 1,051 27.5% $26,278 1,325 30.6% $20,630

Total 46,336 43.1% $46,146 61,119 52.7% $35,083n/d: data not disclosedn/a: no data available for this area of concentration

Table 6Work Participation And Annualized Wages By Gender For Graduates From W.Va.


Males Females

For females, the highest annualized wages in 2007 were in engineering ($56,593), followed by health related degrees ($46,286), legal professions ($45,278), and physical sciences ($41,459). Female graduates with degrees in foreign languages and literature had the lowest annual returns with average annualized wages equal to $18,665. Work Participation and Wages By Race Overall, we find that the work participation rates of West Virginia graduates are primarily driven by the results for white graduates. Indeed, the vast majority of the student population in West Virginia is of Caucasian origin. As Table 7 shows, 98,471 (91.6 percent) of the total number of graduates from public colleges and universities during the last ten years were identified as Caucasian. The other 8.4 percent is composed of African-Americans (3.7 percent), Hispanics (0.9 percent), Asian-Pacific or Islander (3.2 percent), American-Indians (0.3 percent), and other graduates (0.3 percent).

4-25


Race

Graduates from 1996-1997 to

2005-2006

Work Participation

Average Annualized

WagesCaucasian 98,471 50.7% $39,557African-American 3,956 34.0% $29,936Hispanic 981 25.2% $34,812Asian-Pacific or Islander 3,445 12.5% $48,352American-Indian or Alaskan Native 314 49.4% $35,035Other 288 32.6% $23,455

Total 107,455 48.6% $39,317

Table 7Work Participation And Average Annualized Wages Of Graduates From

West Virginia Public Higher Education Institutions In 2007 By Race

Table 7 also shows the work participation rates and annualized wages of graduates in 2007 by race. Note that with the exception of American-Indians and Alaskan Natives, minorities had work participation rates below the overall average rate. With 12.5 percent Asian-Pacific graduates had the lowest percent of graduates working in West Virginia in 2007. Work participation of Hispanic graduates was twice as high as Asians with 25.2 percent, while African-Americans had a work participation rate of 34.0 percent. Caucasians, on the other hand, had the highest in-state work participation rate in 2007 with 50.7 percent of the graduates during the last decade working in West Virginia. In contrast, Asian-Pacific graduates had the highest annualized wages ($48,352). On average, African-American graduates earned annualized wages of $29,936, the lowest among the ethnic groups identified in the sample. Annualized wages of Caucasian graduates lie close to the middle at $39,557 per graduate. These differences in wages –as well as in work participation- can be explained by a variety of reasons such as gender, degree, or residency, as we will see later. Figure 14 shows how graduates from the same race vary their work participation in the state, according to their experience. As Figure 14 shows, work participation of Caucasian graduates reflects the overall trend depicted from the beginning. Note how work participation of Caucasian graduates falls from 60.6 percent for the most recent graduates to 42.4 percent for the 1996-1997 academic year graduates.

4-26


1996-1997

1997-1998

1998-1999

1999-2000

2000-2001

2001-2002

2002-2003

2003-2004

2004-2005

2005-20060

10

20

30

40

50

60

70Caucasian

African American

Hispanic

Asian/Pacific or Islander

American Indian

Perc

ent

Graduation Year

Figure 14Work Participation Of Graduates From W.Va. Public

Higher Education Institutions In 2007 By Race


When accounting for experience, African-Americans see the sharpest decline in work participation rates. The difference in work participation rates between the least experienced African-Americans and those who graduated ten years before is 21.5 percentage points, followed by Hispanics and Caucasians with 18.6 and 18.2 percentage-point differences respectively, and lastly Asians (11.9 percentage points). Although American-Indians had an increase in the work participation rates over the ten year period (2.7 percentage points), their work participation varies significantly by year of graduation with a tendency to fall overtime. Figure 15 shows how annualized wages of Asian-Pacific or Islander graduates are consistently higher at all levels of experience. In addition, annualized wages of both Asian and African-American graduates tend to increase faster with experience. As Figure 15 implies, average annual wages of African-American graduates from the 1996-1997 academic year are 99.5 percent higher than the average annualized wages of the most recent graduates ($19,915). Asian graduates had an even higher wage growth with annualized wages rising 104.6 percent over the 10 year period. The figure shows slower gains for Caucasians (72.4 percent), Hispanics (60.2 percent), and American-Indians (34.1 percent). However, note that in cases such as that of Asians, Hispanics, and African-Americans, one additional year does not necessarily mean higher wages. For instance, in 2007, average annualized wages of Asian-Pacific graduates from the 1999-2000 academic year were $19,551 lower than the annualized wages of Asians that graduated one year later. In contrast, we observe that wages of Caucasian graduates rise more steadily as every year of experience translates into higher annualized wages.

4-27


1996-1997

1997-1998

1998-1999

1999-2000

2000-2001

2001-2002

2002-2003

2003-2004

2004-2005

2005-2006$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

$60,000

$70,000

$80,000

$90,000

$100,000

CaucasianAfrican AmericanHispanicAsian/Pacific or IslanderAmerican Indian

Figure 15Annualized Wages Of Graduates From W.Va. Public

Higher Education Institutions In 2007 By Race

Graduation Year

Wag

es P

er W

orke

r


Asian

Caucasian

Work Participation And Wages By Race, Degree, and Area of Concentration Table 8 provides information on work participation and returns to education by degree and race. Except for the graduates at the Associate’s level, in 2007, Caucasian graduates from West Virginia public higher education institutions have the highest work participation rates across all other degrees. Unlike the other races, Caucasian graduates also showed work participation rates above the overall average of all summary degrees. As Table 8 shows, work participation rates of African Americans, Hispanics, and Asian Pacific or Islanders were significantly below their degree averages. African Americans, for instance, had work participation rates between 3.4 (Doctoral) and 22.9 (First Professional) percent lower than average. Work participation rates of Hispanic graduates ranged between 9.7 (First Professional) and 29.0 (Master’s) percent below their corresponding average, while those of Asian-Pacific ranged between 16.1 percent below the average for Doctoral graduates and 48.1 percent below the average for graduates with Associate’s degrees.

RaceWork

Participation

Average Annualized

Wages

Work Participation

Average Annualized

Wages

Work Participation

Average Annualized

Wages

Work Participation

Average Annualized

Wages

Work Participation

Average Annualized

WagesCaucasian 67.3% $32,325 44.8% $34,879 55.6% $48,805 48.2% $97,042 29.8% $63,998African-American 54.4% $23,728 30.5% $26,988 34.0% $44,243 23.2% $59,667 21.2% $63,205Hispanic 48.0% $27,281 22.9% $28,916 22.1% $45,164 36.4% $53,200 n/d n/dAsian-Pacific or Islander 18.4% $26,949 15.4% $30,437 8.7% $51,919 22.7% $110,578 8.5% $58,858American-Indian or Alaskan Native 74.1% $31,986 39.4% $30,026 52.6% $39,284 n/d n/d n/d n/dOther 57.7% $17,405 36.3% $20,442 18.8% $46,799 n/d n/d n/d n/d

Total 66.5% $32,071 43.4% $34,539 51.1% $48,703 46.1% $96,653 24.6% $63,502n/d: data not disclosedn/a: no data available

Table 8Work Participation And Average Annualized Wages Of Graduates From West Virginia Public Higher Education

Institutions In 2007 By Degree and Race

DegreeAssociate's Bachelor's Master's First Professional Doctoral

Table 8 also shows the average annualized wages of graduates during the last decade, accounting for degree and race. We find that, for most races, additional levels of education translate into

4-28


higher wages. However, we find that on average American-Indian graduates do not experience higher returns to education until they go beyond the Bachelor’s degree. In fact, in 2007, American Indian graduates with Bachelor’s degrees earned lower annualized wages ($30,026) than those with Associate’s degree only ($31,986). Once American-Indians earn Master’s degrees, their annualized wages rise to $39,284 (up 30.8 percent). Table 9 summarizes work participation and annualized wages for Caucasian graduates by area of concentration. Graduates with degrees in science technologies had the highest work participation rates among Caucasians. Of the 334 graduates with degrees in science technologies during the last ten years, 81.1 percent were on the state payrolls in 2007. Health related fields and education (two of the three fields with the largest number of graduates) ranked seventh and eighth in work participation with rates of 59.5 percent and 59.3 percent respectively. The lowest work participation rate belonged to graduates with degrees in architecture and related fields (10.0 percent). Annual wages for Caucasian graduates in 2007 were highest in engineering ($61,685), followed by health professions ($53,735), legal professions ($52,583), and engineering technologies ($46,705). Graduates in philosophy and religious studies had the lowest annualized wages among Caucasians with $20,580. Foreign languages placed just above them with $20,709 per graduate.

4-29




To 2005-2006

Work Participation



Agriculture, Agriculture Operations 978 37.6% $35,658Architecture and Related Services 250 10.0% $37,294Biological and Biomedical Sciences 2,611 36.8% $37,577Business, Management, Marketing, and Related 16,351 51.1% $39,313Communication, Journalism, and Related Programs 3,970 39.7% $34,766Communications Technologies 295 54.2% $26,040Computer and Information Sciences 1,356 52.4% $44,133Education 16,122 59.3% $36,630Engineering 3,691 36.6% $61,685Engineering Technologies/Technicians 2,581 55.8% $46,705English Language and Literature/Letters 1,440 36.4% $25,248Family and Consumer Sciences/Human Sciences 1,346 32.4% $22,882Foreign Languages, Literatures, and Linguistics 486 29.4% $20,709Health Professions and Related Clinical Sciences 14,856 59.5% $53,735History 1,099 37.2% $25,782Legal Professions and Studies 1,529 60.4% $52,583Liberal Arts and Sci., Gen. Std., and Humanities 8,705 52.5% $31,782Library Science n/d n/d n/dMathematics and Statistics 353 33.1% $37,638Mechanic and Repair Technologies/Technicians 195 65.6% $44,677Multi/Interdisciplinary Studies 1,446 62.6% $33,119Natural Resources and Conservation 1,034 44.7% $37,896Parks, Recreation, Leisure and Fitness Studies 1,527 26.7% $32,053Personal and Culinary Services 165 52.7% $22,778Philosophy and Religious Studies 59 39.0% $20,580Physical Sciences 1,083 35.8% $43,032Precision Production 196 80.6% $43,958Psychology 3,321 44.7% $27,681Public Administration and Social Service Prof 2,210 52.3% $32,836Science Technologies/Technicians 334 81.1% $31,151Security and Protective Services 3,136 60.0% $31,629Social Sciences 3,587 40.1% $28,184Transportation and Materials Moving n/d n/d n/dVisual and Performing Arts 2,151 30.6% $22,927

Total 98,471 50.7% $39,557n/d: data not disclosedn/a: no data available for this area of concentration

Table 9Work Participation And Annualized Wages Of Caucasian Graduates From W.Va.


Table 10 reports work participation and annualized wages by area of concentration for African-American graduates during the last ten years. The highest work participation rates belonged to science technologies (70.0 percent), multi/interdisciplinary studies (45.5 percent), and health professions (42.5 percent). Similar to the results for Caucasian graduates, engineering and health professions had the highest average annualized wages in 2007 ($47,295 and $44,197 respectively). Family and consumer sciences posted the lowest annualized wages with $20,363, translating into an average annualized wage $9,573 below the average annual wages for all African-American graduates in 2007.

4-30




To 2005-2006

Work Participation



Agriculture, Agriculture Operations 21 n/d n/dArchitecture and Related Services n/d n/a n/aBiological and Biomedical Sciences 81 28.4% $25,873Business, Management, Marketing, and Related 719 33.1% $29,699Communication, Journalism, and Related Programs 228 30.3% $26,701Communications Technologies 12 n/d n/dComputer and Information Sciences 53 37.7% $37,625Education 531 36.3% $35,538Engineering 105 13.3% $47,295Engineering Technologies/Technicians 77 28.6% $32,293English Language and Literature/Letters 42 35.7% $27,768Family and Consumer Sciences/Human Sciences 46 32.6% $20,363Foreign Languages, Literatures, and Linguistics 17 n/d n/dHealth Professions and Related Clinical Sciences 252 42.5% $44,197History 42 n/d n/dLegal Professions and Studies 57 36.8% $28,451Liberal Arts and Sci., Gen. Std., and Humanities 629 39.1% $26,920Library Science n/a n/a n/aMathematics and Statistics 21 n/d n/dMechanic and Repair Technologies/Technicians n/a n/a n/aMulti/Interdisciplinary Studies 88 45.5% $27,460Natural Resources and Conservation 13 n/d n/dParks, Recreation, Leisure and Fitness Studies 84 13.1% $29,762Personal and Culinary Services n/d n/d n/dPhilosophy and Religious Studies n/d n/a n/aPhysical Sciences 25 n/d n/dPrecision Production n/a n/a n/aPsychology 143 36.4% $25,444Public Administration and Social Service Prof 153 35.9% $26,948Science Technologies/Technicians 20 70.0% $24,517Security and Protective Services 206 37.9% $23,098Social Sciences 218 24.3% $20,589Transportation and Materials Moving n/a n/a n/aVisual and Performing Arts 63 20.6% $23,573


Table 10Work Participation And Annualized Wages Of African-American Graduates From W.Va.


As Table 11 shows, Hispanic graduates from West Virginia state colleges and universities have a strong preference for areas such as business, liberal arts, education, and engineering. Among those, education (39.8 percent) has the highest Hispanic work participation rates, and is followed by liberal arts with 36.5 percent. Note that work participation and wages of most of the areas of concentration cannot be disclosed due to the small number of Hispanic graduates working and earning wages in West Virginia. Nonetheless, we observe that among the Hispanic graduates in the state, health professions provided the highest returns to education with annual wages equal to$52,299 per graduate.

4-31




To 2005-2006

Work Participation



Agriculture, Agriculture Operations n/d n/d n/dArchitecture and Related Services n/d n/a n/aBiological and Biomedical Sciences 28 n/d n/dBusiness, Management, Marketing, and Related 152 26.3% $41,519Communication, Journalism, and Related Programs 61 n/d n/dCommunications Technologies n/d n/a n/aComputer and Information Sciences 13 n/d n/dEducation 88 39.8% $36,256Engineering 80 n/d n/dEngineering Technologies/Technicians 14 n/d n/dEnglish Language and Literature/Letters 15 n/d n/dFamily and Consumer Sciences/Human Sciences 15 n/d n/dForeign Languages, Literatures, and Linguistics 78 14.1% $27,693Health Professions and Related Clinical Sciences 81 33.3% $52,299History 12 n/d n/dLegal Professions and Studies 16 n/d n/dLiberal Arts and Sci., Gen. Std., and Humanities 96 36.5% $25,808Library Science n/a n/a n/aMathematics and Statistics n/d n/d n/dMechanic and Repair Technologies/Technicians n/a n/a n/aMulti/Interdisciplinary Studies n/d n/d n/dNatural Resources and Conservation n/d n/a n/aParks, Recreation, Leisure and Fitness Studies 24 n/d n/dPersonal and Culinary Services n/d n/a n/aPhilosophy and Religious Studies n/d n/d n/dPhysical Sciences 12 n/d n/dPrecision Production n/d n/a n/aPsychology 36 27.8% $20,312Public Administration and Social Service Prof 19 n/d n/dScience Technologies/Technicians n/a n/a n/aSecurity and Protective Services 23 n/d n/dSocial Sciences 52 25.0% $20,092Transportation and Materials Moving n/a n/a n/aVisual and Performing Arts 28 n/d n/d

Total 981 25.2% $34,812n/d: data not disclosedn/a: no data available for this area of concentration

Table 11Work Participation And Annualized Wages Of Hispanic Graduates From W.Va.


Table 12 shows work participation and annualized wages for Asian-Pacific or Islander graduates in 2007. Although engineering has had the largest number of Asian graduates during the last ten years, only 5.5 percent of them collected wages in West Virginia in 2007. In fact, the highest work participation rates among Asian graduates are in health professions (23.8 percent) and education (23.7 percent). Average annualized wages for Asian graduates are highest in the health related fields with $81,330, 68.2 percent higher than the average wages across all Asian graduates. In contrast, Asian graduates with visual arts degrees experienced the lowest average annual wages at $21,434 per graduate.

4-32




To 2005-2006

Work Participation



Agriculture, Agriculture Operations 39 n/d n/dArchitecture and Related Services n/d n/a n/aBiological and Biomedical Sciences 156 21.2% $32,890Business, Management, Marketing, and Related 568 10.7% $48,213Communication, Journalism, and Related Programs 70 15.7% $29,719Communications Technologies n/d n/a n/aComputer and Information Sciences 230 7.4% $58,449Education 156 23.7% $34,815Engineering 839 5.5% $57,966Engineering Technologies/Technicians 21 n/d n/dEnglish Language and Literature/Letters 30 n/d n/dFamily and Consumer Sciences/Human Sciences 36 n/d n/dForeign Languages, Literatures, and Linguistics 46 n/d n/dHealth Professions and Related Clinical Sciences 370 23.8% $81,330History 18 n/d n/dLegal Professions and Studies 20 n/d n/dLiberal Arts and Sci., Gen. Std., and Humanities 166 18.7% $28,954Library Science n/a n/a n/aMathematics and Statistics 148 12.2% $42,790Mechanic and Repair Technologies/Technicians n/a n/a n/aMulti/Interdisciplinary Studies 25 n/d n/dNatural Resources and Conservation 21 n/d n/dParks, Recreation, Leisure and Fitness Studies 24 n/a n/aPersonal and Culinary Services n/a n/a n/aPhilosophy and Religious Studies n/d n/a n/aPhysical Sciences 97 12.4% $37,703Precision Production n/a n/a n/aPsychology 63 n/d n/dPublic Administration and Social Service Prof 33 n/d n/dScience Technologies/Technicians n/d n/a n/aSecurity and Protective Services 12 n/d n/dSocial Sciences 124 n/d n/dTransportation and Materials Moving n/a n/a n/aVisual and Performing Arts 122 9.0% $21,434


Table 12Work Participation And Annualized Wages Of Asian-Pacific or Islander Graduates From W.Va.


Finally, Table 13 shows the average annualized wages and in-state work participation of American-Indian graduates from West Virginia public higher education institutions. Of the 41 graduates with degrees in health related fields, 65.9 percent earned wages in the state in 2007. Salaries for those graduates in the health sector averaged $50,501 per worker. Work participation of American-Indian graduates with business, management, and marketing degrees in 2007 was 42.0 percent, with average annualized wages of $33,395.

4-33




To 2005-2006

Work Participation



Agriculture, Agriculture Operations n/d n/d n/dArchitecture and Related Services n/a n/a n/aBiological and Biomedical Sciences n/d n/d n/dBusiness, Management, Marketing, and Related 50 42.0% $33,395Communication, Journalism, and Related Programs 15 n/d n/dCommunications Technologies n/d n/d n/dComputer and Information Sciences n/d n/d n/dEducation 30 46.7% $35,032Engineering 12 n/d n/dEngineering Technologies/Technicians n/d n/d n/dEnglish Language and Literature/Letters 11 n/d n/dFamily and Consumer Sciences/Human Sciences n/d n/a n/aForeign Languages, Literatures, and Linguistics n/d n/a n/aHealth Professions and Related Clinical Sciences 41 65.9% $50,501History n/d n/d n/dLegal Professions and Studies n/d n/d n/dLiberal Arts and Sci., Gen. Std., and Humanities 41 58.5% $21,189Library Science n/a n/a n/aMathematics and Statistics n/d n/d n/dMechanic and Repair Technologies/Technicians n/a n/a n/aMulti/Interdisciplinary Studies n/d n/d n/dNatural Resources and Conservation n/d n/d n/dParks, Recreation, Leisure and Fitness Studies n/d n/d n/dPersonal and Culinary Services n/a n/a n/aPhilosophy and Religious Studies n/a n/a n/aPhysical Sciences n/d n/d n/dPrecision Production n/d n/d n/dPsychology n/d n/d n/dPublic Administration and Social Service Prof 11 n/d n/dScience Technologies/Technicians n/d n/d n/dSecurity and Protective Services 11 n/d n/dSocial Sciences 19 n/d n/dTransportation and Materials Moving n/a n/a n/aVisual and Performing Arts n/d n/d n/d

Total 314 49.4% $35,035n/d: data not disclosedn/a: no data available for this area of concentration

Table 13Work Participation And Annualized Wages Of American-Indian Graduates From W.Va.


4-34


Appendix: List Of Institutions, Degrees, and Areas Of Concentration Public Higher Education Institutions Bluefield State College Community and Technical College at WVU Tech Community and Technical College of Shepherd Concord University, Fairmont State University Eastern West Virginia Community and Technical College Fairmont State Community and Technical College Glenville State College Marshall Community and Technical College Marshall University New River Community and Technical College Potomac State College of West Virginia University Shepherd University Southern West Virginia Community & Tech College West Liberty State College West Virginia Northern Community College West Virginia School of Osteopathic Medicine West Virginia State Community and Technical West Virginia State University West Virginia University West Virginia University Institute of Technology West Virginia University at Parkersburg Degrees Undergraduate Certificate Associate’s Degree Bachelor’s Degree First Professional Master’s Degree Post-Master’s Certificate Doctoral Degree

Areas Of Concentration And Majors Agriculture, Agriculture Operations, and Related Sciences

Agricultural Economics Agriculture, Agriculture Operations, and Related Sciences, Other. Agriculture, General Animal Sciences, General. Aquaculture Plant Sciences, Other.

Architecture and Related Services Landscape Architecture

4-35


Biological and Biomedical Sciences Anatomy Biochemistry Biochemistry, Biophysics and Molecular Biology, Other Biological and Biomedical Sciences, Other. Biology/Biological Sciences, General Botany/Plant Biology Exercise Physiology Genetics, General. Medical Microbiology and Bacteriology Microbiological Sciences and Immunology, Other. Pharmacology and Toxicology Physiology, General Reproductive Biology Zoology/Animal Biology

Business, Management, Marketing, and Related Support Services Accounting Accounting Technology/Technician and Bookkeeping Administrative Assistant and Secretarial Science, General Business Administration and Management, General Business Administration, Management and Operations, Other Business, Management, Marketing, and Related Support Services, Other Business/Commerce, General Business/Managerial Economics Business/Office Automation/Technology/Data Entry Entrepreneurship/Entrepreneurial Studies Executive Assistant/Executive Secretary Fashion Merchandising Finance, General Hospitality Administration/Management, General Hospitality Administration/Management, Other Hotel/Motel Administration/Management Information Resources Management/CIO Training. Labor and Industrial Relations Management Information Systems, General Marketing/Marketing Management, General Office Management and Supervision Operations Management and Supervision Retailing and Retail Operations. Sales, Distribution, and Marketing Operations, General Tourism and Travel Services Marketing

4-36


Communication, Journalism, and Related Programs Communication Studies/Speech Communication and Rhetoric. Communication, Journalism, and Related Programs, Other. Journalism

Communications Technologies/Technicians and Support Services Graphic and Printing Equipment Operator, General Production. Printing Press Operator. Graphic Communications, Other. Communications Technologies/Technicians and Support Services, Other

Computer and Information Sciences and Support Computer and Information Sciences and Support Services, Other. Computer and Information Sciences, Computer and Information Sciences, General. Computer Programming, Specific Applications. Computer Programming/Programmer, General. Computer Science. Information Science/Studies.

Education Adult and Continuing Education and Teaching Agricultural Teacher Education. Business Teacher Education Counselor Education/School Counseling and Guidance Services. Curriculum and Instruction. Early Childhood Education and Teaching. Education, General. Educational Administration and Supervision, Other. Educational Leadership and Administration, General. Educational Psychology. (Moved, Report Under 42.18 series) Educational/Instructional Media Design. Elementary Education and Teaching Junior High/Intermediate/Middle School Education and Teaching Kindergarten/Preschool Education and Teaching Physical Education Teaching and Coaching Reading Teacher Education Secondary Education and Teaching Special Education and Teaching, General Teacher Assistant/Aide. Teacher Education and Professional Development, Specific Levels and Methods, Other Technical Teacher Education. Trade and Industrial Teacher Education

Engineering

4-37


Aerospace, Aeronautical and Astronautical Engineering Chemical Engineering. Civil Engineering, General Computer Engineering, General. Computer Software Engineering. Electrical, Electronics and Communications Engineering Engineering Physics Engineering Science Engineering, General. Engineering, Other Environmental/Environmental Health Engineering Industrial Engineering. Mechanical Engineering. Mining and Mineral Engineering Petroleum Engineering. Systems Engineering.

Engineering Technologies/Technicians Aeronautical/Aerospace Engineering Technology/Technician Architectural Drafting and Architectural CAD/CADD Architectural Engineering Technology/Technician Automotive Engineering Technology/Technician Civil Engineering Technology/Technician Computer Engineering Technology/Technician Computer Technology/Computer Systems Technology Drafting and Design Technology/Technician, General Electrical, Electronic and Communications Engineering Technology/Technician Electromechanical Technology/Electromechanical Engineering Technology Energy Management and Systems Technology/Technician Engineering Technologies/Technicians, Other Engineering/Industrial Management Environmental Engineering Technology/Environmental Technology Industrial Production Technologies/Technicians, Other Industrial Technology/Technician Manufacturing Technology/Technician Mechanical Drafting and Mechanical Drafting CAD/CADD. Mechanical Engineering Related Technologies/Technicians, Other Mechanical Engineering/Mechanical Technology/Technician Mining Technology/Technician. Occupational Safety and Health Technology/Technician Petroleum Technology/Technician Surveying Technology/Surveying.

4-38


English Language and Literature/Letters Creative Writing. English Language and Literature, General. Speech and Rhetorical Studies.

Family and Consumer Sciences/Human Sciences Child Care and Support Services Management. Family and Consumer Sciences/Human Sciences, General Housing and Human Environments, Other.

Foreign Languages, Literatures, and Linguistics Foreign Languages and Literatures, General French Language and Literature. Sign Language Interpretation and Translation.

Health Professions and Related Clinical Sciences Athletic Training/Trainer Audiology/Audiologist and Speech-Language Pathology/Pathologist. Clinical Laboratory Science/Medical Technology/Technologist Clinical/Medical Laboratory Science and Allied Professions, Other Clinical/Medical Laboratory Technician Community Health Services/Liaison/Counseling Cytotechnology/Cytotechnologist Dental Clinical Sciences, General Dental Hygiene/Hygienist Dental Laboratory Technology/Technician Dentistry (DDS, DMD). Dietetics/Dietitian (RD). Emergency Medical Technology/Technician (EMT Paramedic). Health Information/Medical Records Technology/Technician Health Professions and Related Clinical Sciences, Other Health/Health Care Administration/Management Medical Administrative/Executive Assistant and Medical Secretary Medical Radiologic Technology/Science – Radiation Therapist Medical Transcription/Transcriptionist Medical/Clinical Assistant Medicine (MD). Nuclear Medical Technology/Technologist Nurse/Nursing Assistant/Aide and Patient Care Assistant Nursing, Other Nursing/Registered Nurse (RN, ASN, BSN, MSN) Occupational Therapy/Therapist Osteopathic Medicine/Osteopathy (DO). Pharmaceutics and Drug Design.

4-39


Pharmacy (PharmD [USA], PharmD or BS/BPharm [Canada]) Pharmacy Technician/Assistant Physical Therapist Assistant Physical Therapy/Therapist Psychiatric/Mental Health Services Technician Public Health, General (MPH, DPH). Respiratory Care Therapy/Therapist Speech-Language Pathology/Pathologist Surgical Technology/Technologist Veterinary/Animal Health Technology/Technician and Veterinary Assistant Vocational Rehabilitation Counseling/Counselor

History History, General

Legal Professions and Studies Law (LL.B., J.D.). Legal Administrative Assistant/Secretary. Legal Assistant/Paralegal. Legal Professions and Studies, Other.

Liberal Arts and Sciences, General Studies and Humanities General Studies Humanities/Humanistic Studies. Liberal Arts and Sciences, General Studies and Humanities, Other Liberal Arts and Sciences/Liberal Studies

Library Science Library Science/Librarianship

Mathematics and Statistics Mathematics, General. Statistics, General

Mechanic and Repair Technologies/Technicians Avionics Maintenance Technology/Technician Heating, Ventilation, AC and Refrigeration Maintenance Technology (HAC(R), HVAC(R)). Heavy/Industrial Equipment Maintenance Technologies, Other Mechanic and Repair Technologies/Technicians, Other

Multi/Interdisciplinary Studies Biological and Physical Sciences Gerontology Multi-/Interdisciplinary Studies, Other Science, Technology and Society Systems Science and Theory

Natural Resources and Conservation Environmental Studies.

4-40


Forest Management/Forest Resources Management. Forest Sciences and Biology. Forest Technology/Technician. Forestry, General. Natural Resource Economics. Natural Resources Management and Policy, Other. Wildlife and Wildlands Science and Management. Wood Science and Wood Products/Pulp and Paper Technology.

Parks, Recreation, Leisure and Fitness Studies Health and Physical Education, General Kinesiology and Exercise Science Parks, Recreation and Leisure Facilities Management Parks, Recreation and Leisure Studies

Personal and Culinary Services Culinary Arts/Chef Training. Food Preparation/Professional Cooking/Kitchen Assistant. Institutional Food Workers Restaurant, Culinary, and Catering Management/Manager

Philosophy and Religious Studies Philosophy

Physical Sciences Chemistry, General. Geology/Earth Science, General Physical Sciences. Physics, General.

Precision Production Machine Shop Technology/Assistant Welding Technology/Welder Precision Metal Working, Other

Psychology Counseling Psychology Educational Psychology Psychology, General School Psychology

Public Administration and Social Service Prof Community Organization and Advocacy Public Administration Social Work

Sciences Technologies/Technicians Chemical Technology/Technician Science Technologies/Technicians, Other

4-41


Security and Protective Services Corrections Criminal Justice/Police Science Criminal Justice/Safety Studies Criminalistics and Criminal Science Fire Protection and Safety Technology/Technician Forensic Science and Technology Security and Protective Services, Other

Social Sciences Economics, General Geography International Relations and Affairs Political Science and Government, General. Social Sciences, General. Social Sciences, Other. Sociology

Visual and Performing Arts Art/Art Studies, General Commercial and Advertising Art Design and Visual Communications, General Drama and Dramatics/Theatre Arts, General Drawing Graphic Design Interior Design Music, General Visual and Performing Arts, General Visual and Performing Arts, Other

4-42

West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission Meeting of January 23, 2009 ITEM: Presentation on Class of 2008 High School

Senior Opinions Survey INSTITUTIONS: All RECOMMENDED RESOLUTION: Information Item STAFF MEMBER: Rion McDonald and Angela Bell BACKGROUND: This report examines the results of the Class of 2008 High School Senior Opinions Survey that was administered by the Division of Policy and Planning in the spring of 2008 at 27 high schools across West Virginia. The report explores student perceptions regarding college access, college choice, and the various aspects of the PROMISE Scholarship Program. Survey results indicate that the majority of students (80 percent) indicated that they plan to attend college, with 75 percent reporting that they would begin college immediately in the Fall after high school graduation. However, not all students who stated that they planned to attend college in the Fall had actually applied or been accepted. Furthermore, survey results indicate that college aspirations, choice, and enrollment vary by family income. Of those respondents who indicated that they did not plan to attend college, the desire to earn money immediately after graduation, as well as the high cost of college were the most widely citied reasons for this decision. Additionally, 45 percent of such students reported that a college degree was not necessary for their chosen career and subsequently did not see the value of a post-secondary education for their ultimate career aspirations. Staff will provide a detailed review of this data to the Commission, with focused attention on college aspirations, affordability, college preparation, financial planning, major/degree selection, and other issues related to the college choice decision. Additionally, staff will examine the impact of a range of financial aid programs on this decision calculus, with particular focus on the PROMISE Scholarship Program.

5-1

Review and Analysis of the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission’s Class of 2008 High School Senior Opinions Survey

5-2

Executive Summary This paper reports the results of the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission’s Class of 2008 High School Senior Opinions Survey, a comprehensive examination of the post-graduation plans of the state’s public high school seniors. The general goal of the survey was to study, using self-reported data, students’ aspirations related to postsecondary education and the factors and concerns that influence their decisions regarding whether to go to college and, if so, what type of institution to attend. Of specific importance in this year’s survey was the influence of the Providing Real Opportunities for Maximizing In-State Student Excellence (PROMISE) Scholarship Program on college decisions and how students’ plans might change in response to potential alterations to this program. The following summary presents a brief overview of the findings of the survey, including statewide percentage estimates based on the responses of those surveyed. Specific sections of this report are dedicated to the following areas of interest: high school preparation, post-high school plans and college participation, college cost and affordability, college choice, and the impact of PROMISE. High School Preparation Table A reports survey results related to indicators measuring readiness for college or work after high school graduation. The vast majority of West Virginia’s high school seniors took the curriculum designed to ready students for college. Considering that a sizable proportion of students answered that they did not know their specific curriculum path, though, the figure of 68.2 percent listed here could be even higher. Regardless, this percentage represents an increase of about 10 percent from the 2007 survey (though differences in analysis methodology make comparisons between the two surveys somewhat inexact). Additionally, over 74 percent completed Algebra II or a higher-level math course, a statistic which is important because Algebra II is ACT’s bellwether course indicating preparedness for college-level mathematics. Finally, in terms of general academic performance, over three fourths of seniors had an overall high school grade point average (GPA) of 3.0 or greater, reflecting at least a B average. While the high school performance statistics for the state’s seniors were good, the percentage of students earning a composite score of 22 (the score needed to get a merit-based PROMISE Scholarship) or higher was 47.7 percent. This figure suggest a disconnect between the courses high school students are taking, their grades in these courses, and how prepared the students actually are for college. It is also interesting to note that only 51.0 percent of seniors felt that their high school experience had left them either “prepared” or “very prepared” for pursuit of their post-graduation ambitions, which included college for most.

5-3

Table A. High School Preparation

Measure Percentage of Seniors

Taking College Preparatory Curriculum 68.2

HS GPA ≥ B Average 76.4

ACT ≥ 22 47.7

Completed Algebra II or Higher 74.2

Feel Prepared or Very Prepared for Post-Graduation Plans 51.0

Post-High School Plans and College Participation As alluded to above, a large proportion of the state’s high school seniors had plans to pursue a traditional postsecondary education. As Table B shows, almost 80.0 percent of students statewide intended to go to college at some point, and 73.8 percent planned to start school in the fall of 2008. Additionally, 75.0 percent of seniors hoped to earn a bachelor’s or a higher-level degree.

Table B. College Plans

Measure Percentage of Seniors

Will Attend College 79.9

Will Attend College in Fall 73.8

Aspire to Bachelor’s or Higher 75.0 In terms of planned attendance, there was a statistically valid association between student intentions and their self-reported family income. For example, the percentage of students from families earning greater than $60,000 who planned to begin college in the fall was over 20 percentage points higher than that of students from families with income of $30,000 or less. A section of this survey was dedicated to exploring the reasons why some of West Virginia’s high school seniors decided not to pursue a college education. Table C presents the five most common factors that students viewed as either “important” or “very important” in their decision-making. The desire to begin working immediately was by far the most prevalent factor in the choice to forego traditional postsecondary education. Only about half that proportion, however, felt that a need to help support their family was a material influence on their decision. Regarding other popular reasons, the cost of college was judged to be influential by an estimated two thirds of non-attending seniors, and over half considered self-doubt about their ability to succeed in college as at least an “important” factor in choosing not to attend.

5-4

Table C. Reasons for Not Attending College

Factor Percentage of Seniors

Want to Work & Earn Money 86.0

Costs Too Much 66.0

Tired of School 54.3

Would Likely Not Succeed 52.3

Want to Attend Vocational School 51.9 College Cost and Affordability The financial obligations of postsecondary education can play a role in a student’s decision not to enter college. Cost also can shape the experience of those who are college-bound; it can influence everything, from the specific institution selected to their financial position upon degree completion (think of those who incur student loan debt). Thus, one objective of this survey was to measure students’ confidence in their ability to pay for higher education and to examine how they planned to finance their college career. Table D below reports that over half of West Virginia’s college-going high school seniors had “some” concerns about paying for college, but felt they likely would be able to cover expenses. The proportion who had “major” financial concerns, meaning that they were uncertain about having enough money to finish college, was 21.5 percent. Predictably, there was a statistically valid inverse relationship between family income and the amount of student financial uneasiness, with 36.0 percent of seniors in families earning $30,000 or less having “major” concerns, as compared with only 10 percent of seniors from families earning more than $60,000.

Table D. Financial Concerns Related to College

Amount/Level of Concerns Percentage of

Seniors

None 22.5

Some 56.0

Major 21.5 Table E displays the five most common sources of financial support that college-going students intended to use to cover at least part of their postsecondary expenses. The highest percentage of seniors expected to employ parental or family assistance (77.4%), followed by those that intend to work part-time while in school (70.3%), and those who plan to use institution-based scholarships (56.1%).

5-5

Table E. Sources of Financial Support

Source Percentage of Seniors

Parents 77.4

Part-Time College Job 70.3

College Scholarship 56.1

Personal Savings 55.6

Non-Federal Loans 50.1 College Choice This survey also examined students’ college choices and attempted to pinpoint the key factors behind their selection of a specific school. Table F presents, based only on the responses of those who intended to start college in fall 2008, the college choices of West Virginia’s seniors in terms of general institution type. As the table shows, over 70 percent intended to start their college career at a public four-year school in West Virginia. The next highest estimated percentage (14.2%) planned to attend an in-state public two-year institution, while a small proportion of students intended to enroll in either an in-state private school or an out-of-state institution of some kind.

Table F. College Choice by Institution Type

Institution Type Percentage of Seniors

WV Public Four-Year Institution 71.0

WV Public Two-Year Institution 14.2

WV Private Institution 6.0

Out-of-State Institution 8.6 Table G lists the ten most prevalent factors considered by college-bound students as either “important” or “very important” in their choice of a specific school to attend. The percentage estimates below were based on the survey responses of those seniors who intended to begin college in the fall of 2008. Almost all students (96.3%) felt that finding a school with an academic program that fit their personal goals was a significant criterion in the college selection process. Other academic-related choice factors considered important by a large percentage of seniors included the presence of an outstanding program in a chosen field of study, the overall reputation of the school, and the chances of moving from the school into a prestigious graduate or professional program. An examination of Table G also reveals that variables tied to cost were viewed as pivotal in choosing a postsecondary institution. Affordability was deemed to be an “important” or “very important” element by 89.9 percent of students who planned to start their college careers in fall 2008. It is not surprising, then, that factors such as ease in obtaining financial aid/loans or

5-6

earning an institution-awarded scholarship weighed heavily in the college choice decisions of a great many students as well. A perhaps surprising result was the comparative impact of college marketing information and school-related correspondence on students’ selection of a specific institution. Over three fourths (76.2%) judged this type of material and information to be influential in their decision-making, which was a much higher proportion than those associated with factors such as proximity to home (57.4%), college size (56.6%), and parental desire (44.0%).

Table G. Influences on Specific College Choice

Factor Percentage of Seniors

Academic Program Offering 96.3

Affordable Cost 89.9

Superior Program in Major 85.9

Ease in Obtaining Financial Aid/Loans 83.8

Academic Reputation 77.8

School Marketing Information/Correspondence 76.2

Obtained Scholarship 70.7

Social Life 66.8

Chances of Getting Into Top Graduate/Professional School 62.5

Part-Time Employment Available 58.7 Impact of PROMISE The 2008 High School Senior Opinions Survey contained a group of questions designed to gather information about the possible effects of West Virginia’s merit-based scholarship program, PROMISE (Providing Real Opportunities for Maximizing In-State Student Excellence), on students’ decisions regarding postsecondary education. One question asked college-going students if their fundamental decision to attend college was tied to earning this scholarship. Based on the responses to this question, it was estimated that 76.5 percent of PROMISE-eligible students would have gone to college even if they had not received a PROMISE Scholarship (see Table H below). Conversely, 23.5 percent would not have pursued postsecondary education without a scholarship.

Table H. Effect of PROMISE on College Attendance

Choice Percentage of Seniors

Would Attend Without PROMISE 76.5

Would Not Attend Without PROMISE 23.5

5-7

In regard to the selection of a specific college to attend, obtaining a PROMISE Scholarship did convince a sizable proportion of students to stay inside the state of West Virginia for the start of their postsecondary careers. According to the results of this survey, 38.7 percent of scholarship-eligible, college-going seniors would have gone to school out of state were it not for the PROMISE Scholarship Program. The scholarship, though, appeared to have little impact on which in-state institution students chose to attend, at least as far as this issue was addressed by this year’s survey. Future surveys should examine the potential impact of PROMISE on the distribution of students among the state’s four-year and two-year sectors, as well as the influence it could have on students’ choice of a public or private in-state institution. Table I contains survey results related to how West Virginia students might react to possible changes to the PROMISE program. Turning the scholarship into a forgivable loan, with forgiveness contingent upon a student working in the state for a period of time after degree completion, would likely reduce considerably the number of students accepting an award. As Table I shows, just 62.1 percent of 2008’s PROMISE-eligible seniors would have accepted the award with a one-year work stipulation attached, and only 42.2 percent would have done so if a multi-year requirement had been in place. Also, some students would have declined an award that mandated 20 hours of community service per year to maintain eligibility; in this case, however, the vast majority (75.8%) still would have accepted PROMISE funds.

