Arizona State University Strategic Enterprise Plan: 2016 Update & Operational and Financial Review Arizona Board of Regents February 4, 2016 1
Arizona State University
Strategic Enterprise Plan: 2016 Update & Operational and Financial Review
Arizona Board of Regents
February 4, 2016
1
Today’s Presentation
Progress towards achieving metric goals The 2025 metric goals in context Arizona’s current incomplete socio-economic /competitiveness trajectory and the critical role of higher education in preparing for future competition, change and opportunity The current public investment model will not allow us to move as quickly as needed to play this critical role ASU’s enterprise strategy and its emerging elements
2
ASU Charter
3
ASU is a comprehensive public research
university, measured not by whom it excludes, but
by whom it includes and how they succeed;
advancing research and discovery of public
value; and assuming fundamental responsibility
for the economic, social, cultural, and overall
health of the communities it serves.
Responsibility and The Public Trust
The charter is a promise to the citizens of Arizona.
ASU has a responsibility to fulfill the requirements of the Arizona
Constitution to provide public education.
The responsibility is not one that is conditional upon the actions
of the legislature; it is ASU’s responsibility to find the means to
fulfill its charter while seeking appropriate and fair public
investment.
4
Progress on Key Metrics
5
Total Enrollment
Full Immersion/On-Campus and Digital Immersion/Online
-
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
90,000
100,000
Fall 03 Fall 04 Fall 05 Fall 06 Fall 07 Fall 08 Fall 09 Fall 10 Fall 11 Fall 12 Fall 13 Fall 14 Fall 15
Undergraduate immersion Graduate immersion Undergraduate online Graduate online
6
Freshman retention increases through ongoing process improvement
76.7% 76.8%
79.0% 78.5%
77.2%
79.5%
81.2%
84.0% 83.5%
80.0%
83.8%
84.1%
84.1%
76.0%
78.0%
80.0%
82.0%
84.0%
86.0%
88.0%
90.0%
Total Freshman First Year Retention
Cohort Entry Year
78.0%
79.1%
80.8% 81.2%
80.4%
82.5%
84.3%
87.1% 86.9%
83.7%
86.2%
87.1%
86.8%
76.0%
78.0%
80.0%
82.0%
84.0%
86.0%
88.0%
90.0%
Arizona Freshman First Year Retention
Cohort Entry Year
7
Arizona Resident Graduation Rates
8
28.4% 28.7% 31.0%
32.2% 34.2%
38.8%
43.6%
47.3%
50.8% 49.0%
51.2%
49.3% 51.2%
53.0% 53.2% 54.5%
56.9%
61.4% 63.8%
65.7% 62.8%
57.0% 58.1%
60.2% 60.3% 60.8% 62.5%
66.3%
69.3% 70.2%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
40.0%
45.0%
50.0%
55.0%
60.0%
65.0%
70.0%
75.0%
2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012ESTIMATE
Fre
shm
an C
oh
ort
Gra
du
atio
n R
ate
Cohort Year
4 Year ASU Graduation Rate 5 Year ASU Graduation Rate 6 Year ASU Graduation RateX 4 Year rates
X Ohio State: 58.5% X UT Austin: 57.8%
UC Riverside: 53.1% X Purdue: 51.5% X
X Iowa State: 43.6% X Kansas: 41.0%
X Oregon State: 32.9% X Georgia State: 23.3%
Four Year Graduation Rates at UIA Campuses, 2013
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
9
Source: IPEDS and internal
ASU data
Cal State
System
Average:
17.8%
UC System
Average:
59.3%
3.75+ HS GPA
3.50-3.75 HS GPA
All Freshman
N= 1,423
N= 687
N= 3,668
Numbers of Graduates: Total Degrees
-
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15
Undergraduate immersion Graduate immersion Undergraduate online Graduate online
Five Year Trends
ASU Ohio State UT Austin Purdue Iowa State
10
Numbers of Graduates: High Demand Fields
0
1,000
2,000
3,000
4,000
5,000
6,000
7,000
8,000
9,000
FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15
STEM Education Health Profesions
11
Enrollment in Engineering
-
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
18,000
20,000
Fall 03 Fall 04 Fall 05 Fall 06 Fall 07 Fall 08 Fall 09 Fall 10 Fall 11 Fall 12 Fall 13 Fall 14 Fall 15
Undergrad immersion Undergrad online Graduate immersion Graduate online
87%
Freshman
Retention
12
The number of undergraduate engineering degrees will be rising since the most recent classes graduating are from the period prior to the recent spike in enrollments.
