New Jersey’s Long-Range Plan for Higher Education A BLUEPRINT FOR EXCELLENCE - UPDATE 2005 Introduction One of the Commission on Higher Education’s primary statutory responsibilities is statewide planning for higher education, including the development of a master plan for higher education in New Jersey that is regularly revised and updated. In November 2003, the Commission adopted New Jersey’s Long-Range Plan for Higher Education: A Blueprint for Excellence. This dynamic plan, which was developed with the assistance of over 500 stakeholders, will be reviewed regularly and revised as needed based on progress and changes in circumstances. Annual updates of the Blueprint will (1) monitor progress in achieving the plan’s seven principal objectives and key outcome measures, (2) inform future state investments linked to the objectives, and (3) develop new components to enhance progress toward achieving the overall vision. A Plan to Ensure New Jersey’s Competitiveness and Well-Being New Jersey’s public and private colleges and universities have a high degree of autonomy. They are encouraged to pursue distinct institutional missions to meet the varied needs of the state and its diverse population. At the same time, a central voice and plan for higher education are essential to balancing institutional missions, visions, and ambitions with the state’s interests and evolving needs. This long-range plan for higher education is critically important to the state, because it provides the coordinating blueprint to bring institutions and state and private sector leaders together to ensure New Jersey’s future economic prosperity. The state’s employment growth rate has started to fall behind the nation’s, including in key technology-based sectors of the economy. Concerted efforts must be made to enhance the state’s economic trajectory. As a critical aspect of New Jersey’s infrastructure and economic prosperity, higher education will play a major role in revitalizing the economy and maintaining the state’s status as a regional and national economic leader. That revitalization will require a sustained public policy effort focused on education, technology, and industry in the state, as America and the world transform the way business is done. New Jersey will continue to benefit from market location. But the rapidly changing knowledge economy brings a new landscape, intensifying competition and the need for workers with increasingly sophisticated skills. The future of New Jersey’s economy is tied to workforce quality, employment opportunities in knowledge-based industries, and complex research and technology. Higher education is challenged to deliver enhanced research and prepare people of all backgrounds to contribute to society. But it will require increased state support for faculty and facilities, efficient and strategic use of resources, enhanced coordination and collaboration, and targeted initiatives. It requires a deliberate plan – a blueprint – that has the commitment of state and business leaders, the higher education community, and the citizens. Update 2005 This 2005 update of A Blueprint for Excellence provides refined key outcome measures; initial recommendations regarding the enhancement of public research universities (Objective VII); status reports on the other six principal objectives, including some new and revised components; and baseline data to assess progress in achieving goals over time. Where data are readily available, institutional or sector comparison groups of similar institutions are used to provide an external context. Using the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS) and other sources, the Commission will track outcome data annually on seven institution-specific components that are directly related to key state goals of enhancing student access, improving student outcomes, and increasing external funding. The baseline data for those components are in Appendix A, along with peer group comparisons where data are available. Moreover, while each institution will work to achieve all aspects of the plan, individual institutions have internally identified several specific components on which they will focus primary efforts; a summary of initial increases over baseline data is provided under the relevant objectives. In reviewing progress made since the plan was adopted in late 2003, it is important to recognize that changes in student outcomes and external funding are best assessed by examining trend data over several years. Also, as noted in the plan, external circumstances and funding levels will influence significantly the degree to which some institutional goals can be met. In addition to the outcome data in Appendix A, Appendix B provides supporting data for various recommendations in the plan. And Appendix C presents a general system overview, with data on student enrollments, faculty, degrees conferred, and the fiscal 2006 state higher education budget. The long-range plan assessment process will continue to evolve as circumstances warrant. Ultimately, the assessment of statewide progress on all of the key outcome measures and individual components in A Blueprint for Excellence will help to guide future higher education planning, policy development, and initiatives. Overview Higher education has become increasingly important to the success and the quality of life of individuals, states, and the nation. New Jersey’s economic competitiveness and prosperity are directly related to the quality and capacity of its colleges and universities, which develop human potential and discover and apply knowledge through teaching, research, and service. It is essential that New Jersey harness the intellectual power of higher education to propel the economy forward and serve the needs of the state and its citizens. A Blueprint for Excellence includes seven principal state objectives, along with action components and outcome measures, to achieve the following vision for the state:
To realize this vision, the Blueprint proposes an unprecedented new compact between the state and higher education, calling for a significant investment by the state and a measurable return on that investment by the institutions. The additional state investment in higher education is necessary to do the following:
Colleges and universities in New Jersey need increased and predictable operating support and a major infusion of capital funds to help meet growing expectations. Consistent with the proposed compact, state and institutional leaders began working on two task forces in the summer of 2005 to develop sound state policy and methodologies to address these two fundamental institutional needs and guide state investments. The Blueprint’s recommendations are divided in four categories: Quality, Capacity, Resources, and Collaboration. Within those four areas, seven principal state objectives were identified to realize the vision. PRINCIPAL STATE OBJECTIVESThe Foundation of the State Plan for Higher EducationI. Achieve and sustain higher levels of excellence in teaching and learning, research, and public service in all sectors, valuing differences in institutional missions and using resources effectively and efficiently. II. Support targeted, multifaceted increases in capacity and specific state and campus programs to (1) prepare a growing and increasingly diverse population for responsible citizenship in a democratic society and (2) attract more New Jersey students to New Jersey institutions and prepare them for high-demand occupations. III. Support financial aid programs that enable New Jersey students from all backgrounds to afford higher education of high quality. IV. Establish and implement funding policies and methodologies that provide sufficient and reasonably predictable state operating support and ongoing state capital investments for the public research universities, state colleges and universities, community colleges, and independent institutions to provide the fundamental infrastructure necessary to achieve the state’s vision for higher education. V. Encourage and enhance coordination and collaboration between and among all educational institutions in the state, including P-12 schools and associate and baccalaureate degree-granting institutions, to facilitate transition from each educational level to the next, to develop mutually beneficial partnerships, and to improve the quality of teaching and learning at all levels. VI. Encourage and expedite systemic, innovative, and institutionalized partnerships and other collaborations between higher education and other sectors of society, including business and industry, the nonprofit sector, and the public sector to help meet the state’s most pressing workforce needs and to create nationally competitive programs of research and development. VII. Enhance the public research universities to improve (1) the overall educational excellence of the universities; (2) collaboration in teaching, research, and service; and (3) the state’s competitiveness for federal and other support for research and development. Achievement of these principal state objectives through the coordinated leadership efforts of elected and appointed state officials, the Presidents’ Council, the Commission on Higher Education, boards of trustees, and other stakeholders will make the vision for higher education a reality. KEY OUTCOME MEASURES The key outcome measures have been refined and revised where necessary to reflect changing circumstances. To varying degrees, full achievement of these measures will be influenced by levels of state operating aid and capital support, student tuition and fees, and external support. Given the time necessary to achieve results, progress in the initial years may be modest on many measures.
Enrollment grew by 18,675 between 2002 and 2004, exceeding projections. (See Objective II.) An example of progress is the August 2005 $20.9 million federal GEAR UP grant to expand collaboration and enhance access. In addition renewed efforts are underway to improve transfer and articulation. (See Objective V.) Efforts through the American Diploma Project and other initiatives are underway. (See Objective V.) Baseline data have been established, and initial progress is summarized in Objective I. Baseline data are available in Objective I and Appendix A. Baseline data are available in Objective I and Appendix A. While specific areas of need are still being identified, growth in the number of degrees in some high-demand areas has occurred since 2003. (See Objective VI.) An initial employer satisfaction survey was completed, and focus groups are planned to gather additional information. (See Objective VI.) New Jersey continues to be 21st in the national ranking, but the institutions increased their federal research funding by 14 percent in 2003, one percent more than the increase in total federal dollars available; they increased funding in 2004 by 16 percent. (See Objective I.) A compilation of most valuable higher education assets was completed in 2004; updates will help to assess increased recognition and achievements, as well as national rankings and ratings. (See Objective I.) State support has increased for the state’s two major financial aid programs, and two new programs have been established. (See Objective III.) Initial operating support goals have not been met. A task force of key state and institutional leaders is working to develop a funding policy/methodology for public research universities and state colleges and universities. (See Objective IV.) Additional capital funding has not yet been provided. A task force of key state and institutional leaders is working to develop a long-term state policy for support for capital needs. (See Objective IV.) Baseline data are available in Objective IV and Appendix A. Two-year rolling averages show external funding revenue increases at several institutions. OBJECTIVE I - Achieve and sustain higher levels of excellence in teaching and learning, research, and public service in all sectors, valuing differences in institutional missions and using resources effectively and efficiently. RATIONALE The quality of teaching and learning, research, and service at the colleges and universities in a state has an enormous impact on the overall competitiveness of the state and its economic strength and societal well-being. Increased excellence of programs and outcomes at New Jersey’s rich array of higher education institutions will benefit New Jersey’s students; attract additional talented faculty members; better prepare individuals for the future; improve workforce development; draw business and industry to New Jersey and retain them in the state; and enhance research that is essential to educational, social, technological, and economic progress and innovation. The development and maintenance of an excellent system of higher education call for deliberate planning, adequate and predictable state funding, and institutional accountability. Achieving excellence will require institutions to focus on enhancing existing programs and improving student outcomes consistent with their clearly focused and differentiated missions. And recognizing that state and other resources are limited, increased program development should occur only within a well-articulated statewide planning context consistent with what the market and funding sources can sustain. These basic components, along with the specific strategies described below, are necessary to move New Jersey higher education to the upper echelon nationally. ONGOING ACTION COMPONENTS 1. Student Outcomes Assessment of student outcomes is a key step to institutional improvement and excellence. By identifying goals and expected outcomes and analyzing resultant data, institutions are in a better position to improve educational quality and effectiveness. Ultimately, improved student outcomes are essential to realizing New Jersey’s vision for higher education. Status An annual examination of student retention, graduation, and transfer rates at New Jersey colleges and universities will provide important indications of the quality, efficiency, and effectiveness of higher education. Appendix A provides baseline data, data for 2004, and where available, comparative data to provide a national context for review of these key student outcome areas in New Jersey. Graduation rate data are also disaggregated to monitor success of groups traditionally underrepresented on