Monday, July 25, 2016

Out of state admissions in Californis universities

Out of state admissions into California state universities



Two recent articles in the N.Y. Times discuss the implications of recent increase in the number of  out of state and international students admitted to state universities in California.  The controversy.stemmed from a report by a California auditor of state universities.


Recent articles on out-of-state admissions to California state universities:

The articles in the NY times focused on the political reaction to the finding that California universities were increasingly turning away in state students.  


Public colleges chase out of state students
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/08/us/public-colleges-chase-out-of-state-students-and-tuition.html?_r=0


Response to recent increase in out of state admisissions into California state schools
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/13/us/after-outcry-university-of-california-increases-in-state-admission-offers.html?_r=0

Audit of California State University Admissions
https://www.auditor.ca.gov/pdfs/reports/2015-107.pdf


The basic gist of these articles is that California has reduced enrollment of in state students and  increased the enrollment of foreign and out of states students in order to make up revenue from state budget cuts.  


It is clear that California state universities have a motive for increasing admittance of out of state students.  They pay around $25,000 per year more in tuition than in state students.

However, the evidence presented in the auditors report and many reactions to the issue in the NY Times articles overstate the extent to which in state students have lost places in California schools.  

Report findings



The main findings of the report are:


After 2011 the California State university system made it easier for non residents to gain admittance to state universities.






In a three year period 16,000 out of state students with scores below the median were admitted with scores below the median.

Increasingly,  many in state students while accepted to the state university system do not get accepted to the first choice school.  Only around 2 percent of these students actually enroll in the state system

Comments:



In my view the auditor cherry picked its numbers to make its case that out of state students are displacing in state students.

It would be useful to divide 16000 students by the number of admitted students in the three academic years in all schools in the system.   This is a really small percentage.   Also, how many out of state students are in the bottom 10 percent.   If there are any I bet they are great athletes.


The statistics in the report appear to indicate a much larger growth in the number of out of state applicants than in state applicants over the last ten years.   The number of in state applicants rose from around 66000 applicants to 97,000 applicants per year over the last ten years while the number of out of state applicants rose from around 10,000 to around 48,000.  It is  now harder for both in and out of state applicants to get in California state universities probably because of a huge influx of out of state perhaps foreign applicants.

The auditor points out that many in state applicants even when admitted do not get their first choice school and that most accepted applicants who are denied their first choice do not enroll in the state system.   I am not surprised by this result.   The brightest students in China. India, Russia, Western Europe and Africa want to go got the best schools in America and at least two California schools --- UCLA and Cal Berkeley --  are highly competitive.  I suspect that the out of state and foreign entrants to theses two schools have higher test scores than in state entrants.  


The auditor does not present any data on in and out of state text scores and acceptance rate across the schools in the California system. Such data could help resolve whether in state students are being treated unfairly or not.

Concluding Remarks:  


The California auditor says some relatively weak foreign and out of state students are displacing in state students.    This is probably not occurring at the top schools and if admissions to the top schools are to remain based on merit many in state students will not get their first choice.   These students are likely to go out of the California state system.


The only way to prevent this from happening is to force the  top California schools to favor in state residents regardless of the quality of out of state residents.


 


The case could be made that California universities should target their services toward teaching in state students.     Costs could be cut by firing the Nobel laureate professors who teach only a few graduate students.  This would lead many foreign and out of state applicants to apply elsewhere.


The potential conflict posed by the additional money obtained from admitting out of state students will be exacerbated by the adoption of the Clinton/Sanders promise of free or at least debt free in state tuition.  







Thursday, July 21, 2016

Trump on NATO and his wife's birth country.

Trump's approach to NATO and Melania's  birth country

I am in France on vacation so my blogging is sparse.  I have a quick statement and question regarding Donald Trump's statement that he would not automatically defend new entrants to NATO.  


Slovenia the country where Melania Trump was born and still has family and friends is a new entrant to NATO.   Slovenia joined NATO in 2004 with several other countries.   Would Trump not come to the defense of Slovenia if Russia attacked and if Slovenia did not contribute 2 percent of GDP?    Can Slovenia and many other countries with lower per capita income reasonably afford 2 percent of GDP for NATO?

Monday, June 6, 2016

Performance and Debt Incurred at For-Profit Schools





Performance and Debt Incurred at For-Profit Schools

The post today provides data on the performance and debt incurred by students at 10 large for-profit schools.

The first table provides information on average annual cost, the graduation rate, the salary after attendance at the 10 schools.   The numbers are compared to national averages.

Debt is available for 9 of the 10 schools.   (I exclude the school in Puerto Rico because students at that school did not incur much debt.)   The second table looks at percent of students with federal loans, typical federal loan debt incurred and percent of former students who repaid some debt.

These debt numbers for the for-profit schools are compared to the debt numbers at California State University at Los Angeles, a large state university with a fairly low graduation rate.

The Performance Data:  

The source of the data is the college scorecard database.   I looked at all for-profit universities that had more than 15,000 undergraduate students.   The chart is sorted from largest school to smallest school.