68%
Freshman
Retention
Research Expenditures
13
Funded research is a new venture at ASU. In 1980, the level was zero.
$0
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
$300,000
$350,000
$400,000
$450,000
$500,000
ASU competes successfully with the best universities
14
2014 National Science Foundation (NSF) Higher Education Research and Development
(HERD) Rankings
ASU competes successfully with the best universities
15
2025 Metric Goals and
Strategies
16
2025 Metric Targets
The metric targets for 2025 are likely to be the bare minimum needed to build Arizona’s competitiveness.
Rapid progress in the short term is needed to build the base for achieving the targets. Building enterprise financial capacity is essential given current state investment indicators.
ASU has been assigned a very significant component of the targets and will need to expand its share of enrollment, degrees and research– greater than anything we have ever done.
17
18
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0%
NAU
UA
ASU
Share of Total Enrollment
2024-25 metric 2019-20 metric 2014-15 actual 2008-09 actual
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0%
NAU
UA
ASU
Share of Total Degrees
2024-25 metric 2019-20 metric 2014-15 actual 2008-09 actual
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0%
NAU
UA
ASU
Share of High Demand Degrees
2024-25 metric 2019-20 metric 2014-15 actual 2008-09 actual
0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0% 60.0% 70.0%
NAU
UA
ASU
Share of Research Expenditures
2024-25 metric 2019-20 metric 2014-15 actual 2008-09 actual
2025 Enrollment Metric Targets
-
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
Fall 15 Fall 16 Fall 17 Fall 18 Fall 19 Fall 20 Fall 21 Fall 22 Fal 23 Fall 24
Undergraduate immersion Graduate immersion Undergraduate online Graduate online
19
Data Source: IPEDS
ASU Enrollment Compared to University
Systems in Texas by Total FTE, Fall 2014
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
160,000
180,000
200,000
Texas TexasA&M
ASU TexasState
Houston TexasTech
NorthTexas
20
Central or
Largest
Campus Other
Campuses
Enrollment Efforts
Targets can be achieved if:
The pipelines from AZ high schools and community colleges are expanded
• ASU Prep
• High school programs
• me3
ASU brand reputation continues to grow in the United States and overseas.
International student markets remain open and financially secure
• #1 school for innovation
• Intensive recruitment activities
• National visibility
• International partnerships
Sensible financial aid policies continue to be manageable within the overall
University budget priorities
21
2025 Degree Metric Targets
22
-
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
35,000
FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25
Undergraduate immersion Graduate immersion Undergraduate online Graduate online
2025 Metric Targets for Degrees in High
Demand Fields
0
2,000
4,000
6,000
8,000
10,000
12,000
14,000
16,000
FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22 FY23 FY24 FY25
STEM Education Health Profesions
23
The recent trajectory has shown a strong shift towards these high demand fields. The metric increase will be achieved if that trend continues. ASU will assure adequate capacity in these programs to allow that to happen.
Retention and Graduation Efforts
Targets can be achieved if:
Innovations to improve retention continue to be discovered
• ASU has pioneered many innovations over the last five years, leading to dramatic improvements
• Continued trial and error efforts must continue
• Seeking ideas from many sources; University Innovation Alliance is an example of this effort.
