Skip to main content

Another Way of Looking at Graduation Rates

Another article appeared in my Facebook feed about college ROI, although it was called the 50 Best Private Colleges for Earning Your Degree on Time.   As is often the case, there is nothing really wrong with the facts of the article: You see a nice little table showing the 50 Colleges with the highest graduation rate.

But it got me to thinking: What if high graduation rate wasn't enough?  What if a considerable portion of your freshman class that graduates takes longer than four years to do so? Is that a good deal?  Let's take some hypotheticals:

College A: 1000 freshmen, 800 who graduate within four years, 900 who graduate in five, and 950 who graduate in six.  So the four-, five-, and six-year graduation rates are 80%, 90%, and 95%.  But of the 950 who eventually graduate, only 84.2% do so in four years.

College B: 1000 freshmen, 750 who graduate within four years, 775 who graduate in five, and 800 who graduate in six.  So the four-, five-, and six-year graduation rates are 75%, 77.5%, and 80%. Thus, of the 800 who eventually graduate, almost 94% do so in four years.

College C: 1000 freshmen, 550 who graduate within four years, 600 who graduate in five, and 625 who graduate in six.  So the four-, five-, and six-year graduation rates are 55%, 60%, and 62.5%. Of the 625 who eventually graduate, 88% do so in four years.

If you were choosing among these three colleges, which might you choose?  The easy money says you go with College A, the one with the highest graduation rate. College B would be your second choice, and C would be your third.  But what if you are absolutely, positively certain you'll graduate from the college you choose? College B is first, then College C, then College A.

Data can be tricky.  And as I've written many times, things like graduation rates are really almost inputs, not outputs: If you choose wealthy, well-educated students, you're going to have higher graduation rates.  It's a classic case of making a silk purse out of, well, silk.

I've tried to demonstrate this in this visualization, and I like the simplicity here.  Each dot is a college (hover over it for details).  They're in boxes based on the average freshman ACT score across the top, and the percentage of students with Pell along the side.  The dots are colored by four-year graduation rates, and you should see right away the pattern that emerges.  Red dots (top right) tend to be selective colleges with fewer poor students.

But if you want to look at the chance a graduate will finish in four years, use the filter at the bottom right.  Find a number you like, pull the left slider up to it, and see who remains.  (Just a note: I'm a little suspicious of any number of 100% on this scale, which would mean absolutely no students who graduate take longer than four years to do so.  It might be true, but it's hard to believe. But I'd set the right slider to 99% at the most.)  Remember, there's a lot of bad IPEDS data out there, so don't place any bar bets on what you see here.

What do you see?



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Another 1000 Words and Ten Charts on First-generation, Low-income, and Minority Students

I have always enjoyed writing, and I consider this and my other blog like a hobby.  Usually, I spend no more than 45 minutes on any post, as I don't make my living by writing, and my blogs are not "monetized." But once in a while, an opportunity presents itself to write for a wider audience, and that's when I see what it takes to make a living putting words to paper. That happened this week.

You may have seen my opinion piece in the Chronicle of Higher Education. If not, you can read it first, read it last, or not at all; I think both this and that stand alone, despite their relationship.  In the end, we ended up with about 40% of my first draft, which is what happens when you write for a print publication. And of course, a print publication makes interactive charts, well, difficult.

I think there is more to say on the topic, because the similarities in recruitment challenges for first-generation, low-income, and minority students tend to look a lot alike, and the mo…

2018 Admissions Data

This is always a popular post, it seems, and I've had a couple of people already ask when it was going to be out.  Wait no more.

This is IPEDS 2018 admissions data, visualized for you in two different ways.  You can switch using the tabs across the top.

The first view is the universe of colleges and universities that report data; not every college is required to, and a few leave data out, and test optional colleges are not supposed to report test scores.  But IPEDS is not perfect, so if you find any problems, contact the college.

On the first view, you'll see 1,359 four-year private and public, not-for-profit institutions displayed.  In order to make this as clean as possible, I've taken out some specialty schools (nursing, business, engineering, etc.) as many of those don't have complete data.  But you can put them back in using the filter at top right.

Hover over any bar, and a little chart pops up showing undergraduate enrollment by ethnicity.

You can also choose to…

Yes, your yield rate is still falling

In 2015, I wrote this post on falling yield rates.  It was pretty obvious to many of us in the profession that this trend was widespread, and largely driven by a dramatic increase in applications against a more modest increase in actual students who could or would enroll.

It apparently wasn't so obvious to everyone.  Response was much stronger than I thought it would be, and I never had seen so many requests from people who wanted to share it with their trustees (btw, this is public; you never have to ask permission to share).

So I redid it, using trend data from 2005 to 2018.  First a couple of definitions:


Admit rate is the percentage of applicants who were offered admission (admits/applicants).Yield rate is the percentage of admitted students who enroll (enrollers/admits).Draw rate is not commonly known, and I wish I remember who first mentioned it to me in the 1980's.  It stuck with me and is a valuable metric, I think, as we attempt to measure market position.  It's Y…