diversity update 2013 october 2013

Diversity Update 2013

October 2013

http://apir.wisc.edu/diversity-forum.htm




This section includes information on:• Demographic variables and how they are

collected and reported

Demographic Variables and Reporting

Equity in Educational Outcomes

http://apir.wisc.edu/diversity.htm

Demographic Variables for Analysis

This presentation is limited to variables for which we have quantitative information, including: Race/ethnicity Income level First-generation in college Gender Geographic diversity Information is not systematically available for all groupsthat are important to inclusive excellence.


Race/Ethnic Categories: Students

Continued terminology from Plan 2008

Includes all Asians, useful for national peer comparisons.

• Targeted Minorities include:» African American» Native American» Hispanic/Latino/a» Southeast Asian

(Cambodians, Laotians, Vietnamese, and Hmong)

• Minorities include:» Targeted Minority

categories» Other Asians» Native Hawaiians

Students self-report their race/ethnicity at the time of application.http://apir.wisc.edu/diversity.htm

International students are not counted in any of these collections, in keeping with state/federal guidelines.

Race/Ethnicity Reportinghttp://apir.wisc.edu/diversity.htmReporting Methodologies for Race/Ethnicity Information

The relatively new ability to indicate multiple race/ethnic values results in a much richer picture of student diversity but data reporting is more complicated. To deal with these complexities, methodology options for data reporting have emerged . The method that is most appropriate depends on for what purpose the data will be used. The table below describes the features of each method and shows how the methods are similar and different from each other. Subsequent slides in this presentation use the Primary reporting methodology.

Reporting Feature Primary Federal Count All

Results in single count of students P P

Prioritizes Hispanic/Latina(a) over other values P

Creates new categories that are not reported by students themselves P

Displays race/ethnic values only for domestic (non international) students P P P

Displays ALL students who indicate a particularrace/ethnicity P

Prioritizes some race/ethnicities over others P P

Used in external data reporting and rankings P

This section includes information on:• Enrollment

– Undergraduate– Graduate– Professional– School/College– Peer comparisons

Includes breakouts by race/ethnicity, gender, geography

Enrollment



From 2004 to 2013 4.7 percentage

point increase in Minority Enrollment

3 percentage point increase in Targeted Minority Enrollment

Indicator 1: Percent Enrollment of MinorityUndergraduate Students

Targeted Minorities include African American, Native American, Hispanic/Latino/a, Southeast Asian (Cambodians, Laotians, Vietnamese, and Hmong). Minorities include targeted minorities as well as Other Asians and Native Hawaiians. International students are not counted for targeted minority calculations.


2013 data is preliminary.74 76 78 80 82 84 86 88 90 92 94 96 98 00 02 04 06 08 10 120

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

Revised Race/Ethnic Categories

Southeast Asian Collection BeginsRace/Ethnicity Collection Be-gins

Minority Students, 15.4%

Targeted Mi-nority Students,

10.1%

Indicator 2: Percent Enrollment of Targeted Minority Undergraduate Students by Race/Ethnicity

Targeted Minorities include African American, Native American, Hispanic/Latino/a, Southeast Asian (Cambodians, Laotians, Vietnamese, and Hmong). International students are not counted within the targeted minority categories.


From 2004 to 2013: Increases in undergraduate

enrollment in all race/ethnic

categories 3.0 percentage

point increase in undergraduate

targeted minority enrollment

International Students: 7.3% of

Undergraduate Enrollment

2013 data is preliminary.

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 20130%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

2.4% 2.5% 2.7% 2.9% 2.9% 3.0% 2.8% 2.8% 2.7% 2.8%

1.4% 1.6% 1.7% 1.8% 1.8% 1.9% 1.9% 1.8% 1.8% 1.9%0.6% 0.6% 0.6%

0.7% 0.7%0.8% 0.9% 1.0% 0.9% 0.9%

2.6%2.8%

3.1%3.3% 3.6%

3.8% 3.9% 4.3% 4.4% 4.5%

% o

f Tot

al U

nder

grad

uate

s

Hispanic/ Latino/a

Native American

SE Asian

African American


2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 20130%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

2.7% 2.9% 3.3% 3.0% 2.6% 3.0% 2.6% 2.8% 2.3%3.0%

1.9% 1.9%2.0% 2.2%

1.6%2.2%

2.2% 2.0%1.6%

2.1%

0.8% 0.6%0.6% 0.9%

0.9%

1.2%1.0% 1.0%

0.8%

0.9%

3.3% 3.4%3.7% 3.7%

4.2%

4.7%

3.7%

5.2%

4.3%

4.7%

% o

f Tot

al F

irst Y

ear U

nder

grad

uate

s

Hispanic/ Latino/a

Native American

SE Asian

African American

From 2004 to 2013: 2 percentage

point increase in first-year undergraduate targeted minority enrollment

Indicator 2 Detail: Percent Enrollment of First-Year Targeted Minority Undergraduates, by Race/Ethnicity



Percent Enrollment of Targeted Minority Undergraduates



• 10.1% of all undergraduates are targeted minorities.

• 10.4% of new students (new freshmen + new transfers) are targeted minorities.

All Undergraduates

New Undergraduates2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

7.1 7.5 8.0 8.6 9.0 9.7 9.5 9.9 9.9 10.1

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 20130

2

4

6

8

10

12

8.1 8.1 8.8 9.3 8.910.2

9.110.7

8.810.4

• In 2013, the College of Letters and Science has the largest number of undergraduate targeted minority students enrolled.