Table I. Acceptance Rates of PROMISE by Eligible Students Given Potential Program Changes

Program Change Percentage of Seniors

One-Year Work Requirement 62.1

Multi-Year Work Requirement 42.2

Community Service Requirement 78.5

5-8

Methodology This survey was conducted based on a stratified cluster sample design. 27 public high schools were selected randomly to administer the survey to their entire senior classes in April/May 2008. In survey design parlance, each high school represented a cluster or primary sampling unit (PSU). Before selection of the PSU’s, though, the state was stratified (or divided) by congressional district. Then potential PSU’s were placed into one of three school-size categories within each of the state’s three districts. 40 of West Virginia’s 120 public schools were categorized as “small,” with a senior class of equal to or less than 97 students; another third were classified as “medium” size (98 to 180 seniors); and the “large” category consisted of 40 schools with a senior class of 181 to 488 students. Finally, three schools of each size level were chosen randomly within each district to participate in the survey. Fortunately, all 27 schools receiving the survey instrument were able to administer it and send back valid results, even if not all seniors at the various schools could be canvassed (due to absences or other such inevitable difficulties). The district and size stratification variables were employed in selecting the PSU’s to ensure that students from all areas of the state could participate in the survey and to reflect any fundamental differences that might exist between schools of different sizes. The results of the 2008 High School Senior Opinions Survey were analyzed statistically and are discussed at length in the remainder of this report. Each results table in the following pages presents the actual frequency of various responses to a survey question/measure. More importantly, each table also reports the estimated population percentage related to a given response. The population under study here is that of all West Virginia public high school seniors. Percentage estimates were computed based on actual survey responses with appropriate adjustments made to account for the sampling design used for this project. Information concerning the amount of sampling error associated with these statewide percentages is contained in the confidence limits listed along with each estimate. Each set of limits bookends---with a certainty level of 95 percent---the range within which the population percentage fell. The confidence limits were also developed based on actual responses and the sampling methodology employed.

5-9

Section One: High School Preparation The following analysis relates to the preparedness of West Virginia’s high school seniors for college. As Table 1.1 below demonstrates, an estimated 68.2 percent of the 2008 senior class took the college preparation curriculum while in secondary school. Taking sampling error into account, this proportion could have been as low as 63.3 percent or as high as 73.1 percent. Approximately 13.6 percent of seniors pursued a technical/vocational training curriculum, while a surprising 18.2 percent actually did not know their program of study. This high percentage of “unknowns” does affect the reliability of these estimates and may be reflective of a need for more thorough guidance counseling in the state’s high schools or it could be the result of a poorly-worded survey question. This is an issue that needs to be explored in future administrations.

Table 1.1 High School Curriculum

Curriculum FrequencyPopulation Percentage

95% Confidence Limitsfor Percentage

College Preparation 1526 68.2 63.3 73.1

Technical Preparation 308 13.6 11.2 16.1

Don’t Know 414 18.2 14.9 21.5

Total 2248 100.0 Table 1.2 conveys that the vast majority of the state’s seniors performed very well in high school in terms of cumulative grade point average (GPA), with an estimated 76.4 percent having a B average or better. Earning a B average is one of the requirements for earning a PROMISE Scholarship, as is a composite ACT score of 22 or better. It should be noted that this figure is based on overall, not core, GPA and that averages were self-reported on the survey.

Table 1.2 Cumulative High School GPA

B Average or Higher FrequencyPopulation Percentage


No 505 23.6 20.2 27.0

Yes 1654 76.4 73.0 79.8

Total 2159 100.0

Table 1.3 on the following page provides an overview of how the class of 2008 performed on the ACT. This table presents the proportion of seniors who earned a 22 or above on the test. While it is estimated that close to half of West Virginia’s seniors taking the ACT made a 22 or higher, the disparity between this percentage (47.7%) and the proportion earning a B average or greater in their coursework (76.4%) is striking, even after sampling error is considered. This gap perhaps reflects a general disconnect between the level of academic rigor in the state’s secondary schools and the knowledge and skills needed to succeed in college, at least to the extent that those elements are measured accurately by the ACT.

5-10

Table 1.3 Composite ACT Score

ACT ≥ 22 FrequencyPopulation Percentage


No 759 52.3 48.5 56.1

Yes 703 47.7 43.9 51.5

Total 1462 100.0

In order to prepare for college-level work, ACT recommends that high school students take at least three years of mathematics, encompassing a sequence of Algebra I, Geometry, and Algebra II. Table 1.4 contains the results from the 2008 High School Senior Opinions Survey regarding the highest level math course students completed in their high school career. According to the survey, roughly three fourths of the state’s seniors had passed Algebra II or a higher-level course. This large proportion of students taking the ACT-recommended coursework, however, is not matched by the percentage of 2008 ACT-taking graduates earning at least a 22 on the math subtest, ACT’s benchmark score indicating readiness for college math. The fact that only 31 percent––according to the testing service’s Measuring College Readiness 2008 report––of the state’s test-taking seniors met this criterion is perplexing because it appears that a much larger percentage completed the appropriate secondary coursework. In fact, if the analysis is limited to just ACT takers, then approximately 87.0 percent of the class of 2008 completed the prescribed math courses or more. This discrepancy between the proportion of students having taken the recommended classes and the proportion with a satisfactory score on the ACT might point to a need to evaluate the academic rigor of the mathematics courses in the state’s high schools. Table 1.4 Highest Math Course Completed in High School

Highest Math FrequencyPopulationPercentage


Less Than Algebra I 21 0.9 0.6 1.2

Algebra I 62 2.8 1.8 3.8

Geometry 475 22.1 19.3 24.8

Algebra II or Above 1648 74.2 71.5 77.0

Total 2206 100.0

The following table (Table 1.5) presents how 2008’s seniors judged the adequacy of their high school education in terms of preparation for their future. Only a small estimated proportion of students (8.9%) felt that their secondary education left them totally unprepared for their post-high school plans; on the other hand, a similarly small percentage (12.0%) believed that they were exceptionally prepared. The general consensus was that students felt that they were either “prepared” or “somewhat prepared” for either college or work after high school.

5-11

Table 1.5 Student Perception of the Quality of Their High School Education

Level of Preparation FrequencyPopulation Percentage


Very Prepared 261 12.0 9.8 14.3

Prepared 865 39.0 36.3 41.7

Somewhat Prepared 886 40.1 37.0 43.3

Not Prepared At All 201 8.9 7.1 10.6

Total 2213 100.0

The 2008 survey also asked students if they wished their high school had offered additional courses in various areas of study, such as math and science. In West Virginia, as is also the case in many other states, the cultivation of college graduates in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics (STEM) is seen as vitally important to the future development of the state economy. The information in Table 1.6 can be viewed as one way of gauging whether the state’s secondary system is offering enough in terms of STEM coursework. The table provides the percentage of students who desired more STEM classes in high school, both on an overall basis and among those students who intended to major in a STEM field in college. Only an estimated 22.2 percent of all West Virginia seniors wished they had had the opportunity to take more STEM classes, but this percentage doubled when only the responses of expected STEM majors were analyzed. Table 1.6 Percentage of Students Wanting More STEM Courses

Type of Students Frequency Population Percentage

95% Confidence Limitsfor Percent

All Students 511 / 2263 22.2 20.0 24.4

STEM Majors 254 / 560 44.9 40.8 48.9

Section 2: Post-High School Plans and College Participation One of the objectives of this survey was to obtain information about the post-high school plans of West Virginia’s seniors. Of primary importance were the intentions of college-going seniors, but an attempt also was made to examine the reasons why some students decided not to pursue a traditional postsecondary education. Table 2.1 on the following page presents both the proportion of the state’s seniors who planned to pursue a college education at some point and the proportion who were going to start school in the fall of 2008. An estimated 79.9 percent intended to go to college, but a smaller percentage (73.8%) planned to start in the fall. This latter percentage was close to the 75.2 percent reported in the 2007 survey; however, it was well above the college-going rate of 57.5 percent reported by the Higher Education Policy Commission for fall 2007. It appears that quite a few students either change their plans between the time of the survey and the fall semester or encounter some kind of obstacle that prevents them from enrolling. A closer look at this issue reveals that only

5-12

about 94 percent of students with plans to start college in the fall had applied at the time of the survey, and an even lower percentage (88%) had been accepted. The proportion of students who intended to enter the freshmen class of 2008 and had actually been accepted was 64.8 percent, a figure much closer to 2007’s official college-going rate (the 2008 figure is not yet available). Table 2.1 Plans Regarding College

College Plans FrequencyPopulation Percentage


Will Attend 1682 / 2095 79.9 76.5 83.3

Will Attend Fall 1562/ 2110 73.8 70.7 76.8

The following table (Table 2.2) looks at the college plans of students across three self-reported family income brackets. As the table shows, both the percentage of students who planned to attend college and the proportion who intended to begin in fall 2008 rose as family income increased. Additionally, statistical testing, by means of a modified chi-square test which accounted for the sampling design used for this project, showed that there was a significant association between family income and planned college attendance. The rate at which students in the upper income bracket planned to attend the college was roughly 15 percentage points higher than that of students in the below $30,000 category. This difference increased to over 20 percentage points when considering those students who decided to begin their postsecondary career right away. Table 2.2 College Plans by Family Income

Income Class College Plans Frequency PopulationPercentage

95% Confidence Limits

for Percentage

≤ $30k Will Attend 418 / 583 71.9 67.9 75.8

Will Attend Fall 374 / 593 63.7 60.7 66.8

> $30k and ≤ $60k Will Attend 531 / 651 81.3 77.3 85.4

Will Attend Fall 489 / 652 74.5 71.2 77.7

> $60k Will Attend 618 / 706 86.9 83.2 90.6

Will Attend Fall 597 / 708 83.9 80.8 87.0

The 2008 survey contained a question asking students to recollect the point at which they first thought about pursuing a college education. The objective of this question was to gain some perspective on when the state’s public school students began to view college as a viable option. Table 2.3 displays the overall results from this question. According to the survey results, the largest percentage of students (estimated at 36.9 percent) first considered going to college in elementary school. Additionally, approximately a quarter had their first thought while in middle school; therefore, over half of 2008’s seniors began thinking about college before reaching high school. Roughly 30 percent began considering

5-13

higher education while in high school, and about 10 percent had never entertained the thought of attending college. Table 2.3 First Consideration of College

When First Thought of College Frequency

Population Percentage


Never Thought of Going 211 9.5 7.6 11.4

Elementary School 837 36.9 32.8 40.9

Middle School 534 24.5 22.3 26.6

Early High School 323 15.0 12.9 17.1

Late High School 314 14.1 12.5 15.8

Total 2219 100.0

There is an assumption that students who start thinking about college at an earlier age are more likely to prepare themselves properly for postsecondary education. This survey did contain evidence to support this hypothesis. An estimated 84.0 percent of those who considered college prior to high school were already accepted to college at the time of the survey; the acceptance rate among students who started thinking about college while in high school was only 62.2 percent. Furthermore, 55.2 percent of students in the “before high school” category earned a 22 or higher on the ACT, as compared to just 26.2 percent of the “while in high school” group. Statistical testing confirmed this relationship between time of first consideration and both acceptance rates and ACT performance. Focusing on why some West Virginia seniors decided not to go to college, Table 2.4 gives the proportion of students who marked various reasons for non-attendance as either “important” or “very important.” As the table shows, a desire to start working and earning money, as well as the cost of post-secondary education, ranked very high in importance. A slight majority (estimated at 52.2 percent) of those not attending college felt their belief that they “probably could not do well in college” was at least an “important” reason for their decision. Additionally, a fairly large proportion (44.5%) saw a college education as irrelevant to their future career/job choice. While personal rationalization may have been the primary culprit here, it could be possible that the responses in these last two areas were partly consequences of a lack of preparation at the secondary level. Or perhaps the state’s education establishment could be more effective in stressing the benefit of post-secondary education in basically all career fields. It is important to note, however, that 51.9 percent viewed a vocational or technical school as an alternative route for continuing their studies/training. Finally, it appears that first-generation status was not a pervasive influence on why students did not go to college, as only 22.8 percent of non-attending seniors considered this influence as “important” or “very important” (though the sampling error was about 5.7 percent).

5-14

Table 2.4 Reasons for Not Attending College

Reason Frequency Population Percentage


for Percentage

Want to Start Work to Earn Money 264 / 307 86.0 81.3 90.6

Costs Too Much 199 / 303 66.0 61.9 70.2

Tired of School 162 / 302 54.3 48.3 60.3

Would Likely Not Succeed 161 / 302 52.3 46.6 58.0

Want to Attend Vocational School 159 / 307 51.9 47.4 56.5

Unnecessary for Future Job 136 / 302 44.5 37.6 51.5

Need to Help Support Family 128 / 303 43.6 38.9 48.3

Undecided About Major 121 / 302 40.4 33.6 47.1

No Desirable School Nearby 84 / 305 27.0 20.7 33.2

Want to Join Military 75 / 302 24.9 19.2 30.7

No One in Family Has Gone 69 / 304 22.8 17.2 28.5

Friends Not Going 63 / 304 19.9 16.1 23.7

High School Staff Advice 49 / 305 15.7 12.1 19.3

Increasing the proportion of the citizenry holding a bachelor’s degree is one of the foremost long-range goals of West Virginia’s education system. Attaining this goal, of course, first requires that young adults desire to earn a college diploma. Regarding student academic aspirations, Table 2.5 below displays the estimated percentage of all West Virginia high school seniors who wanted to obtain a bachelor’s degree or higher. Based on survey results, 75.0 percent had this aspiration (with a sampling error of roughly 3.9 percent). Table 2.5 Degree Aspirations

Aspiration FrequencyPopulation Percentage

95% Confidence Limits for Percentage

Bachelor's Degree or Higher 1673 75.0 71.1 78.9

Less than Bachelor's Degree 547 25.0 21.1 28.9

Total 2220 100.0

Section Three: College Cost & Affordability This section presents information related to student responses concerning the financial obligations and constraints of postsecondary education. Only the answers of students planning to attend college were included in the analysis.

5-15

Table 3.1 below displays information regarding students’ concerns about their ability to pay for college. Over half (56.0%) of West Virginia’s high school seniors had some concerns about being able to afford postsecondary education, but felt that the necessary funds probably would be available. An estimated 21.5 percent had major concerns related to this issue. Here “major” concerns were defined as the student being unsure that he would have enough money to finish school. Only 22.5 percent had no financial concerns.

Table 3.1 Level of Financial Concerns Amount/Level of Concerns Frequency



None 405 22.5 19.5 25.4

Some 1007 56.0 53.1 59.1

Major 380 21.5 18.0 25.0

Total 1792 100.0

An analysis of student concerns by family income demonstrated that there was a statistically significant association between income category and financial uneasiness. This predictable conclusion was evidenced by the percentage of students with “major” concerns across the three income categories utilized in this report. While only 10.3 percent of students with self-reported family income of more than $60,000 had “major” concerns, this proportion rose to 21.0 percent among those in the $30,000 to $60,000 range and jumped to 36.0 percent of those in the bottom third ($30,000 or less). However, this means that 64 percent of the least affluent students did not have major concerns about financing college. The following table (3.2) lists various forms of financial support and the percentage of students who planned to pay at least part of their educational expenses from each source. The vast majority of students (77.4%) intended to use some form of parental/family support. The table also shows that an estimated 70.3 percent planned on working a part-time job while in college. While about a third expected to receive the state-awarded, merit-based PROMISE Scholarship, 56.1 percent were awarded institution-based scholarship money. Furthermore, almost half (49.8%) received scholarship funds from other sources. Regarding loan funding, over half (50.1%) intended to take out non-federal loans to cover at least some of the cost of college. Finally, in terms of the use of aid intended for the neediest of students, an estimated 30.6 percent of West Virginia’s 2008 seniors were going to be federal Pell grant recipients, and 36.4 percent were expecting its state-awarded counterpart, the West Virginia Higher Education Grant. Focusing only on those students who reported a family income of $30,000 or less painted a different picture with regard to the extent to which many of the above sources of financial support would be used. For instance, only an estimated 57.1 percent of students in this lower income bracket were receiving parental/family contributions. Additionally, 53 percent of these students will be expecting a Pell grant, and 52.2 percent were planning to use a West Virginia Higher Education Grant. The fact that almost half of students with family incomes of $30,000 or less do not plan to use need-based aid, however, merits investigation.

5-16

Table 3.2 Sources of Financial Support

Source of Support Frequency Population Percentage


for Percentage

Parents 1381 / 1779 77.4 74.5 80.4

Part-Time College Job 1238 / 1762 70.3 67.6 73.1

College Scholarship 982 / 1756 56.1 53.3 58.8

Personal Savings 978 / 1765 55.6 53.1 58.1

Other Loans 861 / 1747 50.1 46.4 53.9

Other Scholarship 859 / 1740 49.8 47.1 52.5

WV Higher Education Grant 617 / 1736 36.4 32.3 40.5

PROMISE 585 / 1750 33.3 30.4 36.2

Federal Loan 568 / 1743 33.2 30.2 36.2

Pell Grant 517 / 1735 30.6 27.2 34.0

College Work/Study 469 / 1730 27.7 25.7 29.8

Full-Time College Job 257 / 1726 14.6 12.5 16.7

Concerning student efforts to procure financial aid, the survey did ask seniors if they had completed the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) form, which is a prerequisite for receiving many types of aid, including the state Higher Education Grant and even the PROMISE Scholarship. Based on these results (see Table 3.3), it is estimated that 84.4 percent of 2008’s college-going seniors completed the form. To the extent that this year’s survey results can be compared to last year’s, there appears to have been a fairly sizable increase in the proportion of students filling out the form, and thus initiating the process of obtaining aid. Only 75.7 percent of last year’s survey respondents indicated that they had completed the FAFSA.

Table 3.3 Completion of FAFSA

Completed FAFSA FrequencyPopulation Percentage


No 275 15.6 12.9 18.3

Yes 1531 84.4 81.7 87.1

Total 1806 100.0

An examination of FAFSA completion rates by the family income categories used throughout this report revealed that there was no statistically valid relationship between income level and form completion. All income groups basically filled out the form at the same rate; so in this respect, the state seems to have been doing a good job in educating students from all economic backgrounds about the college aid process.

5-17

Section 4: College Choice One objective of the 2008 High School Senior Opinions Survey was to examine the distribution of the state’s high school graduates in terms of college choice. With regard to type of institution, the following table (4.1) presents the aggregated choices of the class of 2008. Only the results of students who indicated which school they planned to go to in the fall were analyzed. As Table 4.1 shows, the vast majority of West Virginia’s graduating seniors planned to enroll in an in-state four-year institution (71.0%). Taking sampling error into consideration, this proportion could have been as low as 65.7 percent or as high as 76.4 percent. The percentage attending a state two-year institution was estimated to be 14.2 percent, with a 95 percent probability range of 8.8 percent to 19.6 percent. A small percentage of graduating seniors (6.0%) picked one of the state’s private schools, while 8.6 percent intended to go to an out-of-state institution. Table 4.1 College Choice by Institution Type

Institution Type Frequency



for Percentage

WV Public Four-Year Institution 909 71.0 65.7 76.4

WV Public Two-Year Institution 173 14.2 8.8 19.6

WV Private Institution 75 6.0 3.7 8.3

Out-of-State Institution 112 8.6 5.8 11.5

Other 2 0.1 0.0 0.4

Total 1271 100.0

Considering the need for more STEM graduates in West Virginia, it was instructive to analyze the college choice patterns of those who intended to major in STEM fields versus non-STEM majors. Table 4.2 displays the results of this analysis and demonstrates that the institution-type choices of the state’s high school seniors were quite similar for STEM and non-STEM students in 2008. This general conclusion was supported by statistical testing which provided no evidence of an association between whether a student planned to study a STEM discipline and the type of institution chosen. Last year’s survey seemed to show that STEM majors enrolled in out-of-state institutions at twice the rate of non-STEM students; however, the population estimates from this year’s study were much closer than 2007’s sample results. Also, a look at the 95 percent probability ranges for the two estimates suggests that sampling variation, not some underlying reality, was likely the reason for last year’s large discrepancy.

5-18

Table 4.2 Institution Type by STEM Major

Student Major Institution Type Frequency



for Percentage

Non-STEM Out-of-State Institution 68 8.0 5.6 10.5




Total 824 100.0

STEM Out-of-State Institution 41 9.5 5.5 13.6




Total 428 100.0

Another purpose of this survey was to obtain information regarding the factors that influence West Virginia’s high school seniors in deciding which college to attend. The table below (4.3) lists, in descending order, the estimated percentage of students who rated various factors as either “important” or “very important” in the process of selecting their postsecondary institution. Based on these results, most students (96.3%) chose a school based on the availability of an academic program that matched individual needs or goals. In fact, over 74 percent of students considered this criterion “very important,” a far higher proportion than any other criterion. Closely related to this factor, 85.9 percent of students indicated that attending a school with a “superior program in my major” was important or very important. The second highest ranked college choice factor, however, was the affordability of the selected school, with almost 90 percent giving weight to this feature. Over half of 2008’s seniors (53.8%) felt that that the impact of cost was highly important, making it the only factor other than program availability to be viewed as “very important” by a majority of students. The significance of cost in the college selection process was echoed in how students ranked the influence of variables such as the ease in obtaining financial aid/loans at a school or the benefit of an institution-awarded scholarship. A majority of seniors also considered the availability of part-time employment to be a material factor in choosing an institution. This result was not surprising, given the large percentage of seniors who expected to work part-time while in college (see Section Three above). Finally, it is interesting to note the percentage of students (76.2%) who relied in their institutional choice on correspondence sent to them by their selected school. This ranked far ahead of other factors such as parental wishes, teacher/counselor recommendations, and national rankings.

5-19

Table 4.3 Impact of Various Factors on College Choice*

Choice Factor Frequency Population Percentage


for Percent

Academic Program Offering 1757 / 1823 96.3 95.2 97.4

Affordable Cost 1652 / 1834 89.9 88.3 91.5

Superior Program in Major 1564 / 1820 85.9 83.8 87.9

Ease in Obtaining Financial Aid/Loans 1524 / 1822 83.8 82.1 85.6

Academic Reputation 1414 / 1822 77.8 75.4 80.1

School Marketing Information/Correspondence

1379 / 1813 76.2 73.8 78.5

Obtained Scholarship 1285 / 1819 70.7 67.8 73.5

Social Life 1220 / 1825 66.8 62.5 71.0

Chances of Getting Into Top Graduate/Professional School

1133 / 1818 62.5 59.6 65.4

Part-Time Employment Available 1052 /1816 58.7 55.9 61.5

Near Home 1053 / 1825 57.4 53.1 61.7

College Size 1023 / 1820 56.6 53.9 59.3

PROMISE Accepted 1009 / 1820 55.6 52.9 58.4

Ease of Admittance 891 / 1820 49.0 46.0 52.1

Plan to Work/Live in Same State 814 / 1817 445.0 39.5 50.5

Choice of Friends 806 / 1827 44.0 40.5 47.5

Athletic Program 782 / 1821 42.7 38.1 47.3

Advanced Academic Programs 740 / 1825 40.8 37.9 43.6

Live at Home 791 / 1825 43.0 38.3 47.6

Parental Wishes 674 / 1824 36.7 33.8 39.5

Campus Religious Life 636 / 1819 34.8 31.1 38.6

Teacher/Counselor Recommendation 600 / 1813 33.7 31.0 36.3

Racial/Ethnic Mix of Students/Faculty 513 / 1822 28.5 25.6 31.3

College Recruiters 461 / 1821 25.6 23.9 27.4

Religious Affiliation 457 / 1816 25.1 21.7 28.4

National Rankings 442 / 1824 24.1 22.6 25.67

Legacy (Parents) 273 / 1827 14.5 12.4 16.62* Rankings were based on point estimates of the population percentages; sampling error could result in a different rank order among some of the choice factors.

5-20

Section 5: Impact of PROMISE Like Georgia, Tennessee, and several other states, West Virginia has a broad, merit-based scholarship program known as PROMISE (Providing Real Opportunities for Maximizing In-State Student Excellence). The scholarship provides, for those high school graduates who qualify, coverage of tuition and fees at any of the state’s four-year or two-year institutions or an amount equal to the average four-year public cost if a student attends one of West Virginia’s private schools. The revenue source for this award is largely slot machine gambling. Several questions in this section of the survey examined the possible influence of PROMISE on the college-going choices of high school students. Specifically, the impact of PROMISE eligibility on students’ decisions to pursue college and where to attend were studied. As the program, which began in fall of 2002, has matured, a practical and predictable problem has emerged. Large numbers of students qualifying for the scholarship as well as rising tuition have caused scholarship costs to exceed the allotted revenue. The state has responded three times by raising the academic eligibility standards of the scholarship in order to reduce the number of recipients. Despite these adjustments, the scholarship probably still will have difficulty fulfilling all its obligations as the program is currently constituted. Therefore, the state presently is undertaking a comprehensive review of the program and is studying the possible impact of potential changes to PROMISE. One initial-stage proposal, which would allay concerns that West Virginia taxpayers are subsidizing the educational capital of other states too heavily via college graduate out-migration, is to transform the scholarship into a forgivable loan. College graduates would agree to work in West Virginia for a certain length of time or repay the funds they received. This section of the 2008 high school senior survey examines the impact this stipulation might have had on the decision of likely PROMISE recipients to accept the award. The survey also collected the responses of students to the hypothetical attachment of a yearly community service requirement to the receipt of PROMISE funds. The idea is that a service stipulation would increase the extent to which scholarship holders would be benefiting the state community directly. To be eligible to receive a PROMISE award, a high school student must meet the following requirements:

• graduate with both an overall and core GPA of 3.00 or better • earn a composite score of 22 or more on the ACT (or a 1020 on the SAT) • make at least a 20 on the ACT math, science, reading, and English subtests (or a

490 and a 480 on the SAT critical reading and math subsections, respectively) Overall, 33.8 percent of West Virginia’s 2008 high school seniors were eligible for a PROMISE Scholarship, based on self-reported data from the survey. Taking sampling error into account, this percentage ranged from 30.2 percent to 37.5 percent (at a confidence level of 95 percent).

5-21

The table below (5.1) reports college-going, scholarship-eligible students’ feelings about the impact of PROMISE on their decision to pursue a college education. Approximately 76.5 percent of these students would have attended college with or without the scholarship; conversely, though, 23.5 percent would not have gone without a PROMISE award. Obviously there was a segment of college-bound seniors in the class of 2008 whose college-going decisions were affected positively by the program. Whether this proportion is considered “large” or not is, of course, a more subjective question. Table 5.1 Effect of PROMISE on College Attendance

Would Attend Anyway Frequency PopulationPercentage


No 144 23.5 19.7 27.2

Yes 477 76.5 72.8 80.3

The following analysis pertains to the influence of PROMISE on where students chose to attend college. Table 5.2 displays the results. The program seemed to have little influence on the distribution of students among state colleges and universities, at least as far as this process was gauged in this particular survey. A plurality of students (an estimated 44 percent) indicated that the scholarship had no bearing on their school choice; these students would have attended the same in-state institution with or without PROMISE. Very few students switched to a different West Virginia public or private school because of PROMISE. A nice addition to future surveys would be a question designed to measure the impact of PROMISE on student decision-making regarding selection of a state public versus a state private school. It might also be worthwhile to study any possible effect of the program in relation to two-year or four-year institution selection. Of significant note, though, is the fact that an estimated 38.7 percent of PROMISE-eligible students chose an in-state college instead of an out-of-state school as a direct result of the scholarship. This suggests that the program has been successful in keeping more of the state’s better-performing high school students in West Virginia for their postsecondary education. Table 5.2 Effect of PROMISE on College Choice

Effect/Choice Decision FrequencyPopulation Percentage


for Percentage

No impact: attend same WV college 250 44.1 38.2 50.1

No impact: attend same out-of-state college 67 10.8 7.3 14.2

Significant impact: attend WV college vs. out-of-state 229 38.7 34.0 43.3

Significant impact: attend different WV public college 27 4.5 2.6 6.4

Significant impact: attend different WV private college 7 1.1 0.4 1.8

Do not know where attending yet 5 0.8 0.2 1.5

Total 585 100.0

5-22

In regard to a potential transformation of the scholarship into a forgivable loan, Table 5.3 presents how PROMISE-eligible students would have responded to such a modification. If a one-year in-state work requirement was attached, approximately 62.1 percent of eligible students still would have accepted the award, while, of course, about 37.9 percent would have declined. The proportion which would have refused a PROMISE jumped to 57.8 percent when the hypothetical work requirement was extended to one year for every year of scholarship receipt. It should be noted, though, that the sampling error associated with these estimates was roughly 7.7 percent. Regardless, it is apparent that turning the PROMISE into a forgivable loan likely will reduce the number of those who accept the award significantly. Table 5.3 Impact of In-State Work Requirement

In-State Work Requirement

Decision to Accept Award Frequency

PopulationPercentage


One Year Not Accept 230 37.9 31.3 44.5

Still Accept 354 62.1 55.5 68.7

Total 584 100.0

Multi-Year Not Accept 348 57.8 50.1 65.5

Still Accept 237 42.2 34.5 49.9

Total 585 100.0

Finally, Table 5.4 measures how PROMISE-eligible students would have reacted to the imposition of a community service requirement. Over three fourths indicated that they still would have accepted the scholarship with a service requirement of 20 hours per year. Table 5.4 Impact of Community Service Requirement

Decision to Accept Award FrequencyPopulationPercentage

95% Confidence Limits for Percentage

Not Accept 125 21.5 18.8 24.2

Still Accept 460 78.5 75.8 81.2

Total 585 100.0

5-23

Conclusion The purpose of this survey was to examine the postsecondary education plans and decisions of West Virginia’s high school seniors. This objective required looking at such variables as students’ academic preparation at the secondary level, their educational/career aspirations, and their financial circumstances. While caution often should be exercised when drawing conclusions from opinion-based or self-reported data, the results of the Class of 2008 High School Senior Opinions Survey do offer some insights into the process that leads young adults into the state’s higher education system. First, a large majority of West Virginia’s public high school students take the college preparatory curriculum and perform quite well at the secondary level in terms of GPA. This does not mean, however, that they are fully prepared for the academic demands of higher education as indicated by student performance on the ACT. Also, a large percentage of students themselves felt less than adequately prepared for their post-graduation plans. Secondly, a vast majority––around 74 percent for the class of 2008––of the state’s high school students intend to start college right away. A smaller percentage of students, however, will actually attend a postsecondary institution in the fall after graduation, if history is any guide. Last year’s estimated college-going rate, for instance, was 57.5 percent. Perhaps at some point students are lured away from college by the immediate monetary rewards of going straight into the workforce, as this was the most common reason given in this year’s survey for not attending college. Whatever the reason, narrowing the gap that appears to exist between intentions and reality with regard to college participation should be a goal of the state’s education establishment. In addition to gauging college ambitions, the High School Senior Opinions Survey was also designed to gather feedback related to how students planned to meet the financial obligations of a postsecondary education. Cost can have a profound influence on one’s college experience, including whether one is able to remain in school long enough to earn a degree. Based on the survey results, about half of West Virginia’s college-going seniors harbor “some” concerns about paying for college, but believe they will likely have sufficient funds. Roughly a fifth have serious doubts about being able to stay in school, however. Many students are counting on sources of financial support such as a part-time job and scholarship funds to cover at least part of their expenses, in addition to parental/family assistance. This survey also explored students’ reasons for choosing their college as well as the distribution of students across different types of institutions. Seventy-one percent of students who indicated a college choice plan to attend one of the state’s public four-year institutions. Only 14 percent plan to attend a public two-year college and smaller numbers intend either to enroll in a state private school or go out of state. With respect to the factors that influence the selection of a specific institution, almost all students selected their institution based on it having an academic program that suits their goals/needs. Other academic features that students view as key in their decision-making include the overall reputation of the institution and the opportunity to progress from a there into a top graduate or

5-24

professional program. As might be expected, factors linked to cost and affordability, such as receiving an institutional scholarship, also play a significant role in college selection. Finally, the High School Senior Opinions Survey looked at the impact of the PROMISE Scholarship program on the college-related decisions of West Virginia high school students. Based on the evidence provided by the survey, the large majority of PROMISE awardees (77%) would go to college with or without the scholarship. However, there is a group (23%) for whom the scholarship was critical in their decision to attend college. In terms of where students go to school, PROMISE seems to convince a healthy number of West Virginians to stay in the state for their college education. As evidence of this effect, approximately 39 percent of last year’s PROMISE-eligible seniors indicated they would have gone out of state were it not for the scholarship. This year’s survey also asked scholarship-eligible students to consider whether they still would accept the award given certain hypothetical changes to the program. The responses to these questions indicated that many eligible students would decline the PROMISE award if it were transformed into a forgivable loan, with students agreeing to work in West Virginia for a certain length of time after college graduation. This is especially true if a multi-year work requirement were put in place; an estimated 58 percent of 2008’s eligible high school seniors would have turned down an award with such a stipulation. Students appear to be much more agreeable to the attachment of a community service requirement, however. Over three fourths of last year’s eligible students would have accepted an award with an obligation of 20 service hours annually.

5-25

West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission Meeting of January 23, 2009 ITEM: Final Report of the PROMISE Scholarship Ad-

Hoc Advisory Committee INSTITUTIONS: All RECOMMENDED RESOLUTION: Information Item STAFF MEMBER: Rob Anderson BACKGROUND: At the request of Governor Manchin, the PROMISE Scholarship Ad-Hoc Advisory Committee was formed in early 2008 to review a host of issues pertaining to the PROMISE Scholarship Program. The committee’s work was chaired and coordinated by Dr. Jerry Beasley, President Emeritus of Concord University, who will present the final report and address questions from the Commission. The final product of this committee follows this agenda item. At its core, the report examines the landscape of merit aid programs nationally, offers an overview of the development and evolution of the PROMISE Scholarship Program, and offers suggestions and proposals to ensure the future viability of the program.

6-1

W E S T V I R G I N I A H I G H E R E D U C AT I O N P O L I C Y C O M M I S S I O N

6-2

Table of Contents List of Tables ....................................................................................................................... i List of Figures ..................................................................................................................... ii I. National Context .........................................................................................................1 II. History of the PROMISE Scholarship Program .........................................................6 III. Creation of the Committee/Committee Membership/Charge of the Committee ......10 IV. PROMISE Scholarship Objectives and Higher Education in West Virginia ...........11 V. Other Educational Trends in West Virginia Post-PROMISE...................................17 VI. Recommendations.....................................................................................................19 VII. Other Initiatives ........................................................................................................24 VIII. Future Direction ........................................................................................................25 Afterword and Acknowledgements ...................................................................................27 References..........................................................................................................................29

6-3

i

List of Tables Table 1. State Merit Scholarship Program Funding Source and Eligibility Requirements, 2008-2009 ............................................................................................................................4 Table 2. State Merit Scholarship Award Continuation Requirements and Maximum Duration of Award, 2008-2009............................................................................................5 Table 3. State Merit Program Award Amount and Included Components, 2008-2009 .....5 Table 4. Scholarship Academic Eligibility Requirements by Academic Year...................7 Table 5. PROMISE Scholarship Freshman Eligibility and Enrollment History ................8 Table 6. Fall Headcount Enrollment, 2002-2006................................................................9 Table 7. Sector Proportion of PROMISE Scholars, 2002-2006 .........................................9 Table 8. Institutional Proportion of PROMISE Scholars, 2002-2006 ..............................10 Table 9. West Virginia High School Students Taking Advanced Math Courses, 2002-2008....................................................................................................................................13 Table 10. Estimated Overall College-Going Rate of West Virginia High School Seniors by Year, 2000-2007 ...........................................................................................................14 Table 11. College-Going Rate of Low-Income Students, 2000-2007 ..............................14 Table 12. West Virginia Recent High School Graduates Leaving State to Attend College, 2000-2006............................................................................................................16

6-4

ii

List of Figures Figure 1. Total Scholarship Recipients by Academic Year................................................7 Figure 2. PROMISE Expenditures by Academic Year.......................................................8 Figure 3. Percentage of West Virginia High School Seniors Taking the ACT Exam......12 Figure 4. ACT Composite Scores: West Virginia Compared to Nation...........................12 Figure 5. Percentage Decrease in Students Eligible with a 1-Point Increase in ACT Requirements by Expected Family Contribution...............................................................15 Figure 6. Percentage of Tuition Waiver Expenditures Going to In-State Students by Category, 2000-01 and 2005-06 ........................................................................................17 Figure 7. Number of Students with Unmet Need at Glenville State College, Marshall University, and West Virginia University, 2002-2006 ......................................................18 Figure 8. Average Amount of Student Unmet Need at Glenville State College, Marshall University, and West Virginia University, 2002-2006 ......................................................18

6-5

1

I. National Context Historically, state governments have borne the brunt financially of ensuring that public higher education is accessible and affordable to students seeking a postsecondary education. Given that the federal government provided less than 14 percent of the revenue to public colleges and universities in 2004-05 (NCES, 2007), states must find a variety of means to generate the funds needed to operate their respective institutions. One approach, raising tuition, has made higher education less affordable for a larger segment of American families. Compounding this problem are financial aid awards at the state and federal levels that have not kept pace with tuition increases. The average Pell grant has fallen from 50 percent of tuition, fees, room and board at a public four-year institution in 1987-88 to 32 percent in 2007-08 (College Board, 2008). Nationally between 2001-02 and 2006-07, while the average state-funded financial aid package grew from $480 to $613, tuition at four-year public institutions increased from $3,766 to $5,804 (NASSGAP, 2002, 2007; College Board, 2008). Furthermore, the nature of this aid has also shifted. Whereas 17 percent of state aid in 1987-88 was based on merit rather than need, this figure had risen to 28 percent by 2006-07 (College Board, 2008). Consequently more families across all income levels must borrow money to pay college costs. As noted in Losing Ground, many low-income families are being priced out of attendance and the middle class has begun to resist continuing price increases (NCPPHE, 2002). Affordability of higher education is especially difficult to maintain during economic recessions when states cannot provide additional assistance, but citizens have the most need. Harold Hovey (1999) posited that state spending for higher education would have to increase faster over the next decade than in other areas just to maintain current services; however, the burgeoning fiscal needs in other critical state arenas such as K-12 education and health services limit what can be appropriated to higher education. This bleak front, worsened by recession, typically results in even steeper tuition increases. Financial constraints have brought college access to the forefront and drawn attention to the manner in which state governments answer the question, “Access for whom?” Since the 1970s, state responses to this rising need of increased revenues for higher education have varied. During economic booms, surpluses fill the coffers. Recessions, however, result in significantly fewer dollars since higher education funding is often not mandated (SHEEO, 2007). Beginning in the first half of the 1990s, some states began turning to a new revenue stream which funds students rather than institutions: merit-based lottery-funded scholarships. This phenomenon began in 1993 with Georgia’s Helping Outstanding Pupils Educationally (HOPE) Scholarship. Since the inception of this initiative in Georgia, many other states have implemented various forms of broad-based merit-aid programs. These states include Alaska, Arkansas, Florida, Kentucky, Louisiana, Massachusetts, Michigan, Mississippi, Missouri, Nevada, New Mexico, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee and West Virginia. Although academic requirements (GPA and SAT/ACT) and financial rewards (from $1,000 up to full tuition, fees, and cash) vary by state, the result is new-found revenue being utilized to support students who meet the various minimum merit criteria. These programs have proven to be popular, as evidenced by the annual

6-6

2

increase in state spending from 1995 to 2003 for undergraduates receiving merit-aid of 20.7 percent, while investments in need-based aid rose 7.5 percent annually (Heller, 2006). The impact of such broad-based merit aid programs is evidenced across both public and private sector institutions. For example, Georgia’s HOPE scholarship provides $3,000 per academic year for full-time study, or $1,500 for part-time study, to students attending one of Georgia’s private institutions. West Virginia’s PROMISE scholarship follows this precedent, offering an amount equivalent to the average tuition and mandatory fees at the state’s public colleges ($4,098 for the 2007-08 academic year). Nonetheless, leaders of many independent institutions believe that the deck remains stacked against them because the student’s prospect of paying no tuition is more attractive than that of paying partial tuition at private institutions. However, research has indicated that the private sector has also realized enrollment gains because students have decided to remain in-state for their postsecondary education (Dynarski, 2003). The adoption of merit-based scholarships in more than a dozen states has prompted research on the scholarships’ effects on students and institutions. One body of research has focused on students’ high school and college academic achievement, a principal stated purpose of most programs. Research found that the Georgia’s HOPE contributed to increases in high school grade point averages (GPA) as well as higher SAT scores relative to GPAs. Additionally, SAT scores for African American test takers gained ground relative to those of white peers (Henry & Rubenstein, 2002).1 Early research on the Michigan scholarship found initially improved scores on the state test used to qualify for the program but plateauing scores soon thereafter (Heller & Rogers, 2003). Similar data for West Virginia can be found in Section IV of this report. Other research has focused on college achievement. For example, recipients of Georgia’s HOPE had higher GPAs, earned more credits, and had higher probabilities of graduation in four years than similar non-recipients (Henry, Rubenstein, & Bugler, 2004). Dynarski (2007) found that the implementation of the programs in Georgia and Arkansas increased the share of the exposed population with a college degree by three percent, and that the effect was stronger for women. However, Cornwell, Lee and Mustard (2005) found that prior to the addition of a semester limit on the HOPE scholarship, HOPE recipients were less likely to take a full load, had more course withdrawals, and took more classes in the summer. Similarly, Binder and Ganderton (2002) found that New Mexico scholarship students take fewer hours and persist at lower rates. Researchers have also focused on the impact of state merit-aid in increasing access to college. Georgia’s HOPE was found to have increased enrollment in the state’s colleges by 5.9 percent, with most of this effect at four-year schools. However, this increase was mostly the result of students being diverted from out-of-state to in-state institutions, not new entrants (Cornwell, Mustard, & Sridhar, 2006). Another study, though, found that HOPE increased the college-going rate of all eighteen- to nineteen-year-olds by about seven percent (Dynarski, 2000). Although New Mexico’s Legislative Lottery Scholarship was found to have increased four-year college enrollments, Binder and Ganderton (2002) found that this increase represented a shift in enrollment patterns from community colleges to four-year institutions, not an increase in overall access. 1 Research about Georgia’s HOPE scholarship is most abundant as it has been around the longest period of time.

