Skip to main content

Public University State Tuition

Note: The visualizations are not optimized for mobile.  A desktop is recommended for best viewing.

From the annual College Board Trends in College Pricing comes some interesting data, which I've combined into one database for visualization, focusing on public university tuition for residents and non-residents.  This looks complex, but it's pretty simple.

The opening view shows six charts: 2015 tuition for residents; for non-residents; and the premium a non-resident pays (in sticker price) across the top.  On bottom are three scatters: Resident tuition as a function of state funding per FTE student; five-year, inflation adjusted tuition for residents and not residents; and funding per $1000 of personal income and resident tuition.  Of these, I think the middle is the most compelling: Note the states that have raised tuition faster for residents than for non-residents.

The chart starts with US Averages in red, against the states as gray.  Use the control in the middle to highlight a single state on all six views.  As always, hover over any point for details, and use the reset arrow at lower left if you get stuck.

Using the tabs across the top, you can navigate to the map view.  Choose any value at top right to display on the map.  That value is displayed on the state, and the tiles (representing the states) are color-coded.  Red is high; blue is low.  Click on any tile on the map, and a summary of that state appears at the bottom.

Would your state legislator find this valuable? If so, I'd encourage you to forward to her or him. Otherwise, leave a comment at the bottom, letting me know what you see.



Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Highly Rejective Colleges

If you're not following Akil Bello on Twitter, you should be.  His timeline is filled with great insights about standardized testing, and he takes great effort to point out racism (both subtle and not-so-subtle) in higher education, all while throwing in references to the Knicks and his daughter Enid, making the experience interesting, compelling, and sometimes, fun. Recently, he created the term " highly rejective colleges " as a more apt description for what are otherwise called "highly selective colleges."  As I've said before, a college that admits 15% of applicants really has a rejections office, not an admissions office.  The term appears to have taken off on Twitter, and I hope it will stick. So I took a look at the highly rejectives (really, that's all I'm going to call them from now on) and found some interesting patterns in the data. Take a look:  The 1,132 four-year, private colleges and universities with admissions data in IPEDS are incl

Freshman Migration, 1986 to 2020

(Note: I discovered that in IPEDS, Penn State Main Campus now reports with "The Pennsylvania State University" as one system.  So when you'd look at things over time, Penn State would have data until 2018, and then The Penn....etc would show up in 2020.  I found out Penn State main campus still reports its own data on the website, so I went there, and edited the IPEDS data by hand.  So if you noticed that error, it should be corrected now, but I'm not sure what I'll do in years going forward.) Freshman migration to and from the states is always a favorite visualization of mine, both because I find it a compelling and interesting topic, and because I had a few breakthroughs with calculated variables the first time I tried to do it. If you're a loyal reader, you know what this shows: The number of freshman and their movement between the states.  And if you're a loyal viewer and you use this for your work in your business, please consider supporting the costs

Yes, your yield rate is still falling, v 2020

I started doing this post on a regular basis several years ago, in response (if I recall) to a colleague talking about their Board of Trustees Chair insisting that "all we need to do" to bring enrollment back to its former level is to get the yield rate up.   That's the equivalent of saying all you need to do is straighten your drives and cut ten putts from each round, and you'll be a great golfer.  Moreover, it's based on the assumption that a falling yield rate is based on something you're doing or not doing.  The challenge is much larger, and a lot harder to address.  It's not a switch you flip. So we've got this: A look at applications, admits, and enrolls over the last twenty years, and three key ratios that are based on those numbers: Admit rate, or the percentage of applicants offered admission; yield rate, or the percentage of those offered admission who enroll; and the lesser-known draw rate, which is calculated by dividing the yield rate by t