sixth edition

Arizona Minority Student
Progress Report

2016

The Transformation
Continues

Executive Summary

Milem Salazar Bryan

Amepac

Arizona Minority Education
Policy Analysis Center

PREPARED BY

Dr. Jeffrey F. Milem
Karina G. Salazar
W. Patrick Bryan
The University of Arizona
Center for the Study of Higher Education

Dr. David Camacho

Fred Lockhart

Northern Arizona University

Arizona Private School Association

Susan Carlson, Chair

Everardo Martinez-Inzunza

Carlson & Affiliates

Arizona Western College

Panfilo Contreras

Jacob Moore

Private Education Consultant

Arizona State University

Dr. Mark S. Denke

Dr. Ray Ostos

Arizona Board of Regents

Maricopa Community College District

Dr. Alfredo G. De Los Santos Jr.

Dr. Rebecca Tsosie

Founding Member

Arizona State University

Dr. René X. Diaz

Magdalena Verdugo

AZ Hispanic School Admin. Association

Dr. Dolores Duran-Cerda
Pima Community College

Joseph García

Chicanos Por La Causa, Inc.

Dr. Angie Williams
University of Phoenix

Arizona State University

COMMISSION STAFF

Tannya Gaxiola

Dr. April Osborn

The University of Arizona

Mary Haluska
Arizona Department of Education

Executive Director

Julie Vo
Office and Program Manager

Arizona Minority Student Progress Report 2016
The Transformation Continues

INTRODUCTION
REPORT OVERVIEW....................................................................................... 4
READING THE REPORT................................................................................. 5
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION............................................................................................. 6
ARIZONA DEMOGRAPHICS....................................................................... 6
P-12 EDUCATION............................................................................................ 6
COLLEGE AND CAREER READINESS......................................................... 7
POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION................................................................ 8
Undergraduate Enrollments.................................................................................. 8
Pell Grant Recipients............................................................................................... 8
Community College Transfer Rates..................................................................... 8
Remedial Education................................................................................................. 8
Undergraduate Degrees......................................................................................... 8
Undergraduate Degree Trends............................................................................. 8
Graduate & Professional Enrollments................................................................. 8
Graduate & Professional Enrollment Trends..................................................... 9
Graduate & Professional Degrees........................................................................ 9
Graduate & Professional Degree Trends............................................................ 9

POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS
PRE-K-12 EDUCATION................................................................................. 10
POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION................................................................11
LIMITATIONS AND OTHER NEEDED STUDIES......................................11
CONCLUSION..................................................................................................11

MORE INFORMATION
The full 2016 report, along with tables and additional data for
Arizona’s 14 counties are available at highered.az.gov/amepac.

The Arizona Minority Education Policy Analysis Center (AMEPAC)
is a policy center of the Arizona Commission for Postsecondary
Education. Through studies, AMEPAC’s mission is to stimulate
constructive statewide discussion and debate about improving
Arizona minority students’ early awareness, access, and achievement
throughout the educational attainment process. Our vision is that all
Arizona students succeed in higher education as a result of quality
research that shapes policy on critical issues.
AMEPAC is proud to provide policymakers, educators, and the
public with this 6th edition of the Minority Student Progress Report
titled The Transformation Continues: Minority Student Progress
Report 2016. The report provides a current “snapshot” of the
educational achievement of minority students in Arizona, from pre-k
through postsecondary education. In addition, trend analyses of key
educational indicators are also provided to give readers a sense of how
the status of minority education in Arizona has changed over time.
In helping readers understand how best to use the findings
described in this report, it is important to clarify that the study does
not provide an analysis of why minority educational disparities
remain. The focus of the report is to provide comprehensive and
accurate baseline and trend data which identify and reveal the type,
extent, and significance of educational attainment disparities during
the time periods reported. In some cases the data are provided for
a single year, but in other cases data are provided for up to a 20
year period. The most current data available were used to provide
information for this report; however, these years vary throughout
the report due to the most current information available through
state and national databases. The data sources are listed at the end
of the report and are noted in each of the figures and data tables. We
encourage readers to use the report’s findings to stimulate important
discussions that lead to policy solutions in a dynamic and ever
changing environment. This report will be most useful to leaders
who recognize and appreciate the complexity of these issues, and
who value the critical role that education plays in improving the
lives and well-being of all Arizonans.

