Data drives decision-making at the highest levels of institutional leadership. This session will use a case of one institution to explore how its global education center collaborates with its institutional research office to determine barriers to studying abroad and compete for campus resources. Using actual data, panelists will guide roundtable discussions on moving from anecdotal observations through data analysis to policy decisions by senior administrators. Information will be provided about how to work with data, what types of data your institutional research office can provide, and how a chief academic officer makes decisions on academic priorities and resource allocation.

1. The Elon Commitment:
Data-Driven Decision Making in
Addressing Study Abroad Barriers
CIEE Annual Conference
November 21, 2014
Baltimore, MD

2. Introductions
Woody Pelton, Dean of Global Studies
Paul J. Geis, Associate Director of Study Abroad
Rod Springer, Executive Director of Institutional
Effectiveness
Steven House, Provost and Vice President for
Academic Affairs

3. Elon University profile
 Private, selective, liberal arts
 6,483 students with 5,782 undergrads
 Theme #1 in our 10 year plan is a
commitment to diversity and global
engagement, including a
 commitment for 100% access to global
engagement

4. Underrepresented
 Diverse backgrounds
 Men
 STEM
 Athletes
 High need
 First generation
 Community College
 Non-traditional age
 Performing arts
Barriers
 Finances
 Curriculum
 Athletics
 Campus Involvement
 Fear (students & parents)
 Health (physical/mental)
 Probation status

5. Assumptions and Anecdotes
 Do demographics tell us about the barriers?
 What assumptions do we make?
 What does the data actually tell us?

6. 90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
All Students Women Men Non-white
students
Athletes
% of Elon Students Who Studied Abroad

7. 90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
All Students Women Men Non-white
students
Athletes
All Students
No Football
% of Elon Students Who Studied Abroad

8. Slide with useful data/chart re: majors
and men
NO ATHLETES WITH ATHLETES
Sport Event Mgmt
Male/Female ratio 45%, 55% 56%, 44%
% of Females who Study Abroad 86% 78%
% of All Majors who Study Abroad 73% 50%
% of Males who Study Abroad 57% 29%
Exercise Science
Male/Female ratio 27%, 73% 29%, 71%
% of Females who Study Abroad 77% 74%
% of All Majors who Study Abroad 68% 64%
% of Males who Study Abroad 44% 40%

9. What the data does tell us
 Men are underrepresented across the board
 25% of students with no financial need did
not study abroad
 Disparities by major

10. % Athlete % Study
Abroad
Arts Administration, Engineering,
Engineering Mathematics, Env.
Studies/Env. Engineering, French,
International Economics
0%
100.00%
International Studies 2% 98.18%
International Business 9% 95.45%
Art History 0% 92.59%
Public Health Studies 0% 88.89%
Human Services Studies 6% 80.80%
Religious Studies 8% 80.56%
Strategic Communications 5% 79.87%
Environmental Studies 3% 79.49%
Elementary Education 5% 77.22%
Psychology 5% 75.00%
Marketing 8% 74.76%
Economics 15% 74.55%
Biology 4% 73.19%
English 1% 72.61%
Mathematics 9% 72.00%
Accounting 9% 71.15%
AVERAGE 8.05% 70.95%
% Athlete % Study
Abroad
AVERAGE 8.05% 70.95%
Finance 10% 70.83%
Communications 3% 70.43%
Physics 20% 70.00%
Theatre Studies 0% 70.00%
Media Arts and Entertainment 6% 67.45%
Entrepreneurship 11% 66.04%
Philosophy 8% 65.79%
Music Education 0% 64.29%
Exercise Science 20% 64.18%
Public Administration 3% 63.64%
Environ/Ecological Science 16% 63.16%
Biochemistry 3% 62.50%
Management 13% 60.98%
Sociology 12% 60.98%
Special Education 5% 58.97%
Computer Science 11% 54.05%
Computer Information Syst 6% 51.52%
Music Technology 5% 50.00%
Sport and Event Management 36% 46.94%
Music Theatre 0% 42.31%
Theatre Arts 0% 39.58%

11. What the data does not tell us
 Barriers (real or perceived)
 Qualitative
 The full story
 Institutional context
 Expertise

12. Institutional Research
 What is IR?
 IR provides information to various
stakeholders so that more informed
decisions can be made.
 What data does IR have access to?
 Typically – lots of data access. Our goal is
to turn that data into information.

13. Correlation
Being a
Female
Being an
Athlete
Having more
NEED (dollars)
Spearman's
rho
Study
Abroad
Y/N
Correlation
Coefficient
.235** -.231** -.152**
Sig. (2-tailed) <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
2
)
Effect-Size (r
.06
moderate
.05
moderate
.02
small
Observations 4,482 4,482 1,597
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level

14. Study Abroad by EFC Level
4-years of
graduating
students
Estimated Family
Contribution (EFC)
Have Need (Headcount) Have Need (Percent)
No Yes No Yes
Study Abroad Study Abroad Study Abroad Study Abroad
No Yes No Yes No Yes No Yes
EFC <= 5,000 196 236 45% 55%
EFC 5,001 - 10,000 86 133 39% 61%
EFC 10,001 - 20,000 153 289 35% 65%
EFC >20,000 140 364 28% 72%
EFC = Full Cost 727 2,158 25% 75%
All 727 2,158 575 1,022 25% 75% 36% 64%