6-7

3

Much of the research on the access outcomes of merit aid has focused less on overall access and more on the differential effect on particular groups of students. Heller and Marin (2002) point to the “negative social consequences” of merit aid since these programs provide funding to many students who already could afford college and planned to attend. Conversely, research indicates that low-income and minority students are less likely to be eligible for this assistance in Georgia (Cornwell & Mustard, 2004), Massachusetts (2004), New Mexico (Binder & Ganderton, 2004), Tennessee (Anderson & Wright, 2007), and across multiple states (Farrell, 2004). The high school one attends has also been shown to affect receipt of Georgia’s HOPE. As Cornwell and Mustard (2004) note, students who attend a large high school, or one with more African American, Hispanic, or low-income students, are less likely to receive the scholarship. Research on the effect of different qualifying criteria has shown that tightening academic standards excludes more minority, low-income, limited English-proficiency, and disabled students from scholarship eligibility (Cornwell & Mustard, 2004; Ledbetter & Seligman, 2003; Heller, 2004). The constriction of opportunity is exacerbated by the fact that states choosing to venture down the merit-aid path (West Virginia being an exception) tend to do so overwhelmingly to the detriment of need-based grants (Heller, 2002). Research on actual enrollment of minorities and low-income students due to merit aid has been mixed. One study on Georgia’s HOPE found that the scholarship had a larger positive effect on African American enrollment than for Caucasians (Cornwell, Mustard, & Sridhar, 2004). Yet, another study using different data found that the HOPE increased inequality in college attendance between African Americans and Caucasians (Dynarski, 2000). Singell, Waddell, and Curs (2006) found that the number of needy (Pell-eligible) students enrolled in college in Georgia increased after HOPE relative to other southern states at both two-year and four-year institutions, but increases were larger at less-selective institutions. Postsecondary Education Opportunity, however, reports that more recently Georgia has had the largest increase of any state from 1997 to 2007 in the number of its low-income students leaving the state to attend public colleges (Mortenson, 2008). Notably missing among the merit-aid research is how well merit aid fulfills its major goal of stanching brain drain. While some of the enrollment-based research points to students being more likely to stay in-state to attend college, little is known about post-baccalaureate migration of students to graduate school or into the workforce. More general work on the migration of college-educated labor has found that the state in which a graduate attends college has a positive, statistically significant impact on where the graduate chooses to work, but that the magnitude of the impact is rather small (Bound, Groen, Kezdi, & Turner, 2004; Groen, 2004). A more recent line of research has examined the complex political process that results in merit-aid policy adoption and development. The conceptual frameworks employed are often from the political science realm (Bell & Anderson, 2004; Ness, 2008) and the lens most often used is the diffusion of policy innovations (Berry & Berry, 1999; Doyle, 2006). These studies have found that adoption of broad-based, lottery-funded merit scholarships has been driven not so much by rational policy analysis to address identified problems, but more by interstate learning and competition, opportunistic policy entrepreneurs, and electoral pressures.

6-8

4

Other State Scholarship Programs Beginning with Georgia in 1993, sixteen states have created merit-based student aid programs. These states typically have been characterized by low college-going rates, lagging student preparation for college, and high school graduates who were more likely to stay in-state if they did attend college (Doyle, 2006). Consequently, their respective scholarship programs were often developed to address these shortcomings and increase academic preparation, college going, and student achievement. As detailed in Table 1, states utilize a variety of eligibility criteria, and most use state general funds or lottery revenues to support the operations of their respective scholarship programs. Compared with eligibility requirements in other states, the standards in West Virginia are demanding. Many of those states that do have stricter standards have tiered awards with varying award amounts depending on high school academic achievement. Table 1. State Merit Scholarship Program Funding Source and Eligibility Requirements, 2008-2009

State Funding Source Merit Award Criteria

Alaska Land leases and sales Class rank-top 10 percent

Arkansas State general funds GPA and ACT matrix; from 2.5 GPA with 25-36 ACT to 3.25 GPA with 15-18 ACT

Florida Lottery Academic Scholars-3.5 weighted GPA, 1270 SAT/28 ACT Medallion Scholars-3.0 weighted GPA, 970 SAT/20 ACT

Georgia Lottery 3.0 GPA in college prep curriculum, or 3.2 with other diploma types, can qualify while in college by meeting retention criteria

Kentucky Lottery Minimum 2.5 GPA; award varies by scores with bonuses for ACT scores of 15+

Louisiana State general funds Opportunity Award-2.5 GPA, 20 ACT Performance Award-3.5 GPA, 23 ACT Honors Award-3.5 GPA, 27 ACT

Massachusetts State general funds Score in advanced category in math or English section of grade 10 MCAS test and proficient or advanced in the other. Combined MCAS in top 25 percent of school district.

Michigan Tobacco settlement Scores of 2 or above in all components of the Michigan Merit Exam qualify student for early installments of award.

Mississippi State general funds 3.5 GPA and 29 ACT or be a National Merit Scholar Missouri State general funds Composite ACT or SAT in top 3 percent of Missouri students

Nevada Tobacco settlement 3.25 GPA and pass all areas of Nevada High School Proficiency Examination

New Mexico Lottery 2.5 GPA in first semester of college

South Carolina Lottery

Palmetto Fellows-3.5 GPA, 1200 SAT/27 ACT, top 6 percent of sophomore or junior high school class or 4.0 GPA, 1400 SAT/32 ACT Life Scholarship-meet two of these three criteria: 3.0 GPA, 1100 SAT/24 ACT, top 30% of high school graduating class HOPE Scholarship-3.0 GPA

South Dakota Education

Enhancement Trust Fund

GPA 3.0 with no grades below C, 24 ACT/1070 SAT

Tennessee Lottery HOPE-GPA 3.0 or 21 ACT/980 SAT ASPIRE-criteria above and parent(s) income below $36,000 Merit Scholarship-3.75 GPA and 29 ACT/1280 SAT

West Virginia Lottery and state general revenue

3.0 core and overall GPA and 22 composite ACT with 20 or higher on all subscores

6-9

5

The award continuation requirements also vary from state to state. Some states require full-time enrollment, while others provide awards for students taking at least six hours per term. The maximum award length tends to be either four or five years with Georgia and Florida having limits based on the number of hours taken. Table 2 provides an overview of the continuation requirements and the maximum award length for each state. Table 2. State Merit Scholarship Award Continuation Requirements and Maximum Duration of Award, 2008-2009

State Award Continuation Requirements Maximum Duration of Award

Alaska Maintain 2.5 GPA and be in good standing (academic, financial, conduct) 8 semesters

Arkansas 2.5 GPA, 15 credit hours per semester (only 12 first semester) 8 semesters

Florida Academic Scholars-3.0 GPA, at least 6 hours per term Medallion Scholars-2.75 GPA, at least 6 hours per term 132 hours

Georgia 3.0 GPA 127 hours Kentucky 2.5 GPA to renew second year; 3.0 thereafter 8 semesters

Louisiana Opportunity-2.3 GPA up to 48 hours, 2.5 thereafter Performance or Honors-3.0 GPA 8 semesters

Massachusetts 3.0 GPA 8 semesters Michigan One-time award 4 years

Mississippi 3.5 GPA, continuous full-time enrollment 8 semesters Missouri 2.5 GPA, satisfactory academic progress 10 semesters

Nevada 2.6 GPA up to 30 credit hours, 2.75 term GPA thereafter Maximum of $10,000 within 6 years of high school graduation

New Mexico Satisfactory academic progress; full-time enrollment 8 semesters

South Carolina 3.0 GPA, 30 credit hours per year

Palmetto and LIFE-8 semesters; HOPE-freshman year only

South Dakota 3.0 GPA from 2nd semester forward; 15 hours per term; pass Board of Regents proficiency exam on first sitting 8 semesters

Tennessee 2.75 GPA through 48 hours, 3.0 thereafter, or 2.75-2.99 cumulative with 3.0 for preceding term; 6 hours per term 5 years

West Virginia 2.75 GPA for first year and 3.0 cumulative thereafter, 30 credit hours per year 8 semesters

West Virginia is atypical in its provision of full tuition and fees for PROMISE recipients. Most states provide a set dollar amount. Those programs with awards that are tiered based on academic achievement provide a range of dollar amounts dependent upon the standard met. Table 3 provides the varying dollar amounts by state. Table 3. State Merit Program Award Amount and Included Components, 2008-2009

State Award Amount and Components

Alaska $1,375 per year (maximum $11,000) Arkansas $2,500 for first year, $2,750 second year, $3,000 third year, $3,500 fourth year

Florida Ranges from 75% to 100% of tuition and fees plus $300 for college-related expenses; comparable amount at Florida private institution

Georgia Full tuition and fees plus $150 book allowance if enrolled for at least 6 hours. $1,750 at Georgia private school for full-time study

Kentucky Incremental based on high school GPA and ACT up to $2,500 per year at any in-state or Academic Common Market institution

Louisiana Full tuition and fees for all programs plus $400 for Performance award, plus $800 for Honors

6-10

6

Award; at private institutions, receive average public tuition plus above stipends Massachusetts Full tuition waiver at public institutions

Michigan $4,000 total award at in-state institution Mississippi Tuition and fees up to $2,500 per year at in-state institution Missouri $2,000 per year at in-state institution Nevada $80 per credit hour at Nevada four-year school; $40-60 at Nevada community colleges

New Mexico Full tuition at New Mexico public institutions beginning second semester of college

South Carolina At in-state institutions: Palmetto-$6,700 first year and $7,500 thereafter; LIFE-$4,700 per year plus $300 book allowance; HOPE-$2,800 plus $300 book allowance

South Dakota $1,000 for each of first three years, $2,000 for fourth year

Tennessee $4,000 per year at Tennessee institution; ASPIRE-$1,500 supplement per year; Merit Scholarship-$1,000 supplement per year

West Virginia Full tuition and fees at a state public institution or equivalent amount at in-state private institution

II. History of the PROMISE Scholarship Program West Virginia’s PROMISE Scholarship Program is one of 16 merit-based, state-level student aid programs in the United States. West Virginia policymakers had considered such a program several years before it became a reality. Then in 1999, the State Legislature passed legislation creating the PROMISE Scholarship Program. However, the program was not funded until 2001, when a new revenue stream to subsidize the scholarship and other programs was established through the regulation and taxation of limited video lottery machines throughout the state. The enabling legislation for PROMISE established initial criteria for students to receive the scholarship; however, those criteria have changed over time. Full funding of the first four classes of PROMISE scholars was initially estimated to cost $27 million. The actual cost, however, was just under $40 million. Not only had more students than expected qualified for the scholarship, but also more students than anticipated had accepted the scholarship. Therefore, in October 2003, the PROMISE Board of Control raised standards (by setting minimum subscores on the ACT) beginning with the class of 2004. The more stringent requirements, however, would have negative consequences. Data from the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission suggested low-income students would be disproportionately affected by these higher standards. Based on this information, the Board of Control resolved to maintain the original ACT and SAT standards in fall 2005 and, as a cost-controlling measure, to reduce the dollar value of the scholarship. Rather than students receiving a full tuition payment at state institutions, a flat rate for each student was proposed. However, the State Legislature did not concur with this decision and in March 2006 amended the enabling legislation governing the PROMISE program and mandated that scholars receive full tuition scholarships to state institutions. Furthermore, House Bill (HB) 4049 directed the Board of Control to keep the program within a specified budget. In the event of a projected budget shortfall, the Board of Control was required to raise academic eligibility standards. Criteria Evolution As mentioned above, the enabling legislation established initial criteria for students to receive the scholarship: a minimum 3.0 GPA in the core and overall coursework plus additional objective

6-11

7

standards, as determined by the Board of Control. For the 2002 applicants, the Board of Control established a minimum ACT composite score of 21 (or SAT equivalent). As detailed in the chart below, over the next five years the requisite ACT scores to obtain PROMISE increased. These standards now include ACT subscores that require proficiency in specific academic areas. Table 4. Scholarship Academic Eligibility Requirements by Academic Year

Awardees During the first four years of PROMISE, a natural increase of program participants occurred because of the matriculation of each new freshman class. Despite the inability of some students to meet the GPA and minimum number of credit hours earned necessary to maintain the award, the overall number of scholars increased. Thus, changes to the award criteria (2004-2005) were implemented to control costs. Thereafter, the overall numbers decreased, as depicted in the following chart. Figure 1. Total Scholarship Recipients by Academic Year

First-Time Awards Another measure of the impact of changing eligibility criteria is the size of the first-time class of awardees. The chart on the next page presents data from the first seven years of the program. The percentage of PROMISE-eligible students, who have accepted the award, has been consistent at 85 to 87 percent. During the first three years of the program’s existence, 23 to 24

Total Scholarship Recipients

6,475

8,545

9,9048,993

9,2829,362

3,555

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09Academic Year

Tota

l Stu

dent

s

Academic Year ACT Composite ACT subscore GPA2002-03 21 N/A 3.002003-04 21 N/A 3.002004-05 21 19 3.002005-06 21 20 3.002006-07 21 20 3.002007-08 22 20 3.002008-09 22 20 3.00

6-12

8

percent of all high school graduates were offered an award. Beginning in 2005, this share dropped to 19 percent, where it remained for three years before increasing to 20 percent in 2008. Table 5. PROMISE Scholarship Freshman Eligibility and Enrollment History

Award Year 2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09

Total Number of High School Graduates 17,776 18,040 18,106 17,838 17,345 18,029 17,477

Total Number of Graduates ACT Tested 11,451 11,728 11,486 11,451 10,990 11,480 11,603

Percent of Total Graduates ACT Tested 64 65 63 64 63 64 66

ACT Criteria for PROMISE 21 21 21/19 21/20 21/20 22/20 22/20

Number of PROMISE-eligible Students / Number Actually Enrolled

4,073 / 3,555

4,392 / 3,812

4,088 / 3,499

3,365 / 2,943

3,315 / 2,867

3,514/ 3,042

3,423 / 2,925

Percentage of PROMISE-eligible Students Actually Enrolled 87 87 87 86 86 86 85

Percentage of High School Graduates Awarded PROMISE 23 24 23 19 19 19 20

Percentage of Students Tested Eligible for PROMISE 36 37 36 29 30 31 30

Expenditures Programmatic expenditures have risen steadily each year. This outcome may appear counterintuitive because the number of overall recipients has decreased over the last three years; however, the fact that the award is tied to tuition explains the increase. As tuition has increased, so has the value of the scholarship. Figure 2. PROMISE Expenditures by Academic Year

PROMISE Expenditures

10.2

20.6

30.7

39.6 40.342.3

38.4

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

2002-03 2003-04 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09

Academic Year

Am

ount

Pai

d (in

Mill

ions

)

6-13

9

Given that projected ongoing costs for the program are a function of tuition levels and enrollment, it is important that one consider changes in the size of the high school population when estimating expenditure levels. For the 2008 academic year, 18,029 students graduated from high school. On average over the past three years, 19 percent of these students go on to become PROMISE scholars. Looking forward, the Southern Regional Education Board (SREB) estimates an increase in graduates in 2009 to 18,732. Although there is a projected decrease in graduates in 2010 to 18,192, the Board of Control may need to address raising academic standards again, most likely for the 2010 graduating class. Cost projections, although still being reviewed, indicate a shortfall for the 2010-11 academic year. Shifts in Enrollment of All College Students Notably, over the past six years, West Virginia headcount enrollment has shifted toward the public four-year sector. Although this movement cannot be statistically attributed to the rise of the PROMISE Scholarship Program, price sensitivity has been lowered in the public sector because the scholarship pays for all mandatory tuition and fees. While PROMISE mitigates some expenses within the private sector, considerable expenses remain for potential postsecondary students. The chart below demonstrates that between 2002 and 2006, postsecondary enrollment has increased at public four-year institutions, was flat in the community college sector and decreased slightly in the private postsecondary sector. Table 6. Fall Headcount Enrollment, 2002-2006

Fall 2002 Fall 2003 Fall 2004 Fall 2005

Fall 2006

% Change 2002-06

% Change 2005-06

Public Four-Year Institutions 57,930 60,382 61,715 63,475 64,943 12% 2%Public Two-Year Institutions 21,046 20,455 21,130 21,238 21,145 0% 0%Private Four-Year Institutions 11,034 11,625 11,650 10,811 10,639 -4% -2%

Shifts in Enrollment of PROMISE Recipients The attendance patterns of PROMISE scholars mirror the overall enrollment shift. The public four-year sector has realized gains, while enrollment in the public two-year sector has remained stable and the private sector has incurred losses. The chart below demonstrates these trends. Table 7. Sector Proportion of PROMISE Scholars, 2002-2006

Since the public and private four-year sectors account for over 98 percent of award recipients, it is worthwhile to examine more closely the PROMISE recipients within these sectors. The following chart depicts each institution’s percentage of recipients and how the percentages have shifted since 2002. Figures show institutional percentages of both the public and private four-year sectors, and the state overall. It should be noted that small shifts have occurred in the private sector. In keeping with how the private sector has fared overall, most institutions have

2002 2004 2006

Public Four-Year Institutions 85.79% 87.66% 88.05%Public Two-Year Institutions 1.63% 1.22% 1.64%Private Four-Year Institutions 12.58% 11.01% 10.16%

6-14

10

seen a slight reduction in their share of PROMISE recipients. The only institutions that have increased their overall share are Alderson-Broaddus College, which increased by less than half of a percent, and the University of Charleston, which increased by just over one percent. The data indicate that Marshall University and West Virginia University, combined, account for over 70 percent of awardees within the public four-year sector and over 62 percent of awardees overall. Of these two universities, the proportion of recipients at Marshall University has decreased between 2002 and 2006, while the proportion continues to rise at West Virginia University. West Virginia University’s share of all in-state college enrollment increased significantly after the creation of PROMISE. This reality will continue to increase the cost of the PROMISE because West Virginia University charges the highest tuition among the public four-year institutions and PROMISE costs are largely tied to its tuition and fees. Table 8. Institutional Proportion of PROMISE Scholars, 2002-2006

2002 2004 2006 2002 2004 2006Alderson-Broaddus College 7.3 10.7 12.1 0.9 1.2 1.2Appalachian Bible College 2.3 1.5 1.2 0.3 0.2 0.1Bethany College 11.6 9.7 7.8 1.5 1.1 0.8Davis & Elkins College 4.3 5.1 4.9 0.5 0.6 0.5Mountain State University 8.4 8.2 6.2 1.1 0.9 0.6Ohio Valley University 2.7 2.6 1.7 0.3 0.3 0.2Salem International University* 1.1 1.6 1.1 0.1 0.2 0.1University of Charleston 7.7 12.5 20.0 1.0 1.4 2.0West Virginia Wesleyan College 41.6 34.5 30.7 5.2 3.8 3.1Wheeling Jesuit University 13.0 13.6 14.2 1.6 1.5 1.4PRIVATE FOUR-YEAR SECTOR TOTAL 100.0 100.0 100.0 12.6 11.0 10.2Bluefield State College 1.7 1.6 1.1 1.4 1.4 0.9Concord University 5.8 5.4 5.1 4.9 4.7 4.5Fairmont State University 6.9 7.3 7.0 5.9 6.4 6.1Glenville State College 2.1 1.8 1.5 1.8 1.6 1.3Marshall University 23.6 23.0 20.8 20.2 20.2 18.3Potomac State College of WVU 2.2 1.4 1.2 1.9 1.2 1.0Shepherd University 3.8 4.0 4.2 3.3 3.5 3.7West Liberty State College 3.4 2.9 2.7 2.9 2.6 2.4West Virginia State University 2.6 2.1 1.7 2.2 1.8 1.5West Virginia University 42.5 46.2 51.0 36.4 40.5 44.9West Virginia University at Parkersburg 2.0 1.7 1.8 1.7 1.5 1.5WVU Institute of Technology 3.5 2.6 2.0 3.0 2.3 1.8PUBLIC FOUR-YEAR SECTOR TOTAL 100.0 100.0 100.0 85.8 87.7 88.0

Publ

ic F

our-

Yea

r Sec

tor

% of Sector % of Overall

Four

-Yea

r Sec

tor

*HB 4049 made new students at Salem International University ineligible for PROMISE funds due to their movement from the not-for-profit to for-profit sector. III. Creation of the Committee/Committee Membership/Charge of the Committee As a result of a host of proposals to alter PROMISE during the 2008 regular legislative session, and a request by The Honorable Joe Manchin III, Governor of the State of West Virginia, the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission (HEPC) convened an assemblage of educational leaders from across the state to review issues pertaining to the PROMISE

6-15

11

Scholarship Program. The PROMISE Scholarship Ad-Hoc Advisory Committee consists of 12 members representing two-year and four-year institutions, both public and private. As directed by Governor Manchin, the Advisory Committee includes representatives from both the West Virginia House of Delegates and the State Senate. The Advisory Committee is led by Dr. Jerry Beasley, President Emeritus of Concord University. HEPC research and staff support were provided by Mr. Rob Anderson, Senior Director of Policy and Planning, and Mr. Jack Toney, Director of State Financial Aid Programs. Committee Membership Ms. Barbara Ashcraft, Coordinator, West Virginia Department of Education Dr. Pamela Balch, President, West Virginia Wesleyan College Dr. Jerry Beasley, President Emeritus, Concord University Dr. J.D. Carpenter, Vice President of Student Affairs, West Liberty State College Ms. Janet Fike, Dean of Enrollments Management and Director of Financial Aid, West Virginia Northern Community College Dr. George Hammond, Associate Professor of Economics, West Virginia University, and Associate Director, Bureau of Business and Economic Research The Honorable Jonathan Miller, Delegate, West Virginia House of Delegates The Honorable Mary Poling, Delegate, West Virginia House of Delegates Mr. Joseph Randolph, Branch Manager, A.G. Edwards and Sons The Honorable Ron Stollings, Senator, West Virginia State Senate Mr. Brian Weingart, Director of Financial Aid, Alderson-Broaddus College Ms. Kaye Widney, Director of Financial Aid, West Virginia University Charge of the Committee The purpose of the Advisory Committee was to serve in an advisory capacity to the Commission and the PROMISE Board of Control by examining the impact of the PROMISE Scholarship Program on the state of West Virginia and its citizenry. These efforts required an examination of the broader context of college affordability and access since this program is one of several state-level funding sources used to provide opportunity to potential postsecondary attendees. It is important to understand how the PROMISE program operates as a component of this broader context. IV. PROMISE Scholarship Objectives and Higher Education in West Virginia Programmatic Goals: Has PROMISE Achieved the Goals of Its Creators? West Virginia’s PROMISE Scholarship Program was designed to meet the needs of the state of West Virginia. Its purposes, cited in the enabling legislation, include the following:

• Improve high school and postsecondary academic achievement through scholarship incentives;

• Promote access to higher education by reducing the costs to students; • Retain the “best and brightest” students in West Virginia colleges and universities; and • Create a more educated workforce which, in turn, will lead to greater economic

development.

6-16

12

The following section examines progress toward meeting each of the goals stated above. It also addresses findings from other states in regard to the impact of their merit-based scholarship programs. Goal 1: Academic Achievement Improvement in academic achievement can be evaluated in terms of both high school and postsecondary progress. High school achievement progress in West Virginia, similar to that found in other merit-aid states, has occurred. Not only has the percentage of West Virginia high school students taking the ACT college admissions test increased, but also their ACT scores relative to the national average have improved. As detailed in Figure 3, the proportion of high school seniors taking the ACT exam has risen from 61 percent to 64 percent since the program’s inception. Although all of these students will not receive a PROMISE scholarship, the fact that they have taken the ACT exam will increase their likelihood of continuing on to postsecondary training. Figure 3. Percentage of West Virginia High School Seniors Taking the ACT Exam Figure 4. ACT Composite Scores: West Virginia Compared to Nation

ACT Composite Scores: West Virginia Compared to Nation

19.6

19.8

20.0

20.2

20.4

20.6

20.8

21.0

21.2

21.4

2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

WV ACT Composite

USA ACT Composite

Percentage of WV High School Seniors Taking ACT

64%64%64%65%65%

63%

61%61%60%

58%

60%

54%

56%

58%

60%

62%

64%

66%

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008

% of WVtaking ACT

6-17

13

Figure 4 provides a comparison of composite scores for the ACT exam for West Virginia against the national average. These data indicate that the gap between national and state averages has decreased from 0.8 points to 0.4 points post-PROMISE. The improvement in ACT scores may be partially explained by the test-taking behavior of West Virginia high school students. ACT researchers report that 36 percent of students who take the exam actually take it two or more times and improve their scores on subsequent tests. Students whose initial composite scores are between 17 and 28 (about 90 percent of all who take the test) improve their composite score on the second test by 0.4 to 0.7. In 2007, 72 percent of the PROMISE recipients had taken the ACT two or more times (3.7 percent sat for the exam five or more times). Notably, the percentage of students taking the SAT has increased from 9.2 to 14.2 percent of the college-going population (HEPC, 2008). Data from the West Virginia Educational Information System indicate that since 2002, the number of students taking AP English (literature and language), AP science (biology, chemistry and physics), and mathematics courses at the level of Algebra II and above has increased. The data for the math subject area are supplied below:

2002 2004 2006 2008Algebra II 12,845 12,465 12,613 14,934Calculus 446 601 382 438Trigonometry 5,142 5,086 5,481 7,358AP Calculus AB 1,063 1,428 1,185 1,261AP Calculus BC 144 198 224 237

Table 9. West Virginia High School Students Taking Advanced Math Courses, 2002-2008

Progress in postsecondary achievement in West Virginia is comparable to what has been found regarding Georgia’s HOPE:

• Compared to similar students prior to the implementation of the scholarship, PROMISE recipients have higher GPAs, complete more credits overall in college and are more likely to take 30 credits per year. They also persist at a higher rate and have higher four-year graduation rates (Scott-Clayton, 2008). It should be noted that the Scott-Clayton study did not control for credits that students may have earned during high school in dual enrollment courses, which may have affected total credits and graduation rates, but not credit per year findings.2

• The achievement of all students, however, has not improved. West Virginia four-year institution retention rates of freshmen returning the following fall and of all students from fall to fall seems to have peaked in 2005 and declined slightly since then.

• The six-year graduation rate of first-time, full-time baccalaureate-seeking freshmen rose from 43 percent in 2003 for the 1997 entering cohort to 47.4 percent in 2006 for the 2000 entering cohort. The most recent data for the 2001 cohort, which still precedes the inception of PROMISE, dropped back down to 45.4 percent.

2 The number of high school students participating in dual enrollment rose from 4,456 to 5,288 between 2003 and 2007 – a 19 percent increase.

6-18

14

• Baccalaureate licensure exam pass rates for the tests with large-enough numbers of test-takers to be reliable show slight declines. The proportion passing the nursing test across the system was 90 percent in 2002 and 85 percent in 2007. The proportion passing the Praxis II teachers’ examination declined from 91 percent in 2002 to 89 percent in 2007.

Goal 2: Increasing Access to Postsecondary Education Thus far, there has been a modest increase in postsecondary access in West Virginia since the implementation of PROMISE:

• The estimated overall college-going rate has increased modestly. The chart below indicates that the college-going rate in West Virginia was 56.4 percent the year before the PROMISE Scholarship Program began. The most recent figure is 57.5 percent.

Table 10. Estimated Overall College-Going Rate of West Virginia

High School Seniors by Year, 2000-2007 Year College-Going Rate 2000 54.9% 2001 56.4% 2002 56.5% 2003 58.0% 2004 59.3% 2005 59.3% 2006 58.3% 2007 57.5%

Source: HEPC, 2007

• The college-going rate of low-income students has actually declined since the inception of PROMISE. The chart shows that this trend also has occurred nationally, but the decline has been greater in West Virginia.3

Table 11. College-Going Rate of Low-Income Students, 2000-2007

Year West Virginia United States 2000 21.5% 25.1% 2001 20.6% 23.5% 2002 21.4% 24.1% 2003 22.4% 25.1% 2004 21.4% 25.9% 2005 21.8% 25.4% 2006 18.6% 23.9% 2007 19.2% 23.8%


3 This rate is derived by calculating the number of Pell grant recipients as a proportion of the number of students who were eligible to participate in the federal free and reduced lunch program. This method has the shortcoming of not including either those low-income students who do not receive Pell or those who did not apply when in secondary school for free and reduced lunch status.

6-19

15

• As criteria have increased over time, PROMISE recipients are increasingly from higher-income families (Noland & DeFrank-Cole, 2007). Figure 5 below depicts the impact on student access if the composite score and subscore requirements were to be raised by a single point. The number of PROMISE-eligible students with an estimated expected family contribution (EFC) of $1,000 or less, the least affluent students, would decrease by 26.9 percent. Conversely, those with an EFC of $13,000 or greater would experience declines of 19.1 percent.

Figure 5. Percentage Decrease in Students Eligible with a 1-Point Increase in ACT Requirements by Expected Family Contribution

Percentage Decrease in Eligibility w ith a 1-Point Increase in ACT Requirements

26.924.6

19.1

23.8

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

$1,000 or less $1,001 -$4,000

$4,001 -$13,000

$13,001 andabove

Estimated Family Contribution

Percentage Decrease inEligibility

The projected recipients with increased standards as depicted in Figure 5 are consistent with findings in other states. Much of the research which has focused on the unequal effects of merit aid on different types of students concludes that merit aid goes disproportionately to more-advantaged students and to students who attend institutions that are more generously subsidized. Also, similar to West Virginia, raising academic standards for receipt of the scholarship has been shown to hurt minorities and less-affluent students the most. Goal 3: Retaining the Best and Brightest in West Virginia While there is some evidence that PROMISE has fulfilled its purpose of retaining West Virginia high school graduates to attend college in the state, there is only one year of data regarding the proportion that subsequently works in the state:

• West Virginia has traditionally been a net importer of students and has remained so after the introduction of PROMISE.

6-20

16

• The number of first-time, degree-seeking freshmen leaving the state to attend college has declined since the inception of PROMISE. As detailed in Table 12, approximately 500 fewer postsecondary students left West Virginia in 2006 than left in 2000.4

Table 12. West Virginia Recent High School Graduates Leaving State to Attend College, 2000-2006

YearPublic 4-Year

Private 4-Year

Public 2-Year

Private 2-Year Total

2000 593 877 180 204 1,8542002 393 732 146 98 1,3692004 353 661 138 84 1,2362006 344 695 207 105 1,351

Source: IPEDS

• In a survey of West Virginia high school seniors, 37.5 percent of PROMISE-eligible students said that the program had a significant impact on their college-going decisions and that they would be attending an in-state institution rather than going out-of-state to attend college (Ness, 2007).

• Research on 2005-06 PROMISE-recipient college graduates (bachelor’s or associate degrees) found that 62.9 percent of these students worked (or worked in combination with attending graduate school) in the state in 2007, which was higher than overall rate for recent degree recipients (57.6 percent) but lower than the proportion of in-state students who earned degrees (69.6 percent) (Hammond & Leguizamon, 2008b).

Goal 4: Creating a More Educated Workforce Although it is premature to evidence post-PROMISE degree production trend data similar to those found for more mature state programs, there are preliminary data to support movement in West Virginia:

• Since the implementation of PROMISE, the proportion of PROMISE students finishing a BA within four years is seven percent higher than a baseline of 26 percent for similar students prior to the advent of scholarship (Scott-Clayton, 2008). Furthermore, PROMISE increased the overall BA attainment rate by 1.8 to 2.3 percentage points from a baseline of 21.5 percent.

• The number of students majoring in science, technology, engineering and math (STEM) fields since the inception of PROMISE has increased for all students, but has increased even more for PROMISE scholars from 15.3 percent in 2002 to 21.4 percent in 2007.

• While West Virginia has one of the higher rates of exporting its college graduates as a percentage of the college-educated population, the rate of loss of college graduates per year has slowed during the 2004-2007 period (when the first PROMISE students would have graduated) compared to the 1999-2004 period (Mortenson, 2008).

4 This reduction ranks seventh in the country for reduction in percent of students migrating out for college over the time period (Postsecondary Opportunity spreadsheet entitled Residence and Migration of College Freshmen Graduating from High School in the Last 12 Months retrieved from internet 11/4/08).

6-21

17

V. Other Educational Trends in West Virginia Post-PROMISE Although not necessarily caused by PROMISE, a number of trends in postsecondary education in West Virginia, nevertheless, may be influenced by the program and are related to who gets an education in West Virginia and the quality of that education. Tuition Waivers Tuition waivers are used to attract a variety of in-state and out-of-state students to West Virginia postsecondary institutions. While certain types of waivers are statutorily mandated, the majority fall within the broad categories of academic, athletic, and graduate student. Institutions may choose to utilize these waivers to recruit or retain students, or to diversify their student population. From a financial perspective, institutions are foregoing revenue that they could potentially collect from these students if they were able to attract them without the incentive. A student utilizes a tuition waiver as a scholarship or a grant. While it can affect a student’s eligibility for other sources of financial aid by reducing unmet need, it can also serve the purpose of providing the monetary assistance needed to enable a student to afford a postsecondary education (HEPC, 2007). The advent of the PROMISE Scholarship Program resulted in the creation of a group of students who were no longer eligible for tuition waivers. Since PROMISE scholarships and tuition waivers are limited by the West Virginia Code to paying for tuition and fees, a PROMISE recipient cannot also receive a tuition waiver. With this dynamic in play, a larger percentage of waiver expenditures began to shift to out-of-state students. The following chart demonstrates the shift in waiver expenditures from the year prior to the PROMISE program compared to the 2005-06 academic year. Figure 6. Percentage of Tuition Waiver Expenditures Going to In-State Students by Category, 2000-01 and 2005-06

Percentage of Tuition Waiver Expenditures Going to In-State Students, 2000-01 and 2005-06

5%

50%

35%

23%

6%

22%

33%

20%

27%

20%

0

0.1

0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5

0.6

Total Athletic Academic Other Graduate

2000-012005-06

6-22

18

The largest shift in expenditures, as a result of the changing nature of tuition waivers, is the decline of institutional funding for in-state students. West Virginians used to account for 50 percent of this waiver category; however, they currently receive 22 percent of this aid as campuses have turned to out-of-state students to round out their incoming classes. The West Virginia students who are academic standouts are receiving PROMISE awards and are making their postsecondary decisions based on this scholarship rather than academic waivers being offered at the institutional level (HEPC, 2007). Unmet Need Unmet need is defined as the difference between the amount of a school’s cost of attendance (tuition, fees, books, living expenses) that is not covered by grants, scholarships, need-based loans, work study, and a student’s expected family contribution (EFC). Overall unmet need in the four-year public system has grown from $80,211,259 in 2002 to $95,826, 932 in 2006.5 Figure 7. Number of Students with Unmet Need at Glenville State College, Marshall University, and West Virginia University, 2002-2006

Number of Students with Unmet Need, 2002-2006

01,0002,0003,0004,0005,0006,0007,0008,0009,000

10,000

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

PROMISE

Non-PROMISE In-State

Out-of-State

Figure 8. Average Amount of Student Unmet Need at Glenville State College, Marshall University, and West Virginia University, 2002-2006

Average Amount of Student Unmet Need, 2002-2006

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

PROMISENon-PROMISE In-StateOut-of-State

5 No unmet need data was provided for West Virginia University Institute of Technology in either year.

6-23

19

An analysis of unmet need at three HEPC institutions since 2002 compares the levels of need over time among PROMISE recipients, in-state non-PROMISE students, and out-of-state students. Throughout the time period, PROMISE scholars have the lowest number of students with unmet need; there are more out-of-state students with unmet need; and in-state students without PROMISE scholarships have the highest number of students with unmet need. Over time, the number of PROMISE scholars with unmet need increased. This is likely due to the growth in number of PROMISE scholars as the program increased from one class of scholars in 2002 to four in 2005. The number of non-PROMISE, in-state students, with unmet need decreased, also partially due to decreasing numbers of non-PROMISE students as the program matured. The number of out-of state students with need decreased at one school, but increased at the other two. When the average level of unmet need per student is examined, PROMISE students are lowest and the average unmet need of out-of-state students is higher than in-state non-PROMISE students. These trends reflect that PROMISE scholars have more grant aid, and therefore less unmet need as well as that out-of-state students have higher tuition than in-state students. Over time, there were increases for all groups in average unmet need. Need increased the least for PROMISE scholars and the most for out-of-state students with in-state non-PROMISE students falling in the middle. VI. Recommendations A myriad of topics were considered regarding how West Virginia should move forward with the PROMISE Scholarship Program. Each item was thoroughly researched, discussed, and ranked by the Advisory Committee as to its significance in refining the program and, consequently, improving postsecondary opportunity for all West Virginians. A comprehensive discussion of the policy options took place at the September 21-22, 2008 meeting of the Advisory Committee. This discussion considered the alignment of each option with the original purposes of PROMISE, as well as the ramifications of each option in terms of cost, impact on students, impact on institutions, and any unintended consequences. The following major topics were considered: (1) increasing financial support of PROMISE; (2) capping award amounts; (3) requiring public service or an internship; (4) identifying unmet need in the system and finding ways to meet it; (5) adding a means test; (6) converting to a forgivable loan; (7) encouraging enrollment in specific majors; (8) varying the scholarship value on the basis of achievement and unmet need; and (9) developing support programs to help students meet eligibility requirements. The primary options that the Advisory Committee ultimately focused on were as follows: (1) capping the amount of the scholarship; (2) requiring an internship; (3) requiring community service; and (4) making the scholarship a forgivable loan with an in-state work requirement. The Advisory Committee recommends capping scholarship awards and a combination of actions to encourage PROMISE recipients to engage in community service. Cap the amount of the PROMISE scholarship at $4,500 per year. Adequate funding of the PROMISE Scholarship Program must be addressed on an annual basis. Because tuition generally increases annually and more students have qualified for awards than

6-24

20

were initially anticipated, an increasing amount of state revenues is needed to fund these scholarships. Current policy directs that the awards pay for all tuition and mandatory fees at a West Virginia public college, or the average equivalent dollar amount at a private college. The anticipated expense for the PROMISE program for the 2008-09 academic year is $42.3 million. The transition to capping award amounts will allow West Virginia to mitigate some of the financial uncertainties associated with the current structure. Program expenses would increase if a greater number of high school graduates qualify for the award. However, current population demographics indicate that the number of anticipated recipients will decrease because the overall number of high school graduates is expected to decline over the next decade. Notably, these savings will be realized gradually as current PROMISE awardees, who are grandfathered in under the present rules, exhaust their eligibility and new classes are added. A method previously implemented to contain costs is the raising of PROMISE’s academic standards. While this approach succeeds in being fiscally responsible, an unintended consequence is that lower-income recipients become ineligible at a higher rate than their middle- or upper-income counterparts. In addition to reducing the number of low-income recipients, the constant shift in standards creates uncertainty and confusion for high school students. Commentary and feedback from high school counselors and parents notes that changing standards are frustrating to students whose hopes are dashed by the increasingly elusive targets. With these consequences in mind, the Advisory Committee does not believe standards should continually be raised in order to balance programmatic expenditures at the expense of West Virginia’s most financially needy students. Although a program that pays for all tuition and fees may appear ideal, it creates a scenario where program expenses are more difficult to control and fewer funds are available for other forms of state-level college assistance, such as need-based aid, institutional expenditures, or campus infrastructure investment. An award cap would also allow for price sensitivity across the public postsecondary system. De-coupling award amounts from tuition levels will return a benefit to those institutions with lower tuitions. There is also the potential for gains by better utilizing federal tax credits. Most PROMISE scholars and their families are unable to utilize current federal education tax credits because PROMISE dollars cover all tuition and fees. Capping awards would lower the funds provided by West Virginia; however, federal tax credits would not only help ameliorate these reductions but, in effect, increase the amount of federal dollars coming into the state. Another benefit of capping awards is a greater transparency of the eligibility criteria. The award standards have risen three times in the last five years. Because of this variability, it is impossible for entering high school students to know what the PROMISE academic requirements will be by the time they finish high school. Consistent standards will create stability for the state’s middle and high school students by presenting a known target for which they can strive. Encourage community service for scholarship recipients. Currently, PROMISE scholars are encouraged to participate in community service. Yet, little has been done to promote community service participation beyond the language that