college campuses. Institutions or sectors have identified peer institutions that provide a national comparative context for the annual update of the Blueprint. In the case of the community colleges and the independent colleges and universities, sector peer comparisons are provided for each of the sectors as a whole, comparing aggregate outcomes for each sector with the aggregate outcomes of its respective national sector. Each of the public research universities, nine state colleges and universities, and proprietary institutions has individually identified a group of similar institutions for peer comparative purposes. In those cases, institutional peer comparisons are provided for each institution, comparing each institution’s outcomes with the average of the outcomes of its respective peers. The number of institutions in each peer group and the variability among the peer institutions differ significantly. In some cases, institutions chose to include both peer and aspirant institutions in their comparative groups, which provides a broader and more challenging comparison level. The student outcome data in this report are essentially baseline data, and it will take time for institutional initiatives to be reflected. Also, it should be noted that student retention, graduation, and transfer rates naturally fluctuate somewhat with individual student cohorts, and variations of a few percentage points from year to year are not uncommon. Improvements are best measured by longer-term trend data, which will be established in subsequent updates. Comparative Data The comparative data for retention rates show that most New Jersey institutions are very competitive with their peers nationally, often exceeding retention rates of comparable institutions. The comparisons of graduation rates with peer institutions vary significantly across timeframes and when disaggregated for groups traditionally underrepresented on college campuses. Undergraduate graduation data for the public research universities and state colleges and universities indicate that several lag behind their peers on four-year graduation rates, but most of these institutions are comparable to or exceed their peers on six-year rates. The community college and independent sectors lag behind their respective peers on this measure, although the independent sector’s six-year rate is closer to that of its peers. Proprietary institutions generally exceed their peers on graduation rates. When disaggregated for minority students, the graduation rate comparisons exhibit similar patterns. There are no peer data available for graduation rates for low-income students. Appendix A presents these rates for New Jersey institutions in 2003 and 2004, indicating a significant increase for a few institutions. The transfer rates for the community college and independent sectors remained level during 2003 and 2004. The average percent of transfer students across all senior public institutions is the same over the two-year period. The percentage of students that transferred to individual senior public institutions shows variation from 2003 to 2004, which is not uncommon, because of fluctuations in the percentage of those who are accepted and those who actually enroll. NEW All data for retention and graduation rates are for first-time full-time degree-seeking students, and community college transfer data are for first-time degree-seeking students. As a result, outcomes for a large number of students are not captured here. Consideration should be given to tracking data for other New Jersey students in future years. Institutional Goals As indicated in the Introduction, each institution was asked to identify several of seven institution-specific components of the long-range plan on which to set long-term goals and focus primary efforts. Four of those components are related to student outcomes, and most institutions are focusing efforts on at least one of those components. An aggregate summary of progress in these key student outcome areas is provided below. Again, it should be noted that student retention, graduation, and transfer rates will naturally fluctuate somewhat with individual cohorts of students. Progress toward 2010 goals is therefore best measured by longer-term trend data. Future updates will report both annual progress and ongoing progress toward goals.
The concerted effort of the institutions that are focused on minority and low-income undergraduate graduation rates is very important. Enhancing outcomes for these two groups will have a major impact on the students and the economy.
Individual institutions are also pursuing other internal goals, such as decreasing time to degree, enhancing learning outcomes, improving student and alumni satisfaction and job placement rates, and increasing rates of acceptance into graduate or professional programs. It should be noted that the 46 colleges and universities in New Jersey that are accredited by the Middle States Commission on Higher Education must also have a student learning assessment process and ensure its use.[1] 2. Enhancement of Research The quality of institutional research, particularly at research universities, is critical to the competitiveness of both the institutions and the state. Strategic efforts to enhance research and increase the amount of federal and other research dollars coming to colleges and universities in the state can significantly improve the economy and quality of life in New Jersey. Status In January 2005, the Commission on Higher Education adopted a report, Target Areas for Enhanced Research Funding and Milestones Toward an Improved National Ranking, to initiate steps to significantly enhance higher education research in New Jersey. The report was prepared in collaboration with the leadership of the research universities and with advice and consultation from other institutions. The report concludes that the state, its research universities, and other colleges and universities where appropriate to their mission have a significant challenge before them to increase New Jersey’s ranking in aggregate share of federal research dollars for higher education from 21st to 15th (by 2012), as called for in the November 2003 Blueprint for Excellence. The magnitude of this increase will require more than incremental growth of existing R&D programs at institutions. It will require a significant investment of state and private sector resources focused on a few target areas that offer the greatest potential for increased federal funding, commercial development, and enhancement of knowledge. Five target areas are identified: stem cell research, biomedically related nanoscience, homeland security, advanced imaging technology, and genomics/bioinformatics. Changing circumstances at the state and federal level may result in a change in the specific target areas or a limitation of targets over time. But the five areas identified provide a strong initial focus with potential to greatly increase the amount of federal and other research dollars for higher education and also increase New Jersey’s role as a national leader in research and economic development. In order to close the gap between New Jersey and the state currently ranked 15th, it will