15. Gender and Athletics
Yes*
Study Abroad
Sport No Yes
Baseball 97% 3%
Softball 88% 12%
Men-Basketball 57% 43%
Women-Basketball 33% 67%
Men-Cross Country 38% 63%
Women-Cross Country 22% 78%
Men-Golf 44% 56%
Women-Golf 36% 64%
Men-Soccer 88% 12%
Women-Soccer 46% 54%
Men-Tennis 82% 18%
Women-Tennis 56% 44%
Football 87% 13%
Volleyball 13% 88%
Total 66% 34%
*May not sum to 100% due to
rounding

16. Financial Need
Students Who Have Need
Graduates
Study Abroad?
No Yes Difference
2010 $24,692 $22,951 $1,741
2011 $27,154 $23,128 $4,026
2012 $28,143 $23,014 $5,129

17. Selected Majors
2010-2013 May Graduates Have Need Gender White/Non-White Athlete
Study
Abroad
Total
%
No
%
Yes
%
Female
%
Male
%
White
% non-
White
%
No
%
Yes
%
Yes
Institutional Average
(unduplicated headcount)
64% 36% 61% 39% 83% 17% 92% 8% 71% 4,482
Major (includes double/triple majors)
Public Health Studies 67% 33% 100% 0% 100% 0% 100% 0% 89% 18
Economics 66% 34% 25% 75% 81% 19% 85% 15% 75% 110
Biology 63% 37% 72% 28% 87% 13% 96% 4% 73% 138
Institutional Average = 72%
Finance 73% 27% 23% 77% 85% 15% 90% 10% 71% 192
Exercise Science 65% 35% 71% 29% 84% 16% 80% 20% 64% 201
Management 67% 33% 40% 60% 78% 22% 87% 13% 61% 82
Sport and Event Management 62% 38% 39% 61% 78% 22% 64% 36% 47% 147

18. Other Data Sources
 Survey Data
 Global Perspective Inventory (GPI)
 Before College Survey of Student Engagement (BCSSE)
 National Survey of Student Engagement (NSSE)
 Multi-Institutional Survey of Leadership (MSL)
 Others (e.g., locally developed surveys)
 Focus Group/Interviews
 National Student Clearinghouse

19. Higher Education Under Pressure

21. “Disruptive Forces and Innovation”
The Elon Commitment:
 “A tsunami is coming” David Brooks - NY Times
 A combination of forces now
“destabilize the residential
college…business model over the
long run” Moody’s Report
 Learning? “Not much” Academically Adrift
 Changing students Demographics

22. The Elon Commitment:
“There is still huge value in the
residential college experience and
the teacher-student and student-student
interactions it facilitates.
But to thrive, universities will have
to nurture even more of those
unique experiences while blending
in technology to improve
education outcomes in measurable
ways at lower costs. We still need
more research on what works, but
standing still is not an option.”
Thomas Friedman, The Professors’ Big
Stage, New York Times, March 5, 2013

23. The Elon Commitment:
In March 2012 Sebastian
Thrun, the CEO of
Udacity, predicted that
“fifty years from now
there will be only 10
institutions in the world
delivering higher
education and Udacity
has a shot at being one of
them.” (The Stanford Education
Experiment Could Change Higher
Learning Forever, Wired, March
2012)
MOOC
– Massive
– Open
– Online
– Course

24. What is College For?
The Elon Commitment:
“Since there are now innumerable other (and
cheaper) ways to be educated, why are we
doing this? … Colleges with a compelling
answer to these questions – where everyone
on campus knows the answers – are going to
be fine. … We each need to figure out what
our college is for. ... If a college’s true product
is a transformed student, then the main effect
of the next decade should be to redouble
every school’s commitment to that cause.”
Dan Currell, “What is College For?” Inside Higher Education

25. What is Elon For? – Engaged Learning
Our core
message:
Engaged
Learning

26. What is Elon For? – Engaged Learning
Theme 1 - An unprecedented university commitment to
diversity and global engagement

27. What is Elon For? – Engaged Learning
1. Finalize a strategy to assure that 100% of Elon students have access
to a global experience either domestically or abroad, including a
process to create award packages for students participating in a
global experience.
6. Implement international recruitment strategic plan, including
partnership with American Language Academy to continue
increasing international enrollment at Elon.

28. What is Elon For? – Engaged Learning
Decisions Based on Study Abroad Data:
• Built Global Neighborhood and Global Commons
• Shifted fellows grants to primarily support Study Abroad and Study
USA
• Increased financial aid for global education - $150,000/year for 3
consecutive years
• Increased first year admissions target by 50 students (i.e. from 1,400
to 1,450) following jump in fall semester abroad enrollments
• Developed Shanghai Center – for business majors - with internships
• Hired Associate Dean and Director of International Admissions

29. What we have done at Elon?
 Scholarship funding
 Asia Center
 Elon Experiences Grant
 Increased ELR
 Global Neighborhood

30. Have you worked with your institutional research office
to obtain and analyze data? (Do you even know them?)
How have you collaborated?
What has surprised you in looking more deeply at data on
your campus? Have you debunked any myths or
assumptions?
In the coming year, how can you more effectively utilize
data to better inform your office’s outreach to
underrepresented students, advocacy for resources,
and/or addressing of barriers?

31. Q & A

32. Contact
Woody Pelton: wpelton@elon.edu
Paul J. Geis: pgeis@elon.edu
Rod Springer: springer@elon.edu
Steven House: shouse@elon.edu