• The School of Human Ecology has the largest percentage of undergraduate targeted minority students enrolled, with 14 percent of SoHE students identifying as targeted minorities.



Percent Targeted Minority Enrollment by School/College: Undergraduates, Fall 2013


10% 10%

6%

12%

8%

14%

11% 11%

2%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

TOTAL CALS Business Education Engineering SoHE L&S Nursing Pharmacy

% o

f Und

ergr

adua

te En

rollm

ent

N=2,989 N=338

N=129

N=213

N=336

N=110

N=1,776 N=86

N=<5

Percent of Undergraduates who are Minorities at AAU Public Institutions, Fall 2011

Average Percent Minority for AAU Public Institutions: 29%

4 AAU Public Institutions have a lower percent of minority students than UW-Madison.

7 AAU Public Institutions have a smaller number of minority students than UW-Madison.

Peer Enrollments by Minority Status


Source: IPEDS Fall Enrollment, Fall 2011

80%

Iowa State

Purdue

Wisconsin

Ohio State

Penn State

Michigan State

Minnesota

Michigan

Texas A&M

Illinois

Georgia Tech

Florida

Washington

Texas

UC-Santa Barbara

UCLA

UC-San Diego

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Percent of Undergraduates

N=15,907N=14,913

N=14,805N=15,723

N=14,209N= 9,017N=14,602

N=16,871N=6,556

N=10,874N=9,883N=11,959N=10,927

N=4,236N=5,129N=8,946N=4,098N=10,873

N=4,910N=6,515

N=3,798N=5,621

N=4,587N=6,213N=3,026N=6,264N=3,163N=6,756

N=3,779N=4,152N=4,543N=4,256N=2,531

N=2,499

Undergraduate Enrollment Comparisons


• UW-Madison enrolled 2,834 targeted minority undergraduates (Fall 2011)

• There are 2,792 institutions in the United States that grant bachelor’s degrees. Of these, only 824 (30%) have more total undergraduates enrolled than UW-Madison has targeted minority undergraduates enrolled

• There are 64 institutions in Wisconsin that grant bachelor’s degrees. Of these, only 19 (30%) have more total undergraduates enrolled than UW-Madison has targeted minority students enrolled

UW-Madison educates relatively large numbers of minority students

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013

-2%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

2.2% 2.1% 2.3% 2.5% 2.7% 2.7% 2.6% 2.7% 2.8% 2.7%

0.3% 0.5% 0.6% 0.7% 0.7% 0.8% 0.9% 1.0% 1.0% 0.9%0.4% 0.5%

0.6% 0.7% 0.8% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%2.5% 2.7%2.8% 2.9% 2.9%

3.2% 3.5% 3.7% 4.0% 4.4%

% o

f Tot

al G

radu

ate

Stud

ent E

nrol

lmen

t

Hispanic/ Latino/a

Native AmericanSE Asian

African American

Indicator 3: Percent Enrollment of Targeted Minority Graduate Students, by Race/Ethnicity


From 2004 to 2013: Increases in

graduate student enrollment in all race/ethnic categories

3.5 percentage point increase in graduate targeted minority enrollment

International students make up 27.1% of graduate enrollment



From 2004 to 2013: Enrollments of

targeted minority students ranged from a low of 8% (2013) and a high of 11% (2008)

International students make up 4.3% of professional student enrollment

Indicator 4: Percent Enrollment of Targeted Minority Professional Students, by Race/Ethnicity



2013 data is preliminary.Professional: DVM, MD, PharmD, Law, PA, MPH, DPT

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 20130%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

3.4% 3.9% 4.0% 4.4% 4.5% 4.1% 4.2% 4.2% 4.3% 3.7%

0.4%0.7% 0.9%

1.3% 1.6%1.6% 1.3% 1.2% 0.7%

0.5%1.0%

0.9%1.1%

1.2%1.3%

1.2% 1.0% 1.0% 1.0%

1.0%

4.1%3.5%

3.6%

3.7%3.7%

3.4%3.4% 3.3%

2.9%

2.8%

% o

f Tot

al p

rofe

ssio

nal S

tude

nt E

nrol

lmen

t

Hispanic/ Latino/a

Native Ameri-canSE Asian

African American

9% 9%

7%

18%

6%

16%

5%

8%

12%

9%

12%

8%

6%

0%

2%

4%

6%

8%

10%

12%

14%

16%

18%

20%

Total CALS Business Educ. Eng. SoHE Nelson L&S Law SMPH Nursing Pharm. Vet Med

% o

f Tot

al G

rad/

Prof

Col

lege

Enr

ollm

ent

N=1,047 N=80

N=38

N=192

N=92

N=11

N=8

N=317

N=89

N=134

N=13

N=47

N=24

Targeted Minority Enrollment by School/College:Graduate/Professional Programs, Fall 2013



Fall 2013• The School of

Education has the largest

percentage of targeted minority graduate students

(18%).


2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 201302468

1012141618

12.811.6 11.5 12.2 11.7

14.717.0 16.0 15.8

14.6

Indicator 5: Percent Enrollment of Pell Grant Recipients (Undergraduates)



• 14.6% of all undergraduates are Pell Grant recipients.

• 14.8% of new students (new freshmen + new transfers) are Pell Grant recipients.

