Contents
Memorandum

Introduction

Discussion of data, challenges and opportunities

Appendices
NAU Surveys and Data
1. Task Forces
2. AADR Summer Session charge 2011-2012
3. ADDR Summer Session report May 2012
4. Memorandum RE: Summer Sessions 5_2014
5. Summer Session Management Enhancements, 10_23_13
6. Summer Session Task Force Recommendations 11_4_13
7. Summer Session 2009 Recommendations
8. Summer School summary and report 2013 and 2014
9. Department Chair Survey Spring 2015
10. a-c. Student survey reports (2009, 2010, 2012)
11. Excel Spread sheet of undergraduate summer course cancellations since 2005
12. SBS 2014 Summer session policies
13. NAU Tuition and fees
External reports and surveys
14. Alternative Academic Calendars
15. Building Quality in summer learning programs
16. Joint Statistical Report Summer 2013
17. Student Characteristics - Summer Enrollment
18. “Determining summer session needs” Summer Academe, V. 7, 2013
19. Administrative Structures and Summer Session, national report
1
Memorandum
Date: June 4, 2015
To: Laura Huenneke, Provost and Vice President of Academic Affairs;
Pauline Entin, Vice Provost
From: Cynthia Kosso, Provost’s Faculty Fellow
Introduction and background
Recent developments in the state of Arizona, including budget reductions and transformed
metrics for measuring university success have amplified pressures on Northern Arizona
University to increase enrollment and ensure student success to graduation, while at the same
time functioning with a reduced financial commitment to the institution.
In order to achieve graduation, enrollment and financial goals (and “do more with less”), it is
clear that more creative use of institutional resources is necessary. As a result the offices of the
President and Provost have asked that staff and faculty evaluate the feasibility of substantially
enhancing Flagstaff’s summer school programs to achieve the following goals:
Increase progress to graduation
Increase revenue
Maximize facility usage
Thus, since 2009, faculty, administrators and staff have been investigating Summer Session
enrollment as a way to increase progression to degree and increase revenues. Two task forces
(Appendix 1) were formally convened in 2011-12 and 2012-13 and during the last year and a
half I was tasked with further study. In June 2014 (Appendix 4), I offered a set of
recommendations, some of which I repeat here. This document also collects the earlier work into
one place (Appendices 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8), reiterates many previous recommendations, and offers
additional data along with further reflection on the opportunities and challenges inherent in
transforming summer session on the Flagstaff campus.
More effectively utilizing our resources during the summer is a stated goal for President Rita
Cheng. At President Cheng’s recent budget forum, it was noted that “One of the long-term
options she unveiled at the April 30 forum is an idea to increase the number of courses the
university offers on the Mountain Campus over the summer. “We have a number of empty
buildings,” Cheng said. “We have a number of residence halls that aren’t being used. We have
the opportunity to bring people to Flagstaff when it’s the nicest. We certainly should be looking
at ways that we can balance having (teachers) have a work-life balance with the need to bring
more activity on campus.” She also noted that the Provost’s Office has created a financial model
to encourage academic departments to offer summer programs. That could mean more
2
accelerated programs that allow students to get their bachelor’s degrees in three years instead of
four will be offered at NAU.1
Discussion
Some challenges persist despite repeated efforts to clarify the nature of and uses of summer
session. I remain convinced that creating a genuine summer semester, while maintaining
flexibility, might ultimately be the best solution to ensuring successful retention and graduation
goals, as well as meeting the other clear goals to generate revenues, provide seats for high
demand courses and to allow students to make up credits. However, there do remain serious
impediments to such an approach, including especially financial aid, ABOR restrictions on
summer funding and faculty workload issues.
Funding of summer session through tuition remains a particular issue – especially for students.
According to the Summer Session Associations’ Joint Statistical Report Summer 20132 only
about one-fifth of responding institutions offered tuition discounts for summer and about 46% of
institutions reported using internal revenue sharing for summer session. Tuition discounts or
other adjustments will be a critical piece of a successful summer programming process at NAU.
Currently, Northern Arizona University is at a competitive disadvantage in the summer school
market, largely for two reasons: first, the summer school costs to students are higher than those
for classes at community colleges and, for some students (depending on the year their “Pledge”
Program began), the other two state universities. (See Appendix 13 for NAU tuition and pricing).
It remains difficult to compare ASU3 and UA4 to NAU because of the complexity of their pricing
structures -- which differ from program to program, campus to campus. Second, course offerings
and the marketing thereof are relatively limited. The result is an underuse of university resources
and a tremendous opportunity to expand enrollment and student success.
A number of surveys have been undertaken (4 student surveys – only three of which were
available to me, see Appendix 10 a, b, c; and a chair survey, see Appendix 9) and these clearly