INTRODUCTION

REPORT OVERVIEW
This 6th edition of the report is presented in four major sections.
Section one provides a summary of key demographic data drawn
from the U.S. Census about the state of Arizona. Section two draws
upon data from the Arizona Department of Education (ADE) to
provide summaries of key educational indicators. This section
includes trend analyses of student enrollments in Arizona schools
by racial/ethnic background. In addition, we present data regarding
the number and proportion of students who are English Language
Learners (ELL), enrolled in special education, and who receive free
or reduced lunch. We also show data summarizing pass rates on
Arizona’s Instrument to Measure Standards (AIMS) tests.
Section three draws upon data from the Arizona Board of Regents
(ABOR), the College Board, the American College Testing (ACT)
service, and the community college districts in the state to provide
information regarding the extent to which Arizona students are
“college ready.”

PHOTO BY KARINA PUGA
4 ARIZONA MINORITY STUDENT PROGRESS REPORT

The fourth section draws upon data from the United States
Department of Education’s Integrated Postsecondary Education
Data System (IPEDS) to summarize 20-year trends in enrollments

and completions for all postsecondary institutions in
Arizona. Moreover, these trend data are provided for
undergraduate, graduate, and professional students
enrolled in postsecondary institutions in Arizona.

READING THE REPORT
As readers review the report, it is important to
understand the conventions used throughout its
many charts and graphs. In the interest of conserving
space, providing clarity, and maintaining consistency,
a code has been employed throughout the report
for presenting race/ethnicity categories. The report
uses the same color for each category (although the
same color may be used for unrelated categories)
and employs a shorthand legend. At right is a key
for understanding the legend and color scheme. It
is important to note the importance of language and
terminology when discussing matters of race and
ethnicity. The terminology used in this report follows
the guidelines established by the White House Office
of Management and Budget before 1997.
These categories, while implemented within the U.S.
Census starting in 2000, were not fully implemented
in the Department of Education reporting structure
until 2010. For this reason, many educational
institutions do not have data for the newest race
categories from the 1997 standards: “Native Hawaiian
/ Pacific Islander” or “Multiracial” until after 2010. In
an effort to standardize terms throughout this report,
which includes data from before 1997 and after 2010
(trend data presented in this report often start as
early as 1994 and end as late as 2014), the decision to
use pre-1997 categories was made. This means that
those individuals who would be classified as “Native
Hawaiian / Pacific Islander” or “Asian” in the post1997 categories will be classified as “Asian Pacific
Islander” in this report because that is how the data
were reported prior to 2010 when many of the OMB’s
1997 guidelines were fully implemented. Data for
individuals who are classified as “Multiracial” are only
provided post-2009, in most cases, because these data
were not collected until that year.

Race / Ethnicity Category Codes
AI

American Indian

AP

Asian / Pacific Islander

B

Black

W

White

H

Hispanic

UK

Unknown Race

M

Multiracial

AZ

Arizona

NR

Non-Resident Alien
(International Student)

AMEPAC realizes that there are many ways in which
individuals may choose to identify their racial or
ethnic heritage, and the decision to use these terms
is not meant to reflect any ideological or political
preference. This report relies completely on data
provided from numerous institutions, and as such is
limited to the reporting categories they use.