All Undergraduates

New Undergraduates

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 201302468

1012141618

12.510.7 11.4 11.7 11.1

14.116 16.5

14.8 14.8

VirginiaMichigan

WisconsinColorado

Penn StateIowa

PittsburghIndianaIllinois

MarylandNorth Carolina

NebraskaPurdue

Texas A & MKansas

MissouriMinnesotaIowa State

OregonWashington

Michigan StateTexas

Ohio StateRutgersFloridaBuffaloArizona

UC-BerkeleyStony Brook

UCLAUC-Santa Barbara

UC-IrvineUC-Davis

UC-San Diego

0 10 20 30 40 50

N = 1,956N = 4,436N = 4,921

N = 4,695N = 7,405N = 4,086N = 3,504N = 6,487N = 6,437N = 5,302N = 3,775N = 4,046N = 7,183N = 8,434N = 4,482N = 5,374

N = 8,090N = 5,741N = 4,977N = 7,406N = 9,250N = 10,236N = 11,854N = 8,679N = 9,857N = 5,971N = 9,679

N = 8,798N = 5,774N = 9,417N = 6,842N = 8,051

N = 10,207N = 10,910

Percent of Undergraduates

Percent of Undergraduates who were Pell Recipients at AAU Public Institutions, 2010-11

Average percent pell recipients for AAU public institutions: 26%

2 AAU public institutions have a lower or equal percent of Pell recipients than UW-Madison.

8 AAU public institutions have a lower number of Pell recipients than UW-Madison.

Peer Enrollments of Pell Grant Recipients

Source: IPEDS Student Financial Aid Data, 2010-11http://apir.wisc.edu/diversity.htm

50%

Pell Grants are federally funded grants for students with high financial need. This indicator is a proxy for low income student enrollments.

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 20130

5

10

15

20

25

8.1

13.3

17.620.8 22.3 22.1 21.8 20.8 20.2 • Data on first-

generation status is collected at the time of application.

• Question first asked in 2005.

• 20.1% of New Students (New Freshmen + New Transfers) are first-generation students.

Indicator 6: Percent Enrollment of First-Generation Students (Undergraduates)



All Undergraduates

New Undergraduates

Accumulating Data

2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 20130

5

10

15

20

25

21.9 23.0 23.4 22.9 23.121.4 21.9

18.9 20.1

Indicator 7: Percent UndergraduateEnrollment by Gender, Fall 2013



Women

Men

Women havecomprised morethan half ofundergraduateenrollment since1996.

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 201342%

44%

46%

48%

50%

52%

54%

56%

51.2%

48.8%

Women as a Percentage of Total Undergraduate Enrollment, by School/College, Fall 2013


Fall 2013• Nursing has the

highest percent of women

undergraduates enrolled (89%)

and Engineering has the lowest percent (21%)


51%

61%

41%

72%

21%

81%

53%

89%

44%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

TOTAL CALS Business Education Engineering SoHE L&S Nursing Pharmacy

2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 201342%

44%

46%

48%

50%

52%

54%

56%

49.9%

50.1%

Women comprised more

than half ofgraduate/

professionalenrollment from

2004-2012.

Indicator 8: Percent Graduate/ProfessionalEnrollment by Gender, Fall 2013


Women

Men


Women as a Percentage of Total Grad/Professional Enrollment, by School/College, Fall 2013


Fall 2013• Nursing has the highest percent of

women enrolled in a graduate or

professional program, while

Engineering has the lowest percent

of women enrolled.


50% 52%

37%

69%

20%

84%

59%

53%

44%

52%

91%

60%

73%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

Total CALS Business Educ. Eng. SoHE Nelson L&S Law SMPH Nurs. Pharm. Vet Med

Enrollments by WI CountyHome County of UW-Madison Undergraduate Students (Wisconsin Residents)


Among the 72 Wisconsin counties, each is represented by at least 5 undergraduate students in Fall 2013.

Red: More than 4% of resident undergraduates from countyBlack: Between 2% and 4% of resident undergraduates from countyLight Gray: Less than 2% (but at least five students) of resident undergraduates from county

This section includes information on:• Undergraduate Pipeline and Access• Diversity Programs

Undergraduate Access and Pipeline



Undergraduate Enrollment Pipeline

The population in high school serves as a major pool for UW-Madison undergraduates• We can estimate the pipeline for several groups

– Minority Students– Low-Income (Pell or Free/Reduced Lunch)– First-Generation Students– Rural students

Pipelinehttp://apir.wisc.edu/diversity.htm

UW-Madison Enrolled

UW-Madison Admits

UW-Madison Applicants

Population 13-17"Potential"* First

Generation Students

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%Percent of Group Total

Wisconsin's First-Generation College-Going Recruiting Pool

(291,312 of 386,920)

(1,862 of 7,564)

(1,287 of 5,860)

(902 of 3,843)

No data available on graduation rates or academic achievement by parental education levels within Wisconsin

Pipeline: First Generation

*“Potential” First Generation Students does not imply any level of academic achievement, school enrollment, or preparedness. This estimate reflects the population 13-17 with no parent/guardian in the household with a Bachelor’s Degree. Sources: Overall WI Population (U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2005-2007 Estimates), Potential First Generation Students (“Parental Education and College Participation Rates in Wisconsin”, Sara Lazenby, August 2009), 2010 US Census Data, Applicants, Admits, and Enrolls for 2013-14 School Year

An estimated 75% of 13-17 year old Wisconsin residents live in households where no parent/guardian holds a bachelor’s degree.

Approximately 24% of UW-Madison Resident New Freshman are first-generation students.

