Download Early College Strategic Plan 2021-2026 (Word Document – Accessibility not verified. All information included is available in text below.)


Introduction:

Maine’s Public Universities have been offering various types of early post-secondary experiences for high school students for decades. In recent years, the rise of early college (EC) and concurrent enrollment visibility and participation in the country and the landscape of PK-16 education in Maine has spurred substantial growth in the level of attention paid to early college programs in the University of Maine System (UMS). That growth happened at individual institutions within the system with little alignment from one institution to the next; thus requiring stakeholders in Maine high schools to navigate a collection of varied programs; all with different policies and operational procedures.

Recently, the University of Maine System has moved to a place where early college has become embedded at the system level and at all individual institutions. This change of emphasis, as well as a statewide push and financial support for growth in early college, resulted in the hiring of a system early college administrator and the collaboration of early college practitioners from throughout the system. They evolved into a team of professionals focused on bringing early college to its next natural step in terms of growth and scope. Early on, this team focused on growth, the alignment of policies and procedures, and on the adoption of shared resources and technology to better serve the stakeholders served by early college. The effort primarily focused on service to students, though improvements to benefit parents and high school partners were also at the forefront. The result has been a fast-moving momentum for significant growth and change in what is probably an unprecedented short period of time for such a shift.

When change is fast, it can result in growing pains and it often leaves very little time for introspection where difficult questions are examined, discussed, and answered. The team leading this effort realized that decisions needed to be made about the future breadth and scope of early college and where it fit within the University of Maine System (with its own strategic plan under development) and within the broader spectrum of education in Maine. It was also important to chart a course that further refined our collaboration and set goals that unified efforts beyond those established at the campus level. It was time for strategic planning.

Process:

This strategic plan was developed in a manner that was inclusive of a large number of stakeholders.  The planning committee, made up of the lead early college administrators at each of the UMS campuses, started its work by conducting dozens of focus groups of early college students, university faculty, high school staff and administration, concurrent enrollment teachers, and parents. These focus groups participated in Appreciative Inquiry (External Site) interviews that were structured around the SOAR strategic planning model; Strengths, Opportunities, Aspirations, Results (External Site). The feedback and data received in the focus groups were analyzed and used in the development of values, priorities, goals, and key strategies. In addition to focus groups, the steering committee engaged in numerous conversations and meetings that delved deeply in specific related topics and tensions that had arisen as our programs grew. The committee also leaned on recent internal UMS early college data from the Office of Institutional Research and the Early College 2020 report to help shape this plan. The combination of stakeholder focus groups; extensive steering committee discussions, and internal data and reports ensured a well-informed strategic plan.


Strategic Plan Development Team (as of December, 2021):

  • Amy Hubbard, PhD, Executive Director of Early College, University of Maine System (UMS)
  • Scott Voisine, Dean of Community Education, University of Maine at Fort Kent (UMFK), UMS EC Strategic Planning Lead
  • Christy Alley, Director of Early College, University of Maine at Machias (UMaine Machias)
  • Jamie Whittemore, Assistant Director of Early College, University of Southern Maine (USM)
  • Carrie Bosse, Early College Counselor, University of Maine at Presque Isle (UMPI)
  • Meghan Cadwallader, Director of Educational Partnerships, USM
  • Allison Drinkwater, Administrative Specialist, University of Maine (UMaine)
  • Katie Ebert, Early College Counselor, University of Maine at Augusta (UMA)
  • Christine Knight, Early College Counselor, UMA
  • Patricia Libby, Assistant Dean, Division of Lifelong Learning, UMaine
  • Rachael Magill, Director of Early College, UMA
  • Seth Ordway, Administrative Specialist, UMaine
  • Kirsten Petroska, Director of Early College Partnerships, University of Maine at Farmington (UMF)
  • Clarissa Thompson, PhD, Early College Coordinator, UMF
  • Teri St. Pierre, Director of Early College Programs, UMPI
  • Kari Suderley, Early College Program Director, UMaine
  • Kirsten Thompson, Coordinator of High School Partnerships, UMFK

Mission Statement:

UMS Early College is a partnership of early post-secondary education programs at UMS campuses; each of which brings its own institutional identity and strategic priorities to the process of serving high school students with opportunities to engage in early college exploration on a college
campus, online, and in their school.

