Oklahoma State Regents Oklahoma State Regents

for Higher Educationfor Higher Education

Enrollment has increased; Enrollment has increased; state appropriations have decreased.state appropriations have decreased.

Enrollment has increased; Enrollment has increased; state appropriations have decreased.state appropriations have decreased.

System Funding and FTE Enrollment History

119,115 121,111

128,530

134,874

140,250 est.

$829.1

$767.8

$791.5

$816.2

$772.2105,000

110,000

115,000

120,000

125,000

130,000

135,000

140,000

145,000

FY00 FY01 FY02 FY03 FY04

$767.0

$777.0

$787.0

$797.0

$807.0

$817.0

$827.0

$837.0

$847.0

$857.0

FTE Enrollment Appropriations

Change in Resident Undergraduate Tuition (public four-year) and State Higher Education Appropriations,

1990-91 to 2003-04

Change in Resident Undergraduate Tuition (public four-year) and State Higher Education Appropriations,

1990-91 to 2003-04

-6%

-3%

0%

3%

6%

9%

12%

15%

90-9191-92

92-9393-94

94-9595-96

96-9797-98

98-9999-00

00-0101-02

02-0303-04

Financial Outlook 2004Financial Outlook 2004Financial Outlook 2004Financial Outlook 2004 

                                                                                             

Tuition on the Tuition on the RiseRise

Over the past decade, average tuition and fees, adjusted for

inflation, increased $1,506 (or 47 percent)

at public four-year colleges and $5,866 (or 42 percent) at private

four-year colleges.

State Population with Bachelor’s State Population with Bachelor’s Degree or Higher Age 25 Years and Degree or Higher Age 25 Years and

Older, 2002Older, 2002

State Population with Bachelor’s State Population with Bachelor’s Degree or Higher Age 25 Years and Degree or Higher Age 25 Years and

Older, 2002Older, 2002Dist of Columbia 1

Maryland 2Colorado 3Virginia 4

Massachusetts 5Connecticut 6New Jersey 7

Vermont 8Minnesota 9

New Hampshire 10Rhode Island 11

Delaware 12Kansas 13

New York 14Washington 15

California 16Illinois 17

Nebraska 18Oregon 19

Utah 20Hawaii 21

Missouri 22Arizona 23

Texas 24Pennsylvania 25

Florida 26Alaska 27

New Mexico 28North Dakota 29

Georgia 30Wisconsin 31

Ohio 32Maine 33

Indiana 34Montana 35

South Dakota 36South Carolina 37

Iowa 38Alabama 39Michigan 40

North Carolina 41Nevada 42

Louisiana 43Kentucky 44Tennessee 45

Idaho 46Mississippi 47Oklahoma 48Wyoming 49Arkansas 50

West Virginia 51

44.437.635.734.634.332.631.430.830.530.130.129.529.128.828.327.927.327.127.128.826.826.426.326.226.125.725.625.425.32524.724.523.823.723.623.623.323.122.722.522.422.122.121.621.520.920.920.419.618.515.9

Oklahoma 48Oklahoma 48 20.420.4

Enrollment Enrollment Growth at Growth at For-Profit For-Profit CollegesCollegesAlthough the biggest for-profit colleges enroll less than 3 percent of all postsecondary students, their enrollment is growing much faster than that of higher education as a whole.

Enrollment Enrollment Growth at Growth at For-Profit For-Profit CollegesCollegesAlthough the biggest for-profit colleges enroll less than 3 percent of all postsecondary students, their enrollment is growing much faster than that of higher education as a whole.

Population with Bachelor’s Degree or higher

Per

Ca

pit

a In

com

e

$16,000

$18,000

$20,000

$22,000

$24,000

$26,000

$28,000

$30,000

15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%

OKState Per Capita Personal Income v. Share of State Per Capita Personal Income v. Share of Adult Population with Bachelor’s Adult Population with Bachelor’s Degree or HigherDegree or Higher

Population with Bachelor’s Degree or higher

Per

Ca

pit

a In

com

e

DCCT

NJMA

MD

VA

CO

CAWA

IL

IN

MESC

MI

NV

AZTXIA

WV AR

MS

ID

OK

LA

KYAL

MTNM

UT

NDSDTN

WY

NC

KSOR

NE

MO

OHWI

GAFL

PAHI VT

RI

NH

DE

MNNYAK

$16,000

$18,000

$20,000

$22,000

$24,000

$26,000

$28,000

$30,000

15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40% 45%

State Per Capita Personal Income v. Share of State Per Capita Personal Income v. Share of Adult Population with Bachelor’s Adult Population with Bachelor’s Degree or HigherDegree or Higher

14.3%15.1%

34.8%37.5%

52.0%

57.7%60.7%

69.2%

0 - $34,999 $35,000 – $64,999 $65,000 - $99,999 $100,000 and above

Percent of Population with Bachelor’s Degree by Age Percent of Population with Bachelor’s Degree by Age and Individual Income and Individual Income

Quartile for the State of Oklahoma and U.S.Quartile for the State of Oklahoma and U.S.