Net tuition after aid is maintained at an affordable level
• Public investment limitations make this challenging
• Because it is university-funded, financial aid investments compete with needs for faculty growth, student support services, and facility improvements
Student support structures are maintained and improved
• More closely targeted advising and mentoring are likely to be important
Arizona students preparation level improves
24
2025 Research Targets
25
$0
$100,000
$200,000
$300,000
$400,000
$500,000
$600,000
$700,000
$800,000
$900,000Funding for research programs in federal agencies is rebounding, and international and corporate sources are increasingly available. Universities able to build programs in areas of priority for funders can increase research volume.
Research Growth Efforts
Targets can be achieved if:
Adequate investment can be made in faculty and facilities
• Internal budget priorities must balance these needs against competing needs
• External support will be needed from efforts such as Research Infrastructure II and Velocity
Ongoing faculty efforts with traditional PI grants continue to grow steadily
• Effective central project acquisition and management support structures must scale as
faculty efforts grow
• Work load balances must be well-managed by schools and departments
Progress continues with multi-investigator, multi-department, multi-institution proposals
National lab- level center is attracted to ASU
Global sources become an increasing component of the mix
• Building programs that can get ahead of anticipated funding agency priorities
• Reward and support structures for the significant faculty effort required for proposal
development
26
Arizona’s Performance
Challenges
27
State Per Capita GDP Relative to National Average
28
75%
80%
85%
90%
95%
100%
105%
110%
115%
120%
1997 1999 2001 2003 2005 2007 2009 2011 2013
Washington
Texas
Colorado
Utah
Arizona
Source: ASU Analysis of Bureau of Economic Analysis Regional Dataset
Bachelor’s Degree Attainment for Population Aged
25-34 Years
29
Washington
Texas
Colorado
Utah
Arizona
20%
22%
24%
26%
28%
30%
32%
34%
36%
38%
40%
2005-2007 2008-2010 2011-2013
United States
Source: ASU Analysis of American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates, Table S1501
Size of Industries in State Economies Relative to Size
of Industries in National Economy, 2014
30
As measured by contribution to state gross domestic product. Source: ASU Analysis of Bureau of Economic Analysis Regional Dataset
Industry Arizona Colorado Texas Utah Washington
Administrative and waste management services 145.9% 98.1% 101.1% 96.2% 90.1%
Retail trade 133.3% 91.8% 96.4% 117.5% 119.8%
Construction 118.8% 116.6% 128.7% 137.3% 98.0%
Utilities 117.9% 90.5% 143.4% 52.2% 51.7%
Arts, entertainment, rec, accomm, food services 117.4% 119.3% 82.7% 87.6% 88.4%
Health care and social assistance 114.0% 83.3% 72.5% 78.6% 87.8%
Finance, insurance, real estate, rental, and leasing 107.6% 93.8% 67.2% 105.2% 84.4%
Educational services 104.1% 67.3% 51.5% 119.0% 50.4%
Transportation and warehousing 101.3% 95.9% 113.0% 115.1% 95.5%
Other services, except government 97.5% 102.1% 90.6% 132.2% 90.7%
Wholesale trade 93.7% 91.6% 117.2% 84.9% 91.9%
Mining 80.3% 232.6% 518.6% 116.8% 9.7%
Professional, scientific, and technical services 78.7% 126.5% 85.9% 89.4% 91.7%
Manufacturing 69.3% 58.7% 119.8% 102.3% 112.0%
Management of companies and enterprises 69.1% 106.5% 59.8% 77.5% 71.5%