Vision Statement:

UMS Early College will open up the world of possibilities of post-secondary education to all students, helping them see their own potential and shape their futures.

Values:

Equity & Access

We provide high-quality, college preparation educational experiences to all Maine high school students.

Aspirations

We play a key role in Maine in developing and nurturing post-secondary aspirations in high school students.

Opportunity

We provide students affordable college learning opportunities and pathways to degrees and careers.

Quality

We serve our students best when we offer college-level courses and programs that are continually assessed.

Student Success

We provide student-focused services and support so they can successfully achieve their individual goals.


Key Priorities:

Priority #1: Our Role

Early College (EC) is a program that builds aspirations and provides a springboard to post-secondary education for Maine high school students. It serves as a means for students and families to pursue a more affordable pathway to college. Early college can be an opportunity for more academically astute high school students to delve into more rigorous courses. While EC benefits all students, it benefits underrepresented students most, providing them with the self-confidence and skills needed to improve college access and success.  Additionally, EC works in partnership with high schools to supplement their curriculum and course offerings. The careful consideration and balance of these roles is an important endeavor in that it provides a construct in which EC  practitioners can balance the demands of a multitude of stakeholders, the enrollment pressures of individual campuses, and the level of program quality and sustainability that is reasonable within the confines of available fiscal and human resources.

Goal 1: Student Access and Aspirations:

UMS will establish the role of its EC programs in increasing equitable access and student aspirations in Maine. (1.1)

Goal 2: Early College to Matriculation:

UMS EC will actively endeavor to maximize its programmatic capacity for the purpose of student exploration of degrees and career pathways. (1.2)

Summary of Key Strategies and Outputs
Define our role/purpose in PK-16 educational spectrum and who we serve.
Ensure our programs provide equitable access to EC students (as defined by Dual Enrollment Playbook).
Leverage career/degree pathways as a means to increase student post-EC matriculations as described in the credits with purpose documents.
Define our role/purpose in institutional and system enrollment.

Key Assessment Areas and Tools:

  • Demographic information about early college students; including first-generation students.
  • School counselor surveys
  • Participation in early college pathway initiatives

Key Planning Takeaway – We are called to serve a multitude of needs of our students, schools, and campuses, but if our focus is always on what’s best for our students, then we can always be proud of what we do.

Tables:

Priority #1: Our Role

Goal 1: Student Access and Aspirations: UMS Early College will define the role of its early college programs in increasing equitable educational access and student aspirations in Maine.

Strategies Responsible Parties Year 1 Year 3 Year 5
Establish our role/purpose in PK-16 educational spectrum and who we serve. Institutional Directors of early college, school districts, homeschoolers, Department of Education (DOE), UMS Chief Academic Officer (COA)s ongoing ongoing ongoing
Define our goal(s) related to increasing student aspirations in Maine. Institutional Directors of early college, adult education, homeschoolers, guidance counselors, high school teachers, middle schools, UMS CAOs ongoing ongoing ongoing
Ensure our programs provide equitable access to EC students (as defined by Dual Enrollment Playbook (External Site)). UMS Early College Program, Institutional Directors of early college, adult education (students who have not earned HS diploma but are not in a high school), homeschoolers, guidance counselors, high school teachers, middle schools, workforce sectors, institutional Student Accessibility Services Directors, Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) offices ongoing ongoing

 

Quantitative Metrics to Assess Goal Baseline Year 1 Year 3 Year 5
Number of first-generation college students. Seek a means to collect data if available to set baseline. maintenance or growth maintenance or growth maintenance or growth
Demographic break-down of early college students (ethnicity, socioeconomic status (SES), geography, homeschool). Seek a means to collect data if available to set baseline. maintenance or growth maintenance or growth maintenance or growth
Percentage of enrollment by schools with high population of low-income families. Seek a means to collect data if available to set baseline. maintenance or growth maintenance or growth maintenance or growth

 

Qualitative Metrics to Assess Goal Baseline Year 1 Year 3 Year 5
Survey of Guidance Counselors – types of students

Survey TRIO (Upward Bound, Gear Up)

Survey Jobs for Maine Graduates (JMG)

Surveys of partners and access to early college, student population involved. Increase access. Capture different audiences. Perception of who the program is for. Increase access. Capture different audiences. Perception of who the program is for. Increase access. Capture different audiences. Perception of who the program is for.

