Currently the model uses single-year comparisons which are subject to greater annual variation. A better approach would be multiple-year comparisons which are better for tracking trend data. Two possible methods we might suggest would be (a) comparing 2005/06 data to either a prior 3-year or 5-year average or (b) comparing the most recent
2- or 3-year averages to prior 3- or 5-year averages. Either
of these methods would help
to reduce the misleading results that can arise from single-year data comparisons.
The model excludes a significant proportion of undergraduate students from eligibility
for additional points (non-Florida students).
The model fails to recognize students who may be working and as a result take longer
to graduate. We believe it is important to differentiate between fulltime versus part-time enrollment when calculating these rates.
Also, it is important to recognize that some degree programs, particularly those in the medical professions have required clinical practice requirements and as a result take
longer then 4 years to complete.
By awarding the same 4 point value to 4 year students who graduate in 4 years and
AA students who graduate in 2 years, Universities would be encouraged to focus on
AA students. Additionally, why use
3-year graduation rates for AA transfers as
opposed to 2 and 4-year rates? The 2 and 4-year rates seem to be the standard used
across the country.
By rewarding the speed of graduation, Universities would be encouraged to admit
only the top students as well as those without previous academic credit that may push
them beyond the 4 year window.
It is interesting to note that UNF’s graduation and retention rates exceed those at other institutions that enroll commuter/non-traditional, part-time students (UWF, FGCU, FAU). Such comparisons to our closest peers may be more appropriate than against universities that have traditional full time student bodies (UF, FSU, etc.).
Additionally, a mechanism needs to be put in place that provides credit for students
that transfer to other Florida Universities. It might be better to track students who
start at institutions like UNF to see if they graduate from other state institutions (e.g. UF).
If we are talking about system successes, it might be beneficial to track students from
their first admitting university.
The listing of emerging technologies is open for discussion because some areas are not supported in the current job market place.