6-25

21

accompanies a scholar’s initial award. The Advisory Committee debated the merits of requiring students to complete a certain number of hours of community service either per year, or in total, during their college career; however, the administrative costs to both the state and colleges would escalate as each sought to facilitate and monitor this process. While promoting a community service requirement might not be very expensive, ensuring quality experiences for students would be quite costly. The locations of many colleges create a disparity in opportunities for community service off campus. Service on campus would yield some benefits, but students would not reap the benefits of getting to know, and of making a difference, in the broader community. Additionally, service on campus would be less likely to foster students’ putting down roots in the community. Some institutions already have existing community service offices and resources, but others do not. Requiring and monitoring this service leaves unanswered questions and exacerbates the challenge of how to make the scholarship financially viable in the long term. One also questions why only PROMISE scholars would be required to provide this service while other recipients of state aid would not. Recognizing the importance and purpose of service yet noting the administrative barriers, the Advisory Committee recommends that each PROMISE scholar sign a pledge making PROMISE a “moral obligation” award that urges some form of “payback” to the state. West Virginia should develop a statewide Governor’s program to recognize the voluntary efforts of PROMISE scholars and other college students in order to encourage this process. PROMISE scholars should be encouraged to submit an annual report on their service efforts similar to the report required of Truman Scholars. The Commission would support these efforts by providing leadership in developing a statewide support structure to undergird these efforts. Through such activities, students would come to know the rewards of service and begin patterns of lifelong volunteerism and civic engagement. Extend the time for scholarship recipients to receive awards after attending an out-of-state institution. Scholarship recipients can currently attend an out-of-state institution for one semester and still maintain their eligibility. The Advisory Committee recommends extending this time to one year for previously awarded students who are academically qualified. Although an extension of the time to claim the scholarship would increase costs, staff evaluation indicates that it would be minimal. Staff found that of the 2004 high school graduates awarded scholarships, 20 scholars returned to West Virginia public institutions after attending an out-of-state institution for one year. Based on the data available, staff could not determine the number of previously awarded students who would have been academically qualified to receive the award upon their enrollment at a West Virginia public institution. This is the number who actually earned PROMISE, went out-of-state and then returned. It is not clear how many students might be incentivized to return to West Virginia by their being able to receive PROMISE upon return. These data are not available for previously awarded students

6-26

22

transferring from out-of-state to West Virginia private institutions; however, staff feels that number would be minimal as well. Eliminate the two percent cap on increases in annual appropriations to the PROMISE program. The Advisory Committee discussed the advisability of various inflationary factors including the Consumer Price Index (CPI), the Higher Education Price Index (HEPI), the current two percent, and an average of tuition and fee increases at four-year institutions in the state. Aware that the value of the scholarship would be subject to continuous examination, the Advisory Committee agreed that, as a cost-saving measure, the program should be disconnected from any growth expectations and especially from the annual round of tuition and fee increases. Maintain the current eligibility criteria. The Advisory Committee examined the impact of the elimination of ACT subscores as a requirement for the scholarship. An action of this nature would open scholarship eligibility to a larger pool of West Virginians. Previous research has demonstrated that students with higher financial need tend to be negatively impacted when subscores are present. However, the Advisory Committee declined to recommend a change due to the need for consistency in standards and the unknown impact of such a change on the number of awardees and the overall program cost. Examine the effectiveness of the PROMISE Board of Control and its current composition. The PROMISE Board of Control has tended to meet on an as-needed basis to address issues pertaining to award amounts and eligibility standards. The Advisory Committee believes that there are efficiencies to be gained by having the Board align future efforts with the financial aid coordinating council as well as other bodies that oversee and administer higher education and financial aid within West Virginia. Find new means to meet the mounting unmet financial needs of students across the state. All scholarship and financial aid policies should be reviewed to assure that they are responsive to the needs of adult students who increasingly represent a larger share of national higher education enrollment. The Advisory Committee applauds the work of the HEPC in its efforts to adjust application deadlines to accommodate adult students and the Governor and State Legislature in increasing the state’s investment in the Higher Education Adult Part-Time Student Grant (HEAPS) program. Need-based awards should also be given parity with merit awards in West Virginia public policy. This type of focused need-based effort at the state level will help alleviate national trends of larger loans and less grant aid. There are numerous qualified college applicants who are hesitant to risk higher education due to a lack of resources. They realize that failure or an inability to afford this endeavor after entry will result in thousands of dollars in loans that they must repay without receiving the intended benefit of a degree. Increased grant aid will help offset these postsecondary expenses making the dream of college a reality for more West

6-27

23

Virginians. Aware of the complexities involved, the Advisory Committee declined to recommend a suggested ratio of financial aid to annual increases in the cost of college attendance. Both state and institution play important roles in this process. West Virginia institutions of higher education are encouraged to more aggressively seek private funds for need-based awards. State agencies should also work together to address the financial aid dilemma. The West Virginia Department of Education and WORKFORCE West Virginia are examples of two allies in these efforts that should be called upon as we seek to pool resources and knowledge in facing our education challenges. Eliminate barriers to sharing of student-level data between the West Virginia Department of Education and Higher Education Policy Commission. Increasing access to and success in postsecondary education requires understanding of the dynamics of academic achievement and educational attainment of all students. Research on postsecondary access in West Virginia would be furthered by the ability of postsecondary education researchers to access data about elementary and secondary students beyond those who actually succeed in enrolling in a public college or university in the state. There is need for a P-20 data pipeline that tracks all students from the time they enter the educational system through their transitions between schools and sectors. The two educational agencies should collaborate and share data to enhance analysis of the complexities of educational attainment in West Virginia, while at the same time carefully safeguarding the privacy of individual student information. Recent clarification by the U.S. Department of Education in regards to the Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) provides hope that major impediments have been removed affording higher education and P-12 the opportunity to collaborate by linking their student data. The U.S. Department of Education acknowledges the importance of privacy but states that it should not create a barrier to “useful and valid educational research.” These opportunities will generate much-needed research addressing the totality of a student’s education experience. Better informed decisions can be made allowing for a more efficient educational system. Activate the financial aid coordinating council that was created by statute several years ago. The Higher Education Student Financial Aid Advisory Board was established by West Virginia Code “to provide financial aid expertise and policy guidance to the Commission, the Council, the PROMISE Scholarship Board of Control, the Vice Chancellor for Administration and the Executive Director of the PROMISE Scholarship Program on all matters related to federal, state, and private student financial aid resources and programs.” It is recommended that this council be activated to serve its mission of coordinating financial aid programs and to maximize the return on the state’s investment.

6-28

24

Ask business leaders and others to help improve job-related information and counseling and provide internships or other capstone experiences for upper-level college students. According to Dr. George Kuh, Director of the Center for Postsecondary Research at Indiana University, both business leaders and students place great import on what can be gained from job-related internships. The Advisory Committee recommends that these opportunities as well as other avenues to enhance the relationship between upper-level students and future employers be explored in order to direct prepared students to the appropriate employment resources. VII. Other Initiatives As one might imagine, there were many initiatives that were discussed and considered. The Advisory Committee wanted to limit its recommendations to an attainable list it believed would most benefit the PROMISE program as well as the state of West Virginia. The following includes other noteworthy topics that garnered much discussion. Internship Requirement for Scholarship Recipients The Advisory Committee considered requiring all students who receive a PROMISE scholarship to participate in an internship at some point during their college career. One benefit is that students would obtain valuable work experience and career guidance prior to graduation from college. Students could also get their feet in the door with particular employers and network with people in their field before actually going on the job market. There is also the possibility that working in internships in West Virginia may breed loyalty to a specific employer, increase a student’s knowledge about work opportunities in the state, and thereby increase the chances that a student stay in West Virginia to work after graduation. This is one of the original goals of the PROMISE Scholarship Program. Another possible by-product is that businesses providing more internships for students could lead them to become more involved with the institutions. This could range from financial assistance to enhanced input into what skills and knowledge graduates need. The limitations that were noted include the fact that this option provides no fiscal savings and actually introduces new costs. The administration of the requirement, both keeping track of students’ fulfillment of it as well as the necessary facilitation of students finding internship opportunities, would add to the cost of PROMISE. Even if administration of the requirement and its costs are shifted to individual institutions rather than occurring at the system level, the costs must be borne somewhere. One also wonders whether there would be sufficient internships available for the 3,000 or so PROMISE recipients that enter the system each year. Required internships may also impose an undue burden, and even considerable financial costs, on students, particularly needy ones. Many students must work to help finance college expenses not covered by PROMISE and may be forced to give up paid employment to participate in an internship that is unpaid or less lucrative.

6-29

25

Campus locale might also play a role if the distance is prohibitive to quality internships. Finding rewarding, relevant internships proximal to all institutions in the state will be difficult. While there may be plenty of opportunities close to some colleges, the remoteness of others will require students to commute long distances or even move during the summer to another area to complete their internship. This will be particularly burdensome to the neediest students. Repayment Requirement for Certain Scholarship Recipients One of the scholarship program goals is to increase the likelihood that West Virginians who perform at high academic levels will remain in the state after completing their postsecondary education by inducing these students to attend institutions of higher education in the state. If PROMISE loan forgiveness was based on a requirement that graduates live and work in West Virginia for a prescribed number of years, it is probable that more graduates would remain in the state after graduation, but it is difficult to predict precisely how many. Also, surveys conducted by Commission staff indicate that fewer students would accept the scholarship if it could later become a loan. Administering a loan forgiveness program would require significantly more administrative resources than does administering a scholarship program. Additional administrative processes would include securing promissory notes, holding meetings with recipients to discuss obligations, securing documentation for forgiveness, processing deferments, and carrying out collection efforts for recipients who do not meet the forgiveness conditions. Sixteen other states have broad merit-based scholarship programs. None of these programs has a requirement that recipients repay the scholarship proceeds if they do not later work in the state. The greatest impact of converting the scholarship to a forgivable loan program would likely be on lower-income students, many of whom are first-generation college students. These students and families may be particularly concerned about the possibility of a financial aid award later becoming a loan. This could result in fewer academically prepared West Virginia students choosing to attend college or more students choosing to enroll in less-expensive programs because of the concerns about incurring or increasing student loan obligations. West Virginia already has one of the higher postsecondary loan default rates in the nation; the state ranked second among SREB states in 2006 and fifth nationally. The Advisory Committee believes that a forgivable loan program would exacerbate this problem. VIII. Future Direction

West Virginia’s master plan for higher education, Charting the Future, establishes a public agenda for higher education and outlines the critical role of our postsecondary system in serving diverse needs of our citizens. Higher education has long been the pathway to upward mobility, and the Commission takes responsibility for opening that pathway to all West Virginians. Charting the Future identifies the following as the critical components of the public agenda for postsecondary education in West Virginia: (1) economic growth, (2) access, (3) cost and affordability, (4) learning and accountability, and (5) innovation.

6-30

26

Postsecondary education is critical not only to the economic futures of our individual citizens, but also to the health of the state’s economy as a whole. In order to foster economic development, maximize use of resources and make our graduates competitive in a knowledge-intensive global economy, Charting the Future focuses on the importance of partnerships, entrepreneurship, and research. The Commission looks to capitalize on existing strengths and better position West Virginia as a globally competitive, economically prosperous and dynamic state. The plan also reflects the Commission’s belief that higher education plays an instrumental role in the cultural and economic health of our communities.

To address the issue of access, the Commission is examining the tough questions. How can we make postsecondary education accessible for all West Virginians? How can we give students the skills and information they need to succeed in college and other postsecondary education programs? How can we provide a range of educational opportunities for citizens located across the state and at various stages of their adult and working lives? To address the issue of cost and affordability, the Commission is also examining the tough questions. In an era of tight budgets and skyrocketing costs, how can we ensure that higher education is affordable for West Virginians?

These questions serve as a framework for policy debate about the purpose of higher education in West Virginia. At their core, they point to the urgent need for more West Virginians to have affordable access to postsecondary education. Over the past decade, policymakers have demonstrated their commitment to this goal by creating and funding a broad range of financial aid programs. Through both the PROMISE Scholarship Program and a host of need-based programs, the state annually invests more than $80 million in state financial aid programs. The Advisory Committee acknowledges this investment and applauds policymakers for their commitment to access. As noted in this report, these programs have served the state well over the past decade and have opened the doors for more students to attend college in West Virginia. However, if these programs are to remain viable in the years to come, certain structural changes may be required. These changes will not come easy, and will be the source of much debate. It is the hope of the Advisory Committee that this report will inform the debate and provide a foundation for success in the on-going evolution of financial aid policy in West Virginia.

6-31

27

Afterword and Acknowledgements

Good decisions usually require timely, valid, relevant and reliable information. Data consistency and accuracy over time allow policymakers to judge the results of their decisions in view of both original intentions and new circumstances. The work of this ad-hoc Advisory Committee depended heavily on the quality of information maintained by the HEPC staff and public institution administrators, national databases maintained by federal education officials and associations of educators, and studies completed by scholars who have addressed student financial aid issues. We are grateful for the active and willing assistance provided by the Commission staff, especially Dr. Brian Noland, Rob Anderson, Dr. Angela Bell, Jack Toney, Ashley Schumaker, and Larry Ponder. We have found that the quality of information in the Commission and institutional data files is uneven. The categories of information in the files, if properly filled and maintained, would have facilitated our data collection needs. Unfortunately, all public institutions have not been diligent in entering financial aid information. Each student financial aid file accommodates information that could have supported useful analyses if aggregated appropriately and related to other files. For example, the file expects the “unmet need” (and the extent to which need is exceeded) of every student to be reported. A significant number of institutions reported no unmet need. When contacted, officers at several institutions said that they have chosen not to enter those data. At another institution that originally reported no unmet need, total unmet need was calculated and found to be close to $4.5 million. Thus, to estimate unmet need throughout the public system, data known to be reliable in a handful of institutions was used to project for all institutions. The definition of “unmet need” itself presents a host of challenges. Probably most problematic is the determination of “student cost of attendance” at each institution, for student need is calculated simply by subtracting the expected family contribution (EFC) from the student cost of attendance. If, after subtracting all financial aid from the cost of attendance, there is still any remaining amount, that amount is considered “unmet need.” Each institution determines the “cost of attendance” for several categories of students including on-campus or residential, commuter, dependent and independent. The Advisory Committee was surprised to learn that the “cost of attendance” at some community colleges was as high as the “cost of attendance” at some public, four-year institutions. The need for current, accurate and comprehensive financial aid data is underscored by the relative importance of student financial aid in West Virginia as a means of financing higher education in the state. Recall one of the principal findings of this report: West Virginia is sixth in the nation in the percentage of higher education funds devoted to student aid. With the exception of last year, augmenting student aid has been the highest budget priority of the Commission and of its predecessor state boards. In addition, the Commission has recently employed a policy analyst who will focus her efforts largely on financial aid issues. The quality and benefits of this work will turn largely on the nature of the information that can be summoned from the institutions.

6-32

28

While there may be some data gaps on public higher education, very little information at all could be found on students attending private institutions. Until 2004, the private colleges and universities did provide information on student financial aid that was compiled by Commission staff (and their predecessors at the Higher Education Central Office) and published in an annual statewide report on student financial aid. That publication did not appear for several years, and recently some of the data included in earlier reports were updated and published for 2006-2007 in draft form. The West Virginia Independent Colleges and Universities (WVICU) was able to provide information on changes in average tuition charges among the private colleges and universities over the past decade. Because the state is now providing substantial, albeit indirect support to private and proprietary institutions through its various financial aid programs ($8,729,111 in 2006-2007), it is reasonable to expect that these institutions will allow policymakers to ascertain the quality of educational experiences students are obtaining with these state funds. This report includes data on student performance in the public institutions. Similar data should be available from the private institutions as long as the state is facilitating student choice of institutions. Increasingly, states that invest large sums in student aid assume the additional duty of consumer protection.

6-33

29

References Anderson, R., and Wright, D. (2007). False HOPE? Implications of expansive eligibility requirements for the Tennessee Education Lottery Scholarship Program. Paper presented at the Southern Association for Institutional Research, Little Rock, AK. Angrist, J., Lang, D., and Oreopolous, P. (2007). Incentives and services for college achievement: Evidence from a randomized trial. IZA Discussion Paper 3134. URL: ftp://repec.iza.org/RePEc/Discussionpaper/dp3134.pdf. Baum, S., and Ma, J. (2007). Trends in College Pricing 2007. Washington, DC: The College Board. Baum, S., and Ma, J. (2008). Trends in College Pricing 2008. Washington, DC: The College Board. Baum, S., and Payea, K. (2007). Trends in Student Aid 2007. Washington, DC: The College Board. Bell, A., and Anderson, R. (2004). Setting the governmental agenda to state lottery funded tuition scholarships. Paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Association for the Study of Higher Education, Kansas City, MO. Berry, F.S., and Berry, W.D. (1999). Innovation and diffusion models in policy research. In P. Sabatier (Ed.), Theories of the Policy Process. Boulder, CO: Westview Press. Binder, M., and Ganderton, P.T. (2004). The New Mexico Lottery Scholarship: Does it help minority and low-income students? In D.E. Heller and P. Marin (Eds.), State Merit Scholarship Programs and Racial Inequality. Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University. Bound, J., Groen, J., Kezdi, G., and Turner, S. (2004). Trade in university training: Cross-state variation in the production and stock of college-educated labor. Journal of Econometrics, 121, 143-173.

Brock, T., and Richburg-Hayes, L. (2006). Paying for persistence: Early results of a Louisiana scholarship program for low-income parents attending community college. New York: MDRC. Cornwell, C.M., and Mustard, D.B. (2004). Georgia’s HOPE Scholarship and minority and low-income students: Program effects and proposed reforms. In D.E. Heller and P. Marin (Eds.), State Merit Scholarship Programs and Racial Inequality. Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University. Cornwell, C.M., Lee, K.H., and Mustard, D.B. (2005). Student responses to merit scholarship retention rules. The Journal of Human Resources, 40(4), 895-917.

6-34

30

Cornwell, C.M., Mustard, D.B., and Sridhar, D.J. (2006). The enrollment effects of merit-based financial aid: Evidence from Georgia’s HOPE Program. Journal of Labor Economics, 24(4), 761-786. Doyle, W.R. (2006). Adoption of merit-based student grant programs: An event history analysis. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis, 28(3), 259-285. Dynarski, S. (2000). HOPE for whom? Financial aid for the middle class and its impact on college attendance. National Tax Journal, 53(3), 329-361. Dynarski, S. (2003). The New Merit Aid. Working Paper. Cambridge, MA. Dynarski, S. (2007). Building the stock of college-educated labor. In press at Journal of Human Resources. Farrell, P.L. (2004). Who are the students receiving merit scholarships? In D.E. Heller and P. Marin (Eds.), State Merit Scholarship Programs and Racial Inequality. Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University. Fox, W.F., Couch, S.E., and Thacker, A. (2007). School-to-work: Do Tennessee’s higher education graduates work in Tennessee? Paper prepared under an agreement with the Tennessee Higher Education Commission with the cooperation of the Tennessee Department of Labor and Workforce Development. Noland, B., and DeFrank-Cole, L. (2007). Merit-based aid in West Virginia: An overview of the PROMISE Scholarship Program. Paper presented at the 47th Annual Forum of the Association for Institutional Research, Kansas City, Missouri. Groen, J. (2004). The effect of college location on migration of college-educated labor. Journal of Econometrics, 121, 125-142. Hammond, G.W., and Leguizamon, J.S. (2008a). West Virginia work and wages by institution and major. Paper prepared for the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission. Morgantown, WV: West Virginia University Bureau of Business and Economic Research. Hammond, G.W., and Leguizamon, J.S. (2008b). Work participation and wages of PROMISE graduates in 2007. Memo prepared for the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission. Morgantown, WV: West Virginia University Bureau of Business and Economic Research. Heller, D.E. (2002). State merit scholarship programs: An introduction. In. D.E. Heller and P. Marin (Eds.), Who should we help? The negative social consequences of merit scholarships. Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University. Heller, D.E. (2004). The devil is in the details: An analysis of eligibility criteria for merit scholarships in Massachusetts. In D.E. Heller and P. Marin (Eds.), State Merit Scholarship

6-35

31

Programs and Racial Inequality. Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University. Heller, D.E. (2006). Merit Aid and College Access. Paper presented at the Symposium on the Consequences of Merit-Based Student Aid, Madison, WI. Heller, D.E., and Marin, P. (2002). Who Should We Help? The Negative Social Consequences of Merit Scholarships. Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University. Heller, D.E., and Rogers, K.R. (2003). Merit scholarships and incentives for academic performance. Paper presented at the 20th Annual NASSGAP/NCHELP Student Financial Aid Research Network Conference, Annapolis, MD. Heller, D.E., and Rogers, K.R. (2004). Stanching the brain drain: Merit scholarships and post-baccalaureate migration patterns. Paper presented at the 21st Annual NASSGAP/NCHELP Student Financial Aid Research Network Conference, San Francisco, CA. Henry, G.T., and Rubenstein, R. (2002). Paying for grades: Impact of merit-based financial aid on educational quality. Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, 21 (1), 93-109. Henry, G.T., Rubenstein, R., and Bugler, D.T. (2004). Is HOPE enough? Impacts of receiving and losing merit-based financial aid. Educational Policy 18(5), 686-709 Hovey, H. (1999). State Spending for Higher Education in the Next Decade: The Battle to Sustain Current Support. San Jose, CA: The National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. Ledbetter, J., and Seligman, J. (2003). Changing eligibility requirements: HSGPA and SAT. Carl Vinson Institute of Government (October 22). Retrieved September 30, 2004, from http://www.cviog.uga.edu.hope/031022requirements.pdf. Mortenson, T. (2008, July). Interstate migration of college freshmen 1986 to 2006. Postsecondary Education Opportunity, 193. Mortenson, T. (2008). College Participation Rates for Students from Low-Income Families by State. Spreadsheet retrieved on November 20, 2008 from http://www.postsecondary.org/topicslist.asp?page=1&od=&search=College%20participation. National Association of State Student Grant and Aid Programs. (2002). 33rd Annual Survey Report on State-Sponsored Student Financial Aid, 2001-2002 Academic Year. National Association of State Student Grant and Aid Programs. (2007). 38th Annual Survey Report on State-Sponsored Student Financial Aid, 2006-2007 Academic Year.

6-36

32

National Center for Education Statistics, (2007). 2003-04 and 2004-05 Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System, Spring 2004, Spring 2005, Spring 2006. Retrieved on December 15, 2008 from http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d07/tables/dt07_338.asp?referrer=list. National Center for Public Policy and Higher Education. (2002). Losing Ground: A National Status Report on the Affordability of American Higher Education. San Jose, CA: Author. Ness, E. C. (2008). Merit aid and the politics of education. New York: Routledge. Ness, E.C. (2007). Class of 2007 Senior Opinions Survey: Implications for College Access, College Choice, and the PROMISE Scholarship Program. Charleston, WV: West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission. Scott-Clayton, J. (2008). On money and motivation: A quasi-experimental analysis of financial incentives for college achievement. National Bureau of Economic Research working paper. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University. Singell, L.D., Waddell, G.R., and Curs, B.R. (2006). HOPE for the Pell?Institutional effects in the intersection of merit-based and need-based aid. Southern Economic Journal, 73(1), 79-99. State Higher Education Executive Officers. (2008). State Higher Education Finance FY 2007. Boulder, CO: Author.

6-37

West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission1018 Kanawha Blvd. EastCharleston, West Virginia 25301-2025

ww ww ww .. hh ee pp cc .. ww vv nn ee tt .. ee dd uu

WVHI

GHER EDUCATIO

N

POLICY COMMIS

SION

WVHI

GHER EDUCATIO

N

POLICY COMMIS

SIONWVHI

GHER EDUCATIO

N

POLICY COMMIS

SION

6-38

West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission Meeting of January 23, 2009 ITEM: Approval of Institutional Compacts INSTITUTIONS: Bluefield State College, Fairmont State

University, Glenville State College, Marshall University, Shepherd University, West Liberty State College, West Virginia State University, and West Virginia University

RECOMMENDED RESOLUTION: Resolved, That the West Virginia Higher

Education Policy Commission approves the institutional compacts for Bluefield State College, Fairmont State University, Glenville State College, Marshall University, Shepherd University, West Liberty State College, West Virginia State University, and West Virginia University that have been developed in conjunction with the Higher Education Policy Commission master plan, Charting the Future, 2007-2012.

STAFF MEMBER: Bruce Flack BACKGROUND: In 2007, the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission in conjunction with the adoption of a new master plan, Charting the Future, 2007-2012, initiated a process for each institution to develop a compact with the Commission that would further institutional advancement and demonstrate commitment to the goals of the master plan. The planning document for establishment of the institutional compacts, Institutional Compact Reporting Elements, provided the following charge:

To address the goals of the Higher Education Policy Commission’s 2007-12 master plan, each institution shall develop a compact with the Commission based on the elements of the statewide master plan. Each institutional compact shall address how the college or university will meet statewide goals and, where appropriate, establish institutional goals for the duration of the master plan. Each institution shall update its compact annually over the course of the planning cycle. In the compact update, the institution shall respond to the elements in the statewide document, summarize significant developments, indicate progress toward achieving goals, and revise goals, if appropriate. Institutional compacts

7-1

and annual compact updates must be approved by the respective governing boards and the Higher Education Policy Commission.

Compact elements The institutional compacts were to be comprised of a set of core elements, consistent across all institutions, as well as specific elements targeted to institutional mission-related outcomes. The core compact elements are as follows:

1. Enrollment 8. Assessment of student learning 2. Retention rate 9. Accreditation 3. Graduation rate 10. Alignment with K-12 schools 4. Degree production 11. Use of instructional technology 5. Degrees in STEM and health fields 12. Career placement 6. Licensure pass rates 13. Institutional financial aid 7. Percentage of faculty with terminal degrees 14. Programs of distinction

Other compact elements, also based on the elements of the master plan, are elective. In responding to these elements, the institutions are able to reflect the variety and diversity of the institutional mission, existing strengths, populations and regions served, and goals throughout the planning cycle. Each institution was to select at least one element from each of the master plan areas of emphasis. The elective elements are: Economic Growth 1. Promotion of global awareness 2. Partnerships with private business for training and employment purposes Access 3. Educational services to adults 4. Service to underrepresented/disadvantaged populations Cost and Affordability 5. External funding 6. Institutional efficiencies Learning and Accountability 7. Expansion of graduate/postdoctoral education 8. National faculty recognition/faculty quality Innovation 9. Student civic engagement 10. Entrepreneurial education

11. Research and external funding (Required elements for Marshall University and West Virginia University. Optional element for other institutions.)

7-2

The compact planning document established a format for institutional reporting on the various compact elements. For each element, the institution was to (1) provide data essential to measuring institutional progress, (2) set goals for the duration of the compact, (3) formulate strategies for goal attainment, and (4) determine timelines for goal implementation. Benchmarks were established for some elements. For example, each institution by the end of the compact period is to reach the median of institutional peers in student retention and graduation rates. Compact review To review the institutional compact reports that were to be submitted by September 1, 2008, an evaluation team including Commission staff and external consultants, was formed. The team was charged to review the initial compact submissions, suggest revisions to the compacts where necessary, and recommend approval or disapproval of the final compacts to the Higher Education Policy Commission. The evaluation team recommends approval of the compacts for Bluefield State College, Fairmont State University, Glenville State College, Marshall University, Shepherd University, West Liberty State College, West Virginia State University, and West Virginia University. In its review, the team did not make a recommendation on the compact submitted by Concord University. The team has requested that Concord revise its compact to address concerns raised by the team and resubmit a final compact by March 1, 2009. The intent is to present the Concord University compact to the Commission for its consideration at a later date. Additionally, the team suggested that the compact for West Virginia University Institute of Technology be submitted as a component of the West Virginia University 2009 compact update, as West Virginia University Institute of Technology is now an integrated division of West Virginia University. Compact updates Beginning with the 2008-2009 academic year, each institution is to submit annually by October 1 a compact update for the duration of the compact reporting period. In these updates, which must be approved by the Commission, institutions shall respond to elements in the statewide compact planning document and to other pertinent issues, summarize significant developments, indicate progress toward achieving goals, and revise goals, if appropriate. Compact reports The subsequent sections provide the following: (1) the team recommendations and comments on each institutional report; and, (2) a chart that summarizes institutional goals on the first five elements of each compact. These elements – enrollment, retention rates, graduation rates, degree production, and degree production in STEM and health fields – include numerical indicators that measure institutional progress for the remainder of the compact reporting period.

7-3

Bluefield State College

Comments on the compact report:

The compact report adequately addresses Bluefield State College’s plans for growth and advancement from 2008 to 2013.

Bluefield State College is planning for a five percent increase in headcount

enrollment by 2012-2013. The institution’s Strategic Enrollment Plan includes a number of strategies for goal attainment.

The graduation rate is ambitious and shows an increase of four percent

between the base year (2007-08) and the final year of the compact reporting period.

One hundred percent of the college’s accreditation-eligible programs (14

programs) have received and continue to hold specialized accreditation.

Students in the nursing program are involved in several outreach initiatives, including vision screenings in primary schools and health education classes in an “after school” program.

The institution has put in place an effective campus technology organization

that enables the offering of a large number of online courses.

The elective element on global awareness indicates a strong commitment to international education. Additionally, the college is planning a collaborative program with Concord University.

Issues to address in the 2009 compact update:

A number of the elements do not include viable strategies for achieving goals (career placement, STEM graduates, licensure pass rates). In other areas the strategies are laudable, but costly. The institution needs to address whether it will be able to commit sufficient resources to implement these ambitious and expensive strategies.

Programs of distinction are merged under the broad categories of

“engineering technologies” and “radiologic science/radiologic technology.” This results in the identification of eleven associate and baccalaureate programs. It is recommended that the institution identify two or three discrete programs for the distinction category.

Evaluation team recommendation:

Approval of the compact.

7-4

Bluefield State College Institutional Compact Reports, 2007-2012 with Goals

Bluefield State College Previous Years Base Year Compact Goals

Measure 2004 2005 2006 2007-08 2008-09

2009-10

2010-11

2011-12

Target 2012-

13

1a Total Fall Headcount Enrollment 1852* 1708 1923 1804 1822 1840 1858 1876 1894

1b Annualized FTE Enrollment 1612 1599 1618** 1588(est) 1604 1620 1636 1652 1667

2a 1st to 2nd Year Retention (first-time, full-time degree-seeking freshmen)

60 58 64 60 60 61 62 63 64

2b Avg. Retention Rate of Institution Peers (median) 60 58 62 63.5 N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

3a

Graduation Rates, Bachelor degree seeking first-time, full-time freshmen (same inst)

23 38 33 27 31 32 33 34 35

3b

Graduation Rates, including those transferring out and completing degrees at other institutions

34.5 35 12.8 24.1 31 32 33 34 35

3c Avg. Graduation Rate of Peers (Median) 31 31.5 35 * N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A

Degree Production Certificate Associate 182 120 96 96 96 96 96 96 96 Bachelor 185 204 233 247 250 253 256 259 262 Masters 1st Professional Doctoral

4

Total Degrees 367 324 329 343 346 349 352 355 358

5 Number of undergraduate degrees in STEM and Health Fields***

205 201 167 177 194 200 205 211 216

*Adjusted for the separation of New River Community and Technical College which occurred that year. **New River Community and Technical College included in the IPEDS numbers; adjusted to remove those numbers. ***Adjusted to include those Allied Health CIPS not in common with the CIPS delivered by HEPC but in common with the STEM definition.

7-5

Fairmont State University


The Fairmont State University compact report is well-written and correlates positively with the institution’s strategic plan.

Fairmont State University projects a six percent increase in headcount

enrollment during the compact reporting period. The institution has done an excellent job of looking at potential growth in all academic programs.

The institution has established an attainable goal of increasing the retention

rate from 64 percent to 66 percent and has developed appropriate strategies. The 66 percent goal is equivalent to the median of institutional peers.

The university has achieved accreditation for all programs in which licensure

is required by accrediting boards and will seek accreditation for the computer science and information systems programs.

The report provides evidence that the institution is developing an excellent

focus on use of instructional technology and is implementing numerous online course initiatives across the entire university. In the 2009 update, the institution should assess the adequacy of technology staffing to meet future needs.

The programs indentified as programs of distinction, accounting and

occupational safety, are supported by strategies that will allow the programs to maintain their status as programs of distinction.

The university plans to promote global awareness through initiatives that will

allow faculty and students to travel abroad and that will enhance on-campus activities. Exchange agreements have been developed with institutions in Italy and Russia.


Fairmont State University projects no increase in the graduation rate (44 percent) over the five-year planning period. While the 44 percent rate exceeds that of institutional peers, the institution in the 2009 update should project some increase, no matter how modest. Since the institution projects a slight increase in student retention, it should consider similar improvement in the graduation rate.

The institution needs to consider establishing a more ambitious goal for

increasing degrees in STEM fields. The goal for total degree production is

7-6

four percent, but the projected increase for STEM degrees is less than three percent.

The report on assessment does not address all items of the compact

preparation document and will need to be revised in the update. It is unclear how the institution utilizes data from initiatives such as the CLA and NSSE.

The section on K-12 alignment suggests good strategies, but measureable

goals need to be developed in order to assess progress.

The goal for graduate program expansion needs to be clarified. The compact narrative suggests a goal of increasing the number of graduate students by 100. The compact table, however, shows an increase of only five students.



7-7

Fairmont State University

Institutional Compact Reports, 2007-2012 with Goals

Fairmont State University Previous Years Base Year Compact Goals

Measure 2004 2005 2006 2007-2008 2008-09

2009-10

2010-11

2011-12

Target 2012-

13

1a Total Fall Headcount Enrollment 4,071 4,740 4,611 4,464

4,547 4,592 4,638 4,685 4,732

1b Annualized FTE Enrollment 3,745 4,087 3,901 3,763

3,801 3837 3877 3916 3955

2a 1st to 2nd Year Retention (first-time, full-time degree-seeking freshmen) 77 69 66 64

65% 65% 66% 66% 66%

2b Avg Retention Rate of Institution Peers (median) 63.0 63.5 65.5 63est peers peers peers peers peers

3a Graduation Rates, Bachelor degree seeking first-time, full-time freshmen (same inst) 41 42 41 44

44% 44% 44% 44% 44%

3b

Graduation Rates, including those transferring out and completing degrees at other institutions*** 40.1 40.2 38.0 41.1 40 40.0 40.0 40 40

3c Avg Graduation Rate of Peers (Median) 34.0 33.5 32.0 36.5

peers peers peers peers peers

Degree Production Certificate Associate 0 0 73 79 75 80 83 85 90 Bachelor 625 676 663 672 670 675 680 685 690 Masters 3 27 48 65 65 66 68 68 70 1st Professional Doctoral

4

Total Degrees 628 703 784 816 810 821 831 838 850

5 Number of undergraduate degrees in STEM & Health Fields** 133 126 178 183 184 185 186 187 188

7/28/2008 *IPEDS data not released

** STEM fields were determined in conjunction with EPSCOR. The CIP codes utilized are on the attached worksheet and include degrees classified as "NSF LSAMP", "NSF +"' and "Technology." ***Problem with this rate; we will work with Rob Anderson’s office to make sure IPEDS submission is correct in future.

7-8

Glenville State College


The Glenville State College compact report is comprehensive and includes multiple strategies for attaining compact goals. The report is evidence of the commitment the college has given to institutional planning. The institution has established ambitious goals and suggested a program of aggressive action to move the institution forward.

Glenville has developed an assessment program that could be used as a

model by the other four-year colleges. The institution, however, is encouraged to establish timelines for implementing and achieving its long term assessment goals and strategies over the next five years.

The institution is implementing an impressive array of activities to enhance

alignment with public schools, highlighted by the Hidden Promise Initiative, a program to increase college readiness among high school and middle school students.

The college has appropriately selected criminal justice and natural resource

management as programs of distinction. The institution has identified 76 percent of its students as “low-income” and

67 percent as “first-generation college-going students,” numbers that reflect the socio-economic nature of Glenville’s service region. A number of specific strategies have been developed to serve more effectively this under-represented/disadvantaged population.


While the compact goal report is comprehensive and includes multiple strategies for goal attainment for most compact elements, many of the strategies will require a substantial commitment of financial resources. In the compact update, the institution should consider prioritizing strategies consistent with available resources.

While a 25 percent increase in enrollment for the five-year period is a

commendable goal, such a goal may be overly ambitious. In the compact update, the institution should consider the appropriateness of maintaining the goal level.

The institution has outlined an ambitious set of strategies aimed at improving

retention and graduation rates. While these efforts are laudable, it will be a difficult challenge for Glenville to reach compact goals of 66 percent for

7-9

retention and 36 percent for graduation. The percentage goals identified are at the level of the median of institutional peers, but would require a six percent increase in retention and an eleven percent increase in graduation rates. In the update, the institution may wish to revisit the goals.



7-10

Glenville State College


Glenville State College Previous Years Base Year Compact Goals

Measure 2004 2005 2006 2007-2008 2008-09

2009-10

2010-11

2011-12

Target 2012-

13

1a Total Fall Headcount Enrollment 1,313 1,392 1,381

1,441

1,501

1,575

1,651

1,726

1,801

1b Annualized FTE Enrollment 1,129 1,246 1,195

1,196

1,286

1,330

1,397

1,464

1,531

2a 1st to 2nd Year Retention (first-time, full-time degree-seeking freshmen) 61 63 60 *

62.0 63.0 64.0 65.0 66.0

2b Avg Retention Rate of Institution Peers (median) 62 63 66 *

3a Graduation Rates, Bachelor degree seeking first-time, full-time freshmen (same inst) 26 27 24

25

27% 30% 32% 34% 36%

3b

Graduation Rates, including those transferring out and completing degrees at other institutions 37.0 32.7 29.2 31.9 33.9 35.9 37.8 39.8 41.8

3c Avg Graduation Rate of Peers (Median) 36.0 41.5 36.0 * Degree Production

Certificate

Associate 50 29 32

53 54 55 56 67 68

Bachelor 187 202 182

182

185

188

191

194

197 Masters 1st Professional Doctoral

4

Total Degrees 237

231

214

237

239

243

247

251

255

5 Number of undergraduate degrees in STEM & Health Fields**

75

65

61

71 75 81 86 91 96

7/28/2008 * IPEDS data that has not been released.

** STEM fields were determined in conjunction with EPSCOR. The CIP codes utilized are on the attached worksheet and include degrees classified as "NSF LSAMP", "NSF +"' and "Technology."

7-11

Marshall University


The compact report adequately addresses Marshall University’s plans for growth and advancement from 2008 to 2013.

Marshall University anticipates a decline in headcount enrollment during the

initial year of the compact. The institution, however, through enhanced recruitment and retention efforts expects enrollment to exceed the base year by 4.8 percent by the end of the compact reporting period.

The university is implementing a new first-year experience program. This

program and other activities should assist the institution in meeting a student retention goal of 74 percent – a level that will match the median of institutional peers.

The institution projects a growth of twelve percent in the number of students

graduating in STEM and health fields.

The university has a comprehensive program for assessment of student learning that could serve as a model for other institutions.

The Marshall Technology Outreach Center has implemented a vast array of

programs and activities designed for the K-12 audience including a “How to Succeed in College” module, virtual field trips, and an electronic newsletter. An “Online College Courses in the High Schools” program offers qualified high school students the opportunity to take Marshall courses online.

The use of instructional technology is strong as evidenced by the high

number of degree programs and online courses offered, excellent staffing level and support, effective funding model, and sound program of assessment.

The elective element on global awareness reveals a vast array of programs to

support both students and faculty. The Center for International Programs is advised by a Campus Internationalization Committee comprised of faculty from all of the colleges.

The university is engaging in active planning to strengthen its research

components.

7-12


The university lists eight programs of distinction, but provides descriptions and goals for only two – biomedical sciences and accounting. The compact update should clarify the programs designated as programs of distinction and provide clear goals for enhancement. The update should also provide an explanation for the anticipated enrollment decline for the integrated science and technology program.

In the compact update, the university needs to develop measurable goals for

measuring success in serving underrepresented/disadvantaged populations.

The compact update needs to include a revision of the element on expanding graduate education opportunities. The current language lists two programs previously implemented and plans for implementation of two undergraduate programs. The update should clearly indicate plans for expanding graduate education opportunities (new and existing programs) for the entire compact reporting period.