Goal 2: Early College to Matriculation: UMS Early College will actively endeavor to maximize its programmatic capacity for the purpose of student exploration of degrees and career pathways.

Strategies Responsible Parties Year 1 Year 3 Year 5
Continue to leverage career/degree pathways to increase student post-EC matriculations as described in the credits with purpose documents. UMS Early College ongoing ongoing ongoing
Define our role/purpose in institutional and system enrollment. UMS Early College Program,Individual institutions, UMS leadership, EC leadership at individual institutions ongoing ongoing ongoing

 

Quantitative Metrics to Assess Goal Baseline Year 1 Year 3 Year 5
Number of students who use pathways that are offered. Collect current data as baseline. to be determined to be determined to be determined
Number of students who attain pathway completion. Collect current data as baseline. to be determined to be determined to be determined
Number of students who start in pathway then continue to same degree plan. Collect current data as baseline. to be determined to be determined to be determined
Number of students earning 15 or more credits (not in a pathway) upon HS graduation. Collect current data as baseline. to be determined to be determined to be determined
Number of pathways offering job shadowing, career fairs, question and answer (Q&A) sessions with professionals in field. Collect current data as baseline. to be determined to be determined to be determined

 

Qualitative Metrics to Assess Goal Baseline Year 1 Year 3 Year 5
Student feedback on general experience with EC pathways. This information will be collected using student feedback and surveys already identified in other student assessment portions of this strategic plan. This information will be collected using student feedback and surveys already identified in other student assessment portions of this strategic plan. This information will be collected using student feedback and surveys already identified in other student assessment portions of this strategic plan. This information will be collected using student feedback and surveys already identified in other student assessment portions of this strategic plan.
Student feedback on what parts of EC pathways and courses helped them to make decisions about degree plan. This information will be collected using student feedback and surveys already identified in other student assessment portions of this strategic plan. This information will be collected using student feedback and surveys already identified in other student assessment portions of this strategic plan. This information will be collected using student feedback and surveys already identified in other student assessment portions of this strategic plan. This information will be collected using student feedback and surveys already identified in other student assessment portions of this strategic plan.

Priority #2:  Our Program Structure and Sustainability

Increased high school student enrollment in early college courses was the impetus for much of what occurred in the first few years of the collaboration between the campus-based programs. Initially, the new partnership of programs focused on developing the structures, resources, and processes necessary for significant increases in participation throughout Maine. Such a level of growth often requires a period of introspection and ultimately a recalibration of human resources and fiscal resources, and a regrouping of stakeholders and partners to forge forward in a manageable and sustainable manner.

Goal 1: Partnership and Differentiation:

Formalize definition of UMS Early College as a partnership of programs sharing system-wide processes and services while maintaining program differentiation and identity by institution. (2.1)

Goal 2: Financial Sustainability:

UMS Early College, in collaboration with the State of Maine Department of Education, will strive to determine a balance of financial responsibility for early college at the state, system, and campus level. (2.2)

Goal 3: Human Resources:

Develop UMS Early College human resource structure to better meet the needs of programs. (2.3)

Goal 4: Program Marketing and Outreach:

Increase and improve effectiveness of marketing and outreach of early college programs. (2.4)

Key Assessment Areas and Tools:

  • Successful development of and participation in system-level early college shared services such as orientation, advising, etc.
  • Alignment of programs and services to the standards of the National Alliance for Concurrent Enrollment Partnerships (NACEP).
  • Improvements and sustainability of budgets
  • Position and resource reviews at the campus and system levels.