REPORT OVERVIEW 5

INTRODUCTION
In the previous version of this report, we reported that in 2004
students of color had become the majority of students enrolled
in Pre-k through 12 schools in Arizona and that Hispanics had
surpassed Whites as the largest group of students enrolled.
Moreover, trend analyses indicated that the representation of
students of color was steadily increasing over time. Our analyses in
this edition of report document that these trends have continued in
the two years since we released the 2013 edition of the report.
The introduction to the 2013 AMEPAC report cited evidence from
the Morrison Institute for Public Policy’s 2012 report, “Dropped?
Latino Education and Arizona’s Economic Future,” to establish the
critically important connection between education and workforce
development. In its report, the Morrison Institute warned that
“Arizona is at risk of becoming a second-tier state, educationally and
economically” (p. 5). Given the trends documented in our previous
report and the findings of our current report, we believe that this
admonition has even greater significance today.
This edition of the report details trends in demographics and
education in Arizona, which shape the context for the state of
Arizona. Selected data from the P-12 and higher education sectors
are highlighted to provide information about some of the significant
educational challenges and opportunities that face our state. These
are not comprehensive analyses of all of the relevant data, but rather
are intended to be “snapshots” that provide insight into the key
educational and public policy challenges Arizona faces.

ARIZONA DEMOGRAPHICS

EXECUTIVE
SUMMARY

Arizona’s population is comprised of a larger proportion of Hispanics
and American Indians than the nation as a whole. The state is
becoming increasingly Hispanic, especially among younger age
cohorts, where, as of 2014, Hispanics comprised the largest group of
students enrolled in pre-K through 12 classrooms.
As of 2013, 27 percent of Arizonans over the age of 25 have obtained a
bachelor’s degree or higher, 8 percent have completed an associate’s
degree, 25 percent have completed at least some college, 25 percent
have obtained a high school diploma or equivalent, and 14 percent of
Arizonans have not obtained a high school diploma.
In 2013, the median household income for Arizonans was $49,774
compared to the U.S. median household income of $53,046. Across the
state, 18 percent of Arizonans lived below the poverty threshold with
poverty levels higher among American Indians (39%), Hispanics (28%),
Blacks (25%) than among Asian Americans (13%) or Whites (11%).

P-12 EDUCATION
As we previously stated, minority students became the majority in
Arizona Schools in 2004 and their representation has continued to
grow at a steady rate. More Hispanics are enrolled in Arizona schools
at all grade levels than students from any other racial/ethnic group.
For the first time in this year’s report, we tracked the enrollment
of students by school type. Notable in these findings is the fact that
enrollment of students in charter schools in Arizona has steadily
increased from 12 percent in 2010 to 15 percent in 2014.
PHOTO BY PRISCILA MATEI

6 ARIZONA MINORITY STUDENT PROGRESS REPORT

For the first time in this year’s report, we present data on students
who receive free or reduced lunch. Between 2010 and 2014 the
number of students who received free or reduced lunch increased

dramatically by 12 percent. Nearly three quarters
(72%) of American Indian students receive free or
reduced lunch followed by Hispanic students (66%),
Black students (62%), White students (42%), and Asian
Pacific Islander students (26%).
School dropout rates have remained constant over
the past few years. The highest dropout rates in 2014
were among American Indian students (7%), Hispanic
students (4.1%), Black students (4%), Whites (2.5%),
and Asian Pacific Americans (less than 1%). Since 2008,
three quarters of Arizona students graduate from high
school within four years of entering high school. While
more than 8 in 10 Asian Pacific Americans (85%) and
Whites (83%) graduate within four years, about 7 in 10
Blacks (70%) and Hispanics (69%) and 6 in 10 (61%)
American Indian students graduate within four years of
entering high school.
English Language Learners in Arizona have decreased
dramatically over the last ten years, from 161,136 in
2004 to 66,275 in 2014, due to changes in the AZELLA
(Arizona English Language Learner Assessment)
proficiency test allowing for ELL students to be
classified as proficient even when the student was not.
Recent trends show similar decreases (from 76,325 in
2010 to 66,275 in 2014). As would be expected given
their large representation in Arizona schools, the
majority of ELL students are Hispanics.
The number of Arizona students enrolled in special
education increased by 3 percent between 2010 and
2014. As in previous years, Black and American Indian
students are more likely to be enrolled in special
education than are students from other racial/ethnic
groups while Asian Pacific American students are least
likely to be in special education.
As noted in the 2013 report, AIMS test scores show
persistent discrepancies in pass rates between Asian
Pacific American, and Whites (who pass at higher
rates) and American Indians, Blacks, and Hispanics
(who pass at much lower rates). There has been no
improvement in pass rates on the mathematics and
science portions of the AIMS tests. In fact, only 4 in 10
high school students pass the AIMS science test and
just over 6 in 10 students pass the AIMS mathematics
test. As in the past, the consequences of not passing the
AIMS test for students are severe—making it virtually
impossible for them to enroll in courses that they need
to become eligible for admission to one of the state’
public universities because they must enroll in classes
that prepare them to retake the AIMS test in order to
meet high school graduation requirements.