7-13

Marshall University


Marshall University Previous Years Base Year Compact Goals

Measure 2004 2005 2006 2007-2008 2008-09

2009-10

2010-11

2011-12

Target 2012-

13

1a Total Fall Headcount Enrollment 13,920 13,988 13,936

13,808

13,697

13,779

13,959

14,198

14,476

1b Annualized FTE Enrollment 11,808 11,818 11,706 *

11,505

11,574

11,726

11,926

12,160

2a 1st to 2nd Year Retention (first-time, full-time degree-seeking freshmen) 70 72 73

71 71% 72% 72% 73% 74%

2b Avg Retention Rate of Institution Peers (median) 73.5 73.5 73.5

72.5

3a Graduation Rates, Bachelor degree seeking first-time, full-time freshmen (same inst) 39 43 47

40 45% 46% 47% 48% 49%

3b

Graduation Rates, including those transferring out and completing degrees at other institutions 44.0 48.2 42.2 46.0

3c Avg Graduation Rate of Peers (Median) 46.5 47.5 49.0

48.0

Degree Production Certificate

Associate 90 84 96 *

100

100

100

100

100

Bachelor 1,487 1,433 1,389 *

1,411

1,359

1,359

1,389

1,416

Masters 871 861 945 *

860

850

840

830

820

1st Professional 43 46 47 *

45

57

58

65

72

Doctoral 10 11 25 *

20

20

20

20

20

4

Total Degrees 2,501 2,435 2,502 *

2,436

2,386

2,377

2,404

2,428

5 Number of undergraduate degrees in STEM & Health Fields**

395

373

352

375

363

397

390

377

420

7/28/2008 * IPEDS data that has not been released.


7-14

Shepherd University Comments on the compact report:

The compact report is comprehensive, thorough and well-written. It provides abundant evidence of effective institutional planning.

Five-year goals established for enrollment growth, student retention,

graduation rates, degree production, and STEM/health degree production are reasonable and reflect the solid stance of the institution on these goals.

Goals established for licensure pass rates in education, nursing, and social

work are appropriate and consistent with national standards. The pass rate in nursing education, while above the NCLEX-RN standards of 80 percent for previous years, dropped to 73 percent for 2007. Indications are that Shepherd will raise the pass rate to above 80 percent in future years.

Shepherd University has an effective program for assessment of student

learning. Use of programs such as the Collegiate Learning Assessment, the National Survey of Student Engagement, and the Voluntary System of Accountability will add to the viability of assessment efforts.

Academic programs selected as programs of distinction are music, social

work, and contemporary art and theater. The choices are appropriate and reasonable goals have been established. The focus on music and contemporary art and theater will strengthen the liberal arts commitment of the institution.

The university is implementing programs to increase global awareness of

students, with major focus in expansion of study abroad opportunities.

The report demonstrates that the institution is cognizant of its mission and has outlined reasonable, but demanding goals and attainment strategies for the Master Plan reporting period, 2007-2013.


No specific issues cited. Evaluation team recommendation:


7-15

Shepherd University Institutional Compact Reports, 2007-2012 with Goals

Shepherd University Previous Years Base Year Compact Goals

Measure 2004 2005 2006 2007-08

2008-09

2009-10

2010-11

2011-12

Target 2012-

13

1a Total Fall Headcount Enrollment 5,206 3,901 4,091 4,119 4,181 4,243 4,304 4,366 4,428

1b Annualized FTE Enrollment 4,018 3,351 3,479 * 3,584 3,637 3,690 3,743 3,796

2a 1st to 2nd Year Retention (first-time, full-time degree-seeking freshmen)

71 69 70 67 70% 70% 70% 71% 71%

2b Avg. Retention Rate of Institution Peers (median) 64.0 60.5 65.0 65.0 N/A*** N/A*** N/A*** N/A*** N/A***

3a

Graduation Rates, Bachelor degree seeking first-time, full-time freshmen (same inst)

37 38 38 32 40% 40% 40% 41% 41%

3b

Graduation Rates, including those transferring out and completing degrees at other institutions

42.7 45.4 38.2 40.4 40.0 40.0 41.0 41.0 41.0

3c Avg. Graduation Rate of Peers (Median) 33.0 32.0 33.5 36.0 N/A*** N/A*** N/A*** N/A*** N/A***

Degree Production Certificate Associate 138 0 0 - - - - - - Bachelor 526 530 569 * 550 558 566 574 582 Masters 5 12 19 * 49 50 50 51 52 1st Professional Doctoral

4

Total Degrees 669 542 588 * 599 608 616 625 634

5 Number of undergraduate degrees in STEM and Health Fields**

125 123 123 137 167 191 177 181 187

7/28/2008 * IPEDS data that have been submitted to IPEDS, but have not yet been made publicly available. ** STEM fields were determined in conjunction with EPSCOR. The CIP codes utilized are on the attached worksheet and include degrees classified as "NSF LSAMP", "NSF +"' and "Technology." *** The behavior of Shepherd's peers cannot be reliably predicted in these areas. Thus, no projections based upon this behavior are possible.

7-16

West Liberty State College


West Liberty State College has prepared a comprehensive compact report that outlines goals, strategies and timelines for institutional advancement from 2008 to 2013. The compact indicates the aggressive and ambitious goals that are a part of the new institutional master plan.

Strategies to accommodate a five percent increase in enrollment include a

number of new programs and the expansion of some existing programs. West Liberty will also be offering its first stand-alone graduate program.

West Liberty currently exceeds its peers with respect to retention and

graduation rates. The institution, however, has established goals to further enhance these positive elements.

The institution is implementing an effective student assessment program and

has outlined a timeline for implementation of strategies to achieve the goals.

West Liberty will expand its roles in graduate education through the establishment of a MA in Education. The institution hopes to add an MBA program in the later years of the compact reporting period.


The compact update should address additional efforts to enhance K-12 alignments. The strategies listed are limited to three program areas. The institution is encouraged to develop measureable enrollment goals for the “college courses in the high school” initiative.

The compact update should provide current data on instructional technology

efforts including a) current adequacy of IT staff, b) current faculty/staff technology training activities, and c) current technology assessment activities.

Programs of distinction are identified as dental hygiene, nursing and

elementary education. The institution proposes to enhance these programs by increasing budgetary allocations by 15 percent over the compact period. The compact update should provide current budgetary allocations for each of the programs in order to provide a base line measure.

In the compact update, the institution needs to clarify its goals for increasing

external funding, particularly on matching funds for the Bucks for Brains initiative.



7-17

Goal/Objective Submission Form: Institutional Strategic Planning Goals Institution: WEST LIBERTY STATE COLLEGE

67


West Liberty State College Previous Years Base Year

Compact Goals

Measure 2004 2005 2006 2007- 2008

2008- 2009

2009- 2010

2010- 2011

2011- 2012

Target 2012- 2013

1a Total Fall Headcount Enrollment 2,374

2,248

2,268

2,405

2,429 2,453 2,478 2,503 2,528

1b Annualized FTE Enrollment 2,545

2,263

2,257

2,313 2336 2359 2383 2407 2431

2a

1st to 2nd Year Retention (first-time, full-time degree-seeking freshmen) NOTE: In 2006, the retention rate of 76% was incorrectly reported to IPEDS. The correct retention rate for 2006 is 65%. 65 64 65 67 68 68 69 69 70

2b Avg Retention Rate of Institution Peers (median) 62 60 61 *

3a Graduation Rates, Bachelor degree seeking first-time, full-time freshmen (same inst) 42 43 44 43

44

44

45

45

45

3b Graduation Rates, including those transferring out and completing degrees at other institutions 44.3 43.7 45.0 42.6 43 43.8 45 46.6 46.8

3c Avg Graduation Rate of Peers (Median) 33

36

33 *

4

Degree Production

Certificate

Associate 38 30 33 31

31

31

32

34

35

Bachelor 436 432 378

369

369

369

387

406

414

Masters

1st Professional

Doctoral

Total Degrees 474 462 411

400

400

400

419

440

449

5 Number of undergraduate degrees in STEM & Health Fields** 25

26

28 22

23

24

25

26

27

(7/28/2008)* IPEDS data that has not been released. ** STEM fields were determined in conjunction with EPSCOR. The CIP codes utilized are on the attached worksheet and include degrees classified as "NSF LSAMP", "NSF +"' and "Technology."

7-18

West Virginia State University


The compact report adequately addresses West Virginia State University’s plans for growth and advancement from 2008 to 2013.

The goals established for an increase in headcount enrollment (7.8 percent)

over the five-year planning period are ambitious, but attainable. The university commits to plans for enrolling strong incoming classes of freshmen and providing essential support services to ensure their success.

The 2013 retention (65 percent) and graduation rate (33 percent) goals are

ambitious, but attainable with sufficient institutional oversight. While the graduation rate goal is below the median (37 percent) of the institutional peers, the institution is projecting a steady increase in the percentage of students that graduate.

The institution satisfactorily addresses goals and attainment strategies for

serving its land-grant mission.

The academic degree programs in biology and communications are appropriate choices for selection as programs of distinction.

West Virginia State University has a commendable record of promoting global

awareness through its program offerings and has established goals for expanding its commitment to international education.

The institution has plans to develop new graduate programs in five discipline

areas by 2013. While expansion of graduate education is a commendable goal, plans to offer additional master’s programs must be carried out with an eye to student demand and adequacy of institutional resources for offering high quality graduate education.


Strategies identified for goal attainment for the various compact elements, e.g. graduation rates, emphasize data collection and additional study. While such initial steps are essential to any effective planning efforts, the institution may want to modify its plans in subsequent compact updates to take more aggressive actions.

The university has established an ambitious goal for an increase in student

enrollment – an increase largely predicated on recruiting larger numbers of freshmen. Essential to its program of enrollment management is adequate

7-19

provision of support services to ensure student success. Since the institution in the fall 2008 semester had conditionally enrolled a significant number of first-time freshmen, i.e. students who do not meet the system minimum standards for regular baccalaureate admission, the institution in the 2009 and subsequent updates must address how it will address the issues of enrollment management and meeting system baccalaureate mission standards.

The institution has established appropriate goals for student success in

passing licensure exams. The compact report, however, incorrectly lists the pass rate for teacher education students who have taken the Praxis II content exams. The report does not list the pass rate for all students who have taken the exams in the past year, but only those who have completed all program requirements. Subsequent compact updates should indicate pass rates for all examinees, and not just program completers.

The compact report states that the university will give “preliminary

consideration” to use of the Voluntary system of Accountability (VSA). The institution is encouraged to adopt the VSA and to clarify its stance on the accountability measure in the 2009 update.

The institution should indicate any additional programs it chooses to select as

programs of distinction. Evaluation team recommendation:


7-20

Institutional Compact Reports, 2007-2012 with goals

West Virginia State University Previous Years Base Year Compact Goals

Measure 2004 2005 2006 2007-2008 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Target

2012-13

1a Total Fall Headcount Enrollment 3,344 3,491 3,502 3,218 3,270 3,320 3,370 3,420 3,470

1b Annualized FTE Enrollment 2,557 2,715 2,697 2,526 2,551 2,577 2,603 2,629 2,655

1st to 2nd Year Retention

2a (first-time, full-time degree-seeking

freshmen) 58 58 61 58 61 62 63 64 65

2b Avg Retention Rate of Institutional

Peers (median) 65 65 64 **

Graduation Rates, Bachelor

3a deree seeking first-time, full-time

freshmen (same institution) 29.0 22.0 19.0 30.0 30.5 31.0 31.5 32.0 33.0

Graduation Rates, including those

3b transferring out and completing

degrees at other institutions 26.4 22.7 23.7 28.1 29.0 31.0 33.0 35.0 37.0

3c Avg Graduation Rate of Peers

(Median) 37.5 37.0 37.0 **

Degree Production

Certificate

Associate

4 Bachelor 438 473 464 443 450 455 465 475 485

Masters 0 6 7 8 8 9 10 12 13

1st Professional

Doctoral

Total Degrees 438 479 471 451 458 464 475 487 498

Number of undergraduate degrees

in STEM & Health fields

Program Degrees 2004-05 2005-06 2006-07 2007-08 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 2012-13

Awarded

5 Biology BS 19 13 21 17 19 19 21 21 22

Biotechnology MS/MA 2* 4 5 5 5 5 5 6

Chemistry BS 4 4 5 2 3 3 4 4 4

Computer Science BS 0 0 0 0 1 1 2 2 2

Mathematics BS 4 3 3 1 2 2 3 3 4

Health Sciences BS 6 10 6 8 16 20 22 23 25

Total 33 30 39 33 46 50 57 58 63* first year of graduates** IPEDS data has not yet been released

Growth in the undergraduate areas of Biology and Health Sciences is expected to increase by 13.6% and 18.75% respectively. The Departments of

Biology, Chemistry, and Mathematics will add a freshman experience to their respective curricula with the expected goal of increasing retention

and graduation rates in Biology, Computer Science, and Mathematics programs, and the maintenance of the existing rate in Chemistry.

7-21

West Virginia University Comments on the compact report:

The West Virginia University compact report addresses all compact elements. While the report is succinct, it does spell out general goals for the various compact elements.

The university projects a slight growth in headcount enrollment (5.6 percent)

to 29,700 by 20012-2013.

Projected student retention rate (84.5 percent) from the freshman to sophomore year will bring West Virginia University to the median of its institutional peers. The retention rate for 2007-2008 at West Virginia University was 81 percent.

Baccalaureate degree production has grown steadily in recent years and

continued growth is projected through 2012-2013. The 4,500 baccalaureate degrees projected by 2012-2013 marks an increase of 24 percent from last year. If the university is successful in achieving the projected increases in baccalaureate degree production and student retention, this growth should also enable an increase in the graduation rate.

The university anticipates a 15 percent increase in the number of graduates in

STEM and health fields by 2012-2013.

The section on educational service to adults indicates growth in extended learning programs and provides extensive data on current and future university initiatives.


The compact report does not fully address the questions in some of the elements in the compact template. Narrative and explanatory comments on the core elements are often sketchy. Additionally, there is heavy reliance on inclusion of previously published reports on topics related to the core elements. The inclusion of these reports are appendices is not inappropriate, but the institution in the 2009 compact update will need to extrapolate from such data to indicate more clearly goals and strategies for goal achievement over the next five years.

In discussion of the core and elective elements, West Virginia University

needs to report more fully in the 2009 update on how it will correlate strategies and timelines to achieve goals projected for the planning period extending to 2012-2013.

7-22

The projected increase in baccalaureate graduation rates (55 to 56 percent)

over the next five years is modest and falls far short of the 65.5 percent median level for its institutional peers. The rate is also short of the 63 percent graduation rate the university has projected in the West Virginia University 2010 Strategic Plan. The university is cognizant of the impact on graduation rates of various factors such as mix of resident and non-resident student enrollment, the need to maintain adequate enrollment levels, and baccalaureate admission standards. As part of its planning efforts, the university should determine what is a desirable student profile in terms of undergraduate enrollment, mix of resident and non-resident students, and baccalaureate admission standards, as these are the significant factors in impacting graduation rates. To assist in developing strategies to improve graduation rates, the institution indicates in the compact report that it will engage a consulting firm.

In selecting programs of distinction, the institution lists academic departments

rather than specific academic programs. While it is problematic for a comprehensive research university to identify only several programs, West Virginia University, nevertheless, is encouraged to identify a reasonable number of distinctive programs and to indicate specific strategies that will be developed for supporting and enhancing those programs.

West Virginia University Institute of Technology and Potomac State College of West Virginia University

West Virginia University Institute of Technology (2007) and Potomac State College of West Virginia University (2005) under provisions of West Virginia Code are now integrated divisions of West Virginia University. While a number of the compact elements are appropriate to an assessment of the growth and functioning of the two divisions, it is not essential that discrete compacts be required. Beginning with the preparation of the 2009 West Virginia University compact update, the university, in its report shall include a separate section for each division that addresses goals, strategies, and timelines for planning efforts during the compact reporting period (2009-2013). Elements selected for compact reporting for West Virginia University Institute of Technology and Potomac State should be appropriate to the respective missions. West Virginia University should work closely with the administrations of the two divisions in preparation of the compact updates.

The Chancellor shall determine the appropriate elements for reporting the

compact updates. Evaluation team recommendation:


7-23



West Virginia University Previous Years Base

Year Compact Goals

Measure 2004 2005 2006 2007-2008 2008-09 2009-10 2010-11 2011-12 Target

2012-13

Total Fall Headcount Enrollment 25,255 26,051 27,115

28,113

28,764

29,237

29,483

29,667

29,700 Annualized FTE Enrollment 26,154 25,999 27,127

27,900

28,500

29,000

29,200

29,400

29,400 1st to 2nd Year Retention (first-time, full-time degree-seeking freshmen)

80.0 80.0 80.0 81.0 81.5 82.0 83.0 84.0 84.5

Avg Retention Rate of Institution Peers (median) 84 84 84 84.5

Graduation Rates, Bachelor degree seeking first-time, full-time freshmen

54.0 55.0 55.0 55.0

55.0

55.3

55.6

55.9 56

Graduation Rates, including those transferring out and completing degrees at other WV institutions

55.5 55.7 55.0 56.9 56.9 56.9 56.9 56.9 56.9

Avg Graduation Rate of Peers (Median) 64.0 65.0 65.5 66.0

Degree Production Certificate Associate

Bachelor 3,157 3,372 3,620 3,790

3,920

4,110

4,340

4,250 4,500

Masters 1,499 1,619 1,459 1,527

1,500

1,550

1,600

1,650 1,700

1st Professional 337 351 396 355

350

350

350

350 350

Doctoral 159 168 148 204

180

185

190

195 200

Total Degrees 5,152 5,510 5,623 5,876

5,950

6,195

6,480

6,445 6,750

Number of undergraduate and graduate degrees in STEM & Health Fields** HEPC DEFINED

1,293 1,437 1,554 1,725

1,747

1,819

1,902

1,892 1,982

Number of undergraduate and graduate degrees in STEM & Health Fields classified by NSF

1,100 1,149 1,198 1,319

1,336

1,391

1,455

1,447 1,515


7-24

Potomac State College


Potomac State Previous Years Base Year Compact Goals

Measure 2004 2005 2006 2007-2008 2008-09

2009-10

2010-11

2011-12

Target 2012-13

Total Fall Headcount Enrollment 1,304 1,279 1,485 *

1,610

1,625

1,640

1,675 1,700

Annualized FTE Enrollment 1,002 1,002 1,107 *

1,191

1,202

1,213

1,239 1,258

1st to 2nd Year Retention (first-time, full-time degree-seeking freshmen) 49 43 51 *

53% 54% 55% 57% 58%

Avg Retention Rate of Institution Peers (median) 55.0 57.5 53.0 *

Graduation Rates, Bachelor degree seeking first-time, full-time freshmen (same inst) 24 24 21 *

25% 26% 27% 28% 29%

Graduation Rates, including those transferring out and completing degrees at other institutions Avg Graduation Rate of Peers (Median) 31.5 32 28 *

Degree Production Certificate

Associate 142 133 158 *

178

179

180

182 184

Bachelor 0 0 2 * 8 10 12 15 20 Masters 1st Professional Doctoral

Total Degrees 142 133 160 *

186

189

192

197 204

Number of undergraduate degrees in STEM & Health Fields**

17

14

21

25 26 27 28 29 30

7/28/2008

* IPEDS data that has not been released. ** STEM fields were determined in conjunction with EPSCOR. The CIP codes utilized are on the attached worksheet and include degrees classified as "NSF LSAMP", "NSF +"' and "Technology."

7-25

West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission Meeting of January 23, 2009 ITEM: Approval of Revised Mission Statement INSTITUTION: Bluefield State College RECOMMENDED RESOLUTION: Resolved, That the West Virginia Higher

Education Policy Commission approves the revised mission statement for Bluefield State College.

STAFF MEMBER: Bruce Flack BACKGROUND: Bluefield State College proposes the adoption of a revised mission statement for the institution. The college has consciously chosen to adopt a more concise mission statement that reflects the core values of the institution. The statement has been approved by the college’s Board of Governors.

8-1

West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission Meeting of January 23, 2009 ITEM: Approval of Series 49, Accountability System,

Legislative Rule INSTITUTIONS: All RECOMMENDED RESOLUTION: Resolved, That the West Virginia Higher

Education Policy Commission approves Series 49, as amended, as a legislative rule for filing with the Secretary of State and submission to the Legislative Oversight Commission on Education Accountability for approval and further legislative action.

STAFF MEMBER: Bruce Flack BACKGROUND: At its August 1, 2008 meeting, the Commission approved the proposed legislative rule, Series 49, Accountability System, for filing with the Secretary of State for a thirty-day public comment period. While no comments were received, discussion with legislative staff indicated that the Commission would be better served with a rule that provided a more detailed summation of the process by which the Commission and its institutions would develop, implement, and evaluate progression to achieve the goals and objectives set forth in Senate Bill 595, Vision 2020: An Education Blueprint for Two Thousand Twenty. This extensive measure sets forth a blueprint for educational advancement for both public education (K-12 schools) and the state’s public higher education system. During the November 21, 2008 meeting, the Commission approved an amended version of Series 49 to be filed with the Secretary of State’s office for a thirty-day public comment period. Staff received comments from two persons relating to various sections of the rule during the comment period, which are summarized below. Comment: Subsection 5.4.3.5, which states that the Commission may take whatever action it deems appropriate in its review of institutional compacts, is too broad and potentially gives too much latitude to the Commission.

Response: To address the concern of overly-broad authority provided to the Commission, the recommendation is to revise subsection 5.4.3.5 as follows: Take whatever other action consistent with its statutory responsibilities that is necessary or appropriate to ensure that adequate progress is made in the future.

9-1

Comment: A comment was received indicating that the language of Series 49, e.g. the definitions, goals and purposes, was often obscure and oblique. The comment also questioned the validity of a common statewide accountability system. The commentator was concerned that what he perceived as vague and ambiguous language in the rule would render unlikely any positive change. A final observation was that commitment to positive change by the Commission was essential to achieving the design of Series 49.

Response: Since Series 49 has been crafted to implement the provisions of Senate Bill 595, including the goals and definitions set forth in Vision 2020, and since the language of the rule is consistent with the language of Senate Bill 595, no additional changes are recommended.

It is recommended that the Commission approve the amended legislative rule for filing with the Secretary of State’s Office and that the rule be submitted to the Legislative Oversight Commission on Education Accountability (LOCEA) for approval and further legislative action.

9-2

TITLE 133 LEGISLATIVE RULE


SERIES 49 ACCOUNTABILITY SYSTEM

§133-49-1. General.

1.1. Scope: This rule sets forth an accountability system for West Virginia public higher education institutions under the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission’s jurisdiction.

1.2. Authority: W. Va. Code §§ 18B-1-6 and 18B-1D-1

1.3. Filing Date:

1.4. Effective Date:

§133-49-2. Purpose.

2.1. This rule describes the responsibilities of the West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission (Commission) and public higher education institutions under its jurisdiction to West Virginia taxpayers for the performance of the state public higher education system.

2.2. The rule sets forth an accountability system for the Commission and

institutions under its jurisdiction. §133-49-3. Definitions.

3.1. “Accountability System.” All research, reports, documents, data and any other materials, the collection, analysis and dissemination of which are necessary to accomplish the purpose of this rule. The system includes goals, objectives and priorities, public policy agendas, statewide master plans, state and institution compacts, implementation plans, institutional mission statements and master plans, and the system report card.

3.2. “Goal.” A long-term public purpose that is a desired and expected end

result for which public higher education is established. 3.3. “Higher Education Institution” or “Institution.” Bluefield State College,

Concord University, Fairmont State University, Glenville State College, Marshall University, Shepherd University, West Liberty State College,

9-3

West Virginia School of Osteopathic Medicine, West Virginia State University, and West Virginia University, including Potomac State College and West Virginia University Institute of Technology.

3.4. “Implementation Plan.” A document developed within the higher

education community that identifies a series of objectives, sets forth performance indicators that can be used to determine if objectives are being achieved, and outlines strategies over the life cycle of the system master plan.

3.5. “Institution Compact.” A formal, written contract between the

Commission and a state institution of higher education under its jurisdiction expressing intent to accomplish state and system goals and objectives.

3.6. “Objective.” End to be accomplished or attained within a specified period

of time for the purpose of meeting established goals. 3.7. “Priority.” The order in which objectives are to be addressed for the

purpose of achieving state goals. 3.8. “Report Card.” Report or series of reports that assesses the progress of the

Commission and institutions under its jurisdiction toward achieving state, system or institution goals and objectives.

3.9. “State Compact.” A formal written agreement between the Commission

and at least one other external entity to achieve state goals and objectives where significant collaboration and commitment of resources between the partners to the agreement is required in order to achieve the desired results.

3.10. “System Master Plan.” A document developed by the Commission that

sets forth system goals, objectives and strategies and is aligned with, but not limited to, meeting state goals, objectives and priorities.

§133-49-4. System Master Plan.

4.1. Development.

4.1.1. The Commission shall develop a system master plan for public higher education institutions under its jurisdiction at least once every five years.

4.1.2. The system master plan shall be developed in collaboration with

various parties with an interest in higher education policy,

9-4

including institution presidents and administrators, faculty, classified employees and students.

4.1.3. Before becoming effective, a proposed system master plan shall be

approved by both the Commission and the Legislative Oversight Commission on Education Accountability.

4.1.4. At a minimum, the Chancellor shall provide interested parties with

at least one thirty-day opportunity to comment on the proposed system master plan before it is taken to the Commission for its approval.

4.1.5. Unless replaced or amended by the Commission, the

Commission’s current system master plan Charting the Future 2007-2012: A Master Plan for West Virginia Higher Education shall remain in place through 2012.

4.2. Contents.

4.2.1. The system master plan shall address all major goals and objectives for higher education of relevance to institutions under its jurisdiction that are contained in W. Va. Code §§ 18B-1-1a and 18B-1D-3, as well as in other provisions of the West Virginia Code.

4.2.2. The system master plan shall include a well-developed analysis of

the state of all major components of the public higher education system for which the Commission is responsible, including, but not limited to, institution missions, degree offerings, resource requirements, physical plant needs, personnel needs, enrollment levels, and other planning determinants needed for a quality system of higher education.

4.2.3. The system master plan shall include a detailed set of system

objectives designed to meet all major state goals and objectives as well as to address other issues of importance to the development of a quality system of higher education.

4.2.4. The system master plan shall identify a strategy for cooperation

and collaboration with the State Board of Education, the State Department of Education, the Council for Community and Technical College Education, higher education institutions and other relevant education providers to assure a comprehensive and seamless system of education in West Virginia.

9-5

4.3. Implementation.

4.3.1. The Chancellor shall be responsible for ensuring that the system master plan is implemented.

4.3.2. The Chancellor shall report to the Commission at least annually on

progress made in implementing the system master plan. 4.3.3. The Chancellor, on behalf of the Commission, shall report to the

Legislative Oversight Commission on Education Accountability no later than in January of each year on progress made in implementing the system master plan.

4.4. Review and Evaluation.

4.4.1. The Chancellor shall review the system master plan annually to determine whether it should be amended to address new state goals and objectives or other issues of importance to public higher education. Any proposed amendment to the system master plan shall be approved by the Commission and the Legislative Oversight Commission on Education Accountability.

4.4.2. Before beginning a new system master planning cycle, the

Chancellor shall prepare and submit a comprehensive report to the Commission and the Legislative Oversight Commission on Education Accountability evaluating current system master planning implementation, including:

4.4.2.1. A detailed, data-based analysis of the progress of the

system and institutions within the system toward meeting each goal and objective included in the current system master plan; and

4.4.2.2. A strategy for using these data as a basis for developing

the new system master plan. §133-49-5. Institution Compacts.

5.1. Development.

5.1.1. The Commission shall enter into a compact with each higher education institution under its jurisdiction to accomplish state and system goals, objectives and priorities as set forth in the system master plan.

9-6

5.1.2. Before the process of developing institution compacts begins, the Chancellor shall identify specific focus areas and proposed outcomes that align with state and system public policy goals, objectives and priorities for institutions to address.

5.1.2.1. The Chancellor may identify focus areas applicable to all

institutions or a designated group of institutions. 5.1.2.2. The Chancellor may identify focus areas from which

institutions may select only a certain number to address.

5.1.3. Institutions should develop proposed institution compacts in collaboration with as many institution units and constituency groups as possible to increase the likelihood that implementation will be effective.

5.1.4. Before becoming effective, a proposed institution compact shall be

approved by the Commission. 5.1.5. Once approved, a compact constitutes a negotiated contract

between the state institution of higher education and the Commission.

5.2. Contents.

5.2.1. Each institution compact shall contain a comprehensive assessment

of education needs within the institution’s geographic area of responsibility, if applicable.

5.2.2. Each institution compact shall identify the institution’s mission and

address any changes that may be necessary or expedient to the accomplishment of state, system and institution goals, objectives and priorities.

5.2.3. Each institution compact shall explain how the compact aligns

with and will be implemented in conjunction with the institution’s master plan.

5.2.4. Each institution compact shall address all required focus areas and

an appropriate number of elective focus areas, if any. For each focus area that an institution addresses in its proposed compact, the institution at a minimum must discuss:

5.2.4.1. Current performance in addressing the focus area; 5.2.4.2. Goals, objectives and priorities over the course of the

compact period;

9-7

5.2.4.3. Barriers to the accomplishment of the identified goals,

objectives and priorities; and 5.2.4.4. Strategies for focusing resources to accomplish the

identified goals, objectives and priorities.

5.2.5. Each institution compact shall provide for collaboration and brokering of education services as necessary or expedient to carry out the institutional mission and meet its objectives, as appropriate.

5.2.6. Each institution compact shall address the provision of student

services at the optimum level to support the institution mission and compact goals, objectives and priorities.

5.2.7. Each institution compact shall address strategies for using existing

infrastructure and resources within each region, where feasible, to increase student access while controlling costs and maintaining academic quality.

5.3. Implementation. 5.3.1. The institution’s board of governors and president shall be

responsible for ensuring that the institution compact is implemented.

5.3.2. Each institution shall report to the Commission no later than

October 1 of each year on progress made in achieving compact goals, objectives and priorities during the preceding academic year. At a minimum, the progress report shall contain:

5.3.2.1. Outcomes associated with each goal, objective or

priority; 5.3.2.2. A summary of strategies undertaken during the previous

academic year to achieve each goal, objective or priority, as well as an assessment of the effectiveness of each strategy if the goal, objective or priority was not achieved;

5.3.2.3. A summary of strategies being undertaken during the

current academic year to achieve each goal, objective or priority; and

5.3.2.4. Recommendations concerning the modification of

institution compact goals, objectives or priorities, which must be approved by the institution’s board of governors.

9-8

5.3.3. The Chancellor shall develop strategies to assist institutions in

accomplishing the goals, objectives and priorities set forth in their respective institution compacts.

5.4. Review and Evaluation.

5.4.1. The Commission shall review each compact progress report no

later than December 31 annually to determine whether each institution is:

5.4.1.1. Making sufficient progress in achieving identified goals,

objectives and priorities; and 5.4.1.2 Proposing to implement strategies that will produce

continued progress in achieving identified goals, objectives and priorities.

5.4.2. If an institution’s board of governors requests to modify its

institution compact’s goals, objectives or priorities, the Commission shall approve or disapprove its request.

5.4.3. If the Commission determines that an institution is not making

sufficient progress overall or in a particular area, the Commission may:

5.4.3.1. Direct the institution to modify its compact

implementation strategies; 5.4.3.2. Direct the institution to develop an overall remediation

plan or a remediation plan in a particular focus area; 5.4.3.3. Direct the Chancellor to work with the institution’s board

of governors and or president to remedy the deficiencies or to develop a remediation plan;

5.4.3.4. Withhold approval of a salary increase for the

institution’s president; and/or 5.4.3.5. Take whatever other action the Commission deems

consistent with its statutory responsibilities that is necessary or appropriate to ensure that adequate progress is made in the future.

9-9

§133-49-6. State Compacts.

6.1. In its system master plan, the Commission may identify important state and system goals, objectives and priorities that it and institutions under its jurisdiction acting alone will be unable to accomplish. In such cases, the Commission directs the Chancellor to attempt to enter into state compacts, or contracts, with those external entities.

6.2. In determining whether a state compact may be appropriate, the

Chancellor shall consider: 6.2.1. Whether significant collaboration with an external entity or entities

is necessary or advantageous to increase the likelihood of accomplishing a goal, objective or priority;

6.2.2. Whether an external entity or entities would need to make a

significant commitment of resources to accomplish a goal, objective or priority; and

6.2.3. Whether an external entity or entities is/are receptive to entering

into a state compact.

6.3. At a minimum, a state compact shall:

6.3.1. Identify the parties to the compact; 6.3.2. Identify the term of the compact; 6.3.3. Set forth measurable outcomes the parties seek to achieve by

entering into the compact; 6.3.4. Identify what each party will contribute in terms of resources as

part of the compact; 6.3.5. Set forth a system for evaluating the success or failure of the

compact to achieve the outcomes sought; and 6.3.6. Provide that the failure of one party to the compact to perform

excuses the Commission from performance under the compact.

6.4. Before a proposed state compact becomes operative and binding on the Commission and institutions under its jurisdiction, the Commission shall approve it.

6.5. The Chancellor shall provide a copy of any approved state compact to the

Legislative Oversight Commission on Education Accountability.

9-10

§133-49-7. Implementation Plans.

7.1. Development.

7.1.1. The Chancellor and/or the Presidents of institutions under its jurisdiction periodically may develop implementation plans to assist in the accomplishment of state, system and institution goals, objectives and priorities.

7.1.2. Implementation plans are internal documents developed among

members of the public higher education community and generally are not subject to external approval processes.

7.1.3. Unless specifically mandated by the Commission, a system

implementation plan need not be approved by the Commission before being implemented.

7.1.4. Unless specifically mandated by an institution’s board of

governors, an institution implementation plan need not be approved by the institution’s board of governors before being implemented.

7.2. Contents. An implementation plan shall:

7.2.1. Identify the goals and objectives to be achieved; 7.2.2. Identify the parties to the implementation plan and a process for

developing consensus among the parties; 7.2.3. Contain a needs assessment or other mechanism to determine the

current status of proposed objectives; 7.2.4. Identify challenges or barriers to meeting objectives; 7.2.5. Delineate tasks to be performed; 7.2.6. Contain a specific time line for meeting objectives; 7.2.7. Contain an evaluation process; and 7.2.8. Contain a method for determining success in achieving objectives.

9-11

§133-49-8. Institution and System Report Cards.

8.1. Purpose.

8.1.1. A primary purpose of institution and system report cards is to make information available to parents, students, faculty, staff, state policymakers and the general public on the quality and performance of public higher education.

8.1.2. A primary purpose of the system report card is to provide a

mechanism to evaluate the annual progress of the Commission and institutions under its jurisdiction in achieving state and system goals and objectives.

8.2. Contents.

8.2.1. The system report card shall provide information on the performance of state higher education institutions, including health sciences education, in relation to the state and system goals, objectives and priorities.

8.2.2. When possible, the system report shall be based upon information

for the current school year or for the most recent school year for which information is available, in which case the year shall be clearly noted.

8.2.3. When possible, the system report card shall break down data by

institution, including Potomac State College and West Virginia University Institute of Technology, and by system.

8.2.4. When possible, the system report card shall provide regional

and/or national comparison data. 8.2.5. When possible, the information contained in report cards shall

allow for easy comparison with higher education-related data collected and disseminated by the Southern Regional Education Board, the United States Department of Education and other education data-gathering and data-disseminating organizations.

8.2.4. The information contained in report cards shall be consistent and

comparable between and among higher education institutions. 8.2.5. To the extent practicable, report cards shall be analysis-driven,

rather than simply data-driven, and present information in a format that can inform education policymaking.

9-12

8.3. Implementation.

8.3.1. The higher education central office staff, under the direction of the Vice Chancellor for Administration, shall provide technical assistance to each institution and governing board in data collection and reporting.

8.3.2. The president or chief executive officer of each higher education

institution shall prepare and submit all requested data to the Commission at the times established by the Commission.

8.3.3. The higher education central office staff, under the direction of the

Vice Chancellor for Administration, is responsible for assembling the statewide report card from information submitted by each institution.

8.3.4. The system report card shall be completed no later than January 1

annually and copies provided to the Commission, the Legislative Oversight Commission on Education Accountability, institution boards of governors, institution presidents and other interested parties.

8.3.5. A report highlighting specifically the trends, progress toward

meeting goals and objectives and major areas of concern for public higher education, including medical education, shall be prepared for presentation to the Legislative Oversight Commission on Education Accountability no later than January annually.

9-13

West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission Meeting of January 23, 2009 ITEM: Approval of Master Plan INSTITUTION: West Liberty State College RECOMMENDED RESOLUTION: Resolved, That the West Virginia Higher

Education Policy Commission approves Distinction and Distinctiveness: An Institutional Master Plan for West Liberty University, 2008-2013.

STAFF MEMBER: Brian Noland BACKGROUND: Pursuant with the responsibilities delegated under §18B-2A-4, the Commission is charged with the review and approval of institutional master plans. Such plans shall include, but are not limited to, the following: (A) a detailed demonstration of how the master plan is used to meet the goals and objectives of the institutional compact; (B) a well-developed set of goals which outline institutional missions, degree offerings, resource requirements, physical plant needs, personnel needs, enrollment levels and other planning determinates as necessary; and, (C) documentation of the involvement of various constituency groups in the development of the institutional master plan. West Liberty State College, soon to become West Liberty University, has recently completed a strategic master planning initiative, the results of which are presented for consideration and approval by the Commission. Distinction and Distinctiveness: An Institutional Master Plan for West Liberty University involved the contributions of many members of the West Liberty State College community including faculty, classified staff, administrators, students, alumni, benefactors, and friends. Many of these constituencies, along with prominent members of the Greater Wheeling area, were also involved in a careful review and analysis of the proposed master plan. Distinction and Distinctiveness is intended to provide a critical roadmap for West Liberty State College in terms of discharging its responsibilities as a public institution of higher learning in West Virginia through careful alignment of planning goals and objectives with those outlined in the Commission’s statewide planning document, Charting the Future: A Master Plan for West Virginia Higher Education. Additionally, the proposed master plan clarifies the newly adopted university mission of the institution through the maximization of the unique qualities and attributes that characterize West Liberty. President Robin Capehart will be in attendance to address questions and present the proposed campus master plan.

10-1

WEST LIBERTY STATE COLLEGE

WEST LIBERTY, WEST VIRGINIA 26074 OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT TO: Dr. Brian Noland, Chancellor West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission FROM: Robin C. Capehart, President West Liberty State College DATE: December 17, 2008 RE: Institutional Master Plan Chancellor Noland: Attached is the final draft of Distinction and Distinctiveness: An Institutional Master Plan for West Liberty University. Many members of the West Liberty State College community—faculty, classified staff, administrators, students, alumni, benefactors, friends—have contributed to the development of this important planning and strategizing document. Many of these same constituencies, along with prominent members of the Greater Wheeling area, also have been involved in a careful review and analysis of our Institutional Master Plan. Simply stated, Distinction and Distinctiveness is intended to provide a critical roadmap for West Liberty in terms of discharging our responsibilities as a public institution of higher learning in West Virginia by aligning our Institutional Master Plan with Charting the Future: A Master Plan for West Virginia Higher Education and by fulfilling our mission through maximization of the special qualities and attributes that characterize West Liberty. We appreciate your review of our Institutional Master Plan which, unless otherwise directed, we are planning to submit as an agenda item for the January 23 meeting of the HEPC. Attachment C: Bruce Flack, John McCullough Office: 304.336.8000 ~ Fax: 304.336.8285 ~ E-Mail: [email protected]

142 Campus Service Center, P.O. Box 295, West Liberty, WV 26074-0295

10-2

Distinction and Distinctiveness An Institutional Master Plan for West Liberty University

2008‐2013

10-3

1

DISTINCTION AND DISTINCTIVENESS

OVERVIEW

Over the next five years, West Liberty University will embark on a great

and historic transformation as it aspires to move from a good college to a great

university. Such a remarkable advancement requires a thoughtful and deliberate

plan that focuses on a shared vision of the future of the institution both in terms

of those who have dedicated their time and effort in the fulfillment of the college’s

mission and the role of the institution as an integral part of a public system of

higher education in West Virginia.

“Distinction and Distinctiveness: An Institutional Master Plan for West

Liberty University” is a five-year strategic plan whose purpose is to guide our

institution as we meet challenges and pursue opportunities during this time of

transformation.

Moreover, our Institutional Master Plan is organized in a manner that will

allow West Liberty University to (1) discharge its responsibilities as a public

institution of higher education in West Virginia by aligning the plan with Charting

the Future: A Master Plan for West Virginia Higher Education and (2) fulfill its

mission by maximizing the special qualities and attributes that characterize West

Liberty University.

More specifically, our institutional master plan consists of the following five

parts.

Part I sets forth our Strategic Platform which includes our (1) mission; (2)

vision; (3) core values; (4) Pillars of Distinction; and (5) Points of Pride. Part II

10-4

2

sets forth our Academic Plan. Part III sets forth our Student Life Plan; Part IV

sets forth our Campus Development Plan. Part V provides our Planning

Statement.

Our Academic Plan and Student Life Plan address the following five

planning areas set forth in the Statewide Master Plan: economic growth, learning

and accountability, innovation, accessibility, and cost and affordability. Both the

Academic Plan and the Student Life Plan include the goals, strategies and

projects necessary to fulfill our responsibilities. Each project also includes

proposed programs and a fiscal note.

