Angela Lynn Western Illinois University 2011 IACRAO Conference

 STARS: Students access their University records online using their WIU ID number and password.  Affidavit of Dependency: Taxpayer submits affidavit along with proof showing student was claimed as a dependent on most recent tax forms. Valid for one year.  Authorization to Release Information: Student identifies the information to be released and to whom it may be released. Student’s signature must be notarized.

 There was a significant increase in the use of the Student Authorization to Release Information Form.  University wanted a more user-friendly way for parents/guests to have access to authorized student records.  Major Goals Students – To authorize access to their records. Parents – To have access to the records in an easy format. University – To provide a mechanism for access with limited intervention by officials.

 Registrar’s Office coordinated with Billing and Receivables and Financial Aid to create a system that covered the primary screens of each office.  Access to the student’s records would be completely controlled by the student.  No administrative mechanism to allow offices to confirm whether or not the student had set up or activated an account.  Implemented in Summer 2007.

 Student may grant online access to records to multiple guests (maximum of 5) by selecting Parent and Guest Account Management from the STARS menu.  Student may provide different levels of access to STARS account information for each guest.  Student identifies “name” for guest.

 When student creates a guest account, a WIU ID Number and Password is assigned.  The student is responsible for communicating the login information to the guest.  Parent and Guest Access to STARS is the University’s preferred method for parents to access information about their students.

 Growing interest in tuition-and-fee stability in an unpredictable economic environment, more colleges and universities are implementing cost guarantees (FinAid, 2007; Kim, 2004).  Concerns were expressed regarding the values and merits of a cost guarantee (Morphew, 2007).  No study has attempted to examine the impact of a cost guarantee.

 The primary purpose of this study is to investigate how the Cost Guarantee program impacts student enrollment, retention, and graduation in a comprehensive public university.  This study also examined how the Cost Guarantee influenced annual college attendance cost.

1. Did the Cost Guarantee policy make the university competitive in attendance cost, compared to other public universities in the state? 2. Did the Cost Guarantee policy increase student enrollment? 3. Did the Cost Guarantee policy improve student outcomes, particularly retention and graduation rates?

 Data Collection ◦ Secondary data set ◦ Trends data for cost of attendance, new freshmen enrollment, retention, and graduation rates of 12 Illinois public universities ◦ From IBHE Data Book and IPEDS Peer Analysis System and CSRDE reports  Data Analysis ◦ Descriptive statistics

Did the Cost Guarantee policy make the university competitive in attendance cost, compared to other public universities in the state? Question 1.

FY2000FY2001FY2002FY2003FY2004FY2005FY2006FY2007 Univ. A Univ. B Univ. C Univ. D Univ. E Univ. F Univ. G Univ. H WIU 1st WIU 2nd WIU 3rd WIU 4th

FY2000FY2001FY2002FY2003FY2004FY2005FY2006FY2007 Univ. A Univ. B Univ. C Univ. D Univ. E Univ. F Univ. G Univ. H WIU1st WIU2nd WIU3rd WIU4th

 Results confirmed that the cost guarantee program helped the university become more competitive in attendance cost compared to other public universities within the same state after the policy implementation. ◦ FY2004 and FY2005, the university’s second, third and fourth year students were paying the lowest tuition rates of Illinois public universities.

Did the Cost Guarantee policy increase student enrollment? Question 2.

 Table 2-1. Number of Enrollments at Illinois Public Universities: Fall 1992-Fall 2006 (in Handout)  Table 2-2. Annual Enrollment Change (%) (in Handout)  Table 2-3. Annual Enrollment Change Rank (in Handout)

 There was a stronger demand for the system than expected. In Fall 2007, there were 1,734 active guest accounts set up by 1,417 students. By Fall 2010, there were 6,484 active guest accounts.  There are currently 8,443 active guest accounts for 6,740 students.  Over 53% of our current student population has set up at least one guest account.

 Offices could not verify if student had provided access to specific records and had no information on the guest.  If there were problems with an account, we could not see a history of what occurred.  The system was not as user-friendly as it could be, especially the add/update process.  Parents thought they needed both STARS access and an authorization form signed by the student to speak with offices.

 Despite the new system, there continued to be an increase in the use of the Student Authorization to Release Information form.

 Coordinated with the same offices again.  Decided to not create changes so significant that current users would be required to reactivate their guest accounts.  Moved the “Add” function to the end of the screen selection process.  Added a disclosure statement.  Organized selections by functional area.  Built in an audit trail.

Did the Cost Guarantee policy improve student outcomes, particularly retention and graduation rates? Question 3.

 Changes are in the programming queue.  Goal is to implement by Summer  Will notify users of changes through , news release, and message on STARS.  Re-evaluate revisions again after the new screen has been rolled out.