Key Planning Takeaway – Growth is at the same time exciting and challenging. We need to maintain that excitement even as we move from rapid growth to balance and sustainability.

Tables:

Priority #2:  Our Program Structure and Sustainability

Goal 1:  Partnership and Differentiation: Formalize definition of UMS Early College as a partnership of programs sharing system-wide processes and services while maintaining program differentiation and identity by institution.

Strategies Responsible Parties Year 1 Year 3 Year 5
Define what is system level (services). EC team leads, EC Executive Director ongoing
Define what is institutional level. EC team leads, EC Executive Director ongoing
NACEP accreditation and procedures. EC teams, EC Executive Director, UMS faculty, concurrent enrollment (CE) high school (HS) teachers, HS administrators, school counselors, CAO’s, registrars, Institutional Research (IR) ongoing ongoing ongoing

 

Quantitative Metrics to Assess Goal Baseline Year 1 Year 3 Year 5
System-wide EC orientation implemented. 9% participation Ongoing assessment to include not only increased participation but also broader awareness among students and school personnel. Ongoing assessment to include not only increased participation but also broader awareness among students and school personnel. Ongoing assessment to include not only increased participation but also broader awareness among students and school personnel.
List of advising resources and processes by institution and system (e.g. activation codes, transcripts, etc.). Initial list List of advising resources that are system-wide increases (institution-specific resources/ processes decreases). Revision of resources as processes and procedures change. Everything we can align system-wide is aligned.

 

Qualitative Metrics to Assess Goal Baseline Year 1 Year 3 Year 5
List of system vs. institutional processes, policies, and procedures. No list (anecdotal) Draft list Completed list with process to review as issues/questions arise. Established list with updates as needed.
Development, implementation, revision of system-wide orientation. New system-level orientation in progress and piloted. Implementation of an annual review of system-wide orientation. Determine what metrics we will track (e.g. types of questions), how we will track student need. Discuss if/when we require orientation and how we would build this into our registration process. Reduced student need for follow up during registration process/throughout semester (e.g. orientation outcomes show students are better prepared). Established revision process. Culture shift (e.g. expectation that students will complete is known and accepted).
NACEP Accreditation System-wide self-assessment, IR Re-evaluate and determine next steps. Conduct another self-assessment, gap analysis. Determine if we are able to apply as system or individual institution based on unified accreditation and NACEP. Rough draft of NACEP Application. Accreditation institute/support from NACEP. Apply for NACEP Accreditation

Goal 2: Financial Sustainability: UMS Early College, in collaboration with the State of Maine Department of Education, will strive to determine a balance of financial responsibility for early college at the state, system, and campus level.

Strategies Responsible Parties Year 1 Year 3 Year 5
Work with DOE to improve financial structure (advocacy) Aspirations Budget UMS Executive Director of EC, DOE, Maine Community College System (MCCS) Director, UMS leadership ongoing ongoing ongoing
Set expectations for system-level investments in EC (what will and will not be paid for at this level) Operational Budget UMS Executive Director, UMS leadership ongoing
Set expectations for institutional-level investments in and support for EC (e.g. revenue sharing) Aspirations/Operational Budget UMS Executive Director, UMS budget and finance leadership, UMS leadership, CAO’s ongoing ongoing

 

Quantitative Metrics to Assess Goal Baseline Year 1 Year 3 Year 5
Operational budget $3M biennial allocation Progress towards alignment of allocation with strategic planning goals/institutional needs Better alignment of allocation with strategic planning goals/institutional needs
Aspirations budget $5.5M annual (shared with MCCS)
Return on investment (e.g. matriculation rate, retention rates, revenue) – is also included in another area No process, additional funds determined by campus Develop a process to determine what would be a reasonable ask to request a % of EC revenue (from tuition)

 