We do not have a reliable data source on high school graduation or college preparedness by parental education levels for Wisconsin residents.



Wisconsin's Low-Income Recruiting Pool

(92,142 of 261,179)

(15,484 of 60,454)

No Data Available on Low-Income Status of UW-Madison Applicants or Admits

(668 of 3,837)

Economically Disadvantaged High School Public School Students

Economically Disadvantaged Public High School Graduates

UW-Madison Enrolled

Pipeline: Low Income

“Economically Disadvantaged” represents those students who are eligible for free/reduced lunch.Sources: Wisconsin DPI WINSS, 2012-13 Enrollment by Student Group, Completions by Student GroupUW-Madison Data based on Fall 2013

• 35% of Public K-12 students in Wisconsin are Economically Disadvantaged (2012-11)

• 26% of Public High School Graduates are Economically Disadvantaged (2012)

• We have no reliable information on income of applicant students, all data based on financial aid applications

• 17% of Resident New Freshmen are Pell Grant Recipients


UW-Madison Enrolled

UW-Madison Admits

UW-Madison Applicants

"Well-Prepared" Minority Public High

School Graduates

Minority Public High School Graduates

Minority Public High School Students


Wisconsin's Minority Recruiting Pool

(290,550 of 385,907)

(1,303 of 7,564)

(879 of 5,860)

(601 of 3,837)

(693 of 12,695)

(11,546 of 60,454)

(57,874 of 261,179)

Pipeline: Minority

• 22% of Public High School students in Wisconsin are minority students(2012-13)

• 19% of Public High School Graduates are minority students (2012)

• 16% of Resident New Freshmen are minority students (2013)


“Well-prepared” high school graduates are in the top quartile of their graduating classes and score at least 22 (WI Average) on the ACT (or equivalent SAT score). The ACT is only one of many academic factors considered in the admissions process.

23

23

21

30

50

77

77

79

70

50

Percent of Enrolled Freshmen

Percent of Freshmen Admits

Percent of Freshmen Applicants

Percent of 12th Graders

Percent of High Schools

Percent Rural, by Pipeline Step Not Rural Rural

Pipeline: Rural

• While over half of WI high schools are considered rural, only 30% of 12th graders attend a rural high school.

• Rural high school students apply at lower rates than other students

• Once they apply, rural students are admitted and enroll at rates proportional to their application rate.

Source: High School Characteristics and Early Academic Performance at UW-Madison, Clare Huhn, APIR.


Applicants, Admits, and Enrolls,New Freshmen, Fall 2013

• Wisconsin residents are the most likely applicants to be admitted and are most likely to enroll compared to other groups.


Total Applicants

% Admitted

% Enrolled/ Yield Rate

Overall 29,675 51.1 41.8

Male 14,808 47.6 43.4Female 14,867 54.5 40.4

Resident 7,564 77.5 65.5Domestic Non-Res. 12,938 48.1 22.9

International 6,006 24.0 27.2

Targeted Minorities 3,233 48.4 43.7Total Minority 5,461 50.7 36.8

First Generation 4,361 50.4 52.8

Applicants, Admits, and Enrolls, Transfer Students, Fall 2013

• One reason for low admit rates for transfer applicants is that many applicants do not meet the minimum requirements for admission

• Wisconsin residents are the most likely applicants to be admitted and are most likely to enroll compared to other groups.


Total Applicants

% Admitted

% Enrolled/ Yield Rate

Overall 4,453 39.8 61.3

Male 2,293 38.3 61.2Female 2,160 41.3 61.5

Resident 2,053 52.3 74.6Domestic Non-Res. 982 32.0 30.6

International 1,198 25.8 46.0

Targeted Minorities 418 31.8 64.7Total Minority 593 35.2 60.3

First Generation 1,160 41.6 68.9

Diversity Programs

Programs that increase access and success for underrepresented populations on campus and are centrally coordinated.• Programs with a Pre-College Component

– PEOPLE– POSSE

• Student Support Programs– CEO (formerly TRIO)– Academic Advancement Program– Pathways

• Scholarship Programs– Chancellor’s Scholars– Powers/Knapp– First Wave

Academic Excellence Communitieshttp://apir.wisc.edu/diversity.htm

Fall 2013 Undergraduate Participation in Academic Excellence Communities

*Targeted Minorities include African American, Native American, Hispanic/Latino/a, Southeast Asian (Cambodians, Laotians, Vietnamese, and Hmong). International students are not counted within the targeted minority categories.

Academic Excellence Community

Total Participants

Targeted Minority* Male Wisconsin

ResidentFirst

GenerationPell Grant

Eligible

Academic Advancement Program (AAP)

282 95% 45% 73% 29% 43%

Center for EducationalOpportunity (CEO) 440 88% 40% 72% 92% 79%

PEOPLE 325 86% 46% 96% 56% 58%

Posse 157 83% 48% 0% 62% 51%

First Wave 61 77% 43% 20% 59% 54%

Chancellor’s Scholar Program 203 99% 37% 62% 30% 23%

Powers/KnappProgram 174 99% 40% 84% 52% 46%

Pathways 79 91% 59% 61% 19% 23%

All Undergraduates 29,119 10% 48% 62% 21% 15%


Impact of PEOPLE and POSSE on Freshmen Enrollment

Targeted Minority New Freshmen Fall 20132013 New Freshmen (684)

Non-Residents(264)

WI Residents(420)

Illinois(98)