COLLEGE AND CAREER READINESS
Access to postsecondary education is a function of
admissions requirements and the preparation that
students receive. Trend data reveal little improvement
in eligibility rates between 2009 and 2014 as
university eligibility rates for students across Arizona

remain very low. Students in urban areas of the state
are more likely than students from other areas in
the state to meet ABOR eligibility requirements; yet,
only half of students in Maricopa and Pima counties
are eligible for admission to a state university. Fewer
than four in ten students from other counties in the
state are university eligible. There are clear gaps in
university eligibility by racial/ethnic groups as White
and Asian Pacific American students show much
higher eligibility rates than do American Indian, Black
and Hispanic students. Most students in Arizona, six
in ten, do not demonstrate the necessary proficiency
in mathematics. Moreover, four in ten students show
deficiencies in the science and language requirements.
Standardized tests, advanced placement (AP) courses,
and dual enrollment courses play a significant role in
college access in Arizona. Similar to findings from the
2013 report, there is less disparity in the proportion of
students from different racial/ethnic groups who took
the ACT than those who took the SAT. While Whites
comprise 40 percent of Arizonans between 15 and 17
years of age, they make up 57 percent of SAT takers
and 38 Percent of ACT takers in the state. The number
of students who took the ACT increased by 6,000
students between 2011 and 2014.
Mean SAT scores for all Arizona students dropped
between 2011 and 2014. There is a significant gap
between mean SAT scores of White and Asian Pacific
American students compared to American Indian,
Black, and Hispanic students in the state. Mean
ACT scores have remained stable since 2010. Asian
Pacific American and White students tend to score
significantly higher than American Indian, Black and
Hispanic students in the state.
Nearly 8 in 10 Arizona students fail to meet College
Readiness Benchmark Scores established by the
ACT in all four subject areas (English, Reading,
Mathematics, and Science). While 39 in 100 Asian
Pacific American students and 35 in 100 White
students meet the Benchmarks in all four subject
areas, only 9 in 100 Hispanic students, 7 in 100 Black
students, and 4 in 100 American Indian students meet
all four benchmarks.
Significantly more students took Advanced Placement
(AP) courses in Arizona in 2014 (57,161) than they
did in 2011 (42,982). White students were more than
twice as likely to enroll in AP courses as Hispanics
were to enroll. Asian Pacific American students (7
in 10) and White students (6 in 10) were much more
likely to obtain a score of 3 or higher on their AP
tests than were American Indian (3 in 10), Black (4 in
10), and Hispanic students (4 in 10). In 2014, 22,888
high school students enrolled in dual enrollment
courses through a community college in the state.
About 7 in 10 of these students did so in the Maricopa
Community College District. About three quarters of
the dual enrollment courses taken were academically
focused while one quarter were vocationally focused.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 7

POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION
In 2014, 454,759 students (undergraduate, graduate,
and professional) were enrolled in a postsecondary
institution in the state of Arizona. Nearly half of these
students were enrolled at a public community college
in the state and about one third were enrolled in one
of the state’s three public universities.
2014 UNDERGRADUATE ENROLLMENTS

Just over half of undergraduates were enrolled at a
public, two year college while 3 in 10 undergraduates
were enrolled at a public university. Between 1994
and 2014, the enrollment of undergraduates in public
two-year colleges in Arizona increased by about 31
percent from 158,382 students in 1994 to 209,053
students in 2014. The proportional enrollment of Whites
decreased during this time period while the proportional
enrollment of Hispanics, Blacks, American Indians, and
Asian Pacific Americans increased. Between 1994 and
2014, undergraduate enrollments at private, for-profit,
four-year institutions increased by 320 percent from
7,844 to 33,115.
PELL GRANT RECIPIENTS