Agriculture, forestry, fishing, and hunting 63.9% 87.7% 57.5% 46.9% 150.4%
Information 59.6% 155.2% 67.7% 87.4% 222.6%
Unemployment Rate and Median Weekly Earnings by Educational Attainment, 2014
31
$1,591
$1,639
$1,326
$1,101
$792
$741
$668
$488
Median Weekly Earnings
2.1
1.9
2.8
3.5
4.5
6
6
9
Unemployment Rate
Less than high
school diploma
High school
diploma
Some college, no
degree
Associate’s degree
Bachelor’s degree
Master’s degree
Professional degree
Doctoral degree
Source: Current Population Survey, U.S. Department of Labor, U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics
-20%
-10%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
4% 8% 12% 16% 20% 24% 28% 32%
Pe
rce
nt
Inc
rea
se
in
Pe
r
Ca
pit
a G
DP, 2
00
0-1
0
Change in Percent of 25 Year or Older Having Attained a Bachelors Degree or Higher, 2000-10
Relationship between Change in Educational Attainment and Economic Development in US
States, 2000-2010
Data Sources: US Census Bureau,
US Bureau of Economic Analysis
North Dakota
Arizona
Utah
South Dakota
32
State Funding Overview
33
34
$18,230
$17,243
$24,228
$19,955
$20,935
$20,398
$12,500
$14,500
$16,500
$18,500
$20,500
$22,500
$24,500
FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16
Tuition, Fees and State Appropriations per FTE Student FY03 to FY14 IPEDS data
FY15 and FY16 ASU actuals and estimates Constant FY2015 Dollars
ASU Arizona Very High MedianUA
35
$69,589
$64,536
$92,366
$82,379
$83,178
$77,092
$50,000
$55,000
$60,000
$65,000
$70,000
$75,000
$80,000
$85,000
$90,000
$95,000
FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16
Tuition, Fees and State Appropriations per Degree Awarded FY03 to FY14 IPEDS data
FY15 and FY16 ASU actuals and estimates Constant FY2015 Dollars
ASU Arizona Very High MedianUA
36
$5,000 $6,000 $7,000 $8,000 $9,000 $10,000 $11,000 $12,000 $13,000
2003-04
2004-05
2005-06
2006-07
2007-08
2008-09
2009-10
2010-11
2011-12
2012-13
2013-14
2014-15
2015-16
Target= 50% of ed cost
FY2004 to FY2016 Higher Ed General Fund Appropriations Per Resident Student (HC)- Three Universities
Nominal Dollars and Constant FY16 Dollars
Actual in FY16 constant dollars Actual Appropriations
De-investment
Educational Resources Available at ASU Tuition, Fees vs. State Appropriations per Degree Awarded and per FTE Constant FY2015 Dollars FY03 to FY14 IPEDS data---FY15 and
FY16 ASU actuals and estimates
37
$0
$5,000
$10,000
$15,000
$20,000
FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16
State Appropriations per FTE
Tuition and Fees per FTE
$0
$10,000
$20,000
$30,000
$40,000
$50,000
$60,000
$70,000
FY03 FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09 FY10 FY11 FY12 FY13 FY14 FY15 FY16
State Appropriations per Degree
Tuition and Fees per Degree
ASU Financial Overview
38
ASU Financial Overview
ASU ‘s has built it financial strength over the last five years
ASU is already among the most efficient universities so substantial cost cutting is not an effective strategy option
Substantial investment in base operations planned for achieving metric goals
• 1,200 to 1,500 new faculty by 2025 (ratio to students will still decline)
• Over 500 new staff by 2025
• Teaching and research facilities
Revenue/margin from existing immersion and online activities will be inadequate to cover all of these costs
Large tuition rate increases are not a likely strategy, but the non-resident, international, and online markets must be regularly evaluated for opportunities.