POSSE (11) Milwaukee(103)

PEOPLE (23)

Other (87) Other (80)

Minnesota(48)

Dane(59)

PEOPLE (34)

Other (25)

California(32)

POSSE (8) Waukesha(35)

PEOPLE (4)


DC/Maryland/VA(20)

POSSE (13) Kenosha(14)

PEOPLE (2)


New York(15)

POSSE (5) Marathon(14)Other (10)

Other States(51)

Racine(12)

PEOPLE (2)

Other (12)

Other Counties(183)

PEOPLE (3)

Other (180)


This section includes information on progress to degree measures including

• Retention and graduation rates• Time to degree • Peer comparisons

Undergraduate Progress to Degreehttp://apir.wisc.edu/diversity.htm

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Year of Cohort Entrance

Perc

ent

Gra

duat

ed

Retention and Graduation


14 percentage pointGraduation Rate gap

1.5 percentage point First-Year Retention Rate gap

All Students: 95%

All Students: 84%

Targeted Minority Students: 70%

Targeted Minority Students: 94%

Closing the Achievement Gap in Graduation Rates at UW-Madison(percent graduated within 6 years)

Closing the Achievement Gap in Retention Rates at UW-Madison (percent retained to the second year)

1998

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

70

80

90

100

Year of Cohort Entrance

Perc

ent

Reta

ined

Summary of Retention and Graduation Rates by Student Group



1-Year Retention Rate % Difference 6-Year Graduation

Rate % Difference

All New Freshmen 95.1 - 83.7 -Women 95.3 +0.2 85.2 1.5

Men 94.9 -0.2 82.0 -1.7Targeted Minority 93.6 -1.5 69.8 -13.9

Non-Targeted 95.3 +0.2 85.3 1.6African American 96.1 1.0 68.1 15.6Native American 87.5 -7.6 63.6 -20.1

Hispanic/Latino/a 93.4 -1.7 76.6 -7.1South East Asian 96.8 1.7 63.4 -20.3

Non-Targeted Asian 94.0 -1.1 80.1 -3.6International 95.2 0.2 74.3 -9.1

Wisconsin Residents 95.2 0.1 83.9 0.2Non-Residents 95.0 -0.1 82.5 -1.2

First-Generation College Students 92.5 -2.6 77.1 -6.6Freshmen Recipients of Pell Grants 94.3 -0.8 73.3 -10.4

FIGs 95.4 0.3 84.6 0.9Targeted Minority in FIGs 92.6 -2.1 67.4 -15.7

Note: 1-Year Retention Rate for 2012 Cohort, 6-Year Graduation Rate for 2007 Cohort





1-Year Retention Rate % Difference 6-Year Graduation

Rate % Difference

All New Freshmen 95.1 - 83.7 -Targeted Minority 93.6 -1.5 69.8 -13.9

PEOPLE 95.9 0.8 62.8 -20.9POSSE 100 4.9 90.9 7.2

Chancellor's Scholars 98.2 3.1 88.7 5.0Powers/Knapp Scholars 100 4.9 66.7 -17.0

AAP Participants 96.8 1.7 62.2 -21.5First Wave* 87.5 7.6 80.0 -3.7Pathways* 98.0 2.9

CEO*

Note: 1-Year Retention Rate for 2012 Cohort, 6-Year Graduation Rate for 2006 Cohort

*Retention/Graduation Rates not yet available for CEO. Graduation Rates not yet available for Pathways;

Graduation Rates of Targeted Minorities by Participation in an Academic Excellence Program



All Students

Targeted Minorities in an Academic Excellence Program

Targeted Minorities not in an Academic Excellence Program

All Targeted Minorities

*Academic Excellence Programs do not include programs coordinated by Schools/Colleges

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 200750

60

70

80

90

100

Retention and Graduation Rates, by Gender and Race/Ethnicity


Retained to Second Year (Men)

Retained to Second Year (Women)

Graduated in Six Years (Men)

Graduated in Six Years (Women)

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

UW-Madison Retention and Graduation Rates By Gender and Race/Ethnicity

All Students White Asian/Pacific Islander Hispanic Black American Indian/Alaskan Native

Perc

ent

Source: UW-Madison CSRDE Submission; 3-Year Average of Rates from 2004-2006, SL, APIR, October 2013

Ari

zona

Kans

asSU

NY-

Buffa

loN

ebra

ska

SUN

Y-St

ony

Broo

kCo

lora

doO

rego

nM

isso

uri

Iow

a St

ate

Purd

ueM

inne

sota

Iow

aIn

dian

aRu

tger

sO

hio

Stat

eW

eigh

ted

Ave

rage

Pitt

sbur

ghM

ichi

gan

Stat

eG

eorg

ia T

ech

UC

Sant

a Ba

rbar

aCa

se W

este

rnTe

xas

A&

MW

ashi

ngto

nTe

xas

UC

Dav

isM

aryl

and

Syra

cuse

UC

Irvi

neW

isco

nsin

Illin

ois

Flor

ida

Penn

Sta

teCa

ltec

hM

ichi

gan

UCL

AU

C Be

rkel

eyVa

nder

bilt

MIT

Colu

mbi

aCo

rnel

lVi

rgin

iaBr

own

Nor

thw

este

rn

-20.0

-15.0

-10.0

-5.0

0.0

5.0

10.0

Perc

enta

ge P

oint

Gap

Percentage Point Graduation Gap of Fall 2003-2005 Entrance Cohorts, Selected AAU Institutions

Selected Institutions, CSRDE data, sorted from lowest to highest overall graduation rates.

