Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social,...

29
Se$ng produc-ve, a1ainable educa-onal goals for North Carolina June 15, 2018 ECONorthwest ECONOMICS FINANCE PLANNING

Transcript of Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social,...

Page 1: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

Se$ng produc-ve, a1ainable

educa-onal goals for North Carolina

June 15, 2018

ECONorthwestECONOMICS • FINANCE • PLANNING

Page 2: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

Takeaways •  Technological change has demanded, and will con-nue to demand,

higher skilled labor •  North Carolina’s postsecondary a1ainment gap (across various

defini-ons) is 11-15 percentage points •  North Carolina’s postsecondary a1ainment (associate+) increased by

7 percentage points over the past decade •  Sta-ng the obvious: postsecondary enrollment at age 19 is a predictor

of postsecondary a1ainment at age 26

•  P12 goals should consider measures of hard and soR skills •  Achievement gaps measured at age 5 have proven difficult to narrow

during K12, confirming the need for age 0-4 programming and measures

Page 3: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

Educa-on and the economy

Page 4: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

0.0

0.5

1.0

1.5

2.0

2.5

3.0

Sout

h Da

kota

North

Dak

ota

Conn

ectic

utVi

rgin

iaCo

lora

doM

assa

chus

etts

New

Ham

pshi

reTe

xas

Geor

giaKa

nsas

Nebr

aska

Loui

siana

Mar

ylan

dNe

w Je

rsey

Utah

Arka

nsas

Min

neso

taM

ississ

ippi

Alab

ama

Iow

aRh

ode

Islan

dOr

egon

North

Car

olin

aSo

uth

Caro

lina

Tenn

esse

eOk

laho

ma

Was

hing

ton

Mai

neW

iscon

sinFlo

rida

Calif

orni

aNe

w Y

ork

Mon

tana

Penn

sylva

nia

Arizo

naIll

inoi

sId

aho

Indi

ana

New

Mex

icoVe

rmon

tM

issou

riKe

ntuc

kyOh

ioNe

vada

Wes

t Virg

inia

Haw

aiiM

ichig

an

Annu

al a

vera

ge G

DP p

er c

apita

gro

wth

, 197

0-20

07

Years of schoolingTest scoresTotal annual average GDP per capita growth

Contribu-ons to GDP per capita growth, 1970-2007

Economic benefits of a be1er-educated workforce

Source: Hanushek et al. (2017). Economic Gains from Educa-onal Reform by US States. Journal of Human Capital.

Other factors

Page 5: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

Risk of job disrup-on Share of occupa-ons at high risk of automa-on

Percent Automation Risk

45% - 50%

50% - 55%

55% - 60%

60% - 65%

Source: Frey and Osborne (2017) & analysis by Ball State University

Lower Higher

Page 6: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

Growing importance of social skills in the labor force

Actu

al

Pred

icte

d

Source: Deming, D.J. (2017). The Growing Importance of Social Skills in the Labor Market. Quarterly Journal of Economics, vol. 132 issue 4.

1980 1990 2000 2010

High Social, High Math

Low Social, High Math

High Social, Low Math

Low Social, Low Math

Occupational Task Intensities based on 1998 O*NETSources: 1980-2000 Census, 2005-2013 ACS

Cumulative Changes in Employment Share by Occupation Task Intensity1980 to 2012

High Social, High Math

High Social, Low Math

Low Social, High Math

Low Social, Low Math

Page 7: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

Early thoughts on goal se$ng

Page 8: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

Early thoughts on goal se$ng

•  Start at the end and work back

•  Consider:

–  Age range(s)

–  Creden-al types

–  Growth feasibility

–  Exis-ng gaps by income, race/ethnicity, geography

–  Time to goal

Page 9: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

State-level goals versus current state-level a1ainment

Sources: Goals compiled by the Lumina Founda-on (HCM Strategists, Strategy Labs); ECONorthwest analysis of ACS PUMS data; Georgetown CEW.

AKAZ

AR

CO

CT

GA

HIID

IA

ILIN

KS

KY

LA

MEMD

MAMN

MOMT

NV

NH

OH

ORRI

SC

SD

TN TX

UT

VT

VAWA

AL

FL

NJ

NM

ND

OK

WY

WI

20%

40%

60%

80%

20% 40% 60% 80%

Act

ua

l a

tta

inm

en

t (f

or

25

-34

or

25

-64

ye

ar

old

s, d

ep

en

din

g o

n g

oa

l)

Attainment goal

State postsecondary attainment goals and actual attainment, 2016

Legend:

Certificate+

Associate+

Bachelor's+

Page 10: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

North Carolina postsecondary a1ainment (associate+) by age, 2016

Source: ECONorthwest analysis of ACS PUMS

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64

Age

Page 11: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

North Carolina postsecondary a1ainment (associate+) by age, 2016

Source: ECONorthwest analysis of ACS PUMS

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64

Age

Ages 25-34: recent graduates

AA+ a1ainment:

43%

Ages 35-64: adult workforce

AA+ a1ainment:

42%

Page 12: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

White

Black

Hispanic

North Carolina postsecondary a1ainment, by age and race/ethnicity, 2016

Source: ECONorthwest analysis of ACS PUMS

Page 13: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

Postsecondary a1ainment (associate+) by NC region and race/ethnicity, 2016

Source: ECONorthwest analysis of ACS PUMS

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

North Central Northeast Northwest Piedmont-Triad Sandhills(South Central)

Southeast Southwest Western

Total White Black Hispanic

Page 14: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

Postsecondary a1ainment (associate+), 2016

Source: ECONorthwest analysis of ACS PUMS

Younger (25-34) Older (35-64) All (25-64)

North Carolina 43% 42% 42%

Top state 58% 52% 53%

Difference -15 -10 -11

Lumina Founda-on’s Stronger Na-on (cer-ficate+), 2016

All (25-64)

North Carolina 47%

Lumina na-onal goal 60%

Difference -13

Page 15: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

What’s feasible? Change in a1ainment (associate+) by state, 2006-2016, ages 25-34

Source: ECONorthwest analysis of ACS PUMS

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12

ME WY NE OR CO DC TN IL MO TX CA UT VA OH MN SD NH NC WAMA RI NY KY CT AL NJ WI AR FL PA OK ID SC KS IA IN GA LA AZ MS NM AK WV HI MI NV VT MD DE MT ND

Change in associate+ attainment from 2006-2016, ages 25-34

Page 16: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

Source: ECONorthwest analysis of ACS PUMS

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12

DC IA NC SD MT MNWV OH IN SC PA NH WI GA NE VA MO KY TN MS AL ND WY MI NJ CO CT KS RI LA ME OR IL NY AR MA WA OK TX ID MD FL UT AZ HI NV DE CA AK NM VT

Change in associate+ attainment from 2006-2016, ages 35-64

What’s feasible? Change in a1ainment (associate+) by state, 2006-2016, ages 35-64

Page 17: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

0.00

0.02

0.04

0.06

0.08

0.10

0.12

DC IA NC SD NE MN OH WY TN MO NH CO VA PA ME WI IN SC WV OR KY IL GA AL RI NJ MT CT NY TX MS MA KS WA UT LA AR MI ND OK ID FL CA AZ MD HI NV DE NM AK VT

Change in associate+ attainment from 2006-2016, ages 25-64

Source: ECONorthwest analysis of ACS PUMS

What’s feasible? Change in a1ainment (associate+) by state, 2006-2016, ages 25-64

Page 18: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

Younger (25-34) Older (35-64) All (25-64)

Moderate +11 pp +8 pp +9 pp

Stretch +13 pp +10 pp +11 pp

Ambi-ous ? ? +13 pp

Poten-al a1ainment goals for North Carolina

Page 19: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

Other measures that track progress toward the goal

Page 20: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

Age 19 enrollment versus age 26 a1ainment for the cohorts born in 1988-90 (averaged), by state

Source: ECONorthwest analysis of ACS PUMS

Page 21: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

North Carolina postsecondary enrollment, by age, 2016

Source: ECONorthwest analysis of ACS PUMS

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64

Age

Page 22: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

NC enrollment, by age, compared with a top-performing state and neighboring states, 2016

Source: ECONorthwest analysis of ACS PUMS

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64

Age

MNVANCGATN

Page 23: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

8th grade NAEP performance versus age 26 a1ainment for the cohorts born in 1988-90 (averaged), by state

Source: ECONorthwest analysis of ACS PUMS and NCES NAEP data

Page 24: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

K12 indicators: academic achievement, a1endance, gradua-on

Not proficient in elementary

reading Not proficient In elementary

math

No disciplinary incidents in grades 6-8

Steady attendance in

9th grade On-time

HS graduation

No on-time HS graduation

Source: ECONorthwest analysis of ODE and NSC data

Postsecondary enrollment

Postsecondary outcomes

Page 25: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

Achievement gaps measured at age 5 have proven difficult to narrow during K12

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0

-0.2

-0.4

-0.6

-0.8

test

scor

esin

sta

ndar

d d

evia

tions

parent income in highest quartile

parent income in lowest quartile

age0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14

Source: White House Council of Economic Advisors (December 2014) The Economics of Early Childhood Investments. Figure 3, page 13.

Page 26: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

Analysis to come

Page 27: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

Example ques-ons answered by modeling

•  What will happen through 2030 if we do nothing? •  How much would high school gradua-on rates have to

improve to reach the postsecondary a1ainment goal by 2030?

•  To what extent can the state increase overall a1ainment while reducing dispari-es across specified popula-ons given an-cipated upper bounds on postsecondary enrollment growth?

Page 28: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

Modeling ac-vi-es

•  Develop a baseline a1ainment forecast (current condi-ons/policy)

•  Set targets for system performance needed to achieve the goal

•  Evaluate contribu-ons of subpopula-on a1ainment to the goal

Page 29: Se$ng producve, aainable educaonal goals for North Carolina · 1980 1990 2000 2010 High Social, High Math Low Social, High Math High Social, Low Math Low Social, Low Math Occupational

Example of goal-reaching approach to modeling: Establish the ul-mate goal and iden-fy condi-ons necessary to achieve this goal

(condi-ons can be independent of the means used to achieve the goal)

Baseline (certificates+)

Alternative trajectory (certificates+)