New enterprise programs are the only pathway with reliable (but risky) potential for closing gaps
39
40
12.5% 11.9%
1.9%
11.3%
15.5%
22.3%
28.7% 30.1% 30.5%
31.3%
0.0%
5.0%
10.0%
15.0%
20.0%
25.0%
30.0%
35.0%
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Fiscal year ended June 30
$580.3 $595.8 $725.5 $665.9 $661.7 $634.3 $643.0 $664.9 $695.6 $718.6
$117.7 $139.0
$141.5 $120.2 $139.8 $136.7 $145.6 $160.4
$173.4 $174.5 $145.1
$155.7 $27.4 $165.9
$235.3 $359.4 $463.0
$511.3 $563.3
$161.6
$473.9
$0
$200
$400
$600
$800
$1,000
$1,200
$1,400
$1,600
2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015Invested in capital assets, net Restricted Unrestricted GASB 68 Adjustment
$1,251.6
Net Position ($ in Millions)
$843.1 $890.5 $894.4 $952.0
$1,036.8
$1,130.4
$1,336.6
$1,432.3 $1,524.5
Unrestricted Net Position to Operations
$635.5
FY2015
Instructional Staff Per 100 FTE Students
ABOR Approved Peers (Excludes Medical School Employees)
Full time equivalent postsecondary teachers whose principal activities are for instruction, research, and/or public service. They may hold academic rank titles of professor, associate professor, assistant professor, instructor, lecturer or equivalent of any of those academic ranks.
4.09
6.49
6.49
11.47
0.0 2.0 4.0 6.0 8.0 10.0 12.0 14.0
Arizona State University
Ohio State University-Main Campus
Florida State University
The University of Texas at Austin
University of Iowa
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
University of California-Los Angeles
MEDIAN - Indiana University, Bloomington
MEDIAN - University of Connecticut
Michigan State University
University of Wisconsin-Madison
Rutgers University-New Brunswick
Pennsylvania State University-Main Campus
University of Washington-Seattle Campus
University of Minnesota-Twin Cities
University of Maryland-College Park
41
FY2015
Non Instructional Staff Per 100 FTE Students
ABOR Approved Peers (Excludes Medical School Employees)
Full time equivalent employees who are not classified in the Postsecondary Teachers category. Included are Management Occupations, Office and Administrative Support Occupations, and Other Occupations for the purpose of performing academic support, student services, institutional support, and maintenance of facilities.
8.76
18.19
21.91
0.0 3.0 6.0 9.0 12.0 15.0 18.0 21.0 24.0
Arizona State University
Florida State University
Michigan State University
Indiana University-Bloomington
University of Maryland-College Park
Rutgers University-New Brunswick
University of Washington-Seattle Campus
Ohio State University-Main Campus
MEDIAN - University of Iowa
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
University of Wisconsin-Madison
University of California-Los Angeles
The University of Texas at Austin
Pennsylvania State University-Main Campus
University of Connecticut
University of Minnesota-Twin Cities
42
43
$0
$20,000
$40,000
$60,000
$80,000
$100,000
$120,000
Tuition, Fees, and State Appropriations per Degree Awarded Very High Research Universities
IPEDS FY2014
UA $81,812
ASU $61,223
Median $76,561
In FY14, ASU used 20% fewer resources per degree awarded than the national median. If spending were at the median, costs would have been $300 million greater.
UCLA $92.937
Purdue $90,444 Mich State
Washington $83,367
Utah $74,092 Wisconsin
$69,657 Colorado $65,070
44
$0
$20,000
$40,000
$60,000
$80,000
$100,000
$120,000
Ru
tger
s
Pu
rdu
e
Ge
org
ia T
ech
UC
Be
rkel
ey
Ind
ian
a
UC
Riv
ersi
de
NC
Sta
te
Ne
bra
ska
Texa
s A
&M
UC
San
ta C
ruz
LSU
Um
ass
Ge
org
ia
ND
Sta
te
VP
I
Iow
a St
ate
UC
San
ta B
arb
ara
WSU
UI u
rban
a
Mar
ylan
d
Mo
nt
Stat
e
Mis
s St
ate
Ore
gon
Sta
te
Ark
ansa
s
Okl
aho
ma
Co
lora
do
Ore
gon
Alb
any
ASU
AL
Hu
nts
ville
Texa
s
GSU
Ho
ust
on
CSU
Tuition, Fees, and State Appropriations per Degree Awarded Very High Research Public Universities without Medical Schools
IPEDS FY2014
Median
ASU
ASU's use of resources per degree was
18.6% below the median for universities without medical schools.