articulate some of the issues that need to be addressed.
Chair survey
The chair surveys clearly articulate a shared understanding of the potential benefits to students
and College departments: progress towards degree and revenue generation. However, there is
also evidence of a lack of clarity about funding mechanisms, when revenue is generated, how
break-even numbers are achieved, and in some cases a lack of understanding about how
particular departments might contribute to summer session efforts. (See Appendix 10.)
1
Arizona Daily Sun: http://azdailysun.com/news/local/education/cheng-readies-plan-for-new-revenue-fornau/article_24d9b933-221c-5d81-859e13bb4a40a11e.html#utm_source=azdailysun&utm_campaign=/emails/dailyheadlines/&utm_medium=email&utm_c
ontent=headline
2
Prepared by
Quality and Research Committee of the North American Association of Summer Sessions and
The
Center for Survey Research at Virginia Tech, pg. 7. Full report is attached as Appendix 16.
3
For ASU tuition and fee structures see: https://catalog.asu.edu/tuitionandfees/index.html
4
For UA see: http://www.bursar.arizona.edu/students/fees
3
Policy documents exist for only a few colleges and I would recommend that each college
develop a set of guideline s and policies regarding each of the issues outlined above. The
College of Social and Behavioral Sciences has developed an excellent document that could be
used by other units as a model. (See Appendix 13.)
Student surveys
The data are clear. Students want core courses for their majors offered in the summer. Liberal
studies and elective course are a distant second place in terms of student interest. Students take
summer classes as a means to graduate on time or early – very rarely for personal enrichment.
The majority of students prefer on-line course in the summer. Thus, encouraging on-line courses
in the summer will likely be more successful than offering face-to-face courses in the short term.
Cost was the main barrier to summer attendance. More than half the students who took
satisfaction surveys (and thus were enrolled in a summer class) were interested in taking courses
in subsequent summers. Thus carefully analyzing student characteristics will be a fundamental
tool in marketing summer sessions. (Appendix 10 a, b, c; see also Appendix 17 for student
characteristics nationally)
Summary enrollment trends (2013, 2014)
Most summer session attendees are juniors, seniors and graduate students, regardless of college.
Most are female Arizona residents and the ethnicity of theses attendees mirrors that of the
university at large. CEFNS and SBS provide most courses to students in the summer, followed
by the WH Franke College of Business and then HHS. The other colleges have a much lighter
presence in the summer. In extended campuses, the College of Education still predominates
(however with fewer than 1000 students attending courses). More than half of all students, at all
levels, take on-line courses. On the Flagstaff campus, in 2014, CAL offered 84 web-based
courses, WH Franke COB 18, COE 125, CEFNS 34, HHS 84 and SBS 148. SBS is notable in its
ability to meet student need online. The revenue generated by the colleges is significant and I
would recommend that this data be shared with the chairs, in addition to the deans, to emphasize
the fiscal benefits of encouraging summer participation. For a summary of these trends and
revenue generation during these two academic years, see Appendix 8.
Class cancellations (undergraduate only) dramatically decreased during the 2013 (252 total) and
2014 (155 total) summer sessions, after a record number of cancellations in 2009 (576 total),
indicating that summer session planning has improved. (See Appendix 11 for specific course
cancellations).
Recommendations
Following are several recommendations to meet the stated goals of student success and enhanced
revenue generation. It is important to note that changes to the summer school program would
ideally maintain or increase current levels of funding and operational flexibility for all areas of
Academic Affairs, as well as provide a reasonable guarantee to students of stable schedules and
tuition.
Balanced Trimesters: Regularizing the summer into a true third semester may be the most
effective way to achieve the goals of progression to degree. Advantages would appear to
4
outweigh disadvantages, but both are listed below for reference and discussion. Trimesters can
be uniform, such as 14/14/14 weeks, or can vary in length (e.g., fall and spring, 15 weeks and
summer, 14 weeks). See Appendix 14 for alternative academic calendars.
Advantages
 With a predictable summer schedule of classes and a regular and competitive
tuition schedule, students will be more likely to attend in the summer, thus
enabling students to better manage their plan progression, possibly graduating in
three years, while also increasing enrollments and revenues
 Twelve class slots (4 per trimester) instead of ten in a traditional semester
structure will allow for more diversity of available classes
 Students (a large number of whom are from the hot Phoenix metro area) could go
home to work when it is cooler, then could take a full semester of classes in
Flagstaff in the summer
 Housing is available on the Flagstaff campus in the summer
 The “break” semester could be any semester – not just summer
 A third semester will allow faculty more flexibility to do their scholarly work
during any of the three semesters
 A third semester will use classroom space that is otherwise unused in the summer
 Sets NAU apart as providing a unique service/niche
Disadvantages