Also, in order to meet our responsibilities in each of these areas, state law

requires West Liberty University to enter into a performance agreement with the

Higher Education Policy Commission regarding their use of state resources to

achieve the general goals for higher education.

In response to this requirement, each year, West Liberty University will

submit its Institutional Compact that sets forth the step-by-step process we will

employ to achieve these goals and includes objectives and benchmarks to

measure progress.

Finally, our Institutional Master Plan includes our Campus Development

Plan that designates the physical needs and requirements necessary to execute

our Institutional Plan.

In summary, West Liberty University is an integral part of the system of

higher education in West Virginia. As such, Charting the Future: A Master Plan

for West Virginia Higher Education sets forth the higher education agenda for

10-5

3

West Virginia; Distinction and Distinctiveness: An Institutional Master Plan

provides West Liberty University’s contribution to our statewide effort by aligning

its efforts with the Statewide Master Plan; the Campus Development Plan

component of the Institutional Master Plan sets forth the physical assets

necessary for West Liberty University to fulfill its charge; and the Institutional

Compact reports the University’s annual progress.

Planning Statement

Our Planning Statement describes the process used to develop our

Institutional Master Plan.

In particular, our Planning Statement details the involvement of our

institutional constituency groups such as faculty, staff, students, alumni and

benefactors and the public, in general, in the development of all aspects of our

Institutional Master Plan as well as the contribution provided by the public, in

general.

10-6

4


PART I: STRATEGIC PLATFORM

Our Strategic Platform sets forth in a clear and concise manner our philosophical

foundation which includes our institutional mission, the enduring core values we embody

as an institution of higher education and a campus community, and our shared vision for

the future of West Liberty University.

Our Strategic Platform also identifies our academic “Pillars of Distinction” and

our student-oriented “Points of Pride.”

In an increasingly competitive academic environment, the key to sustainability

lies in the ability to achieve distinction and distinctiveness by demonstrating (1) our

competitiveness with our peer institutions and (2) our ability to achieve remarkable

results based upon our size and our commitment.

The competitiveness of today’s academic environment requires us to identify and

prioritize our “Pillars of Distinction” which represents the academic programs, program

clusters or program themes that are best positioned to enhance West Liberty University’s

visibility, academic reputation and competitiveness.

Moreover, as a student-centered institution, today’s competitive market requires

us to identify and prioritize our “Points of Prides” which include those special attributes

or features of the total student learning experience for which West Liberty University

seeks to be known, admired, and valued. Our “Points of Pride” include those experiences

that pertain to all students regardless of their area of academic concentration.

10-7

5

WEST LIBERTY UNIVERSITY

STRATEGIC PLATFORM

Mission Statement

To provide our students the opportunity for a high quality undergraduate, graduate and professional education.

Core Values

Opportunity Caring

Professionalism and Integrity Excellence

Civic Engagement

Vision Statement

West Liberty University will be the premier institution of higher learning in the Upper Ohio Valley by:

• Providing extensive opportunity and a positive environment for a high quality undergraduate, graduate and professional education;

• Providing its students the academic offerings necessary to meet the professional

and career needs of an evolving, contemporary society;

• Providing a comprehensive and significant liberal arts foundation that will prepare its students to communicate effectively, think critically and assume productive roles as citizens of their communities;

• Achieving excellence in all facets of University life including academics, student

experiences, athletics, visual and performing arts;

• Standing as a vigorous and vibrant source for the creation of knowledge through innovative and creative research and scholarly activity;

• Standing as an active member and contributor to the community through social,

civic, and economic engagement activities that will include productive partnerships with K-12 schools, businesses, and nonprofit organizations, and

• Building strong and enduring relationships with alumni, benefactors, and the

community, in general.

10-8

6

Academic “Pillars of Distinction”

Business

Health Care Science Journalism and Media Arts

Teacher Education

Total Student Learning Experience “Points of Pride”

Internships and Professional Development

International Studies Contemporary Student Housing

An Active Campus Life

10-9

7


PART II: ACADEMIC PLAN

In 2007, the Higher Education Policy Commission issued Charting the Future:

2007 - 2012, a six-year Statewide Master Plan for higher education in West Virginia. The

purpose of the Statewide Master Plan is to meet the general goals for higher education in

West Virginia as established by the Legislature and, in pursuance of those goals,

“coordinate the efforts of the various institutions of higher education in the state while

recognizing that each institution plays a unique role within the larger system.”

The Statewide Master Plan recognizes that, as public entities, institutions of

higher education have a responsibility to respond to the needs of the people of West

Virginia and, thus, sets forth a public policy agenda that addresses those needs.

In regard to this agenda, the Statewide Master Plan addresses the following areas

that are necessary components of a program of effective and high quality post-secondary

education in West Virginia: (1) economic growth; (2) learning and accountability; (3)

innovation; (4) access; and (5) cost and affordability.

Our Academic Plan addresses the first three planning areas: economic growth,

learning and accountability, and innovation by setting forth a series of goals, strategies,

and projects. In particular, our Academic Plan is organized, as follows:

• Goals – broadly defined measures of achievement from which can be determined

the extent of our ability to meet or exceed our responsibilities in each planning

area.

• Strategies – the method or means employed to achieve a specific goal.

10-10

8

• Projects – Each academic year, the responsible parties will provide a Plan of

Action for budget and planning purposes that sets forth the projects to be

implemented or continued from a prior period that will further the execution of

each strategy. Each project will include:

Programs - the specific programs implemented to facilitate the execution

of a strategy.

Fiscal Note – a statement that sets forth the resources necessary to

effectively and efficiently implement and maintain a program over the

period of the institutional master plan. In particular, the fiscal note should:

(1) state the general purpose of the project and the goals and strategies for

which the project is associated; (2) estimate the project’s needs in terms of

additional personnel; physical plant requirements, and operational

resources; (3) provide the projected costs for the additional resources; (4)

identify potential sources of revenue; (5) estimate the amounts of revenue

that be may generated and the method for calculating such estimates; and

(6) present any other planning determinants, projections, costs, or

revenues that may result from the undertaking of the project.

ACADEMIC PLAN OUTLINE

1. ECONOMIC GROWTH 1.1. Goal: Students prepared to participate in a knowledge-intensive global

economy

1.1.1. Strategy: Develop an interdisciplinary program in international business

1.1.1.1.Project: B.S.B.A. Degree in International Business

10-11

9

1.1.2. Strategy: Increase selection of foreign languages through articulation agreements with other institutions

1.1.2.1.Project: Foreign Language Enhancement Program

1.1.3. Strategy: Establish and maintain a program to provide for the

international exchange of students and scholars.

1.1.3.1.Project: Center for International Studies 1.1.4. Strategy: Create a program to develop and enhance basic skills

including reading, comprehension, written communication, critical thinking and problem solving.

1.1.4.1.Project: The Hilltopper Academy

1.2. Goal: Students qualified in high demand fields

1.2.1. Strategy: Expand existing undergraduate science and health care related programs

1.2.1.1.Project: Teacher Education in STEM fields 1.2.1.2.Project: Undergraduate Nursing Program 1.2.1.3.Project: Dental Hygiene Program

1.2.2. Strategy: Develop and implement graduate health care programs

1.2.2.1.Project: Nurse Practitioner Program 1.2.2.2.Project Physician Assistant Program 1.2.2.3.Project: Nurse Anesthetist Program

1.3. Goal: Adults and other nontraditional students prepared for professional

advancement in current or alternative vocations

1.3.1. Strategy: Provide leadership, continuing education and professional certificate program opportunities

1.3.1.1.Project: Center for Professional Studies

1.3.2. Strategy: Increase number of online course

1.3.2.1.Project: Distance Learning Development Program

1.4. Goal: Students prepared to transition from school to work.

1.4.1. Strategy: Increase internship and externship opportunities

10-12

10

1.4.1.1.Project: Enhance the Career Development Center

1.4.2. Strategy: Establish and maintain a clearinghouse that will connect graduates with job opportunities

1.4.2.1.Project: Enhance the Career Development Center

2. LEARNING AND ACCOUNTABILITY 2.1. Goal: Curricula that promote the development of reading comprehension,

written expression and critical thinking.

2.1.1. Strategy: Reward course offerings that maintain a reading comprehension, writing, and critical thinking component.

2.1.1.1.Project: Integrated General Studies Program

2.1.2. Strategy: Enhance research opportunities

2.1.2.1. Project: S.U.R.E. Summer Undergraduate Research Experience Program

2.2. Goal: Curricula that promote international programs and study abroad.

2.2.1. Strategy: Introduce an international element into various disciplines

2.2.1.1.Project: B.S.B.A. Degree in International Business 2.2.1.2.Project: Center for International Studies

2.3. Goal: Continuous and measurable improvement in terms of student learning outcomes

2.3.1. Strategy: Strengthen national assessment measures of progress

2.3.1.1.Project: Assessment Value Project

2.4. Goal: A Freshman-to-sophomore retention rate and a graduation rate equal to the average of our national peers.

2.4.1. Strategy: Enhance student support services

2.4.1.1.Project: TRiO Student Support Services Program

2.5. Goal: Graduate-level programs

10-13

11

2.5.1. Strategy: Offer graduate-level programs through collaborations with other universities

2.5.1.1.Project: Joint M.B.A. Program with Marshall University

2.5.2. Strategy: Offer our own graduate-level programs in high demand

fields

2.5.2.1.Project: Nurse Practitioner Program 2.5.2.2.Project Physician Assistant Program 2.5.2.3.Project: Nurse Anesthetist Program

2.6. Goal: An increased number of teachers with in-field graduate degrees

2.6.1. Strategy: Quality and accessible pre-service and in-service programs

2.6.1.1. Project: Alternate Certification Masters for Content Specialists

2.6.2. Strategy: Offer post-graduate programs in subject area fields

2.6.2.1.Project: Master of Science in Environmental Science

2.7. Goal: A high quality faculty

2.7.1. Strategy: Increase compensation

2.7.1.1.Project: Provide merit stipends for research work 2.7.2. Strategy: Increase professional development opportunities

2.7.2.1.Project: Professional Development Enhancement 2.7.3. Strategy: Maintain annual performance evaluations

2.7.3.1.Project: Post-tenure Review Process

3. INNOVATION 3.1. Goal: A robust research environment.

3.1.1. Strategy: Reward scholarly activity.

3.1.1.1.Project: Professional Development Fund

10-14

12

3.1.2. Strategy: Establish interdisciplinary campus programs that focus on scholarly activities

3.1.2.1.Project: Presidential Colloquium 3.1.2.2.Project: Government Policy Research Center

3.2. Goal: An engaged university

3.2.1. Strategy: Develop scholarly centers that address the economic, social, cultural, and public policy needs of the community and the State

3.2.1.1.Project: Government Policy Research Center 3.2.1.2.Project: Center for Professional Studies

3.2.2. Strategy: Promote the expertise of the members of the academe and staff throughout the community and the state

3.2.2.1.Project: Speakers Bureau

3.2.3. Strategy: Utilize the physical and human resources of the University to provide extracurricular activities for members of the community.

3.2.3.1.Project: Performing Arts Camp

10-15

13

DISTINCTION AND DISTINCTIVENESS:

PART III: STUDENT LIFE PLAN

The Student Life Plan of our Institutional Master Plan addresses the advancement

of the non-academic part of our students’ overall collegiate experience and embodies

both our “Points of Pride” and the fourth and fifth planning areas of the Statewide

Master Plan: access and cost and affordability:

West Liberty University will seek distinction and distinctiveness by focusing on

our “Points of Prides” which include those special attributes or features of the total

student learning experience for which our institution seeks to be known, admired, and

valued. In particular, our “Points of Pride” include the following elements of student life

that pertain to all students regardless of their area of academic concentration: (1)

Internships and Professional Development; (2) International Studies: (3) Contemporary

Student Housing; and (4) an Active Campus Life.

Moreover, a key and historical component of our institution’s mission is to

provide students the opportunity for a high quality education. Opportunity consists of

maintaining both affordability and accessibility.

Affordability includes fostering retention and enrollment increases in order to

enhance our financial base and distribute our costs throughout a greater student

population. Thus, maintaining affordability includes investing in aggressive recruitment;

a competitive athletic program; and a robust and enjoyable campus life.

Access includes making our academic offerings available through a wider variety

of delivery systems including online education and off-campus instruction.

10-16

14

Our Student Life Plan is organized, as follows:

• Goals – broadly defined measures of achievement from which can be determined

the extent of our ability to meet or exceed our responsibilities in each planning

area.

• Strategies – the method or means employed to achieve a specific goal.

• Projects – Each academic year, the responsible parties will provide a Plan of

Action for budget and planning purposes that sets forth the projects to be

implemented or continued from a prior period that will further the execution of

each strategy. Each project will include:

Programs - the specific programs implemented to facilitate the execution

of a strategy.

Fiscal Note – a statement that sets forth the resources necessary to

effectively and efficiently implement and maintain a program over the

period of the institutional master plan. In particular, the fiscal note should:

(1) state the general purpose of the project and the goals and strategies for

which the project is associated; (2) estimate the project’s needs in terms of

additional personnel; physical plant requirements, and operational

resources; (3) provide the projected costs for the additional resources; (4)

identify potential sources of revenue; (5) estimate the amounts of revenue

that be may generated and the method for calculating such estimates; and

(6) present any other planning determinants, projections, costs, or

revenues that may result from the undertaking of the project.

10-17

15

STUDENT LIFE PLAN OUTLINE

4. ACCESS 4.1. Goal: Matriculating students who are better prepared for the rigors of higher

education

4.1.1. Strategy: Articulate and communicate our course and skill expectations to high schools and college-bound high school students

4.1.1.1.Project: Counselor Communication Initiative

4.1.2. Strategy: Participate and expand programs that offer college credit for post-secondary-level courses taken by students in high school

4.1.2.1.Project: Dual Credit Program 4.1.2.2.Project: The Academy at West Liberty

4.2. Goal: An enhanced public awareness of opportunities offered by post-secondary education

4.2.1. Strategy: Communicate the importance of post-secondary education

through mass communication

4.2.1.1.Project: Radio and Television PSA Campaign

4.2.2. Strategy: Communicate the availability of information regarding college curricula, post-secondary opportunities and financial aid options through mass communication

4.2.2.1.Project: Radio and Television PSA Campaign

4.3. Goal: Adults and other nontraditional students prepared for professional

advancement in current or alternative vocations

4.3.1. Strategy: Provide leadership, continuing education, and professional certificate program opportunities

4.3.1.1.Project: Center for Professional Studies

4.3.2. Strategy: Increase number of online course

4.3.2.1.Project: Distance Learning Development Program

10-18

16

4.4. Goal: An efficient and expeditious process for degree completion for transfer students

4.4.1. Strategy: Assign personnel to assist and advise transfer students

regarding credit transfer, the availability of financial aid, and the availability of other campus services

4.4.1.1.Project: Transfer Orientation Program

4.4.2. Strategy: Increase number of articulation agreements with community colleges and other baccalaureate institutions

4.4.2.1.Project: Articulation Agreement Committee

5. COST AND AFFORDABILITY 5.1. Goal: Affordability

5.1.1. Strategy: Maximize institutional efficiency

5.1.1.1.Project: Cost Containment Initiative 5.1.2. Strategy: Increase enrollment

5.1.2.1.Project: Athletic Opportunities 5.1.3. Strategy: Increase retention

5.1.3.1.Project: Student Life Initiative 5.1.4. Strategy: Increase scholarship opportunities

5.1.4.1.Project: Institutional Scholarship Enhancement 5.1.4.2.Project: Comprehensive Fundraising Plan

10-19

17

DISTINCTION AND DISTINCTIVENESS:

PART IV: CAMPUS DEVELOPMENT PLAN

The Campus Development Plan establishes the institution’s physical plant needs

in relationship to the Statewide Master Plan and its Institutional Compact, Institutional

Master Plan, and institutional mission. The Plan forms the basis for our institutional

recommendations and capital improvement requests.

This Plan applies to the physical needs of this five-year Institutional Master Plan

and also sets forth proposals for a five-year period subsequent to its intended application.

The Campus Development Plan is divided into three sections: (1) new facilities;

(2) renovated facilities; and (3) potential disposal and demolitions of facilities. Pursuant

to C.S.R. 133, Series 12, § 3.1, each project that pertains to new and renovated facilities

includes: the location of the property; need addressed; size of the property or facility;

estimated cause of construction or renovation; cost and proposed funding source;

scheduled completion; and the priority of the project established by the Board of

Governors.

In regard to the proposed disposal and demolition of property, the Plan sets forth

the location of the property, reason for disposition or demolition, appraised value of the

property, and the date available for disposition, and any future scheduled use of the

property on which the facility is located.

In terms of priority, each project has been designated as highest, high, moderate,

or extended. Highest priority represents the most immediate need as well as the greatest

impact upon our ability to meet our goals and our responsibilities as a public institution.

10-20

18

High priority represents a significant need that we seek to address one to two years into

the Institutional Master Plan. Moderate priority represents a need that is important to the

Institutional Master Plan, but is not as immediate. An extended priority follows all other

projects listed.

Relationship to Other Planning Documents

The Campus Development Plan sets forth the physical needs of the campus as

they relate to the University’s mission as well as its Institutional Master Plan. The

Academic and Student Life Plans contained within the Institutional Master Plan embody

West Liberty University’s responsibilities as a public institution of higher education in

West Virginia and sets forth the goals, strategies, and projects that are intended to fulfill

those responsibilities.

Each proposed project includes a reference to a particular responsibility or

recommendation contained within the Statewide Master Plan and a statement of the

impact on the local community.

10-21

19

New Facilities

I. Health/Science Center A. Property: Campus B. Location: Triangular area behind Boyd Hall C. Need: Current academic areas are dislocated and reached

maximum area capacity D. Size: 66,000 sq. ft. E. Est. Cost: $13,200,000 F. Funding: Appropriation G. Schedule: Two years after funding H. Priority: Highest I. Reference This project addresses the goal of qualifying students in high

demand fields. It also creates the potential for increased enrollment which will maintain the overall affordability of the cost of college.

J. Impact Our ability increase the number of qualified health care providers will have a significant impact on the State of West Virginia where there is a shortage of professionals in these areas.

II. Dormitories A. Property: Campus B. Location: East of baseball field C. Need: Utilization existing dormitories at capacity; 25% non-air

conditioned; dorms are in 40-60 year age range. D. Size: 6 units at 84 beds/unit (see 2001 Campus Master Plan on

Housing) E. Est. Cost: $4,000,000/Unit F. Funding: Lease/purchase or county bonds backed by room charge

and related capital fees G. Schedule: 2 units complete August 2010; 2 units complete August

2012; 2 units complete August 2014. H. Priority: High I. Reference Our ability to provide attractive housing alternatives will

attract and retain students, thus, furthering the goal of maintaining affordability. This project also addresses one of our “Points of Pride.”

J. Impact: Attractive housing options will encourage local students and students from throughout West Virginia to stay in this area and State to pursue their education.

10-22

20

III. Theme Housing A. Property: Campus B. Location: East of tennis courts C. Need: Utilization existing dormitories at capacity; student desire for

fraternity/sorority type living D. Size: 14 to 16 beds/unit – 6 units E. Est. Cost: $500,000/Unit F. Funding: Lease/purchase backed by room charge and capital fees G. Schedule: 2 units January 2010; 2 units August 2011; 2 units August

2013 H. Priority: High I. Reference Our ability to provide attractive housing alternatives will

attract and retain students, thus, furthering the goal of maintaining affordability. This project also addresses one of our “Points of Pride.”

J. Impact: Attractive housing options will encourage local students and students from throughout West Virginia to stay in this area and State to pursue their education.

IV. The Highlands Center A. Property: Off Campus B. Location: I-70 Highlands – Ohio County C. Need: Non-health related masters programs; expansion of off-

campus and non-degree courses; major location improvement from Warwood.

D. Size: 22,000 sq. ft. E. Cost: Long term lease with Ohio County Development Authority

and $800,000 appropriation towards build out. F. Funding: Lease to be paid from tuition and fees G. Schedule: August 2009 H. Priority: Highest I. Reference Through the potential for increased enrollment, this project

will further our goal of affordability and provide enhanced accessibility as inherent in our mission statement.

J. Impact: There is an estimated 3,000 to 4,000 potential students who work at the Highlands and are eligible for tuition reimbursement from their employers. This facility will provide these students with greater and more convenient access to a college education.

V. Softball Complex A. Property: Campus B. Location: East of Beta Hall C. Need: Competitive Title IX situation

10-23

21

D. Size: Regulation softball field E. Cost: $300,000 F. Funding: Internal G. Schedule: Spring 2010 H. Priority: Highest I. Reference: Title IX of the United States Code J. Impact: This facility will allow us to meet our obligations under Title

IX to provide women’s sports with a facility comparable to our men’s baseball team.

VI. Soccer Complex A. Property: Off Campus B. Location: (1) Cemetery property adjacent to north side of campus (2) Consol property owned by Foundation approximately 3

miles north on Rt. 88 C. Need: Increased enrollment and additional intercollegiate sport for

students D. Size: Regulation soccer field E. Cost: $300,000 F. Funding: Internal G. Schedule: Spring 2011 H. Priority: Extended. I. Reference: Increased enrollment will further our goal of maintaining

affordability. J. Impact: This project will offer additional opportunities for students to

attend college, thus increase enrollment and affordability. VII. Non-Highlands Off-Campus Site A. Property: Off Campus B. Location: South Wheeling Hospital C. Need: Center for health related masters program utilizing hospital

facilities in the community – housing also available. D. Size: Up to 24,000 sq. ft. plus available housing E. Est. Cost: Non-cost related lease plus build out of existing facility F. Funding: City bonds or hospital build out to be backed by tuition and

capital fees G. Schedule: July 2010 H. Priority: Moderate I. Reference This project addresses the goal of qualifying students in high

demand fields. J. Impact Our ability increase the number of qualified health care

providers will have a significant impact on the State of West Virginia where there is a shortage of professionals in these areas.

10-24

22

Campus Development Plan

Renovated Facilities I. Athletic Complex A. Property: Campus B. Location: Existing football complex C. Need: Non-ADA compliant stadium seating, aisles, restrooms;

press box capacity limited and non-ADA compliant; lighting need for greater facility use and night game scheduling; coaches offices currently in Blatnik which is planned to be student recreation center.

D. Size: Stadium seating (3,500); press box; restrooms; lighting; coaches building (10,000 sq. ft.)

E. Est. Cost: $7,300,000 F. Funding: Private and internal through capital fees G. Schedule: Lights August 2010; stadium, press box, restrooms August

2013; coaches building 2015 H. Priority: High. I. Reference: Our ability to generate private funds contributes to our goal

of maintaining affordability. The success of our football program has elevated the reputation of the school both in terms of athletics and academics.

J. Impact: This project provides an initial attraction and connection to the school which will evolve into financial support for the University.

II. Shaw Hall A. Property: Campus B. Location: College entrance C. Need: Relocation administrative offices to make Main Hall a “One

Stop” center for Admissions, Financial Aid, Business, Registrar’s, and Housing; expand Main Hall business and education academic areas.

D. Size: First and second floors – 21,000 sq. ft. E. Est. Cost: $2,000,000 F. Funding: Grants, private, internal G. Schedule: First floor August 2010; second floor August 2012 H. Priority: Moderate I. Reference This project maximizes institutional efficiency, thus

maintaining affordability. J. Impact: A more affordable institution will provide more opportunity for

the students of our area and our State.

10-25

23

III. Main Hall A. Property: Campus B. Location: Campus center C. Need: Expand Main Hall business and education academic areas;

relocate Admissions, Financial Aid, Business, Registrar’s, and Housing in such a manner as to be “student friendly” as well as efficient.

D. Size: Primarily center section of Main Hall E. Est. Cost: $1,500,000 F. Funding: Internal G. Schedule: “One Stop Shopping” – August 2011, Business/Education

August 2013 H. Priority: Moderate I. Reference This project maximizes institutional efficiency, thus


the students of our area and our State. IV. Arnett Hall A. Property: Campus B. Location: Southeast corner of quad C. Need: 1960’s portion of Fine Art’s building is a one floor, primarily

glass that is in need of major repair; original construction was low cost. With move of Science Department to new Health/Science building opportunity exists to relocate this portion of Fine Arts.

D. Size: 33,000 sq. ft. E. Cost: $1,000,000 F. Funding: Private and internal – music relocation may be potential for

private contributions G. Schedule: August 2014 H. Priority: Moderate. I. Reference: This project maximizes institutional efficiency, thus


the students of our area and our State. V. Blatnik Hall A. Property: Campus B. Location: East side campus C. Need: With increased enrollment the College’s student facilities are

limited; in order to have the College a seven day campus a

10-26

24

renovation of this area to a student recreation center would improve the student’s total college experience.

D. Size: 15,000 sq. ft. E. Cost: $1,500,000 F. Funding: External and internal, the latter backed by capital fees;

external to the extent of leasing sections to outside interests such as bowling alley entrepreneur.

G. Schedule: Main section August 2013; coaches section August 2016 H. Priority: Moderate I. Reference: A more robust student life increases enrollment and

retention, thus increasing affordability. J. Impact: A more affordable institution will provide more opportunity for

the students of our area and our State.

10-27

25

Campus Development Plan

Potential Disposal and Demolitions

I. Warwood Center A. Property: Off campus B. Location: Center of Warwood section of Wheeling on Route 2 North C. Reason: Very old building; not ADA complaint; renovations would

require asbestos abatement; location is on fringe of accessibility to other valley locations; replaced by Highlands Center.

D. Appraisal Price: $125,000 – 2007 E. Availability for Disposal: August 2009 II. Fine Arts Building – Old Section A. Property: Campus B. Location: Southwest end of quad C. Reason: 1960’s one floor predominately glass construction; need of

major upgrade with original low cost construction; becomes available for demolition with construction of new health/science building.

D. Demolition Cost: $100,000 E. Schedule: August 2014 F. Future Use: Parking lot – flat area accessible to majority of campus

building III. Boyd Hall – Potential Demolition A. Property: Campus B. Location: East side Main Hall C. Reason: Old dormitory, no air conditioning, embedded piping. Rooms

not required after dormitory and theme housing completion. D. Reason for Expansion of enrollment where additional rooms required

after new dormitory Retaining: and theme housing completion. This dormitory will be

utilized during new construction. If additional rooms are required the dorm could be renovated subject to current building requirements and cost.

E. Schedule: August 2016

10-28

26

General Maintenance Condition

1. Lighting, campus roads, parking lots, grounds, ADA compliance are

approximately 80% complete and will be finished during summer 2009. 2. Dormitories in general are in good condition. Rogers and Boyd are not air

conditioned; Krise and Hughes have original windows. 3. Elevators throughout the campus are outdated and subject to periodic

failures. 4. Blatnik, Student Union, Shaw, and Shotwell need new roofs, while Main

Hall could use window replacement. 5. Major maintenance problem is the overall condition of the HVAC systems,

which are in need throughout the campus of repair and upgrades. 6. Older buildings Shaw and Shotwell are in need of major maintenance for

ADA compliance and preservation.

10-29

27


PART V: PLANNING STATEMENT

The development of Distinction and Distinctiveness: An Institutional Master Plan

for West Liberty University involved representatives of the faculty, staff, administrators,

students, alumni, and benefactors as well as “clientele” of the institution and members of

the community, in general. The Board of Governors of West Liberty State College, who

also participated in the development of the plan, provided the final review and approval.

A chronology setting forth this participation is as follows:

February 6, 2008 President presented Distinction and Distinctiveness: A Strategic Focusing Initiative for West Liberty University to the West Liberty State College Board of Governors

March 28, 2008 Open campus meeting for announcement of the Strategic Focusing

Initiative. President appointed the following; SFI Advisory Council Dr. John McCullough, Executive Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer John E. Wright, III, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (June 2008) John Davis, Executive Vice President and General Counsel Dr. Donna Lukich, Provost/Vice President of Academic Affairs Dr. J.D. Carpenter, Vice President of Student Affairs Scott Cook, Executive Director of Enrollment Services Jeff Knierim, Chief Development Officer James Clark, Chief Information Officer Patrick Henry, Chief of Operations Ronald Witt, Director of Alumni Affairs James Watson, Director of Athletics Tammi Secrist, Director of College Relations and Marketing Brian Warmuth, Director of Human Resources Reid Amos, Director of Media Operations Steve Cohen, Director of Communications

10-30

28

Strategic Platform Task Force Dr. John McCullough, Task Force Chair Dr. Donna Lukich, Task Force Vice-Chair Dr. Richard Brown, Interim Chair, Department of Arts and Communications Carol Frum, President, Alumni Association Bo McConnaughy, President, Classified Staff Council Dr. Rhonda Noble, Faculty Stephanie North, Staff Shane Stack, President, Student Government Association Pillars of Distinction Task Force Dr. John McCullough, Task Force Chair Dr. Donna Lukich, Task Force Vice-Chair Dr. Jarrett Aguilar, Chair, Department of Natural Sciences and Mathematics William Baronak, Interim Dean, School of Liberal Arts Dr. Richard Brown, Interim Chair, Department of Arts and Communications Les DeFelice, WLSC Foundation Dr. Dan Joseph, Alumnus Dr. Robert Kreisberg, Dean, School of Sciences Dr. Beth Musser, Dean, School of Education Elizabeth Robinson, Dean, School of Business Administration Points of Pride Task Force Dr. J.D. Carpenter, Task Force Co-Chair William Baronak, Task Force Co-Chair Beverly Burke, Staff Dr. Steve Domyan, Faculty Theresa Gretchen, Staff Courtney Huffman, Faculty Brenda King, Director of Admissions and Recruitment Dr, Robert Kruse, Faculty Christine Nardelli, Faculty Elizabeth Reinhardt, Staff Dr. Erik Root, Faculty Amy Shriner, Vice President, Student Gov’t Association Shane Stack, President, Student Government Association Lynn Ullom, Associate Athletic Director and Head Women’s

Basketball Coach

10-31

29

Dr. Carrie White, Chair, Department of Administrative Systems Richard Whitehead, Student Government Association Bob Wise, Staff Campus Development Plan Task Force Dr. John McCullough, Task Force Chair John E. Wright, III, Campus Development Plan Coordinator William Baronak, Interim Dean, School of Liberal Arts Beverly Burke, Staff Dr. J.D. Carpenter, Vice President of Student Affairs James Clark, Chief Information Officer Patrick Henry, Chief of Operations Brenda King, Director of Admissions and Recruitment Dr. Donna Lukich, Provost/Vice President of Academic Affairs Joe Mills, Supervisor, Housing Ashlea Minch, Center for Student Success Marcella Snyder, Director of Housing and Residence Life Shane Stack, President, Student Government Association Gary Weisner, Supervisor, Maintenance Dr. Carrie White, Chair, Department of Administrative Systems Lynn Ullom, Associate Athletic Director and Head Women’s Basketball Coach Drafting Team Robin C. Capehart, President Dr. John McCullough, Executive Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer John E. Wright, III, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (June 2008) Dr. Donna Lukich, Provost/Vice President of Academic Affairs

August 1, 2008 Task forces submit White Papers to Drafting Team. White Papers made available to campus constituencies and for public comment.

Sept. 16, 2008 Presentation of Draft Plan to SFI Advisory Council October 1, 2008 Review of Draft Plan by campus constituencies

10-32

30

Internal Review Committee William Baronak, Deans Council Dr. Steve Domyan, Chairs Council Dr. Robert Gall, Faculty Senate Dr. Melinda Kreisberg, School of Sciences Dr. Robert Kruse, School of Liberal Arts Dr. Gail Smith, School of Education Dr. Jane Wallace, School of Business Administration Bo McConnaughy, Classified Staff Council Shane Stack, Student Government Association

October 23, 2008 Presentation of Draft Plan to Community Leaders

Ogden Nutting, President, Ogden Publishing, Inc. Carlyle Farnsworth, Board of Directors, United Bank W. Peter Holloway, VP, Hazlett, Burt and Watson Richard Carter, President, Wheeling-Nisshin Steel Tony Gentile, Director of Marketing, United Bank Randy Worls, Oglebay Park Foundation Nick Sparchane, Wells Fargo, former Mayor, Wheeling, WV, Paul Prater, Manager of Community Affairs, PPG Ed Schmidt, CFO, Reisbeck Food Stores Steve Fox, Director – Technical, P.P.G. Industries Jeff Bolden, Plant Manager, Bayer Industries David McKinley, Principal, McKinley, Carter Wealth Services

October 28, 2008 Presentation of Draft Plan to Media Advisory Group Michael Myer, Executive Editor, Wheeling News-Register/ Intelligencer John McCabe, Managing Editor, Wheeling News- Register/Intelligencer Alex Marshall, Publisher, Weirton Daily Times Roger Lyons, General Manager, WTRF-TV, West Virginia Media Charlotte Cohen, Sales Manager, WTRF-TV, West Virginia Media Tim McCoy, VP and General Manager, WTOV-TV Brandon Goebel, News Director, WTOV-TV Jennifer Braumm, Producer, WTOV-TV

10-33

31

October 28, 2008 Presentation of Draft Plan to Health Care Advisory Group William Mercer, M.D. Rex Lasure, M.D. Raina Burke, M.D. Vic Wood. D.O. Brian Felici, CEO, Ohio Valley Medical Center Holly Kossuth, D.V.M. Charla Anderson, M.D. Gary Kennamond, M.D. Daniel Joseph, D.D.S. Michael Joseph, D.D.S. Gary Lewis, D.D.S. Hugo Andrieni, M.D. Michael Blatt, M.D. James Stultz, Vice President, Ohio Valley Medical Center James Comerci, M.D. John Holloway, M.D. Robert Altmeyer, M.D. Howard Shackelford, M.S. Nancy Warmuth, Dental Hygienist Richard Glass, M.D.

November 6, 2008 SFI Advisory Council Retreat for review, discussion and drafting of Final Draft.

November 7, 2008 Board of Governors Retreat for review and discussion of Final

Draft.

December 10, 2008 Presentation and Adoption of Distinction and Distinctiveness: An Institutional Master Plan for West Liberty University by the West Liberty State College Board of Governors

10-34

West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission Meeting of January 23, 2009 ITEM: New Residence Hall Project INSTITUTION: Glenville State College RECOMMENDED RESOLUTION: Information Item STAFF MEMBER: Richard Donovan BACKGROUND: Information related to this item will be distributed to the Commission in advance of the meeting.

11-1

West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission Meeting of January 23, 2009 ITEM: Approval of the Ten-Year Campus Master Plan

Update INSTITUTION: West Virginia State University RECOMMENDED RESOLUTION: Resolved, that the West Virginia Higher

Education Policy Commission approves West Virginia State University’s update of its Ten-Year Campus Master Plan and Five-Year Implementation Plan pursuant to Series 12, the Commission’s Rule for Capital Project Management.

STAFF MEMBER: Richard Donovan BACKGROUND: West Virginia State University working with Silling Associates, Inc. and Educational Facilities Consultants, LLC has updated its ten-year campus master plan in accordance with Series 12, the Commission’s Rule for Capital Project Management. The campus development plan is designed to help West Virginia State University continue to create a physical environment commensurate with its mission of providing quality academic programs for undergraduate and graduate instruction for West Virginia State University and West Virginia State Community and Technical College students and to enable the University to fulfill its obligations as a land-grant institution. This update to the existing campus development plan respects and makes use of previous planning efforts and will serve as the overall guide for developing capital projects, making improvements to the campus, and for property acquisition over the next ten years. The University anticipates that funding for projects identified in the new plan will be provided over time through a combination of private gifts and grants, capital fees collected from students, and capital appropriations secured from the Legislature through the Commission. The process used to develop this plan has been thorough and transparent. The plan evolved with the input of constituents that included faculty, staff, students, alumni, community members and representatives of advisory committees. These constituent groups were updated as the plan developed and they fully support the final product. The plan has also been approved by the institution’s Board of Governors. The West Virginia State University 2006 Campus Master Plan may be reviewed at this website address: http://www.wvstateu.edu/campus_master_plan A brief presentation will be made by representatives of the University and the master planning consultants.

12-1

West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission Meeting of January 23, 2009 ITEM: Approval of Fiscal Year 2010 Capital Bond

Project Priorities INSTITUTIONS: All RECOMMENDED RESOLUTION: Resolved, That the West Virginia Higher

Education Policy Commission approves the prioritized capital bond project lists in Table 3 for FY 2010 and directs the staff to report the capital project priorities to the Legislative Oversight Commission on Education Accountability as required by state law.

STAFF MEMBER: Richard Donovan BACKGROUND: As part of its overall FY 2010 appropriation request submitted to the State Budget Office on September 2, 2009, the Higher Education Policy Commission requested $15 million in funding for a new bond issue. Substantial time was devoted in the 2008 legislative session to enlist support for another state funded bond issue for the four-year institutions. During the upcoming session, staff will seek Legislative support to redirect the $10 million in lottery revenue that is currently dedicated to pay off the Education, Arts, Science and Technology (EAST) Bonds, which will be paid off in FY 2010, plus an additional $5 million appropriation to support a new HEPC bond issue for capital projects. Prior to the recent turmoil in the municipal bond market, annual revenue of $15 million should have supported a bond issue of approximately $230 to $240 million for thirty-year bonds, but given current market conditions, it would likely result in net proceeds of approximately $180 to $190 million. There has been some improvement in the MUNI market over the past few weeks; however, it is unlikely to return to the level seen earlier this year for some time, and may not for the foreseeable future. Staff has developed a priority list of proposed bond projects for consideration which totals approximately $240 million. This assumes the Commission would receive annual appropriations of $15 million for debt service. A running total is also shown to identify projects that could be funded if the Commission receives less than $15 million. The list was compiled from the Educational and General (E&G) capital project appropriation requests for major building and campus renewal (renovation) projects and new facilities institutions submitted to the Commission Office in August and shown in Tables 4 and 5 in the agenda book for November 21st Commission meeting, which have been

13-1

prioritized and relabeled as Tables 1 and 2 for this agenda item. The E&G project requests in these tables totaled a little over $759 million. The following criteria were used to identify these projects based on the lists approved by the Commission and Council:

• State bond funding should support education and general (E&G) projects for the most part and should not be used to fund auxiliary projects which should be funded from auxiliary fees.

• State bond project rankings should give priority to building and campus renewal (renovation) projects over new building projects.

• State bond project rankings should give priority to projects for which significant partial funding is in place.