Undergraduate enrollments grew across all sectors
between 1991 and 2010. The for-profit sector
demonstrated the greatest proportional growth in
undergraduate. Between 2010 and 2013, the proportions
of first time, full time (FTFT) Pell grant recipients
enrolled at public four year and two year institutions
increased. The proportion of FTFT students at
Arizona’s public universities receiving Pell grants
increased from 29 percent in 2010 to 32 percent in 2013.
The proportion of FTFT students at Arizona’s public
two year institutions receiving Pell grants increased
from 47 percent in 2010 to 54 percent in 2013.
COMMUNITY COLLEGE TRANSFER RATES

Arizona’s public community colleges are the major
access point for students into higher education in
the state given that over half of all undergraduates
are enrolled in a community college. Moreover, the
community colleges are the primary entry point into
higher education for American Indian, Black, and
Hispanic students in Arizona.
Recent analyses conducted by the Arizona State System
for Information on Student Transfer (ASSIST) show
that fewer than 3 in 10 “transfer eligible” students
actually transfer to one of the state’s three universities
within 6 years of enrolling in community college.
REMEDIAL EDUCATION

Although data on remedial education are difficult
to obtain due to a lack of a statewide coordinating
entity for community colleges, reports provided
by Maricopa Community College District (MCCD)
provide some insight on the status of remedial
8 ARIZONA MINORITY STUDENT PROGRESS REPORT

education in Arizona. Of the 14,389 2013 high school
graduates who attended MCCD the year following
their graduation, 49 percent enrolled in a college level
English course, 22 percent enrolled in a pre-freshman
(remedial) English course, and 29 percent did not
enroll in an English course in their first year following
high school graduation. Of the 2013 high school
graduates attending MCCD , 31 percent enrolled in
a college level math course, 23 percent enrolled in an
intermediate level math course, 18 percent enrolled in
a pre-intermediate (remedial) algebra course, and 28
percent did not enroll in a math course in their first
year following high school graduation.
2013 UNDERGRADUATE DEGREES

The majority of the 28,722 bachelor’s degrees awarded
in the state came from the public universities (70%).
The remainder came from the private, for profit sector
(27%) and the private, not for profit sector (3%). At
the state’s three public universities, most bachelor’s
degrees were awarded to White students (67%)
followed by Hispanic students (17%), Asian Pacific
American students (6%), Black students (3%) and
American Indian students (2%).
2013 UNDERGRADUATE DEGREE TRENDS

The number of Associate’s degrees awarded increased
significantly between 1994 (8,813) and 2013 (23,016)
with the majority coming from Arizona’s public, two
year institutions. The number of bachelor’s degrees
granted in Arizona increased by 50 percent between
1994 and 2013 from 15,236 to 22,950. The six year
graduation rates at the University of Arizona and
Arizona State University have slowly increased for the
entering cohorts between 1998 and 2007 (from 57%
to 61% at the U of A and from 55% to 58% at ASU).
However, the six year graduation rate has remained
steady during this time period at Northern Arizona
University (about 50 %).
2014 GRADUATE AND PROFESSIONAL ENROLLMENTS

About half of all graduate and professional students in
Arizona are enrolled at one of the public universities
in the state while just about four in ten are enrolled
at a private, for profit institution. Finally, one in
ten graduate and professional students in Arizona
is enrolled at a private, not for profit institution.
Whites are the group with the highest percentage of
enrollments within each sector and make up nearly
six of ten graduate students at public institutions and
at private, not for profit institutions. International
students make up about 2 in 10 of graduate and
professional students enrolled at public institutions
and 1 in 10 of graduate and professional students
enrolled at private, not for profit institutions.