be necessary for New Jersey institutions to consistently, over time, increase their percentage share of the total federal research dollars available for higher education. Currently, the 15th-ranked state receives 2.10 percent of federal dollars available, while New Jersey receives 1.46 percent. Over ten years, New Jersey should seek to increase its share of available federal dollars by a full percent. In order to grow the state’s percentage share of available dollars, New Jersey should annually increase its federal research dollars at a percentage that exceeds the annual federal increase in funding available for that year. In 2003, federal dollars increased by 13 percent, and New Jersey’s increase in federal research dollars was 14 percent. National data for 2004 are not yet available, but we know that New Jersey institutions increased their federal research dollars by 16 percent. Since fiscal 2005, the state has appropriated $20 million for stem cell research at the public research universities, which will enhance institutional competitiveness in this area. In addition, the research universities have initiated discussions about how to enhance successful existing research partnerships and to break down barriers that will allow for the development of new partnerships. The continuation and expansion of such discussions are essential in order to develop specific strategies in the target research areas through interinstitutional and private industry partnerships and targeted state investments that will provide the strongest possible advantage. The Presidents’ Council’s newly established Research Committee will work with the Commission on Higher Education and the Commission on Science and Technology to coordinate efforts of the various public and private entities that support this goal and to develop specific strategies to achieve it. New Jersey increased its amount of federal research dollars and the total amount of external research dollars[2] for higher education between 2002 and 2004, as indicated below. Federal Research Dollars for NJ Higher Education
Total External Research Dollars for NJ Higher Education
A total of 12 individual institutions are focused specifically on increasing total external research dollars. In 2004, 11 of those institutions increased external research funds over 2002 levels. 3. Public Service Colleges and universities provide public service in myriad ways, but especially through their faculty, staff, and students, with projects ranging from faculty sharing professional expertise to solve problems to students engaged in internships. Public service significantly expands the boundaries of the institution, promoting democratic principles and maximizing human potential. Status Each college and university is encouraged to reflect the value of service in its teaching and research and to further engage students, faculty, and staff in public service on and off campus. In particular, each institution is called upon to expand, consistent with its mission, the level of student participation in learning experiences outside the classroom, including, but not limited to, cocurricular offerings, off-campus learning experiences such as internships, mentoring, public service, service learning, and international study. Since 2003, many new public service efforts and out-of-class learning experiences have been initiated, ranging from off-campus learning for students in social service degree programs and free dental care for underprivileged children in the community, to a university delegation helping to improve living conditions in Honduras by building a water purification system. The Commission on Higher Education will survey institutions in 2007 and 2010 on their progress in enhancing on- and off-campus public service. NEW A working group will be formed to consider strategies to further advance the public purpose of colleges and universities, improvement of community life, and education of students for civic and social responsibility. Discussion will include the possibility of becoming a state affiliate of Campus Compact, which is a national nonprofit organization dedicated to promoting community service, civic engagement, and service-learning in higher education. 4. Faculty Because of their primary role in teaching and learning, faculty members are critical to student outcomes and institutional quality. Regardless of the type of institution or its mission, an adequate core of full-time faculty is important, as is the provision of professional growth opportunities for all faculty members, including opportunities related to teaching and learning with a diverse student body. Status Each institution has developed or will develop by June 2006:
The Commission on Higher Education will survey the institutions in summer 2006 and provide a summary report regarding institutional faculty composition targets and development plans. Subsequently, in 2008 and 2010 the Commission will survey institutions and report on progress in achieving institution-specific goals in these areas. It should be noted, however, that changes in faculty composition are extremely difficult in times of fiscal constraints and when revenues are not increased sufficiently to add new faculty. Increased faculty diversity continues to be a goal as well. The chart below summarizes full-time faculty diversity data available for 2002 and 2004. However, a full picture of the breakdown among these racial/ethnic groups is not possible because there are approximately 1,000 faculty members for whom ethnicity is unknown. Overall, the number of full-time faculty members increased by 9 percent between 2002 and 2004, but there was very little change in the distribution by ethnicity (to the extent that it was reported), as indicated on the chart below. FULL-TIME FACULTY DIVERSITY
5. Collaborative
Funding Opportunities Status The Presidents’ Council, working with the Commission on Higher Education and other entities as appropriate, will develop and implement strategies for increasing collaborative efforts to seek external funding in areas related to achieving the long-range plan objectives. A notable example of such efforts is the research funding initiative. The importance of collaboration is paramount in this new statewide initiative to enhance external funding for university research. (See pages 11-13.) The Council, the Commission, and various other state and private sector entities are working together to develop strategies to achieve this broadly shared goal. 6. Raising Public Awareness The reputation and image of a state’s higher education system directly affects the desirability of the state as a place to attend school, to operate a business, to pursue a career, and to live. States that have been in the forefront nationally in terms of economic growth and quality of life depend on the excellence, image, and visibility of their colleges and universities. Status The Commission appointed a Marketing Leadership Team of distinguished state leaders to guide the development of a multiyear public awareness campaign. The purposes of the campaign are to enhance the image of the state by raising the visibility of higher education quality and diversity in New Jersey and to increase