13-2

TAB

LE 1

H

IGH

ER E

DU

CA

TIO

N P

OLI

CY

CO

MM

ISSI

ON

Bui

ldin

g &

Cam

pus

Ren

ewal

(Ren

ovat

ion)

Pro

ject

s1/

15/2

009

Rec

omm

ende

d Fu

ndin

g So

urce

Stat

e &

Fed

eral

Fun

dsIn

stitu

tion

Fund

sN

on-S

tate

Inst

.H

EPC

Pr

i. #

Proj

ect

Tota

l Pro

ject

C

ost

Fund

s A

vaila

ble

FY10

+Fu

nds

Nee

ded

Stat

e G

ener

al o

r Sp

ecia

l R

even

ue

FY10

+

Fede

ral

Rev

enue

FY

10+

Pote

ntia

l Bon

d Pr

ojec

t Lot

tery

R

even

ue

FY10

+E&

G C

apita

l Fe

es F

Y10+

Aux

iliar

y Fe

es F

Y10+

Priv

ate

Gift

s &

G

rant

sTo

tal F

unds

R

equi

red

E&G

PR

OJE

CTS

Bui

ldin

g an

d C

ampu

s R

enew

al (R

enov

atio

n)W

VU

1W

hite

Hal

l23

,000

,000

023

,000

,000

00

23,0

00,0

000

00

23,0

00,0

00M

U2

Sm

ith H

all R

epai

rs9,

000,

000

09,

000,

000

00

9,00

0,00

00

00

9,00

0,00

0

WV

SU

3Fl

emin

g H

all R

enov

atio

n &

Add

ition

15,0

00,0

000

15,0

00,0

000

015

,000

,000

00

015

,000

,000

BS

C4

Mah

ood

Hal

l Ren

ovat

ion

5,00

0,00

00

5,00

0,00

00

05,

000,

000

00

05,

000,

000

WLS

C5

Sha

w H

all R

enov

atio

ns (A

DA

)2,

750,

000

02,

750,

000

00

2,75

0,00

00

00

2,75

0,00

0

CU

6Fi

ne A

rts B

uild

ing

& L

ibra

ry

Ren

ovat

ion

6,00

0,00

00

6,00

0,00

00

06,

000,

000

00

06,

000,

000

WV

SO

M7

pB

uild

ing

B (M

ain)

and

Bui

ldin

g C

(O

ld C

linic

)3,

500,

000

03,

500,

000

00

3,50

0,00

00

00

3,50

0,00

0FS

U8

Turle

y C

ente

r Ren

ovat

ions

6,00

0,00

00

6,00

0,00

00

06,

000,

000

00

06,

000,

000

SU

9

Ren

ovat

ion

to W

hite

, Sny

der,

Stu

tzm

an-S

lona

ker &

Iken

berr

y H

alls

1,15

0,00

00

1,15

0,00

00

01,

150,

000

00

01,

150,

000

MU

10A

cade

mic

Bui

ldin

gs

Ren

ovat

ion/

Rep

air

13,0

00,0

000

13,0

00,0

000

013

,000

,000

00

013

,000

,000

BS

C11

Bas

ic S

cien

ce &

Dic

kaso

n H

all L

ab

Upg

rade

s1,

000,

000

01,

000,

000

00

1,00

0,00

00

00

1,00

0,00

0FS

U12

Wal

lman

Hal

l Ren

ovat

ions

5,20

0,00

00

5,20

0,00

00

05,

200,

000

00

05,

200,

000

FSU

13M

usic

k Li

brar

y E

leva

tor

2,00

0,00

00

2,00

0,00

00

02,

000,

000

00

02,

000,

000

WV

U14

HS

C E

lect

rical

Upg

rade

(HS

C)

2,00

0,00

00

2,00

0,00

00

02,

000,

000

00

02,

000,

000

WV

U15

Col

lege

of P

harm

acy

Pro

gram

R

enov

atio

n/E

xpan

sion

1,50

0,00

00

1,50

0,00

00

01,

500,

000

00

01,

500,

000

FSU

16H

ardw

ay H

all R

enov

atio

ns5,

500,

000

05,

500,

000

00

5,50

0,00

00

00

5,50

0,00

0W

VU

17O

ld M

ain

Ren

ovat

ions

(WV

UIT

)3,

000,

000

03,

000,

000

00

3,00

0,00

00

00

3,00

0,00

0W

VS

U18

Wal

lace

Hal

l Ren

ovat

ion

1,80

0,00

00

1,80

0,00

00

01,

800,

000

00

01,

800,

000

WV

SU

19D

avis

Fin

e A

rts R

enov

atio

n2,

000,

000

02,

000,

000

00

2,00

0,00

00

00

2,00

0,00

0W

VU

20R

esea

rch

Labo

rato

ries

(HS

C)

3,20

0,00

00

3,20

0,00

00

03,

200,

000

00

03,

200,

000

WV

U21

Ren

ovat

ion

of H

ealth

Sci

ence

s N

orth

(HS

C)

15,0

00,0

000

15,0

00,0

000

015

,000

,000

00

015

,000

,000

BS

C22

Cam

pus

Infra

stru

ctur

e Im

prov

emen

ts

6,00

0,00

00

6,00

0,00

00

06,

000,

000

00

06,

000,

000

13-3

TAB

LE 1

H

IGH

ER E

DU

CA

TIO

N P

OLI

CY

CO

MM

ISSI

ON

Bui

ldin

g &

Cam

pus

Ren

ewal

(Ren

ovat

ion)

Pro

ject

s1/

15/2

009

Rec

omm

ende

d Fu

ndin

g So

urce

Stat

e &

Fed

eral

Fun

dsIn

stitu

tion

Fund

sN

on-S

tate

Inst

.H

EPC

Pr

i. #

Proj

ect

Tota

l Pro

ject

C

ost

Fund

s A

vaila

ble

FY10

+Fu

nds

Nee

ded

Stat

e G

ener

al o

r Sp

ecia

l R

even

ue

FY10

+

Fede

ral

Rev

enue

FY

10+

Pote

ntia

l Bon

d Pr

ojec

t Lot

tery

R

even

ue

FY10

+E&

G C

apita

l Fe

es F

Y10+

Aux

iliar

y Fe

es F

Y10+

Priv

ate

Gift

s &

G

rant

sTo

tal F

unds

R

equi

red

MU

23Fo

rens

ic S

cien

ce C

ente

r A

nnex

/Ren

ovat

ion

5,99

2,10

04,

992,

100

1,00

0,00

00

01,

000,

000

00

01,

000,

000

WV

U24

Che

mis

try R

esea

rch

Ann

ex

Ren

ovat

ion

1,50

0,00

00

1,50

0,00

00

01,

500,

000

00

01,

500,

000

WV

U25

Hod

ges

Ren

ovat

ion

25,0

00,0

000

25,0

00,0

000

025

,000

,000

00

025

,000

,000

Fund

ing

Cut

off

MU

26O

ld M

ain

Rep

airs

9,00

0,00

00

9,00

0,00

00

09,

000,

000

00

09,

000,

000

WV

U27

Ste

war

t Hal

l Ren

ovat

ion

5,00

0,00

00

5,00

0,00

00

05,

000,

000

00

05,

000,

000

FSU

28Ja

ynes

Hal

l Ren

ovat

ions

4,00

0,00

00

4,00

0,00

00

04,

000,

000

00

04,

000,

000

FSU

29H

unt H

augh

t Hal

l Ren

ovat

ions

2,00

0,00

00

2,00

0,00

00

02,

000,

000

00

02,

000,

000

BS

C30

Ren

ovat

ion

Har

dway

Lib

rary

1,50

0,00

00

1,50

0,00

00

01,

500,

000

00

01,

500,

000

WV

SU

31R

enov

atio

n of

WV

Reh

abili

tatio

n C

ente

r5,

000,

000

05,

000,

000

00

5,00

0,00

00

00

5,00

0,00

0

WV

SU

32R

epla

ce D

rain

Jor

dan

Libr

ary

Coo

ling

Tow

er75

,000

075

,000

00

075

,000

00

75,0

00W

VS

U33

Upg

rade

Lig

htin

g C

lass

room

s10

0,00

00

100,

000

00

010

0,00

00

010

0,00

0W

VU

34W

oodb

urn

Hal

l Res

tora

tion

750,

000

075

0,00

00

00

750,

000

00

750,

000

WV

U35

Cla

ssro

om R

enov

atio

ns (H

SC

)50

0,00

00

500,

000

00

050

0,00

00

050

0,00

0

FSU

36K

enne

dy B

arn

Ren

ovat

ions

- P

hase

II55

0,00

032

5,00

022

5,00

00

00

225,

000

00

225,

000

MU

37S

cien

ce H

all -

Exh

aust

Fan

s/U

nits

500,

000

050

0,00

00

00

500,

000

00

500,

000

MU

38D

rinko

Lib

rary

Mis

cella

neou

s Im

prov

emen

ts50

0,00

00

500,

000

00

050

0,00

00

050

0,00

0

MU

39W

elco

me/

Rec

ruitm

ent C

tr -

Ren

ovat

ions

360,

000

036

0,00

00

00

360,

000

00

360,

000

BS

C40

Inst

itutio

nal E

nerg

y A

sses

smen

t/Pha

se I

Ele

ctric

al

Eva

luat

ion

and

Upg

rade

1,50

0,00

00

1,50

0,00

00

00

1,50

0,00

00

01,

500,

000

SU

41K

ing

Stre

et P

edes

trian

izat

ion

1,50

0,00

00

1,50

0,00

00

00

1,50

0,00

00

01,

500,

000

SU

42S

nyde

r Ann

ex R

enov

atio

n50

0,00

00

500,

000

00

050

0,00

00

050

0,00

0G

SC

43N

orth

Ent

ranc

e2,

275,

000

02,

275,

000

00

02,

275,

000

00

2,27

5,00

0W

VU

44A

rt M

useu

m10

,000

,000

010

,000

,000

00

010

,000

,000

00

10,0

00,0

00FS

U45

Col

eban

k H

all -

IT E

xpan

sion

850,

000

085

0,00

00

00

850,

000

00

850,

000

13-4

TAB

LE 1

H

IGH

ER E

DU

CA

TIO

N P

OLI

CY

CO

MM

ISSI

ON

Bui

ldin

g &

Cam

pus

Ren

ewal

(Ren

ovat

ion)

Pro

ject

s1/

15/2

009

Rec

omm

ende

d Fu

ndin

g So

urce

Stat

e &

Fed

eral

Fun

dsIn

stitu

tion

Fund

sN

on-S

tate

Inst

.H

EPC

Pr

i. #

Proj

ect

Tota

l Pro

ject

C

ost

Fund

s A

vaila

ble

FY10

+Fu

nds

Nee

ded

Stat

e G

ener

al o

r Sp

ecia

l R

even

ue

FY10

+

Fede

ral

Rev

enue

FY

10+

Pote

ntia

l Bon

d Pr

ojec

t Lot

tery

R

even

ue

FY10

+E&

G C

apita

l Fe

es F

Y10+

Aux

iliar

y Fe

es F

Y10+

Priv

ate

Gift

s &

G

rant

sTo

tal F

unds

R

equi

red

FSU

46S

haw

Hou

se G

reat

Roo

m A

dditi

on20

0,00

00

200,

000

00

020

0,00

00

020

0,00

0

BS

C47

Leas

e of

Gas

Com

pany

Lot

, P

arki

ng U

pgra

de60

0,00

00

600,

000

00

060

0,00

00

060

0,00

0

GS

C48

Par

king

, Tra

ffic

& P

edes

trian

C

ircul

atio

n1,

000,

000

01,

000,

000

00

01,

000,

000

00

1,00

0,00

0

FSU

49In

frast

ruct

ure

- Ped

estri

an S

teps

be

twee

n H

ardw

ay &

Tur

ley

500,

000

050

0,00

00

00

500,

000

00

500,

000

WV

SU

50C

lass

room

Fur

nitu

re R

epla

cem

ent

100,

000

010

0,00

00

00

100,

000

00

100,

000

Subt

otal

E&

G B

ldg.

& C

ampu

s R

enew

al$2

13,9

52,1

00$5

,317

,100

$208

,635

,000

$0$0

$186

,600

,000

$22,

035,

000

$0$0

$208

,635

,000

AU

XILI

AR

Y PR

OJE

CTS

Bui

ldin

g an

d C

ampu

s R

enew

al (R

enov

atio

n)

WLS

C1

Bla

tnik

Hal

l Stu

dent

Rec

reat

ion

Cen

ter

1,50

0,00

00

1,50

0,00

00

00

01,

500,

000

01,

500,

000

BS

C2

Bas

ic S

cien

ce F

ood

Cou

rt A

sses

smen

t/Im

plem

enta

tion

500,

000

050

0,00

00

00

050

0,00

00

500,

000

CU

3To

wer

s R

enov

atio

ns2,

000,

000

02,

000,

000

00

00

2,00

0,00

00

2,00

0,00

0

CU

4A

uxili

ary

HV

AC

Pla

nt R

enov

atio

ns4,

000,

000

04,

000,

000

00

00

4,00

0,00

00

4,00

0,00

0B

SC

5S

tude

nt C

ente

r Air

Con

ditio

ning

450,

000

045

0,00

00

00

045

0,00

00

450,

000

FSU

6A

thle

tic F

ield

s - U

pper

Pra

ctic

e Fi

eld

Exp

ansi

on12

5,00

00

125,

000

00

00

125,

000

012

5,00

0FS

U7

Mor

row

Hal

l Ren

ovat

ions

4,80

0,00

00

4,80

0,00

00

00

04,

800,

000

04,

800,

000

WLS

C8

Foot

ball

Sta

dium

Ren

ovat

ions

5,00

0,00

00

5,00

0,00

00

00

04,

000,

000

1,00

0,00

05,

000,

000

Subt

otal

Aux

. Bld

g. &

Cam

pus

Ren

ewal

$18,

375,

000

$0$1

8,37

5,00

0$0

$0$0

$0$1

7,37

5,00

0$1

,000

,000

$18,

375,

000

TOTA

L - B

LDG

. & C

AM

PUS

REN

EWA

L$2

32,3

27,1

00$5

,317

,100

$227

,010

,000

$0$0

$186

,600

,000

$22,

035,

000

$17,

375,

000

$1,0

00,0

00$2

27,0

10,0

00

13-5

TAB

LE 2

HIG

HER

ED

UC

ATI

ON

PO

LIC

Y C

OM

MIS

SIO

NN

ew P

roje

cts

& F

acili

ties

1/15

/200

9

Rec

omm

ende

d Fu

ndin

g So

urce

Stat

e &

Fed

eral

Fun

dsIn

stitu

tion

Fund

sN

on-S

tate

Inst

.H

EPC

Pr

i. #

Proj

ect

Tota

l Pro

ject

C

ost

Fund

s A

vaila

ble

FY10

+Fu

nds

Nee

ded

Stat

e G

ener

al o

r Sp

ecia

l R

even

ue

FY10

+

Fede

ral

Rev

enue

FY

10+

Pote

ntia

l Bon

d Pr

ojec

ts

Lotte

ry

Rev

enue

FY

10+

E&G

Cap

ital

Fees

FY1

0+A

uxili

ary

Fees

FY

10+

Priv

ate

Gift

s &

G

rant

sTo

tal F

unds

R

equi

red

E&G

PR

OJE

CTS

New

Bui

ldin

g &

Fac

ilitie

sW

LSC

1S

cien

ce C

ente

r15

,000

,000

015

,000

,000

00

15,0

00,0

000

00

15,0

00,0

00S

U2

Vis

ual A

rts P

roje

ct13

,900

,000

013

,900

,000

00

13,9

00,0

000

00

13,9

00,0

00

GS

C3

Mul

ti-Fu

nctio

n H

ealth

and

W

elln

ess

Edu

catio

n C

ente

r (S

tate

fund

ing

to b

e ap

plie

d to

aca

dem

ic fa

cilit

ies

only

)30

,000

,000

030

,000

,000

00

10,0

00,0

000

020

,000

,000

30,0

00,0

00

MU

4B

iote

chno

logy

Dev

elop

men

t C

ente

r & A

pplie

d E

ngin

eerin

g50

,000

,000

050

,000

,000

010

,000

,000

40,0

00,0

000

050

,000

,000

Fund

ing

Cut

off

WV

U6

Ani

mal

Res

earc

h Fa

cilit

y (H

SC

)16

,000

,000

016

,000

,000

04,

000,

000

12,0

00,0

000

00

16,0

00,0

00

WV

U5

Law

Cen

ter R

enov

atio

n an

d A

dditi

on50

,000

,000

050

,000

,000

00

050

,000

,000

00

50,0

00,0

00

WV

U7

Agr

icul

ture

, For

estry

, and

C

onsu

mer

Sci

ence

Bui

ldin

g89

,800

,000

089

,800

,000

020

,000

,000

69,8

00,0

000

00

89,8

00,0

00

MU

8R

ural

Hea

lth &

Res

iden

cy

Edu

catio

n C

ente

r(s)

9,77

3,18

12,

773,

181

7,00

0,00

00

4,00

0,00

03,

000,

000

00

07,

000,

000

WV

SU

9A

dditi

on -

Dra

in J

orda

n Li

brar

y5,

000,

000

05,

000,

000

00

5,00

0,00

00

00

5,00

0,00

0W

VU

10C

olis

eum

and

CA

C B

ridge

3,90

0,00

00

3,90

0,00

00

00

3,90

0,00

00

03,

900,

000

SU

11M

aint

enan

ce a

nd S

ervi

ce

Cen

ter

6,00

0,00

00

6,00

0,00

00

06,

000,

000

00

06,

000,

000

MU

12Fi

ne A

rts C

ente

r for

Vis

ual

Arts

38,5

00,0

000

38,5

00,0

000

00

38,5

00,0

000

038

,500

,000

MU

13C

ente

r for

Mus

ic/M

usic

E

duca

tion

40,3

00,0

000

40,3

00,0

000

00

40,3

00,0

000

040

,300

,000

MU

14H

igh

Tech

nolo

gy C

lass

room

B

uild

ing

15,0

00,0

000

15,0

00,0

000

00

15,0

00,0

000

015

,000

,000

WV

U15

Ext

ensi

on S

ervi

ces

Bui

ldin

g25

,000

,000

025

,000

,000

00

025

,000

,000

00

25,0

00,0

00

WV

U16

Den

tistry

Pro

gram

Exp

ansi

on4,

383,

000

04,

383,

000

00

04,

383,

000

00

4,38

3,00

0

BS

C17

Equ

ipm

ent/

Lab/

Ele

ctro

nic

Cla

ssro

om N

eeds

400,

000

040

0,00

00

00

400,

000

00

400,

000

CU

18R

ahal

l Tec

h C

ente

r Equ

ip.&

Te

ch.

500,

000

050

0,00

00

00

500,

000

00

500,

000

13-6

TAB

LE 2

HIG

HER

ED

UC

ATI

ON

PO

LIC

Y C

OM

MIS

SIO

NN

ew P

roje

cts

& F

acili

ties

1/15

/200

9

Rec

omm

ende

d Fu

ndin

g So

urce

Stat

e &

Fed

eral

Fun

dsIn

stitu

tion

Fund

sN

on-S

tate

Inst

.H

EPC

Pr

i. #

Proj

ect

Tota

l Pro

ject

C

ost

Fund

s A

vaila

ble

FY10

+Fu

nds

Nee

ded

Stat

e G

ener

al o

r Sp

ecia

l R

even

ue

FY10

+

Fede

ral

Rev

enue

FY

10+

Pote

ntia

l Bon

d Pr

ojec

ts

Lotte

ry

Rev

enue

FY

10+

E&G

Cap

ital

Fees

FY1

0+A

uxili

ary

Fees

FY

10+

Priv

ate

Gift

s &

G

rant

sTo

tal F

unds

R

equi

red

FSU

19Fi

ne A

rts B

uild

ing

- New

Fa

cilit

y18

,000

,000

018

,000

,000

00

018

,000

,000

00

18,0

00,0

00M

U20

Sou

th C

harle

ston

Fac

ility

3,00

0,00

00

3,00

0,00

00

00

3,00

0,00

00

03,

000,

000

FSU

21La

nd A

cqui

sitio

n - H

ospi

tal

2,50

0,00

00

2,50

0,00

00

00

2,50

0,00

00

02,

500,

000

WV

U22

Eva

nsda

le P

E B

uild

ing

/ O

utdo

or R

ecre

atio

n23

,000

,000

023

,000

,000

00

023

,000

,000

00

23,0

00,0

00M

U23

Teay

s C

ente

r7,

000,

000

07,

000,

000

00

07,

000,

000

00

7,00

0,00

0

WV

SU

24A

cade

mic

/Tec

hnol

ogy

Cla

ssro

om B

uild

ing

10,0

00,0

000

10,0

00,0

000

00

10,0

00,0

000

010

,000

,000

WV

SU

25R

esea

rch/

Sci

ence

Bui

ldin

g8,

000,

000

08,

000,

000

00

08,

000,

000

00

8,00

0,00

0

WV

SU

26M

edia

Cen

ter C

lass

room

B

uild

ing

22,0

00,0

000

22,0

00,0

000

00

22,0

00,0

000

022

,000

,000

WV

SU

27Fe

rgus

on-L

inco

ln S

econ

d Fl

oor C

lass

room

Add

ition

1,20

0,00

00

1,20

0,00

00

00

1,20

0,00

00

01,

200,

000

WV

SU

28M

edia

Cen

ter -

Dow

ntow

n C

harle

ston

Cam

pus

10,0

00,0

000

10,0

00,0

000

00

10,0

00,0

000

010

,000

,000

WV

U29

Dat

a C

ente

r14

,000

,000

014

,000

,000

00

014

,000

,000

00

14,0

00,0

00W

VS

U30

Cam

pus

Info

rmat

ion

Cen

ter

750,

000

075

0,00

00

00

750,

000

00

750,

000

MU

31C

aree

r Cen

ter

6,00

0,00

00

6,00

0,00

00

00

6,00

0,00

00

06,

000,

000

MU

32M

arch

ing

Ban

d B

uild

ing

800,

000

080

0,00

00

00

800,

000

00

800,

000

MU

33S

hop

- Sto

rage

of A

thle

tic &

B

&G

Equ

ipm

ent

350,

000

035

0,00

00

00

350,

000

00

350,

000

MU

34Te

nnis

Com

plex

- In

door

C

ourts

3,30

0,00

00

3,30

0,00

00

00

3,30

0,00

00

03,

300,

000

BS

C35

Ath

letic

Fie

ld U

pgra

de50

0,00

00

500,

000

00

050

0,00

00

050

0,00

0

WLS

C36

Wom

en's

Sof

tbal

l Sta

dium

an

d Fi

eld

300,

000

030

0,00

00

00

250,

000

050

,000

300,

000

WV

SU

37N

atat

oriu

m5,

000,

000

05,

000,

000

00

05,

000,

000

00

5,00

0,00

0

WV

U38

Faci

litie

s M

aint

enan

ce

Cen

ters

2,10

0,00

00

2,10

0,00

00

00

2,10

0,00

00

02,

100,

000

SU

39C

ampu

s E

ntra

nces

and

B

oard

ers

Def

initi

ons

500,

000

050

0,00

00

00

500,

000

00

500,

000

FSU

40In

frast

ruct

ure

- Sto

ne S

teps

to

Loc

ust A

venu

e50

0,00

00

500,

000

00

050

0,00

00

050

0,00

0

FSU

41In

frast

ruct

ure

- Rea

r Cam

pus

Ent

ranc

e U

pgra

de25

0,00

00

250,

000

00

025

0,00

00

025

0,00

0

FSU

42In

frast

ruct

ure

- Dev

elop

men

t S

outh

of L

ocus

t Ave

nue

1,00

0,00

00

1,00

0,00

00

00

1,00

0,00

00

01,

000,

000

13-7

TAB

LE 2

HIG

HER

ED

UC

ATI

ON

PO

LIC

Y C

OM

MIS

SIO

NN

ew P

roje

cts

& F

acili

ties

1/15

/200

9

Rec

omm

ende

d Fu

ndin

g So

urce

Stat

e &

Fed

eral

Fun

dsIn

stitu

tion

Fund

sN

on-S

tate

Inst

.H

EPC

Pr

i. #

Proj

ect

Tota

l Pro

ject

C

ost

Fund

s A

vaila

ble

FY10

+Fu

nds

Nee

ded

Stat

e G

ener

al o

r Sp

ecia

l R

even

ue

FY10

+

Fede

ral

Rev

enue

FY

10+

Pote

ntia

l Bon

d Pr

ojec

ts

Lotte

ry

Rev

enue

FY

10+

E&G

Cap

ital

Fees

FY1

0+A

uxili

ary

Fees

FY

10+

Priv

ate

Gift

s &

G

rant

sTo

tal F

unds

R

equi

red

Subt

otal

New

E&

G B

uild

ings

& F

acili

ties

$553

,506

,181

$2,7

73,1

81$5

50,7

33,0

00$0

$38,

000,

000

$174

,700

,000

$317

,983

,000

$0$2

0,05

0,00

0$5

50,7

33,0

00

AU

XILI

AR

Y PR

OJE

CTS

New

Bui

ldin

gs &

Fac

ilitie

s

SU

1N

ew S

tude

nt C

ente

r/ D

inin

g Fa

cilit

y36

,184

,000

036

,184

,000

00

00

36,1

84,0

000

36,1

84,0

00

WV

U2

Chi

ld C

are

Cen

ter a

nd

Nur

sery

Sch

ool

8,00

0,00

00

8,00

0,00

00

00

08,

000,

000

08,

000,

000

WV

SU

3Li

ving

and

Lea

rnin

g C

ente

r3,

500,

000

03,

500,

000

00

00

3,50

0,00

00

3,50

0,00

0

WV

U4

Stu

dent

Hea

lth &

Car

ruth

C

ouns

elin

g C

ente

r20

,000

,000

020

,000

,000

00

00

20,0

00,0

000

20,0

00,0

00

CU

2In

terfa

ith C

hape

l & A

lum

ni

Cen

ter

5,92

3,62

64,

051,

235

1,87

2,39

10

00

01,

872,

391

01,

872,

391

MU

5In

door

Pra

ctic

e Fa

cilit

y10

,000

,000

010

,000

,000

00

00

10,0

00,0

000

10,0

00,0

00M

U6

Bas

ebal

l Fie

ld8,

000,

000

08,

000,

000

00

00

8,00

0,00

00

8,00

0,00

0M

U7

Trac

k S

tadi

um1,

750,

000

01,

750,

000

00

00

1,75

0,00

00

1,75

0,00

0M

U8

Soc

cer F

ield

1,20

0,00

00

1,20

0,00

00

00

01,

200,

000

01,

200,

000

FSU

3La

nd A

cqui

sitio

n - C

aper

ton

Cen

ter P

arki

ng E

xpan

sion

500,

000

050

0,00

00

00

050

0,00

00

500,

000

WV

SU

9E

ast C

ampu

s La

nd

Acq

uisi

tion

& P

arki

ng L

ot90

0,00

00

900,

000

00

00

900,

000

090

0,00

0

WV

SU

10W

est C

ampu

s La

nd

Acq

uisi

tion

& P

arki

ng L

ot90

0,00

00

900,

000

00

00

900,

000

090

0,00

0S

U11

Par

king

Stru

ctur

e8,

000,

000

08,

000,

000

00

00

8,00

0,00

00

8,00

0,00

0

WLS

C12

Par

king

Gar

age

by th

e Li

brar

y3,

800,

000

03,

800,

000

00

00

3,80

0,00

00

3,80

0,00

0

WLS

C13

Par

king

Gar

age

behi

nd

AS

RC

6,28

0,00

00

6,28

0,00

00

00

06,

280,

000

06,

280,

000

WV

U14

Col

iseu

m a

nd C

AC

Par

king

G

arag

e23

,000

,000

023

,000

,000

00

00

23,0

00,0

000

23,0

00,0

00Su

btot

al N

ew A

ux. B

uild

ings

& F

acili

ties

$137

,937

,626

$4,0

51,2

35$1

33,8

86,3

91$0

$0$0

$0$1

33,8

86,3

91$0

$133

,886

,391

TOTA

L - N

EW B

UIL

DIN

G &

FA

CIL

ITIE

S$6

91,4

43,8

07$6

,824

,416

$684

,619

,391

$0$3

8,00

0,00

0$1

74,7

00,0

00$3

17,9

83,0

00$1

33,8

86,3

91$2

0,05

0,00

0$6

84,6

19,3

91

13-8

TAB

LE 3

HIG

HER

ED

UC

ATI

ON

PO

LIC

Y C

OM

MIS

SIO

NPr

opos

ed B

ond

Proj

ects

1/15

/200

9

Rec

omm

ende

d Fu

ndin

g So

urce

Inst

.H

EPC

Pr

i. #

Proj

ect

Tota

l Pro

ject

C

ost

Fund

s A

vaila

ble

FY10

+Fu

nds

Nee

ded

Inst

itutio

n, F

eder

al

& P

rivat

e Fu

ndin

g L

otte

ry B

ond

Fund

ing

FY10

+

Run

ning

Tot

al

Lotte

ry B

ond

Fund

ing

E&G

PR

OJE

CTS

Bui

ldin

g an

d C

ampu

s R

enew

al (R

enov

atio

n)W

VU

1W

hite

Hal

l23

,000

,000

023

,000

,000

023

,000

,000

23,0

00,0

00M

U2

Sm

ith H

all R

epai

rs9,

000,

000

09,

000,

000

09,

000,

000

32,0

00,0

00

WV

SU

3Fl

emin

g H

all R

enov

atio

n &

Add

ition

15,0

00,0

000

15,0

00,0

000

15,0

00,0

0047

,000

,000

BS

C4

Mah

ood

Hal

l Ren

ovat

ion

5,00

0,00

00

5,00

0,00

00

5,00

0,00

052

,000

,000

WLS

C5

Sha

w H

all R

enov

atio

ns (A

DA

)2,

750,

000

02,

750,

000

02,

750,

000

54,7

50,0

00

CU

6Fi

ne A

rts B

uild

ing

& L

ibra

ry

Ren

ovat

ion

6,00

0,00

00

6,00

0,00

00

6,00

0,00

060

,750

,000

WV

SO

M7

Pha

se II

HV

AC

Rep

lace

men

t in

Bui

ldin

g B

(Mai

n) a

nd B

uild

ing

C

(Old

Clin

ic)

3,50

0,00

00

3,50

0,00

00

3,50

0,00

064

,250

,000

FSU

8Tu

rley

Cen

ter R

enov

atio

ns6,

000,

000

06,

000,

000

06,

000,

000

70,2

50,0

00

SU

9

Ren

ovat

ion

to W

hite

, Sny

der,

Stu

tzm

an-S

lona

ker &

Iken

berr

y H

alls

1,15

0,00

00

1,15

0,00

00

1,15

0,00

071

,400

,000

MU

10A

cade

mic

Bui

ldin

gs

Ren

ovat

ion/

Rep

air

13,0

00,0

000

13,0

00,0

000

13,0

00,0

0084

,400

,000

BS

C11

Bas

ic S

cien

ce &

Dic

kaso

n H

all L

ab

Upg

rade

s1,

000,

000

01,

000,

000

01,

000,

000

85,4

00,0

00FS

U12

Wal

lman

Hal

l Ren

ovat

ions

5,20

0,00

00

5,20

0,00

00

5,20

0,00

090

,600

,000

FSU

13M

usic

k Li

brar

y E

leva

tor

2,00

0,00

00

2,00

0,00

00

2,00

0,00

092

,600

,000

WV

U14

HS

C E

lect

rical

Upg

rade

(HS

C)

2,00

0,00

00

2,00

0,00

00

2,00

0,00

094

,600

,000

WV

U15

Col

lege

of P

harm

acy

Pro

gram

R

enov

atio

n/E

xpan

sion

1,50

0,00

00

1,50

0,00

00

1,50

0,00

096

,100

,000

FSU

16H

ardw

ay H

all R

enov

atio

ns5,

500,

000

05,

500,

000

05,

500,

000

101,

600,

000

WV

U17

Old

Mai

n R

enov

atio

ns (W

VU

IT)

3,00

0,00

00

3,00

0,00

00

3,00

0,00

010

4,60

0,00

0W

VS

U18

Wal

lace

Hal

l Ren

ovat

ion

1,80

0,00

00

1,80

0,00

00

1,80

0,00

010

6,40

0,00

0

13-9

TAB

LE 3

HIG

HER

ED

UC

ATI

ON

PO

LIC

Y C

OM

MIS

SIO

NPr

opos

ed B

ond

Proj

ects

1/15

/200

9

Rec

omm

ende

d Fu

ndin

g So

urce

Inst

.H

EPC

Pr

i. #

Proj

ect

Tota

l Pro

ject

C

ost

Fund

s A

vaila

ble

FY10

+Fu

nds

Nee

ded

Inst

itutio

n, F

eder

al

& P

rivat

e Fu

ndin

g L

otte

ry B

ond

Fund

ing

FY10

+

Run

ning

Tot

al

Lotte

ry B

ond

Fund

ing

E&G

PR

OJE

CTS

WV

SU

19D

avis

Fin

e A

rts R

enov

atio

n2,

000,

000

02,

000,

000

02,

000,

000

108,

400,

000

WV

U20

Res

earc

h La

bora

torie

s (H

SC

)3,

200,

000

03,

200,

000

03,

200,

000

111,

600,

000

WV

U21

Ren

ovat

ion

of H

ealth

Sci

ence

s N

orth

(HS

C)

15,0

00,0

000

15,0

00,0

000

15,0

00,0

0012

6,60

0,00

0

BS

C22

Cam

pus

Infra

stru

ctur

e Im

prov

emen

ts

6,00

0,00

00

6,00

0,00

00

6,00

0,00

013

2,60

0,00

0

MU

23Fo

rens

ic S

cien

ce C

ente

r A

nnex

/Ren

ovat

ion

5,99

2,10

04,

992,

100

1,00

0,00

00

1,00

0,00

013

3,60

0,00

0

WV

U24

Che

mis

try R

esea

rch

Ann

ex

Ren

ovat

ion

1,50

0,00

00

1,50

0,00

00

1,50

0,00

013

5,10

0,00

0W

VU

25H

odge

s R

enov

atio

n25

,000

,000

025

,000

,000

025

,000

,000

160,

100,

000

Subt

otal

E&

G B

ldg.

& C

ampu

s R

enew

al$1

65,0

92,1

00$4

,992

,100

$160

,100

,000

$0$1

60,1

00,0

00

New

Bui

ldin

gs &

Fac

ilitie

sW

LSC

1S

cien

ce C

ente

r15

,000

,000

015

,000

,000

015

,000

,000

15,0

00,0

00S

U2

Vis

ual A

rts P

roje

ct13

,900

,000

013

,900

,000

013

,900

,000

28,9

00,0

00

GS

C3

Mul

ti-Fu

nctio

n H

ealth

and

W

elln

ess

Edu

catio

n C

ente

r (S

tate

fu

ndin

g to

be

appl

ied

to a

cade

mic

fa

cilit

ies

only

)30

,000

,000

030

,000

,000

20,0

00,0

0010

,000

,000

38,9

00,0

00

MU

4B

iote

chno

logy

Dev

elop

men

t Cen

ter

& A

pplie

d E

ngin

eerin

g50

,000

,000

050

,000

,000

10,0

00,0

0040

,000

,000

78,9

00,0

00Su

btot

al N

ew E

&G

Bui

ldin

gs &

Fac

ilitie

s$1

08,9

00,0

00$0

$108

,900

,000

$30,

000,

000

$78,

900,

000

Tota

l - E

&G

Fac

ilitie

s$2

73,9

92,1

00$4

,992

,100

$269

,000

,000

$30,

000,

000

$239

,000

,000

13-10

TAB

LE 3

HIG

HER

ED

UC

ATI

ON

PO

LIC

Y C

OM

MIS

SIO

NPr

opos

ed B

ond

Proj

ects

1/15

/200

9

Rec

omm

ende

d Fu

ndin

g So

urce

Inst

.H

EPC

Pr

i. #

Proj

ect

Tota

l Pro

ject

C

ost

Fund

s A

vaila

ble

FY10

+Fu

nds

Nee

ded

Inst

itutio

n, F

eder

al

& P

rivat

e Fu

ndin

g L

otte

ry B

ond

Fund

ing

FY10

+

Run

ning

Tot

al

Lotte

ry B

ond

Fund

ing

E&G

PR

OJE

CTS

Inst

itutio

nLo

ttery

Bon

d Fu

ndin

g

Blu

efie

ld S

tate

Col

lege

$12,

000,

000

Con

cord

Uni

vers

ity$6

,000

,000

Fairm

ont S

tate

Uni

vers

ity$1

8,70

0,00

0G

lenv

ille

Sta

te C

olle

ge$1

0,00

0,00

0M

arsh

all U

nive

rsity

$63,

000,

000

She

pher

d U

nive

rsity

$15,

050,

000

Wes

t Lib

erty

Sta

te C

olle

ge$1

7,75

0,00

0W

est V

irgin

ia S

choo

l of O

steo

path

ic M

edic

ine

$3,5

00,0

00W

est V

irgin

ia S

tate

Uni

vers

ity$1

8,80

0,00

0W

est V

irgin

ia U

nive

rsity

$74,

200,

000

Tota

l$2

39,0

00,0

00

13-11

West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission Meeting of January 23, 2009 ITEM: Approval of 403(b) Tax Deferred Retirement

Savings Plan Document INSTITUTIONS: All RECOMMENDED RESOLUTION: Resolved, That the West Virginia Higher

Education Policy Commission approves the 403(b) Tax Deferred Retirement Savings Plan document and further designates the Chancellor to sign the plan document.

STAFF MEMBER: Margaret Buttrick BACKGROUND: The West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission and Council for Community and Technical College Education provide three major types of tax deferred retirement plans for higher education employees: a 401(a) qualified defined contribution retirement plan into which certain benefit eligible employees contribute six percent of wages, and employers provide a six percent match; an optional 457(b) deferred compensation plan; and an optional 403(b) deferred compensation plan. The Commission and Council operate these plans through TIAA-CREF and Great West Retirement Services. Staff seeks the Commission’s approval for the 403(b) plan document. In 2005 the Commission approved 401(a) and 457(b) plan documents. At that time, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) did not require a 403(b) plan document. The IRS, however, recently adopted regulations requiring the development of a 403(b) plan document by January 1, 2009. The IRS provided an extension for the development of a written plan document to December 31, 2009; however, employers must comply with the regulations effective January 1, 2009. The proposed plan document, which applies to both TIAA-CREF and Great West, follows the IRS’s model language and was developed with assistance from Bowles Rice McDavid Graff & Love LLP and a committee of higher education legal, finance, and human resources professionals. At its meeting on December 12, 2008, the Council approved the proposed plan document contingent upon two modifications being made. Those changes relate to fees charged and education provided by plan vendors. The attached plan document reflects the changes made by the Council in Sections 8.2 and 8.4.

14-1

403(B) TAX DEFERRED RETIREMENT SAVINGS PLAN

OF

WEST VIRGINIA HIGHER EDUCATION POLICY COMMISSION AND WEST VIRGINIA COUNCIL FOR

COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL COLLEGE EDUCATION EFFECTIVE FEBRUARY 1, 2009

14-2

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of the Plan is to provide retirement savings through annuity contracts and/or mutual fund custodial accounts for Employees of the Employers covered under the Plan.

This written document sets forth the terms of the Plan, which constitutes a tax deferred retirement savings plan within the meaning of Section 403(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended from time to time (“Code”). This Plan is further intended to comply with the Treasury Regulations promulgated under Section 403(b) of the Code, which became effective January 1, 2009.

14-3

403(b) TAX DEFERRED RETIREMENT SAVINGS PLAN

ARTICLE I – DEFINITIONS

The following words and terms, when used in the Plan, have the meaning set forth below.

1.1 Accumulation Account: The account or accumulation maintained for the benefit of any Participant or Beneficiary under an Annuity Contract or a Custodial Account.

1.2 Account Balance: The bookkeeping account maintained for each Participant which reflects the aggregate amount credited to the Participant’s Account under all Accounts, including the Participant’s Elective Deferrals, the earnings or loss of each Annuity Contract or a Custodial Account (net of expenses) allocable to the Participant, any transfers for the Participant’s benefit, and any distribution made to the Participant or the Participant’s Beneficiary. If a Participant has more than one Beneficiary at the time of the Participant’s death, then a separate Account Balance shall be maintained for each Beneficiary. The Account Balance includes any account established under Section 6 for rollover contributions and plan-to-plan transfers made for a Participant, the account established for a Beneficiary after a Participant’s death, and any account or accounts established for an alternate payee (as defined in section 414(p)(8) of the Code).

1.3 Administrator: The West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission and the West Virginia Council for Community and Technical College Education, or any successor(s) thereto designated to act jointly as the administrator of the Plan.

1.4 Annuity Contract: A nontransferable contract as defined in Section 403(b)(1) of the Code, established for each Participant by the Employer, or by each Participant individually, that is issued by an insurance company qualified to issue annuities in West Virginia and that includes payment in the form of an annuity.

1.5 Beneficiary(ies): The designated person(s) who is entitled to receive benefits under the Plan after the death of a Participant, subject to such additional rules as may be set forth in the Individual Agreements.

1.6 Code: The Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as now in effect or as hereafter amended. All citations to sections of the Code are to such sections as they may from time to time be amended or renumbered.

1.7 Commission: The West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission, or any successor thereto.

1.8 Compensation: (a) All cash compensation for services to the Employer, including salary, wages, fees, commissions, bonuses, and overtime pay, that is includible in the Employee’s gross income for the calendar year, plus amounts that would be cash compensation for services to the Employer includible in the Employee’s gross income for the calendar year but for a compensation reduction election under Section 125, 132(f), 401(k), 403(b), or 457(b) of the Code (including an election under Article II made to reduce compensation in order to have Elective Deferrals under the Plan). (b) With respect to an Employee who is totally and

14-4

2

permanently disabled within the meaning of Code section 22(e)(3), Compensation also includes any cash compensation for services to the Employer that satisfies (a) above which the Employee would have received for the calendar year if the Employee was paid at the rate of compensation paid immediately before becoming disabled, if such compensation is greater that the compensation determined under (a) above.

1.9 Council: The West Virginia Council for Community and Technical College Education, or any successor thereto.

1.10 Custodial Account: The group or individual custodial account or accounts, as defined in Section 403(b)(7) of the Code, established for each Participant by the Plan Sponsor, or by each Participant individually, hold assets of the Plan.

1.11 Disabled: The definition of disability provided in the applicable Individual Agreement.

1.12 Elective Deferral: The Employer contributions made to the Plan at the election of the Participant in lieu of receiving cash compensation. Elective Deferrals are limited to pre-tax salary reduction contributions.

1.13 Employee: Each individual, whether appointed or elected, who is a common-law employee of the Employer performing services for the Employer, except student teachers. Former employees of the Employer and independent contractors of the Employer are hereby specifically excluded from the definition of Employee; provided, however that an Employee who is receiving Compensation while totaling and permanently disabled within the meaning of Code section 22(e)(3) shall be considered an Employee hereunder while receiving such Compensation. This definition is not applicable unless the Employee’s compensation for performing services for the Employer is paid by the Employer. Further, a person occupying an elective or appointive public office is not an Employee performing services for the Employer unless such office is one to which an individual is elected or appointed only if the individual has received training, or is experienced, in the field of education. A public office includes an elective or appointive office of a State or local government.

1.14 Employer: The Commission, the Council, the administrative units of the Commission or Council and all state institutions of higher education in the State of West Virginia as defined in West Virginia Code § 18B-1-2. All Employers, as such term is used herein, shall be political subdivisions, agencies or instrumentalities of the State of West Virginia.

1.15 Excess Elective Deferrals: Those Elective Deferrals that are includable in a Participant’s gross income under section 402(g) of the Code to the extent the Participant’s Elective Deferrals for a taxable year exceed the dollar limitation under such Code Section.