GRADUATE AND PROFESSIONAL ENROLLMENT TRENDS

The growth in enrollment of graduate and professional
students in the public four-year institutions increased
by 11 percent, from 25,112 in 1994 to 28,031 in 2014.
Small and steady increases in the proportional
representation of students of color at the state’s public
institutions are evident between 1994 and 2014—with
Hispanics increasing from 7 percent to 11 percent,
Asian Pacific Islanders increasing from 3 percent to 5
percent, Blacks increasing from 2 percent to 3 percent,
and American Indians increasing from 1 percent to 2
percent. At private, for-profit, four-year institutions
in Arizona, graduate and professional enrollments
increased by more than 200 percent from 4,565 in 1994
to 15,548 in 2014.
2013 GRADUATE AND PROFESIONAL DEGREES

During 2013, fewer than half of the 12,466 master’s
degrees awarded in Arizona came from public
institutions. About 43 percent were awarded by
private for profit institutions and 10 percent were
awarded by private, not for profit institutions. The
proportion of degrees awarded to Hispanic, African
American, and Native American students decreases
significantly when compared to their representation
among bachelor’s and associate’s degree recipients.
At the public institutions, about 6 in 10 master’s
degrees were awarded to white students, 18 percent to
international students, about 10 percent to Hispanics,
4 percent to Asian Americans, 3 percent to Blacks, and
2 percent to Native Americans. Arizona postsecondary
institutions awarded 1,172 doctoral degrees in 2013..
The majority of these degrees were granted by the
three Arizona public universities (65 percent). Private,
for profit institutions awarded 34 percent of the
doctoral degrees granted in 2013 while the private
not for profits awarded about 1 percent of doctoral
degrees. Institutions in the state of Arizona produced
1,667 professional degrees (allopathic medicine,
osteopathic medicine, naturopathic medicine,
pharmacy, law) in 2013. More than 4 in 10 of these
degrees were awarded by the private, not for profit
sector, another 4 in 10 were awarded by the state’s
three public universities, and about 2 in 10 by the
private for profit institutions.

6 percent were awarded to Hispanics in 2013. Asian
Pacific Americans received about 6 percent of doctoral
degrees in 1995 and 5 percent in 2013. The proportion
of doctoral degrees awarded to American Indians was
especially low at at 0.4 percent in both 1994 and 2013.
The percentages of Black (0% in 1995 and 2%
2013), Hispanic (6% in 1995 and 8% in 2013), and
Native American students (0% in 1995 and 1% in
2013) who received degrees in allopathic medicine
remained quite low between 1995 and 2013. The
number of pharmacy degrees awarded in Arizona
increased between 1995 and 2013 from 51 to 244. The
percentages of degrees awarded to Blacks (2% in 1995
and 3% in 2013), Hispanics (6% in 1995 and 7% in
2013) and Native American (2% 1995 and 0% in 2013)
students have remained low during this twenty year
period.
The number of law degrees awarded by Arizona
institutions increased by more than 100 percent from
281 in 1995 to 630 in 2013. About 68 percent of law
degrees were awarded to white students in 1995,
decreasing to 65 percent in 2013. The proportion of
law degrees awarded to Hispanics in Arizona also
decreased from 15 percent in 1995 to 9 percent in 2013.
While decreases were also evident in the proportion
of Asian Pacific Islanders (from 6% in 1995 to 5% in
2013) and Blacks (from 7% in 1995 to 5% in 2013), the
proportion of Native American students earning law
degrees remained stable from 1995 to 2013 (3%).

GRADUATE AND PROFESSIONAL DEGREE TRENDS

The number of master’s degrees awarded in Arizona
increased by about 50 percent between 1994 (6,292
master’s degrees awarded) and 2013 (9,298 master’s
degree). The number of doctoral degrees awarded
in Arizona between 1994 and 2013 increased by 100
percent from 754 to 1,519. While Blacks received only
1 percent of doctoral degrees in 1995, they received
1 in 10 (10%) in 2013. The proportion of doctoral
degrees awarded to Hispanics was very low relative to
their representation in the state’s population as only
5 percent of doctoral degrees awarded in 1995 and
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 9

Policy
Recommendations
The 2016 AMEPAC Minority Student Progress Report
is the 6th edition of this report created to provide
an examination of the educational achievement
of minority students in Arizona. These findings
of educational attainment for Arizona’s student
population have given us a sense of where we are and
where we have been.

and collaborate to provide all students in Arizona an
equal opportunity to succeed in pre-K-12 education,
higher education, and the workforce.