public awareness of and support for higher education. The team anticipates three sources of support for the campaign: colleges and universities, state entities with related goals, and the private and nonprofit sectors. Two efforts have been completed to inform development of the campaign. The Commission gathered information from the colleges and universities regarding higher education’s most marketable assets, and a baseline public opinion survey was completed. The resulting information will be provided as background when a public relations firm is employed to develop the campaign. In addition, the Commission and Presidents’ Council have made initial commitments to support the campaign, state entities have expressed an interest in supporting or working collaboratively on the campaign, and a subgroup of the Marketing Leadership Team has begun to seek external support. In April 2005, a coalition headed by the American Council on Education initiated a similar campaign at the national level. Together, the state and national campaigns offer significant potential to increase the understanding of the social benefits of and need for an educated population. OBJECTIVE II – Support targeted, multifaceted increases in capacity and specific state and campus programs to (1) prepare a growing and increasingly diverse population for responsible citizenship in a democratic society and (2) attract more New Jersey students to New Jersey institutions and prepare them for high-demand occupations. RATIONALE The convergence of economic competitiveness, growing workforce demands, and demographic trends poses critical policy decisions for New Jersey. Increasing higher education capacity – to educate the growing number of recent high school graduates, to provide ongoing education to upgrade the skills of the current workforce, to extend educational access to underrepresented groups, and to provide baccalaureate and graduate programs in underserved areas of the state – is an opportunity and an obligation deserving immediate statewide attention and resources. It will require new commitments from and accountability for colleges and universities, a central plan and policies to balance institutional growth with state interests and needs, and a significant additional investment in higher education. Such an investment is vital to New Jersey’s prosperity in the knowledge-based, global economy. Moreover, making the benefits of the new economy available to all is essential to maintaining quality of life and the nation’s preeminence. New Jersey ranks eighth among states in the percentage of high school graduates that go directly from high school to college, and ranks fifth among the states in the percentage of population with bachelor’s degrees or higher. Nevertheless, the state has the sixth highest outmigration rate of baccalaureate-seeking students in the nation. And net migration (the difference between the number of students leaving the state and those entering to attend college) is the highest in the nation. Compared with other states, colleges and universities in New Jersey have historically served a relatively smaller percentage of the state’s recent high school graduates. Based on 2002 data, approximately 47 percent of recent high school graduates across the nation remained in their home state to attend college compared with only 36 percent in New Jersey. In 2004, the percentage staying in New Jersey grew to 38 percent; comparative national data regarding student attendance are not yet available for 2004. Recent population growth projections from various sources indicate that New Jersey will be a high-growth state in terms of the numbers of 18-to-24-year-olds over the next eight to ten years. The prospect of not being able to serve the growing number of high school graduates and others in need of higher education due to lack of capacity does not bode well for workforce development and the economy. State, county, and institutional revenue will be necessary to support incremental growth at colleges and universities in New Jersey through multiple means. The necessary expansion of services should not depend solely on new or enhanced facilities. Nevertheless, a state bond issue, a dedicated revenue source, or some other means of support will be essential to address facility renovation and construction needs. In addition, significantly increased collaboration between and among the public and private senior institutions and community colleges, enhanced use of technology, and expanded facilities and human resources should all be employed strategically through the diverse missions of the institutions to increase the state’s ability to efficiently meet increasing demand. ONGOING ACTION COMPONENTS 1. Increased Capacity to Serve More Students For the most part, New Jersey’s colleges and universities lack additional capacity to respond to the increasing demand from high school graduates, nontraditional undergraduates, recent associate degree graduates who seek the baccalaureate, and graduate students, especially in math, science, and other areas related to the state’s economic development initiatives. The institutions also lack additional capacity to attract more high-achieving out-of-state students, which is an important aspect of a competitive, nationally recognized system of higher education. Status Institutional Plans: Each institution has or will develop a plan consistent with state needs and its mission to efficiently increase capacity to provide high-quality higher education opportunities. The use of available resources through collaboration and other strategies should be employed, along with plans for necessary renovation and construction. Each institution is working to make progress annually in achieving the goals of its plan within the parameters of its mission and budget. Overall Growth: As this plan was developed in 2002 and early 2003, growth estimates were based on projected increased demand from recent New Jersey high school graduates and nontraditional undergraduates (over age 25), as well as modest growth in graduate students. Actual enrollment growth reported by the institutions for fall 2003 and 2004 indicates that undergraduate increases were primarily attributable to students who were not recent high school graduates. In addition graduate enrollment increases far exceeded expectations. As detailed in the two sections below, total enrollment growth between 2002 and 2004 was 18,675, rather than the originally projected 15,450. Changes in enrollments by sector vary considerably, with the greatest growth occurring in the community college sector. Headcount Enrollment Changes by Sector – Fall 2002 to Fall 2004
Based on the new data available and revised projections, the enrollment growth goal for 2010 is slightly higher than originally proposed. The total enrollment should increase annually, and by 2010 the number of undergraduate and graduate students should be between 50,000 and 54,000 more than in 2002. (See breakdown in two sections below and detail in Appendix B, pages 62-63.) A total of 42 institutions established enrollment growth targets for 2010. In 2004, 31 of these institutions increased their enrollment. This commitment of so many of the state’s public and independent, two-year and four-year institutions to serving more students is essential to achieving statewide enrollment and workforce goals. And increased state support will be essential for these institutions to increase their capacity to serve the additional students. Undergraduate