1.16 Fund Sponsor: An insurance, variable annuity or investment company that provides Funding Vehicles available to Participants under this Plan.

1.17 Funding Vehicles: The Annuity Contracts or Custodial Accounts issued for funding amounts held under the Plan and specifically approved by the Administrator for use under the Plan.

14-5

3

1.18 Includible Compensation: An Employee’s actual wages in box 1 of Form W-2 for a year for services to an Employer, but subject to a maximum of $200,000 (or such higher maximum as may apply under Section 401(a)(17) of the Code) and increased (up to the dollar maximum) by an compensation reduction election under Sections 125, 132(f), 401(k), 403(b) or 457(b) of the Code (including any Elective Deferral under the Plan. The amount of Includible Compensation is determined without regard to any community property laws.

1.19 Individual Agreement: The agreements between a Vendor and the Employer or a Participant that constitutes or governs a Custodial Account or an Annuity Contract.

1.20 Institution: A state institution of higher education in West Virginia as defined in West Virginia Code § 18B-1-2.

1.21 Participant: An individual for whom Elective Deferrals are currently being made, or for whom Elective Deferrals have previously been made, under the Plan and who has not received a distribution of his or her entire benefit under the Plan.

1.22 Plan Sponsor: The Commission and the Council, which shall jointly approve the terms of this Plan and any amendments hereto or termination hereof.

1.23 Plan: The 403(b) Tax Deferred Retirement Savings Plan of The West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission and West Virginia Council for Community and Technical College Education, as the same may be amended from time to time.

1.24 Plan Year: January 1 through December 31.

1.25 Related Employer: The Employer and any other entity which is under common control with the Employer under Section 414(b) or (c) of the Code. For this purpose, the Plan Sponsor shall determine which entities are Related Employers based on a reasonable, good faith standard and taking into account the special rules applicable under Notice 89-23, 1989-1 C.B. 654.

1.26 Severance from Employment: For purposes of the Plan, Severance from Employment means Severance from Employment with the Employer and any Related Employer. However, a Severance from Employment also occurs on any date on which an Employee ceases to be an employee of the Employer, even though the Employee may continue to be employed by a Related Employer that is another unit of the State or local government that is not a public school or in a capacity that is not employment with a public school (e.g., ceasing to be an employee performing service for the Employer but continuing to work for the same State or local government employer).

1.27 State: Means the State of West Virginia, a political subdivision of the State of West Virginia or any agency or instrumentality of the State of West Virginia.

1.28 Vendor: The provider of an Annuity Contract or Custodial Account.

1.29 Valuation Date: Each business day unless otherwise provided in any applicable Funding Vehicle; provided, however, that such Valuation Date shall occur at least annually.

14-6

4

ARTICLE II – PARTICIPATION AND CONTRIBUTIONS

2.1 Eligibility. Each Employee shall be eligible to participate in the Plan and elect to have Elective Deferrals made on his or her behalf hereunder immediately upon becoming employed by the Employer.

2.2 Compensation Reduction Election. (a) General Rule. An Employee elects to become a Participant by executing an election to reduce his or her Compensation (and have that amount contributed as an Elective Deferral on his or her behalf) and filing it with the Administrator. This Compensation reduction election shall be made on the agreement provided by the Administrator under which the Employee agrees to be bound by all the terms and conditions of the Plan. The participation election shall also include designation of the Funding Vehicles and Accounts therein to which Elective Deferrals are to be made (in whole number percentages, the total of which shall equal 100%) and a designation of Beneficiary. Any such election shall remain in effect until a new election is filed. Only an individual who performs services for the Employer as an Employee may reduce his or her Compensation under the Plan; provided, however, that with respect to any Employee who is totally and permanently disabled within the meaning of Code section 22(e)(3), Elective Deferral includes contributions made on behalf of the disabled Employee, in accordance with such Employee’s Compensation reduction election, for the fixed period of time during which the disabled Employee receives Long Term Disability benefits as provided in the Employer’s Long Term Disability policy. Each Employee will become a Participant and such elections will become effective in accordance with the terms and conditions of the Individual Agreements. All Elective Deferrals shall be made on a pre-tax basis. An Employee shall become a Participant as soon as administratively practicable following the date applicable under the Employee’s election. 2.3 Information Provided by the Employee. Each Employee enrolling in the Plan should provide to the Administrator at the time of initial enrollment, and later if there are any changes, any information necessary or advisable for the Administrator to administer the Plan, including any information required under the Individual Agreements. 2.4 Change in Elective Deferrals Election. Subject to the provisions of the applicable Individual Agreements, an Employee may at any time revise his or her participation election, including a change of the amount of his or her Elective Deferrals, his or her investment direction, and his or her designated Beneficiary. A change in the investment direction shall take effect as of the date provided by the Administrator on a uniform basis for all Employees and subject to the provisions of the applicable Individual Agreements, which Individual Agreements may be more restrictive with regard to such changes. A change in the Beneficiary designation shall take effect when the election is accepted by the Vendor. 2.5 Contributions Made Promptly. Elective Deferrals under the Plan shall be transferred to the applicable Funding Vehicle within 15 business days following the end of the month in which the amount would otherwise have been paid to the Participant. 2.6 Leave of Absence. Unless an election is otherwise revised, if an Employee is absent from work by leave of absence, Elective Deferrals under the Plan shall continue to the extent that Compensation continues.

14-7

5

ARTICLE III – FUNDING AND CONTRIBUTIONS

3.1 Basic Annual Limitation. Except as provided in Sections 3.2 and 3.3, the maximum amount of the Elective Deferral under the Plan for any calendar year shall not exceed the lesser of (a) the applicable dollar amount or (b) the Participant’s Includible Compensation for the calendar year. The applicable dollar amount is the amount established under section 402(g)(1)(B) of the Code, and is adjusted for cost-of-living after 2007 to the extent provided under section 415(d) of the Code. 3.2 Special Section 403(b) Catch-up Limitation for Employees With 15 Years of Service. Because the Employer is a qualified organization (within the meaning of § 1.403(b)-4(c)(3)(ii) of the Income Tax Regulations), the applicable dollar amount under Section 3.1(a) for any “qualified employee” is increased (to the extent provided in the Individual Agreements) by the least of:

(a) $3,000; (b) The excess of: (1) $15,000, over (2) The total special 403(b) catch-up elective deferrals made for the qualified employee by the Employer for prior years; or (c) The excess of: (1) $5,000 multiplied by the number of years of service of the employee with the Employer, over (2) The total Elective Deferrals made for the employee by the qualified organization for prior years. For purposes of this Section 3.2, a “qualified employee” means an Employee who has completed at least 15 years of service taking into account only employment with a qualified organization.

3.3 Age 50 Catch-up Elective Deferral Contributions. An Employee who is a Participant who will attain age 50 or more by the end of the calendar year is permitted to elect an additional amount of Elective Deferrals, up to the maximum age 50 catch-up Elective Deferrals for the year. The maximum dollar amount of the age 50 catch-up Elective Deferrals for a year is $5,000 for 2007, and is adjusted for cost-of-living after 2007 to the extent provided under the Code.

3.4 Coordination. Amounts in excess of the limitation set forth in Section 3.1 shall be allocated first to the special 403(b) catch-up under Section 3.2 and next as an age 50 catch-up contribution under Section 3.3. However, in no event can the amount of the Elective Deferrals for a year be more than the Participant’s Compensation for the year.

14-8

6

3.5 Special Rule for a Participant Covered by Another Section 403(b) Plan. For purposes of this Article III, if the Participant is or has been a participant in one or more other plans under section 403(b) of the Code (and any other plan that permits elective deferrals under section 402(g) of the Code), then this Plan and all such other plans shall be considered as one plan for purposes of applying the foregoing limitations of this Article III. For this purpose, the Administrator shall take into account any other such plan maintained by any Related Employer and shall also take into account any other such plan for which the Administrator receives from the Participant sufficient information concerning his or her participation in such other plan. Notwithstanding the foregoing, another plan maintained by a Related Entity shall be taken into account for purposes of Section 3.2 only if the other plan is a § 403(b) plan. 3.6 Correction of Excess Elective Deferrals. If the Elective Deferral on behalf of a Participant for any calendar year exceeds the limitations described above, or the Elective Deferral on behalf of a Participant for any calendar year exceeds the limitations described above when combined with other amounts deferred by the Participant under another plan of the employer under section 403(b) of the Code (and any other plan that permits elective deferrals under section 402(g) of the Code for which the Participant provides information that is accepted by the Administrator), then the Elective Deferral, to the extent in excess of the applicable limitation (adjusted for any income or loss in value, if any, allocable thereto), shall be distributed to the Participant. 3.7 Protection of Persons Who Serve in a Uniformed Service. An Employee whose employment is interrupted by qualified military service under section 414(u) of the Code or who is on a leave of absence for qualified military service under section 414(u) of the Code may elect to make additional Elective Deferrals upon resumption of employment with the Employer equal to the maximum Elective Deferrals that the Employee could have elected during that period if the Employee’s employment with the Employer had continued (at the same level of Compensation) without the interruption or leave, reduced by the Elective Deferrals, if any, actually made for the Employee during the period of the interruption or leave. Except to the extent provided under section 414(u) of the Code, this right applies for five years following the resumption of employment (or, if sooner, for a period equal to three times the period of the interruption or leave).

ARTICLE IV – LOANS

4.1 Loans. Loans shall be permitted under the Plan to the extent permitted by the Individual Agreements and in accordance with any Fund Sponsor procedures. 4.2 Information Coordination Concerning Loans. Each Vendor is responsible for all information reporting and tax withholding required by applicable federal and state law in connection with distributions and loans. To minimize the instances in which Participants have taxable income as a result of loans from the Plan, the Administrator shall take such steps as may be appropriate to coordinate the limitations on loans set forth in Section 4.3, including the collection of information from Vendors, and transmission of information requested by any Vendor, concerning the outstanding balance of any loans made to a Participant under the Plan or any other plan of the Employer. The Administrator shall also take such steps as may be

14-9

7

appropriate to collect information from Vendors, and transmission of information to any Vendor, concerning any failure by a Participant to repay timely any loans made to a Participant under the Plan or any other plan of the Employer. 4.3 Maximum Loan Amount. No loan to a Participant under the Plan may exceed the lesser of: (a) $50,000, reduced by the greater of (i) the outstanding balance on any loan from the Plan to the Participant on the date the loan is made or (ii) the highest outstanding balance on loans from the Plan to the Participant during the one-year period ending on the day before the date the loan is approved by the Administrator (not taking into account any payments made during such one-year period); or (b) one half of the value of the Participant’s vested Account Balance (as of the valuation date immediately preceding the date on which such loan is approved by the Administrator). For purposes of this Section 4.3, any loan from any other plan maintained by an Employer and any Related Employer shall be treated as if it were a loan made from the Plan, and the Participant’s vested interest under any such other plan shall be considered a vested interest under this Plan; provided, however, that the provisions of this paragraph shall not be applied so as to allow the amount of a loan to exceed the amount that would otherwise be permitted in the absence of this paragraph.

ARTICLE V – VESTING

5.1 Elective Deferrals. Elective Deferrals shall be fully vested and nonforfeitable when such Elective Deferrals are made.

ARTICLE VI – BENEFIT DISTRIBUTIONS

6.1 Benefit Distributions At Severance from Employment or Other Distribution Event. Except as permitted under Section 3.6 (relating to excess Elective Deferrals), Section 6.4 (relating to withdrawals of amounts rolled over into the Plan), Section 6.5 (relating to hardship), or Section 10.2 (relating to termination of the Plan), distributions from a Participant’s Account may not be made earlier than the earliest of the date on which the Participant has a Severance from Employment, dies, becomes Disabled, or attains age 59½. Distributions shall otherwise be made in accordance with the terms of the Individual Agreements. 6.2 Small Account Balances. The terms of the Individual Agreement may permit distributions to be made in the form of a lump-sum payment, without the consent of the Participant or Beneficiary, but no such payment may be made without the consent of the Participant or Beneficiary unless the Account Balance does not exceed $1,000 (determined without regard to any separate account that holds rollover contributions under Section 7.1). 6.3 Minimum Distributions. Each Individual Agreement shall comply with the minimum distribution requirements of Section 401(a)(9) of the Code and the regulations thereunder. For purposes of applying the distribution rules of Section 401(a)(9) of the Code, each Individual Agreement is treated as an individual retirement account (IRA) and distributions shall be made in accordance with the provisions of § 1.408-8 of the Income Tax Regulations, except as provided in § 1.403(b)-6(e) of the Income Tax Regulations.

14-10

8

6.4 In-Service Distributions From Rollover Account. If a Participant has a separate account attributable to rollover contributions to the Plan, to the extent permitted by the applicable Individual Agreement, the Participant may at any time elect to receive a distribution of all or any portion of the amount held in the rollover account. Note: A plan is not required to permit in-service distribution from a rollover account. See Rev. Rul. 2004-12, 2004-1 C.B. 478. 6.5 Hardship Withdrawals. (a) Hardship withdrawals shall be permitted under the Plan to the extent permitted by the Individual Agreements controlling the Account assets to be withdrawn to satisfy the hardship. If applicable under an Individual Agreement, no Elective Deferrals shall be allowed under the Plan during the 6-month period beginning on the date the Participant receives a distribution on account of hardship. (b) The Individual Agreements shall provide (or, alternatively, the Vendors by separate agreement shall provide) for the exchange of information among the Plan Sponsor and the Vendors to the extent necessary to implement the Individual Agreements, including, in the case of a hardship withdrawal that is automatically deemed to be necessary to satisfy the Participant’s financial need (pursuant to § 1.401(k)-1(d)(3)(iv)(E) of the Income Tax Regulations), the Vendor notifying the Plan Sponsor of the withdrawal in order for the Plan Sponsor to implement the resulting 6-month suspension of the Participant’s right to make Elective Deferrals under the Plan. In addition, in the case of a hardship withdrawal that is not automatically deemed to be necessary to satisfy the financial need (pursuant to § 1.401(k)-1(d)(3)(iii)(B) of the Income Tax Regulations), the Vendor shall obtain information from the Plan Sponsor or other Vendors to determine the amount of any plan loans and rollover accounts that are available to the Participant under the Plan to satisfy the financial need. 6.6 Rollover Distributions. (a) A Participant or the Beneficiary of a deceased Participant (or a Participant’s spouse or former spouse who is an alternate payee under a domestic relations order, as defined in section 414(p) of the Code) who is entitled to an eligible rollover distribution may elect to have any portion of an eligible rollover distribution (as defined in section 402(c)(4) of the Code) from the Plan paid directly to an eligible retirement plan (as defined in section 402(c)(8)(B) of the Code) specified by the Participant in a direct rollover. In the case of a distribution to a Beneficiary who at the time of the Participant’s death was neither the spouse of the Participant nor the spouse or former spouse of the Participant who is an alternate payee under a domestic relations order, a direct rollover is payable only to an individual retirement account or individual retirement annuity (IRA) that has been established on behalf of the Beneficiary as an inherited IRA (within the meaning of section 408(d)(3)(C) of the Code). (b) Each Vendor shall be separately responsible for providing, within a reasonable time period before making an initial eligible rollover distribution, an explanation to the Participant of his or her right to elect a direct rollover and the income tax withholding consequences of not electing a direct rollover.

ARTICLE VII - ROLLOVERS TO THE PLAN AND TRANSFERS

7.1 Eligible Rollover Contributions to the Plan. (a) Eligible Rollover Contributions. To the extent provided in the Individual Agreements, an Employee who is a Participant who is entitled to receive an eligible rollover distribution from another eligible retirement plan may request to have all or a portion of the eligible rollover distribution paid to the Plan. Such rollover contributions shall be made in the form of cash only. The Vendor may require such

14-11

9

documentation from the distributing plan as it deems necessary to effectuate the rollover in accordance with section 402 of the Code and to confirm that such plan is an eligible retirement plan within the meaning of section 402(c)(8)(B) of the Code. However, in no event does the Plan accept a rollover contribution from a Roth elective deferral account under an applicable retirement plan described in section 402A(e)(1) of the Code or a Roth IRA described in section 408A of the Code. (b) Eligible Rollover Distribution. For purposes of Section 7.1(a), an eligible rollover distribution means any distribution of all or any portion of a Participant’s benefit under another eligible retirement plan, except that an eligible rollover distribution does not include (1) any installment payment for a period of 10 years or more, (2) any distribution made as a result of an unforeseeable emergency or other distribution which is made upon hardship of the employee, or (3) for any other distribution, the portion, if any, of the distribution that is a required minimum distribution under section 401(a)(9) of the Code. In addition, an eligible retirement plan means an individual retirement account described in section 408(a) of the Code, an individual retirement annuity described in section 408(b) of the Code, a qualified trust described in section 401(a) of the Code, an annuity plan described in section 403(a) or 403(b) of the Code, or an eligible governmental plan described in section 457(b) of the Code, that accepts the eligible rollover distribution. (c) Separate Accounts. The Vendor shall establish and maintain for the Participant a separate account for any eligible rollover distribution paid to the Plan. 7.2 Plan-to-Plan Transfers to the Plan. (a) At the direction of the Plan Sponsor, for a class of Employees who are participants or beneficiaries in another plan under section 403(b) of the Code, the Administrator may permit a transfer of assets to the Plan as provided in this Section 7.2. Such a transfer is permitted only if the other plan provides for the direct transfer of each person’s entire interest therein to the Plan and the Participant is an employee or former employee of the Employer. The Administrator and any Vendor accepting such transferred amounts may require that the transfer be in cash or other property acceptable to it. The Administrator or any Vendor accepting such transferred amounts may require such documentation from the other plan as it deems necessary to effectuate the transfer in accordance with § 1.403(b)-10(b)(3) of the Income Tax Regulations and to confirm that the other plan is a plan that satisfies section 403(b) of the Code. (b) The amount so transferred shall be credited to the Participant’s Account Balance, so that the Participant or Beneficiary whose assets are being transferred has an accumulated benefit immediately after the transfer at least equal to the accumulated benefit with respect to that Participant or Beneficiary immediately before the transfer. (c) To the extent provided in the Individual Agreements holding such transferred amounts, the amount transferred shall be held, accounted for, administered and otherwise treated in the same manner as an Elective Deferral by the Participant under the Plan, except that (1) the Individual Agreement which holds any amount transferred to the Plan must provide that, to the extent any amount transferred is subject to any distribution restrictions required under section 403(b) of the Code, the Individual Agreement must impose restrictions on distributions to the Participant or Beneficiary whose assets are being transferred that are not less stringent than those imposed on the transferor plan and (2) the transferred amount shall not be considered an Elective Deferral under the Plan in determining the maximum deferral under Section 3.

14-12

10

7.3 Plan-to-Plan Transfers from the Plan. (a) At the direction of the Plan Sponsor, and to the extent permitted by the Individual Agreements, the Administrator may permit a class of Participants and Beneficiaries to elect to have all or any portion of their Account Balance transferred to another plan that satisfies section 403(b) of the Code in accordance with §1.403(b)-10(b)(3) of the Income Tax Regulations. A transfer is permitted under this Section 7.3(a) only if the Participants or Beneficiaries are employees or former employees of the employer (or the business of the employer) under the receiving plan and the other plan provides for the acceptance of plan-to-plan transfers with respect to the Participants and Beneficiaries and for each Participant and Beneficiary to have an amount deferred under the other plan immediately after the transfer at least equal to the amount transferred. (b) The other plan must provide that, to the extent any amount transferred is subject to any distribution restrictions required under section 403(b) of the Code, the other plan shall impose restrictions on distributions to the Participant or Beneficiary whose assets are transferred that are not less stringent than those imposed under the Plan. In addition, if the transfer does not constitute a complete transfer of the Participant’s or Beneficiary’s interest in the Plan, the other plan shall treat the amount transferred as a continuation of a pro rata portion of the Participant’s or Beneficiary’s interest in the transferor plan. (c) Upon the transfer of assets under this Section 7.3, the Plan’s liability to pay benefits to the Participant or Beneficiary under this Plan shall be discharged to the extent of the amount so transferred for the Participant or Beneficiary. The Administrator may require such documentation from the receiving plan as it deems appropriate or necessary to comply with this Section 7.3 (for example, to confirm that the receiving plan satisfies section 403(b) of the Code and to assure that the transfer is permitted under the receiving plan) or to effectuate the transfer pursuant to § 1.403(b)-10(b)(3) of the Income Tax Regulations. 7.4 Contract and Custodial Account Exchanges. (a) A Participant or Beneficiary is permitted to change the investment of his or her Account Balance among the Vendors under the Plan, subject to the terms of the Individual Agreements. However, an investment change that includes an investment with a Vendor that is not eligible to receive contributions under the Plan (referred to below as an exchange) is not permitted unless the conditions in paragraphs (b) through (d) of this Section 7.4 are satisfied. (b) The Participant or Beneficiary must have an Account Balance immediately after the exchange that is at least equal to the Account Balance of that Participant or Beneficiary immediately before the exchange (taking into account the Account Balance of that Participant or Beneficiary under both section 403(b) contracts or custodial accounts immediately before the exchange). (c) The Individual Agreement with the receiving Vendor has distribution restrictions with respect to the Participant that are not less stringent than those imposed on the investment being exchanged. (d) The Plan Sponsor enters into an agreement with the receiving Vendor for the other contract or custodial account under which the Plan Sponsor and the Vendor will from time to time in the future provide each other with the following information: (1) Information necessary for the resulting contract or custodial account, or any other contract or custodial accounts to which contributions have been made by the Employer, to satisfy section 403(b) of the Code, including the following: (i) the Plan Sponsor providing information as to whether the Participant’s employment with the Employer is continuing, and notifying the Vendor when the Participant has had a Severance from Employment (for purposes of the distribution restrictions in Section 6.1); (ii) the Vendor notifying the Plan Sponsor of any hardship withdrawal under Section 6.5 if the withdrawal

14-13

11

results in a 6-month suspension of the Participant’s right to make Elective Deferrals under the Plan; and (iii) the Vendor providing information to the Plan Sponsor or other Vendors concerning the Participant’s or Beneficiary’s section 403(b) contracts or custodial accounts or qualified employer plan benefits (to enable a Vendor to determine the amount of any plan loans and any rollover accounts that are available to the Participant under the Plan in order to satisfy the financial need under the hardship withdrawal rules of Section 6.5); and (2) Information necessary in order for the resulting contract or custodial account and any other contract or custodial account to which contributions have been made for the Participant by an Eligible Employer to satisfy other tax requirements, including the following: (i) the amount of any plan loan that is outstanding to the Participant in order for a Vendor to determine whether an additional plan loan satisfies the loan limitations of Section 4.3, so that any such additional loan is not a deemed distribution under section 72(p)(1); and (ii) information concerning the Participant’s or Beneficiary’s after-tax employee contributions in order for a Vendor to determine the extent to which a distribution is includible in gross income. (e) If any Vendor ceases to be eligible to receive Elective Deferrals under the Plan, the Plan Sponsor will enter into an information sharing agreement as described in Section 7.4(d) to the extent the Plan Sponsor’s contract with the Vendor does not provide for the exchange of information described in Section 6.4(d)(1) and (2). 7.5 Permissive Service Credit Transfers. (a) If a Participant is also a participant in a tax-qualified defined benefit governmental plan (as defined in section 414(d) of the Code) that provides for the acceptance of plan-to-plan transfers with respect to the Participant, then the Participant may elect to have any portion of the Participant’s Account Balance transferred to the defined benefit governmental plan. A transfer under this Section 7.5(a) may be made before the Participant has had a Severance from Employment. (b) A transfer may be made under Section 7.5(a) only if the transfer is either for the purchase of permissive service credit (as defined in section 415(n)(3)(A) of the Code) under the receiving defined benefit governmental plan or a repayment to which section 415 of the Code does not apply by reason of section 415(k)(3) of the Code. (c) In addition, if a plan-to-plan transfer does not constitute a complete transfer of the Participant’s or Beneficiary’s interest in the transferor plan, the Plan shall treat the amount transferred as a continuation of a pro rata portion of the Participant’s or Beneficiary’s interest in the transferor plan (e.g., a pro rata portion of the Participant’s or Beneficiary’s interest in any after-tax employee contributions).

ARTICLE VIII - INVESTMENT OF CONTRIBUTIONS

8.1 Manner of Investment. All Elective Deferrals or other amounts contributed to the Plan, all property and rights purchased with such amounts under the Funding Vehicles, and all income attributable to such amounts, property, or rights shall be held and invested in one or more Annuity Contracts or Custodial Accounts. Each Custodial Account shall provide for it to be impossible, prior to the satisfaction of all liabilities with respect to Participants and their Beneficiaries, for any part of the assets and income of the Custodial Account to be used for, or diverted to, purposes other than for the exclusive benefit of Participants and their Beneficiaries.

14-14

12

8.2 Investment of Contributions; Fee Disclosures. Each Participant or Beneficiary shall direct the investment of his or her Account among the investment options available under the Annuity Contract or Custodial Account in accordance with the terms of the Individual Agreements. Transfers among Annuity Contracts and Custodial Accounts may be made to the extent provided in the Individual Agreements and permitted under applicable Income Tax Regulations. In accordance with the terms of any Individual Agreement and the terms of any services, administrative or recordkeeping agreement or agreements entered into between a Fund Sponsor and Administrator, as the same may be amended from time to time, a Fund Sponsor shall disclose in writing to each Participant prior to the selection of investment options under a Funding Vehicle offered under the Plan by the Fund Sponsor and periodically at such other time or times as may be agreed upon between the Fund Sponsor and Administrator in any services, administrative or recordkeeping agreement or agreements, all investment fees, costs and expenses, including without limitation, any surrender charges, applicable to the investment options under such Funding Vehicle. 8.3 Current and Former Vendors. The Administrator shall maintain a list of all Vendors under the Plan. Such list is hereby incorporated as part of the Plan. Each Vendor and the Administrator shall exchange such information as may be necessary to satisfy section 403(b) of the Code or other requirements of applicable law. In the case of a Vendor which is not eligible to receive Elective Deferrals under the Plan (including a Vendor which has ceased to be a Vendor eligible to receive Elective Deferrals under the Plan and a Vendor holding assets under the Plan in accordance with Section 7.2 or 7.4), the Employer shall keep the Vendor informed of the name and contact information of the Administrator in order to coordinate information necessary to satisfy section 403(b) of the Code or other requirements of applicable law. 8.4 Participant Education. In accordance with the terms of any Individual Agreement and the terms of any service, administration or recordkeeping agreement or agreements between the Fund Sponsor and the Administrator, as the same may be amended from time to time, each Fund Sponsor shall make available to Participants investment education at no cost..

ARTICLE IX – ADMINISTRATION

9.1 Plan Administrator. The Plan will be administered by the Administrator. The Administrator will have full power to administer the Plan in all of its details. The Administrator shall have the authority to control and manage the operation and administration of the Plan.

9.2 Authority of the Administrator. The Administrator has all the powers and authority expressly conferred upon it herein and further shall have discretionary and final authority to determine all questions concerning eligibility and contributions under the Plan, to interpret and construe all terms of the Plan, including any uncertain terms, and to determine any disputes arising under and all questions concerning administration of the Plan. Any determination made by the Administrator shall be given deference, if it is subject to judicial review, and shall be overturned only if it is arbitrary or capricious. In exercising these powers and authority, the Administrator will always exercise good faith, apply standards of uniform application, and refrain from arbitrary action. The Administrator may employ attorneys, agents, and accountants as it finds necessary or advisable to assist it in carrying out its duties. The Administrator, by

14-15

13

action of its Board, may designate a person or persons other than the Administrator to carry out any of its powers, authority, or responsibilities. Any delegation will be set forth in writing.

9.3 Action of the Administrator. Any act authorized, permitted, or required to be taken by the Administrator under the Plan, which has not been delegated in accordance with Section 9.2 above, may be taken by a majority of the members of the Commission and a majority of the members of the Council, either by vote at a meeting, or in writing without a meeting. All notices, advice, directions, certifications, approvals, and instructions required or authorized to be given by the Administrator under the Plan will be in writing and signed by either (i) a majority of the members of the Commission, or by any member or members as may be designated by an instrument in writing, signed by all members, as having authority to execute the documents on its behalf, or (ii) a person who becomes authorized to act for the Administrator in accordance with the provisions of Section 9.2 above. Any action taken by the Administrator that is authorized, permitted, or required under the Plan and is in accordance with Funding Vehicles contractual obligations are final and binding upon the Administrator, and all persons who have or who claim an interest under the Plan, and all third parties dealing with the Administrator.

9.4 Indemnification. The Commission and Council will satisfy any liability actually and reasonably incurred by any members of the Commission and Council, respectively, and the Commission and Council will jointly satisfy any liability actually and reasonably incurred by any person to whom any power, authority or responsibility of the Administrator is delegated pursuant to Section 9.2 above (other than the Fund Sponsors). These liabilities include expenses, attorney’s fees, judgments, fines, and amounts paid in connection with any threatened, pending or completed action, suit or proceeding related to the exercise (or failure to exercise) of this authority. This is in addition to whatever rights of indemnification exist under the regulations or by-laws of the Commission and Council, under any provision of law, or under any other agreement.

ARTICLE X – AMENDMENT AND TERMINATION

10.1 Termination of Contributions. The Plan Sponsor has adopted the Plan with the intention and expectation that elective deferral contributions will be continued indefinitely. However, the Plan Sponsor has no obligation or liability whatsoever to maintain the Plan for any length of time and may discontinue such contributions under the Plan at any time without any liability hereunder for any such discontinuance. 10.2 Amendment and Termination. The Plan Sponsor reserves the authority to amend or terminate this Plan at any time. 10.3 Distribution upon Termination of the Plan. The Plan Sponsor may provide that, in connection with a termination of the Plan and subject to any restrictions contained in the Individual Agreements, all Accounts will be distributed, provided that the Employer and any Related Employer on the date of termination do not make contributions to an alternative section 403(b) contract that is not part of the Plan during the period beginning on the date of plan termination and ending 12 months after the distribution of all assets from the Plan, except as permitted by the Income Tax Regulations.

14-16

14

ARTICLE XI - MISCELLANEOUS 11.1 Non-Assignability. Except as provided in Section 11.2 and 11.3, the interests of each Participant or Beneficiary under the Plan are not subject to the claims of the Participant’s or Beneficiary’s creditors; and neither the Participant nor any Beneficiary shall have any right to sell, assign, transfer, or otherwise convey the right to receive any payments hereunder or any interest under the Plan, which payments and interest are expressly declared to be non-assignable and non-transferable. 11.2 Domestic Relation Orders. Notwithstanding Section 11.1, if a judgment, decree or order (including approval of a property settlement agreement) that relates to the provision of child support, alimony payments, or the marital property rights of a spouse or former spouse, child, or other dependent of a Participant is made pursuant to the domestic relations law of any State (“domestic relations order”), then the amount of the Participant’s Account Balance shall be paid in the manner and to the person or persons so directed in the domestic relations order and to the extent consistent with the rules of the Fund Sponsor. Such payment shall be made without regard to whether the Participant is eligible for a distribution of benefits under the Plan. The Administrator shall establish reasonable procedures for determining the status of any such decree or order and for effectuating distribution pursuant to the domestic relations order. 11.3 IRS Levy. Notwithstanding Section 11.1, the Administrator may pay from a Participant’s or Beneficiary’s Account Balance the amount that the Administrator finds is lawfully demanded under a levy issued by the Internal Revenue Service with respect to that Participant or Beneficiary or is sought to be collected by the United States Government under a judgment resulting from an unpaid tax assessment against the Participant or Beneficiary in accordance with the procedures of the Fund Sponsor. 11.4 Tax Withholding. Contributions to the Plan are subject to applicable employment taxes (including, if applicable, Federal Insurance Contributions Act (FICA) taxes with respect to Elective Deferrals, which constitute wages under section 3121 of the Code). Any benefit payment made under the Plan is subject to applicable income tax withholding requirements (including section 3401 of the Code and the Employment Tax Regulations thereunder). A payee shall provide such information as the Administrator may need to satisfy income tax withholding obligations, and any other information that may be required by guidance issued under the Code. 11.5 Payments to Minors and Incompetents. If a Participant or Beneficiary entitled to receive any benefits hereunder is a minor or is adjudged to be legally incapable of giving valid receipt and discharge for such benefits, or is deemed so by the Administrator, benefits will be paid to such person as the Administrator may designate for the benefit of such Participant or Beneficiary in accordance with the procedures of the Fund Sponsor. Such payments shall be considered a payment to such Participant or Beneficiary and shall, to the extent made, be deemed a complete discharge of any liability for such payments under the Plan. 11.6 Mistaken Contributions. If any contribution (or any portion of a contribution) is made to the Plan by a good faith mistake of fact, then within one year after the payment of the contribution, and upon receipt in good order of a proper request approved by the Administrator,

14-17

15

the amount of the mistaken contribution (adjusted for any income or loss in value, if any, allocable thereto) shall be returned directly to the Participant or, to the extent required or permitted by the Administrator, to the Employer. 11.7 Procedure When Distributee Cannot Be Located. The Administrator shall make all reasonable attempts to determine the identity and address of a Participant or a Participant’s Beneficiary entitled to benefits under the Plan. For this purpose, a reasonable attempt means (a) the mailing by certified mail of a notice to the last known address shown on the Employer’s or the Administrator’s records, (b) notification sent to the Social Security Administration or the Pension Benefit Guaranty Corporation (under their program to identify payees under retirement plans), and (c) the payee has not responded within 6 months. If the Administrator is unable to locate such a person entitled to benefits hereunder, or if there has been no claim made for such benefits, the Funding Vehicle shall pay such benefits to the Participant’s estate unless the Individual Agreement or the procedures of the Fund Sponsor provide otherwise. 11.8 Incorporation of Individual Agreements. The Plan, together with the Individual Agreements, is intended to satisfy the requirements of section 403(b) of the Code and the Income Tax Regulations thereunder. Terms and conditions of the Individual Agreements are hereby incorporated by reference into the Plan, excluding those terms that are inconsistent with the Plan or section 403(b) of the Code. 11.9 Governing Law. The Plan will be construed, administered and enforced according to the Code and the laws of the State of West Virginia. 11.10 Headings. Headings of the Plan have been inserted for convenience of reference only and are to be ignored in any construction of the provisions hereof. 11.11 Gender. Pronouns used in the Plan in the masculine or feminine gender include both genders unless the context clearly indicates otherwise.

11.12 Plan Non-Contractual. Nothing in this Plan will be construed as a commitment or agreement on the part of any person to continue his or her employment with the Employer or any Related Employer, and nothing in this Plan will be construed as a commitment on the part of the Employer to continue the employment or the rate of compensation of any person for any period, and all employees of the Employer will remain subject to discharge to the same extent as if the Plan had never been put into effect.

11.13 Claims of Other Persons. The provisions of the Plan will not be construed as giving any Participant or any other person, firm, or corporation, any legal or equitable right against the Employer, any Related Employer, the Commission, the Council, any of their officers, employees, or trustees, except the rights as specifically provided for in this Plan or created in accordance with the terms and provisions of this Plan.

11.14 Contracts - Incorporation by Reference. The terms of each Funding Vehicle issued to a Participant are a part of this Plan as if fully set forth in this written plan document and the provisions of each are incorporated by reference into the Plan. The terms of the Funding Vehicle

14-18

16

control in any case where there is any inconsistency or ambiguity between the terms of the Plan and the terms of the Funding Vehicle.

14-19

17

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Commission and Council have executed this Plan on January __, 2008, effective February 1, 2009.

WEST VIRGINIA COUNCIL FOR COMMUNITY AND TECHNICAL COLLEGE EDUCATION

By: ________________________________

Title: _______________________________

WEST VIRGINIA HIGHER EDUCATION POLICY COMMISSION By:_________________________________ Title:_______________________________

2384239.1 14-20

West Virginia Higher Education Policy Commission Meeting of January 23, 2009 ITEM: Approval of West Virginia Higher

Education Grant Program Distribution Plan for Fiscal Year 2010

INSTITUTIONS: All RECOMMENDED RESOLUTION: Resolved, That the West Virginia Higher

Education Policy Commission approves the proposed West Virginia Higher Education Grant Program Distribution Plan for Fiscal Year 2010.

STAFF MEMBERS: Dennis Taylor and Jack Toney BACKGROUND: The West Virginia Higher Education Grant Program, the state’s long-standing need-based financial aid program, provides opportunities for full-time students with demonstrated financial need to attend postsecondary education at qualified institutions. Although aimed at promoting access to higher education for all students, the Higher Education Grant has historically provided disproportionate funding to traditional students and those students who have already completed one or more years of postsecondary education. As such, the Higher Education Grant has been more effective at reducing debt of needy students than it has been at meeting the goal of promoting college access. To address these issues, the Higher Education Policy Commission (Commission) has proposed an amended Higher Education Grant Program legislative rule that would, among other things, remove the requirement for the filing of a secondary application in addition to the Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA); strike the March 1 priority date for applications, which has operated more as a deadline than a priority date in practice; and eliminate a complex formula that considers both grades and ACT and SAT scores to determine eligibility. In exchange for providing increased flexibility in determining how to make Higher Education Grant awards, the proposed rule calls for the Commission and Council for Community and Technical College Education to “establish criteria to be used in award selection each year based on the amount of funding expected to be available to use for awards.” Section 7.3.1. The following provides an overview of the proposed distribution plan for the 2009-2010 academic year.

15-1

Revenue Staff expects to have approximately $37.7 million in new revenue available for awards in Fiscal Year (FY) 2009. The funding breakdown is as follows:

• State Appropriation – $35,353,200. The Legislature appropriates funds annually directly to the Higher Education Grant Program. In FY 2009, the Legislature appropriated $34,660,000. This amount presumptively increases two percent annually, bringing the projected state appropriation for FY 2010 to $35,353,200. See W. Va. Code § 18C-5-3(c).

• Higher Education Resource Assessment (HERA) – $1,800,000. The Legislature

requires the Commission and Council to allocate a portion of its Higher Education Resource Assessment for financially needy students. See W. Va. Code § 18B-10-2(d). Historically, the Commission and Council have allocated $1,800,000 annually to the Higher Education Grant Program to satisfy that requirement. Because the HERA applies only to students attending public institutions of higher education, it will be used exclusive for traditional prospective students and renewal students at those institutions.

• Federal Funding – $500,000. The federal government provides additional

funding for need-based financial aid through the Leveraging Educational Assistance Partnership (LEAP) and Special Leveraging Educational Assistance Partnership (SLEAP) grants. Staff estimates that West Virginia will receive approximately $500,000 from LEAP and SLEAP during Fiscal Year 2010.

Projected FY 2010 Higher Education Grant Program Funding Summary State Appropriation $35,353,200Higher Education Resource Assessment $1,800,000Leveraging Educational Assistance Partnership Grant $218,369Special Leveraging Educational Assistance Partnership Grant $280,892Total: $37,652,461

Expenditures

Award Amounts The proposed Higher Education Grant Program rule allows the Commission to link awards to expected family contribution (EFC), instead of institution tuition and fees, which historically have served as the basis of awards. Staff proposes that block awards be provided for students who also qualify for the federal Pell Grant (currently students with an EFC of less than $4,041). This proposal complements the existing Pell Grant structure which utilizes a sliding scale of awards based on need for such students. For students with EFCs in excess of $4,041, staff proposes to tier awards based upon their level of financial need.

15-2

The following chart, which may need to be modified slightly to reflect any changes in Pell Grant eligibility standards for the 2009-2010 academic year, outlines the proposed award structure:

Expected Family Contribution Maximum Award $0 - $4,041 $3,300

$4,042 - $4,500 $3,000 $4,501 - $5,000 $2,500 $5,001 - $5,500 $2,000

All Other Awarded Students $1,500 Priority Application Dates Historically, West Virginia has had one of the earliest priority application dates (March 1st) among states with broad need-based financial aid programs. This early application date was viewed as a barrier to program access, especially for non-traditional students. Traditional Prospective Students and Renewal Students. The Free Application for Federal Student Aid (FAFSA) can be completed beginning on January 1 preceding the award year. Although families are permitted and encouraged to submit the FAFSA as soon as possible after January 1, many are hesitant to estimate required data elements until wage statements or other income verification is available. Therefore, staff proposes to extend the priority application date to April 15 for all applicants to promote greater program access. Non-Traditional Students. The traditional reliance upon a March 1st application deadline has negatively impacted the participation rate of non-traditional students, who are unaware of this deadline (which is separate and distinct from federal requirements). Staff believes that this is one of the reasons (but not the only reason) West Virginia has one of the lowest college participation rates in the nation among adults 25 years of age or older. To provide greater programmatic access and to increase adult college participation rates, staff proposes an extended priority application date of July 1, 2009 for (1) prospective first-time students 25 years of age or older and (2) students who have earned undergraduate college credits, but have not been enrolled in a Higher Education Grant-approved institution for two years preceding the fall semester of the 2009-10 academic year, regardless of age. Staff proposes to set aside 10 percent of the base state allocation for these applicants not assisted in the general awarding process. Awards would be based first on need and then on application date, if need were the same. Staff will provide background data and estimates of the number of students eligible for, and expected to be served, by the Higher Education Grant under this proposal at the meeting.

15-3