1. Leading Indicators Project Review & Discussion: Looking at Milestone Attainment and Degree Completion among the 2003 Freshman Cohort

2. 1.This stage in the process emphasized the opportunity for your campus to customize the leading indicators framework. Explain how you arrived at focusing on specific indicators. Why were these indicators particularly important to your campus? How can we make it the best 4?

3. We identified some additional data to enable insights into best practices

4. In the definition of “Pell Recipient” we included any student who received Pell assistance during any year of attendance at UHH.

5. Taking Math & English Composition in first year has clear association with academic success We expanded our data to include those students who had taken MATH or Composition at a college prior to transferring to UHH.

6. Including student success initiated at UHH and completed elsewhere A large number of UHH students complete their degree at another college. An incomplete data set exists to track degree completion at other campuses. When we include successful degree attainment from another UH, or extra-system, campus our retention numbers more closely resemble national averages. this modification disarticulates unsuccessful students from those who complete their degree elsewhere.

7. Demographics We included statistics on sex (we do not collect self- identified gender data) to compare against national trends We also included more detailed information about non- resident students so that we avoid lumping together students from FSM, Samoa, Canada, and Japan into a single category.

8. Row Modifications to the Template Hawaii ethnicity looks like this: Other additional variables were added into the template as rows, like follow URM Black Hispanic American Indian / Alaska Native Native Hawaiian Pacific Islander Filipino Non-URM White Asian Neutral/Unknown Mixed Race/Unknown Non-Resident Alien

9. Changing Majors We included data on changing majors and differentiated between very large changes (between different colleges) and very small changes (between closely related Departments).

10. We also included enrollment in summer school

11. 2.What are your key findings around those indicators? Identify at least one finding that can help guide your campus toward the A2S goal of halving the success gaps between low-income and minority students and other students on your campus. Which findings do you want to explore more deeply and what are your next steps for this deeper analysis?

12. Pell data This data indicates a slightly higher rate of graduation for Pell recipients

13. Pell Transfers By including those students to graduate elsewhere the trend changes. This suggests that non-Pell students have a little bit higher chance of graduating though a significant number graduate elsewhere. Pell students are more likely to graduate at UHH

14. Key Findings: of 443 Freshmen, the percentage satisfying milestones

15. Key Findings: Of those satisfying milestone, the percent graduating

16. Not enough data... sample size of cohorts for residency and major changes are too small to have meaningful results just yet. There is a higher rate of graduation for students who changed their major. More data will help to determine relationships with advising.

17. 3.Discuss where you are in developing a pathway analysis. Have you identified intervention points? If so, what do those look like? unification of GE “Pre-built” Freshmen Schedules (esp Math and Comp) Text Kilohana Manditory Advising

18. 4.How are you communicating your findings to drive change on your campus? For example, have you identified key internal stakeholders to share progress with on a systematic basis? What are you doing or planning to do that will help embed this new knowledge into reporting and other data routines on campus? This is a challenge... inter-campus communication on LI data