Students: According to data provided by the institutions through the Integrated Postsecondary Education Data System (IPEDS), progress was made in increasing the number of recent high school graduates who attend college within the state, with 2,641 more recent high school graduates served in 2004 than in 2002. The institutions did not achieve the anticipated increase of 4,200 recent high school graduates. Nevertheless, based on revised high school graduation projections from the Western Interstate Commission for Higher Education (WICHE) of more high school graduates by 2010 and actual reported 2004 enrollments in New Jersey colleges, the goal of enrolling approximately 14,000 more recent high school graduates in 2010 than in 2002 still appears reasonable, providing there are additional resources and space. Growth at that level would move New Jersey considerably closer to the national average of serving 47 percent of recent high school graduates. Enrolling approximately one percent more each year will increase enrollments of recent high school graduates by about 14,000 and bring New Jersey to 44 percent of the projected graduating class by 2010. Students Other Than Recent High School Graduates: Overall, undergraduate enrollment increased by 16,306 between 2002 and 2004. In addition to the 2,641 more recent high school graduates, undergraduate enrollment increased by another 13,665. This growth in the number of students who were not recent high school graduates could be attributable to many factors, and the number has fluctuated considerably over time. But student demand in this group is significant, as demonstrated by the increase over the past four years. Projected annual enrollment increases of about 4,500 for this group are based on the average increase over the past eight years. Graduate Students: Capacity at the graduate level should continue to increase, particularly in high-demand workforce areas. Between 2002 and 2004, the number of graduate students served increased by 2,369. The initial incremental targets recommended for total students enrolled were 1.2 percent a year. Recent data suggest the initial target was low, because for the past fifteen years, the average growth in full- and part-time graduate students enrolled was actually 1.5 percent. If this trend continues, New Jersey’s colleges and universities will need capacity to serve an estimated 7,900 more full- and part-time graduate students in 2010 than in 2002. 2. Multifaceted Strategies Necessary to Increase Capacity Facilities and human resources expansion will be essential to meet the recommended growth targets, but colleges and universities should also achieve capacity increases through technology, increased use of classrooms and other enhanced productivity, innovative facility design, possible new educational sites, and interinstitutional collaboration.Status Enhanced Use of Technology: The NJEDge.Net Network Board and the Commission on Higher Education staff collaboratively collected baseline data on the institutions’ use of technology. The initial survey provided data on courses, enrollments, and graduates in terms of various instructional modalities, including online, web-enhanced, and hybrid. Future surveys will seek examples of how technology enhances capacity to serve additional students. By 2010, all institutions should have demonstrated the use of technology to increase capacity to some degree. Programs in Underserved Areas: The Commission on Higher Education and Presidents’ Council proposed $3 million in seed money for enhanced collaboration to provide high-quality baccalaureate and graduate degree programs in underserved areas of the state, including the northwest, southern, and coastal regions. Owing to state fiscal constraints, the proposed fiscal 2006 budget does not include funding for this initiative, but efforts to generate seed money for this program should continue in future years. In the meantime, institutions continue the many efforts already underway to meet needs in underserved areas. For example, the New Jersey Coastal Communiversity, a unique partnership of community colleges and senior colleges and universities, is significantly increasing access to post-associate-degree education for residents in the coastal region of the state. Similarly, senior colleges and universities have increased their provision of degree completion programs offered on community college campuses in underserved and other areas of the state. As a result, residents and employers benefit from the increased access to convenient postsecondary education and workforce development opportunities. Meeting the Needs of an Increasingly Diverse Student Population: The Commission on Higher Education should collaborate with the Presidents’ Council to support institutional efforts that address the needs of an increasingly diverse student population. Commission staff is working with the Council for the Education of Language Minority Students and the New Jersey Council of ESL/Bilingual Program Coordinators in Higher Education to create an online directory of institutional ESL programs that will provide information for prospective college students. The number of ESL students served statewide increased from 13,812 to 15,860 between fall 2001 and fall 2003. The Special Needs Regional Centers and several other organizations hosted a statewide conference to provide college service providers, administrators, and other stakeholders with information about serving students with disabilities. The seven student service centers funded through the statewide Special Needs grant program increased the number of students served from 912 to 1,052 between fiscal 2002 and fiscal 2004. The eighth center allows all New Jersey institutions to borrow adaptive technology for students who have learning disabilities, are deaf or hard of hearing, or are visually impaired. The Commission, in collaboration with its partners, reapplied for the federal GEAR UP grant and will receive $20.9 million over the next six years. (See pages 38 and 43.) In addition, the Commission recommended increased state funding in fiscal 2006 for the College Bound program to serve additional students from Abbott school districts. While significant state fiscal constraints precluded increased state support for College Bound in fiscal 2006, efforts to expand College Bound should continue in future years, and outreach to Abbott middle and high school students will be expanded through the renewed GEAR UP program. Despite level state funding between fiscal 2002 and fiscal 2004, the number of students served through these two programs was 2,539, an increase of 300 students. Both of these programs benefit from systemic collaboration across educational levels. The institutions have done an extraordinary job of sustaining services and serving additional students in the above programs with basically level funding. Institutions are also