Impact on faculty and administrative workload – three periods for deadlines, e.g.,
administration, teaching, grading, and scheduling
Reduced downtime for systems upgrades and yearly maintenance
Impact on faculty who engage in summer research
Coordination of use of facilities for summer camps, conferences and Cardinals
Coordination of dates with FUSD high school holidays, start and stop dates, and
graduation
Change of curriculum to meet different scheduling practices
Financial aid: Federal financial aid regulations limit aid options for students
during summer. Within the constraints of the current regulatory environment,
there is a limited band for institutional maneuvering to counter this barrier to
summer enrollment
Students say they prefer the 5 week format
Expansion of the current system: If converting to a balanced trimester calendar is considered
too challenging, progress toward the stated goals can be made with many enhancements to the
current summer system. Following are suggestions that can, in most cases, easily be
implemented.
A. Administrative support/operations5
 Clarify relationship between EC, Marketing and Academic Affairs.
5
See Appendix 19 for a national report on administering summer sessions.
5






Identify someone to take primary responsibility for the overall leadership of
Flagstaff campus Summer Sessions and other academic activities (perhaps an
associate provost and director of summer sessions). Depending on the
commitment to increase summer use of campus resources and the goal of the
Office of the Provost and/or President, as well as to the proposed relationship to
EC, this position could have a fairly extensive set of responsibilities. One college
dean strongly suggested we “need a director of summer school, someone who is
an entrepreneur not a functionary.”
Provide stronger Provost administrative support for planning and operations by
colleges. The Summer Session director/vice provost would
o Serve as policy authority for Flagstaff campus summer sessions.
o Provide regular communication about policies and protocols.
o Conduct central reporting, enrollment tracking, expense and revenue reports.
o Provide data and guidance for planning.
o Coordinate programmatic initiatives involving multiple units.
o Facilitate and incentivize new, innovative programming.
o Set priorities for enrollment and revenue.
o Consult academic units regarding management for student progression and
revenue generation.
o Liaise with Extended Campuses for planning and administration of summer
sessions.
o Collaborate with Extended Campuses to market Flagstaff summer sessions
o Encourage academic support services for students, including supplemental
instruction and writing support.
Decisions and calculations about summer salaries, enrollment requirements,
scheduling deadlines, CIE funding distribution, department/college overattainment, and set-asides need to be made early by Extended
Campuses/Academic Affairs, in consultation with colleges, and clearly articulated
to all administrators, faculty, and staff.
Assemble an implementation committee to develop a system for better
communication between departments, colleges, and Extended Campuses, with a
goal to be more proactive so that students can plan their schedules more in
advance, aiding degree progress, and departments and colleges can plan course
offerings around sabbaticals and other anticipated leaves.
Hire lecturers on 12-month contracts with summer teaching as an expectation
Allow Summer/Fall and Spring/Summer assignments with a 50/50 distribution as
fitting with unit needs for instruction, subject to approval of the dean and provost.
o Salary counted as zero for summer.
o One ERE budgeted with half in the summer and half in the year.
B. Curricular enhancements6
6
See Appendix 15 on building quality summer programs and Appendix 18 on determining summer session needs.
6







Be more deliberate about offering required courses and other classes that
departments have reason to believe will enroll successfully. Build trust - students
should secure in knowing their classes will not be cancelled.
Create a required summer course list (anthropology labs, for example) to increase
degree progression.
Increase predictability and stability of course offerings.
Build summer classes for specific conference attendees to increase revenue.
Design and market specific courses to the local community.
Enhance course offerings via pilot programs in three academic disciplines (i.e.,
BUS, ED, NUR). Use Summer 2014 data as the baseline from which to measure
change.
Encourage the idea of “pilot programs” to create a sense of safety around trying
new things.
o Consider ways to incentivize creativity.
C. Marketing improvements
 Market any tuition changes.
 Notify that summer tuition is less expensive up to a certain number of hours.
 Refine the summer school message for targeted students/majors.
 Ramp up marketing to transfer students who may be able/willing to move to
Flagstaff in the summer before they start their first regular academic term. This
same approach could also be targeted to new high school graduates, WUE, and
out-of-state students.
D. Summer tuition adjustments
 Do a price elasticity study and if feasible lower summer tuition. There is
discussion on-going about beginning such as study in fall 2015.
E. Financial Aid remarketing
 Encourage students to have their financial aid disbursed over fall, spring, and
summer.
 Consider holding back some “Regents-Set-Aside” (RSA) for summer student
financial need.
 A prime market for summer school is out-of-state students, so allow them, as well
as local students, to attend full time and use pledge semester in the summer.
F. Admission, Pricing & Financial Aid continued7