Qualitative Metrics to Assess Goal Baseline Year 1 Year 3 Year 5
DOE financial structure – statute revisions. Statute and funding as is (2021) Draft revisions to statute. Plan to work within funding allocation (e.g. sustainable growth). Make recommendations. Follow statute, communicate with stakeholders. Make recommendations. Evaluate statute, determine if changes need to be made. Make recommendations.
Set campus operational budgets (system allocation for institution operational EC budget) and define allowable expenses in operational budget. Current budget process Set allocation per institution per year. Possibility of additional funding for special projects. Determine what expenses are acceptable to charge to UMS EC budget vs institutional budget. Institutions know what to expect each year (baseline operational budget). Institutions know what to expect each year (baseline operational budget). Revisions as needed, possibility of advocating for increasing budget (state allocation) if necessary.
Determine expectations for campus EC investment. Current budget process (e.g. tuition revenue from EC goes to Educational and General (E&G)) In conjunction with need-based budget, advocate for campus contribution when more funding is needed in excess of EC operational budget (e.g. salary increases). Institutions know what to expect each year (e.g. baseline operational budget vs. expectations of campuses to contribute). what to expect each year (e.g. baseline operational budget vs. expectations of campuses to contribute).

Goal 3: Human Resources: Develop UMS Early College human resource structure to better meet the needs of programs.

Strategies Responsible Parties Year 1 Year 3 Year 5
Conduct a position and resource review for each campus to better align services and supports. EC team leads, EC Executive Director, CAO’s, UMS budget and finance leadership, HR partners ongoing ongoing
Consider potential centralization of some services to improve efficiency. EC team leads, EC Executive Director, relevant stakeholders as needed (eg. information technology (IT), shared processing center, billing offices), human resources (HR) partners, campus chief business officer (CBO) and CAO ongoing ongoing

 

Quantitative Metrics to Assess Goal Baseline Year 1 Year 3 Year 5
Note:  May be developed as reviews and related plans are developed throughout the span of this strategic plan.

 

Qualitative Metrics to Assess Goal Baseline Year 1 Year 3 Year 5
Conduct review of all current positions, descriptions. Identify gaps and needs. Evaluate team strengths and opportunities for PD and growth. Team PD to give other leads training in certain areas others don’t have (e.g. advising). Are there opportunities for positions to assist (work study, grad assistants)? Current job descriptions, job titles, position qualification description (PDQ) Development of templates for core positions (e.g. application processing, EC counselor, advising, EC Director) Review (ongoing) Review (ongoing)
Review workflow of EC processes, opportunities for alignment, centralization. Discuss and evaluate benefits and drawbacks, feasibility of unified approach (e.g. billing, activation, student communication regarding registration, counselor communication,, transcripts) Current processes, procedures, and documentation Update processes, procedures and documentation. Meet with internal (EC teams) and external stakeholders (IT, registrars, billing offices) to find efficiencies in processes and areas needing improvement. Workflow is operationalized, efficient, with periodic review as new needs arise. Expectations are clear to all internal and external stakeholders. Review (ongoing)

Goal 4: Program Marketing and Outreach: Increase and improve effectiveness of marketing and outreach of early college programs.

Strategies Responsible Parties Year 1 Year 3 Year 5
Develop individual institution and system-wide outreach/marketing to students, families, high school personnel, and relevant stakeholders (external). EC team leads, EC Executive Director, DOE, grad assistant, campus marketing/communication teams ongoing ongoing ongoing
Develop individual institution and system-wide outreach/marketing to internal stakeholders (faculty, staff, deans, CAO, EMS, Board of Trustees (BOT), Board of Visitors (BOV), UMS Public Relations). EC team leads, EC Executive Director, UMS leadership, campus marketing and communication teams ongoing ongoing ongoing

 

Quantitative Metrics to Assess Goal Baseline Year 1 Year 3 Year 5
Note:  May be developed as reviews and related plans are developed throughout the span of this strategic plan.