working on efforts to better meet the needs of the increasingly diverse student population by expanding faculty professional development and faculty diversity. (See page 14.) NEW Capacity can be further enhanced by obtaining for the 14 independent colleges and universities with a public mission the same status in the zoning/planning process that is provided for public institutions. The Commission on Higher Education will create a working group with the independent sector and representatives from the Department of Community Affairs to study this issue and make recommendations regarding the zoning/planning process for these 14 institutions. OBJECTIVE III - Support financial aid programs that enable New Jersey students from all backgrounds to afford higher education of high quality. RATIONALE Historically, state support for student financial assistance has been guided by three basic principles: access, affordability, and choice. Broadly defined, access refers to providing opportunities for all who desire to pursue higher education, while affordability refers to the reduction or elimination of cost barriers. Choice is the ability of students to select among the range of colleges and universities in the state.Guided by these three principles, New Jersey is consistently among the leaders in the nation in providing need-based student financial assistance and has expanded merit-based aid during the past decade. New Jersey ranks second in the nation in the estimated need-based undergraduate dollars per full-time undergraduate student, fourth in the nation in the estimated undergraduate grant dollars per full-time-equivalent student, and twelfth in expenditures for need-based programs. The enrollment of students of color and other traditionally underrepresented students continues to increase in New Jersey. Overall demographics suggest that future undergraduate student populations will require substantially increased levels of financial assistance and support to ensure improved levels of persistence. Net costs for students to attend college in New Jersey, and across the nation, have increased rapidly and are threatening postsecondary opportunity for low- and middle-income students. A mix of financial aid options (i.e., grants, scholarships, loans, college savings plans) is necessary to achieve the goals of making New Jersey colleges and universities accessible, affordable, and attractive to students from diverse socioeconomic backgrounds.ONGOING ACTION COMPONENTS 1. Adequate Need-Based Student Aid New Jersey has a long-standing commitment to need-based student financial assistance. Approximately 87 percent of the total state appropriation for student financial assistance is channeled through the need-based Tuition Aid Grant (TAG) and the Educational Opportunity Fund (EOF). It is essential that these programs keep pace with growing enrollments, rising costs, and changing demographics. Status Full-Time TAG: Consistent with recommendations by the Commission on Higher Education, Presidents’ Council, and the Higher Education Student Assistance Authority (HESAA), state funding for TAG increased, and awards for the neediest full-time students were based on the previous year’s tuition levels in fiscal years 2005 and 2006. In future years, state funding should be increased to adjust awards for other recipients proportionately to reduce the current three-year lag to a one-year lag between tuition levels and award values. The fiscal 2005 and 2006 budgets combined also provided increased funding for up to 3,000 additional TAG award recipients. The Governor and Legislature should be encouraged to implement the statutory language regarding TAG for independent colleges and universities (up to 50 percent of their weighted average tuition). Part-Time TAG: There are compelling needs for both the full- and part-time TAG programs. Since its inception in fiscal 2004, the appropriation for the part-time TAG program for community colleges has increased from $3.5 million to $4.45 million in fiscal 2006. Within the next few years, the HESAA Board will conduct an evaluation of this program and consult with the Commission and Presidents’ Council on the future potential and expansion of the program. Federal Financial Aid: The Commission and HESAA have encouraged the state’s Congressional representatives to support increases in federal student financial aid and to maintain the key programs that exist. Educational Opportunity Fund: As called for in the plan, the EOF Board amended its regulations in 2004 to extend eligibility and program services to graduates of College Bound and NJ GEAR UP programs who attend colleges and universities in New Jersey. In fiscal 2005, the Legislature and Governor responded to recommendations made by the Commission and EOF Board for increased support to assist students with rising educational costs and to enhance foundational support services. An additional $1.5 million for Article III was used to increase academic year student grants by $100 per student. A $500,000 increase for Article IV provided a 3.2 percent increase to support campus programs, including but not limited to counseling and tutoring to improve student success rates. In addition, $80,000 of the Article IV increase was distributed to eight EOF programs based on improved student outcomes, consistent with the recommendation to link increases for campus programs with program outcomes. In fiscal 2006, the Legislature and Governor again increased funding for student grants. An additional $3.5 million was appropriated, with $3 million designated as “Opportunity Program Enhancement” funds for institutions to increase their number of EOF students and/or increase maximum awards for students. A portion of the increased funding will support the EOF summer program and increased awards for graduate students. The Commission, Presidents’ Council, and EOF Board should continue to seek increased EOF funding. The first and most critical priority is additional support for Article IV to ensure high-quality, campus-based services to improve EOF student success rates. Article IV support services, including but not limited to counseling and tutoring, are the critical components that make EOF successful, and state support has not kept up with inflation over the years. In addition, the increased number of students in the program will require expansion of programs and services. The EOF program should continue to benchmark retention and graduation rates to measure improvement, and increases for campus programs should be linked to program outcomes. In addition, the Commission’s EOF staff and a committee of EOF directors should continue to review EOF outcomes data, benchmarks, and regulations for future recommendation to the EOF Board. 2. Undergraduate Merit-Based Aid New Jersey has gradually increased funding for merit-based undergraduate grants during recent years. While approximately 12.6 percent of all current student aid allocation is designated for merit-based scholarships, the state’s student assistance programs continue to be primarily need-based. Dependable, annual merit-based state appropriations enhance the ability of institutions to attract high-achieving students and help to curtail the exodus of top students. (New Jersey ranks sixth in the nation in outmigration of its recent high school graduates.