PRE-K-12 EDUCATION
Ensure All Students Achieve a High School Diploma
•

Modify high stakes requirements to include
alternate pathways to a diploma.

•

Provide resources to support all students’
achievement of graduation requirements.
While the graduation requirement for
four years of math appears to be a barrier,
employers and postsecondary educators alike,
tell us that all students must have adequate
math to be successful in postsecondary
endeavors. Therefore, we must maintain
high expectations for all Arizona students,
and together with resources, provide what is
needed to ensure their success.

The data summarized in this report continue to
demonstrate a troubling trend of a growing minority
population with a major education attainment gap
which results from a lack of access to important
educational resources. A deeply troubling finding is
that the educational achievement gap for minority
(now majority) and low-income students in both
urban and rural schools has not been erased.
This pipeline, which provides the workforce of
Arizona’s future, is losing too many students in the
process. This has become a grave concern for the
future economic health of our families and Arizona as
a competitive economic power.
Foundational to minority student success, a
large percentage of whom live in poverty is an
infrastructure that ensures that we not only can track
and analyze trends, but also put in place the strategies
needed to give the best opportunity possible for
academic growth and achievement to create a diverse
and capable workforce. Therefore, it is imperative
that we continue to gather relevant data, question
our current education funding strategies, and explore
ways to forge our collective efforts to solve the
problems we face.
Based on the data presented in this report, we
have taken a pragmatic approach and provided
policy recommendations with a goal to close the
achievement gap for minority (now majority)
students. The recommendations provided in this
report are based on various platforms for comparisons
and analysis. We have relied on the help of experts
in diverse fields to analyze and prioritize these
recommended actions.
We encourage you to review and consider the
recommendations from AMEPAC’s 2013 Minority
Student Progress Report: Arizona in Transformation
before reading this report. We hope you will be able
to use the rich data in this report to develop your own
conclusions and recommendations for addressing the
issues we highlight. We recognize that there are other
policy stakeholders, agencies, and organizations in
our state looking at our educational challenges as we
move deeper into the 21st century. It is our hope that
we can create a common vision with these partners
10 ARIZONA MINORITY STUDENT PROGRESS REPORT

Improve English Language Learners’
Academic Success
The current approach leaves too many behind. There
are other research-based approaches proven successful
with ELL students.
•

Analyze and strengthen entrance
requirements to ELL services. Ensure that
exit requirements enable proficiency in
academic English for ELL students.

•

Explore alternative approaches to structured
English immersion. The 4-hour block limits
ELL students from graduating because
students do not have the time and facility with
the language to take the coursework required
for graduation.

Ensure Poverty Does Not Dictate the Level of
Student Success
•

Identify and/or refocus dedicated state-level
funding streams to expand projects proven
successful and increase the participation and
success of lower socioeconomic students.

Ensure that Every Student Receiving a Diploma
Is College and Career Ready and Is Prepared to
Transition into Postsecondary Credit-bearing
Courses or the Workforce
•

Provide all students the opportunity for AP
and dual enrollment; with appropriately
trained teachers.

•

Ensure access to and funding of technology to
provide access to rural communities.

•

Provide all students no cost/low cost classes
for ACT/SAT test prep.

•

Ensure that all students have exposure to
Career and Technical Education (CTE)
opportunities, including access to counselors
trained in CTE and all postsecondary options.

POSTSECONDARY EDUCATION
Improve Transition by Decreasing the Number of
Students Who Do Not Qualify for College-level
Credit-bearing Courses
•

Establish a K-12/Postsecondary education task
force to explore current and future programs
to reduce the need for remediation.

