The sweet spot which the Association has discussed in its Blog yesterday is nothing, but the “Optimum Size”. Think about the following simple example. If one keeps pouring coffee in a cup, at one point in time (t+i), it will overflow. This unwelcomed spill causes extra time for cleaning up the mess.  She or he may need to change clothes, washing hands, or even to see a physician for the burn that has been caused by the spills. More importantly, one has wasted her or his time, perhaps, being late to work, or a board meeting,  catch the plane, or get caught on the traffic jam (..ugh), etc.

In other words, it causes extra or unnecessary expenses, due to inefficiency. Coffee in this case is student enrollment. Before it reaches the limit, increasing enrollment is always welcomed. But not beyond the optimum (max) level. That is exactly what the State of Iowa has done–to limit the enrolled students. The question is how a higher ed institution can find this sweet spot—well, one needs to borrow the simple mathematical or calculus concept for maximizing a function:

(1). ΔY/ΔX= 0 and (2). (Δy2/Δx2) < 0, and x,y > 0

These maximum conditions lead to generate a maximum solution, away from them, it may cause dead-weight loss, negative social cost or simply inefficiency.

This example shows why Education Analytics (IRI—Institutional Research Intelligence) is a new mindset, and it may not exactly the same with the “old IR”. Also, it magnifies the difference between data analytics and data visualization. That said, an IRI professional has more skill sets than that of IR’s (without the word of intelligence).  Therefore, it is expected that their will have higher earning.  With disclaimer, may be the US may need years to fill the shortages of such IRI professional shortages. The IRI is not a simple addition of statistics to the “old IR” either, but there is more than that, as AAEA has demonstrated above.  More posting and discussions are coming.