 

Qualitative Metrics to Assess Goal Baseline Year 1 Year 3 Year 5
Plan to provide outreach, support, and training to schools and student populations, with a focus on underserved schools. DOE data (% participation by school, income. SES). 19-20 EC demographic data (EC report). Develop an outreach plan. Establish focus groups to determine needs and challenges of our schools, parents, students. Promote value of “free” courses to external stakeholders Plans are implemented, revised as needed based on feedback. Review (ongoing)
Cultivated partnerships with stakeholders (Trio-Talent Search, Upward Bound, JMG, Educate Maine, Student Success Center, Maine Opportunity Center, Adult Education, Native American liaisons, community centers, Downeast Teen Leadership, FAME) Current social media, marketing, current partnerships Development of comprehensive communication, outreach, and marketing plan.
Increased awareness, support, and knowledge about EC programs and benefits to Institutions. Current communication and outreach (internally) Determine system-wide marketing efforts as appropriate (e.g. EC report and success metrics, update infographic). Develop plans at each institution as appropriate. Plans are implemented, revised as needed based on feedback. Review (ongoing)

Priority #3: Our Student and Program Sucsess

As a partnership of programs, UMS Early College is made up of a number of moving parts. Individual campus programs have varied emphasis areas, histories, and constituencies.  One iimportant thread that ties all programs together and determines the success of the program and the people it serves is a concerted effort of program evaluation and student success. A great starting point for much of that evaluation comes from two sources: UMS data collection and reporting requirements help determine metrics while the standards set forth by the National Alliance for Concurrent Enrollment Partnerships help guide efforts made in ensuring quality programming. UMS Early College will continue to build a culture of program evaluation and continuous improvement.

Goal 1:  Evaluation & Assessment:

Develop a shared system of student and program evaluation at the institutional and at the UMS level to enhance the use of data in decision making and to align with NACEP standards. (3.1)

Goal 2: Meeting Student Needs:

Enhance support services to meet the needs of early college students in all course modalities. (3.2)

Summary of Key Strategies and Outputs
Establish mechanisms for student voice in program assessment, direction, and quality.
Common metrics to assess student success of early college students in all course modalities.
NACEP alignment; including standards and assessment processes.
Enhanced academic and student success supports for early college.
Models of centralization that provide institutional early college staff more time to provide advising, student service, and support.

Key Assessment Areas and Tools:

  • Student success rates in early college courses.
  • Four- and six-year graduation rates among early college cohorts (aggregate all EC types) compared to non EC Maine HS students.
  • Matriculation rate of all EC students in UMS, Maine, and other institutions upon HS graduation.
  • Stakeholder engagement in regular opportunities for feedback for quality control and program success (UMS and institutional level).

Key Planning Takeaway – We will thrive as programs, and our students will have quality experiences with us, if we operate within a culture of evaluation. How many we serve is secondary to how well we serve them.

Tables:

Priority #4:  Our Partnerships and Collaborations

Goal 1:  Partnerships: Enhance/build statewide HS and other external partnerships (to encompass Concurrent Enrollment, Aspirations, Bridge Academy, etc.) to achieve EC program goals.

Strategies Responsible Parties Year 1 Year 3 Year 5
Develop stronger school stakeholder communication to achieve shared goals and objectives. UMS EC team, individual campus teams ongoing
Create professional development opportunities for concurrent enrollment instructors that are aligned with NACEP accreditation standards and are mindful of CE instructors’ time and needs. UMS EC team ongoing ongoing ongoing

 

Quantitative Metrics to Assess Goal Baseline Year 1 Year 3 Year 5
Number of partner schools participating in CE 98 Increase by 3 schools Increase by 5 schools Increase by 5 schools
Number of partner schools participating in online/on-campus opportunities. 196 Increase by 3 schools Increase by 5 schools Every school in Maine
Number of partner schools participating in Bridge Academy. 7 Increase by 1 school (8) Increase by 2 schools (10) Increase by 2 schools (12)
Number of system PD opportunities offered annually 1 2 4 Discuss if more than 4 are needed/division by subject matter

 

Qualitative Metrics to Assess Goal Baseline Year 1 Year 3 Year 5
Create or modify current communication methods 3 methods: Email, social media, in person visits 1st new/modified method 2nd new/modified method. BUS/mobile attention grabber
System survey of CE instructors Individual campus outreach Create survey and implement after each PD session Modifications to PD offerings based on feedback Continued refinement
Incentivize participation in PD None Awarding Continuing Education Units (CEUs) for PD Offering scholarship for CEUs Continue with CEUs and scholarships
Expand system definition of PD Includes only system/campus offerings Vet 3 third-party offerings for applicability Vet 3 additional third-party offerings for applicability Full list of vetted PD offerings

Goal 2: Academic Program and Institutional Early College Program Partnerships: Increase collaboration between EC and academic programs within each institution and between EC programs at different institutions.