• Average graduation gap among AAU institutions is 1.2% (was 9.1% for 2002-2004 cohorts)

• Gap at UW-Madison is 10.5 percent, Compared to 17.1% for 2002-2004 cohorts.


This section includes information on • Participation in the Wisconsin

Experience• Student’s perception of their

learning experience

Bachelor’s Degree Holdershttp://apir.wisc.edu/diversity.htm

• “Wisconsin Experience” captures four inquiry-based high-impact practices and includes:– Substantial research experiences that

generate knowledge and analytical skills

– Global and cultural competencies and engagement

– Leadership and activism opportunities– Application of knowledge in the “real

world”• In 2011-12, 88% of bachelor’s degree

recipients participated in at least one Wisconsin Experience Program

• Targeted minority graduates were slightly more likely to have completed at least one Wisconsin Experience activity.

Wisconsin Experience



88% 91%

0

20

40

60

80

100

Percent of Graduates with at Least One Wisconsin Experience Activity

All Graduates Targeted Minority Graduates

Updated information is available annually in November.



• In 2011-12 targeted minority students were slightly more likely to have completed a Wisconsin Experience activity.


Updated information is available annually in November.

Percent of Bachelor’s Degree Recipients Who Participated in a Wisconsin Experience Activity

Total CALS Business Education Engineering SoHE L&S Nursing

88100

80

9685

9786

10091

100

8597

8497

89100

Non-Targeted Targeted



• Transfer-start graduates participated in Wisconsin Experience activities at lower rates (80%) than freshman-start graduates (91%).


Percent of Bachelor’s Degree Recipients Who Participated in a Wisconsin Experience Activity

Total CALS Business Education Engineering SoHE L&S Nursing

91100

8496

8798

90100

80

100

63

95

79

94

73

100

Freshman-Start Transfer-Start

Post-Graduation Plans – at Graduation“How able were/are you to …”(Targeted Minorities and Non-Targeted Students)


Learn on your ownApply skills and knowledge of your chosen major(s)

Find, organize, and evaluate information from multiple sources

Draw conclusions after weighing evidence, facts, and ideas

Develop a personal code of ethics and values

Empathize w/ind. differences based on culture, ethnicity, disability or sexual orientation

Write Effectively

Apply knowledge and skills in real world settings

Use computers and electronic technologyUnderstand that science is relevant to everyday life

Lead others effectively

Work collaboratively in groups

Speak Effectively

Understand culture and society within the United States

Contribute to the welfare of others

Understand cultures and societies outside of the United States

Appreciate the arts such as literature, music, and fine arts

Communicate in a language other than English

1

2

3

4

5

Targeted Minority Graduates Non-Targeted Graduates

Post-Graduation Plans – at Graduation“How able were/are you to …”(First-Generation and Continuing Generation)

http://apir.wisc.edu/diversity.htmLearn on your own

Apply skills and knowledge of your chosen major(s)





Write Effectively





Speak Effectively






1

2

3

4

5

First Generation Continuing Generation

Post-Graduation Plans – at Graduation“How able were/are you to …”(Males and Females)


Learn on your ownApply skills and knowledge of your chosen major(s)





Write Effectively





Speak Effectively






1

2

3

4

5

Female Male

This section includes information on • Faculty and Staff by gender and by

race/ethnicity

Faculty and Staffhttp://apir.wisc.edu/diversity.htm

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 20120

500

1000

1500

2000

2500

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Num

ber o

f Fac

ulty

Perc

ent o

f Fac

ulty

2013data available in December 2013

Indicator 10: Women as a Percentage of all Faculty


• In Fall 2012 32% of Faculty were women.

• 25.9% of Full Professors, 40.9% of Associate Professors, and 41.4% of Assistant Professors were women.

32%

Women as a Percentage of Faculty and Staff

2013 data available in December 2013


• Women make up just under 50% of all employees at UW-Madison.

• A smaller proportion of faculty members are women (32%)

Total Faculty Exec/Dir/Admin

Instructional Acad. Staff

Other Acad. Staff Classified0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Employee Race/Ethnicity Data

Employees self-report their race/ethnicity at the time of hire.

Employees may choose any of the following designations, and may select two or more races as of 2009:

• White• Black• Asian• American Indian• Hispanic/ Latino/a• Hawaiian


Indicator 11: Minority Faculty Recruitment

• Increases in the percent of faculty hires that are racial/ethnic minorities.

• 2011-12 Data affected by HRS conversion, 25% of faculty hires are missing information on race/ethnicity


82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08 09 10 11 120

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

UW-Madison Faculty Hires by Minority Status

Minority Faculty

Year of Hire

Perc

ent

Madison Plan

Strategic Hires

SHI - 2

Disciplinary Division Affiliation

• Selecting a divisional affiliation is a step in the tenure process. Faculty are not required to identify their divisional affiliation at the time of hire, but many do.

• Women, especially minority women, are heavily concentrated within the Social Studies Division

Note: Chart excludes 27 faculty members who have not yet selected a disciplinary division, as they are not required to do so until they go up for tenure and 75 with missing race/ethnicity data. Data as of October 2012 payroll.