Performance Statistics for Large For-Profit Schools
Average Annual Cost
Grad Rate
Salary After Attending
University of Phoenix On-line
$14,411
20%
$53,400
Ashford University
$20,983
21%
$37,500
Kaplan University
$19,162
16%
$34,400
American Public University System
$9,095
31%
NA
Grand Canyon University
$28,309
31%
$45,200
Everest University
$22,446
31%
$25,300
Devry University
$19,653
29%
NA
Full Sail University
$29,945
79%
$34,100
Colorado Technical University
$17,256
18%
$44,100
Institutio de Banco y Comercie Inc.
$4,954
61%
$16,300
National Average
$16,574
43%
$34,300


Comments on the data in the table:


Eight of the ten for-profit schools have an average annual cost greater than the national average of average annual costs for all schools. 

One of the two schools with low average annual cost was in Puerto Rico.  This school was the only school with a graduation rate over the national average.   The low salary after attending the school reflects differences in the economy of Puerto Rico and the mainland. 

Eight of the ten for-profit schools have a graduation rates below (in many cases substantially below) the national average.

Two of the ten schools do not report salary after attending the school.

The national average of salary after attending is really low probably because of community colleges.  

Five of the for-profit schools have a salary ten years after attending below $40,000.

The Debt Data:

The data on debt incurred and repaid at the for-profit schools are presented below.

Debt Statistics for Large Non-Profit Schools
% Students with Federal Loans
Typical Debt Incurred
% Students who Repaid Some Debt
University of Phoenix On-line
62%
$35,500
41%
Ashford University
74%
$32,813
43%
Kaplan University
65%
$30,500
36%
American Public University System
27%
$17,311
60%
Grand Canyon University
62%
$18,750
40%
Everest University
77%
$27,500
22%
Devry University
82%
$43,068
54%
Full Sail University
80%
$30,843
57%
Colorado Technical University
89%
$35,500
43%
Instittutio de Banco y Comercie Inc.
NA
NA
NA
Average
69%
$30,198
44%
Median for-profit schools
74%
$30,843
43%
California State University Los Angeles
39%
$14,125
66%

Comments:


Median percent of students with debt at the for-profit schools is 74%.  By comparison, the percent at Cal State LA is 39%


Median typical debt incurred at for-profit schools is $30,843.  Debt at Cal State LA is $14,125.


Median % of students in repayment at for-profit schools is 43%.  At Cal State LA this figure is 66%.


Concluding thoughts:  Society and the affected students would be much better off if fewer students attended for-profit schools and instead enrolled in public universities. 



People interested in the economics and politics of the growth of for-profit schools may also want to look at the following posts:

Graduation rates at Phoenix University:
http://policymemos.blogspot.com/2016/06/evaluating-graduation-rates-at-phoenix.html

Hillary Clinton's ties to for-profit schools:
http://2016memos.blogspot.com/2016/06/hillary-clintons-ties-to-for-profit.html

Saturday, June 4, 2016

Evaluating Graduation Rates at Phoenix University

Situation:   California has 21 public universities with over 15,000 undergraduate students.   The top part of the chart below list the graduation rates for the eight public universities with the lowest 25th percentile SAT scores.   The bottom panel of the chart has graduation rates for eight branches of Phoenix University in the western part of the United States.

How does the graduation rate of these public universities compare to the graduation rates of the for-profit branches of Phoenix University?


Data on Eight Large Public
Universities in California
Graduation Rates
1
Cal State Los Angeles
36
2
Cal State San Bernandino
42
3
Cal State Northridge
47
4
Cal State Fresno
48
5
Cal State Sacramento
42
6
San Francisco State University
46
7
San Jose State
48
8
Cal State Long Branch
59
Data on Eight Branches of Phoenix University in Western United States
Graduation Rates
1
Oregon Campus
19
2
Northern Nevada Campus
16
3
Central Valley Campus
19
4
Western Washington Campus
20
5
San Diego Campus
17
6
Bay Area Campus
14
7
Sacramento Campus
17
8
Hawaii Campus
24


Initial Comments:  There are 21 public universities with more than 15,000 undergraduate students in California.  The eight public universities presented for this comparison are the schools with the lowest Verbal 25th percentile SAT.    The verbal 25th percentile SAT score at these schools ranged from 380 to 450.  

I am not comparing Phoenix University to Cal Berkley or UCLA.   Such a comparison would be unfair.

I believe that it is reasonable to expect that a fairly expensive for-profit school should have a graduation rate comparable to the graduation rate for public schools with Verbal 25th percentile SAT scores below 450.

Is this expectation supported by the data?

Answer:   Statistics comparing the eight second-tier public universities to eight branches of Phoenix University are presented below.



Comparing Eight Second Tier Public Universities to
Eight Branches of Phoenix University
Public Universities
Eight Branches of Phoenix University
Min
36
14
Max
59
24
Mean
46
18.25
Median
46.5
18


Phoenix University has a graduation rate that is substantially below the graduation rate of public universities with Verbal SAT 25th percentile scores that are below 450.

Concluding thoughts:  Phoenix University is not cheap.   The average cost of the eight branches was near $19,000.   California State University Los Angeles has an average annual cost less than $14,000.


People who attend Phoenix University are also much more likely to default on their loans than people who attend Cal State LA.

In my view, the next Congress and the next President need to do more to restrict lending to universities that underperform their students and have low graduation rates and/or high default rates.

We know that Donald Trump is not going to reign in lending to for-profit schools.   He owned one.

Unfortunately, I don’t expect Hillary Clinton to do much better on this front.  She and her husband have taken a lot of money from for-profit schools, including the parent company of Phoenix University.