45
33% 41%
28% 24% 22% 19%
38% 30%
33% 36% 38%
40%
15% 14%
11% 11% 10% 11%
14% 10%
13% 12% 11% 10%
5%
14% 17% 18% 20%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
FY08: $.5B FY12: $.80B FY16: $1.3B FY18: $1.5B FY20: $1.7B F25: $2.2B
ASU Enterprise Revenue Sources: Gross Tuition and Fees
ASU Onlinetuition (gross)
Fees and summersession
Graduate tuition
Non-Resident UGtuition
Resident UGtuition
46
47%
25%
17% 16% 16% 14%
5% 5% 6%
15%
28%
21% 18% 16%
14%
17%
20%
25% 26% 28% 30%
7%
9%
9% 8% 8% 9%
7%
7%
10% 9% 8% 7%
4% 11% 12% 13% 15%
7% 7% 7% 6% 5% 4%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
FY08: $1.1B FY12: $1.2B FY16: $1.7B FY18: $2.0B FY20: $2.2B F25: $3.0B
ASU Enterprise Education & General Revenue Sources
Total other
ASU Online tuition(gross)
Total fees and summersession
Graduate tuition
Non-Resident UGtuition
Resident UG tuition
Shortfall
General Fund
47
35%
19% 13% 12% 11% 10%
4% 4% 5%
12%
20%
16% 13% 12% 11%
13%
14%
19% 20% 20% 23%
5%
7%
7% 6% 6% 6%
5%
5%
8% 7% 6% 6%
0% 3% 8% 9%
10% 11%
5% 4%
5% 5% 4% 4%
3% 4%
3% 3% 3% 3%
10%
6% 6% 6%
6% 5%
11% 17%
13% 15% 17% 16%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
80%
90%
100%
FY08: $1.4B FY12: $1.7B FY16: $2.2B FY18: $2.7B FY20: $3.1B F25: $3.8B
ASU Enterprise Gross Revenue Sources: All Funds
Research including F&A(external only)**
TRIF**
Auxiliary *
Gifts *
Other E&G sources
New revenue sources
ASU Online tuition(gross)
Fees and summersession
Graduate tuition
Non-Resident UGtuition
Resident UG tuition
Shortfall
State appropriations
Enterprise Strategies and
Initiatives
48
Why is The Enterprise Strategy Important?
A powerful higher education enterprise is needed if Arizona is to succeed and its citizens are to prosper financially and socially.
Continued new investment will be necessary to be that force and to meet or exceed our ABOR metric goals.
State investment at the needed levels is not a safe bet.
Current educational activities must grow at accelerated rates, but overall revenue assumptions are not enough to provide the needed resources without threatening affordability.
New enterprise programs are the only pathway with reliable (but risky) potential for filling the resource gap.
49
Moody’s recognizes the strength of the ASU
enterprise model
50
New Enterprise Programs: Principles
Stay consistent with ASU’s educational and research charter.
Expand institutional capacity to achieve ABOR metric goals.
Build institutional capacity to close resource gaps.
Support efforts to improve Arizona’s economic performance.
Build global partnerships in support of the mission.
Serve as exemplars of New American University goals to demonstrate ways to expand educational opportunities to under-served groups and to provide new methodologies for higher education.
51
Five Forces Are Reshaping
Higher Education
1. Economic and social disruption is continuing to accelerate, which is placing many institutions at risk. 2. The globalization of education is accelerating. 3. New business and delivery models are gaining traction. 4. Greater transparency about student outcomes is becoming the norm. 5. Student and family demands are rising for a greater return on investment in higher education.
