Higher Education Enrollment and Graduation Rate: Initial Thoughts

One of my research interests is higher education enrollment. What I mean by this is how many students are enrolled at the many different types of higher education institutions in the United States . This interest stems from my job where the vast majority of students who attend the university I work and teach at are students with many risk factors that contribute to the difficult task of completing a traditional 120 credit undergraduate degree within four to six years. I also taught at community colleges in Arizona where the student demographic has a similar student profile.

Institutions who educate at-risk students are often harshly criticized in the higher education community for poor graduation rates while other institutions are lauded for high graduation rates. Articles at The Chronicle and Inside Higher Education seem to reflect an inherent bias towards associates education and focuses on higher performing undergraduate and graduate institutions, faculty, and students. In this article I will merely present data about higher education enrollments as I work on where to take my initial thoughts and observations.  

Higher Education Enrollment Data:

Using the IPEDS Data Center I downloaded data for all higher education institutions in North America for the academic year 2013 (the most recent available). There are dozens and dozens of reports you can create using IPEDS and for this initial investigation I downloaded: total enrollment, undergraduate enrollment, graduate enrollment, 4, 5, and 6-year undergraduate graduation rate, and the 2010 Basic Carnegie Classification for all institutions.

There are a lot of higher education institutions in the United States. There are 7,764 institutions with a total enrollment of 22,180,669; 18,233,606 undergraduate and 2,947,063 graduate students.

First observation: 86% of the learning occurring at higher education institutions is undergraduate education.

Chart 1 uses the Carnegie 2010 Basic classifications; I divided the higher education landscape into four simple categories; institutions that focus on four-year undergraduate and graduate education; institutions that primarily focuses on associates education; other or specialized institutions; and not applicable (using the exact Carnegie classification).

Chart 1: Number of Institutions and Enrollments

Second observation: The majority of undergraduate education occurs at schools that focus on four-year baccalaureate degrees or schools that also have graduate education (51.03%) but not far behind are schools that almost exclusively focus on associates or undergraduate education (42.15%).

Ivy and Ivy Equivalents:

The Ivy League and Ivy League equivalents get a lot of press. This is understandable because of the prestige, the notoriety, and the sheer wealth of these institutions. When I read higher education articles it seems that these institutions set the bar when it comes to higher education which in my opinion, is not right, is not feasible, and not realistic.

I went through the 7,764 institutions and categorized schools as part of the Ivy League, Ivy EQ (equivalent and private), Ivy EQ State (equivalent state schools), or Baby Ivy (primarily undergraduate). Chart 2 shows the 80 schools I, and others would consider to be part of the top tier of higher education institutions in the United States and their undergraduate and graduate enrollment.

Chart 2: Enrollments at Ivy and Ivy Equivalents

Third observation: Higher education press focus way too much attention on the 1% of the institutions that educate 3.83% of all undergraduates. It doubly focuses way too much time and energy on the Ivy League; those 8 institutions educate 0.36% of all undergraduates.

Graduation Rates:

Graduation rates are important but the problem with graduation rates is the limited manner in which it is measured. The government provides an excellent definition of the very specific metric it uses to measure 4, 5, and 6-year graduation rates.

When looking at the graduation rates for higher education it is nearly impossible to observe graduation rates for over half of the institutions. The institutions that are Carnegie classified as Associate's primarily focus is on associates level education and do not directly contribute to the 4, 5, or 6-year graduation metric. That means that we cannot use Graduation Rates to define the effectiveness of 1,826 institutions that teaches 42% of all undergraduates (there are other ways but Graduation Rate is always in the press).

This leaves the other half of higher education with mostly useable data about graduation rates. Chart 3 contains the Carnegie classified Baccalaureate, Masters, Doctoral, and Research institutions and their average Graduation Rate, mean Graduation Rate, and High(est) Graduation Rate for 4, 5, and 6-years. I did not put the lowest Graduation Rate because it was always in the single digit or teens. I also included the row, 'Ivy and Ivy EQ' as a comparison.

Chart 3: 4, 5, & 6-Year Graduation Rates

Fourth observation: Most higher education institutions struggle with graduation rates, the average 4-year Graduation Rate is 35.24% for the observed schools, and too much attention is given to the highest performing schools.

Chart 4 shows how the Graduation Rates for the for Carnegie classified Baccalaureate, Masters, Doctoral, and Research institutions are distributed. I divided the 100 point scale evenly with the number of institutions per row and the percentage of the total per 4, 5, & 6-year Graduate Rate. Some institutions did not provide Graduation Rates and some data was missing from IPEDS (Blanks).

Chart 4: Distribution of Graduation Rates

Fifth observation: The 6-year graduation rate is more applicable to today's college student.

Finally I graphed the Graduation Rate distribution but did not include the blanks. Graph 1 shows the Graduation Rate distribution for Carnegie classified Baccalaureate, Masters, Doctoral, and Research institutions (does not include Blanks).

Graph 1: Graduation Rate Distribution

Sixth observation: The six-year Graduation Rate is more akin to a bell curve than the 4 or 5-year Graduation Rate.

Conclusions:

My findings from this article is that the higher education community should: 1) use the 6-year Graduation Rate as a more realistic metric for institutions; 2) institutions with 'poor' Graduation Rates should get most of the attention to help improve their Graduation Rates; and 3) stop talking about the Ivy League and Ivy League equivalents, they are fine.

Besides those three broad statements I do not have any solid conclusions yet. Since this is my first foray into higher education enrollments in the United States I am curious to see where my research will go from here and how my observations and conclusions will change over time.