Identify academic liaisons, who will be willing and able to move relatively
quickly to evaluate either transfer credits, or more importantly, prerequisites in
7
The greatest challenges to the idea of a third semester are in the administrative hurdles posed by financial aid rules.
NAU is held to two disbursements for an Academic Year and the campus would have to switch to BBAY (Borrower
Based Academic Year), where the student would choose which 2 payment periods for loans that they want
(Fall/Spring, Spring/Summer). This approach does not work smoothly with PeopleSoft without major modifications
and even at universities that have done the modification; there are still many issues.
7


order to facilitate summer student access to course. Such a process has begun, but
needs enhancement and careful monitoring.
Admit late fall applicants deferred to spring for Spring-Summer AY package.
Clearly articulate to students what their financial aid options are. In particular,
identify options for packaging financial aid (RSA) to include summer session.
Market program options as a package with housing, meal plan, fees. Create a
summer session web page that covers all aspects of the summer experience, from
housing to dining, to tuition and fees, parking, admissions, enrollment and
anything else.
G. Facility usage
 Develop “hours in residence,” hybrid courses that only meet on campus a few
times in the summer and market Residence Life’s room rental program for single
night stays.
 Residence Life should review the logistics of giving summer school students
priority in fall housing selection and/or priority check-in.
 Residence life is currently able to accommodate 3,000-4,000 students in residence
in addition to those choosing to live off campus. American Campus Communities
will also have capacity for 550 additional students; Hilltop Townhomes are
currently leased on a 12-month basis.
H. Communication
 Clarify what is and what is not possible (repeatedly and transparently).
I. Registration
 Allow students to register for an entire year: Fall, Spring, and Summer at the same
time to enhance planning for both students and departments.
Major challenges
There remain two main, nearly universal, challenges in the way of expanding summer use of the
campus.
1. There is a persistent misunderstanding about what is and what is not possible and how
resources from summer session are allotted and used
a. There are several areas of entrenched resistance to teaching in the summer. These
areas have several sub-categories:
 Lack of willingness to adjust from old practices,
 Units in which professors are unwilling to give up opportunities to instructors,
lecturers, and untenured faculty, not for pedagogical reasons, but for financial
ones (increasing their retirement income), regardless of their ability to make
the minimum numbers for the course to succeed, and
 Lack of creativity that seems to stem from a fear of losing resources.
2. Financial aid packaging and pricing for summer students.
Opportunities/strengths
8
The campus has the facilities, the faculty, and the imagination to expand summer opportunities.
Summer session expansion offers the potential to meet revenue needs and student success goals.
SBS continues to stand out in its willingness to think creatively and actively about how summer
activities, of all sorts, might be enhanced on the campus. These programs and policies should
serve as a model for other colleges and an inspiration as well. Thus if a team for expanding
summer activities were created, a representative from SBS would be valuable. CEFNS
effectively meets the needs of many its own students in need of core courses, but could expand it
repertoire of courses offered in its college, but required by other colleges. Mathematics and
Statistics stands out in its efforts to support student needs for required courses.
Leadership in the W. H. Franke College of Business also had creative and transferrable ideas and
is currently transforming their summer session programming. In the past faculty felt that they
were not encouraged to work across silos, but this feeling is changing. If a team for expanding
summer activities were created, a representative from the W. H. Franke College would be
valuable.
The Dean of CAL felt that the financial support or institutional wherewithal was not forthcoming
for adventurous summer programming. Nevertheless his ideas included: Outreach programs,
Honors summer camp, Art camp, Foreign language camps, Elderhostel, all of which would
nourish the campus climate intellectually and culturally and would contribute to our recruiting
efforts. He urged us to think about creating a portfolio of, for example, repeated and repeatable
high level festivals, camps, speakers, film institutes, and diverse audiences.
Recurrent conversations, in general, with deans and chairs to exchange ideas and innovative
practices would clearly be welcomed. Much work could simply be connecting people to one
another in order to find solutions to perceived difficulties. Someone with a deep familiarity of the
campus culture and its various divisions would be a useful leader to provide rapid response
where needed to enhance summer programming.
In summary, best practices for summer programming should include and require the creation
and publication of college policies that focus on a student-need-driven approach to scheduling,
the same method used for the spring and fall semester and that address:
Principles for summer course programming (these principles should address an approach
that ensures that student needs are met within a model that works to maximize returns to the
institution/unit, and provide fair compensation to faculty)
Curricular planning: Historically, many colleges and departments offerings were driven
by faculty requests to teach certain courses, often resulting in course cancellations.
o Make decisions for scheduling classes for summer based on:
 Successful course offerings in previous summers (not cancelled).
 Analysis of unmet need in the previous fall and spring terms.
 Core and required course need
o The Summer School AVP/Director or other should review any exceptions on a
case-by-case basis.
9
Faculty workload and compensation based on level and kinds of courses, which must
be very clearly articulated.
Course Cancellation options need to be clearly articulated and shared.
All curricular planning should be completed well in advance of the summer semester.
Departments should be prepared to market summer courses at least by the fall prior to the
summer offering.
10