52
Advancing Learning and Knowledge Core Enterprise Structure
53
ASU Teaching and Learning Realms
54
Innovations in teaching and learning can be leveraged across the realms to improve outcomes and reduce cost
55
Teaching and Learning Realm 1
Full Immersion / On-campus / Technology Enhanced
Immersion campuses are the home for the faculty which are the heart of
all of the current and future activities in all of the four learning realms
Immersion campuses are the home of all of the research activities that
are crucial to innovative contributions to economic development
Goals:
• Broad admission standards
• Fluid interface with community colleges
• Socioeconomic status predicts nothing
• All students are science and technology literate
• 2-3 majors are common
• Costs are lowered for all
• Scalable to 3x the historic norm
56
Full Immersion - On Campus - Technology Enhanced
72,000 students growing to 100,000
Four metropolitan campuses:
Tempe, West, Polytechnic, and
Downtown Phoenix
Four regional centers: Lake Havasu,
Yuma, Safford, and Tucson
Anticipate substantial enrollment
expansion and limited expansion in
numbers of locations
57
New Programs in Realm 1
Global Launch
58
Intensive English (non-credit)
for international students
seeking admission to American
universities
Pathway Programs: preparation
for ASU and other US degree
programs combining intensive
English and freshman courses
Specialty short duration non-
credit programs for global
cohorts such as STEM training
for Brazilian teachers
Teaching and Learning Realm 2 Digital Immersion - Online - Technology Enhanced
20,000 students growing to 100,000 +
Provides the capability to advance
degree attainment numbers by reaching
potential students not able to reach
campus
Goals:
• College completion for the majority
• Lifelong personalized learning
• Lifelong network learning
59
Digital Immersion - Online - Technology Enhanced
ASU Online
ASU Online
• Largely a domestic student body
• Different age and work demographics than on campus
• Requires major marketing efforts
• Anticipate continued rapid and substantial enrollment
expansion
Starbucks College Achievement Plan
• Targets a population that might otherwise be shut out
of college educational opportunities
• Serves as an experiment in reaching new populations
• Corporate partnership reduces marketing efforts
sharply
Will be taking steps and making investments to refine the
operating models to increase internal reinvestment
60
New Programs in Realm 2
PLuS Alliance
61
Consortium with King’s College London
and University of New South Wales
Expansion of ASU Online into
international markets
• Under-served populations
• Mix of certificates and degree
programs
• Varied delivery modalities are likely
• Working with international partners to
expand reach, broaden potential
offerings, and to enhance reputation
Teaching and Learning Realm 3
Digital Immersion – Massive Scale - Technology Enhanced
In start-up mode at ASU, with a
demonstrated capacity to reach a
million learners
Provides the ability to reach learners with
limited resources that will benefit from the
teaching prowess of a research university
Goals:
• Enhance social scale learning
• Enhance learning activation
• Enhance college pipeline
• Move at social speed
62
New Programs in Realm 3
Global Freshman Academy
63
Core freshman classes taught by
prestigious ASU faculty in an enhanced
MOOC format.