Minority Males Minority Female

Non-Minority Male

Non-Minority Female

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

3220

35 27

16 3214 29

3311

28 10

1937

2334

Faculty Disciplinary Divison Affiliation,by Minority Status and Gender

Social Studies

Physical Sciences

Arts and Humanities

Biological Sciences

Black, 2.3%

Asian, 11.5%

American Indian, 0.4%

Hispanic, 3.6%

Two or More Races, 0.8%

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Minority Faculty as a Percent of the Total Faculty Headcount

16.8%16.9%16.2%

14.3% 14.6% 15.1% 15.4%

17.6% 17.8%18.5%

Indicator 12: Minority Faculty Representation

• In 2012: 2,173 total faculty members

• 18.5% (396) of Faculty are racial/ethnic minorities.

• 4.2% increase in minority faculty since 2003

2013 data available in December 2013, New race/ethnic categories implemented in 2010


Instructional Academic Staff

• In 2012, 2,299 Instructional Academic Staff members

• 12.2% (269) of Instructional Academic Staff are racial/ethnic minorities

• 2.4% increase in minority instructional academic staff since 2003


0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Minority Instructional Academic Staff as a Percent of the Total Headcount

11.7%12.1%11.2%

11.9%11.5%10.5%

9.8%

Black,1.4%

Asian,7.4%

American Indian,.3%

Hispanic/Latino/a,2.6%

11.8%

Two or More Races,.5%

11.4% 12.2%


0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Minority Non-Instructional Academic Staff as a Percent of the Total Headcount

Hispanic/ Latino/a, 1.9%AmericanIndian, .4%

Asian,8.3%

Black,2.0%

12%12%11.7%11.2%11.1%10.9%

10.2%

12.3%

Two or More Races,

.5%

12.5% 13.1%Hispanic/ Latino/a, 1.9%AmericanIndian, .4%

Asian,8.3%

Black,2.0%

12%12%11.7%11.2%11.1%10.9%

10.2%

12.3%

Two or More Races,

.5%

12.5% 13.1%

Non-Instructional Academic Staff

• In 2012: 5,084 non-instructional Academic Staff

• 13.1% of non-instructional Academic Staff are minorities

• 2.9% increase in minority non-instructional academic staff since 2003



Classified Staff

• In 2012: 5,311 Classified Staff members

• 13.5% (705) of classified staff are minorities

• 4.4% increase in minority classified staff since 2003


0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Minority Classified Staff as a Percent of the Total Headcount

12.6%12%11.8%11.3%11%

10%9.1%

Hispanic/ Latino/a, 5.2% American Indian,.3%

Asian, 4.6%

Black,2.8%

12.9%

Two or More Races, 0.6%

13.1% 13.5%


Executive/Director/Administrators

• In 2012: 425 Executive/Director/Administrators

• 12.3% of Executive/Director/Administrators are racial/ethnic minorities

• 1.2% increase in minority Executive/Director/Administrators since 2003.


0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

18

20

2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012

Minority Executive/Director/Administrators as a Percent of the Total Headcount

Hispanic/Latino/a, 3.7% American Indian, .5% Asian, 1.7%

Black,6.2%

11.2%11.6%11.2%11.2%10.8%10.8%11.1%11.9%

Two or More Races,.2% 11.8%

12.3%


All Employee Groups

- 14% of all employees are members of a minority group.- 18% of faculty are members of a minority group.


Total Faculty Exec/Dir/

Admin

Instructional Acad. Staff

Other Acad. Staff

Classified0%2%4%6%8%

10%12%14%16%18%20%

Percent of Minority Faculty and Staff by Employee Type

2013 data available in December 2013, New race/ethnic categories implemented in 2010. Total excludes Employees-in-Training and Graduate Assistants.

Peer Comparisons

for Faculty Diversity

Non-White Full-Time Faculty as a Percent of Total Full-Time Faculty at AAU Public Institutions, 2011-12

Source: IPEDS Fall HR, 2011-12 (AAUDE data)


Average percent non-white faculty for AAU public institutions: 28%

UW-Madison: 17%

7 AAU public institutions have a lower number of non-white faculty.

WisconisnVirginiaOregonIndiana

Penn StateNorth Carolina

ColoradoWashington

KansasOhio State

Texas A&MMichigan State

BuffaloIowa

MissouriIllinoisFlorida

ArizonaMinnesota

Stony BrookIowa State

Georgia TechRutgers

UC-Santa BarbaraUT-Austin

PurdueUC-Berkeley

MarylandPittsburgh

UC-DavisUCLA

UC-San DiegoMichiganUC-Irvine

0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%

N=873N=2,250N=1,301N=1,629

N=1,252

N=526N=365

N=258N=491N=670N=681

N=648

N=1,725N=1,098

N=1,049N=758

N=775

N=412N=738N=306

N=630N=451N=1,183

N=742N=1,175N=585

N=818N=632N=400

N=648N=587N=834

N=800N=602

This section includes information on • Faculty and Tenure

Faculty and Tenurehttp://apir.wisc.edu/diversity.htm

Faculty Tenure Data

• Faculty who did not receive tenure include:– Those who were denied

tenure– Those who left the

university for another position elsewhere

– A few faculty members still hold probationary appointments after 9 years.

• Tenure and promotion rates are calculated at 6 and 9 years after hire, to account for those who have extensions on the tenure clock.

• Data combine hires from 1992-93 to 2006-07 or 1993-94 to 2006-07. This is necessary to account for small numbers of hires.

• Small Ns make tenure rates subject to large variation.


