Skip to main content

Who's Going to NACAC?

One of the things I hope to show people on this blog is that data is a lot more fun and interesting when you actually do something with it, rather than just present it in a spreadsheet. Here's a good example.

This week, over 6,000 people who work in or around college admissions will converge on Columbus, Ohio for the NACAC Conference.  (Yes, Oktoberfest is also in Columbus this weekend, and based on my informal discussions, there may be some overlap.)  NACAC puts its attendees in a table on its website for anyone to use.

But it's just data: What does a simple spreadsheet have the power to tell us?  Maybe more than you think.  Yesterday, I put the information in a visualization (first page is set up for mobile but autosized) designed to help people find other attendees.  As a side effort, I put up a chart of the most common first names of attendees, and it proved to be very popular. So last night I did a little more, and looked at most common first, and last names, as well as city, state, country, and organization.  They're below, and I think they say a lot about our profession.  What the information says is up to you to decide.

If you want to interact, click on a first name, and the other views update.  See? Interactivity can be fun too.

A note about the data: I did only minimal cleaning on it; when 6,000 people enter data on a form, there are bound to be errors.  Chicago, for instance, is not in Bosnia-Herzegovina. And I'm pretty sure Beijing is in China.  I did not clean up names, so if you really think your first name is "Mr. Daniel" you miss out on a chance to be included with the other Daniels. And Daniel is Daniel, not Dan, so variations are not grouped together.

Have fun.  And tell me what you think the data says.


Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Baccalaureate origins of doctoral recipients

Here's a little data for you: 61 years of it, to be precise.  The National Science Foundation publishes its data on US doctoral recipients sliced a variety of ways, including some non-restricted public use files that are aggregated at a high level to protect privacy. The interface is a little quirky, and if you're doing large sets, you need to break it into pieces (this was three extracts of about 20 years each), but it may be worth your time to dive in. I merged the data set with my mega table of IPEDS data, which allows you to look at institutions on a more granular level:  It's not surprising to find that University of Washington graduates have earned more degrees than graduates of Whitman College, for instance.  So, you can filter the data by Carnegie type, region or state, or control, for instance; or you can look at all 61 years, or any range of years between 1958 and 2018 and combine it with broad or specific academic fields using the controls. High school and indep

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

So you think you're going back to the SAT and ACT?

Now that almost every university in the nation has gone test-optional for the 2021 cycle out of necessity, a nagging question remains: How many will go back to requiring tests as soon as it's possible?  No one knows, but some of the announcements some colleges made sounded like the kid who only ate his green beans to get his screen time: They did it, but they sure were not happy about it.  So we have some suspicions about the usual suspects. I don't object to colleges requiring tests, of course, even though I think they're not very helpful, intrinsically biased against certain groups, and a tool of the vain.  You be you, though, and don't let me stop you. However, there is a wild card in all of this: The recent court ruling prohibiting the University of California system from even using--let alone requiring--the SAT or ACT in admissions decisions next fall.  If you remember, the Cal State system had already decided to go test blind, and of course community colleges in