Options to purchase ASU credit after
completion
Launched in Fall 2015 (Astronomy,
Human Origins, Western Civilization)
Partnership with edX for promotion and
delivery
Initial enrollment of 50,000 in the first
three courses with 30% to 40% in the
demographic of potential interest in
receiving credit
Over 50,000 students enrolled
from 192 countries in the first
three GFA courses
New Programs in Realm 3
ASU Digital Academy
64
To be built upon the ASU Prep
Academy successes in making ALL
students successful
Will offer high-level coursework to
high school students in schools with
limited offerings and diplomas to
Arizona students unable to attend
physical schools
Curriculum design by ASU Prep
Academy teachers with EdPlus
instructional designers
Currently exploring the market with
hopes of deployment within a year
Teaching and Learning Realm 4
Education through Exploration- Technology Enhanced
Extend educational opportunities for to millions of under-served students globally
Provide new ways to learn through interactive short lessons
Provide initial contact with potential students for realms one, two, and three
Global impact
Goals:
• Global scale engagement
• Totally personalized learning
65
New Programs in Realm 4
Center for Education Through Exploration
66
New Teaching Philosophy:
• Explore the unknown instead of mastery of the
known
• Focus on transdisciplinary questions instead
of disciplinary silos
• Design, develop, deploy and research
interactive, exploration-based learning using
digital platforms and teaching networks
• Explore the unknown instead of mastery of the
known
• Focus on transdisciplinary questions instead
of disciplinary silos
• Design, develop, deploy and research
interactive, exploration-based learning using
digital platforms and teaching networks
Advancing the ASU Charter’s research and community
responsibility missions through innovation
• Supporting entrepreneurship
• Accelerating technology transfer
• Encouraging new businesses through the Innovation Zones
@ ASU
• Advancing community health and biomedical investments
• Expanding the population of college-ready students in all
communities
• Sharing and scaling innovations in student success
67
Economic Development: Entrepreneurship
Technology Transfer (FY15)
• 270 invention disclosures
• 63 U.S. patents
• 12 new start-up companies
• 81 major licensing and option transactions
• $500M to ASU spin-outs
Support for Entrepreneurs
• Innovation Challenges, Launch Days, and
Start-up Spring Break engaged over
12,000 students last year
• Entrepreneurship Outreach Network,
Startup School
• Furnace
68
Entrepreneurship Outreach Network
Economic Development: The Regional Environment
Innovation Zones @ ASU • ASU Research Park in south Tempe- 1.8 million SF serving as
the home to 48 companies and over 4,500 employees
• SkySong in south Scottsdale- home to a wide range of
technology companies and ASU EdPlus
• Chandler Innovation Center- home to TechShop and ASU
student innovation programs
• ASU Polytechnic Innovation campus- in the planning stages
• ASU-Mayo Health Solutions Innovation Center- in the planning
stage at Desert Ridge adjacent to Mayo Hospital
Regional Planning Support • The Central Idea”: a concept plan to spur the Phoenix Arts
District
• “Downtown Assembled”: a study to contribute to Mesa’s
intensive planning efforts
• “Nexus City”: a schematic proposal for the Polytechnic- Gateway
area
69
Shared facilities
Collaborative research
Shared faculty, appointments and
graduate students
Mayo Medical School in Arizona in
collaboration with Arizona State
University (2017)
Joint education programs
Joint seed-fund program
Proton-beam therapy program
School for the Science of Health Care
Delivery
70
Mayo Clinic and ASU
ASU and the Mayo Clinic Innovation in Individual and Community Health
70
ASU Preparatory Academy
Demonstrating that Every Student Can Succeed
71
Two charter schools located in
downtown Phoenix and East Mesa on the ASU Polytechnic campus.
Operating principles = “The Four Pillars”:
• Academics
• Partnership
• Leadership
• Innovation
2,000 students in pre-K to grade 12
1,000+ students on the waitlist
76% low income students in Phoenix
330% enrollment increase in 3 years
ASU Prep Phoenix Performance
me3
College Planning Needs to Start Early in High School
72
A mobile-friendly and visually-
oriented tool designed for early year
high school students
Asks simple questions about student
interests
Pairs those interests with possible
career options and college majors
Identifies what high school classes
are needed to be accepted and when
to apply to college
Gives insights about life after college
University Innovation Alliance
Sharing Resources and Best Practices
A unique consortium of public
research universities established to
help more students from all
socioeconomic backgrounds graduate
from college.
UIA members share information about
innovative practices at their campuses
that have been implemented at their
campuses in the effort to increase
retention and graduation rates.
The UIA members have collectively
pledged to increase the number of
graduates from lower income
backgrounds by 68,000 by 2025.
73