Strategies Responsible Parties Year 1 Year 3 Year 5
Encourage internal EC collaborations with academic programs. Individual Campuses ongoing ongoing ongoing
Encourage institution-to-institution EC program alignment where feasible and mutually beneficial. UMS EC team ongoing ongoing ongoing
Admissions/Enrollment Management Individual Campuses ongoing ongoing ongoing

 

Quantitative Metrics to Assess Goal Baseline Year 1 Year 3 Year 5
Create and implement pathways/projects to encourage matriculation
NetTutor student usage
4 campuses (UMaine, UMaine Machias, UMA, UMFK) 4 campuses; other campuses constructing potential pathways 5 campuses All campuses
NetTutor student usage 2021 (through 11/17), 192 sessions, 4525 minutes.  2020, 186 sessions, 3649 minutes (represents duplicate student use) increase overall usage by 10% over base lines increase usage by 10% over year 1 baselines increase usage by 10% over year 3 baselines
EC assists Admissions teams to create targeted communication for EC HS population None Create year-long campus specific communication plan Implement communication plan Refine communications as necessary

 

Qualitative Metrics to Assess Goal Baseline Year 1 Year 3 Year 5
EC programs collaborate to make a system General Education pathway None Discussion about alignment of a single pathway to be determined to be determined
Common Application Portal Done Successful launch of teacher portal Updates as needed Updates as needed
Common orientation In progress Create and implement beta version of online orientation All campuses using tool and collaborating on updates Continued collaboration
Advising tool None Create and implement beta version of advising tool All campuses using tool and collaborating on updates Continued collaboration
EC engagement with campus outreach for education Limited Source training plan from team of EC campus teams for adaptation to individual campus admissions’ offices Create communication plan with each EC team/campus admissions for targeted outreach to EC students Refine communications as necessary

 


Glossary

Aspirations:

A fund of the Maine Department of Education, established in Maine Legislative statute, that provides funding to support tuition for public high school students to enroll in early college classes in the University of Maine System and the Maine Community College System.

Baseline:

A minimum or starting point used in measurement and assessment.

Concurrent Enrollment (CE):

A program in which high school students take college-level classes for credit offered in their high schools by high school teachers who have been deemed academically qualified to do so by a sponsoring institution of higher education.

DOE:

An abbreviation for Department of Education.

Early College (EC):

An umbrella term for any program in Maine in which high school students enroll in college-level classes for credit while still in high school.

Priorities:

Important areas of interest needing action or attention.

Metric:

Measure of assessment commonly used for assessing, comparing, and tracking performance, improvement, growth, etc.

Mission Statement:

A concise explanation of an organization’s reason for existence. It describes the organization’s purpose and its overall intention. The mission statement supports the vision and serves to communicate purpose and direction to stakeholders.

NACEP:

An abbreviation for the National Alliance for Concurrent Enrollment Partnerships. Established in 1999, NACEP is a professional organization for college and high school partnerships offering college courses in American high schools. It is the only accrediting body for concurrent enrollment in the U.S.

Qualitative Metrics:

(See Metric) Measures based on subjective opinions and conclusions one forms based on information one receives or collects.

Quantitative Metrics:

(See Metric) Measures based on specific numbers, percentages, formulae, or other precise mathematical data.

Values:

Deeply held convictions and underlying assumptions that influence an individual’s or organization’s attitudes, direction, and behaviors.

Vision Statement:

An organization’s aspirational declaration of its goals over a period of time; stating what they want to become in the future. Vision statements act as a goal for an organization to strive toward.