Restore and Create Student Financial Aid Programs
that Support Increasing Underrepresented
Populations in All Levels of Higher Education
•

Restore state postsecondary scholarships and
grants that provide incentives to accelerate
graduation, thereby reducing loan debt and timeto-degree for first-generation and low income
students, many of whom are students of color.

Increase the Number of Community College
Students Successfully Transferring into a
4-Year Institution
The data indicate a tremendous opportunity to increase
enrollments and transition community college students
into colleges or universities for completion of a 4-year
degree.
•

Ensure that all students receive counseling and
support in the areas of financial literacy, career
options, and proper course of study.

•

Ensure that all students entering a remedial
or developmental education community
college educational pathway with intentions
to transfer to a four year institution have
access to the academic support structures
necessary to succeed.

Support the Community College System in its
Role as the First Point of Enrollment in the
Postsecondary System for Most Students in
Low-Income Families
•

Provide state funding for all community colleges.

LIMITATIONS AND OTHER NEEDED STUDIES
Lack of a statewide longitudinal data system: Effective tracking,
monitoring and reporting on student progress and promising
practices are hampered without such a system. Creating a
longitudinal, statewide data system has been a key focus of policy
makers within the past decade. Millions of dollars and countless
hours of time have been spent discussing, promoting and planning
for such a system. It continues to be unfinished work.
Lack of common definition: One of the limitations in the data is
remedial or developmental education in community colleges. Based
on the data, the primary point of entry into postsecondary education
is community college for a significant number of minority students
graduating from high school. Rather than qualifying for university
credit-bearing coursework, too many must enroll in remedial or
developmental education tracks. Because definitions of remedial
students vary from one institution to another, it is difficult to track
like data on students across the state and we are unable to provide
a clear state-wide picture of this student population. Therefore,
AMEPAC will consider the topic of students in community college
remedial or developmental education as a subject for further study
in our next research.
Data on education funding: While the data in this report detail
trends in demographics and education in Arizona, one also cannot
ignore the importance of education funding to provide resources
needed for serving the student population. Other reports dealing
specifically with education funding and equity are germane to this
issue and must be considered as funding affects everything from
teacher recruitment, retention, and training to adequate resources
for children and families in poverty.

CONCLUSION
Data on educational attainment show that students who graduate
from postsecondary institutions with professional certifications
and/or degrees tend to be the most economically successful. It is
also these graduates who contribute the most to Arizona’s economy.
Minority students, now the majority of students in Arizona schools,
are crucial to ongoing economic prosperity of our state because
of the critical human capital that they provide. A highly qualified
workforce is the best resource our state can offer for economic
development.
In the 2013 report, we affirmed the warning from the Morrison
Institute’s Dropped report from 2012 that “Arizona is at risk of
becoming a second-tier state, educationally and economically.”
Now, today, in 2016, Arizonans have an opportunity choice. We
can resign ourselves to becoming that second-tier state or we can
choose opportunity by collaborating with others to implement these
recommendations in order to close the achievement gap.

Recruit and Retain Home-Grown Graduate
Students in Arizona
•

Provide incentives to postsecondary
institutions to attract and retain Arizona
students receiving graduate degrees and
certificates to enhance the professional
workforce in Arizona.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY 11

Arizona is in the midst of a demographic, economic and
educational transformation.
Although our past has been illustrated with inequity and average achievement,
our future is painted with quite a different brush. As Arizona solidifies itself as a
majority minority state, we will be forced to focus our attention on how even the
most underperforming students can enhance their educational outcomes for the
greater benefit of all Arizonans.
This report illuminates the current status and trends of educational achievement
in the State of Arizona from the beginning of the pipeline in elementary education
through to graduate and professional school.
We encourage you to consider the 2013 Minority Student Progress Report before
reading this sixth edition. We hope you will be able to use the rich data in these
reports to develop your own conclusions and recommendations for addressing the
issues we highlight.
Beyond this edition, there are additional data and resources available at the Arizona
Minority Education Policy Analysis Center website: www.highered.az.gov/amepac

all minorities

white
hispanic

arizona p-12 enrollment
2003

american indian
asian

see figures 9 and 10 for detailed charts

2013

black