Per

cen

t of

Pop

ula

tion

wit

h a

B

ach

elor

’s D

egre

e

Income Quartile

Oklahoma 25 years of age and over

U.S. 25 years of age and over

Number of Public Higher Education Number of Public Higher Education Institutions Compared to Total PopulationInstitutions Compared to Total Population

(Actual vs. Predicted)(Actual vs. Predicted)

Number of Public Higher Education Number of Public Higher Education Institutions Compared to Total PopulationInstitutions Compared to Total Population

(Actual vs. Predicted)(Actual vs. Predicted)

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

140

160

0 5000000 10000000 15000000 20000000 25000000 30000000 35000000 40000000

Population

Nu

mb

er o

f P

ub

lic In

stit

uti

on

s

OK

Projected Change in Employment by Projected Change in Employment by Education and Training, 1998-2008Education and Training, 1998-2008Projected Change in Employment by Projected Change in Employment by Education and Training, 1998-2008Education and Training, 1998-2008

Education and PercentTraining Category IncreaseDoctoral Degree 23Master’s Degree 19

Bachelor’s Degree 24Associate Degree 31

Vocational Training 14Work Experience 12On-Job Training 7All Occupations 14

Source: Monthly Labor Review, U.S. Bureau of Labor

Empowered, Informed, Self-Directed Life Empowered, Informed, Self-Directed Life Long LearnersLong Learners

Stable or Less State Funding

Lecture = Most Economical Approach

More Students

Bigger Classes

Reduced Student Learning

Experience

Employers (Business Leaders) Less Satisfied With

Graduates

Legislators Less Sure of Quality and Value

Alternative Approaches,

Remedies

Course Redesign

Shared Resources

Skills and Attributes Skills and Attributes of a Nation of Learnersof a Nation of Learners

Skills and Attributes Skills and Attributes of a Nation of Learnersof a Nation of Learners

LeadershipLeadership TeamworkTeamwork Problem SolvingProblem Solving Time ManagementTime Management Self-managementSelf-management AdaptabilityAdaptability Analytical ThinkingAnalytical Thinking Global ConsciousnessGlobal Consciousness Basic CommunicationsBasic Communications

The Business-Higher Education Forum, Spanning the Chasm: Corporate and Academic Cooperation To Improve Workforce Preparation, 1997.

Course Redesign ProjectCourse Redesign ProjectCarol Twig, RPICarol Twig, RPI

Course Redesign ProjectCourse Redesign ProjectCarol Twig, RPICarol Twig, RPI

Active Student LearningActive Student Learning

Learning Assistance TechnologiesLearning Assistance Technologies

http://www.center.rpi.edu/pewgrant/rd2less.htmlhttp://www.center.rpi.edu/pewgrant/rd2less.html

http://www.center.rpi.edu/pewgrant/rd2award.htmlhttp://www.center.rpi.edu/pewgrant/rd2award.html

Today’s WorldToday’s WorldToday’s WorldToday’s World

Continuing conditions of tight budget.Continuing conditions of tight budget.

College degrees important to self, state College degrees important to self, state

and beyond.and beyond.

Think differently about teaching and learning.Think differently about teaching and learning.

Teaching for TomorrowTeaching for TomorrowTeaching for TomorrowTeaching for Tomorrow

Teach collaborativelyTeach collaboratively Advisory boards for every departmentAdvisory boards for every department Content important, but new focus on learningContent important, but new focus on learning Students expect technologyStudents expect technology Strategic investment for teachingStrategic investment for teaching

Technology Intensity of Technology Intensity of Business BaseBusiness Base

TECHNOLOGY INTENSITY OFBUSINESS BASE RANK

%Established in high-tech businesses 32

%Employed in high-tech 35

% Percent payroll in high-tech 36

% Established births in high-tech 35

2003 U.S. Department of Commerce report “The Dynamics of Technology-Based Economic Development.”

Funding In-FlowsFunding In-FlowsFUNDING IN-FLOWS RANKR&D expenditures/$1000 of GSP 43

Industry R&D/$1000 of GSP 40

Federal R&D/$1000 of GSP 28

University R&D/$1000 of GSP 31

SBIR awards/$1000 of GSP 41

STTR awards/$1000 of GSP 19

2003 U.S. Department of Commerce report “The Dynamics of Technology-Based Economic Development.”

Industrial R&D Per CapitaIndustrial R&D Per Capita

1997 1998 20001999Year

400

300

200

100

0

500

600

700

800

$ P

er C

apit

a

Source: OCAST

US

AR

OK

MO

TX

KS

Federally Funded University R&DFederally Funded University R&D

40

30

20

10

0

50

60

70

80

$ P

er C

apit

a

Source: OCAST

1996 20001999

Year

1994 1995 1997 1998 2001

AR

OK

MOKS

TX

US

State R&D ProfileState R&D Profile• Oklahoma’s Fed R&D funding

capture rate $55 per capita

• National Fed R&D funding capture rate $269 per capita

Leave $738,000,000 in federally-sponsored R&D funding on the table each year

INSTRUCTIONAL SPENDING PER FTE, BY STATEPercent Change and Current Position Relative to U.S. Average

-50%

-40%

-30%

-20%

-10%

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

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

Percent Over/Under the U.S. Average, FY02

Per

cen

t C

han

ge,

FY

91 -

FY

02

high and increasing

low and increasing

low and decreasing

high and decreasing

AK

MS

WV

MD

KY

ILNJ

NYTX

ALSD

TNCO

NEFL

OK

LA

MT NMNC

HI

RI,MA

WA SC

ND

AR

VA

ID

KS MOGA

NH

MN

OH

WIIA

ME

MI

PA

VT

U.S.

WYUT

CA IN

OR

NVAZ

DE

Source: State Higher Education Finance (SHEF) Survey1990-91 through 2001-02 - SHEEO

Oklahoma State Regents Oklahoma State Regents

for Higher Educationfor Higher Education