BT Prospectus Data Request: Partner Notes

	A	B	C
1	Term	Definition	Example(s)
2	Mission Level Priority Area	Based on the strategic planning review, these large categories attempt to capture the major priorities of Big Ten executive leaders as a cohort.	✤Delivering Educational Value ✤Catalyzing Impactful Research
3	Outcome	Grouped by priority area, these are the outcomes which appeared frequently during the strategic planning review.	"Identify and address complex 21st century challenges, relevant to local and global communities" is an outcome within Catalyzing Impactful Research
4	Weighted Frequency	At the close of the strategic planning review, we assigned each outcome a frequency (i.e., the percentage of schools that included this outcome in their strategic planning materials) and each data source (e.g., full strategic plan, presidential remarks) a weight indicating its quality. We then assigned each weight a value multiplied the average for each outcome by the frequency to create a weighted frequency. We then translated these figures into three levels: high, medium, and low.	An outcome represented among 12 of the 14 institutions (frequency=86% or 0.86) with an average weight of 0.75 (meaning most of the data sources were of relatively high quality) would have a weighted frequency of 0.64, still considered "HIGH."
5	Partner Frequency	Based on feedback from the pre-AASHE meeting, the partner frequency indicates the number of groups (out of five) that considered this outcome a priority.	A frequency of 1 represents 5 out of 5 groups or complete consensus.
6	Foundational Quantitative	These are quantitative metrics most schools can reasonably collect in the window provided based on our estimates. These metrics may be new or they may rely on existing STARS data.	We consider "total sustainability-related annual giving" foundational quantitative because most schools can likely collect data for this metric within the window allotted.
7	Aspirational Quantitative	These are quantitative metrics we expect only a few schools will be able to collect in the window provided based on our estimates. We hope the innovators among us will already have started collecting (based on previous needs or projects), or will be willing to begin collecting data for these challenging, but potentially powerful metrics.	We consider "mastery of learning outcomes/student success for students in sustainability-related courses vs. not" aspirational quantitative because few schools will have the capacity to meaningfully collect data for this metric in the time allotted.
8	Create Your Own Metric	Here we’re encouraging those of you who haven't had the chance to provide input through the MWG or pre-AASHE meetings to develop or contribute innovative metrics for collection. We ask that you only use this option for strong, well-developed, outcome-oriented metrics.	An institution that has developed an innovative survey measuring student perceptions of sustainability might apply their data to a metric within the Delivering Educational Value priority area.
9	Qualitative Prompts	Here we have provided several prompts suggesting features or profiles on relevant figures, programs, or initiatives that help make an anecdotal case for sustainability’s contribution to mission level priorities. We encourage you to tell strong, bold, innovative stories here.	Institutions can choose any story that captures sustainability's contribution to this outcome.
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
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
65
66
67
68
69
70
71
72
73
74
75
76
77
78
79
80
81
82
83
84
85
86
87
88
89
90
91
92
93
94
95
96
97
98
99
100