1. EDUCAUSE Core Data Service
Brian L. Hawkins
Anaheim, CA
November 4, 2003
Brian L. Hawkins, Copyright 2003.

2. Purposes This is NOT an assessment tool !
Create a systematic network for data
Dispel myths and reduce hype
Create an awareness of variations
Create a basis for outcome analyses
Allow for informed comparisons
Provide assistance in planning efforts
This is NOT an assessment tool !

3. Defining the Value of IT
The EDUCAUSE Core Data Survey
Necessary…but Not Sufficient

4. Measuring outcomes is the goal Value of Investment (VOI)
Assessment
Teaching / Learning
Research / Discovery
Service / Engagement
Measuring outcomes is the goal
Value of Investment (VOI)

5. Who participated? 634 institutions 56% Public / 44% Private
Carnegie Classes
Over 45%
of the
EDUCAUSE membership DR MA BA AA
Other
International 65

6. A Service – Not a Survey To help members plan
To assist members in seeking info
To provide a research basis
To enhance a culture of evidence

7. Some features of the Survey
Web-based data collection
51 questions, with 267 data elements
Definitions in “fly-overs”
Glossary
Data integrity checks
Limited access to the data
Rigorous “use agreement”

8. Some features of the Service
Ability to identify specific participants
Available only to those who participated
Ability to create your own “peer groups”
Filters for Carnegie, size, control, etc.
Ability to sort data
Graphics & statistics

9. Some Observations
Participation was reflective of the EDUCAUSE membership
The value is in the breadth of participation
Support from the vendor community
Complementary with other efforts

10. Five Areas of Focus IT Organization, Staffing & Planning
IT Financing & Management
Faculty & Student Computing
Networking & Security
Information Systems
a flavor of the data . . .

11. Percent of Top IT Administrators Who Are Members of the President’s Cabinet
ALL DR
Yes
37.5% MA
Other AA BA
57.3%
33.1%
43.8%
49.3%
43.6%
Analysis of titles
275 unique titles out of 621
CIO in the title of 27.4%

12. Students Who Own Computers
ALL DR
Mean MA AA BA
12%
72%
54%
68%
51%
ALL DR
Private MA AA BA
30%
76%
63%
84%
70%
12%
40%
45%
60%
38%
Public

13. Centralized vs. Decentralized
Percentage of Central IT Staff expenditures
As a Function of Total Campus IT Staff Expenses
ALL DR
Mean MA AA BA
92%
96%
90%
76%
88%
100%
97%
79%
Median

14. Percentage of IT Budget Devoted to Staff
Ratio Of Total Staff Compensation to Total IT Budget
ALL DR MA BA AA
Mean
50.6%
50.3%
50.5%
50.8%
55.0%

15. Core Data Service Monograph
For non-participants
Aggregate Data
Ratio Analyses
Statistical analyses
Over 100 tables
A resource for all members

16. New Features for 2004 Trend tools Ratio Analyses Re-issuance of data
Turbo-Tax features
Refined definitions
Consistency of items

17. To Find Out More