1. Council for Continuous Improvement and Innovation in Texas Higher Education Progress Update October 25, 2012 THECB Quarterly Board Meeting Gerry Griffin, Fred W. Heldenfels IV, Brenda Hellyer, Ed.D., and Charles R. Matthews, Ed.D.

2. Council Themes & Presenters International Competiveness and Higher Education (January): Woody Hunt and Aims McGuinness Student Success (April): Andreas Schleicher, Larry Faulkner, and George Grainger Workforce (July): Anthony P. Carnevale and Doug Ridge Cost Efficiency (October): Kal Kallison Council for Continuous Improvement and Innovation

3. January Meeting: International Competitiveness & Higher Education Criteria for determining the comparison group(s)? Is 60% a reasonable benchmark for 2030 (or different levels)? How do we incorporate (skill) competency levels? Council for Continuous Improvement and Innovation

4. April Meeting: Student Success Canada, Australia, Germany, and Korea recommended as comparison countries; and states similar to Texas should also be considered. Majority of the Council felt that 60% is a reasonable benchmark for 2030 — while emphasizing a focus on the pre-kindergarten/preschool through a four-year college degree (P-16) to meet the goal. The usefulness of PISA; an emphasis on the need to define competency; and the need to modify how it is measured nationally to gain relevance were both cited as important considerations to incorporate competency levels of skills. Adding the simple ratio introduced by the Houston Endowment for tracking the success of 8th graders in and through college, with emphasis on including a P-16 component and the need for a common language if tracking is utilized. Unanimous recognition of the value of existing IPEDS data for the percent, number, or percent increase of students who complete their credential within 150% of program time across all states. Council for Continuous Improvement and Innovation

5. July Meeting: Highlights of Dr. Carnevale’s Presentation Connecting wage records and transcript data is the “gold standard” in determining the economic value of post-secondary programs. Did people in a particular program get a job, keep a job, and earn enough wages to justify the cost of their education? Council for Continuous Improvement and Innovation

6. July Meeting: Workforce Add employer ratings of preparation and quality of graduates; the measure of alignment of post-secondary degrees, courses, and program content with workforce needs; and adding a metric for workforce success. Suggestions and questions regarding postsecondary education costs and degree cost measures that were scheduled to be considered by the Council at the October meeting:  Are there trends on incoming freshman expectations,regarding earning credits, (as that type of data leads to a change in the culture of the five year graduation timeframe); and student incentives for graduating within 4-5 years is needed.  Importance of institutional stakeholder input to define/identify barriers to reduce costs with the understanding that investing more funds may improve outcomes: “Creativity before capital but not in lieu of capital.”  Is a consideration of a “lower boundary” possible: Do we really know if this is what a 4- yr. degree should cost? The definition of the cost-per-degree-program is needed.  Globalization of the numbers can be misleading: sometimes one institution is composed of several colleges, and different colleges incur varying costs.  Cost savings should be measured carefully; primarily at the state level but also at the federal level as far as student incurred cost vs. tax incurred. Council for Continuous Improvement and Innovation

7. October Meeting: Cost Efficiency Unanimous agreement to add metrics for both cost efficiencies and productivity: – Examine the range and not just the average out-of-pocket student cost per degree; and have the goal to ensure that cost savings are fairly and appropriately shared between the state and students. – Focus on the statewide total cost for both associate and bachelor degrees awarded; disaggregate by category and institutions of higher education. – The composite measure of transfer alignment between high school and college and between 2-year and 4-year institutions was met with overwhelming support. – The number of citations, number of patents, and licensing income is mostly a secondary consideration, especially the number of citations; it isn’t a relevant focus. Focus on what the value will be to the statewide economy in the growth of total alternative funding. Council for Continuous Improvement and Innovation

8. Transition Closing the Gaps Texas Will Continue Driving Toward CTG Goals Until 2015; Building Consensus around the New Post-CTG Vision Will Begin Prior to 2015 2030 Leadership Vision and Strategic Plan 2013 Work to achieve the goals of Closing the Gaps, moving toward national parity Start planning for national and international leadership with higher education, business, and community leaders 2014 Vet and build consensus for 2030 Vision and create complete strategic plan for 2030 Review Closing the Gaps successes and pursue strategies focused on Student Success and Excellence 2015 Launch 2030 Vision and new 2030 strategic plan Refresh strategic plan in 2018, and likely 2023 Council for Continuous Improvement and Innovation