[4]) Status NJ STARS, a merit-based program established in fiscal 2005, covers the cost of tuition and approved fees at the state’s community colleges for high school graduates who rank in the top 20 percent of their graduating class. During its first year of operation, approximately 1,140 students participated in this program. The possibility of extending the program has been raised by some legislators who wish to allow NJ STARS recipients who complete their associate degree to receive continued support at a New Jersey baccalaureate institution. The higher education community should continue to work with the Legislature and Governor’s office to shape such a program. The NJ STARS statute requires that HESAA provide a report on the implementation of the program to the Governor and Legislature no later than September 2006.HESAA, in collaboration with the Commission and the Presidents’ Council, should make recommendations regarding merit-based aid availability and distribution in the fiscal 2007 budget and beyond.3. Graduate and Professional Student Aid Labor force requirements for employees with master’s and doctoral degrees are rapidly increasing, particularly in high-demand fields. To meet those needs, New Jersey’s public and private sectors need well-prepared, highly skilled leaders who have completed their graduate studies at colleges and universities in the state. Status By March 2006, HESAA should review, in consultation with the Commission and the Presidents’ Council, the feasibility of creating a graduate and professional student assistance program to encourage students to complete advanced degrees in those areas where the most pressing labor force needs exist. If determined advisable, HESAA, the Commission, and the Council should make a joint recommendation to the Governor and Legislature to establish such a program for inclusion in the fiscal 2008 budget. While not focused only on graduate and professional students, the Social Services Student Loan Redemption Program was created in fiscal 2006 to provide an opportunity for students with a baccalaureate or master’s degree in a human services discipline to redeem a portion or all of their outstanding student loans in exchange for years of employment in state-designated areas of need. OBJECTIVE IV - Establish and implement funding policies and methodologies that provide sufficient and reasonably predictable state operating support and ongoing state capital investments for the public research universities, the state colleges and universities, the community colleges, and the independent institutions to provide the fundamental infrastructure necessary to achieve the state’s vision for higher education. RATIONALE The development and maintenance of a higher education system that is among the best in the world requires a new compact between the state and its public and private colleges and universities. Higher education institutions have a variety of responsibilities – effective and efficient operations, strategic use of limited resources, high-quality programs and student services, successful student outcomes, significant scholarship and research, and attainment of external revenues – and they are dependent on the state to varying degrees for fundamental financial support. Excellence in teaching and learning, research, and public service to accomplish broad state economic and societal goals hinges on this support. As a result, this objective of the long-range plan is integral to the successful implementation of the other objectives and specific goals. Some progress can be made without the proposed sufficient and reasonably predictable state operating support, but the colleges and universities will not be able to make the significant advances necessary to propel New Jersey forward in today’s knowledge-based economy. The three public research universities, nine state colleges and universities, nineteen community colleges, and fourteen independent institutions in New Jersey all receive varying levels of state operating and capital assistance. Each of these colleges and universities derives its operating and capital revenues from differing combinations of direct state appropriations, tuition and fees, federal support, and private gifts and grants. The community colleges also receive widely varying county support. Cohesive planning and effective operation of colleges and universities to meet student and state needs require clear state support policies and methodologies. New Jersey law establishes state funding levels for the community colleges and the independent institutions, but the established levels are contingent on annual appropriations and have not been fulfilled. There has been no clear funding policy or methodology for the public research universities or the state colleges and universities since the 1980s, resulting generally in across-the-board annual increases or decreases for all twelve senior public institutions without regard to enrollment, programmatic need, or other considerations. It is understandable that predictability of state operating appropriations for all sectors is affected by the state’s overall fiscal condition in a given year. But state funding predictability and adequacy have been lacking even in the best of fiscal climates, which is apparent in comparing the percent change of the higher education budget over time with that of the state budget and New Jersey’s gross state product (Appendix B, page 63). This lack of adequate and predictable funding impedes efficient and effective management of institutions and predictability of student tuition and fees. New Jersey, like most other states, has experienced serious revenue constraints since fiscal 2002. As a result, increased state support for higher education has been limited. Fortunately, New Jersey has avoided the drastic cuts made in many other states that have led to extreme increases in student tuition and fees. Nevertheless, enrollments have increased and state support has not kept pace with inflation. At the same time, rapidly changing demographics and workplace needs are placing far greater demands on higher education each year, leaving the state with a pressing need to enhance teaching and research and efficiently increase capacity to serve more students. It is critical to the economic and societal well-being of New Jersey for the state to commit to increased investments in higher education through clear funding methodologies that are consistent with the state’s vision and the six other principal objectives for higher education. ONGOING ACTION COMPONENTS 1. Operating Support for Public Research Universities and State Colleges and Universities Of all the institutions, the twelve senior public colleges and universities rely to the greatest extent on state operating aid, including direct operating support, annual funding for contractual salary increases, and fringe benefits. But for nearly two decades, state support has not recognized enrollment growth or new program development, and these institutions have relied increasingly on tuitio | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
