The Selection Process
In selecting our peer groups, we sought institutions within the same Carnegie classification (a framework “intended to be an objective, degree-based lens through which researchers can group and study similar institutions.” Source) The majority of SFCC’s students and our local community think of us as a two-year public community college. However, SFCC now offers four Bachelor of Applied Science programs which classifies SFCC as a four-year public, Baccalaureate/Associate’s Dominant institution. This classification is of importance due to the data reporting structure of IPEDS.
In addition to selecting comparable institutions by classification, we also considered SFCC’s programs, students, and mission. Over 70% of our students select a transfer intent program, which is unusually high for a community college. SFCC students are more likely to attend full-time with only about a third attending part-time. Our average student age is also younger than typical, in part due to our robust dual enrollment programs, such as Running Start and Gateway to College. And because diversity, equity, and inclusion are important to SFCC, we also wanted to find colleges with similar population representations so we could learn from those facing similar equity challenges. While racial and ethnic diversity is increasing in the SFCC service area, it is still less diverse than most of the state of Washington. (Source)
Using these criteria and the two data sources, SFCC selected a set of Washington state peer colleges to take advantage of the more detailed data available through SBCTC as well as an additional regional set of peer colleges and a wider national peer group, using the more limited IPEDS data source.
SFCC and Washington State Peer Data
SFCC selected four Washington state colleges based on the criteria above—Centralia College (Centralia), Clark College (Vancouver), Lower Columbia (Longview), and Pierce College District (Lakewood).
The interactive visualizations below present the percentage of students in the selected category who achieved the progress metric within the most recent reporting year. There are some differences in disaggregation due to the data being specifically about SFCC versus our state peers—we have access to more data about ourselves than others. Two key differences are 1) the ability to disaggregate with multiple filters on the SFCC only visualization while that is not possible with the state peer visualization due to the structure of the SBCTC data provided, and 2) the ability to include students who self-identify in more than one race/ethnic identity into each of those groups. This allows a fuller representation of our students’ identities but does change the headcounts. In the SBCTC data, these students are only counted once and in the “Multiracial” group.
Disaggregated results are available by selecting different Student Filter Categories. (Note: results are not reported for any group with less than ten students both for protection of students and to avoid misinterpretation of the data due to small counts.)