Notes about faculty tenure data:

Indicator 13: Percent of Faculty Promoted to Tenure by Gender

• At 9 years, 66% of women faculty have been promoted to tenure.Percent tenured based on data for hires from 1993-94 to 2006-07


6 Years 9 Years0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

55%

72%

42%

66%

Percent Promoted to Tenure by Gender,within Six (6) and Nine (9) YearsMen Women

Indicator 14: Percent of Faculty Promoted to Tenure by Minority Status

• At 9 Years, 66% of minority faculty members have been promoted to tenure.


Percent tenured based on data for hires from 1993-94 to 2006-07

6 Years 9 Years0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

51%

72%

48%

66%

Percent Promoted to Tenure by Minor-ity

Status, within Six (6) and Nine (9) YearsNon-Minority

Promotion to Tenure

• A lower percentage of women and men are promoted to tenure within the Social Studies.

• The largest gap in tenure rates by gender is within the Social Studies division.

Data on faculty hires from 1992-93 to 2006-07


72%

81% 78%74%

58%66%

73%81%

75%

49%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Total Physical Sciences Arts and Humanities

Biological Sciences Social Studies

Percent of Faculty Promoted within Nine (9) Years, by Gender and Division

Men Women

N=515

N=260

N=82N=135

N=30

N=78

N=179 N=77

N=119

N=75

66%

80%73%

68%

46%

71%79%

85%

75%

56%

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Total Physical Sciences Arts and Humanities

Biological Sciences Social Studies

Percent of Faculty Promoted within Nine (9) Years, by Minority Status and Division

Minority Non-Minority

N=156

N=580 N=45

N=111

N=40

N=115

N=39N=200

N=32N=154

Promotion to Tenure

• A lower percentage of faculty members are promoted to tenure within the Social Studies division.

• The largest gap in tenure rates by minority status is within the Physical Sciences and Arts and Humanities.



Tenure/Promotion Data



• All groups have lower promotion rates within the Social Studies division.

• Women, and especially minority women, are more likely to be within the social studies division.

• For groups with small hiring pools, the effect of one person’s tenure/non-tenure can affect the percent tenured dramatically.

• Those not receiving tenure includes those who took a position elsewhere or still have a probationary appointment after 9 years.

Key findings from tenure/promotion data:

This section includes information on • Climate studies and surveys that include

climate-related questions

Climate Studies and Surveyshttp://apir.wisc.edu/diversity.htm

Climate Studieshttp://apir.wisc.edu/diversity.htm

• UW-Madison participated in UW System Climate Study in 2011 (limited to CALS and Office of Student Life);

• Letters & Science Climate Study was conducted in 2009-10; with linkages to STEM, teaching and learning communities

• NSSE Survey includes many climate-related questions, 2004, 2006, 2008, 2011, 2014 (planned)

• WISELI Studies and Programs; on-going since 2002

Climate Studieshttp://apir.wisc.edu/diversity.htm

UW-Madison Participation in the UW System Climate Study

• The UW System Climate Study was implemented at the request of the Board of Regents. Tier I was implemented by several UWs in 2008-09. Tier II was implemented in 2009-10. Tier III was implemented in 2010-11

• UW-Madison’s Climate Survey was fielded in February 2011; responses were anonymous and confidential

• Questionnaire went to all employees and students in CALS and Division of Student Life

• Reports are now available; see CALS E&D committee poster• More detail: http://apir.wisc.edu/diversity-climate.htm

National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE) 2011

Selected NSSE 2011 Results

** significantly different

Percent of Seniors who often or very much:


Tried to better understand someone else's views by imagining how it looks from their perspective

Included diverse perspectives in class discussion or assignments

Had serious conversations with student of a different race or ethnicity than your own

Understand people of other racial/ethnic backgrounds

75

63

71

55

66

56

49

56

67

57

52

56AllNon-MinorityMinority

**

**

See: http://apir.wisc.edu/students-surveys.htm

NSSE 2011

Selected NSSE 2011 ResultsPercent of Seniors for whom the university emphasizes quite a bit or very much:

See: http://apir.wisc.edu/students-surveys.htm


Encouraging contact among students from different economic, social, and racial or ethnic backgrounds

Helping you cope with non-academic responsibilities (work, family, etc)

Providing the support you need to thrive socially

Providing the support you need to succeed academically

44

25

40

71

47

21

41

72

46

22

41

72

AllNon-minorityMinority

Summary of Indicators

Indicators present in this report:1. Percent enrollment of minority undergraduate students2. Percent enrollment of targeted minority undergraduate students3. Percent enrollment of targeted minority graduate students4. Percent enrollment of targeted minority professional students5. Percent enrollment of Pell grant recipients6. Percent enrollment of first-generation students7. Percent enrollment of undergraduates by gender8. Percent enrollment of graduate/professional students by gender9. Retention/Graduation rates of targeted minorities, Pell grant recipients,

and first-generation students.10. Women as a percent of all Faculty11. Minority Faculty recruitment12. Minority Faculty representation13. Percent of Faculty promoted to tenure by gender14. Percent of Faculty promoted to tenure by minority status


Diversity Update 2013

• Slideshow available at http://apir.wisc.edu/diversity.htm

• Questions about these slides:– Sara Lazenby ([email protected])– Jocelyn Milner ([email protected])


mailto:[email protected]

mailto:[email protected]

diversity update 2013 october 2013

Documents

targeted minority calculations

external data reporting

htminternational students

htm2013 data

primary reporting methodology

raceethnicity informationthe

raceethnicity reportinghttp

raceethnic categories